So my moment of truth did not come all at once. In 2010, I had the chance to be considered for promotion from my job as director of policy planning at the U.S. State Department. This was my moment to lean in, to push myself forward for what are really only a handful of the very top foreign policy jobs, and I had just finished a big, 18-month project for Secretary Clinton, successfully, and I knew I could handle a bigger job.
Moj trenutek resnice ni prišel v enem kosu. Leta 2010 sem imela priložnost za napredovanje v službi kot direktorica načrtovanja politik pri ameriškem Ministrstvu za zunanje zadeve. To je bil moj trenutek, da se nagnem naprej, da stisnem, za eno od peščice najvišjih služb v zunanji politiki. In takrat sem ravno končala velik 18-mesečni projekt za državno sekretarko Clintonovo, uspešno, in vedela sem, da zmorem večji zalogaj.
The woman I thought I was would have said yes. But I had been commuting for two years between Washington and Princeton, New Jersey, where my husband and my two teenage sons lived, and it was not going well. I tried on the idea of eking out another two years in Washington, or maybe uprooting my sons from their school and my husband from his work and asking them to join me. But deep down, I knew that the right decision was to go home, even if I didn't fully recognize the woman who was making that choice.
Ženska, za katero sem se imela, bi rekla ja. Ampak že dve leti sem se vozila v službo med Washingtonom in Princetonom v New Jerseyu, kjer so živeli moj mož in dva najstniška sinova, in ni šlo dobro. Pomislila sem, da bi stisnila še dve leti v Washingtonu ali pa da bi preselila sinova iz njunih šol in moža iz njegove službe in jih prosila, da se mi pridružijo. Ampak globoko v sebi sem vedela, da je prava odločitev, da grem domov, čeprav nisem popolnoma prepoznala ženske, ki se je odločala.
That was a decision based on love and responsibility. I couldn't keep watching my oldest son make bad choices without being able to be there for him when and if he needed me. But the real change came more gradually. Over the next year, while my family was righting itself, I started to realize that even if I could go back into government, I didn't want to. I didn't want to miss the last five years that my sons were at home. I finally allowed myself to accept what was really most important to me, not what I was conditioned to want or maybe what I conditioned myself to want, and that decision led to a reassessment of the feminist narrative that I grew up with and have always championed.
To je bila odločitev na podlagi ljubezni in odgovornosti. Nisem mogla gledati, kako moj starejši sin sprejema slabe odločitve, ne da bi lahko bila ob njem, kadar in če bi me potreboval. Ampak prava sprememba je prišla bolj postopno. V naslednjem letu, ko je moja družina prišla k sebi, sem začela dojemati, da četudi bi lahko šla nazaj v vlado, ne bi hotela. Nisem hotela zamuditi zadnjih pet let, ko sta moja sinova doma. Končno sem si dopustila priznati, kaj mi je resnično najbolj pomembno, ne kar sem si bila pogojena želeti ali pa kar sem si sama zamislila, da si želim. In ta odločitev je vodila v ponoven razmislek o feminističnem diskurzu, s katerim sem odrasla in se zanj zavzemala.
I am still completely committed to the cause of male-female equality, but let's think about what that equality really means, and how best to achieve it. I always accepted the idea that the most respected and powerful people in our society are men at the top of their careers, so that the measure of male-female equality ought to be how many women are in those positions: prime ministers, presidents, CEOs, directors, managers, Nobel laureates, leaders. I still think we should do everything we possibly can to achieve that goal. But that's only half of real equality, and I now think we're never going to get there unless we recognize the other half. I suggest that real equality, full equality, does not just mean valuing women on male terms. It means creating a much wider range of equally respected choices for women and for men. And to get there, we have to change our workplaces, our policies and our culture.
Še vedno sem popolnoma zavezana cilju enakosti med spoloma, ampak pomislimo, kaj enakost pravzaprav pomeni in kako jo najbolje doseči. Vedno sem sprejemala idejo, da so najbolj spoštovani in vplivni ljudje v naši družbi, moški na vrhuncu svojih karier, tako da je moralo biti merilo enakosti med spoloma, koliko je žensk na teh mestih: premierke, predsednice, generalne direktorice, šefice, menedžerke, Nobelove nagrajenke, voditeljice. Še vedno mislim, da moramo narediti, kar se da, da dosežemo ta cilj. Ampak to je le del resnične enakosti in zdaj mislim, da je ne bomo nikdar dosegli, če ne priznamo tudi druge polovice. Predlagam, da resnična enakost, popolna enakost, ne pomeni le ceniti žensk z moškimi kriteriji. Pomeni, da moramo ustvariti veliko širši izbor enako spoštovanih odločitev za ženske in za moške. In da to dosežemo, moramo spremeniti delovna mesta, naše politike in kulturo.
