Tags
Over the past few days, several posts and conversations have led me to reflect on what it means to be a woman in today’s society, and where we’re going from here. I’d like to share my thoughts. Let me just give a little overview of what’s been happening:
A few days ago, NYU professor and media researcher Clay Shirky wrote a post titled A Rant About Women, which has ruffled some feathers and sparked a lot of commentary in response. Here’s a few clips from his rant:
And it looks to me like women in general, and the women whose educations I am responsible for in particular, are often lousy at those kinds of behaviors, even when the situation calls for it. They aren’t just bad at behaving like arrogant self-aggrandizing jerks. They are bad at behaving like self-promoting narcissists, anti-social obsessives, or pompous blowhards, even a little bit, even temporarily, even when it would be in their best interests to do so.
Now this is asking women to behave more like men, but so what? We ask people to cross gender lines all the time.
It’s tempting to imagine that women could be forceful and self-confident without being arrogant or jerky, but that’s a false hope, because it’s other people who get to decide when they think you’re a jerk, and trying to stay under that threshold means giving those people veto power over your actions.
I don’t want to manipulate the tone of the piece by pulling those quotes out of context, but they were the ones that stood out most to me. I interpreted much of what he said as a call for women to do more lying and self-promotion in order to get ahead in society. Whether his intention was to make a statement about the disparity caused by the system, or the failure of women to play by its rules, I don’t know. You can read his full post here and decide for yourself.
Having tried to contact Shirky in the past myself, I felt compelled to respond. Here is the comment I left on his post:
Hi Clay,
I started to write a post in response to this rant, but I realized I wanted to speak directly to you, so I’m just posting here.
You seem to suggest that women need to behave like ‘arrogant self-aggrandizing jerks’ in order to get noticed, but I wonder, is that how you think we must act in order to get noticed by YOU?
I’m a grad student at the New School in a Media Studies program, and so of course have come across your work. I’ve tried to contact you via Facebook to discuss the ITP program at NYU and to find out the possibility of collaborating, but never received a response. I’ve tried to get in touch with you on Twitter, but haven’t received a response. I’ve tried to enter a conversation with you by building on some ideas of Jeff Jarvis’s and yours on algorithmic authority in a post, but didn’t receive a response.
I’m currently on the homepage of Nokia’s IdeasProject website, and share space with you on the “Ideator” page, sandwiched there between IDEO’s Tim Brown and sci-fi author Vernor Vinge. Douglas Rushkoff is looking forward to having me in his class next semester so we can share ideas, Howard Rheingold has said he likes the way I think, and John Hagel tells me he loves my stuff. On Twitter, I chat with Paul B Hartzog, Michel Bauwens, and Trebor Scholz. Brian Solis and David Armano retweet my posts and link to my work. I’ve written guest posts for Georgetown University’s peer-reviewed journal (one of my articles is actually on their homepage now), for unstructure, and {grow}, among others. My blog has attracted over 30,000 visits in 2 months, and sparked interesting conversations in the comments sections, and led to new opportunities and partnerships in real life.
I’ve done this all rather quietly, just by thinking deeply about things and putting in an effort to write in a fashion that is simple, approachable, and engaging. Never have I felt it was necessary to be “arrogant” or “jerky” or an “anti-social obsessive” or a “pompous blowhard” in order to display confidence in my abilities.
I’ve managed to impress the people listed above by acting as an intelligent, capable woman.
What do I have to do to capture your attention?
– Venessa Miemis
I felt a little karmically sick after leaving the comment because I don’t like that kind of name-dropping, but the point was just to illustrate that women don’t have to behave negatively in order to get noticed.
A few days after that, I saw that social media researcher danah boyd also wrote a post in response to Shirky’s rant, titled whose voice do you hear? gender issues and success. It’s great to have a fellow female out there who can clearly articulate her thoughts and also expose her vulnerabilities without apologizing for it. She digs into the gender biases we face, and points out that female confidence and assertiveness often get labeled as bitchiness, but argues that there’s no point for us to try “outmanning the men.” She makes some delightful statements about my favorite topic – the need to think differently:
But bringing in a woman whose attitude and approach is just as masculine as the men isn’t going to help your team break outside of its current mindset. They key is to bring people who think differently than you.
