Global summit of women 2014 is a sausage party

[noblegiraffe]

mobile.twitter.com/mapaquet/status/478526392947048448/photo/1

Anyone know the story behind this farce?

Post 2:

No: means I don't know the story behind the image answering the OP's question

I need to work on my shocked and surprised face for a few minutes. : this part means that if it's clearly as dumb as the image implies, then I'm not shocked. I'm not shocked because I have attended many, many conferences where this happened. Just last week, the UK social workers org had their annual conference. The vast majority of social workers are women. The vast majority of speakers were male. This is the reality in which we live: we do the work, but still need men to tell us what to do.

It's called misogyny.

"His crime went beyond hated of women and into something far worse."

If he had shot/stabbed two black men and four white, because he didn't like black people and didn't like his white roommates being friends with black people, would his crime cease to be racially motivated because it was "far worse" than a gang of white kids beating up a black kid for, say, dating a white girl?

Even as a subset of a female dominated conference it stinks.

People complained that there weren't enough men discussing how to get women into power in business. So they convened an all-male panel to discuss how men can get men to get more women into power. If men deserve a voice in the first discussion then women deserve a voice in the second, especially as it is ultimately about them.

On Twitter these men have been getting a whole lot of abuse. Yet these powerful men seem to be fighting the feminist cause in their own companies. Read about Gianmarco Monsellatos law firm, who is on the panel. How he has fought for and achieved complete gender equality throughout his company.

The vast majority of speakers were women (90%). Next time these men, who were invited by the organisers, may simply not bother coming.

I would assume the reason they are all male is that the question is about gender breakdown in their companies and therefore any company with a female CEO is less likely to be one that is wanted on that platform.

I would be asking about those at the bottom of the work pyramid and numbers versus amount paid. This should be a chance to look at creche facilities and flexible working for those returning to work. These are nightmare areas IME and really need to be addressed.

Why wouldn't it be valid to have a female CEO on that platform? Surely it would be really interesting to see if the gender breakdown is more even with a female in charge, and whether a woman faces the same issues in recruiting women that a man does.

Bonkers to exclude women from that discussion.