Women's Networks and their constant emphasis on men

[MrsFogi]

Over the years I have been active in womens networks (both work ones and wider industry/sector ones) but I am always amazed at the sheer effort and emphasis that seems to be put on attracting men/increasing male membership/getting more men to attend. Somehow networks that are supposed to focus on women end up spending 90% of their time on men. This seems crazy to me - ethnic minority networks don't seem to have attracting white people at the top of their agendas, lgbt don't beg hetrosexuals to run them. Why do womens networks seem to do this? Tbh it is why I always leave as I don't want to attend panels where men are speaking with the sole "qualification" that they "let their wife work" so "must understand working women's issues". Whenever I have mentioned this at network meetings I have been absolutely shot down in flames so I suspect I am missing something/the same may happen here on my first foray into the feminism chat forum.

But I do love you for loving E.F.Benson (if I have got the cultural reference in your user name correct)

MelindaMay
I have

I don't mean your au pair or your gardener or your nanny or your tennis coach...

I mean a genuine workforce who rely on you and the institution that employs them to be able to pay their bills and their mortgage..

Lose an argument and say "night night"...

What have I made up?

Curiously, the proportion of senior female managers in my current organisation is significantly higher than that at previous organisations without women's networks or any interest in diversity more generally.

Just a coincidence, I daresay.

Genuinely, what have I made up? Your salary is paid either by the tax payer or by a willing customer who is willing to hand over their hard earned, highly taxed income to you because they believe it is good value for money in some way.

Convince me that that the people paying your salary are happy for a proportion of it to pay for you to attend a notwork where you blame "them" and "the patriarchy" for all of life's woes.

Damn, this could have been an interesting thread before it was hijacked.

Irene
What is your current organisation?

Hijacked? Or just promulgating an alternative point of view? It is legal as far as I am aware - even on MN.

Give me the name of your CEO. I will write to him/ her to ask about the quantifiable benefit he/she has seen from the notworks and I promise you I will never comment on such a thread again.

Quantifiable benefit.

All about money, isn't it?

Let's talk about this money thing - many initiatives to get women into science/engineering/business have the thing about how having more "diversity" makes your business more profitable. As if money if all that counts. Isn't that interesting?

Melinda

Actually our CEO is quite keen on diversity networks and would probably be happy to talk about their value to the business. I'm still not going to tell you where I work, though.

I'm a Director of my own company, and hold a C level role at another, and I'd say a 5th of my working life is spent maintaining connections and networking. Our CFO spends even more time than that at conferences (both women in business type ones, and industry ones)

That's how people hear about me and the companies I work with, it's how we get a lot of our business.

In fact, I've never got any work through advertising, it's always been through contacts.

I really don't understand why people like slow feel the need to come on and be wankers.

Probably because their dicks tell them they can. Particularly loved the constant "misspelling" of words in the style of a 10 year old bully. I'm sure that whichever super successful business he's CEO of in his head is just the peachiest ever for women and BME people.

GreenTomato
"A fifth of my working life" ..

I am not talking about external BD. I
am asking about internal networks.what fraction of your average employees working week would you be comfortable for them to spend in on internally focused networkin? A full day every week?

Palmer Violet
That's a bit mean. I run a business that supports over 350 (mainly women) pay their mortgages, support their families, learn, grow and hopefully make a positive difference to society. We also pay our UK corporate taxes in full and are happy to do so.
I have actively supported women's network s and I happen to be BAME myself. I am just questioning whether they actually make a difference. Happy to be proved wrong.

My lot have invested a chunk of the recruitment budget in hosting networking sessions, for varied groups including women's groups.

Basically, we could buy wine and nibbles for 30/40 people every single month for 5 years and still be quids in, for the recruitment fee saving on a single senior tech approaching us directly instead of through a recruiter.

Going back to the OPs far more interesting point now that bollocks has been summarily disposed of [dusts hands briskly] - I've found that IME internal networks were more focused on bringing men in, but the women in tech groups are really not that worried. Where men are involved, there's no shortage of male volunteers but they tend to worry about being poor role models. (With reason, run a programming workshop with 100% male coaches and it's not giving women the idea they can succeed).

Happy to be proved wrong.

Would you like a fire extinguisher for your underwear, or do you like them that warm?

Sluglettuce
Where did I say women or BAME don't have issues? I am asking if networks actually make a difference.

Slightlyglitter
"Now that bollocking has been summarily disposed of"".. Has it?

I supported and funded extensive networks until two of my most senior female colleagues told me that they become delusioned with them. Now if anyone says "We need a network" I say "Great ..go for it "

I just find the forced formality of a company funded network counter productive

"I did a post on here a while back and got an amazingly useful response so I might dig it out if anyone's interested?"

I'd be interested slugseatlettuce.