Divided Labours: An evolutionary view of women at work

by Kingsley Browne from the Darwinism today series

I have just finished reading this book Paul recommended. Here are some interesting bits that relate to my area of study:

"Although women constitute approximately 40% of the US workforce –and, indeed, 40% of all managers –they hold only 5 to 7% of senior executive positions."

"It might sound terribly sexist to suggest that men are more competitive, more driven towards acquisition of status and resources, and more inclined to take risks; and that women are more nurturing, risk averse, less greedy, and less single-minded."

"Many of the traits Darwin studied had obvious functional significance and were clearly related to survival"

"Competition for mates creates winners and loosers in the genetic lottery of life, and the greater reproductive variance of males makes the stakes of the game higher for them than for females. Males thus have more t gain by adopting greater risk-taking behaviour (particularly when it comes to requiring resources and mates), greater aggressiveness, and greater promiscuity. After all, if the male can establish himself as a desirable mate, he may sire many children; if he cannot, he may sire none."

"One of the most consistent differences between the sexes is in 'aggressiveness'...'assertiveness', 'competitiveness','achievement-motivation' and 'dominance-seeking'."

"Males also exhibit more competitive behaviour and respond more positively than females to competitive situations. While competition significantly increases the motivation in men, it does not do so for women. The more competitive an achademic programme is perceived by women, for example, the poorer the performance, while the correlation is reversed for men."

"Studies consistently find that girls prefer co-operation to competition and boys prefer competition to co-operation." As the graphic design industry is very competitive this may explain why men seems to flourish more than women.

"Evolutionary theory also predicts a sex-difference in risk-taking – a behavioural trait relevant to workplace outcomes."

"Psychologist Elizabeth Arch has suggested that sex differences in achievement-orientation may be attributable to differences in risk-taking. From an early age, females are more averse to social, as well as physical, risk, and 'tend to behave in a manner that ensures continued social inclusion'. Arch notes that achievement opportunities often present the potential for loss of resources or group support. Thus, it is not female lack of ability, but rather a difference in attitudes towards failure, that leads women to avoid competitive situations."
"Arch's description of male and female attitudes fits easily within an evolutionary framework. She observes that females need explicit positive feedback in order to maintain confidence in themselves, which is an excellent mechanism for ensuring that they will be hesitant to venture into potentially risky situations...On the other hand, males tend to maintain confidence in themselves despite feedback, 'a response that would be very useful for situations where people challenge and are challenged and where a tendency to face the opponent with a sense of confidence just might provide the margin necessary for victory."

"Women everywhere exhibit more nurturing behaviour...women not only define themselves in the context of human relationship but also judge themselves in terms of their ability to care."

"In sum males and females have grossly different temperamental styles. Men tend to be competitive, while woman tend to be more co-operative. Men want to be at the top of a dominance hierarchy, while women seek to cement less-stratified social relations. Men tend to be single-minded in their pursuits, while women have more varied interests." So are women more distracted by nurturing and forming relationships, making sure everyone is happy than the job in hand, men generally head straight for the goal and don't care too much what anyone else thinks or if they upset anyone in the process. This definitely helps to explain why men succeed beyond women in becoming successful designers. Although obviously we can't generalise, there are always exceptions to the norm.

"One study found that the more 'masculine' the woman, the greater her career achievement. Masculine traits included assertiveness, competitiveness, dominance, and standing up well under pressure,while feminine traits included nurturing, accommodating warmth, and eagerness to sooth hurt feelings. Career achievement was positively correlated with masculinity and negatively correlated with femininity. Interestingly, whether a woman was classified as masculine or feminine was unrelated to her marital status or fertility."

The Graphic Glass Ceiling

I found this article on designobserver.com by Michael Bierut:

A week ago, I was the moderator of a presentation and panel discussion at the 92nd Street Y, "The Art of the Book: Behind the Covers." The panelists were Milton Glaser, Chip Kidd and Dave Eggers. The organizers seemed pleasantly surprised by the turnout: over 900 people showed up on a Monday night to hear three people talk about book design.

After a visual presentation from each participant, all three joined me on the stage for questions submitted from the audience. There were seven questions in all. The fourth question to the all-male panel was as follows: "Why do you — all three of you — suppose there are so few female graphic designers — or at least so few female 'superstar' graphic designers? Is there a glass ceiling in graphic design?"

I read the question to the panel. There was a moment of uncomfortable silence. What would your answer be?