In thinking about creating parity, we all need to look around and account for our biases. Whose voices are you listening to because they’re the loudest or the most like yours? Are you going out of your way to seek out people who approach the world differently than you? Everyone needs to make an effort to make visible what has become invisible.
I would love to see more women stand up and say “me!” and I vow to continue to help younger women assert themselves. But let this not push the onus entirely to women. We need men as allies, men who both encourage women to speak up and who consciously choose to spotlight women who are talented. But, more importantly, we need men (and anyone with privilege) to consciously and conscientiously account for their own privilege and biases and to actively work to highlight and embrace diverse voices of all kinds. Your interpretation of others is just as (if not more) important in creating change as their efforts to impress you. The privileged cannot expect the disenfranchised to assimilate, as tempting as that may be. And even if that were possible, it wouldn’t give us the society we want anyhow.
I thought her sentiments were well-put, and all of this has made me wonder – What are the expectations for women (or what should they be) as we progress into an increasingly interdependent global society?
I think this needs to be looked at in a larger societal context, and at how our systems are structured. Everything I talk about on this blog is about seeing the world in different ways and shifting between multiple perspectives in order to discover new approaches to solving problems. For me, this topic is no different. I think we’re in the middle of a lot of big changes in society, and it’s becoming accepted that encouraging collaboration and diversity is a better formula for fostering innovation than keeping information in silos, and departments homogeneous.
I just came across a recent article from the Economist, Female power, which reviews the role of women in the workforce around the world. As I read through it, it seems clear that the problem has never been the lack of assertiveness or intelligence among women – the problem is systemic. Our structures haven’t been set up in a way that allows for a woman’s success. But now, as we are transitioning into a service economy/knowledge economy/creative economy, or whatever it’s being called this afternoon, the opportunities for equality are presenting themselves. I liked this passage:
The rich world has seen a growing demand for women’s labour. When brute strength mattered more than brains, men had an inherent advantage. Now that brainpower has triumphed the two sexes are more evenly matched. The feminisation of the workforce has been driven by the relentless rise of the service sector (where women can compete as well as men) and the equally relentless decline of manufacturing (where they could not).
The article then points out that today women make up the majority (51%) of professional workers in the US, and the trend is likely to continue:
The Bureau of Labour Statistics calculates that women make up more than two-thirds of employees in ten of the 15 job categories likely to grow fastest in the next few years. By 2011 there will be 2.6m more women than men studying in American universities.
It ends on an uplifting note, highlighting the changes that are being made worldwide to create systems that don’t force women to choose between careers and families – from advances in company policies, like flextime and home-working options, to conveniences for working mothers, like the length of school days and availability of after-school programs for children.
A similar article in the New York Times, In Germany, A Tradition Falls, and Females Rise, also addresses the social revolution taking place that’s allowing women to take their place alongside men in the workplace. It ends with this great line:
“Many obstacles remain, and a backlash is always possible,” said Ms. Hagemann, the history professor in North Carolina. But, in Germany and elsewhere, once unthinkable notions are now being entertained. “All change,” she said, requires “a change in the head.”
Then just this morning, this inspiring list of women entrepreneurs passed through my tweetstream – Women 2.0’s Female Founder Successes of 2009.
When I see stuff like this, I feel encouraged that we really are moving towards a place of equality. In the meantime, I think it’s important for us as women to be true our nature, and not sell out to the behaviors often applauded in the current system. This sentiment was well put by @renatalemos, in her own response to Shirky:
we all have our lenses. life in a patriarchy looks different for males and females. what determines our “beingness” in terms of gender is not a simple equation. gender is COMPLEX. now one thing is simple: the rules of society were established by MALES. so if women play by the book it will definitely increase their chances of success. so you’re saying: be aggressive. act like a guy. you’ll be better off! of course. this is how the game works. we know what the rules of the game are. and yes, you’re right. your diagnostic is precise. but the medicine you’re prescribing for us, women, does actually KILL us as WOMEN.
there are different waves of feminism:1st: break the chains.
