Guest Writer

Gender gaps in health

From birth to death, human beings experience a wide range of emotional, psychological and physical experiences that shape our lives and inevitably can affect the state of our health and well-being. These experiences and our reactions to them can be quite different depending on whether you are a boy or a girl, or a woman or man.

Males and females are socialised by parents, caregivers, peers, intimate partners, spouses, schools, religious institutions and the media to have certain stereotypical emotions, perceptions, and behaviours. These are known as our gender roles, and they often influence the way each sex deals with emotions, forms thoughts and ultimately how we behave and interact with one another.

Gender Roles and Behaviours

For males in the Western world, traditional gender roles typically promote and expect boys and men to be active, aggressive, and express anger, but not to openly display sadness. We have all heard our boy children being scolded and told messages “don’t cry” or “don’t be a sissy” when they injure themselves, and Caymanian seafarers can relate to coming of age in an era of “wooden ships and iron men.” These traditional male gender roles are considered masculine, and when these behaviours are taken to the extreme, they may be used to attain goals without engaging in the process of social interactions (e.g. bullying, violent crimes, involvement in gangs, etc.).

Conversely, traditional feminine gender roles encourage girls and women to be passive and yield to the needs of others and authority (e.g. “be seen and not heard”, provide caregiving for children and elderly, volunteer to assist with community needs). Girls and women are allowed to express sadness, but it is frowned upon if anger or aggressiveness is openly expressed by females.

Additionally, when females assert themselves in a positive manner to look out for their own needs, this is often perceived negatively by others and labels or “who does she think she is” looks are doled out.

These traditional expectations of how males and females are supposed to behave and react to situations and problems are in opposition, creating very rigid gender roles that influence how males and females are expected to live their lives. Traditional attitudes about gender roles can leave persons feeling confined to their ascribed ‘gender box’, and when they are not allowed the opportunity to experience and display the entire range of human emotions and behaviours, there can be negative effects to their health and well-being.

Traditional Gender Roles and Health 

Research from the United States suggests that gender role socialisation influences a person’s vulnerability to the level of stress and distress experienced as a result of life experiences and problems and the need to fulfill gender role expectations. Traditional feminine gender role attitudes have been linked to turning distress inward and internalising problem behaviors in females. Specifically, women report higher levels than men of psychological distress, depression, low self-esteem, anxiety, and somatic complaints.

In the Cayman Islands, the 2010 Census of Population and Housing revealed that our women are similarly internalising this distress. The prevalence of chronic non-communicable diseases like asthma and diabetes was higher among females and this gender gap was widest in regards to high blood pressure. Among females, 106 of every 1,000 reported having high blood pressure compared to 71 of every 1,000 males.

For males, traditional masculine gender roles encourage boys and men to deal with issues by externalising problem behaviours. Impulsivity, sensation seeking, risk-taking and other anti-social behaviours have different and often times more deadly health consequences, including accidents, injuries and early death.

It is these limited ways of dealing with problems that lead to different negative effects on health when females internalise problem behaviours and males externalise problem behaviours.

Seeking Assistance for Health and Well-being

The 2010 Census data did reveal positive news in regards to gender and health. There was virtually no gender disparity regarding access to health insurance between men and women overall. It is only when comparing Caymanians and non-Caymanians that minimal gaps are evident. Caymanian females were more likely than Caymanian males to have health insurance, and conversely, non-Caymanian males were more likely to have health insurance than non-Caymanian females.

While males and females in the Cayman Islands seem to have equitable access to health services, gender roles often influence whether or not they access services or seek preventative care for physical and mental health matters.

More flexible gender roles need to be encouraged which allow girls and women to express themselves, look after the needs of others without sacrificing their own health and well-being, and seek solutions to their problems instead of internalising them. Boys and men need to hear that is okay to express sadness and to deal with anger in a healthy manner instead of expressing it through violence, risk taking or anti-social behaviour. Males also need to be encouraged to take preventative physical and mental health measures instead of subscribing to the ideology that seeking assistance makes them less masculine.

When all individuals are taught and allowed to experience the full range of human emotions in a healthy manner – without either internalising or externalising their problems – then we will close the current gender gaps in health status and experience a healthier society overall.

Continue Reading

Accountability, senior civil service & statutory boards

The disclosures of the past few weeks have made me wonder whether senior civil servants and members of government boards have ever heard of the concepts of honesty, accountability and the rule of law. In theory, the civil service falls under the responsibility of the Governor, but the present reality appears to be that crafty and less than scrupulous politicians have a different idea.