You may have heard already what happened next. Chip Kidd made a quick joke about Larry Summers, who lost his job at Harvard partly by ruminating a little too freely on a related topic. After another pause, Milton Glaser offered an answer. Jill Priluck reported it on Gothamist, with an update several days later:

[Glaser said] that the reason there are so few female rock star graphic designers is that "women get pregnant, have children, go home and take care of their children. And those essential years that men are building their careers and becoming visible are basically denied to women who choose to be at home." He continued: "Unless something very dramatic happens to the nature of the human experience then it's never going to change." About day care and nannies, he said, "None of them are good solutions."

The crowd was silent except for a hiss or two and then Eggers piped up that he and his wife both work from home and share child care responsibilities — but added that maybe New York was different (although we don't think Eggers really believes this). Then it was clear to everyone in the room that it was time to move on.

On stage, I remember feeling...well, I remember feeling there sure are a lot of guys up here. As I recall, I eventually volunteered that, in fact, cover design was a part of our field that had provided a route to success for several notable female designers, including Louise Fili, Carin Goldberg, Knopf's Carol Carson and Barbara deWilde, not to mention (as noted by our questioner) my own partner Paula Scher. There didn't seem to be much else to say. Luckily, there were other, and easier, questions to answer. Next?

I began getting emails about the event, and particularly its "Larry Summers moment," the next day, as well as links to other reviews that raised the same question. On Youngna Park's blog, Glaser's comments were rendered like this:

There are no women at the top of the [book designing] field because women give up that time to have babies and families. [ed. note: Milton! whatttttt are you talking about?!!]

Now, it occurs to me now that I might have also said that evening that three of the world's best book designers — no, make that the three best book designers in the world — are all women: Julia Hasting, Lorraine Wild, and Irma Boom. But this misses the point. Because the issue isn't about talent, or ability, or accomplishment. It's about celebrity.

"Superstar" designers — and that's what we're talking about; read the question again — aren't just good designers. They're celebrity designers. And celebrity is a very specific commodity. It certainly helps to be good at what you do to be a celebrity designer (although celebrities in other fields don't always seem to have this requirement). But that's only a start. You also need to develop a vivid personality, an appetite for attention, and a knack for self-promotion. Accept every speaking engagement. Cough up a memorable mot juste for every interviewer. Make sure they spell your name right every time. This is time consuming work, particularly on top of your regular job, which presumably consists of doing good graphic design. Naturally, if you choose this route, it helps to be free of the distractions of ten to twenty years of caring for children, to say the least. In many ways, Milton Glaser's observations were shocking only in their obviousness.

We all know that women face challenges in the workplace that go far beyond being denied spots on panel discussions. According to a 2004 study, women make only 75.5 cents for every dollar earned by men. Last year, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission handled over 23,000 charges of sex-based discrimination. Just a few months ago, the London School Of Economics estimated at it will take 150 years to eliminate economic inequality based on gender worldwide. These are real problems.

Yet, you have to start somewhere. Glaser answered the question on the card, but the real question was the unspoken one: "Why is it that you guys up there are always...guys?" There is no good answer for this, and it doesn't seem we should have to wait 150 years to come up with one. It's depressing for a profession that's more than half female to keep putting up 100% male rosters, at the 92nd Street Y or anywhere else. And I say this with no small degree of self consciousness, as a member of a firm where only 10% of the partners are women. This is what made me squirm last Monday night, and it's what makes me squirm today.

Celebrity is good for certain things. It puts the butts in the seats at the 92nd Street Y, for instance. But it's not the only thing, and based on the reactions of those people in the audience last week, it might be time for something more.

http://www.designobserver.com/observatory/entry.html?entry=5017

Women Will Never Be Rock Star Designers

I came across this online which really got my thinking about this subject area and has helped me formulate my essay question:
Why are there so few female 'superstar' graphic designers? Is there a glass ceiling in graphic design?


(Audience question card, 92nd Street Y, New York City, December 4, 2006)

Just a tidbit for your contemplative pleasure: Jill Priluck at Gothamist describes what she calls a “Larry Summers moment” for the graphic design guru Milton Glaser during a panel discussion on the art of book jacket design at the 92nd Street Y Monday night. (The author and McSweeney’s captain Dave Eggers and designer Chip Kidd were also on hand).

