Male dominance in urban planning debate

Messages
195
Likes
0
Points
6
#21
Its the same with Landscape Architecture programs, about 2:1 (f-m) ratio. But the same statistics result: more males in the industry than females. Obviously there's a disconnect and either the stats are junk; or, (what I think), women tend to burn out faster and/or are more adept at finding other, equally lucrative/enjoyable work so they just move-on from the industry and never look back.
 

Suburb Repairman

moderator in moderation
Moderator
Messages
7,268
Likes
13
Points
28
#22
I think a lot of that has to do with active recruiting into the professions. APA & ASLA a couple decades ago started putting forth efforts to recruit women into the professions, along with several of the universities. For efforts like that, it usually takes a couple of decades for it to show up in workplace statistics.

There have been similar efforts begun with minority recruitment, and it has a similar ratio beginning to show up (higher representation in academic programs compared to workplace).

I do know two women that have left the planning profession. Both were for the same reason... after about a decade, they got sick of CONSTANTLY dealing with sexist behavior primarily from customers.
 
Messages
360
Likes
5
Points
12
#23
Well I am not a pure planner by trade, its one hat I wear. I can say that in the administrative profession we are seeing more women come in the millenial age group. Not as many Boomer or Xer (Like me) women. Really noticeable at our conferences and stuff in the last five years I would say as the boomers retire.
 
Messages
195
Likes
0
Points
6
#24
I'm riding the X'er / Y'er divide and I've finished two master programs: planning and land. arch, both were dominated by women not only as students but as instructors. I also found that women in my cohort tended to find initial employment easier than their male counterparts, yet somehow men are still dominating the workforce (?). Something doesn't jive; because, like I said before, my experience here in CA is that the public sector is packed with women.

Side note: try looking at urban dictionary for 'mansplaining', I literally laughed out loud at some of the definitions and examples.
 
Messages
26
Likes
0
Points
2
#25
Well here in touchy-feely CA, the public (planning) realm seems to be dis-proportionality ran by women. If you're a woman, and a minority woman, then management has your name on it. It's a simple case of over-reaction due to years of male dominance and abuse + a reaction to the (still) prevalent male dominance in the private sector. All of that has merit, but the shoe is on the other foot here - if you're a man, you have to talk/walk like a woman around the office in order to survive (OMG, how many times can I BS with my boss about her cats!). So worry not, injustice is everywhere and it's prevalent on both sides of the coin.
In my new gig, I am the only white male planner on my floor. And i estimate men are out numbered 2:1. I guess I can't use my white male privilege any more?

It feels weird to be the minority for once in my life. But at least I am one of the taller people, so that helps.
 
Messages
6,671
Likes
1
Points
26
#27
I've worked up and down the west coast and my perception is that there are generally more women planners than men, or at least a close split. Much more men in top leader roles however, but I am interviewing next week with a very large department run by a woman.
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
16,864
Likes
71
Points
46
#29
Generation Xer and progressive liberal checking in.

I'm not a fan of the term "mansplaining". It's associating a behavior that isn't unique to one gender with men. Why not call it what it is -- being condescending. That being said, I'm trying to be more self-aware of when I use a gendered term to describe some behavior that's not unique to men or women, like "bitch" to mean "complain".

I'd like to see more women represent the higher echelons of the planning profession, and an end to the sexism that's out there among our peers. However, I think it's insulting if women get called out for their gender, just for doing their jobs. "Women can plan too!" Well, no kidding. It's no different than saying a black man is "a credit to his race". It's demeaning.

One troubling trend I'm seeing among younger planners -- the assumption that some older plan or project is inherently racist, even in the absence of evidence, just because white men wrote or backed it. Many assume urban planning before 2000 comprised mainly of groups of WASPs wearing suits and fedoras gathered in a room, smoking cigars behind closed doors, manically laughing as they think of new and nefarious ways to screw over people of color.

[Blueprints_spread_out_on_conference_table,_one_man_standing]_International_Center_of_Photogra...jpg

Yeah, you know they're up to no good, right? :rolleyes:

Ad hominem assumptions have no place in a profession that has been collectively committed to social and environmental justice and equity for decades. A project should be judged on its own merits; not the race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual preference of the people who worked on it.
 
Last edited:
Top