The unscrupulous have learned how to ensure that those willing to do what they are told, and to turn a blind eye to what is being done, are the ones that are fast-tracked for promotion, appointed to certain board positions and given very lucrative positions after retirement in return for these ‘services’.

Civil servants who do as they are told, irrespective of the law, are particularly sought after by certain politicians. Those selected and promoted primarily on the basis that they will ‘wuk wit’ the unscrupulous in turn use their ill-gotten positions to ensure that those who will also play along and won’t ‘rat’ are hired and promoted. Those that won’t ‘wuk wit’ the unscrupulous are cast aside or are forced to leave the civil service in order to make room for more cronies.

And so the cancer of corruption spreads in the civil service, each bent unit protecting the next, remaining in their jobs to undermine the efforts of honest politicians once the less scrupulous are out of office, awaiting the return of their benefactors. No one from the highest levels of the senior civil service on down shows sufficient interest in confronting and ending rule bending and law breaking, and so lawlessness grows and grows.

I have no doubt that the great majority of those in the civil service, as well as those serving on government boards (at least those who are not greed driven cronies), are honest, conscientious people. I am under no delusion that they all are. I am therefore very grateful for the work of the Auditor General and the Information Commissioner's Office. I am also grateful for those that use our Freedom of Information Law and publish evidence of wrong-doing, and for those that resort to drop boxes in pickup trucks and other measures to drag the rot into the light. I give my thanks to our still free press and those that blow the whistle on corruption and cronyism, and I hope that they continue and increase their efforts, as it seems that these days just about everywhere an audit is done or questions are asked, something very wrong is discovered.

It may be that some senior civil servants and members of statutory boards simply don’t have any idea of what is right or what our laws require of them. It also may be that they simply don’t care and will do as they like. Unlike most countries, there is no requirement for senior civil servants to formally demonstrate even the faintest knowledge of the rules governing the civil service in order to be hired into, or promoted to, management positions. The same seems to be true for appointments to statutory boards.

Another critical flaw in our civil service is that it is essentially self-policing. There is no penalty for failures of internal oversight and there is no formal external oversight. The highest levels in the civil service simply aren’t accountable, and in turn they impose no accountability on those at lower levels in the civil service. Senior civil servants are under no obligation to report or correct unlawful activities they observe or otherwise learn about. In general, this means that senior civil servants are free to completely ignore our laws in going about their jobs in any manner they choose, even if that manner is unlawful. That complete lack of accountability needs to change.

We need whistle-blower protection laws and published annual external compliance audits of the highest levels in the civil service, specifically to determine whether they are enforcing the standards, procedures and rules they are supposed to. Every hint of wrong-doing should be thoroughly investigated. Every hint of a failure to apply or enforce the rules should be thoroughly investigated. Every senior civil servant or board member found to be breaking the rules or not enforcing the rules should be fired, and prosecuted if possible. Nothing will improve until there is full accountability at the highest levels of the civil service and at the board level of every statutory authority and every government company. 

Meaningful external audits will require meaningful standards. The standards of performance that the highest levels in the civil service presently accept and apply are so low as to be subterranean. The standard of lawlessness that the highest levels in the civil service appear to be prepared to accept is frightening. The highest levels of civil service management need to be held accountable for ensuring that there are serious consequences for every single thing done by any civil servant that does not meet a high standard or otherwise comply with the rules.

Think of what has come to light in the past few years and ask yourself, when was the last time a senior civil servant was fired, demoted or disciplined for either incompetence or negligence in doing their job, or for deliberately or carelessly not following the law? From the highest levels in the civil service on down, there is a need to ensure that every civil service boss and every statutory board member is held accountable, and by that I mean fired or at least demoted for any failure in supervision.

Whatever respect for the law still remains in the civil service will not remain if the perception persists that cronyism trumps both competence and performance, and that civil servants performing abysmally or breaking or ignoring our laws face no consequences.

There is much talk about reducing the size of the civil service. Let us start with those civil servants who don't obey our laws and those senior civil service managers who don't enforce our laws. Things need to be fixed now.

Continue Reading

Convenient scapegoats: “Tax Havens”

Adolph Hitler was one of the most infamous examples of a politician skilled at deflecting the blame for a country's woes to others so as to take the people's focus away from fundamental problems on the home front  The ploy worked for a while, Hitler rose to power as Fuhrer and the Jews suffered as Nazi scapegoats.  In the end, Hitler put a gun to his head as Allied forces marched on Berlin and the Third Reich ended rather ingloriously.