Mr. Glaser — the designer of the “I Heart N.Y.” icon, Gothamist points out — was apparently asked about, or simply offered (it’s unclear), his opinion on why so few women achieve greatness in graphic design. Here’s how Gothamist said the awkward moment went down:

[H]e said that the reason there are so few female rock star graphic designers is that “women get pregnant, have children, go home and take care of their children. And those essential years that men are building their careers and becoming visible are basically denied to women who choose to be at home.” He continued: “Unless something very dramatic happens to the nature of the human experience then it’s never going to change.” About day care and nannies, he said, “None of them are good solutions.”

The crowd was silent except for a hiss or two and then Eggers piped up that he and his wife both work from home and share child care responsibilities — but added that maybe New York was different (although we don’t think Eggers really believes this). Then it was clear to everyone in the room that it was time to move on.

By TOM ZELLER JR.
(Milton Glaser’s theory on women designers is not available on his Web site.)

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/07/women-will-never-be-rock-star-designers/

Mrs Eaves

From the Emigre website FAQs with Zusanna Licko

FAQ: How did you arrive at the names Mrs Eaves and Filosofia for your recent classic revivals?
ZL: When we named Filosofia, we were looking for something Italian to reflect the origins of Bodoni. Filosofia is the Italian word for "philosophy," and it has a real nice ring to it!
Mrs Eaves has a slightly longer story; it is named after Sarah Eaves, the woman who became John Baskerville's wife. As Baskerville was setting up his printing and type business, Mrs. Eaves moved in with him as a live-in housekeeper, eventually becoming his wife after the death of her first husband, Mr. Eaves. Like the widows of Caslon and Bodoni, and the daughters of Fournier, Sarah similarly completed the printing of the unfinished volumes that John Baskerville left upon his death.
We picked the name Mrs. Eaves for this font, since that is how Sarah was often referred to in the various books documenting Baskerville's era. In order to differentiate the trademark name of the font from the common word "Mrs." as it appears in the dictionary, we removed the period.

To read more about the typeface go to the website:
http://www.emigre.com/EFfeature.php?di=109

Bauhaus Women: Art, Handicraft, Design

by Ulrike Müller

Although this isn't solely Graphic Design or contemporary it still relates to my subject matter.

A review on http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2009/nov/07/the-women-of-bauhaus
Jonathan Glancey. Sat 7 Nov 2009 states:

"Yes, the world's most famous modern art school accepted women. But few became well known. While the men of the Bauhaus – Gropius, Paul Klee, Wassily Kandinsky, László Moholy-Nagy and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe – are celebrated, names like Gunta Stölzl (a weaver), Benita Otte (another weaver), Marguerite Friedlaender-Wildenhain (ceramicist), Ilse Fehling (sculptor and set designer) or Alma Siedhoff-Buscher (toy maker) mean precious little."

"More women than men applied to the school in 1919, and Gropius insisted that there would be "no difference between the beautiful and the strong sex" – those very words betraying his real views. Those of the "strong sex" were, in fact, marked out for painting, carving and, from 1927, the school's new architecture department. The "beautiful sex" had to be content, mostly, with weaving."

"But if the school's women are largely unsung, their legacy lives on. As Bauhaus architecture becomes a distant vision of the future, so Bauhaus fabrics remain as useful, tactile and special as they were when these women set out to equal their male peers."

Women of Design

by Bryony Gomez-Palacio and Armin Vit

Influence And Inspiration From The Original Trailblazers To The New Groundbreakers.

There is one book and one book only published solely on female graphic designers. It is definitely worth checking out if you're feeling a bit misrepresented ladies! Unfortunately it is written by a mexican and an American so the majority of the case studies are American designers. There are only 3 British designers. (Not sure about Brasilian, Korean or Chinese). Interesting as the 3 designers Sian suggested checking out are American too. Perhaps American female designers have more 'balls'???

Sheila Levrant De Bretteville

Sheila Levrant de Bretteville is a graphic designer, artist and educator whose work reflects her belief in the importance of feminist principles and user participation in graphic design. In 1990 she replaced Alvin Eisenman as director of the Yale University Graduate Program in Graphic Design. This appointment was met with opposition from designer Paul Rand, who left the department and convinced colleague Armin Hofmann to do the same. Rand detailed his reasons for his opposition in the essay "Confusion and Chaos"

In 1971 Levrant de Bretteville founded the first design program for women at the California Institute of the Arts, and two years later co-founded both the Woman's Building, a public center for women's culture, and its Women’s Graphic Center in Los Angeles. In 1981 she initiated the communication design program at the Otis College of Art and Design.