2nd: learn to walk.
3rd: start to dance.all kinds of different women are scattered accross these different stages. what you are saying belongs to a 2nd wave: hey, learn to walk, but walk like men! well, i would kindly ask you to reconsider that argument.
we shall move to a 4rth wave of feminism, one in which women are liberated not by playing by the rules of men’s game, but by embracing their own FEMALE power, which is very different from male power. in essence. in expression, in everything. not a male power that is based on war and competition; but a female power that is based on LOVE and CO-CREATION.
when the female powers of love and co-creation are valued in the ECONOMIC life of the world, then we´ll be moving from a patriarchy to a pluriarchy
not a patriarchy, not a matriarchy: a PLURIARCHY.”
Well said, Renata. I too think it’s all about a balance, about us benefitting from the strengths from both sides. It’s so easy to get sucked in to the norms, to do what society says we should do, and gauge our happiness and success on other people’s standards. Maybe losing both my parents while still in my 20s has given me the ability to see how little time we really have and that there’s nothing more important than being true to your ideals and ethics. I guess I had my mid-life crisis 30 years early. But I clearly remember thinking to myself, ‘my GOD, what am I doing with my life? Am I really going to continue doing a corporate job I’m not passionate about, behave in a way that is not true to myself, and then later find that I’d never been real, that I’d never really lived?’
The past few years have been a process of (re)discovery, and I’m happy with who I’m becoming. I’m not behaving like an “arrogant self-aggrandizing jerk,” and I’m proud of that. Maybe my path to “success” will be a little longer because I’m not a shameless self-promoter – that’s ok. I think we’re seeing a shift in the values we find commendable in society, and it’s not about men or women being better. It’s about being co-designers of a healthy, equitable society. It’s about keeping an eye on the big picture, and trying to live up to a standard that’s captures the essence of what it means to be human. And I don’t think that’s going to be accomplished through acting like anti-social obsessives or pompous blowhards. It’s going to be through empathy, altruism, and collaboration.
emergent by design 
Just to share a way of looking at that has been working for me. I think it’s fair to say that the popular discourse about the “60’s” was about the civil rights, anti war, environmental movement and of course “women’s liberation.”
My perspective is that all of these were connected in many tangled ways and that what we are seeing now in all of those spaces are the next stage in the evolution of the same forces.
Just a couple of data points: I believe that something like 97% of micro financing go to women. The number of two family earners has been a huge demographic shift since the 60’s.
It shouldn’t really be a surprise. I think it’s fair to say that culture is created and supported in the family. Women have always been the guardians of the family. Now that work is more flexible it means that the most fundamental roles we have as human beings are radically changing. Perhaps for the first time at this scale in human history. Men have become care givers. Women have become hunters.
It will be interesting to watch as this continues to play out in all parts of our societies. Your post is a wonderful granular description of what it looks like from one modern woman’s point of view in a global metropole.
thanks michael,
i just came across an article that hits on those same areas you just talked about – microfinancing & family as infrastrucutre. you might enjoy: 2nd Decade of the 21st Century: Gender Equality, Food Security & Counter-extremism
I’m still not sure I see what Shirky is trying to get at. To me, the obvious answer to this is not that women should act more like men, as he seems to be arguing, but rather that the system needs to change. That’s why I like your response to him – because the real question he (everyone!) should be asking is ‘how can I make this different?’
And just as an aside, danah boyd has to be one of the smartest people around today – everything I’ve read from her has been great!
Thanks for another interesting post.
thanks tim. maybe i should be thankful to shirky for at least getting this conversation going.