Fast forward to contemporary America and the rhetoric that many Americans seem to be eating up lately, the rancorous rhetoric aimed at "closing down" so-called "Tax Havens". Tax Havens being those jurisdictions that some American politicians conveniently blame for America's economic woes and describe in terms meant to lead voters to believe that these vital offshore financial centres are nefarious cosmic black holes for American dollars. The spirit of Mein Kampf still lives on via the vapid spewing of the U.S. politicians who deflect blame for their mismanagement of their country's economy — and deflect attention from the USD$1,090,000,000,000 federal deficit they helped create and continue to grow — by pointing their slimy fingers at "Tax Havens".

Let's look at the facts: Americans and the poor leaders that they have chosen over the years have fueled the fires of unsustainable spending and have amassed a debt that now hovers at around  USD$16,700,000,000,000. Stack this figure against the claim that offshore tax havens are said to cost the US Treasury an estimated $150,000,000,000 per year in lost revenues and an interesting picture begins to emerge. If the claims of revenue losses are true, (and if I did my math right at this late hour) the loss claimed to be caused by "Tax Havens" amount to a paltry sum of less than 1% of US debt. Hitler would be proud of (and maybe even a bit awestruck by) power-hungry American politicians and their beguiling propaganda.

It is important to bear in mind that it is not the "tax havens" that are collecting this USD$150 billion annually; it is US businesses that are benefiting by reducing their tax burden by that amount. The offshore jurisdictions that are being lambasted by American political demagogues receive revenue based on professional financial and business services and that's all. 

Lower tax expenditure means that US companies have more money to spend on capital expansion, and on research and development. Economically this should be a good thing. If we assume that  the lion's share of stock in US companies is held domestically then an even more interesting picture materialises:  less money spent on taxes means more profits and more dollars to distribute as dividends to shareholders. More profits to American shareholders means more money circulating in the country's economy. Is this bad?

American corporations saving on taxes may be a good thing for the US economy, but not so good for leaders of a wasteful government that is unable to control its expenditures and powerless to curb its gnawing appetite for tax dollars to waste. Combine US tax gluttony with the unrealistic and absolutely unsustainable expectations of the American people and their insatiable desire for a comfy share of government services, and you can see why a scapegoat is needed: at the current rate of runaway expenditure the U.S. debt is forecast to mount from its current level of around 70% of GDP to grim predictions of up to 200% of GDP within the next 25 years.

To add to an already dire scenario, America is steadily loosing its global competitive edge. This is partly because of its own esurience, and significantly because China, India and other strongly emerging countries are beginning to adapt rapidly and are quickly becoming able to play the global economic domination game all too keenly. Their cut of the global pie is rapidly expanding. They are beginning to eat America's lunch primarily because the cost of doing business is less in those places, and significantly because the labour and technical talent pool is industrious, ambitious, skilled, vast, and cheap. The economic slide America is experiencing will inexorably continue and will most likely accelerate, whether or not so-called "Tax Havens" are "closed down". But, they gotta blame somebody, right? So why not blame the Cayman Islands and other politically small and oh-so-convenient scapegoats? Sieg heil!

Americans and their leaders need to look in a mirror and do the healthy thing and accept their fair share of the blame for the mess their country is in. Then they need to wake up to the stark and cold reality that the world's old economic and political map is being burned and a new one is being redrawn even as you read this. Like it or not, new global paradigms are evolving. Whenever sweeping global economic shifts take place it results in domestic conditions undergoing massive change, a great many people are deeply discomfited, established powers and entities are turned topsy-turvy and established societies experience almost unbearable turmoil. Rather than embracing political propaganda and trying to hold on to an unsustainable standard of living and an unhealthy dependence on government services, the people of America need to stop looking for external scapegoats, face reality and try to figure out how to best survive the unrelenting changes that are taking place in the world. A new race is being run and those not ready to keep pace in the pack will be left in the dust.

Pointing fingers at scapegoats and embracing political rhetoric ended badly for Hitler and the German people. The bad ending was a foregone conclusion as soon as the masses began to believe in Hitler's enticing rhetoric. Sadly, the poll mentioned in the article on CNS Business entitled "Democrats bring bill to cut tax loopholes" shows that the people of the USA seem to be no less gullible than the masses of pre-war Germany.  Unless the people of America face reality and act accordingly, a bad ending for the USA is no less certain.