In the workplace, real equality means valuing family just as much as work, and understanding that the two reinforce each other. As a leader and as a manager, I have always acted on the mantra, if family comes first, work does not come second -- life comes together. If you work for me, and you have a family issue, I expect you to attend to it, and I am confident, and my confidence has always been borne out, that the work will get done, and done better. Workers who have a reason to get home to care for their children or their family members are more focused, more efficient, more results-focused. And breadwinners who are also caregivers have a much wider range of experiences and contacts. Think about a lawyer who spends part of his time at school events for his kids talking to other parents. He's much more likely to bring in new clients for his firm than a lawyer who never leaves his office. And caregiving itself develops patience -- a lot of patience -- and empathy, creativity, resilience, adaptability. Those are all attributes that are ever more important in a high-speed, horizontal, networked global economy.
Na delovnem mestu prava enakost pomeni ceniti družino prav tako kot delo in razumeti, da se oboje dopolnjuje. Kot voditeljica in menedžerka sem vedno delovala po mantri, da če postaviš družino na prvo mesto, to ne pomeni, da je delo na drugem. Življenje pride v enem kosu. Če delaš zame in imaš družinske probleme, bi pričakovala, da se jim posvetiš, in sem prepričana in moje prepričanje se je vedno potrdilo, da bo delo opravljeno, in to bolje. Zaposleni, ki imajo razlog, da gredo domov, da skrbijo za svoje otroke ali družinske člane, so bolj osredotočeni, bolj učinkoviti, bolj usmerjeni k rezultatom. In hranilci, ki so obenem skrbniki, imajo veliko širše izkušnje in poznanstva. Pomislite na odvetnika, ki preživi del svojega časa na šolskih dogodkih svojih otrok in se pogovarja z drugimi starši. Veliko verjetneje bo privedel nove stranke za svoje podjetje kot odvetnik, ki nikdar ne zapusti pisarne. In skrbništvo samo po sebi razvija potrpežljivost - ogromno potrpežljivosti - in empatijo, kreativnost, odpornost, prilagodljivost. Vse to so lastnosti, ki so vedno bolj pomembne v hitri, horizontalni in mrežni globalni ekonomiji.
The best companies actually know this. The companies that win awards for workplace flexibility in the United States include some of our most successful corporations, and a 2008 national study on the changing workforce showed that employees in flexible and effective workplaces are more engaged with their work, they're more satisfied and more loyal, they have lower levels of stress and higher levels of mental health. And a 2012 study of employers showed that deep, flexible practices actually lowered operating costs and increased adaptability in a global service economy.
Najboljša podjetja to gotovo vedo. Podjetja, ki prejemajo nagrade za fleksibilnost na delovnem mestu v ZDA, so med najbolj uspešnimi korporacijami. Nacionalna raziskava iz leta 2008 o spremenjeni delovni sili je pokazala, da so zaposleni na fleksibilnih in učinkovitih delovnih mestih bolj zavzeti za svoje delo, so bolj zadovoljni in bolj zvesti, so manj pod stresom in so duševno bolj zdravi. In raziskava o delodajalcih iz 2012 je pokazala, da so zakoreninjene fleksibilne prakse pravzaprav zmanjšale operacijske stroške in izboljšale prilagodljivost v globalni storitveni ekonomiji.
So you may think that the privileging of work over family is only an American problem. Sadly, though, the obsession with work is no longer a uniquely American disease. Twenty years ago, when my family first started going to Italy, we used to luxuriate in the culture of siesta. Siesta is not just about avoiding the heat of the day. It's actually just as much about embracing the warmth of a family lunch. Now, when we go, fewer and fewer businesses close for siesta, reflecting the advance of global corporations and 24-hour competition. So making a place for those we love is actually a global imperative.