I have written several posts about how women are showing up (or not showing up) in business, especially the social web, and have heard many sentiments similar to Clay’s reflected in the comment sections.
Is blogging a man’s job: http://businessesgrow.com/2009/12/16/is-blogging-a-mans-job/
and
Social web: Women need not apply? http://businessesgrow.com/2009/10/14/%e2%80%9csocial-media-expert%e2%80%9d-women-need-not-apply/
… are examples.
I feel like I’ve led a sheltered life in that I have usually worked in corporate environments that celebrate diversity and treat people with respect … so a lot of this is new to me, but I can’t deny there are problems.
Let me tell a short story. There’s a point.
I once had a female Asian employee who was brilliant and had boundless potential. I did what I could to get her, and my other gifted employees, invited to important meetings so they could get exposure to key executives. Time after time she would sit in these meetings completely silent while others made an impact on these folks through active dialogue.
Subsequently, one of the ways I coached her was to SHOW UP. To have a voice, you have to voice your voice. Does that make sense? : )
I don’t know Clay — don’t follow him — at all. Some of his comments seem provocative but I don’t think he’s asking anybody to lie. Perhaps it’s just a challenge — in an extreme way — to show up. One of the themes that has come across over and over in the comment section on my blogs (from women) is that they don’t promote themselves and sometimes feel they are getting run over by the men.
This does not excuse the underlying behavior that keeps inequalities in place, but simply blogging about inequality or commenting about it isn’t going to change a gender and a generation who value people who show up.
I find it bizarre that Clay has not taken the opportunity to connect with a mind like yours, Venessa but you have DEFINTELY shown up! It’s unlikely you’re going to have much of an impact on this chap. Move on to people who appreciate your brilliance. There are a lot of them. His loss.
In the end, all we can do is control our own behaviors and reactions and try to make our places and spaces better. Thanks for doing that through this passionate and thorough post, Venessa.
thank you mark. one thing i didn’t mention in the post was that blogging has been actually been really powerful in giving me the confidence to “show up.” in some ways, i feel like my posts get more bold and challenging as time goes by.
when i first started blogging, it felt like whispering into the dark; now it feels like having a conversation with an intelligent community.
it’s actually been great to have this screen as an interface, because interacting with new people in real life always intimidated me, and i felt like i wasn’t good enough to converse with people i thought of as smarter or more successful than me.
spending time online has completely changed my opinion about that. people are incredibly more accessible than i would have thought, and willing and eager to engage. it made me really ask, “who is anyone?” you know what i mean? i used to be kind of enamored by people i respected, and held them up on this pedestal of sorts. now i realize, we’re all just people. just because you’re better known, doesn’t mean you’re better.
so the web has been a flattener for me, and i carry that back into real life. sure, maybe i’m still awkward in new situations, but i’m not intimidated. i’m a lot more confident that my talents will show through, and that people will want to interact or collaborate with me.
and if not – like you said – their loss.
🙂
deep bows and namaste, venessa.
it really is about re-defining “the essence of what it means to be human”.
thank you for your mention and your thoughts.
it already feels like we´re moving forward.
i really liked your post too. i wish people were able to see that things don’t have to be ‘this’ or ‘that.’ so many problems stem from everyone wanting to be ‘right’ instead of seeing we all are part of the same thing. maybe there needs to be an english word for ‘namaste’…….
Over the years I have seen the gender debate pop up at various times without much effect in terms of changing the status quo. However, as you point out in your post I do think the time has come where the stars have aligned itself (new technologies, the easy diffusion and sharing of knowledge, a tilt towards service and non-profits, increasing entrepreneurship and micro-businesses etc.) to give women a fair chance at achieving their dreams without having to resort to unhealthy behaviors.