PS: We see that other countries that have also jumped on the "Let's make Tax Havens the scapegoat" band wagon. To them I say: "Read carefully and apply accordingly!" because most of them are even bigger tax gluttons and tax wasters than the USA.

Continue Reading

Gender gaps in the workforce

There are multiple gender gaps relating to economic activity in the Cayman Islands, including who works and where they are employed. The 2010 Census of Population and Housing found that the unemployment rate was higher among males (6.7%) than females (5.8%). Females were more likely to not be participating in the labour force at all — 20.6% compared with 13.7% of males.

There were also significant gender gaps within the employed population. For example, the vast majority of workers employed by private households (92.1%) or in clerical occupations (75.1%) were female and they also dominated in education (74.8%) and human health and social work (74.8%). Craft and trade workers (96%), skilled agricultural, forestry and fishery workers (95.9%) and those employed in construction (93.4%) and utilities (78.7%) were almost exclusively male.

How did we get here?

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) concludes that gender gaps in the labour market are the result of complex economic, demographic and behavioural factors – including various forms of discrimination. While it is often easy to see and understand direct or indirect discrimination against individuals, structural discrimination is more elusive and a much bigger contributor to these gaps.

Structural discrimination occurs when society's major 'structures' — such as the family, labour market or education system — consistently disadvantage males or females through norms, policies and behaviour. This prevents equality of opportunity and leads to unjust outcomes. Characteristics and roles that people associate with being male or female are learned from childhood through socialisation, so it is often an invisible factor that is not considered. We expect men and women and boys and girls to want different things and to have different capabilities. These stereotypes, not our innate abilities, affect us in many ways and often limit our opportunities in life.

Labour force participation

The gap in labour force participation is one outcome of the unequal responsibilities and opportunities that arise from stereotyped gender roles. Within households, paid and unpaid work is divided to meet the needs for income, housework and caregiving. Beliefs about gender roles affect how this work is divided and how much each individual’s contribution is valued. Often, females are outside the labour force because they are seen as having sole or primary responsibility for unpaid housework and caregiving. In the 2011 Labour Force Survey, 22.2% of females and 4.6% of males reported home or family duties as the main reason they did not seek paid work.

When female employees are seen as having a weaker connection to the workforce – because they are more likely to take career breaks or have family responsibilities – companies may also hire men over women, pay them more money, and/or provide greater training opportunities because males are seen as better “investments”. The 2010 Census showed that there were more employed males than employed females and that males earned a higher income at every educational level. In the 2011 Labour Force Survey, employed males were also 10% more likely to have received training than employed females.

If an employer makes these decisions based on stereotypes about how a worker is expected to behave instead of on his or her individual qualifications, achievements and potential then that employer is discriminating.

Segregation of labour

Stereotypes about housework and caregiving responsibilities also channel females seeking paid work into similar careers, such as domestic work, education and human services. Likewise, when boys engage in activities and chores outside the home and are encouraged to be tough and physically strong, they are led to construction, agriculture, automotive repair and similar industries.

Once the gender segregation of labour is established it encourages males and females to choose certain occupations. Employers often further reinforce the segregation by not adapting work environments to suit men and women or by favouring one sex over the other.

This is also a major factor in the gender income gap, as “masculine” jobs pay more than “feminine” jobs for the same level of education and skill required. The ILO has demonstrated this consistent wage bias in a study across fourteen different countries.

Unemployment

Gender gaps can also affect who is most impacted by economic events. Generally, unemployment is higher among females. However, the recent slump has impacted the sexes differently and caused male unemployment to significantly outpace female unemployment. Different educational achievements – also a product of gender stereotypes – and the concentration of males in hard-hit industries led to the current gender gap in unemployment.

The 2011 Labour Force Survey showed that unemployment was lowest among those with a college degree, and females are more likely than males to hold an associate degree or a bachelor’s degree or higher. Almost 80% of unemployed males had no post-secondary education. Additionally, 51.7% were most recently employed in construction, which declined by 63.5% between 2008 and 2011. In that same time period, male unemployment almost doubled, increasing from 3.8% to 6.7%, while female employment rose from 4.1% to 5.8%.

Why do these statistics matter?

