Tag Archives: sexism

Personal is Political

Wouldn’t it be cool to be the person who made up the phrase “The personal is political?” No one knows who came up with it, though it was popularized in 1970 by a Carol Hanisch essay. Gloria Steinem once said that trying to find the originator of the phrase would be like trying to figure out who first called it “World War II.” Oh Gloria, so witty!

This week for Role/Reboot I wrote about the relationship I see between personal decisions and political ramifications. Or, sometimes, between political action and the resulting personal choices. It goes both ways.

personal politicalRelated Post: Why are we, of all people, the right ones to question our socialization?

Related Post: Maslow and feminist privilege

Leave a Comment

Filed under Gender, Politics, Republished!

What if instead of work trips to golf courses, we had yoga retreats?

My  new piece for Role/Reboot is about gender and the workplace. I work in tech, as you know, and there’s this phenomenon that I call the “treehouse mentality.” It’s basically like the old boy’s club, except replace brandy and cigars with video games and porn. It’s more juvenile, but it’s the same idea.

I kind of get it; for a while, tech has been this secret space of very smart, very nerdy dudes. Because they were so isolated, they were able to create a work environment that suited them perfectly. Now the treehouse is being invaded by girls (though not as fast as we might like) and they’re pointing at all the pictures of boobs on the wall and being all like, “Yo, guys, you’ve got to get rid of this shit.”

Screenshot_5_2_13_5_38_PM-2

On one hand, I understand; their secret space is being invaded. On the other hand, well, it was all theirs for a while, now it’s time to grow up and open the gates.

I was inspired by a great Bob Martin essay on the software company 8th Light’s blog called “There Are Ladies Present.” He writes about trying, and at first failing, to welcome women to the tech industry. He errs on the side of treating them too daintily, which they don’t like, and this essay is his exploration of where the lines fall:

Have we created a locker room environment in the software industry? Has it been male dominated for so long that we’ve turned it into a place where men relax and tell fart and dick jokes amongst themselves to tickle their pre-pubescent personas? When we male programmers are together, do we feel like we’re in a private place where we can drop the rules, pretenses, and manners?

Related Post: Brogramming

Related Post: I’m reading Sheryl Sandberg so you don’t have to

Leave a Comment

Filed under Gender, Republished!

Sandberg: The Final Chapters

sandbergAlright, folks, chapter 9 through 12, the end of the Sandbergian road! If you missed it, here are rounds one and two of my discussion of Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In, and here’s my bit from the radio.

Before I recap some of the big ideas of the last third, it’s probably worth summing up my feelings on this book. They go something like this: Skeptical, but read it anyway. Old news, new language. Big ideas, pithy terms. Fix the system, beat the system at the same time. Dudes, this is for you too. Hoorah!

So what did we learn in the last chapters? Stuff like…

Setting limits = longterm success – While burning yourself out in the short term may earn you quick kudos, you’re setting yourself up for a fall in the long run. If you crash and take your exhaustion to your boss, the last thing you want your boss to say is “Well, why didn’t you take your vacation days?” Self care is step one in being a productive member of any team.

“Intensive mothering” is a new phenomenon – The last few decades have seen the perceived importance of spending large amounts of time with your children culturally elevated to the point of imperative. A “good” mother is always around, 100% focused on the needs of her kids 100% of the time. This all-consuming standard is socially created; parenting has not always been this way and it doesn’t necessarily have to be. Keeping guilt-free time for yourself and your work is setting a good example for your kids; you’re teaching them about balance.

Whoever has the power takes the noun – This is a Gloria Steinem adage that Sandberg borrows to talk about being labeled the “female” COO. The reverse would be someone referring to a “male nurse;” “nurse” is assumed female and “COO” is assumed male. Many women don’t want to be the female XYZ because “no one wants their achievements modified.”

“Is this your thing now?” – If you start speaking up about an issue (gender, racism, homophobia, whatever it may be), suddenly that’s your “thing.” While quietly fitting in may still be the safest path (and in past worlds may have been the only safe path), it’s not a strategy that bodes well for the gender as a whole. So yeah… it’s one of my many “things,” got a problem?

The Bias Blind Spot – If you are overconfident in your own powers of objectivity, you can fail to correct for your biases. And we all have biases. Studies show that people who believe themselves to be the most impartial actually exhibited more bias in hiring and promotion.

