<p>Okay, it can be discussed by the two people involved in that discussion. But, for a women not to be able to negotiate child rearing duties with a spouse to then complain about not being a CEO is really quite comical. And, children frequently decide to go in the complete opposite direction of their parents for a variety of reasons. Nothing is at all unusual about that.</p>
<p>To be honest, I don’t feel the problem with the social norms lies so much in the home anymore…rather it lies in the professional world. Look at the statistics. More women are the “breadwinners” in their homes. Stay-at-home dads present is more households. </p>
<p>This is why education is so important. If throughout these young girls’ lives they are reinforced and supported, I believe the perceived “rigid” gender roles won’t have such a strong effect. The values you were raised with weaken as world experiences are gained. </p>
<p>EDIT: Didn’t see Flossy’s post and am in agreement. A child’s rearing does not dictate their values and beliefs in adulthood. </p>
<p>I’m sorry, I can’t help hearing ghostly voices from the past, saying, "Yes, but some black people really are uppity…</p>
<p>I don’t know where you’re trying to get to with the “uppity” comments. </p>
<p>Well, Flossy, in that case, we are just never going to agree. If you truly don’t see how much societal roles limit people and think they are so easy to break, there is probably nothing I can do to change your mind.</p>
<p>Frankly, I think the tilt toward male CEOs is not the fault of women being mommy-tracked or being perceived as bossy instead of leaders. I think it’s more a reflection of cultural weakness of too many businesses. Listen to a conversation on the financial types or among senior execs, and what you’ll hear is that all too often testosterone and ego are mistaken for leadership. </p>
<p>The leadership style of women appears to me to be different from men’s, and too easily overlooked and undervalued. Men with similar styles have the same problem. Consensus building and goal-oriented thinking is in many industries not valued as much as self-promotion, buzz-word thinking, and aggressive short sightedness. For example, if Enron had had more women and fewer club-wielding, war-hooping males, they would have been a lot better off. </p>
<p>I played golf with a male manager once who told me that the problem with women is that we don’t take mulligans, we just count all the strokes. I told him the problem with men is that they take too many mulligans, and never know what the real score is.</p>
<p>
Happens as well in the arts, academia, fashion, you name it. I call it chest-beating, as in gorilla behaviour. Too much bluster, not enough brains.</p>
<p>For a good touchstone to determine “bossy”, watch the Profit on CNBC. Marcus Lemonis is quite “bossy”, but always from a point of legitimacy. I started watching that show last year, and have always enjoyed it. </p>
<p>This quote by @Hayden deserves to be read again . “Consensus building and goal-oriented thinking is in many industries not valued as much as self-promotion, buzz-word thinking, and aggressive short sightedness”. </p>
<p>I cannot agree more and could start a new thread on this but it makes me so sick I can’t stand thinking about these people for one more minute.</p>
<p>This along with historical revisionism are effective ways to get ahead today. </p>
<p>Where I differ is that I believe women have also adopted these effective strategies to get ahead.</p>
<p>
I agree with this, and I also agree that one reason women are underrepresented in leadership positions is that many women do not exhibit these traits, but are more consensus-oriented, etc. But I also think that women who DO exhibit those testosterone and ego-related traits are negatively labeled (as b*****s, etc.) as opposed to men with the exact same traits. That’s really the point of this discussion.</p>
<p>Who was it that said up thread that they were complaining about the wrong b word? Women with those traits aren’t labeled bossy, that doesn’t even make sense, and confuses the issue. Use the other word, and it is accurate.</p>
<p>Men are considered negative names, just as a woman would be. If I had a manager that was always micromanaging and bulldozing their way through meetings without considering their coworkers inputs and suggestions, they wouldn’t think of them nicely, no matter their gender. If anything, perhaps women are more likely to hear those names than men are?</p>
<p>EDIT: Banning the word “b*tch”? That’s a big feat to try to conquer. Perhaps, ban the misuse of the word, but if the shoe fits…</p>
<p>
Do you really believe this? I mean really? I can’t help thinking that anybody who thinks this is very young, hasn’t been exposed to the business world, or is really tone-deaf.</p>
<p>And your phrase “if the shoe fits” is why I hear those ghostly voices reminding us that some black folks really are “uppity.”</p>
<p>Added: Of course, some women are obnoxious, nasty micromanagers and deserve criticism. The point, which I can’t believe I must continue to belabor, is that women are criticized for levels of assertiveness that are praised in men. Is this so hard to get?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I just asked H about this, who has spent his entire career in the business world. He said, absolutely, men like that are called “a**holes.” (No prompting from me, lol, I proffered that word earlier)</p>
<p>Yes, really, Hunt. I may not be exposed to the business world, but I have been exposed to the working world. Two of my managers in the past have had the same nasty attitude. One is a man. One is a woman. They are both thought of as nasty names.</p>
<p>Can you provide some examples of “levels of assertiveness” that a woman would be criticized for than a man would be praised for?</p>
<p>Here’s an article that explains it pretty well, and cites a study about it: <a href=“Women and the Double Standard of Office Behavior - The New York Times”>Women and the Double Standard of Office Behavior - The New York Times;
I note that the language the author suggests a women to use to avoid being labeled is much more namby-pamby than what a man might typically say in the situations she describes.
If you’ve never observed this double standard, you’re pretty lucky, especially if you’re a woman.</p>
<p>And how is the B word the root of these problems?</p>
<p>tl;dr: Here is an example of exactly the problem, from the article Hunt linked to:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is “bossy” a euphemism for the other “b” word?</p>
<p>“Even in this day and age, a guy barks out an order and he is treated like someone who is in charge and a leader. But when a woman communicates in the exact same way, she’s immediately labeled assertive, dominating, aggressive and overbearing.”</p>
<p>I’ve had an equal number of male and female bosses and I disagree with this. </p>
<p>Oh, my, I so agree with this.</p>