E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Adrees Latif / Reuters
Sheryl Sandberg, chief operating officer of Facebook, speaks during an interview in New York.
“A truly equal world would be one where women ran half our countries and men ran half our homes,” writes Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg in her book, "Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead," a self-named “manifesto” for her proposed women’s revolution.
As appealing as such a world may sound, some working women argue that it’s easier said than done.
Nonsense, Sandberg says. Too many women are being overlooked for promotions due to lack of confidence and poor negotiation skills, not lack of opportunity. It has become the norm for women to sidestep advancement in order to focus on family responsibilities, she writes, and the result is a shocking imbalance of power on the workforce.
Women still only hold 4 percent of top government posts worldwide, 14 percent of top corporate jobs and 17 percent of board seats, and those numbers haven’t budged over the past decade. With a skilled, college-educated female army out there, there is no reason men are still holding the keys the kingdom.
On CBS's "60 Minutes," Sheryl Sandberg said men outnumber women in the ambition to lead and be a leader. Mindy Grossman, HSN, Inc. CEO, offers her perspective.
But any "revolution" is bound to draw its fair share of criticism, and this one is no exception. Sandberg, a Harvard-educated, über-power player and Facebook’s COO, is often derided for being out of touch with the challenges and frustrations of ordinary working women. Sandberg’s supporters counter, who better to lead a revolution? – and point out that she has been able to create a meaningful dialogue about the driving forces that define most women’s lives – a conversation that has not taken place on a national scale for quite a long time.
“It’s hard to talk about women leaving the workforce without sounding like you’re criticizing the choices they’ve made. But by definition, if women aren’t out there making the laws, running the corporations, doing the research – if women aren’t engaged in professional life, they’re not having an impact,” says Kim Grahl, a physician and senior clinical educator at North Shore University Health System in Evanston, Ill. “So how can you blame it on men when women have taken themselves out of the game?”
Grahl, a mother of two, has kept her place in the workforce while raising her children. But she’s the first to admit that she has allowed her career to take a backseat to her husband’s. “I have a much less interesting career than my husband has. So yes, women are making our own choices but the problem is, sometimes we’re not given very good choices.”
The fallacy, she says, shared by many women of her generation, was that it was possible to take time off to raise children and then jump back into the game.
In light of Sheryl Sandberg's interview on CBS's "60 Minutes," CNBC's Jane Wells and Cindy Perman chat about balancing work and family.
“It’s like we were sold a bill of goods,” she says. “Jobs demand too much. It would be good if you could take 15 percent of your time to devote to family life – but this is a fantasy, right? The sheer volume of menial work that a mother has, I mean, you’re just exhausted. And then, all of a sudden you wake up and you’re 46. And the train has gone by. And when it went by, you were in the basement doing laundry.”
Suzanne Keller, an attorney at The Rachel Coalition, a nonprofit women’s organization in New Jersey, agrees that managing two high-powered careers along with a family can be next to impossible.
“It’s very hard to accept that I was on a trajectory to be higher in my field than I am,” says Keller, a Harvard Law School graduate whose husband is the director of two Health and Human Rights programs at New York University. “I’m not out there in the way that I could have been if my husband’s job wasn’t so demanding. It’s very hard for two people have big careers. It’s an incredible strain on a family.”
Julie Martin, an attorney at Scott, Scriven and Wahoff, LLP in Columbus, Ohio, says she was able to “lean in” and make partner at her law firm because her husband was willing to “lean out.”
“How I did it was by having a great spouse who took on 50 percent or more of the home responsibility,” she acknowledges. “My husband is a high school English teacher, so he’s home with the kids every summer and shares their schedule. He works the structured hours so I can work the crazy hours.”
In fact, while most working women acknowledge the importance of a helpful partner, many said the single most important factor in successfully “leaning in” is a supportive employer. For Laura Griffin, publications editor at Montclair State University in New Jersey, an understanding boss made it possible for her return to her job at a prominent Dallas newspaper after her first child was born.
Clara Shih, "The Facebook Era" author, discusses what it was like to be mentored by Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg, and weighs in on how women can redefine their positions in the workplace.
“My boss made it easy for me to come back from maternity leave,” she says. “He gave me a sizable raise before I left, let me come back at 30 hours a week and made sure I still had worthwhile assignments. He knew that I needed a compelling reason to 'lean in' to my job when I had the tug of a baby at home.”
Martin concurs that a family-friendly employer can make the difference between a working mom and a stay-at-home mom.
“I was fortunate to have an employer who allowed me to work flexible hours,” she says. “It was a flex-time thing, no questions asked: an exchange of office hours for family time.”
“We don’t live in a culture where anyone can 'lean into' the home and not expect to take a hit on their career,” Keller says. “Sheryl Sandberg’s telling people to lean in or lean out when she should be talking about the culture of business. For instance, why is Yahoo taking away telecommuting? That’s been something that’s been really helpful to women.”
Mwezi Pugh, a sixth-grade literacy teacher in the New York City public school system, says the work environment at many large corporations, particularly within the competitive financial sector, tends to be female unfriendly.
“Before I became a teacher I worked for Morgan Stanley, and I could see that my female boss had to work twice as hard as the men in that male-dominated industry,” she says. “I feel like there’s still an 'old boys network' at those places. Men are given extended opportunities to socialize and work their way up, such as going for drinks at a bar or going to a game. Women are less likely to be asked along in those situations. And even if they went, they’d be the only woman there.”