Benevolent Sexism (aka Nice Guy Misogyny) – Men who hold positive but outdated views of women tend to view women in the workplace less favorably, promote fewer women, and think that companies with high percentages of women run less smoothly. Benevolent sexism often manifests in admiring but reductionist comments about women, i.e. “Women are good at nurturing, that’s just what they’re best at.” These comments, while technically positive, will ultimately lead to the discrediting, consciously or subconsciously, of female accomplishments that don’t fit a traditional gender model.

Raise the ceiling, raise the floor – While Sandberg’s advice is mostly targeted at professional women on a particular career path, her point is that women in power (in business, in policy, in everything) will lead to better conditions for women everywhere. Forty % of working mothers don’t have any sick leave at all. Families with no paid leave can go into debt taking care of sick kids or elderly parents. Basically, working conditions suck, and diversifying the pool of leaders who form those decisions can only mean good things for everyone.

So there’s that. Hey readers, did anyone think I missed anything big?

Related Post: You get no points if you don’t do the work: women in tech

Related Post: Sex talk in the modern workplace

Leave a Comment

Filed under Books, Gender

I’m Reading Sandberg So You Don’t Have To (But You Should)

leanYes, yes, I know, I know, Sheryl Sandberg’s book is too hip, too ubiquitous, too annoyingly in your face at every Best Seller table or airport book store “Recommended!” shelf. I, too, want to be too cool for school, want to march to the beat of my own drum, want to ignore what’s trendy in favor of what makes me a special unique snowflake.

However, sometimes the trendy thing is trendy for a reason. And sometimes, that reason is a good one. This is one of those times. You should read this book. I admit, I was skeptical. I admit, I was irritated by her perky demeanor, by her clear privilege, by her pat pieces of advice. I admit, I am a reluctant convert, but I am a convert nonetheless.

For my work book club, we are reading this book in chunks, and lucky you guys get to go along for the ride. So far, I have read the first four chapters. This is not a perfect book. It does not address every concern of every woman of every class and every situation, and that’s okay. I know it, now you know it, and most important of all, Sandberg knows it. Most of the criticism around her little personality cult is begins with “But what about women who…” (i.e. “But what about women who are working two jobs just to put food on the table?!”) This is not a book for them, and that’s okay, it’s not trying to be.

The other pushback she gets is that she puts too much emphasis on what women need to do differently, instead of on systemic and institutionalized sexism that needs to be changed. For those critics, I am just convinced they haven’t actually opened the goddamn book yet. Sandberg has her eyes wide open and she calls entrenched sexism when she sees it, which is all the time. Her point, which I agree with, is that we need a two pronged approach. Simultaneously A) Fix the broken shit (i.e. paid maternity leave like every other developed country in the worldor better yet, paid parental leave) and B) Do what we can to advocate for ourselves and our families at every turn.

But the most important thing I think Sandberg contributes to the conversation is the language to discuss the issues. We’ve added terms like “victim blaming”, “slut shaming,” “heteronormative,” “gaslighting,” etc. to the lexicon already, and these have helped us articulate what happens around us. Banging our fists in frustration has never worked. What Sandberg has done is compiled (and she gives credit where credit is due), a range of the underlying causes of the wage/work/ambition gap and distilled them into shareable, discussable, tweetable, referrable chunks.

So with no further preamble, a few of the concepts and vocabulary terms from chapters 1 through 4 that are worth sharing, discussing, tweeting, and referring to:

  • “The Social Penalty” – Men who display ambition and desire for power are rewarded professionally and personally. They are promoted more and admired more. Women who display ambition or desire for power are rewarded professionally but punished personally. They get promoted, but they are not liked. This “social penalty” is important because being respected and liked is what leads to the most success.
  • “Stereotype Threat” – When you tell people there’s a negative stereotype that applies to them, they tend to sink to it. If you remind a girl that “typically, boys are better at math,” she will actually perform worse than if you hadn’t said anything at all. If you ask kids to identify their race before a standardized test, even that small act of checking a box results in black and Latino kids performing worse if you hadn’t had them label themselves. If you tell a woman that “women are bad negotiators,” she will become a worse negotiator.
  • “The Imposter Syndrome” – Ever get to work and worry that people were realize you’ve been “faking” all along? That you’re not the expert people think you are, that you shouldn’t be in charge, that you tricked them into hiring you? Both men and women feel this way, but the difference is that women consistently underestimate their own abilities. This means we don’t apply for jobs unless we feel 100% qualified for the listed responsibilities, while men apply even when they’re only confident of 60% of the skills. The truth is, we all learn on the job, but sometimes we weed ourselves out of jobs we very likely could have done.
  • “The Gender Discount” – When you do what your gender is “supposed” to do, you don’t get credit for it. Women are “supposed” to be communal, so when we work well with others, that skill is discounted because it’s “natural.” When men work well in others, they are complimented for being a team player. Similarly, women who do coworkers a “favor” get significantly less thanks and respect then men who perform similar favors. For men, it is viewed as going the extra mile, while women are just acting like women (You know how women are, amirite?)
  • “Relentlessly Pleasant” – Given the social penalty described above, one of the most successful strategies for women to navigate work place situations (especially controversial, confrontational, or challenging ones) is to be “relentlessly pleasant.” Always be smiling, always be asking for what you want. Do not let up on either front. Take note of this one the next time you are asking for a raise or a promotion. You need to be persistant while also being liked. Good luck!
  • “Tiara Syndrome” – Women expect good work to be noticed and rewarded. They don’t want to have to ask for praise (because, as we’ve seen, being demanding or ambitious has a personal cost for women that it does not for men). While waiting for their work to be noticed, their male peers have forwarded “kudos” emails to their bosses, have asked clients to recommend them, have told their bosses about their positive reviews. You are not being judged on the quality of your work. You are being judged on the quality of the work your boss sees.

Phew, that was a lot! And only in four chapters! I want to reiterate again that Sandberg is never claiming it is “fair” that such discrepancies in perception and attitude exist, only that they do. The question then is, how to address them? For me, it will mean handing this book to my excellent (male) boss as soon as I’m finished. Any man that manages women should be reading this.

Related Post: Ladies helping ladies get raises

Related Post: How to accidentally raise a feminist daughter

6 Comments

Filed under Books, Gender

How Different Are Men and Women? Does It Matter?

This week on Role/Reboot I wrote about the idea of fundamental gender differences and whether or not this is a useful way of thinking.

Screenshot_3_28_13_10_08_AM

The idea for this post was a mishmash of a few strange things. I was watching Brief Interviews with Hideous Mena movie based on the David Foster Wallace novel about a female researcher interviewing a range of men about their relationships. It becomes this surreal series of monologues about gender roles and modern masculinity that is both appalling and engrossing at once. It also stars a ridiculous cast of dudes including Josh Charles, Chris Messina, Jim Krasinski, and Clarke Peters. Even the “good guys,” the ones who speak about women with tenderness, admiration, or respect, still had this strange veil of “othering” layered over everything they said. The way each fictional monologuer addressed the researcher revealed how many of them viewed women as this sort of alien other that needed to be addressed as they we are a different species.

Then, I was watching Battlestar Galactica (Spoiler Alert), and there’s this horrible scene where a captive female Cylon (the robotic-but-humanoid enemies of humans) is about to be raped by her human guards. When two men try to prevent the crime, they accidentally kill one of the rapists. During their trial, her defenders explain their behavior by saying, “But they were going to rape her!” only to be told by the commanding officer, “You can’t rape a Cylon.” The implication is very clear; despite having by all appearances complete agency and autonomy, the Cylon woman is deemed sub-human and treatment of her no longer has to abide by rules of human decency.

This is what I worry about when I see women dehumanized and objectified in the media. It creates the space for men to think of women as somehow fundamentally different than themselves, and consequently deserving of different treatment. Anyway, there’s more on that, plus some homemade graphs, in my essay.

Related Post: Genderswapping the Internet

Related Post: “A Letter to the Girl I Harassed”

Leave a Comment

Filed under Gender, Hollywood, Media, Republished!

I Think I’m Doing OkCupid Wrong

This week for Role/Reboot, I did a little internal investigation on how I behave on online dating sites. We already know how I feel about gendered traditions once we’re actually on the date (i.e. Who pays?), but what about the sending of and responding to messages? Why do I sit back and wait? Is the answer really because it’s just so freaking easy? That seems like laziness to me, and no one should rest on their laurels when it comes to equalizing the playing field, least of all ladies who write about gender and equality on the internet…

onlinedatingRelated Post: Comparing dating to church.

Related Post: Guest post: the dangers of dating while freelancing

2 Comments

Filed under Gender, Republished!