Mislite si lahko, da je dajanje prednosti delu pred družino le ameriški problem. Na žalost ta obsedenost z delom ni več le ameriška bolezen. Pred dvajsetimi leti, ko je moja družina začela hoditi v Italijo, smo uživali v kulturi sieste. Siesta ni samo izogibanje dnevni vročini. Je prav tako sprejetje topline družinskega kosila. Zdaj, kadar gremo, manj in manj podjetij zapre v času sieste, kar odraža napredovanje globalnih korporacij in 24-urne konkurence. Napraviti prostor za tiste, ki jih ljubimo, je pravzaprav globalna nujnost.
In policy terms, real equality means recognizing that the work that women have traditionally done is just as important as the work that men have traditionally done, no matter who does it. Think about it: Breadwinning and caregiving are equally necessary for human survival. At least if we get beyond a barter economy, somebody has to earn an income and someone else has to convert that income to care and sustenance for loved ones.
V političnem smislu prava enakost pomeni, da priznamo, da je delo, ki so ga ženske tradicionalno opravljale, prav tako pomembno kot delo, ki so ga tradicionalno opravljali moški, kdor koli ga opravlja. Pomislite: hranilec in skrbnik družine sta enako nujna za človeško preživetje. Če gremo prek blagovne menjave, mora nekdo zaslužiti denar in nekdo drug mora pretvoriti ta denar v nego in oskrbo bližnjih.
Now most of you, when you hear me talk about breadwinning and caregiving, instinctively translate those categories into men's work and women's work. And we don't typically challenge why men's work is advantaged. But consider a same-sex couple like my friends Sarah and Emily. They're psychiatrists. They got married five years ago, and now they have two-year-old twins. They love being mothers, but they also love their work, and they're really good at what they do. So how are they going to divide up breadwinning and caregiving responsibilities? Should one of them stop working or reduce hours to be home? Or should they both change their practices so they can have much more flexible schedules? And what criteria should they use to make that decision? Is it who makes the most money or who is most committed to her career? Or who has the most flexible boss?
Večina med vami, ko sliši govor o hranilstvu in oskrbi, nagonsko prevede te kategorije v moško delo in v žensko delo. In ponavadi ne izpodbijamo, zakaj je moško delo v prednosti. Ampak zamislite si istospolni par, kot sta moji prijateljici Sarah in Emily. Obe sta psihiatrinji. Poročili sta se pred petimi leti in zdaj imata dvoletna dvojčka. Uživata v materinstvu, ampak prav tako uživata v delu. In zelo dobri sta v svojem poklicu. Torej kako bosta razdelili odgovornosti hranilstva in nege? Ali naj ena neha delati ali zmanjša delovnik, da bo več doma? Ali naj obe spremenita urnike, da bosta lahko bolj fleksibilni? In kakšne kriterije naj uporabljata za to odločitev? Ali je bolj važno, kdo več zasluži ali kdo je bolj predan karieri? Ali kdo ima bolj fleksibilnega šefa?
The same-sex perspective helps us see that juggling work and family are not women's problems, they're family problems. And Sarah and Emily are the lucky ones, because they have a choice about how much they want to work. Millions of men and women have to be both breadwinners and caregivers just to earn the income they need, and many of those workers are scrambling. They're patching together care arrangements that are inadequate and often actually unsafe. If breadwinning and caregiving are really equal, then why shouldn't a government invest as much in an infrastructure of care as the foundation of a healthy society as it invests in physical infrastructure as the backbone of a successful economy?
Perspektiva istospolnega para nam pomaga sprevideti, da ravnovesje med delom in družino niso ženski problemi, ampak so družinski problemi. Sarah in Emily sta med srečnimi, ker imata možnost izbire, koliko hočeta delati. Milijoni moških in žensk morajo biti obenem hranilci in skrbniki, da lahko zaslužijo, kolikor potrebujejo, in mnogi od teh delavcev se mučijo. Skupaj krpajo varstvene možnosti, ki so neprimerne in pogosto res nevarne. Če sta hranilstvo in oskrba res enakopravna, zakaj ne bi vlada investirala toliko v varstveno infrastruturo kot temelj zdrave družbe, kot investira v fizično infrastrukturo kot temelj uspešnega gospodarstva?
