Why women don't want top jobs

[jellybeans]

www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=561159&in_page_id=1879
This is very interesting, what do you think? I have always wondered why some people can't accept maybe men and women are different or that our current work system is the right one which we all follow slavishly.

Sorry, try this here

Well, yes. I agree. But I didn't need to read this article to know all that

Okay, so supposing this is true (which I am not accepting for one moment) - what do we do then?

Shall we close the doors of our medical schools, law schools and business schools to the daughters of our generation, on the basis that as women, they will never have the drive to succeed at the highest levels in the most demanding professions?

I think that this claptrap is in danger of provoking a serious backlash against women, to be honest. It's the old line, you're equal, but different, it's obvious .

Me either but it sums it up nicely and from a feminist view point. I also read yesterday that the Tories may decide to pay a small amount to mothers and they can then choose whether to use it to help them SAH or to pay for nursery. I think it is a great idea and may give choices to more people.

I don't think all mums should work or stay home but do what they feel is right and not be pushed one way or the other (like Labour seem to have tried with getting all mums to work and only subsidising that choice). I know some people will still have no choice but it is a step in thr right direction. I also think more jobs should be 9-3 or flexible/from home rather than make kids be in school/care from 8-6.

SSB I don't think it is saying not to educate women etc but that liberation is about choice not being a clone and following into the traditional 'mens pattern'. I read an interesting study once (Hakim) which estimated that 60% of women want to work p/t and 20% to SAH or be f/t WM's. So actually most women want to work but maybe want to work part time or have some years out. More top jobs should be flexible rather than take over your whole life.

jellybeans, I am not saying that Rosie Boycott is advocating not educating women. But what I am saying is that sooner or later someone is going to start pointing out what a waste it is of places at medical school if over 50% of the new entrants are women, but in the end up they all want to be GPs so that they can work structured hours (for example).

I do see your point but hopefully if flexible work becomes the norm it won't be seen as a bad thing. Maybe more men would take it and share childcare or SAH. Also, people are working longer so even if a women took years out and went back at 40 there is still alot of time to serve, and not all women have children or would work p/t.

The thing is, I think a lot of top jobs can't be done flexibly.

That's not being defeatist to the status quo or arguing that we all should be sitting at our desks till late in the evening, and I run my team with a certain amount of flexibility, but the reality is that many top jobs - especially those that have a strong service or customer facing element; or those that depend on the accretion or cumulation of knowledge and experience - just can't be done flexibly (or in a way that gives the same outcome when compared to someone who has the same job full time with no career breaks).

I thought the article made sense really.

I think it makes sense. Since I had my children, I have dropped the responsibility I had at work... I just want to work part time and do my job without all the extra hassle that goes with it. I want to enjoy my children, I want to enjoy my part time job. I want to enjoy my life.

I don't want promotion. Its true for most of my friends too. Some have given up completely, most work part time but out of my circle of friends (with their preschoolers), only one works full time. I want to enjoy life, and I think having children gives you a different perspective. I now see life through my children, I enjoy life more because of my children - for me, its far more rewarding than promotion or a having a top job. I think we need to see success in a different light - to me success is not about having the top job, but it is now enjoying life, and I achieve that through my part time job and being with my kids. I think this article shows we're starting to get there!

Totally agree Elkat.

The problem I have is that (going by the review of the book in NewScientist) the comparison she makes is between men with ADHD and Asperger's syndrome, and 'succesful' women in the workplace. Apparently a 'successful' woman is intelligent, middle class and university educated. Apples vs Oranges anyone?

This apparently means career success comes down to being more focussed and driven that a man with ASD. [Which means I'm out... but I'm male. Does that make me biologically disadvantaged, or just a loser?] I'm willing to bet these women had more 'successful' personal lives than the men they were compared against... but since these don't earn money, they don't count.

Load of balls IMO. There are plenty of very ambitious, driven women and plenty of not extremely ambitious men. Just another excuse to label all women and decry those who do want to succeed in the sort of career that our society sees as high-status.

The differences between any individual woman and another individual woman cannot be predicted by any crass generalisations about gender.

That is no reason not to make workplaces more flexible - family friendly for men and women but also offer more flexibility to anyone, whether they want to study, do charity work, have an absorbing hobby or whatever.

It's in the statistics Edam. If high powered jobs were family friendly jobs there wouldn't be a problem, but they never will be, for men or women. Man have backbited and schemed to outearn their co-workers in that environment for years, the rules don;t change just because some women want in. It isn't sex discrimination at that level, it's plain old dog eat dog.

The tide is at last beginning to turn thank god. Susan Pinker is sister of Steven Pinker, whipping boy of many a feminist who has been saying the same thing as Susan for years. Feminism seems to be waking up to itself thank god. It can only benefit us all.

I have a top job - I'm a sahm.

She must be refering to Baron-Cohens wiork with men and autistic brains - haven;t read the whole piece sorry. But it's very nuanced Kevlar, very subtle and very compelling actually.

And evidence shows that many in the 'top' jobs are not very nice people in relative terms; spend less time with famly, are less empthetic, more selfish , and they are quote happy to make sacrifices at other peoples expense.

It's all on average - there will be a minority that bucks the trend but that doens't make it any less of a truth. And it's descriptive not prescriptive Kevlar, so it doesn't say anything about you persoanlly.

That won't happen SSB. Our society depends on women in the workplace now and anyway, in a crucially secular liberal democracy the principle of equality is a central tenet, even if it is complex and we are just beginning to fully understand what that means across genders/sexes.

I haven't read the Pinker book. I've only read the same New Scientist review as Kevlar (which is by Anne Campbell monkeytrousers - right up your street).

She seems to take issue with the idea of sex-biased pathologies (such as ASD) as representing extreme male/female-ness. What would be the theory associated with the extreme female brain?
Anxiety/anorexia/depression?

She also crticises, as Kevlar has said, the comparison between one group who are diagnostically defined and another who are socially defined.

I must read the book...

Oh, I met her the other week! I was totally starstruck!

Is there a link on here somewhere??

here it is. Will have a look when i get back from work. ta

Crap don;t have full access. Will go out and buy it tomorrow.

cupsoftea..in my eyes sahm is a top job too. Monkey trousers I agree that the people at the top may have a different personality type. I just don't get the (paid) work is everything culture. Sure, it can be a great part of your life but it can also be horrid, menial and humiliating. Flexible work is the way forward!

I think it is terribly sad that people still write about women as if they are one great big homogeneous group, all with identical career goals.

The whole point of feminism is that women should have the right to choose the career that they want, without people presuming on their behalf what the poor deluded fools are capable of.

Do all women have children?
Do all women with children want to give up work/work part time?
Do we assume that because some men don't want to work, for whatever reason, that all men don't want to work? If not why are we able to see different working desires in men, but not in women?

It strikes me from the summary as the same old, same old. And that is so tiresome, it is beyond tiresome!

Well people talk about everyone like that, it's not anything to do with sexism.

But this is how policy is made, on average stats. Yes, most women do have children.most women do give up work for a while and then return part time - no we don;t assume men don;t want to work, but we do asume most fathers will work while the mothers stay for a time with their infants and the fathers play their role in facilitaing that.

We are able to see and allow for many variables, but the majority should inform us also.

We absoultly are able to see diffrent woirking desires in man and women, and our society actually facitates men and women making individual choices like this more than at any time in our history. That is far from tiresome IMHO.