Oh Hey! An Example of Sexism in Tech

Earlier this week I went to a Chicago tech event called Technori Pitch. A keynote speaker addresses his or her expertise for twenty minutes and then a series of start-ups do five minute pitches on their apps and sites followed by Q&A. Harper Reed, the Chief Technology Officer for Obama for America, was the keynote, and his semi-celebrity presence drew a larger, louder crowd than average.

Reed kept it pretty high-level, with pithy slides and an emphasis on practicing failure over and over again because, as he put it, on Game Day:

photo (69)

One of his last big plugs was to encourage everyone in the audience to work towards bringing more women and more non-Asian minorities in tech. He got big applause. I rolled my eyes, not because I dispute the sentiment, but because awareness of the disparity is only step one and Harper had just finished telling us how the first 25 people he hired were from his personal network. Do you know what happens when white guys with hipster beards hire from their personal networks? They get 25 white guys with hipster beards. Nothing against you guys, but it’s hard to take a plug for diversity too seriously when you just demonstrated exactly why it’s hard to do.

Anyway, that’s not the point, nor is it the sexism I referenced in the title of this post. The format of Technori Pitch allows the audience to anonymously ask questions via an app, and then vote up the questions they’d like the moderator to ask the pitchers. The second pitch after Harper left the stage came from a pair, one man and one woman. These were three of the questions that were voted up.

Are You Single?

What’s your accent, guuuurl?

What’s your accent, guuurrl? (don’t delete this!)

To his credit, the moderator ignored these questions, so the woman presenting may never know they were asked. But seriously, guys? Harper’s point was that you need to work to create a workplace that is not hostile to perceived outsiders. That means treating them like you treat anyone else (which hopefully, is with respect). Calling an adult woman “girl” is not respectful. Asking about relationship status instead of focusing on her work product is not respectful. Declining to treat her pitch as a serious business exercise (as you did everyone else’s) is not respectful. In short, your questions demonstrated exactly the kind of hostile environment Harper Reed just finished warning you about.

There was one black presenter, would you ask in the anonymous questions “Are you good at basketball? Can you dunk? Are you a rapper in your spare time?” Of a gay presenter, would you ask “Are you a top or a bottom? Do you like fashion? Will you be my gay best friend?” Man, I really hope not. In a workplace, the quickest way to make someone feel like an outsider is to point out all the stereotypes attributed to whatever facet of them gives them outsider status. If you’re the “only” in a room, whatever you’re the only of, it’s hard enough feeling like your work represents the work of your whole demographic bloc, without facing asinine questions or shooting down ridiculous assumptions.

Related Post: Brogramming

Related Post: Genderswapping the internet

4 Comments

Filed under Chicago, Gender

Sunday Scraps 91

sunday91

1. Books: So, apparently McDonald’s is giving away 15million books instead of plastic crap. This seems like a good thing, no?

2. SCI-FI: Jim Hines, a fantasy author, illustrates some of the ridiculous lady-poses of sci-fi and fantasy covers with some creative posing.

3. MARRIAGE EQUALITY: The argument against marriage equality has taken a turn for the strange, in my opinion, with this emphasis on unintended pregnancy and accidental babies….

4. CHICAGO: I’m kind of obsessed with these little graphic illustrations of Liz Fosslien, especially her very accurate understanding of all things Chicago. See especially, the Board of Trade drink ratios.

5. CELEBRITY: God bless NYMag for the gift of 60 high school photos of celebrities, from Amy Poehler to Channing Tatum, Alec Baldwin to Zooey Deschanel.

6. TECH: Really fascinating piece from HuffPo on how Siri came to be and how she changed when she went Apple.

Related Post: Sunday 90 – Frida, Lindsay Lohan, James Deen, Zadie

Related Post:  Sunday 89 - Mr. Wright, Matt and Ben, avalanches

6 Comments

Filed under Art, Body Image, Books, Chicago, Food, Gender, Hollywood, Media, Politics

Bright Spot?

Warning: The bright spot referenced in the title of this post will not be arriving for several paragraphs. First, you have to go some dark places with me.

I do not hold grudges well. I am also generally incapable of going to sleep upset, of keeping my feelings to myself, or otherwise letting emotions incubate for reasonable lengths of time. When I feel shitty, whether for external or internal reasons, the shittiness sits front and center in my brain. I can’t think about other things, I can’t distract myself, and I can’t just let bad vibes dissipate at their natural pace; I have to force them out.