International research has proven that reducing gender gaps significantly improves economic growth, per capita income and standards of living. When boys and girls and men and women are able to pursue theirinterests and desires, the economy makes use of all potential labour and skills. The best people are educated, trained and available for jobs and everyone

contributes to and benefits from growth. The labour market is also better able to respond to shocks, for example, the decline of a traditionally male-dominated industry like construction or rise of a traditionally female-dominated industry like healthcare.

Also, when females are less likely to work outside the home and those who do congregate in low-paying occupations that may lack worker protections, they are disadvantaged and often vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. Often, these gaps also contribute to poverty, poor living conditions, fewer opportunities and other negative consequences for their children as well.

When an individual is unemployed or outside of the labour force altogether, he or she is economically dependent on other people to provide for his or her basic needs. There are significant differences in how males and females who are not earning their own income are financially supported. The 2010 Census revealed that among those who were not working, females were more likely than males to rely on a spouse or partner or social services for financial support. Males were more likely to rely on their parents, savings or investment or other earned benefits from a pension or as a Veteran or Seaman.

Promoting gender equality in the workforce

We should all encourage individuals to pursue their interests and aspirations because males and females are equally valuable and capable of succeeding with the right support. Breaking stereotypes, eliminating prejudices and ensuring equality of opportunity will result in a more diverse, skilled, innovative and productive workforce, a more robust economy, and reduced vulnerability and social ills.

Barriers to gender equality don’t just hold back males and females. They also hold back economic growth and human development. But these gender norms are created by society and we can change them. Promote gender equality. Don’t stereotype.

The full 2010 Census of Population and Housing, statistical compendiums and other publications from the Economics and Statistics Office are available online at www.eso.ky. For a detailed gender analysis of the 2010 Census, including all of the statistics referenced in this article, please visit our website at www.genderequality.gov.ky. The “Resources” section also has more information on specific gender issues and how you can take action and promote gender equality

Continue Reading

United wemust stand

Too often in this day and age the youth are not too interested in the political affairs of their country—which presents a problem, especially in the Cayman Islands. It is usually the case that they think politics does not concern them when in actuality government actions encompass the entire population.

For some, going out and having a laugh may seem to be the pinnacle of their agenda, in contrast to the minority that wish to take a stand on the issues that indeed affect us all. I’m not saying young people shouldn’t enjoy their adolescence but they should at the very least exercise their voice and their opinions. It is too frequent that I hear young Caymanians complaining about the political situation, however, these are also the ones who are eligible to vote but do not vote as a part of their respective electorate.

For the youths who are reading this Viewpoint, I would like to suggest some reasons as to why you should vote in these upcoming general elections on May 22nd:

1. The time is right—and by that I am inferring that an entirely new field of independent candidates has joined the political arena. These candidates are autonomous thinkers who use their conscience when making decisions and do not collectively decide an outcome based on the agenda of other politicians—contrary to the existing political parties.
2. Your vote does count. You could make adifference. Your right to vote could be the difference between electing a promising government hereafter this election and electing one which fails to serve its country.
3. Many youths complain about not being able to make entry into the workforce due to there being many foreign professionals which can bargain lower wages here in Cayman. The only solution to this is to be heard so that the elected members of your district can rectify this problem. Whether its immigration reform or diversification of the national economy, you must vote and make that voice of yours be heard or else nothing can be accomplished.
4. Cayman’s infrastructure is in desperate need of a development and expansion. You may think this has nothing to do with you but when you take into account that tourism is a key industry to these islands, the development and economic potential of the current Port and Airport could be further maximised. Amelioration of any infrastructure carries a multiplier effect: more visitors will surely strengthen the economy.
5. Lastly, this is your home. The current economic situation shouldn’t be the reason you have to move elsewhere and leave your island behind only for visiting. Only united can the politicians of the future acknowledge us. Remaining quiet is the easiest way to be forgotten.

I believe firmly that as a collective, we the youth of the Cayman Islands, must stand as one united unit. Twenty-years down the line I want to be living in a Cayman that I can enjoy, and a Cayman that my children can enjoy as well. We shouldn’t remain quiet until we think we’ve matured to an age where it finally matters to us. Politics makes business tick. Politics is what can make this island better, or make this island worse.

You choose.

Continue Reading

Stop the fighting, we are watching!

As the youngest candidate so far who has made intentions to run for public office, I feel as though I have to speak up on behalf of the younger voters and a percentage of the mature voters when I urge that we keep the 2013 election campaign a clean one. As a voice for younger voters, we do not appreciate the personal attacks aired by some individuals in the political arena. 

