International Women's Day or the lack off...

Let’s talk about International Women’s Day and the panels/talks/webinars/workshops that were planned for that day. How many of you attended talks, webinars, and workshops on account of International Women's Day? And how many of these were on the role of male allies supporting women?

First, and foremost, why does a day that is focused on recognizing women become about how men support women?! I mean are men that insecure that even on the one day that we want to highlight women's achievements, we must bring men into the conversation and highlight THEIR support of women?! Don't we do enough of it 364 days in a year? Or 365 days in this year’s case?

Second, what's with these self-proclaimed male allies getting on panels and talking about how good they are? I mean don't we, the women, get to decide if a man is an ally or not? How can you men just start praising yourself?!

So, where all my rage and anger is coming from is this webinar that I listened to about male allyship at workplaces that was held on #IWD2024. This webinar from a "highly recognized" institution in India that focuses on the social impact sector was anything but about male allyship. Here's what I heard on the webinar:

Inclusive leadership is equal to allyship. The panelists had absolutely no understanding of the difference between inclusive leadership and allyship. Being an inclusive leader DOES NOT make you an ally. Allyship is a step further.
Because we work in the social impact sector, we are equity-focused. Again, such an inherent bias that because you work in the social impact sector, you have a greater understanding of equity. How many of us have worked in this sector and realized there is a total lack of understanding of equity?
I was shocked that the male panelists acknowledged that they mansplain but then also continued to say that sometimes it's necessary to do so! How is this acceptable from a leadership perspective forget being an ally?!
There was absolutely no understanding (again) of privilege and how privilege can be used to be an ally.
Panelists also very casually shared their deep-seated bias that "you need to loom over someone to get work done" - if this is not the classic definition of micro-management, then what is?!
The female panelist kept saying you need to know which battles to pick and fight. She brought it up more than once in the context of leadership. And god knows I have practiced this more times than I care to acknowledge. BUT at the same time, isn't it the role of allies to sometimes pick these battles up for you when you can no longer fight them? Or you don't have the bandwidth to fight them?
Male panelists acknowledged - more than once - that sometimes it is good to be a micro-manager so you know what is going on in the organization. There was a clear lack of understanding of the difference between an informed leader and a micro-manager!
One of the male panelists mentioned that men and women are different because we have different priorities. I mean that would make two men different from each other, not just men and women. Do two people in the world have the same priorities ever?! Is that even possible?
The female panelists said that it’s not important for leadership to model what inclusive leadership looks like. Leadership can also learn from their staff. Which is very true. But what was more shocking was that she expected the staff to make leaders aware of their bias. So, not only do we expect staff to put up with bad behaviour but now we also place the onus of educating/making their leadership aware of them.
One of the panelists mentioned that being aware of equity means you are an ally. I mean really?! How many of us know what equity means but rarely practice it? And how many more that practice it are not allies? – I think all of us to some degree!
This was again baffling to me – none of the panelists had an understanding of intersectionality. In a place like India where you are working in the social impact sector if you don’t understand intersectionality – where it is alive and kicking in your face EVERYDAY – then I don’t think you can do your work very successfully.
Also, the male panelists equated diverse voices on the team to including women’s voices in policy making. Is diversity just limited to women?! What about the queer community? The caste-oppressed? The class-divide? The religious divide? The disabled individuals? The neuro-divergent individuals?!
Again a shocker for me, the female colleague said it’s up to us – as women – to keep trying to change men’s behaviour. She said, if they don’t listen to you the first time then you try again and keep doing till you get your message across. Really? I mean the perpetrator of bad behaviour can get away with being bad and awful all the time but I – the victim – have to keep going back to him and telling him he needs to change?
Oh and guess what a successful marker for allyship is? Joy, happy smiles, wanting to come to work, being able to work from home, Sunday evenings where you look forward to Mondays! Really!? Do we have allyship all wrong?
Last but not least, the male panelists said that he didn’t realize till last year that “allyship” was a separate theory in itself.

I don’t know what has been more fired up – the lack of understanding of what allyship means OR that supposedly reputable organizations with recognized leadership being so crass on a webinar. Coming totally unprepared. Not answering ONE, ONE question that was asked about allyship and instead turning everything into an answer about leadership (and not doing a good job at that). Can we afford to get away with such mediocrity and not be ashamed?

This webinar was an eye-opener in what lack of preparation looks like. What being self-absorbed is all about. And, what I hope I never do during interviews, podcasts, or community calls that I host.