International Women’s Day, marked each year on March 8, is all about celebrating women and furthering efforts towards gender equality. Companies are keen to join these conversations and shout about their achievements on a day when minds are focused on female empowerment. But this has led to accusations of hypocrisy.
In 2021, one user on X created the Gender Pay Gap bot. Until 2023,this automated account reposted companies’ supportive messages about International Women’s Day, quoting information about their gender pay gap. The bot’s posts received tens of thousands of views and shares, showing an appetite for calling out misleading corporate claims about women’s empowerment.
Activists and researchers label these misleading actions “gender washing”. It describes communications and practices that present corporations as taking action on gender inequalities even as they engage in things that may be harmful to women and girls.
Gender washing takes many forms. It might be, for example, sponsoring girls’ education programmes without addressing known practices of child labour and sexual harassment in supply chains. Or it could be applying for corporate social responsibility awards while facing lawsuits for discrimination against female employees.
Our research examines global arms manufacturers, including Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. It is estimated that the global arms trade as a whole was worth US$138 billion (£109 billion) in 2022 (the last year for which data are compiled).
It is hard to say how many people are killed by these weapons, but at a minimum it numbers in the tens of thousands each year. Beyond this, the after-effects of weapons use include displacement, starvation and health emergencies, as has been seen in Yemen.
Arms manufacturers continue to produce and sell weapons that cause untold suffering (including to women) across the world. But interestingly, arms manufacturers also issue communications celebrating International Women’s Day.
Careers in science and tech
Where previous research highlights how gender washing shows corporations or their products in a positive light, our research revealed bigger effects. We found that, through joint communications with governments and militaries, arms manufacturers were engaged in the process of gender washing war itself.
By posting for International Women’s Day, these companies portray the technologies and corporate operations of warfare as empowering to women and girls. They show women succeeding in science and technology careers, and girls receiving inspirational talks and science education, while saying nothing about what that science is being used for.
For example, Lockheed Martin Middle East and Africa shared a video on X showing a group of female engineers at the company’s innovation centre in Abu Dhabi, UAE. The post states that the company is “committed to inspiring the next generation of scientists and engineers through real-world #STEM education”.
The video shows a group of women wearing traditional Emirati dress in futuristic labs. They are interacting with touchscreen images of helicopters flying over deserts, examining a drone and sitting next to magnifying glasses. The soundtrack is like something out of a Hollywood action movie.
But the women do not speak for themselves. We are supposed to assume that, thanks to Lockheed Martin, they are being educated in cutting-edge technology and empowered to pursue careers in science. They get hands-on experience using the very military technologies being deployed in many parts of their region.
Lockheed Martin’s sale of weapons to warring parties in the Middle East, including arms sold to Saudi Arabia with devastating consequences for Yemeni women, is presented as a learning opportunity, “inspiring” women of the Middle East into science careers.
For its part, Lockheed Martin said in its 2023 gender pay gap report that it had closed the salary gap by 12.1% since 2017. It also said its investment in STEM activities helped it to focus on a future pipeline of female talent.
We also found that some corporations attempt to join progressive conversations without actually saying anything at all. We label this “constructive silences”. This is where companies say nothing of substance on gender issues, and do not reveal any efforts to tackle gender inequalities within their own practices. But nonetheless they tap into conversations about International Women’s Day that might enhance their reputations.
A post on X from Lockheed Martin India uses International Women’s Day hashtags. But there is no clear link to the accompanying text, which does not mention women specifically. Nor is there any connection to initiatives to address gender inequalities. Instead it talks about how “an inclusive environment” helps employees to “develop innovative solutions”.
This matters because – through social media – arms manufacturers present technologies of war as a force for public good. It is easier to deflect criticism of the harms created by your products when you can point to your efforts supporting women’s empowerment.
These posts for International Women’s Day, and other gender-washing practices, make it easier for governments to continue subsidising the arms industry, buying and using weaponry, and issuing licenses for the sale of weapons in conflicts across the globe. All the while, they give the impression that the corporations producing those weapons are educating and empowering women and girls.
This International Women’s Day, take a look for yourself. Think about which companies are professing care for women and what harms might they be obscuring.
In a statement to The Conversation, a spokesman for Lockheed Martin said: Lockheed Martin’s core business safeguards human rights by advancing cutting-edge technologies that help US and allied defence forces promote deterrence and protect their people. We adhere to strict and ethical business practices guided by US government laws, regulations and policies related to international military sales and the use of products sold to international customers. Our company culture is collaborative and respectful, which allows all of our team members to impactfully contribute to our mission-critical work.
Raytheon and Northrop Grumman were also approached for comment about the claims made in this article, but did not respond by the time we published.