Why were/are women treated differently (not always)? This is really a very complex question to answer. Part of it is the system. Part of it has to do with the job related factors – brute force vs brainpower. And part of it has to do with lack of self-promotion (Don’t get me wrong here. I am not saying women have to be “self-promoting narcissists, anti-social obsessives, or pompous blowhards” – but they have to let the world know what they are good at. Men are not mind-readers you know 🙂 ). Part of it has to do with the social heredity of a person that has been passed on by the previous generation. Part of it has to do with the cognitive differences between the genders – I would even challenge that many women are no less aggresive than men. It is just that men show their aggresiveness in a more physical manner where as women are less overt). Also, sometimes it is the semantic stereotypes we have in our mind – e.g many past researches have shown that people equate “leader” with “male” qualities. So when a women takes on leadership positions, they are viewed through a different lens than men and the expectations are different. Last but not the least, part of the ‘treatment’ has really got to do with men. I have noticed that certain men are not comfortable dealing with a ‘strong’ woman, or one who ‘speaks her mind’. In other words, they are not good at taking directions or accepting them as equals (I guess some of it goes back to culture, nature, nurture etc.)
So how can women go about being recognized in whatever their dreams are? Well, here I do agree with the essence of Clay Shirky’s post — that women have to speak up. Unless you put forward your thoughts, your viewpoints, your stance on issues etc. – others (not just men) are never going to know your true position and so you will always “feel” undermined. I just don’t agree with Clay’s methods. I have known, encouraged, and recommended many a smart women to get ahead in whatever they love to do and not a single one of them had to act bitchy to get noticed or recommended. In fact, without an exception what they all had in common was to stand up to my arguments with arguments of their own in a rational, logical manner — in short, a mature discussion of convince me or be convinced without being anti-social, pompous, or arrogant. Another thing I would highly recommend is to first build and then leverage the social network to your advantage. If you are truly good, it really does not really matter if a man (one node) or a group of men (a few nodes) ignores you or puts you down. With tools such as Twitter, Facebook and the like you can have hundreds and even thousands of nodes in your network and in the end your quality will eventually skew the majority of nodes in your favor (good stuff just cannot be hidden anymore unlike in the past).
And lastly, remember that the scripts for women in powerful or lead roles are sometimes too rigidly defined and so easy to violate. It will take time for society to redefine what is acceptable in certain situations and what is not and it is up to us to accelerate that change through these discussions.
great insights as usual, ned. i love the “men are not mind-readers” comment, lol!!! i’ve found that even after many years with my partner, that is still true. [the “what’s wrong?”/ “if you don’t know, i’m not gonna tell you” routine doesn’t work!]
and you’re so right about keeping a focus on building a strong network and being confident that quality will rise to the top. better chance of positive network effects.
and interesting last point you make about scripts and roles. switch a few words around, and i guess we want the same thing as MLK {let us not be judged by the color of our skin but the content of our character}
Thank you for your thoughtful, passionate piece, Vanessa. I saw your post on dana boyd’s blog and followed you here (though I normally keep a watchful eye for your content via Twitter). If you haven’t already, I highly recommend reading Kate Harding’s (@KateHarding) rebuttal to Shirky on Salon.com. It’s one of the best analysis of what’s wrong with his piece that I’ve come across. She echos both your and dana’s points about men and women working together to combat sexism, and that sexism is an entrenched, systemic problem. The
whole piece is excellent, but here’s a snip:
“The key phrase there, though, is ‘men and women need to work together to change the culture’ — otherwise, just telling women to put themselves out there more, as Shirky’s done, is asking them to risk serious social and professional penalties to get the same rewards as men. Even if it works for some of us, and that paves the way for others, any examination of the negotiation gap that concludes with, ‘Women really should act differently’ willfully sidesteps the fundamental problem. Jezebel’s Anna North pretty much nails it: “‘The world sucks, change yourself’ is a recipe for injustice.’
