Comments on: Women don’t work hard enough

By: custador

custador — Fri, 23 May 2008 12:43:31 +0000

That’s a good question; my evidence is that the two (entry-level) male managers were both very, very good at their jobs, and were both repeatedly knocked-back when applying for middle-level management jobs in favour of female managers who weren’t as good. Of course, my perspective was that of somebody who was managed by them!

By: Mr Angry

Mr Angry — Tue, 13 May 2008 06:15:04 +0000

Custador: I’ve been in female dominated offices that sucked big time so I can understand your frustration. My question to you would be, how do you know male applicants who would have done a better job were being knocked back in favour of less competent females unless you personally were responsible for the hiring process? I’ve heard that line way too much. I’ve also been forced to work under incompetent male managers many, many times.

Mibsphil: you raise a good point, when women in lower level jobs earn less the Professor’s argument falls apart completely.

Boobs: I’m lazy too!

By: Ginormous Boobs

Ginormous Boobs — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:59:19 +0000

It’s all about work/life balance. And if that makes me lazy, so be it.

By: Matthew Holford

Matthew Holford — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:32:46 +0000

mibsphil,

You make some interesting points. Perhaps the issue, then, is that as a society we see “scaling the heights of the greasy pole” as the paradigm expression of our value as human beings? The very fact that it makes very few truly happy probably demonstrates what a hollow goal it is.

Parochial attitudes to pay and gender aside, if one buys into the carrot and stick game, where one never quite reaches the former, but gets plenty of the latter, then one probably only has oneself to blame, because if one is being duped as to what the game is, then everything else is probably a sham, too.

Matt

By: mibsphil

mibsphil — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:32:14 +0000

I’m a little curious why the conversation has veered toward a discussion of female vs male high level managers, executives, etc. In the original post, that didn’t seem to be the point. The premise was that women earn 15 cents less than men for all jobs, not just upper level jobs. Here in the US, I believe the gap is a bit wider: women earn about 79 cents for every dollar men earn. This pay gap has to do with a lot more than whether womean are willing to sacrifice in order to climb the corporate ladder. There are women in all kinds of jobs who consistently earn less than their male counterparts doing the same jobs. This is what we as a society ought to be focused on. In every field of endeavor there are women who are willing to sacrifice personal life, free time, having children or whatever it takes in order to succeed. These men and women are a small percentage of the work force, and are, overall, the exception. It’s the regular working women who are still bearing the burden of decades-old pay discrimination. Things have gotten better, to be sure, but there are lots of women who still earn less than their peers. I think this whole discussion got a bit sidetracked.

By: custador

custador — Mon, 12 May 2008 11:44:59 +0000

I once worked in an office where there were 24 management posts (the easiest and highest paid jobs), of which 2 were held by men and 22 by women. The best candidates for management jobs would get knocked back time and again in favour of women who were less able (and in some cases, plain incompetant) just to fill my department’s need to get more women in management. Pathetic. There is NOTHING positive about positive discrimination where all parties have had access to the same education and experience. It’s not like the old system in the States that gave bright black kids bonus points for being black when applying to uni based on the idea that they probably didn’t go to as good a school as white applicants and so had less access to a decent education – that, to me, addressed a legitimate difference and was a good idea (btw, those “Affirmative Action” laws are now illegal in the USA). In the UK, laws like that are bullshit; there’s no racial or gender difference in the opportunities you’re given.

By: Mr Angry

Mr Angry — Mon, 12 May 2008 01:19:18 +0000

Rob: I agree with you. I think you see more men in top position because being a psychopathic prick seems acceptable and even encouraged for men while being more likely to be frowned upon in women. And the first person I heard describe walnutting was Billy Bragg. A very long time ago.

DOA: For society to exist, people have to be encouraged to have babies. I think rather than punishing women by taking away leave, men should be entitled to the same leave.

Matt: I think his view is too narrow as well. Not completely wrong, but too limited.

Custador: I’m sure you went very well in that conversation

Qiranger: I’ve heard that analysis too, and I think it’s at least partly true.

Hel: I think anyone who argues all groups/minorities are exactly the same is a moron. I don’t really go in for quotas but organisations where 98% of management are white males would seem to have an issue to me.

By: Rob

Rob — Sat, 10 May 2008 11:00:14 +0000

Hel,
I hate that positive discrimination thing, meeting quotas and filling in ‘diversity surveys’ makes me sad.

I’m actually slightly disabled. Blind in one eye and deaf in one ear. Not enough to give me a hard time in life or stop me doing the sort of jobs I want to do, but enough to get an employer in the UK some points with the political correctness brigade running the place these days.

If I can get away with it, I don’t tell employers about those disabilities when I go for a job interview. The idea that I’d be barred from a job I could do *or* get given a job despite *not* being the best candidate based on a personal thing that has nothing to do with my ability fills me with horror.

Of course this comes back to what I’ve been talking about with Matt about ‘playing the game’. If another candidate is willing to exploit their own disability, gender, ethnic minority status, friendship with the CEO’s wife to get ahead then do I take the moral high ground or do I play my own cards just to keep the field level?

By: Matthew Holford

Matthew Holford — Sat, 10 May 2008 00:20:42 +0000

Rob wrote:
“…Fact is, climbing the career ladder is a game and if anyone, man or woman, isn’t prepared to recognise that and play along they’ll only get so far…”

Yes, I think that’s true – at least to the extent that it has been made into a game, for which higher management must accept the lion’s share of the repsonsibility, seeing as they set the culture for an organization.

That is, if one encourages blowjobs as a substitute for high quality work (or, at least, where two candidates are equally good employees, the one who gives the best blowjobs gets the promotion!), then one shouldn’t be terribly surprised to find that morale isn’t that good. Because, while everybody may be aware that the whole thing’s a sham, there will still be those who refuse to play, and see less able types getting promoted, simply because they’re willing to wave their twats (or, in the interests of equality, arses), around!

Matt

By: Hel

Hel — Sat, 10 May 2008 00:05:32 +0000

Feminism in general usually annoys me so I’ll try to curb my tongue a little. Frankly I agree with Prof. Wooden. At this point in our evolution I don’t see how men and women could possibly be exactly the same. Regardless of political correctness we’re just plain hardwired for different things. The workplace is still largely run in a way that men thrive in, which I don’t personally see as a problem. Women are generally not set up for the delicate balance of working in a team whilst still angling for the top job. You’d think they would be with the whole bitchy “be nice to your face, gossip about you to other friends” thing, but we don’t seem to be able to handle the “it wasn’t personal, it’s business” thing.

To be honest I absolutely hate the “we must have x% of women in management positions” policy that seems to be popular now. It’s not equality if you just get the job because they needed to make a quota of women. And on a side note, if the feminists really want equality then they’re going to have to start gunning for women to play sport against men instead of the current practice of “women’s tennis” & “men’s tennis” etc. I doubt it’s the sort of equality they want though. Heaven forbid they have to admit that women are in fact different to men.