I am not so old. My business is a male dominated one and I stay in touch with former colleagues. We’ve witnessed subtle and not so subtle signs over the years that things are not equal.
Many of us have received lower raises than our male colleagues because we were women, we were told, and they “were men with families to support.” We’ve gotten lower raises because we were “going to get married and quit,” or “going to have babies and quit.” And the men didn’t just get more money, they got better assignments and training opportunities too.
It’s difficult to make changes because people are hesitant to complain. Most can’t afford to lose their jobs, and what are the chances others will believe them? The women who do complain are considered hypersensitive troublemakers and nobody takes them seriously. But people like the manager who kept the thermostat setting low because he liked the physical effect it had on women’s breasts didn’t start out that way. They start with little things and push the envelope. And every time we disparage the women who do come forward, we’re making it that much easier for them.
There is a huge difference between saying, “I disagree with her interpretation of the word and I wouldn’t have taken offense,” and the attitude that’s permeated some of these posts. Attitudes like that create environments where women don’t speak.
“I would say that if you don’t want the ramp guy to take your bag then you should just tell him. But I understand why his “default setting” is to help with your bag. If people think he’s sexist then they should probably blame his mother, not him”
No, I would never tell him. I would not want to hurt his feelings when he thinks he is doing a nice thing. There are so few kind people in the world that I would never want to crush that out of him. But honestly, it’s kind of weird, nowadays. In the 100+ ramps I’ve gone to, nobody does that, ever. He’s got to notice that nobody every does that, and he just rushes to do it and insists. I admit, part of what bothers me is that he is a young black guy, and the way he does it seems kind of subservient, he keeps his head down and never says anything. I really don’t like that aspect of it. But now I know to blame his mother! I guess it’s kind of sweet.
"There is a huge difference between saying, “I disagree with her interpretation of the word and I wouldn’t have taken offense,” and the attitude that’s permeated some of these posts. Attitudes like that create environments where women don’t speak
I like your post, @austinmshauri, however, I have no idea what attitude you are talking about. Maybe I missed the posts. Can you point to one specific thing that bothers you?
“It’s difficult to make changes because people are hesitant to complain. Most can’t afford to lose their jobs, and what are the chances others will believe them? The women who do complain are considered hypersensitive troublemakers and nobody takes them seriously”
And this is why I think the law school dean was perfectly within her rights and did a totally fine thing in letting the male law student know it wasn’t appropriate to refer to her in an introduction as vivacious. She is in a power position. It was said publicly in from of others. It removes the contexts raised in what @austinmshauri says above. She CAN correct him and a) set the right tone within the law school for a bias free zone and b) let the student know that its not okay so hopefully he won’t repeat it or something similar in a context where the woman he is speaking about doesn’t feel comfortable voicing herself out of lack of a power position or fear of retaliation.
In a professional setting where male & female professionals wear identical uniforms (e.g. airline pilots), I think male/female social courtesies are a bit awkward.
In a professional setting where there is gender-specific dress, it seems less awkward (e.g. typical corporate office attire; gender-specific flight attendant uniforms).
Is it fair? Maybe not. But people take social cues from clothing.
I get the feeling we’re being judge and jury here. The dean objected to a term which referred to a social quality, usually used for women. It’s an interesting academic point, to me. It wasn’t gender neutral, but a reflection (likely unknowingly) of her being a woman. And she gets comments, too, about her age vis a vis her position.
And that’s the issue, (not how many women find ghosts in corners,overreact, wimp out in various ways,or wave feminist flags.) It doesn’t seem appropriate to the context or her role. How easily we forgive the kid who said it- but don’t allow her to mind. Nor to raise it for consideration. Why?
It’s not enough, to me, to say, “Well, I think it was minor, not bad enough…”
Was it egregious? Does it need to be, for her to remark on it? Can’t we call it inappropriate and hope the kid got his learning moment?
" it egregious? Does it need to be, for her to remark on it? Can’t we call it inappropriate and hope the kid got his learning moment?"