Pattie Sellers, Fortune editor-at-large, discusses Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg's new book, "Lean In," about how women's role in the workplace is changing.
Because the balance of work and family can be so fragile, many women say a difficult boss or a hostile work environment can be enough to derail her career -- or at least change the course of it.
“When I was pregnant with my second child, I got a new boss who resented my maternity leave and my shorter work week,” recalls Griffin of her days at the newspaper. “She gave me assignments no one else wanted to work on. It wasn't long before I decided that giving up my time with my children for that job wasn't worth it.”
Griffin eventually moved to the East Coast and later, found work as an editor.
“If I had leaned into my job when my kids were little, I have no doubt I'd now be at a very different place in my career,” she says. “But I think I would have missed a lot, too. No matter what you do as a woman, it seems you feel guilty. So I guess I leaned in toward my kids.”
Leave a Comment:
The problem with the argument is that it assumes that every woman wants more. I don't for one second think that I couldn't climb further in my career if I wanted to. I just don't want to and it has nothing to do with family (I'm single, no kids) and everything to do with me making a choice about what makes me happy.
Exactly. Her 50/50 work/home statement implies she thinks it should be that way.
It is unsettling to see someone using the pretext of fairness and equality try to postulate how society should be or how others should live their lives.
I've seen this happen more than a few times with the pro-choice pretext to create peer pressure, or coercion, for a single woman's pregnancy. If it's pro choice, then let her make the choice. Don't try to tell her that she could not handle the responsibility of a mother who is single.
So 50% of the soldiers, car mechanics, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, welders, etc. should be women and 50% of the nurses, hairdressers, cosmotologists, administrative assistants, etc. should be men according to her? There are plenty of exceptions to these "traditional" roles for men and women, however at this point in time men and women still generally tend to gravitate to work roles in which they are most comfortable.
Can't it be likely that 50% of men or women want these types of careers but can't get access as easily because of gender stereotypes? From birth children are taught that cars are for boys and princess dolls are for girls. There aren't hairdressing toys marketed toward boys (yet, some awesome and happy hairdressers are men) and there aren't mechanic toys marketed toward girls (yet, many girls have an interest). Then you grow up getting pushed and shoved and taught wrong and end up falling into the stereotypes.
I'm willing to bet that if things were truly equal, 50% of women would want and be happy in "male" careers, and 50% of men would want and be happy in "female" careers.
"In a truly equal world" ... men and women would be doing what they want to be doing. Maybe 70 percent of world leaders would be women, maybe 30, who cares?
And mixedpie - my 3-year-old decided she liked princesses and ponies and the color pink all on her own. Trust me - I stay at home and know exactly what she's been exposed to and how she's been exposed to it. 100% her preference. Funny, boys and girls are biologically different ... and they act different, too!!
Kamity - So your daughter has never seen a single commercial, has never played with other girls, has never gone shopping in the girl department, has had no outside influences showing her that pink is the "girl" color?
There are gender differences at early ages (see any case about GID), however, that doesn't mean that stereotypes have no influence on development or gender-oriented preferences.
If you daughter were raised before WWII would she still like pink, or would she likely prefer blue? (WWII was the cultural turning point for the pink and blue gender stereotypes, before then blue was for girls because it was "calm and nurturing" and pink was for boys because it was "a little red" and therefore vigorous and fiery... then Hitler decided to brand gay men pink and it fell out of fashion for little boys).
Mixedpie, I am not a frilly girl and so I painted my girls room in rust colors and navy, but when she made the choice her first full sentence was I love pink while holding a bow. I have no interest in cars not because my dad did not teach me he did. I just do not. We fall into stereotypes because that is where the majority are comfortable. I am not comfortable with bows and barbie but that is just me. Boys and girls are different and it is not just the plumbing.
I played with Hot Wheels and Transformers, built tree forts and played sports with dad, spent time considering (and working on) a computer science degree (ended up in Anthropology because of issues with the CIS and math departments at uni though...), got a ribbon in the science fair for a project about video games in elementary school, took advanced and honors science courses in high school, etc. I still like unicorns, and pink, and wearing lace dresses, etc. I'm well aware that not everyone is a walking stereotype.
However, when did you see a power work bench in the girl's aisle at the toy store? Obviously, a lot of girls are interested in that sort of thing. But you have to go to the "boy" aisle to find one. The opposite is true for a play kitchen or play house that isn't pirate or similarly themed. Studies (of which there have been many, I don't know the policy on linking to them though) have shown that girls tend to do better in math and science under different parameters. Girls are better at math tests than boys, for example, when they have more work and more time. Boys are better at speed tests. There was another study where Asian women took math tests. When they were conditioned to think about how Asian they were they did very well. When they were conditioned to think about how feminine they were, they did horribly.
What a bunch of horse manure lady. Why don't you just come out and say what you really think. That is, that women who make the choice to stay out of the work force and raise their own children, or take a less demanding career path so they can be involved with their children's lives, are just BIG LOSERS!
Take your "attitude" ladies and take a hike!!!
Bull
Many women still believe raising children to be productive citizens to be the most important job they aspire to excel at..... personally, I admire a great mom far more than any career woman.
