My friend Karima-Catherine (@karimacatherine) sent me a link to an article yesterday from the Wall Street Journal. It was another article about why women don’t seem to be dominating in senior management positions. As I was reading through the article, it seemed like there was an underlying sentiment that women are not more prominent in business settings because women:
1. Lose ambition faster than men
2. Want to “live life” more than men (what does this mean, exactly?)
3. Are restricted by the hours that various schools and day care centers are open
Sorry to be blunt, but these all seem like convenient excuses for a continuing, easily spotted, easily identified problem. In two words? Gender bias.
Why would a woman’s ambition “sour?”
Let’s talk about the first point that the Wall Street Journal article raises, and then references again a bit later. Saying that a woman loses interest or loses ambition is an interesting statement. Why would a highly successful, driven woman just suddenly decide “Eh, not really interested.”
The article seems to suggest that a woman’s ambition sours because she wants to go home and have children. For some women, this might be true. I don’t like to paint with a broad brush. But what might be the case for other driven women?
Is it possible that their ambition sours because they perceive they can’t break through due to gender bias?
Is it possible that they get tired of harassment that runs riot throughout the business world?
I’m just asking.
Don’t men want to “live life?”
I find it odd that the article states that women want to “live life” more, and hence might migrate away from the work-a-day world. I know plenty of men who wish they could spend more time with their children, in fact. If you surveyed a million people, I’ll bet a large majority of them would say, “Sure, I’d love to work less and spend more time with my family. That would be awesome!”
So what does this portion of the article really mean? Are we saying that women aren’t in senior management positions because they either can’t have children and work or don’t want to try? Again, for some women, that might be 100% true, but to say that this is an explanation as to why the “pipeline is leaky” doesn’t ring true to me. Perhaps women feel like they can’t go on maternity leave because their position would simply be taken away, so they feel like they have to choose?
Indicating that women tend to really excel as pediatricians also is a telling statement. Part-time hours, working with children – these are the kinds of jobs women really like. So if you are talking about a senior management position that requires more than an 8-hour workday, women just won’t like that as much.
Again, to me it seems like we are using the fact that women can give birth as a convenient excuse for gender bias. “Oh, you wouldn’t like this job. You wouldn’t be able to spend as much time with your kids.”
Hmm.
It’s gender bias both ways
If I was a man, I would also feel insulted at these articles that insinuate that only women want to stay home and watch their children grow. Is it considered unmanly for a man to want to play with his kids? What about the growing population of stay-at-home dads? Are they just simply lacking ambition? Is child rearing still just “woman’s work?”
Isn’t it time we stopped using the woman’s womb as a weapon against both genders? Isn’t it time we stop using the fact that women can give birth as a shield for bias and discrimination?
It sure seems so to me.
Image by Brent Allison. http://www.sxc.hu/profile/ballison
04/20/2011
Hi Margie
I have good news for you: Women are steadily gaining senior management positions in almost all industries. With in a generation {or less} you will see women holding 50% or more of senior management jobs.
The real good news = The future in business is in “Self Employment”. I beleive there are far more self employeed women running successful small business’s than meets the eye or is readily apparent. Next time your shopping online, in the Mall or looking for a service it is more likely than not you will be dealing with a woman.
I’ve owned my own business & been self employeed for 30 years. 50% Of the suppliers I deal with are headed up by women. This is great as they are far more capabile and efficient than the “Old White Guys” they replaced.
Both Genders produce very competent Manager’s , Administors and Small business owners.
Cordially
Mike
You’re right, Mike. Progress is being made. But can we rest on our laurels? If we say that progress is being made, that can sound like the finish line has been reached. Based on the title of that Wall Street Journal article, I don’t think we’re quite there yet. So we have to explore why that is.
Or so says I!
Thanks for your comment!
This is exactly why you see more and more women become leaders in the entrepreneurial world. They are leading us to create innovative ideas, scaling business, and create tomorrows’ opportunity…today. They see the ceiling of the corporate latter and their knowledge being limited by gender biases. That is why more and more women are not submitting to this corporate b.s.! They want their cake and eat it too…and they are finding that life long flexibility in entrepreneurship.
I feel the same way. Regardless of gender, we have all experience a bias in the corporate work setting, whether it is gender, race, politics, etc…a ceiling begins to present itself. This is not to say that I can, in any way, identify with a woman who has experience gender bias in a corporate setting. With that said, I wanted the flexibility of a home life, family setting, and generating an income that fits me and my families lifestyle as well. Being an “entrepreneur” provides that innovative thinking that is many times restricted inside the walls of the corporate machine. Our innovation is fun for both us and our families!
Thanks so much, Bobby! How interesting it is that this post only has comments from men. Normally these posts only get comments by women. Interesting indeed.
That’s what really bothered me about the article. Clearly, women are the only ones who want to stay home with their kids. Clearly, only women savor the opportunity to work less and stay with family more.
It seemed like an even insult at both genders.
The article reads like expert opinion rather than hard statistical study – those always worry me a little. There’s a tendency in experts of all stripes to adhere to status quo bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_bias) and other opaque processing troubles.
