The Feminist Soapbox

How much are we obligated, as feminists, to remind our friends about certain sexist realities?

Yesterday I found myself talking to a close (male) friend about the strange work politics at the non-profit where he works. We got involved in a discussion about the gender balance on the board. He mentioned that there is only one woman and we joked (sadly) about how it was too bad that she happened to be white and straight because they had missed out on really getting a token showfigure in her. It's always important to display your one female, non-white, non-straight etc. etc. to prove that the company is not homophobic, or sexist, or racist or any ist that you feel like calling them out on. It's important to be pc after all. My friend certainly understands that sexism plays a role in the workplace.



The politics at his work are currently complicated for a number of reasons. The board is insisting on downsizing his department (in fact, one boardmember wants to cut the department entirely). Meanwhile, the board members are each earning six figure salaries. And then he told me something that surprised me. He had asked a coworker about his rate of pay  and the coworker had revealed that it was in his contract not to to discuss his salary with any colleague.  Is this normal at a non-profit? I assume that this information is fairly easy to find on the internet and so most people might not get too ruffled about finding out about this non-discussion clause.

Something else struck my notice that my friend failed to see.  How is one able to find out about gender discrepencies in pay? Why specifically ban this type of discussion? I was curious about whether he had ever attempted to discuss wages with his female coworkers but he hadn't really considered that issue. It seems strange to me that he would be worried about the implications of a 'no discussions of pay' clause and not the problem of sexism and wage earning in this country. My friend was more concerned with the problem of downsizing and work politics when the regular workers cannot discuss their wages and the boardmembers are paid exhorbitant salaries.

Should it be the duty of all male workers to make sure their female coworkers are fairly compensated for equal work? I think we could all answer that question with a resounding yes. But how far should I expect him to press this issue at work when I worry about pressing it with him when it's just the two of us?  Friends discuss intellectual ideas with friends but nobody wants a lecture from a friend. How far is too far? If I monopolize the conversation for an hour about this issue is that too much? What about fifteen minutes? Are social conventions entirely to blame for my trepidation here? How much is too much talk about feminism? (In certain circles, the answer is of course, there is no such thing as too much talk about feminism!) Or is this something my male friend would never worry about when it comes to issues that are close to his heart (say...environmentalism). Is his cause more socially acceptable than mine and he can thus monopolize the conversation for longer? Or is this just a result of patriarchal conventions - so both the cause (feminism) and the speaker (a female) - are less worthy of bogarting the mike?

What does it mean to be a good conversationalist in relation to feminism? When is the right time for a soapbox? Are these the sorts of things a man would rarely worry about?

Ps.
six figure salaries for the board of a non-profit are ridiculous!