So ladies, looks like our numbers are up! The numbers being those detailing just how equally, or unequally, women are treated compared to men in 130 countries, in all kinds of kind-of important things like pay, work opportunities, political power, health and education.

The United Kingdom (we don’t call it Great Britain anymore, bit of an overstatement…) has been ranked 13th by the World Economic Forum in a report on the Global Gender Gap.

You might not be surprised to hear that women actually achieve higher out of the two in terms of attending further education (69% of women compared to 50% of men) and also score better with regards to health. There was also a (very) slight increase in work opportunities- a 1% increase in the proportion of women in senior managerial roles.

But when you find out where women come out beneath men, it probably isn’t really enough consolation that you outlive your husband who made it higher up the ranks in less time than you, if you did at all, considering all you are is an emotional baby farm. Right?

Well, there is a pay gap. This had the biggest decline in performance in the index. The UK dropped 20 places to 81. Call me an amateur employment analyst but if a woman was employed doing the same or an equivalent role to a man, surely, a no-brainer really, they’d be paid the same? It somehow seems not.

Women’s political empowerment is measured by the number of women MPs there are (drop in the number of female ministers of 6% moving from 12th to 21st). I’m not entirely sure how many women feel empowered by anyone who is just as out of reach and out of touch as any male politician. And are we really politically empowered by someone just on grounds of sex. Are we really that superficial?

Or is it superficial? Since all women got the vote in 1928 and helped in the First World War effort, women’s roles have changed more and more into that of getting the same jobs as men. Women’s rights have come along way.

A better measure of political empowerment might see that there is major apathy in the country as a whole. Even from men, who are overrepresented in Parliament. Tit-for-tat, almost wholly centre-right politics has played a part in this. People don’t feel powerful or that decisions affect them.

In some areas Labour drew candidates for election seats from all-women shortlists. This ‘positive discrimination’ was designed to boost the representation of women in Parliament.’ Positive discrimination invites all sorts of criticism, the key word being ‘designed’.

This process is unnatural, and it could be unfair on better-qualified but non-discriminated against candidates. This would ultimately give the public or company a selection of candidates who might not be the best for the job.

Whilst the numbers point to a begrudging gap, the Government are due to debate a new equality bill which should set out new legislation hopefully meaning that women can no longer consciously not be selected for jobs because of the possibility of maternity-leave, or however else we are presumed inferior when taking on more powerful roles. Engineered advancements only make things appear more equal between the sexes, so meritocracy should rule. Show them and believe you are the best for the job.

Related posts:

• Can meritocracy rule in bridging gender equality gap? ...
• Government try to bridge gap between education and industry ...
• UCLan set for election fever ...
• Was ex-UClan’s input necessary in abortion debate? Is there a more pressing issue? ...
• Will Autumn see the end to 0870 permium rate numbers? ...