Hey guys, I'd be really interested to hear what you think of this article. Thoughts?
Ok. I went to the link and read the article. Its just the same old Tear-down-what-works-in-the-hope-it-might-give-you-a-leg-up strategy and the obligatory counter-argument that the aforementioned strategy isn't working. Its interesting, but I don't think it means much.
thanks for bringing it to our attention.
Some cursory comments, 'cause obviously we can't re-hash decades of gender sociology here. We can't even get through everything from this news cycle.
1. I can't comment on most of the last page. I do know that lots of the policies meant to treat men employees the same as women employees don't really accomplish egalitarianism. Studies have shown that men use paternity leave to do freelance work, extensive networking, etc., while women spend it leaking from various orifices.
2. I accept all the wage statistics at face value, and they don't much bother me. My experience backs up studies showing women don't get paid as much as men because we don't negotiate as hard as men - at all stages of employment. That's mostly on us, though it's largely how we're conditioned from toddlerhood, too. I also think business communication will slowly change to be more feminine, as there are more women in the professions. [Think of it like e-documents for courtrooms, another thing I tie to gender, but benefits everyone.]
3. On the broadest level, I know European countries have a hard time getting women to work full time, even with all the incentives socialism can muster. [2 years of paternity leave, free childcare, etc.] I've read that we need to smooth "staying at home" and "career focus" transitions for everyone. The metaphor is lots of on-ramps and off-ramps on the career path. I think we need to be less career-oriented in general. There are ways of being a good and important person outside of business.
You are a much more eloquent person than I, young Lady.
It's crap about crap argued by a hyperfeminazi liberal tard.
... an anecdotal look at selected sociological outliers supported by only those statistics that fit the view. Pretty typical New York Times stuff ... not unlike the majority of mainstream media outlets.