“A truly equal world would be one where an equal number of women and men were happy doing what they are doing”
I was in corporate management for a financial institution for 25 years. I worked my tail off, got pretty far, but eventually I "leaned out." Had nothing to do with family -- I'm single. It's just that for me it was twice the struggle for the men around me. I grew up with brothers, I can talk sports, even hold my own on the golf course, but it's just so ridiculously hard to break through that boys' club.
I, along with many other women, worked hard, did excellent work, then suddenly some hotshot comes up and impresses the right person and that's all it takes. I'm not bitter about it; it's just reality. Eventually, I decided I couldn't become that person, didn't want to live that way. So I stopped the climb, and chose to strive to excel at what I was doing instead of trying to break through. I commend those who hang in there, and hope that other industries are better.
I think the responsibility of the current state is partially women (really sorry) BUT... the employer is the enabler of this activity, and perpetuates it daily. When an employee is measured by their time in the office and not the work that is actually done, I think this keeps women out of leadership positions. Working long hours leads to promotions in most companies. Doing great work, can easily be oversighted by the people staying late to have one of those after-hours conversations with the boss.
" When an employee is measured by their time in the office and not the work that is actually done, I think this keeps women out of leadership positions.."
Oh really? Then can you please explain to me why Yahoo's CEO, who is a WOMAN, is REVOKING the work at home policy, forcing employees to be in the office?
Benn - She's revoking it because too many people were using it as an excuse to slack off on company pay.
Ben - Mixedpie is correct. I can assure you that women who claim that they need or should get to work from home so they don't have to hire daycare are NOT getting the required amount of work done. If you have children that need supervision, you need to get child care if you want to work. Period.
Analyzing equality of opportunity by toting up numbers is a fallacious concept. Due to biology, women are the ones who generally want, and must bear children. Doing a good job of child rearing seriously limits the investment the woman can make simultaneously in a career.
Just because some women want it this way, you can't transfer the maternal instinct to men. So there are choices to be made, but due to biology, the numbers are unlikely to ever be 50/50.
I say you've got it right. The elephant in the room is now the average single salary is so low it's now NECESSARY for women to work which is why we even have this conversation!
When working for women was an "option", those who chose families could actually RAISE their children which averts so many social ills plaguing the world today.
In the end SOMETHING or SOMEONE will suffer: The woman's career, the man's career, or the child who doesn't know their parents and/or is raised by someone else and THEIR values.
HERE is an idea: Let's get AVERAGE single salaries back to where they can support a household with a mortgage (NOT RENT), a NEW car payment, living expenses for a family of 4 again and those that choose to "Lean-in" will have more opportunity to do so.
Agreed, however I wish my mom had worked when I was growing up.
There really are mothers who are like "Mommie Dearest," especially within the privacy of home. On the other hand, this creates lucrative careers for lots and lots of therapists and psychologists.
High horse since 1967 the median income has increased by about 31%. Really it what we consider necessary expenses that makes us require two incomes. We have a much higher quality of living and that costs more. Cell phones, Cable, children having cars, fancy vacations we live a charmed life in the US where you can have a car and eat three meals a day and still be considered poor. Most of the world is not that lucky.
My family cannot make it without me working parttime. We have the cheapest cell phones no bills except rent,electric and gas for the one car that was a 5grand cheapy. So tell me again how a family can live and save on one income?
I think this is a bunch of BS! I think there are many of people out there that can live on one income, they just chose not to. I am sorry, I wont pay anyone to babysit, watch or nanny my children because I have to work and trust me our household income is not large. In the the end your kids are the ones that suffer. Your child(s) need an positive healthy attachement to a person so they can grow into confident, secure and positive people. I am always amazed how people can just put their children in daycare, and not really look at themselves and see how they can manage to have one parent stay home.
kujo I think that's a pretty judgemental comment. I am a working mother of two and I have to work to keep a roof over our head, food on the table and clothes on their back. I'm happy for you and your situation but it's not as easy as you say. My oldest son goes to my parents before and after school and my youngest has been in an in home daycare since he was 6 months. Sure I would love to spend my time with them, but not broke on a park bench wondering how I am going to feed them dinner that day!
It's been proven that children in high-quality child care do just fine. Families who put their children in child care and work are as capable as any other at raising successful children. Women do not need to feel that if they work, they can not raise a wonderful family and be good parents. And women should not feel that, if they choose to work at home, that they are contributing less to society.
In response to S-1914173, I didn't take that from the article. The point of the article is to state that women who do want more should go for it and stop coming up with reasons why they can't make it up the corporate ladder. As the article states, women should stop taking themselves out of the game and allowing their male counterparts to continue to lead in everything. It keeps the world very one-sided, as far as, overall growth and perspective.
And I think women should want more. Women are leading in college graduates compared to men...why are we more educated but we aren't leading more??? I don't really get the point of being ambitious enough to want to complete a degree if we don't plan to "lean in" and really use it.
I know I am doing my part to "lean in" so I can help open the doors for other women who want to enter the IT field and actually move up the ladder and receive equal pay, fair benefits, etc. It hasn't been very easy for me but being a force for other women helps to keep me going. I am a mom but I don't feel guilty for wanting a lot out of my career. I have the knowledge, I'm going to use it and I feel like my sons will respect me even more for it. My sons have already shown that they are proud of what mommy does for a living. My sons have two shining examples because their dad is in the same field and we both have pretty great careers so far. We work really hard and divide up the household stuff 50/50. My husband had more of a flexible career at first so he used to stay home with our sons. Then I took 3 years off to raise our sons when my husband was deployed for the military. I entered back into the work force and we have continued trading off duties so both us can move up in our careers. I admit, it's a juggling act but it can be done.