One of the ways I do this by dumping them on someone else. I never mean to dump, it just kind of happens, and then it takes the stricken look of a coworker caught off guard for me to really realize what  a lunatic I sound like.

Take Wednesday for example. Every piece of news I consumed (and I consume a lot of news) was horrifying. Not like, oh man, the CTA is raising their prices (which does suck,) but like legitimately filling me with actual horror/fear/desperation. And once that horror snowball starts, I can never seem to stop it. It started with the story about the rape case in Cleveland, TX, where the 11-year-old was raped by 20+ boys and men. Is this story in and of itself horrifying? Yes, but it is unfortunately old and faded news. The latest development is that the defense attorney described the 11-year-old girl as a “spider” who “lured” men into her “web.”

So I stared at that for a while, frothing at the mouth, and then shifted my gaze to my email, where my daily Chicagoist updates had arrived, leading with, of course, a horrifying story about a high school coach who condoned (maybe facilitated?) heinous sexual assault on a boys soccer team under the auspices of “hazing”. Does it ever end?

And then, when it seems like it will never end, I stumble on this ad for toy computers in which the boy computer (blue, obviously) has 50 functions and the girl computer (guess what color?) has 25 functions. And this, of course, is the least horrifying thing I’ve seen so far today, but I am already so worked up that this idiotic ad, this thoughtless, sexist, horrible dumb ad, is the thing that tips me over the edge.

My friend senses my consternation, likely because I am at this point moaning into my hand and rocking back and forth (I exaggerate, only slightly), and I unleash on her an incomprehensible torrent of angst, DID YOU SEE TEXAS, CLEVLELAND RAPE CASE DEFENSE ATTORNEY SAYS SHE’S A SPIDER SHE’S A CHILD WHY WHY WHY NO ONE UNDERSTANDS WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE WORLD AND CHIAGOIST SOCCER TEAM HAZING WHAT???? EVERYONE SUCKS I HATE IT ALL COMPUTERS FOR BOYS? WHO APPROVES THIS SHIT? I AM NEVER HAVING CHILDREN. And she just stares back at me, waiting for the steam to cool. I immediately felt better. What had been bottling up all day was at least released, the pressure was gone.

And then she did a cool thing, and sent me something to brighten my otherwise gloomy day. It was the reactions of Jada and Will smith to the criticism of their daughter Willow’s hair (she recently shaved her head). Jada wrote this:

willowThe question is why I would LET Willow cut her hair. First the LET must be challenged. This is a world where women, girls are constantly reminded that they don’t belong to themselves; that their bodies are not their own, nor their power or self determination. I made a promise to endow my little girl with the power to always know that her body, spirit and her mind are HER domain. Willow cut her hair because her beauty, her value, her worth is not measured by the length of her hair. It’s also a statement that claims that even little girls have the RIGHT to own themselves and should not be a slave to even their mother’s deepest insecurities, hopes and desires. Even little girls should not be a slave to the preconceived ideas of what a culture believes a little girl should be.”

And I’m fist-pumping, I’m hollering, I’m jamming out in my chair like this is the best, most joyous song I have ever been privileged enough to hear. And then there’s Will:

We let Willow cut her hair. When you have a little girl, it’s like how can you teach her that you’re in control of her body? If I teach her that I’m in charge of whether or not she can touch her hair, she’s going to replace me with some other man when she goes out in the world. She can’t cut my hair but that’s her hair. She has got to have command of her body. So when she goes out into the world, she’s going out with a command that it is hers. She is used to making those decisions herself

And I’m like… Fresh Prince, I knew you had it in you. You tell ‘em! And so the cloud passes, because although the world is most definitely not an okay place right now, we have allies, and the arc of the universe is long and it bends toward justice, and because some people speak up, and because we are not alone. 

Related Post: Anomie

Related Post: Defunkification

2 Comments

Filed under Gender, Hollywood, Media

Thoughts on Bling

A week ago, I would not have told you that I had any sort of strong feelings about engagement rings. I generally think super expensive, super ostentatious stuff is overrated, but that’s a ship that has sailed on the wedding industrial complex.

Then, through a series of conversations with friends, a lot of internet reading, and a handful of texts with my mom, I realized that the engagement ring tradition is actually one I want no part of. Here’s why:

Related Post: So what does a wedding photographer do exactly?

Related Post: Surprisingly pleased with the Grey’s Anatomy take on marriage…

1 Comment

Filed under Gender, Republished!