This is not limited to those who intend to run for the first time or the seventh but also the supporters of the political parties to include advocacy groups and independents (old-UPD, new-UPD, PPM, C4C).

We find that the lack of focus on the real issues, that are important to us, and the attention on the nit picking of personalities not only distracting but disrespectful to those who have chosen to run and also to the people of this country. These are serious issues we are dealing with — jobs, crime, education, economy to name but a few — issues which need to be taken seriously by ourpoliticians.

We need our young people to know they too should take politics seriously; the politicians need to set the standard. The in-fighting does not reflect well among the young voter base. Remember that many of us look up to you as leaders and role models. Truth be told, we just want a better Cayman and to hear the solutions you have which may solve the major issues affecting our nation, regardless of who or which party the ideas come from.

Yes, there is a need for a strong robust debate on what is the better way forward for the country. That can be accomplished without the negative shots against each other. This behavior is dividing us as a people. 

It's going to take all of us to get Cayman back on track, so even after the May 2013 election has been and gone we all still need to be able to work together as we strive for a better Cayman. 

Continue Reading

Gender gaps in education

The gender disparity in educational participation and achievement is not a new phenomenon, and it certainly is not unique to Cayman. This complex and often emotive issue is one that has been discussed, debated and researched across the globe for several decades. Traditionally, girls have been at a disadvantage to accessing education in most parts of the world, and this continues even today.

The recent headline of the 14-year-old Pakistani teenager, Malala Yusufzai, who was shot by the Taliban for campaigning for girls to be allowed to go to school, is a very real reminder that not all is equal when it comes to boys’ and girls’ access to education. From a global perspective, the gender gap in access to primary education participation actually favours boys. However, over the past 15 years, the World Bank reports that progress has been made in closing the gender gap in primary education with nearly 2/3 of all countries achieving gender equality in primary education.

In the Cayman Islands, the 2010 Census reported a higher percentage of females aged 15-24 attending school for both full-time and part-time study, and 18.3% of females aged 15 years and older had passed no examinations compared to 21.5% of males in the same age group. A nearly equal percentage of males and females had a secondary school diploma, but females in the Cayman Islands were more likely to have an Associate’s Degree or Bachelor’s Degree or higher. Males, however, were more likely to have a vocational or trade certificate or diploma.

Among persons aged 20 years or older in Cayman, both Caymanian females (23.2%) and Non-Caymanian females (35.9%) were more likely than their male counterparts to hold a Bachelor’s degree or higher in 2010. Nearly 20% of Caymanian males and just under 30% of Non-Caymanian males held a Bachelor’s degree or higher.

While females held higher educational qualifications in Cayman, this did not translate into higher income when compared to males with the same education levels. The 2010 Census data indicated that females, on average, earned less than males at every education level. The gender gap was the widest for those with a University degree with males earning on average CI$75,291 a year compared to their female counterparts earnings of CI$57,860.

Gender ideologies and education

The discussions of gender dynamics in education in the English-speaking Caribbean have undergone significant shifts. In recent years, educational retention, completion and attainment by boys in the Caribbean appears to be slipping while girls have improved in these areas. Gender ideology or ideas about what it means to be a boy or man are one of the root causes of gender disparitiesin relation to the issue of education. 

Research in the United States has indicated that boys' academic performance relative to girls has been dropping for decades. Boys are more likely than girls to earn poor grades, be held back a grade, have a learning disability, form a negative attitude toward school, get suspended or expelled, or drop out of school. Boys and men are just as capable as girls and women of succeeding in educational systems; however we have to examine and address at a macro level what it is that causes boys to retreat from the classroom and men to under participate in education systems.

Boys construct their identity by modeling behaviours that differentiate themselves from girls. Therefore as girls participate more in learning and excelling in school, it has become “taboo” for boys to do the same when they define their gender identity in opposition to girls. Boys then seemingly retreat to physical dominance – in the positive form of sports or in the negative form of bullying and physical violence – to prove their gender identity within the school environment.

Girls and women on the other hand see schooling and education as an investment or insurance for the future. Education benefits girls in a variety of way such as increased wages, reduced teen pregnancy and infant mortality, better health, delays in having children, and it is often a way for women to ensure that their children are also educated and provided for in a healthy way. Simply put, educating girls and women has a positive multiplier effect, and it has been identified as one of the best ways in which to decrease poverty.