I feel like Sandberg is stating that women will never have equal opportunity in the World and in the workplace if more of us aren't making an effort to get up the ladder and lead. Men are more likely to hire other men, especially for typical male-dominated fields vs. hiring women. People relate (and are more comfortable) with people who are more like them. And people like to stick with what has always been. If men have always done the job, people feel more comfortable hiring the same ol' gender even if the female is probably more qualified.
I like reading articles and seeing revolutions like this. It's inspiring and propels me to keep moving up the ladder until I get to the top, no matter what.
JaevisMom
As a retired corporate executive (male), I had the pleasure of managing a staff of 18 women and 1 man during the last 12 years of my career. This was a significant change in the gender ratio for my management career.
I do not mind admitting that I initially accepted this assignment somewhat tentatively due to my own "learned" concepts of working women. However, I found the females to be dedicated, involved, and generally a delightfully productive group that made it a joy for me to go to work.
The experience made me a better manager, and, more importantly, a more benevolent individual that began to see the value in considering family needs in addition to the corporate needs.
But, really...
don't you think "may be more qualified." is more appropriate, or do you think that any female is automatically more qualified than a male?
It's funny....I don't see the guys having to "Lean In" where I have worked.
What I see is bosses promoting their golf, hockey and football buddies..even when they are not qualified or haven't been working as hard as their women counterparts.
Promotions just fall in their laps whether they want them or not.
Unfortunately this happens in many companies, and in politics, and in many ways. There is everything from (subtle to obvious) prejudicial preference for which university the applicant attended, to weight or body mass index, to even who the applicant's previous employer was. Decades ago I predicted we would have a black president before we would have a woman president, and my friends were skeptical. Women are still facing the glass ceiling and probably endure the most prejudice. I hope we will evolve past that. After all, each man wouldn't be here if not for his mother.
Uhhh...excuse me, but...while I don't doubt that that happens in some companies, I've only seen it once or twice in more then forty years of working. But, as a single man approaching retirement age, what I HAVE seen my entire working life is the "balance" of the workload that working parents shirk in order to have more "family time" falls on those without families, and having to shoulder that work load many, many times over the years has cost me dearly. Kinda of hard to brainstorm, research, and find solutions when your phone is ringing off the hook covering for someone who chose to have a child, who's off to a soccer game, or taking an entire afternoon for a pre school graduation.
maybe you're just not that good of an employee...
Well you must be working for the wrong company as I have seen several woman "hang" out with the boss to get promotions.
Luck is when hard work meets opportunity. Things rarely "fall into somebody's lap". It is usually because they are making a point of working hard at networking and KEEPING their name out there, and that can get exhausting.
I also find it some what ironic that there are so many comments about the old boys network when all I see these days are WOMENS networking events and Womens conferences. If you are only networking with women then you are excluding yourself from networking with, according to this article, 95% of the executives.
Then you need to change jobs. If you can not because people are not hiring then there is a problem with the person in the mirror. There are jobs out there for qualified people, but you need to get out of your box and look. If a company is that closed it is time to find a new box.
What I have found funny at almost every place I have worked, and even stated in this artical. Women want thier cake and eat it to. I have been subjected to so much reverse discrimination its down right criminal. I seen women making higher salaries or the same as men for half the work. For example, at the end of the day when it comes time to work over, its not the women who are EXPECTED its the men. If I were to say "Oh I have to go get my kids" I wouldnt have a job. A women can use that excuse every time and works. Sure many men would love to be a stay at home Dad. But women nor society excepts that. I get so tired of men being the excuse for a womens short comings. If you want we have come and get but be prepared and expect the EXACT same treatment which 90% of you do not want.
@Really72
Glad I wasn't the first to say it!
Really72, your experience is EXACTLY what I've encountered since the late 1970's. When it came to working nights, weekends, holidays, or even the day before a holiday, there was as stampede of women out the door hollering over their shoulders "I have kids!". And it was nothing short of amazing how many crises or "can't miss" events developed out of thin air at crunch time, but when a position opened up, there they'd be, spouting about how hard they worked, and the sacrifices they'd made for the company. I've ALWAYS been in favor of equal pay for equal work, and I can't complain that a woman was promoted over me unfairly, but honestly, I've had forty years of whining about how much they deserve more then I do because...they have kids. Hell, I think sometimes they make up kids.
I'm a man, 20+ years in biz world (hotel biz,and technology). I am going to buy this book because it sounds like she is contending what I have been saying for years. Finally, a woman of power steps forward to lead with something other than excuses about biology and glass ceilings. Do these women resent the men in the office that are "holding them back"? Or is it the men they share a bed with and their expectations that is really what is occupying their time? Even women without children are usually cleaning up after another person. It is true that a man can do anyting with the right partner. It is true for women as well. Most of the women I know are so obsessed with acheiving wifehood and motherhood by a certain age that they choose a man based on how fast they are going to get those things and not how good a husband he is going to be. MESSAGE TO WOMEN, choose better men! And then you really can have it all. Any idiot can go to Jared. But, what is he going to be like after the glow of your special day wears off? Is he going to be supportive? Can he heat up dinner? Will he do laundry, so that you can stay later at the office? Men are better at forecasting years ahead with regards to their career. Women try and do the same thing with marriage and home life, but they all have one eye on the clock. And they make bad decisions because of that. Is having the baby at 33 instead of 27 that big a deal?