I don’t think the issue is just that she remarked on it. People can say whatever they want. However, if the information is correct (which who knows, these things can be grossly exaggerated), the issue is that it was made a big enough deal that the student is getting harassed. Is that considered a learning moment?
BD, someone asked much earlier for a link to articles about the harassment and if we got one, I missed it. I haven’t found it online. I did, however, see this-
http://www.gainesville.com/news/20160909/uf-law-school-dean-defends-critique-of-gender-bias
“Rosenbury said the last part of the article was to say she still encountered implicit gender bias as a dean, and while overt bias Frug had faced during her life has lessened with time, bias based on one’s identity still exists. In hindsight, she said she could have made the point in a way that avoided any embarrassment to the student.”
I do agree she could have made the example more anonymous.
@busdriver11, I agree, but I think we differ in how we define being “positive and confident.” I don’t think it’s positive or powerful to cover one’s true feelings in a joke. I think it’s much more so to be direct.
People keep saying that the dean should let this slide because the word “vivacious”, regardless of the tone of the word, was used as a compliment. Just because a word is meant as a compliment doesn’t mean it ceases to be problematic. I think most of us, or at least those of a certain age, would see the issues with calling a certain race in general “musical” or an entire certain religion “sharp with money”.
“And @Pizzagirl --sounds like a pretty hostile work environment, if men are encouraged to get “sloshed” and say sexist things to their colleagues”
HUH? On what planet was he “encouraged” to get sloshed? (Btw, as part of the resolution of this incident, the company gave him access to an alcohol treatment program, which he probably needed.) On what planet was he “encouraged” to say sexist things, when I specifically and clearly indicated that when it was brought to the company’s attention, they jumped all over it? Can you please not completely twist things around to the exact opposite of what they are?
I really wish I could identify the company and the CEO. It has propelled women into tons of leadership positions and had a female CEO and females in the C-suite WAY before Marissa Meyer, Sheryl Sandberg etc came on the scene. It was innovative in identifying and addressing work life issues. It created incredible networks for women. Their “alumni” are all over the business world in high positions. You are off your rocker to suggest it was a “hostile environment” for women. It was a great environment and I was proud to have started my career there.
None of that means that this couldn’t have been handled by the woman either ignoring or scoffing at a stupid, sloshed comment made by someone who didn’t have any power over her. Nothing prevented her from saying afterwards, dude, that wasn’t cool, cut it out. But to make it a hostile work environment - that’s insulting to women who really do have to deal with hostile work environments.
"People keep saying that the dean should let this slide because the word “vivacious”, regardless of the tone of the word, was used as a compliment. Just because a word is meant as a compliment doesn’t mean it ceases to be problematic. "
Actually, no. While “let it slide” is certainly one possible reaction, another is to set up private time and say directly, like an adult - Hey, I know you probably didn’t mean anything by this, but I want to let you know that I found this word choice uncomfortable - here’s why - and I’d appreciate it if you didn’t use it in the future. Brightly, positively, but firmly. Assume good intentions. This is how people put on their big girl pants and deal with things in the real world, instead of this passive aggressive nonsense which serves to win the battle but lose the war.
You want the guy to realize on his own why it was probably a poor word choice - that wins the war. If he feels that he’s been beaten into submission by the PC crowd, that loses the war.
This is why we have one of the presidential candidates we do - because those who were (rightly) concerned with racism, sexism, etc are concerned with winning battles but now we are at risk of losing the war with backlash.
Personally, I will never understand why some apparently feel the need to find an “-ism” of some sort in the tiniest aspect of every action or every phrase. What a completely miserable way to live one’s life. I feel sorry for them.
I fully understand and appreciate everything @busdriver11 has referred to in her posts. I flew B-52s in the military, which was one of the last platforms to have female pilots assigned to it. In addition to the resistance to female crewmembers from some male counterparts, there were also incredibly challenging logistical issues that have to be dealt with. There is no sit-down toilet facilities on the aircraft, nor even a privacy curtain of any sort. Regardless of gender, one had to be pretty darned thick-skinned, good humored, and adaptive to perform well in that environment. I have nothing but huge respect for the women I served with who not only functioned but flourished in our community. I hope having extra respect for these women doesn’t somehow offend the “-ism” watchers in the crowd.