When boys feel they need to live up to stereotypes that have been created by society about what it means to be a boy or man, there are important negative consequences such as academic underachievement, bullying, harassment, crime and violence. The issue of gender disparity in education is therefore not a “boy crisis” but a “masculinity crisis”. 

Misconceptions about gender and education

Often times the discussions of gender gaps in education get watered down to a “battle of the sexes” misconception that pits boys against girls. However, this is not a “boys vs. girls” issue, but it is one that benefits from using a gender lens to examine the issues that have been identified.  Girls are not benefiting now or in the long run from this trend of negative male participation and performance in education.

Another misconception is that the past and current efforts of improving girls’ education and women’s empowerment have resulted in boys being negatively impacted in the education system. The reality is that boys don’t face formal discrimination in school settings the way that girls have and continue to face in many societies around the world, and boys underachievement in schools certainly has not translated into the secondary position of men or gender under-privileging when it comes to income or participation in the workforce. In order to have the positive effects of gender equality on society, we must ensure that females and males are advancing together in education systems.

How can this affect us in the long run?

The gender gaps in education can have a negative impact on the workforce and economy. They also can affect marriage rates, the composition of families and society as a whole. Data from the United States indicates that college enrolment is higher than ever with women outnumbering men by four to three; the opposite was true 40 years ago. The problem is not that more women are attending college; the problem is that men aren't attending college at the same rate.

Consequently, this disparity in education levels combined with other stereotypes about feminine and masculine roles and relationships can affect the prospect of marriage partners. If women choose not to marry at all rather than marrying men who have lower educational attainments or are likely to earn less than they do and if men are not interested in pursuing women who are more educated than them or have successful careers, then this can decrease the opportunity to create nuclear families with a mother and father present. This also increases the probability of single female-headed households and fatherless families, which can have a variety of negative impacts for the society as a whole. 

Addressing the gender gaps in education is a complex matter. The problems that are created as a result of these gaps are often inter-related and the stereotypes about gender roles compound the negative effects of inequality in educational opportunities. Therefore the solutions require a multi-disciplinary approach from a wide range of the key stakeholders both inside and outside of education systems.    

Continue Reading

A strategy for jobs

For the past four decades Cayman has focused on economic growth and relied on foreign labour to complement the Caymanian labour force whilst assuming that improved living conditions and greater social development and integration would follow automatically. However, it is now apparent to all that economic growth, improved living conditions and social development and integration do not all occur together or at the same pace. 

Cayman has experienced rapid economic development during this period but social development and integration have struggled to keep pace and living conditions for many have not improved and may now be worse than pre-Hurricane Ivan conditions.

The rate of growth alone has been the sole determinant of economic success in Cayman with little regard given to the distribution of income amongst the population, creating the need for government assisted living and leading some to argue that the growth is not inclusive of the majority in the labour force. 

A quick look at the latest available statistics, the 2011 Labour Force Survey Report, reveals that the overall participation rate in the labour force for the working age population of 15 – 65 and over is 82.8%, whereas, only 75% of the Caymanians of working age participate in the labour force as compared to 91% for non-Caymanians. It is also worth noting that with an overall unemployment rate of 6.3%, which is more than two times the acceptable rate, unemployment for all nationalities in the 15-24 age group at 20.8% is four times greater than most other age groups while the unemployment rate for Caymanians in the same age category is almost three times greater at 32.8% when compared to 11.5% for non-Caymanians. Similar startling statistics also exists for those 65 and over. Therefore, it is imperative that job opportunities commensurate with expectations and abilities are available to the unemployed youth and those over 65 within our population in order to reduce poverty and social tensions.

Recognising that the tourism and financial industries require semi to highly skilled labour and there is a significant and growing pool of low and unskilled labour in Cayman, the time has now come for Cayman to give serious consideration to economic diversification and training as a means of providing meaningful employment opportunities and to ensure greater inclusion of Caymanians in the labour force and poverty reduction in the long term. However, having found ourselves in this position with a shift in the global economy resulting in structural unemployment for many and jobs in the two pillar industries not likely to rebound to pre-2009 levels, what should we do in the short and long term?