In order to choose "better men" there has to "be" better men and there just aren't that many out there.
there are plenty of great guys out there, maybe you should re-prioritize. like most whiners, it's take you too long to realize that there's more to a guy besides looks. So you get burned by these hunks while rejecting perfectly nice guys, then complain when you get screwed over. boo freaking hoo
I totally agree I see women shoot down nice guys all the time before they even know anything about him. So don't cry that there are no good men. The same could be said for most women these days. Most just want to lay on their backs and have a life provided for them well offering nothing in reutrn. So it goes both ways.
Even the "nice guys" have issues, and all of you men think you are "hot" when you are overweight, bald and dressed in rags, while expecting women to all look like Victoria's Secret models. Maybe it's time you men cleaned up your act and came back to reality.
I'd rather be single than with someone like Benn, who seems to think he is "nice"guy, when what he displays on this site is a lot of hostility toward women. I shall bow before yee oh great Benn... Get a therapist. And God, I feel sorry for your wife.
Julie, Or you can choose no man. What's wrong with that? Or at least don't make it your first priority. Society still does not raise young women teaching them the same accountability that it teaches young men. It is still perpetuated by the moms. Young men's first priority is a career. That is not young women's first priority, and that is because it is not taught to be. There are exceptions, of course. But, in general, women are still raised and taught that their greatest accomplishment is the man they bag. It is moving closer to that, not further away, as I thought it would after the 60's. Biggest surprise of my adulthood. When it comes right down to it most women are not anxious for accountability. And to move up in the corporate world it comes in handy.
Leadership positions tend to go to the most committed players....most committed to the organization. What they sacrifice to get there, many companies don't care. I see many divorced men in the VC and high-stakes financial sector.
I teach math to girls and boys, and I see a general pattern that speaks to leadership.
Boys act overconfident, betting that they will be able to improvise their way out of a jam. Girls are only as confident as they are prepared, i.e. they do not speculate about their abilities as wildly as boys do. These are partly the result of hormonal differences. Interestingly, complex problem-solving ability is 1/2 confidence and 1/2 preparation. The confidence is what propels you to venture into the weeds and begin wrestling with a solution. Once you have tackled a wicked-difficult problem and prevailed, your confidence will be notched up a bit next time.
Now, take this up a level, and leadership is about getting groups of people, large groups of people, to take on risk and try some new way to solve a problem.
Leadership training for women is different than for menin that, women leaders have to understand hormonal differences, and learn how to harness the more impulsive, "gut"-driven (testosterone) men and behaviors for the good of the organization. Pretending these biological differences don't exist, or don't matter is not going to lead to real change. Accepting them and adapting to them can.
Julie, not only do "nice guys" have issues as all guys do for that matter, but so do women. I am not overweight, bald, or "dress in rags" nor do I expect every girl I date to look like a Victoria's Secret model. Point is your "nice guys" aren't nice guys. You have to find a real one. Maybe you are looking in the wrong place.
bejuss, many psychologists claim, adamantly, that people seek romantic partners who are of similar health, mentally. their claim, not mine.
anyway, based on the shrinks' claim, maybe they mean that many people do look in the wrong places--until they find someone who has the same quantity of issues.
and...it doesn't take long in the dating world to see that some folks have more issues than National Geographic. (but don't we all, right?)
inMyday, I have never heard that claim on why people can't find "the one" for them, but I think it does hold some value. In what I have seen (and it may not be all that much) I have noticed that a lot of claims psychologists make aren't addressing every issue either. There are so many variables in why anyone chooses to do one thing and not another that it would be impossible for them to look at everything to really figure out why we do what we do.
If I am any category of minority, be it race, religion, sex, and things don't work out for me the way I feel they should, the natural temptation is to assume it's due to discrimination, and not due to my own performance or ability.
The reason I bring this up is that if you convince people of inequality and discrimination, then you are in many ways creating a self defeating prophecy - I can't move up the chain because I'm a woman (or I'm black, a muslim, disabled), therefore what's the point of "leaning in"?
The reason for men dominating the power positions in business and politics is not one dimensional, i.e. it's not because they discriminate against women (although some of that does exist for sure). It's waaaay more complicated than that, and any successful movement to redress that balance cannot be entrenched in the belief that "it's mens fault".
I'm just sayin...
True. Some of my friends who are minorities are (understandably) sensitive to what they perceive as "racist." I suspect that in some cases their experience may not have had much to do with their potential object of prejudice.
The fact is, some people are just rude, and they are too narcississtic to realize the extent and nature of their affect (yes, "affect"). Rudeness is probably the most equal-opportunity way of life.
I have a white friend who dislikes police because of one experience that he had 20 years ago. So of course every time he gets stopped by the police he is sharp, if not rude and therefore is always getting tickets. I on the other hand got a great break 30 years ago so I am nothing if not polite and deferring when pulled over so I often get a warning and not a ticket.
So often what we put out to the world is returned to us.
A saying I like is: "Good things come to those who wait. That which is left behind by those who hustle."