The governments that get it -- no surprises here -- the governments that get it, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, provide universal child care, support for caregivers at home, school and early childhood education, protections for pregnant women, and care for the elderly and the disabled. Those governments invest in that infrastructure the same way they invest in roads and bridges and tunnels and trains. Those societies also show you that breadwinning and caregiving reinforce each other. They routinely rank among the top 15 countries of the most globally competitive economies, but at the same time, they rank very high on the OECD Better Life Index. In fact, they rank higher than other governments, like my own, the U.S., or Switzerland, that have higher average levels of income but lower rankings on work-life balance.
Oblasti, ki to razumejo - brez presenečenj - oblasti, ki to razumejo, Norveška, Švedska, Danska, Nizozemska, nudijo univerzalno varstvo otrok, pomoč skrbnikom na domu, šolanje in predšolsko izobraževanje, varstvo nosečnic in skrb za starejše in invalide. Te vlade investirajo v to infrastrukturo na isti način, kot investirajo v ceste in mostove in tunele in vlake. Te družbe nam prav tako kažejo, da se hranilstvo in oskrba medsebojno podpirata. Rutinsko se uvrščajo med 15 globalno najbolj konkurenčnih gospodarstev, ampak se obenem uvrščajo zelo visoko na indeksu OECD za boljše življenje. Pravzaprav, uvrščajo se višje kot druge države, kot moja, ZDA, ali Švica, ki imata višje povprečne prihodke, a nižje uvrstitve glede ravnovesja med delom in zasebnim življenjem.
So changing our workplaces and building infrastructures of care would make a big difference, but we're not going to get equally valued choices unless we change our culture, and the kind of cultural change required means re-socializing men. (Applause) Increasingly in developed countries, women are socialized to believe that our place is no longer only in the home, but men are actually still where they always were. Men are still socialized to believe that they have to be breadwinners, that to derive their self-worth from how high they can climb over other men on a career ladder. The feminist revolution still has a long way to go. It's certainly not complete. But 60 years after "The Feminine Mystique" was published, many women actually have more choices than men do. We can decide to be a breadwinner, a caregiver, or any combination of the two. When a man, on the other hand, decides to be a caregiver, he puts his manhood on the line. His friends may praise his decision, but underneath, they're scratching their heads. Isn't the measure of a man his willingness to compete with other men for power and prestige? And as many women hold that view as men do. We know that lots of women still judge the attractiveness of a man based in large part on how successful he is in his career. A woman can drop out of the work force and still be an attractive partner. For a man, that's a risky proposition. So as parents and partners, we should be socializing our sons and our husbands to be whatever they want to be, either caregivers or breadwinners. We should be socializing them to make caregiving cool for guys. (Applause)
Torej sprememba naših delovnih mest in izgradnja infrastrukture oskrbe bi pomenila veliko spremembo, ampak ne bomo dobili enako cenjenih možnosti, če ne spremenimo kulture. Kulturna sprememba, ki jo potrebujemo, je resocializacija moških. (Aplavz) V razvitih državah so ženske vedno bolj socializirane tako, da verjamejo, da njihovo mesto ni le doma, moški pa so še vedno tam, kjer so vedno bili. Moški so še vedno socializirani v prepričanje, da morajo biti hranilci, da pridobijo samospoštovanje s tem, kako visoko nad ostale moške lahko splezajo na karierni lestvici. Feministična revolucija ima še dolgo pot pred sabo. Zagotovo ni končana. Ampak 60 let po tem, ko je bila izdana Ženstvena mističnost, imajo mnoge ženske pravzaprav več možnosti kot moški. Lahko se odločimo, da bomo hranilke, skrbnice ali kakršna koli kombinacija tega. Ko se moški, po drugi strani, odloči, da bo skrbnik, postavi svojo moškost na kocko. Njegovi prijatelji lahko hvalijo njegovo odločitev, ampak potiho se praskajo po glavi. Ali ni merilo moškosti njegova pripravljenost, da tekmuje z ostalimi moškimi za moč in prestiž? In mnoge ženske mislijo enako kot moški. Vemo, da mnoge ženske sodijo moško privlačnost na podlagi njegove uspešnosti v karieri. Ženska lahko odide z delovnega trga in še vedno ostane privlačna partnerica. Za moškega je to tvegan predlog. Torej kot starši in partnerji bi morali vzgajati naše sinove in naše može, da so lahko, kar hočejo biti, skrbniki ali hranilci. Morali bi jih vzgajati v ideji, da je oskrba kul za fante. (Aplavz)
I can almost hear lots of you thinking, "No way." But in fact, the change is actually already happening. At least in the United States, lots of men take pride in cooking, and frankly obsess over stoves. They are in the birthing rooms. They take paternity leave when they can. They can walk a baby or soothe a toddler just as well as their wives can, and they are increasingly doing much more of the housework. Indeed, there are male college students now who are starting to say, "I want to be a stay-at-home dad." That was completely unthinkable 50 or even 30 years ago. And in Norway, where men have an automatic three month's paternity leave, but they lose it if they decide not to take it, a high government official told me that companies are starting to look at prospective male employees and raise an eyebrow if they didn't in fact take their leave when they had kids. That means that it's starting to seem like a character defect not to want to be a fully engaged father.