I have an expectation that it’s also a converse accident problem – receiving answers only from women on the lines of “women want family time” MUST mean only women want family time, right? Because the men don’t speak of it in studies; it must not be important.
We’re a lot worse at judging crowds than we think we are. What’s worse; the small pool of high powered women executives is not, perhaps, big enough to constitute a statistical sample yet. If that’s the case, there need to be more of them before anyone can state definitively why there are NOT more of them.
Circular logic. Argh.
Wow, you made me dizzy, but it’s a great point! What are we basing these opinions on? How many people did these experts talk to? Can we base all of our opinions on just that sampling of people? Why?
It was very imprecise and that’s why I think it kind of took me off guard.
Ok Margie I’ll come in with a woman’s point of view. I do think it’s great to see men commenting.
Personally being a woman, and in particular being a mother, does not dampen my career aspirations. If anything, since my child is a girl, I want her to see that it is possible to have a great career and a family. Being a parent inspires me to achieve more, not less.
Finally in regards to Ian’s comments, any study like this must be reviewed objectively. There are three *possible* pitfalls which would nullify the results (wait a sec while I put on my actuarial hat).
1. An insufficient sample group – which could be simply too small or not diverse enough to be representative
2. Subjective or leading questions – anyone who has worked in quantitative market research will tell you that the way a question is asked or worded can prejudice the results
3. You can lie with numbers – you just pick the ones that support you and repress the rest.
Thanks, Nicole. That’s a great perspective to offer. Actually, two great perspectives to offer, as a working mom and as a numbers lady!
Perhaps the presentation the article alludes to was a lot better, but there were an awful lot of broad statements made with precious little support. That always tends to send my worry antennae up 🙂
Interestingly, I recently read an article about gender bias in the world of surgeons that seems to support your statements: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/sexism-charges-divide-surgeons-group/
I work at an engineering company, and women still have a loooong, looooong way to go before achieving gender equality in the engineering field. There are few female engineers and the male company owners rarely hire them, because they incur more costs–higher insurance premiums, time off for maternity leave, the inevitable harassment complaints because the male employees “aren’t accustomed to working with women” and say really inappropriate things. Personally I think that paid maternity and paternity leave would solve a lot of our inequality issues–other industrialized countries have this (including Holland, the Happiest Place on Earth), and their gender equality in the workplace is far ahead of ours. Socialized medicine would be the biggest boon to women in the workplace though, because employers would no longer have to worry about the higher premiums and greater sick time taken by female employees. It would really help to narrow the gap, more than any other reform.
You’re so right, Sarah. I remember literally being taught when I was a kid that “boys tend to be better at science and math,” and I was also virtually kicked off the academic challenge team because “girls aren’t as competitive as boys.” People have crazy ideas about what women can and can’t do, and sometimes I think little girls buy into that because the evidence *seems* so overwhelming.
As for health care, that would be a whole separate post. Why do women have to fight their insurance companies to get breast reduction surgery covered, yet products like viagra get covered with no problem? These are questions that drive me nuts.
I too question the sample size and also another part. We as a society immediately think of women as the custodial parent. In times of divorce or for those that were never married, there are men that are the custodial parent. Did they include men that are custodial parents because I am sure that they are too bound to the times of the day care or have help from family. Did they consider that part? Probably not. I recognize that when we read these articles we do so with a certain POV and while there are parts that I do agree with as a custodial parent, their research is skewed and incomplete.
Sure we see more men running off to work while the women stay home with the children (well in high unemployment, we are seeing a shift where more men are staying home) and while there is not the prestige or the salary that comes with a CEO, taking care of the children and being involved in their lives, teaching them and being with them 24/7 is a job harder than any other one out there.
Well said, Suzanne. That’s why I think there is gender bias against men as well in that article. To say that only women want to stay home with their children just doesn’t make any sense to me. There is too large a population online of “digital dads” for me to really buy that anymore.
Perhaps women need to lend more support to the stay-at-home dads. I think that group is constantly getting overlooked or is made to feel ashamed, and that is an awfully sad state of affairs for men AND women.
Hello Web Admin, I noticed that your On-Page SEO is not that great, for one you do not use all three H tags in your post, also I notice that you are not using bold or italics properly in your SEO optimization. On-Page SEO means more now than ever since the new Google update: Panda. No longer are backlinks and simply pinging or sending out a RSS feed the key to getting Google PageRank or Alexa Rankings, You now NEED On-Page SEO. So what is good On-Page SEO?First your keyword must appear in the title.Then it must appear in the URL.You have to optimize your keyword and make sure that it has a nice keyword density of 3-5% in your article with relevant LSI (Latent Semantic Indexing). Then you should spread all H1,H2,H3 tags in your article.Your Keyword should appear in your first paragraph and in the last sentence of the page. You should have relevant usage of Bold and italics of your keyword.There should be one internal link to a page on your blog and you should have one image with an alt tag that has your keyword….wait there’s even more Now what if i told you there was a simple WordPress plugin that does all the On-Page SEO, and automatically for you? That’s right AUTOMATICALLY, just watch this 4minute video for more information at. WordPress Seo Plugin