I don't think it should be about the percentages of men vs women at all. In a perfect and fair world the most qualified and suited for the job, regardless of sex, would be the one holding it. As far as having a family goes, yes you have to make choices. Someone has to be home to care for and raise that child. Not every employer can offer a generous maternity leave and flexible schedule because of your new baby, its up to you to find out what is available and have it worked out in advance who is going to be the primary caretaker. The business world will not and should not have to revolve around your ticking biological clock, if being the top in your field is truly that important than the choice to have children may have to wait or be foregone altogether.
The game is set up for the men to succeed, that's why a woman has to work twice as hard to get ahead. Until we make changes in the playing field, women will always lag behind. My very comment is a good example, it uses "sports" as an analogy, which men understand. If I had used "recipe" instead of "game" and "kitchen" instead of "playing field", the meaning might be lost on the male species, making it harder for a man to "lean in".
what century are you living in? no wonder you're complaining about men. you're delusional honey, go find yourself a nice man
Julie, I hate to say it, but your attitude is a contributing factor to the "inbalance". If a women believes that it's all someone elses fault; That the playing field is unfair; That women have to work twice as hard; then she has little to no chance of succeeding, and has even less incentive to bother trying.
It is funny how I never hear of a woman complaining about equal responsibility!!!
Benn, I am not your "honey". Please take your condescending attitude and stick it in the hole between your legs where you keep your head.
Mickey, there is nothing wrong with my "attitude". It is a female point of view that you cannot comprehend because the playing field has ALWAYS been in your favor to succeed.
And John, I am SOLELY responsible for the work I do, maintaining a home and raising my children because the "nice guy" I married couldn't keep up with the demands of doing all three of these things.
You see, there you go again Julie. You've already decided the game is rigged and that you've lost.
Why is it that you feel I, as a man couldn't comprehend a female point of view, and yet you are so vehemently convinced you have figured out mans'?
I have a wonderful daughter who is my world, but I will not allow her to believe that she has little to no chance of succeeding professionally because she is a woman. I will not tell her that the game is rigged and she will have to work twice as hard as her brother to keep pace. I'll teach her to work hard, hold her corner, speak up, and believe in herself. And I'll teach her that she can be whatever she wants, so long as she wants it enough.
She will have to wait until she's 30 to start dating though, but that's a different conversation.
I'm a woman and a BIG sports fan, it is one area in which I can hang in there with the guys in my office. My office is not one in which there is the chance for career advancement per se, but in my particular job I have been the most successful person there.
Julie-3196257,
The following comment is not intended to be condescending. However, "I truly despair of your current focus/attitude on the workplace/gender equality issues."
I have a son and daughter. In terms of material wealth, my daughter (30's, a scientist, and unmarried) far exceeds that of my son. He (40's, sales, and married with 3 fantastic children) has a wonderful family life, is totally content with his "position" in life and would not trade it for any other situation.
In other words, each of them chose their respective paths with full knowledge of both the upsides and downsides of their choices. It had/has nothing to do with "lack of good men" for my daughter, nor "lack of opportunities" for my son. It has everything to do with their personal choices and living their lives as they see fit.
I wish only that you achieve the same level of contentment/satisfaction in your continued life searches.
ah, that explains a lot Julie. No wonder you feel the need to explain yourself to Mickey, John and me. but when you say "..all of you men think you are "hot" when you are overweight, bald and dressed in rags, while expecting women to all look like Victoria's Secret model..", well, it just shows that you already have your mind made up to be bitter, kitten, and that's no way to get a man
Maybe it's worthwhile to point this out.
Whenever I need a professional or specialist (for medical, legal, dental, or whatever), I usually choose a woman. Most women professionals are exceptionally good at what they do.
After much thought on "why" this trend exists (assuming it really does exist and is not just my biased perception) it seems that this may be because men are "required" in our culture to have a career. Because they are not given the choice (or don't realize they have a choice) some men are indifferent on which career they seek. This could lead to complacency, or skills incongruent with the expectations of the chosen career.
On the other hand, or the other gender, actually, many women have the opportunity to make the decision whether to have a career at home, for the home, or to seek a career. Then comes the decision to seek which career, whether in business, medical, military, arts, etc. Because (some, not all) women have the options described, they would tend to be very dedicated to their path of choice, with a motivation for excellence.
For what it's worth...just my experience.
Part of the point here is that American companies and our cultural landscape need to change so that families, not just women, can prosper. My husband splits all the work at home with me, and he is great with our kids. However, many women are not in my position. I will say, I discussed these issues with him before we were married and would never have married any man who did not intend to contribute his part to our home and family. I hope all women begin to look for guys like mine. When men are the ones looking for time off for family half the time, this will balance itself out. I think then we will all get more of what we want. I know my husband loves his time with his kids.
Also, stop picking on Julie.
Yeah, right, because you're soooo oppressed. You act like you're minorities even though everything is slanted your way (That's why every in every commercial it's the guy who's the dope and the woman the smart one. But that's only because advertisers are afraid of people like you who cry sexism, chauvinism, and threaten to sue.)
Revolution? Give us a break. It's not men she should worry about it's other women who are going to give her the hardest time
Nothing in her book or in this conversation recognizes that most women work in service jobs where taking even so much a sick day can get them fired. Forget about balancing work and home, they're just trying to put food on the table.
Not all women have degrees from ivy league schools and even those who have degrees from state schools still enter a workforce earing 77% of what a man earns with the exact same education and maybe even a lower GPA. Those women cannot afford nannies and private schools or home help for their children when she and her husband are earning a nice middle income wage together but without would fall into lower middle income status. I agree with the poster that when we make it possible for a family to survive on one income, both men and women will be able to make real choices for themselves and their families.