@Busdriver11 … I have no desire to leave the corporate/charter aviation world for the major airlines, but if we ever cross paths while flying I’ll happily tell you to carry your own damn bag.
Some additional context on the student’s use of “vivacious:” Deans at many top 50 to top 100 research universities tend to come from “outside.” Here is Rosenbury’s c.v.: https://www.law.ufl.edu/law/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/rosenbury_l_resume.pdf
Her first appointment in Florida was as Dean of the Law School, in 2015.
The universities commonly have internal candidates for the Deanship, as well. There is no telling whether or not the older male law review advisor was a candidate.
The Dean’s change to prevent the law review editors from being paid and receiving academic credit for their work simultaneously is certain to have bothered the law review editors and their (hopeful) successors. The student’s getting off on the wrong foot with the Dean probably reduced the student leverage to continue that 30-year practice. Plus, internal politics, anyone?
Returning to my locality: It was stated to me by the current chair of my department that the Dean had advised him to reduce the salary offer to an incoming woman faculty member, on the grounds that women don’t tend to negotiate over salary and they could probably get away with paying the woman less. Going back to the top of this post, Deans tend to come from outside. The Dean picked this viewpoint up somewhere else.
I always have to take into account how much better the opportunities have been for me, as a woman scientist, than for those who were born just 10 years ahead of my birth. The change is due to a lot of hard work and agitation by a large number of women.
My experiences probably more closely align with busdriver and Pizza, mine also in a male dominated field but I still wonder if the “issue” is with academia (and perhaps specific industries) rather than women’s experience in the working world in general. I do think that I learned that there are issues you handle privately one on one and issues that you elevate and that “learning” what is appropriate and when and how is a large part in whether or not one is promoted or not…and that applies equally to men and women. And I do think that much groundwork was laid when we were young…and did show back up after maternity leaves, and did challenge in meetings, and did learn how to be good managers of men and women, and did learn how to make our points without dropping the “f” bomb or solving issues only over cocktails and making sure people knew we were all in and wanting to be promoted and were fully supported by husbands who took their turns staying home with sick kids and attending school related events.
And if some guy wants to carry my bag or let me through the door first, I think “how nice” but if Wolverine told me to carry my own damn bag…I’d smile and say “I certainly can.” And in some ways you do need a tough skin…it doesn’t mean that you give as good as you get…pragmatically it simply means you can roll with whatever circumstances you are dropped into.
For our first engineering jobs in Maine back in 1987, DH and I worked for the same company. We got our master’s degrees the same year, and I had a little more real-world engineering experience than him. I was making $26k and when he threatened to leave the firm one year, they raised his salary to $32k and didn’t change mine! And I never thought to complain! Seems bizarre to me now. Finally, though, the company realized they had a problem, looked at everyone’s salaries, and ended up giving almost all of us women substantial raises. Of course, they then laid DH and me off THE SAME DAY, just two months before we were vested in the company’s retirement plan.
"mine also in a male dominated field but I still wonder if the “issue” is with academia (and perhaps specific industries) rather than women’s experience in the working world in general. "
I suspect it may be part of academia. Rightly or wrongly, there is a stereotype associated with going into academia, which includes overthinking things and being sheltered from, dated, and well behind the curve of the real world. I daresay the real world is not as impressed with academia as academia is impressed with itself. I cannot think of any business context I’ve been in the last 30 years where “we’ve got to pay Bob more than Sally, he has a family” would have been remotely appropriate.
Very True, and as far as salaries I have never worked at a company that was not acutely aware of pay equity dependent on role…both within the corporations but with regard to competitor salaries. That said, I still suspect that men and women in similar positions may not have the same exact salaries, but so many factors may come into play in that regard starting with the negotiated salary at time of hire. The larger the corporation, the more vulnerable it is to EEOC actions and the more they are concerned about equity issues.