We should give serious consideration to adopting a jobs strategy to assess the social value of jobs and identify what other types of jobs would also assist in sustaining economic growth, contributing to improved living conditions and social development and integration as well as identify constraints to job creation for the 15-24 and over 65 age groups. Such a strategy for Cayman might reveal that we need (i) greater collaboration between the public and private sectors to create employment opportunities for those struggling to find adequate employment, (ii) improve flexibility and fairness in the workplace with increased regulation in certain areas and decreased regulation in other areas, (iii) increased labour force participation and skill development through vocational and academic training across all age groups, (iv) establish permanent part-time jobs for those needing to work and care for children and keeping older workers longer in the workforce by enabling them to work shorter hours and take advantage of job sharing programs, and (v) facilitating a transition from government assisted living to working by encouraging able-bodied welfare recipients to enrol in vocational and academic training programs and by reinforcing the need to pursue gainful employment.

It is important to recognise that we did not arrive at this difficult point in time overnight and there are no quick fix solutions. The road back to economic stability and prosperity for Cayman will take prudent financial management on the part of the public sector, greater commitment from the private sector, compassion by those able to assist others and perseverance from those who are struggling. No one has ever succeeded by giving up and we should not.

Continue Reading

Children playing in a busy street

When I was first motivated to put pen to paper, or perhaps that should be "finger to keyboard", I thought about playing it safe. I then remembered that my father and many other men of his generation that went to sea weren't playing it safe. If they did, they would have stayed home.

In the final analysis, I don't need to play it safe when it comes to speaking the truth and quite frankly I am getting tired of these children that are playing in a busy street.

I have always been curious as to the origin of the term "political silly season". After watching the recent back and forth over the One Man One Vote (OMOV) issue, especially the accusations regarding who really supported the measure and who did not, I now understand. While I support the principle of OMOV, I did not support it in the referendum last year as I believed then, as I still do now, that the good intentions of the organizers where hijacked by the purveyors of political expediency. Some of the very people that are now pushing for OMOV in the upcoming elections are the same people who opposed it in the past, simply because it allowed them to get elected and maintain power.

For decades I have listened to some of my fellow Caymanians complain that the people who have come to our islands to live and work have taken advantage of our hospitality and are the cause of the ills facing our country. However, those that complain have failed to argue their point in a logical way. While I agree that some of the people who have moved to Cayman have taken advantage of our hospitality, the truth is that those people are in the minority. Our history is filled with many many more people who came to our shores when we were "the islands that time forgot" who, with their descendants, have helped and continue to help build these islands that we call home today. Any attempt to downplay or deny this fact is disingenuous at best. If we are to progress as a country we must, as we are encouraged to in the Bible, "know the truth" so that we can be "set free" to be greater than we ever dreamed we could be.

The simple truth is that some of the people in the Merchant Class are also to blame for our country's ills. Rather than using their resources to develop local talent, they have searched the world over for anyone else but a Caymanian to manage and work in their establishment. Almost 20 years ago, while working as a night auditor to save funds for college, I was getting paid CI$6 per hour plus grats that ranged from $8 to $10 a hour depending on the season. Today, two decades later, I have seen that same position paying around CI$6.50 per hour with grats around CI$4 to $8 per hour. This decrease in the quantity of income and the quality of available paying jobs are the real issues and it is masked in the argument of whether to have a minimum wage or not. We Caymanians are smarter than you think when we are asleep and way smarter when we are wide awake.

The Cayman Islands is no different from any other country in the world. People who have money want and use their money to obtain power. In the past it was easy to get power as some of them could afford to buy the votes in a whole district. The problem is that these districts have grown so large in such a short time and the economic realities have caught up to some of them that they can only afford to buy a seat within the district. In 1988 there were less than 9,500 people registered to vote in the Cayman Islands, of which 1,430 were in my district of Bodden Town. Today, 25 years later, the number of registered electors is closer to 19,000 nationally, and the number in Bodden Town has increased to almost 4,600. During that time George Town has increased from less than 4,100 registered electors to almost 7,500. The price of buying a district just went up.

Faced with a situation that they cannot control, they have turned to OMOV, but alas, the issue of the OMOV has been resolved. The people have spoken and just above a third of the registered voters (37%) said they wanted it. Slice it and dice it all you want but it was still a minority of the voters. If Caymanians wanted it bad enough they would have come out and supported it.Then again, for some people, maybe they are just used to the minority running things.

I implore these special interest groups to leave this issue alone and focus on what really matters. If you are unsure where to start, please use your resources to develop plans to get our people working again. I realize that finding work for Caymanians may not be a priority as it is easy to just raise the prices on those of us that are working to offset the loss from those that are not working — but at a minimum, please tell me why a gallon of milk cost more than a gallon of gas.  

Walk good (and stay off the busy streets).

Continue Reading