In this commentary, the theory of proxy failure is extended to social systems. John et al. discuss three examples from neuroscience, economics, and ecology. I propose to apply this theory in the field of antisexist and antiracist policies. The minimal goal of fighting sexism and racism is to guarantee equal rights and opportunities for women (sexism) and nonwhites (racism). It is important to consider what is the regulator in both cases. The regulator is both the government and state institutions, as well as private, civic institutions, and can also be individuals. The problem, therefore, is the dispersion of responsibility, as well as conflicts of interest at all levels of potential regulators. Similarly complex is the structure of agents, which can be simultaneously many institutions as well as individuals. What is least ambiguous is the proxy. In both social policies, the proxy is usually the percentage of those excluded in a given power structure, probably the most common and easiest to measure. Here I show that antisexist and antiracist policies are examples of proxy failure. They do not lead to the actual goal of equality. They are also in line with the ideal of liberal feminism, whose goal – and perhaps a side effect caused by proxy failure – is to preserve the unequal structure by focusing on the aforementioned proxy, rather than changing the structure in a more equal direction.
Racism is a very strong system of domination, resistant to antiracist discourse (van Dijk, Reference van Dijk2021). The goal of antiracism is to combat the inequality caused by racism. The regulator of antiracism policy includes all levels of society. Moreover, as history shows, antiracism is basically impossible without grassroots action by the disadvantaged and excluded themselves. This results in a vicious circle paradox. This is because we expect activity and initiative from those whose initiative and activity have been and are being restricted. Another problem of antiracist policies is proxy. The percentage of candidates hired does not address other problems that are difficult to measure or not measurable at all, such as white privilege, racism in education and justice system, color blindness, or racialization of poverty. Increasing the number of representatives of other races will not remove racism. This is because racism is based on the ideology of white supremacy, as well as being acquired through learning (Brookfield, Reference Brookfield and Brookfield2019a). It is worth remembering the limited trust of people of color in whites, where any antiracist effort by whites – including parity policies – can only be perceived as another subtle attempt to mask white supremacy, which in practice cannot shake white dominance (Brookfield, Reference Brookfield and Brookfield2019b). Consequently, antiracism policies should include a number of multilevel proxies, both for institutions and individuals (Berman & Paradies, Reference Berman and Paradies2010). Focusing on the increased numbers of racial minorities as a major proxy paradoxically can reinforce racist sentiment in the form of backlash, including in academia, which should be particularly aware of knowledge about the roots of racism and discrimination. The presence of nonwhite academics may be desirable only because of the institution's desire to appear antiracist, and not necessarily to be so in practice (Joseph-Salisbury & Connelly, Reference Joseph-Salisbury and Connelly2021; Thobani, Reference Thobani2021). This is evidenced by the marginal treatment in the academic world of humanities and social sciences research in both gender and feminism, and especially those representing the achievements of non-Western cultures (see, as an example, the virtual absence of African or South American philosophy and the dominance of the classical canon of European philosophy presented as universal philosophy, “Philosophy,” as well as the absence or minimal presence of African studies programs in most curricula).
Similarly ineffective are antisexist policies whose proxy is to increase the percentage of women in power structures. These are only apparent measures that do not eliminate sexism, but instead allow a small group of women to participate in the prosperity of the patriarchy traditionally held by men (Arruzza, Bhattacharya, & Fraser, Reference Arruzza, Bhattacharya and Fraser2019). Among traditionally marginalized groups, only able-bodied white women usually have a chance to be included in power structures, while racialized minority women are the most marginalized. Thinking about antisexist policies in terms of numerically measurable equality ignores the global perspective of millions of women around the world, whose lives will not be changed by any proxy measured by the number of women in power structures. It is about the unfair effects of climate change, which affect girls and women often more severely than men. This is especially true in those situations where women, traditionally associated with caring for the household and taking care of the family, are required to procure and prepare food, obtain increasingly difficult to access water, and are often forced to abandon their education (Atrey, Reference Atrey, Albertyn, Campbell, Alviar García, Fredman and Rodriguez de Assis Machado2023). Finally, women around the world are experiencing misogynist and sexist abuse and harassment, which is being intensified through the Internet (Ging & Siapera, Reference Ging, Siapera, Ging and Siapera2019). Women still face various obstacles in many parts of the world, including the seemingly most feminized Western societies, simply because they are women, usually centered around their reproductive biology, such as difficult access to abortion, conscience clauses on the part of doctors and pharmacists, or employer interest in reproductive plans and the gender pay gap. All of these sexist and at least partially misogynist phenomena are occurring today, some of them intensifying, such as restrictions on reproductive rights in countries with previously more liberal abortion legislation, such as the USA and Poland.
These phenomena are occurring despite the continuous increase in the number of women in various power structures and social spheres. Thus, this shows that the dynamic of sexism is independent of the aforementioned proxy of antisexist policies. The identical situation applies to the fight against racism and the ineffectiveness of antiracist policies. This therefore suggests that the current proxy for these policies is flawed. It is necessary to increase the participation of both representatives of other races and women in power structures for a variety of reasons, but it is important to keep in mind that these measures do not combat either racism or sexism, and require framing new proxies.