I don't see this woman advocating for better wages for all workers, but only for more choices for those who wish to enter the executive suite. Not everyone can, should or even wants to be an executive and to treat an entire population as if that is everyone's goal or that this book will make that goal achievable is laughable.
Whatever your career choice is, you are an excellent writer. (I infer you are a woman by your "name" and the content.)
I'm not sure I agree her comment about being 46 all of a sudden and the train has "left the station". I had a career in the insurance industry as a young mother. Later I needed to step up and care for a close family member so stayed home for a few years. As soon as I was able I went back to school and received a degree in healthcare at the age of 50 and now am at the beginning of a new career. It isn't a huge mover and shaker position but that isn't what I wanted. I don't think we have an expiration date on our productivity and 46 is YOUNG.
I'm so tired of billionaire women like Sandberg (and Oprah) preaching "how to be like them", assuming that we, as women, want to "be just like them". They have had every opportunity and a great deal of luck. Most women that I know just want to live a comfortable life with equitable choices and treatment in and out of the workplace. Mama, don't preach.
very well put Carol
Amen to that
Well said Carol. And good grief, these high and mighty women with the attitude sound like they have quite a disdain for families where one parent....yes that's more often than not Mom......actually stays out of the workforce to RAISE the kids. Gasp! The horror! Does it ever occur to these women that that's what others might really WANT to do, do it well, and realize how important a "job" it is. I just get so tired of these types looking down on others choices, whom they don't deem "correct".
I'll never forget when Hillary said (circa '93) something like, "what was I supposed to do, stay home and bake cookies?"
And I hope others, as well, don't forget it.
Gotta love these people who do nothing...and know everything. This lady has had the world handed to her...works for a do nothing company that produces nothing but gossip...welcome to wisdom from the leaders of America in decline....
I was thinking the exact same thing Ron. She's a Google executive. Big F'in Deal.
Today is Pi Day! The ratio of the diameter of a circle to its circumference. One can't exist without the other. Is the diameter any less functionally valuable (or meaningful) than the circumference? Equality exists only in embracing "differences" and then accommodating them, for what they each are. The diameter isn't the circumference but it's still the equivalent of the circle, just in a "different" perspective than circumference. It's not "separate but equal", it's DIFFERENT BUT EQUAL.
50% of business and 50% of homes isn't equality any more than trying to arbitrarily change Pi, 3.14.....(less than 33%) to 50% in actuality to try to "equalize" it to what it can never be. It ain't happening. Spinning your wheels :)
Cort, "What did 2 say to pi?"
Mort, "You're so irrational."
Not funny? OK, try this one.
Fred, "What did pi say to "i"?"
Ted, "Get real."
Women have choices, Men have responsibilities.
So your mom wasn't responsible for you? Both sexes have responsibilities and priorities, and every persons are different, don't discount women to having no responsibility. Traditionally, it was for women to be responsible for the home and men for the providing of the finances. Both are necessary responsibilities and are no less important than the other.
Yes. We all choose to avoid you, so you are forced to be responsible for yourself.
The missing point here is that children (of any age -- not just little children) have many needs that must be met by someone. Children's needs cannot just be 'farmed out.'
Many families recognize that and have gladly waved as the train rolled on by.
We don't want 'it all.'
Exactly. These high and mighty women certainly have an attitude, don't they. Heaven forbid families make the choice to have Mom (or Dad for that matter) stay out of the rat race and actually raise their own children, instead of farming the responsibility out to daycare factories, or I suppose in these charmed women's cases, a gaggle of nannies.
I've read these boards on-and-off, depending on an article's interest, but one thing is for sure, JAC, you have a bone to pick with working mothers/women. Your posts come across very insecure - as if you feel an insane need to justify your stay-at-home mom existence. If it works for you and your husband - great. But, guess what? I work and I still raise my own kids, along with my working husband. But, I don't feel the need to justify my easy-peasy life with strangers, or other women. I'm proud to admit I work - because it usually gives me joy and purpose. If working doesn't give you joy and purpose, but being home with kids all day long does - then more power to you.
Many families do let the train go by with 2 working parents. I leave when the school bell rings every day and I'm in charge of homework, dinner, etc... I'm not climbing the ladder, I've let that train roll by for now, I'm raising my kids (along with my husband!), and I'm pretty ok with how life is working out.
And ps - children have needs through adult hood. So, when your non-farmed out children go to school - the school will be helping kids with needs :)
Where did this author malign stay at home moms? All I've gotten from this article is that she is giving advice to women who want to work in the corporate world. Stay at home moms who feel picked on should be more understanding about working moms instead of insinuating that we are inferior parents who don't care about our kids.
In a truly equal world everyone has the SAME Opportunity, based on skill set not gender or color or special interest. In a truly mediocre world equality in numbers 1/2 of everything being gender split artificially waters down the talent pool. And, then we don't worry about get the best out of our society, just equal numbers..