De Bretteville has worked extensively in the field of public art creating works embedded within city neighborhoods. One of her best-known pieces is "Biddy Mason: Time & Place,” an 82-foot concrete wall with embedded objects in downtown Los Angeles that tells the story of a former slave who became a midwife in Los Angeles and lived near the site.In “Path of Stars,” completed in 1994 in a New Haven neighborhood, de Bretteville documented the lives of local citizens—past and present—with 21 granite stars set in the sidewalk.

Here is part of an interview with Sheila Levrant De Bretteville. Her work focus' very much on feminism, I don't want to go off on this tangent in the essay but this bit is relevant:

Q: How does Feminism relate to the issues facing contemporary practicing woman artists and designers?
Sheila: I still see some of the same issues making women’s experience more complex and difficult, primarily our relationship to the intensity of the demands we put on ourselves, and the work we do when we have small children. My office at Yale has also been a pumping station for the many new mothers who teach and come to critiques at our graphic design program here at Yale. My predecessor neither had a private office, nor understood why I felt I needed one, although he gave me one because I requested it. In addition to the production of milk and tears, there has also been a change in the tone and content of conversations in my office. These have included parenting and the passing on of kid’s clothes, as well as form making and in depth discussions of design, pedagogy and career issues. There are also the sleepless young fathers among our faculty and critics, and the changing patterns within their lives with little children that have to be taken into account as well. Much of what I know about teaching and organizing a program comes from being a parent myself, and from asking questions as a way to tease out the voices of others, rather than making a series of pronouncements, which is the way critiques take place at many schools.

See the full interview here:
http://www.notesondesign.net/people/interviews/sheila-de-bretteville-designer-educator-feminist/

“On both coasts of the United States, de Bretteville has used typography and environmental design to enhance communities. Her aesthetically rich, metaphoric projects are meaningful to a diverse range of local populations.”
Ellen Lupton, National Design Triennial catalogue

Design Council survey 2010

Wow hows that for timing. The design council has literally this week published a survey of the British Design Industry.

The gender breakdown is 60% male/40% female.
The average UK designer remains male, white and 38 years old!

http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/About-Design/Research/Design-Industry-Research-2010/

Feedback from Siân Cook

Siân Cook is one of the founding members of The Women's Design + Research Unit (WD+RU) responsible for creating the font Pussy Galore. She is also Pathway Leader, Design for Advertising, Graphic & Media Design BA (Hons) here at LCC. Below is her reply to my email which raises a few interesting points to include in my essay.

Do you feel there is a gender imbalance in the celebrity graphic designer arena?
Yes.

Who do you believe to be the most celebrated female designers of today?
Depends whether you are talking personally or publicly. I would namecheck Sheila Levrant De Bretteville, Laurie Haycock, Paula Scher (all Americans!)

From my research I have noted female designers seems to excel in the areas of book, editorial, type and social design, teaching, mentoring and writing about design, rather than commercial design. Do you believe this to be true? And if so why do you think this is?
I would broadly agree, although I do see the emergence of more women working in the area of digital media recently. This kind of relates to my next answer, but maybe women define 'success' differently to their male counterparts? Also, in my own experience, finding patterns of working that you feel comfortable with can be difficult in the overtly 'commercial' sector. I personally have no dependents or childcare issues, but i still found the 'macho' studio culture of working late and being constantly 'on-call' very wearisome (and often unnecessary).

According to the HESA and the design council 61% of creative, art and design first and post graduate degree students are female, yet only 39% of working designers are female. Why do you think this is?
In my experience on the course that I teach, female graduates often have a wider range of career options that they are willing to consider on graduating (or after a few years in the industry). We have students who end up more on the project management side or transfer their skills into writing or teaching etc. It would be an unsubstantiated guess, but my hunch is that women are often less single-minded and goal-orientated in how they view their careers and are willing to embrace other opportunities or consider how their training is not necessarily purely vocational in industry terms.

Superstar Graphic Designers

Outside of the Graphic Design world are there really any 'superstar' designers? (let alone female ones). This months issue of Grafik magazine (No.185 March 2010) opens with a letter from Angharad Lewis the editor titled 'Endangered species?'