In this commentary, the theory of proxy failure is extended to social systems. John et al. discuss three examples from neuroscience, economics, and ecology. I propose to apply this theory in the field of antisexist and antiracist policies. The minimal goal of fighting sexism and racism is to guarantee equal rights and opportunities for women (sexism) and nonwhites (racism). It is important to consider what is the regulator in both cases. The regulator is both the government and state institutions, as well as private, civic institutions, and can also be individuals. The problem, therefore, is the dispersion of responsibility, as well as conflicts of interest at all levels of potential regulators. Similarly complex is the structure of agents, which can be simultaneously many institutions as well as individuals. What is least ambiguous is the proxy. In both social policies, the proxy is usually the percentage of those excluded in a given power structure, probably the most common and easiest to measure. Here I show that antisexist and antiracist policies are examples of proxy failure. They do not lead to the actual goal of equality. They are also in line with the ideal of liberal feminism, whose goal – and perhaps a side effect caused by proxy failure – is to preserve the unequal structure by focusing on the aforementioned proxy, rather than changing the structure in a more equal direction.
Racism is a very strong system of domination, resistant to antiracist discourse (van Dijk, Reference van Dijk2021). The goal of antiracism is to combat the inequality caused by racism. The regulator of antiracism policy includes all levels of society. Moreover, as history shows, antiracism is basically impossible without grassroots action by the disadvantaged and excluded themselves. This results in a vicious circle paradox. This is because we expect activity and initiative from those whose initiative and activity have been and are being restricted. Another problem of antiracist policies is proxy. The percentage of candidates hired does not address other problems that are difficult to measure or not measurable at all, such as white privilege, racism in education and justice system, color blindness, or racialization of poverty. Increasing the number of representatives of other races will not remove racism. This is because racism is based on the ideology of white supremacy, as well as being acquired through learning (Brookfield, Reference Brookfield and Brookfield2019a). It is worth remembering the limited trust of people of color in whites, where any antiracist effort by whites – including parity policies – can only be perceived as another subtle attempt to mask white supremacy, which in practice cannot shake white dominance (Brookfield, Reference Brookfield and Brookfield2019b). Consequently, antiracism policies should include a number of multilevel proxies, both for institutions and individuals (Berman & Paradies, Reference Berman and Paradies2010). Focusing on the increased numbers of racial minorities as a major proxy paradoxically can reinforce racist sentiment in the form of backlash, including in academia, which should be particularly aware of knowledge about the roots of racism and discrimination. The presence of nonwhite academics may be desirable only because of the institution's desire to appear antiracist, and not necessarily to be so in practice (Joseph-Salisbury & Connelly, Reference Joseph-Salisbury and Connelly2021; Thobani, Reference Thobani2021). This is evidenced by the marginal treatment in the academic world of humanities and social sciences research in both gender and feminism, and especially those representing the achievements of non-Western cultures (see, as an example, the virtual absence of African or South American philosophy and the dominance of the classical canon of European philosophy presented as universal philosophy, “Philosophy,” as well as the absence or minimal presence of African studies programs in most curricula).
Similarly ineffective are antisexist policies whose proxy is to increase the percentage of women in power structures. These are only apparent measures that do not eliminate sexism, but instead allow a small group of women to participate in the prosperity of the patriarchy traditionally held by men (Arruzza, Bhattacharya, & Fraser, Reference Arruzza, Bhattacharya and Fraser2019). Among traditionally marginalized groups, only able-bodied white women usually have a chance to be included in power structures, while racialized minority women are the most marginalized. Thinking about antisexist policies in terms of numerically measurable equality ignores the global perspective of millions of women around the world, whose lives will not be changed by any proxy measured by the number of women in power structures. It is about the unfair effects of climate change, which affect girls and women often more severely than men. This is especially true in those situations where women, traditionally associated with caring for the household and taking care of the family, are required to procure and prepare food, obtain increasingly difficult to access water, and are often forced to abandon their education (Atrey, Reference Atrey, Albertyn, Campbell, Alviar García, Fredman and Rodriguez de Assis Machado2023). Finally, women around the world are experiencing misogynist and sexist abuse and harassment, which is being intensified through the Internet (Ging & Siapera, Reference Ging, Siapera, Ging and Siapera2019). Women still face various obstacles in many parts of the world, including the seemingly most feminized Western societies, simply because they are women, usually centered around their reproductive biology, such as difficult access to abortion, conscience clauses on the part of doctors and pharmacists, or employer interest in reproductive plans and the gender pay gap. All of these sexist and at least partially misogynist phenomena are occurring today, some of them intensifying, such as restrictions on reproductive rights in countries with previously more liberal abortion legislation, such as the USA and Poland.
These phenomena are occurring despite the continuous increase in the number of women in various power structures and social spheres. Thus, this shows that the dynamic of sexism is independent of the aforementioned proxy of antisexist policies. The identical situation applies to the fight against racism and the ineffectiveness of antiracist policies. This therefore suggests that the current proxy for these policies is flawed. It is necessary to increase the participation of both representatives of other races and women in power structures for a variety of reasons, but it is important to keep in mind that these measures do not combat either racism or sexism, and require framing new proxies.
Financial support
This work was supported by the National Science Centre, Poland (UMO 2021/41/B/HS1/00223).
Competing interest
None.