Erasure of Women from Public/Cultural life:

dittany, I was answering happysmiley's question: "Was the money not worth it to the women, but it was worth it to the men, anything to do with the fact that the men were getting paid more?"

This is money paid on promotion. ie if a man was promoted v. woman was promoted to the same position, would they get the same pay. I answered 'yes'.

Quattro, just last week, my dh left work suddenly to collect the dcs because childcare broke down and I could not do it because something blew up at my work. He had no choice.

I think it is common for the older guard to have wives that give up their careers. Not a given for the up and coming. Cultural shifts are happening, albeit slowly, and IMO for the better.

I don't know about women in general but for me having children changed my priorities somewhat. Work was no longer the focus of all my energies, just a means to earn money to provide for my family. If my babies need me then work can get stuffed.
I hadn't really considered it before but now you mention it my DH has definitely become more motivated to work hard since he became a Father.

Happysmiley, in my workplace, the money was equal for men and women. The measure of success is largely transparent.

Quattro, agree with you re men leaving work. Only once seen it where a man left work for a sick child, but sick child had been rushed to hospital. He wouldn't gone anywhere for anything less than a visit to A&E.

Was the money not worth it to the women, but it was worth it to the men, anything to do with the fact that the men were getting paid more?

Rattling good read, that article. Good stuff

When women opt out (or the fire in the belly gets extinguished) it has two effects:

1. Fewer women at senior levels in the workplace
2. Men spending less time at home

It's the second effect that gets ignored by commentators. I have never NOT EVER seen a male colleague leave work unexpectedly to collect a sick child. He doesn't have to, because his wife/partner is prepared to do it. Either because she is staying at home and therefore expected to do it, or because her job is of lesser consequence than her husband's

It's a vicious circle IMO. I really do think that rules around shared maternity/paternity leave would be helpful to break this down.

Dittany, women have seized opportunities once the shackles are off? In what arena?

For a lot of the women in my workplace who have dropped out, you could not pay them to go into senior management. I don't think it is a glass ceiling thing. They just did not want the unpredictable hours and the intrusion into their personal life.

ie to them, the money was not worth it.

But then that takes me back to the beginning. Why do women have that fire in the belly up until the time they have children, what extinguishes it?

And why do men get more fire in their bellies when children come along?

(I say men get more, because if I remember correctly order in which people get paid the most goes:

men with kids
men with out kids
women with out kids
women with kids.)

Just my observation, dittany. I agree they are stereotypes based on my observation. I am allowed to say that, aren't I?

Happysmiley, good point about women being taught the skills. A few of these firms have put in place training programmes for women about to make the leap into senior management. Will be interesting to see if that solves things.

I personally think it is a fire-in-the-belly thing in the workplace that women tend to lack.

Both the "masculine" and "feminine" are equally successful by the way. Neither has the edge on the other.

All the personal traits that you describe are ones that people learn, if they are taught. They are not the exclusive preserve of men. I've learnt most of them myself as I said above. The men I work with have learnt them. They are not innate in men. If these are the skills needed to do the job, why aren't women being taught them?

Re the hours, I agree, for some roles you do need to be "on call" all the time. If you do need to be on call, why are men able to do this and not women? What about jobs were you don't have to be on call? Why are they still dominated by men?

ditany, it not enough or even necessary to be 'good' to succeed. I think we all know that.

Happysmiley, I agree that workplaces have different cultures.

The firms I work are top tier globally. It is a recurring theme amongst the handful of firms in this group that top women are in a minority.

The firms the next tier down have proportionally more women represented at the top. And so on.

It seems the most brutish firms are the ones the succeed the greatest in the most competitive field.

The firms that are slightly more cuddly are not as successful (as in male terms). Coincidentally, they also have more senior women amongst their ranks.

Chicken or egg? I am genuinely interested.

To get to senior management (disclaimer again: at the places I have worked), it was also an hours requirement.

It was given that everyone in the running had ability, but they also had to have commitment and commitment meant being available at the end of a blackberry at the very least, at all times of the day/week.

And like to be in charge. And dominate meetings.

And be the authority and be authoritative. And be good at influencing people.

And like to make decisions where the buck stops and to defend that decision in the face of opposition.

I completely respect any woman (Xenia?) who enjoys this.

However, they would be in the minority.

do = should

Of course, they do, but they're not.