Thanks for the story. This is why, though my approach has been gently and justly accused of being "passive" downthread, the passivity is the key in this case.
Don't overtly "defend" Amy. (Or Chuck, or any teamaker of any gender, for that matter.) Don't use the word "sexism", don't start doing math on how often each team member has been asked to make tea in the last two years, and don't otherwise call attention to your noble sacrifice (which, as you've seen, in an otherwise-mostly-male crowd serves to throw an uncomfortable spotlight on Amy). Say as little as possible. Just make tea. Try to win the initiative: If you start the job first, it can pre-empt argument over who is going to do it. Or if you lose the initiative, but Amy has interrupted her typing to start making the tea, say something like "hey, if you'd like to keep writing I'll make the tea today". (If she says no, don't press.)
If you inadvertently attract too much attention, you can make a joke about how much you enjoy tea. Quote some Hitchhiker's Guide or something. It's amazing how useful random whimsy can be.
Now, of course if you're always missing from the start of every key meeting because you're making tea the folks in the meeting may be liable to demote you in their minds. This is a sad but true fact of politics: Act like the doormat, and you'll become the doormat. There is a reason why badly-gelled teams tend to try and assign lousy jobs to the person with the weakest political position. So this might not be your final move in this game. But you may be in a better strategic position than Amy to negotiate the necessary change (which could be: rotating the tea-making role through the team, getting catered tea, moving an electric kettle into the corner of the conference room, or just "forgetting" to make the tea and seeing what happens: Maybe the team will settle on one of the above alternatives, or maybe it'll turn out that tea just isn't important enough after all to be worth the risk of introducing hierarchy into an otherwise egalitarian team.)
I've been thinking about this, and to be honest that could equally be seen as sexist, and also backfire.
Things like But you may be in a better strategic position than Amy to negotiate the necessary change could certainly be considered sexist if voiced. What you are suggesting is much the same as what I did do - simply missing out the overt portion.
It has advantages; it probably saves people being put in awkward positions, on the spot. But it could take longer, and backfire on you personally. And theoretically (I suppose) it could solidify ones own even-more-subtle sexism.
This is why I struggle with situations of equality in general. I think the whole issue is a minefield where you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't. And any thought process will end up offending someone.
Ultimately the key is to do whatever you do for the right reasons. The wrong reasons are probably "because she cant stand up for herself" and the right reason is probably "because that doesn't seem right". With empathy and common sense applied in spades.
As you say; this is a lot easier to address in a cohesive environment. By my observation - if people are playing office politics the sexism is probably just one part of an overall game.
Things like But you may be in a better strategic position than Amy to negotiate the necessary change* could certainly be considered sexist if voiced.*
Trying to teach manners through the Internet is like trying to teach bicycling by correspondence course.
Yes, of course I wouldn't say that out loud, ever, except in a high-level meta-conversation about an imaginary office populated by imaginary people drinking imaginary tea. In the real world, I would ideally say nothing at all, except perhaps "I'm going to make some tea; would anyone like some?" And then there would be tea. Delicious tea.
Heh :) I was playing devils advocate, mostly to highlight how even that thought process could be construed in the same way as my overt actions.
I agree, with the action you mention in the last paragraph - that is the action I should have taken.
What I was questioning was the thought process behind that action, and arguing it was little different to my own, could also be seen as sexist, and is only "OK" by virtue of being not-overt :)
Day 1: "My turn to make the tea"
Day 2: let $amy make the tea
Day 3: "You did it yesterday, I'll do it again - I guess the rest of these fucks are too lazy or incompetent to use a fucking teapot."
(adjust word choice for the day 3 variant to an appropriate level for your team's social context)
Don't overtly "defend" Amy. (Or Chuck, or any teamaker of any gender, for that matter.) Don't use the word "sexism", don't start doing math on how often each team member has been asked to make tea in the last two years, and don't otherwise call attention to your noble sacrifice (which, as you've seen, in an otherwise-mostly-male crowd serves to throw an uncomfortable spotlight on Amy). Say as little as possible. Just make tea. Try to win the initiative: If you start the job first, it can pre-empt argument over who is going to do it. Or if you lose the initiative, but Amy has interrupted her typing to start making the tea, say something like "hey, if you'd like to keep writing I'll make the tea today". (If she says no, don't press.)
If you inadvertently attract too much attention, you can make a joke about how much you enjoy tea. Quote some Hitchhiker's Guide or something. It's amazing how useful random whimsy can be.
Now, of course if you're always missing from the start of every key meeting because you're making tea the folks in the meeting may be liable to demote you in their minds. This is a sad but true fact of politics: Act like the doormat, and you'll become the doormat. There is a reason why badly-gelled teams tend to try and assign lousy jobs to the person with the weakest political position. So this might not be your final move in this game. But you may be in a better strategic position than Amy to negotiate the necessary change (which could be: rotating the tea-making role through the team, getting catered tea, moving an electric kettle into the corner of the conference room, or just "forgetting" to make the tea and seeing what happens: Maybe the team will settle on one of the above alternatives, or maybe it'll turn out that tea just isn't important enough after all to be worth the risk of introducing hierarchy into an otherwise egalitarian team.)