Skoraj vas lahko slišim razmišljati: "Nikakor". Ampak spremembe se že dogajajo. Vsaj v ZDA je veliko moških ponosnih, da kuhajo, in so obsedeni s štedilniki. So v porodnišnicah. Vzamejo si očetovski dopust, ko lahko. Sprehajajo se z dojenčkom ali pomirijo otroka, prav tako dobro kot njihove žene in opravljajo vedno več gospodinjskih del. Zdaj imamo študente, ki začenjajo govoriti: "Želim ostati doma, ko bom oče." To je bilo popolnoma nepredstavljivo še pred 50 ali 30 leti. Na Norveškem, kjer imajo moški avtomatski trimesečni očetovski dopust, ki ga izgubijo, če ga ne vzamejo, mi je visok vladni uradnik povedal, da podjetja vedno bolj gledajo na bodoče moške uslužbence in so nezadovoljna, če si niso vzeli dopusta, ko so imeli otroke. To pomeni, da postaja nekaj kot značajska napaka, če si ne želiš biti popolnoma prisoten oče.
So I was raised to believe that championing women's rights meant doing everything we could to get women to the top. And I still hope that I live long enough to see men and women equally represented at all levels of the work force. But I've come to believe that we have to value family every bit as much as we value work, and that we should entertain the idea that doing right by those we love will make all of us better at everything we do.
Jaz sem bila vzgojena v prepričanju, da zavzemanje za pravice žensk pomeni početje vsega možnega, da bi ženske prišle na vrh. In še vedno upam, da bom živela dovolj dolgo, da bom videla moške in ženske enako zastopane na vseh nivojih delovne sile. Ampak verjamem, da moramo ceniti družino prav tako kot cenimo delo in da bi morali razmisliti, da nas delanje dobrega za tiste, ki jih ljubimo, naredi boljše pri vsem, kar delamo.
Thirty years ago, Carol Gilligan, a wonderful psychologist, studied adolescent girls and identified an ethic of care, an element of human nature every bit as important as the ethic of justice. It turns out that "you don't care" is just as much a part of who we are as "that's not fair." Bill Gates agrees. He argues that the two great forces of human nature are self-interest and caring for others. Let's bring them both together. Let's make the feminist revolution a humanist revolution. As whole human beings, we will be better caregivers and breadwinners. You may think that can't happen, but I grew up in a society where my mother put out small vases of cigarettes for dinner parties, where blacks and whites used separate bathrooms, and where everybody claimed to be heterosexual. Today, not so much. The revolution for human equality can happen. It is happening. It will happen. How far and how fast is up to us.
Pred tridesetimi leti je Carol Gilligan, čudovita psihologinja, raziskovala najstnice in je spoznala etiko skrbi, element človeške narave, ki je prav tako pomemben kot etika pravice. Izgleda, da je "ni ti mar" prav toliko del nas, kot je "to ni pošteno". Bill Gates se strinja. Pravi, da sta dve pomembni sili človeške narave interes zase in skrb za druge. Združimo ju v eno. Napravimo feministično revolucijo v humanistično revolucijo. Kot celotna človeška bitja bomo boljši skrbniki in hranitelji. Lahko si mislite, da se to ne more zgoditi, ampak jaz sem odrasla v družbi, kjer je moja mati postavljala majhne vaze s cigaretami na večernih zabavah, kjer so črnci in belci uporabljali različna stranišča in kjer so vsi trdili, da so heteroseksualni. Danes ne več. Revolucija človeške enakosti se lahko zgodi. Dogaja se. Zgodila se bo. Kako daleč in kako hitro, je na nas.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Aplavz)