And, when we boil things down to gender, are we talking about physical organs, or amounts of testosterone/estrogen, or those whose mental faculties represent or interpret life as if they are the opposite sex? I am not referring to only folks that need special legislation but all folks who for one reason or another could be included in one gender for certain situations and a different one for another?? OK find that a bit too rough, why does the federal government ask if filing jointly, is it a same sex marriage??? OK how about quotas: can we in the USA be the best we can be if there are mandated ethnic preferences? Hmm how about our Olympic teams or pro Sports, should they too be legislated? this is a question of accountability, character, performance and execution.. Me, i'd like the best banker, school teacher, coach, manager, mentor to help me not the next person on the listed quota... Someone tell that lady that you can't ask the same emotional, physical, spiritual and/or intellectual response from everyone based upon gender? OK who read the article/book etc, and is now going to claim we haven't considered XYZ? The statement is straight forward and so are the responses... sweetie 6 foot females can't dunk!
The problem with this type of arguments is that equal does not mean the same. Men and women are fundamentally very different in many ways. Of course men and women are equal, but they are not the same and therefore they have different strengths and weaknesses. This is why men and women have different roles in life. Following the author's line of reasoning, I would have to add that in a "truly equal" world, women would fight and die in equal numbers of wars and men would have half of the worlds babies. Recognizing reality as it is does not mean women are not equal and pushing an agenda of "sameness" among the sexes is not helpful to either one.
What nonsense. My wife has been a Director for over a decade, won top company awards 2 years running and meanwhile she can't find a seat at the VP table. Not because she doesn't want it or she hasn't performed. She's in a predominantly male oriented Sales/Marketing function and she has had to take a back seat to less talented, less experienced men getting promotions mainly off of her sweat equity and intellectual prowess. It's still a good ole boys club when it comes to certain functions of a company. She's called a leader in the company and been given many accolades, just not been invited into the club yet. There could be many good reasons but in the back of my mind I can't help but think if she had the right anatomy things would be different for her. That's only something one can wonder about but never really prove.
nonsense is right; instead of complaining about this company, go work for another before another decade goes by
To be clear only half a decade at this company. She jumped here because of the "VP promise" in 18 months. 6 months in a new CEO and new Sr mgmt saw those promises go out the window. It's as if she had to start over and prove herself to the new group, which she obviously has. She is on the hunt but VP jobs are harder to come by. She has committed the ultimate sin in being viewed as "indispensable" to the team she is on now so they have no real plans of moving her until she starts walking. At least that's my opinion.
maybe that's a good thing; let the other's get the responsibility that comes with the new title. Hopefully she's happy with her compensation, and if she's indispensable when she finds something better she'll have all the leverage to make them sweat! Screw the title, she should tell them she wants a HUGE raise, more vacations, and other perks!
That's the rub, they have paid her to "be patient" and not walk. So compensation is not a complaint and in fact they did give her "Sr" to her title but it has to be kept a secret. Much like the "Double Secret Probation Promotion" . That's the frustrating deal. They have paid her, they have awarded her but when it comes to public promotions she see's men get the higher jobs in corporate and she's not even given the consideration. Which goes back to my point that if she were a man, perhaps things would be different. In the end VP's get bigger bonuses and stock options and such and plus your one step closer to the coveted SVP positions. So in the end I have to ask myself what gives with the non promotion. It's a great problem to have, no doubt but it is odd and I doubt very seriously a man would be asked to do what she has done. Plus it's no given that the extra pay off money not to be promoted will happen year after year.
At the end of the day as a man I wouldn't accept this and I don't think her bosses would accept it for themselves but for whatever reason they feel they can get a way with doing this with her. She doesn't miss a day of work, no matter what. No vacations, nothing. She feels that she has to be twice as good as the men, certainly can't be seen as a whiner etc... She's built that way to begin with so not that big of a deal but at a certain point she has an ego too just like anyone else. You don't toil for two decades with your ear attached to a blackberry, laptop open the minute you walk in the door and weekends and not want the same things title wise as men expect. She's loyal and not a quitter. They take advantage of that in my opinion and she just over 40 is now realizing that sometimes the "squeaky wheel gets the grease" in corporate. It's interesting to watch and also frustrating as the spouse because I can't do a damned thing to help other than listen.
Your wife's situation is all too familiar. I notice most of the people claiming (on this site) sexism doesn't exist are male. And the women - I too was once the glass half full, "if I only apply myself better", "if I present myself more confidently", "if I bone up on the skills they want" .... believer.
I ask for more work, complete projects others dropped, follow through, have commitment. No kids so no excuses. Put myself through school. It doesn't seem to matter. I, quite simply, am not male. 2 men at the company who have my skills (skills I offered to burnish for the company) make up to 2x my hourly rate. Boss didn't want me to burnish those skills and sent me to Microsoft advanced school. I went. I built new spreadsheets and databases. Nada. All the women at my employer are in administraive positions. We all make exactly the same amount per hour regardless of longevity, education, job description. Period. The more confident I become, thebetter I present the reasons for a raise or a change, the nastier the boss is to me.
Putting the resume out there to walk someplace with room to grow works partly: I get the interview but so far they all offer a 30% pay cut.
Great to have a job. I find reasons to like it. But honestly? It gets very, very old. I have potential and drive and a brain. Well. My brain atrophies while I work far below my potential. Sorry. Not feeling very hopeful lately. And not buying the line of being dedicated and working harder and smiling through a pile of crap when the reward is a kick in the teeth and people who aren't here saying that I'm wrong. No, I'm just finally seeing reality.
CallMeC, Benn Dover called. He says you probably have a lousy rack and therefore deserve what you get.