The concept of the ‘superstar’ graphic designer is outmoded these days, but during recent discussions at Grafik mansions, we found ourselves lamenting the lack of charismatic personalities in UK graphic design. At a push we could come up with a handful that might pass—just—as household names, but only because of their connection with other fields (music, in most cases). All the proper design celebs, who open events, appear on TV and write newspaper columns, are in other fields of design. Product design has its very own Simon Cowell in the shape of Philippe Starck. Architecture has no shortage of memorable characters, from scary Zaha Hadid to dashing David Adjaye. Fashion, of course, is heaving with intriguing and flamboyant characters. Even knitting gets column inches.

Graphic design, meanwhile, remains a nerdy cousin, beavering away in a bunker by the light of a Mac screen, wearing a dodgy slogan T-shirt, with only an ironical ‘adult toy’ for company. Either that or they are moving about the Shoreditch savannah in herds, blending together in a camouflage of plimsolls and bad hair, busying themselves being ‘scenesters’. I know this doesn’t apply to the whole graphic design population, but if you do answer to any of the above descriptions—please stop, you’re giving graphic design a bad name.

I’m often asked by people not connected to work “what exactly IS graphic design, then?” It would be so handy to have a reliable famous name to cite as an example. Instead it’s always a case of giving examples of the type of work graphic designers do, and that is so broad as to sound almost random. Company logos, signposts, stationery... hardly glamorous or newsworthy. But that’s the thing about graphic design—it mostly functions as a conduit for other things—the medium, not the message, setting the tone of voice rather than composing the words. Take typography: it runs like blood through the veins of the visual world and at its best it’s unnoticed. It is rare for graphic design to overshadow or become more famous that the thing it is promoting, which might explain graphic design’s recent foray into making itself an autonomous medium with self-referential products, books and posters etc—graphic design for graphic design’s sake, rather than graphic design for the sake of promoting a telecommunications company or branding a restaurant.

If graphic design does make the headlines it’s for all the wrong reasons and probably because some piece of branding has caused ‘outrage’. Obviously the reporting of the 2012 Olympic logo springs to mind, but for me that’s trumped by a story in the Daily Telegraph in March. “Anger at plans to rebrand Northamptonshire as ‘North Londonshire’,” huffed the headline about a campaign to encourage people to move from London to Northamptonshire (as if). The campaign would be paid for partly by over half a million pounds worth of taxpayers’ money. Obviously this is a stupid, expensive waste and, as I write, I have no idea whether it saw the light of day (according to the report it was due to appear on the Underground, presumably in an attempt to lure commuters away from London’s ‘rat race’ to the delights of, er, Kettering). Let me know if you spotted it.

If graphic design only attracts attention when it’s ‘bad’ but is hardly noticed for being good, perhaps that’s had an effect on graphic designers themselves. There’s no shortage of fantastic work or brilliant, intelligent designers out there, but none who seems willing or able to get noticed for it—to do a Saville maybe. Couldn’t we have a few people self-assured, eloquent and well-turned-out enough to be ambassadors for graphic design and stir up a bit of public interest in the profession? Or perhaps ego and graphic design don’t mix. If they did you’d all be architects and I’d be writing about megabucks concrete erections and reviewing Grand Designs.

http://www.grafikmag.com/index.php?m=GR&sub=GRdetail&id=365

-----------

Only certain pieces of graphic design have gained iconic status like the tube map for example yet most of the general public probably don't know who Harry Beck is. They probably are aware of Phillipe Stark, James Dyson, Zahah Hadid, suggesting that architecture and product design disciplines have far more celebrity designers.

The letter states that Peter Saville is probably the only 'superstar' graphic designer known to the general public today, for his work in the music industry, and most of his well known work is from around 30 years ago. So if the art of the record sleeve is something that provoked a connection with people as record artwork becomes more and more obsolete with digital downloading, these designers disappear from the mainstream with the medium.

A comment on the blog states "there don't currently seem to be the individual 'designer as icon' that we saw years back in the form of Müller-Brockmann, Hans Neuburg, Saul Bass, Alan Fletcher." Perhaps this is why there are no female 'superstar' graphic designers because back in those days woman just weren't working in the industry in the numbers they are today, and if "the concept of the ‘superstar’ graphic designer is outmoded these days" then we have no superstars be it male or female.

Images to be included in essay

Hey girls, what kind of images are you going to include in your essay and any idea as to how many? I don't want to go overboard with them. Hope your all doing well!