Women-only network appoints male chairman

[IAmInsignificunt]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45083594

“A networking group with the aim of supporting female leaders has been criticised for appointing a male chairman.
AllBright announced that Allan Leighton, chairman of the Co-operative Group, had taken the role.
The privately-run group describes itself as "the network for working women in the UK".
Co-founder Debbie Wosskow defended the decision, saying that to create change you "need to bring men with you".”

I am so mad about this. I'm not sure why "bringing men with you" requires ONE man in the TOP job? FFS, there must be other ways to get men involved - set up workshops and seminars; negotiate partnerships with male organisations or corporates run by men.

I mean, never mind anything else, is it really true that there isn't a woman in the whole world who can do this?

I heard that on the radio. They always have to be the chairman, never the tealady

Stinks 😷

I'm not sure why "bringing men with you" requires ONE man in the TOP job?
Yeah, funny that, eh?
A bit like the charity sector, most of the paid jobs, males, most of the unpaid, females.

I am being too lazy to look it up, but isn't the Co-op bank part of that Co-operative Group? You know, the ones that refused the feminist org an account, because blah blah not bowing enough to men blah blah rulez.

www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.theonion.com/man-finally-put-in-charge-of-struggling-feminist-moveme-1819569515/amp

Isn't there a satirical piece somewhere about man being appointed leader of the feminist movement?

But I did smile at the Women's Equality Party comment that that the decision to appoint Mr Leighton "seems at odds with [AllBright's] mission to change the way the world thinks about female-led businesses"
Yes indeed Sophie.

Dammit I knew someone would find it before I did

No, obviously not one single solitary qualified woman in the whole wide world wanted the job

The first thing I thought of was that Onion piece. FFS.

I. Just. Can't.

I. Just. Can't.

Of course you can't, Vicky. You're not a man.

I agree that we need men on-side. I don't think that means taking up all the lead positions. That's just same-old same-old.

So the only way to engage men in supporting women in work is to put them in charge? Is that the only way they will engage? Why would a man who supported women in work take this role? Why wouldn’t he decline it and offer up some women’s names that he knows could do the role probably better than him? What are his motives?

It is exactly like the Onion thing.

I heard their rep on the today programme this morning and she was crap too - clearly reading out from some pre-prepared script rather than just speaking normally, which came across extremely badly. It was irritating in the extreme.

I've just seem this in the BBC app. It's a bloody laugh, isn't it? Looking forward to the day an all male group appoints a female chair, or the day hell freezes over, which will probably happen first.

You have to have a dick to make it
Or so men think regarding profit.
The facts always prove otherwise
But are again so much denied.
It blinds the women of Allbright
And has really put them to flight.
Or maybe they really are thick
Or possibly very big twits

I did like the mental image of bringing men with me. To give me the legitimacy I so clearly lack..

Heard this on the Today programme. You couldn't make it up. Three and a half billion women in the world and they appoint a man - what a way to champion women

Way to sell out.

So the only way to engage men in supporting women in work is to put them in charge? Is that the only way they will engage?

So it seems.
They have no interest in boosting women unless they get the boost to the top.

These women are just so progressive and ahead of all of us. Don’t you know we need to bring the little men with us?
Insert SNEERING EMOJI

I'd love to know what their members think....

Idiots.

Ugh. Part of me thinks if they have some concrete things they wish to achieve this may very well help. Another part of me feels angry at myself for believing this. The biggest part feels angry that this is the scale of the barriers women face.

Of course it COULD be seen that the only way women can get their message across to men at the top, is to have a man at the top to say it? Not because a woman can't do the job, but because men only listen to other men.

True that you don't see many male tea makers. However, isn't the concept of an 'all women' group a bit sexist in itself?

It supposedly has the purpose of supporting women in leadership. You don't find it a teeny tiny bit ironic that they've put a man in charge?