Here’s my brief response to Shirky’s piece which I tweeted about last night: I wish he had named his piece ‘a rant about sexism’ because what he’s noticing in women’s apparent smallness, is the effects of internalized sexism. While I applaud him for urging women to step outside of internalized sexism –by speaking up and being noticed; I disagree with him about being arrogant “blowhards” — without a larger analysis of sexism, he ultimately ends up blaming us. One more point about sexism – I think, as a culture, we’re so drenched in it, that many people, including women, think it’s virtually non-existent. Particularly in the U.S. Ain’t so. It’s ugly and pervasive and perhaps just more invisible to us in it’s current form.
Also loved reading about your, “‘my GOD, what am I doing with my life?” thoughts and your commitment and perseverance in going after a BIG life that matters. Now that’s taking a shovel to the box sexism and internalized sexism tries to keep us in! I had a similar conversation with myself following a severe bicycle accident that landed me in Seattle’s trauma center for 11 days and came very close to killing me. Life is too precious not to go for everything! For love, people, making the world right. (Even if the singularity makes indefinite life extension possible 🙂 ) The bicycle accident and subsequent months of recovery are what actually prompted me to pursue my passions in technology, human rights and the ideas you so eloquently discuss on this blog. It lead me to my Master’s program in information management. And I’m loving it.
Thanks for stretching and sharing your mind with us. It makes my world better. Oh, speaking of which, I included a quote from you in a statement of purpose I recently submitted to UW’s MPA program (I’m looking into getting a concurrent degree).
-Emily
hey emily,
good luck on the 2nd degree! and thanks for the link to the salon piece, just read it. and that’s an interesting point you make about us being so drenched in sexism we think it’s virtually non-existent. when i was originally drafting this post i had a sentence in there that said something like that – that i’m indignant about the idea of the disparity between the sexes, so in some sense i just completely ignore it. but it does exist, and ignoring it doesn’t make it go away.
i was really encouraged by that list of women entrepreneurs. i think for a long time people have assumed women couldn’t be good leaders or business owners because we are too “weak” or emotional, but now as more and more women prove this to be false, the balance towards equal opportunity is slowly tipping.
I read the Shirky post, and being enough out of the loop to not really know him–well, in virtually any other context, I would have seen his rant as flamebait, and more typical of a slashdot mud fight over platforms than reasoned explication.
Some of us old white guys (yes I’ll fess up–don’t know how old Shirky is) haven’t quite gotten ahold of how deeply and pervasively the ground is shifting beneath our feet and can’t help waxing with a wicked and ultimately irrational nostalgia about how the historically “disadvantaged” could do so much better if they just played the game the way it has always been played by those serious enough to win.
Hrrmph! How many generations must pass…
The only thing that frustrates me more is the subversion of “political correctness” to trivialize genuine accountability.
You gotta call this stuff out for what it is, and I appreciate the firm, reasoned approach you adopted to do so.
This ain’t the same game any more–thank God–and the universal uncertainty and discomfort of these in-between times (the disquieting sensation of a room half-painted) requires a little more trust, a whole lot more honesty, and yes, a few discomforting moments of truth and reconciliation.
So bring it on, girl, in your own way–because the fact of our times is the emergence of multiple, diverse ways that together afford the creativity and resilience we so desperately need to get at least a few things, if not right, at least significantly better than before.
amen!
Excellent post. Reminds me of my rant about networking: http://bit.ly/8TfqGo – I got annoyed when sent one of those endless ‘Come and learn how to network’ emails, about a conference designed to make women in technology more confident and assertive when networking. Personally, as a manager, I like hiring people who are quiet and watchful as well as those who assert themselves. As a person, I like talking to ‘wallflowers’ as well as to those who shove their hands into mine. Often, those who watch and listen have interesting observations to put forward. So do those who talk. But we need all types of people to keep the world and the workplace interesting. Or that’s my opinion, anyway.
yea, it’s like the posts i see about “How to get your posts Retweeted”…. is there a formula beyond ‘write something others will find useful or thought-provoking’? *shrug* (how’s the Sanskrit going?)
Completely agree! Sanskrit is going slowly, but I’ll get there eventually. It’s the first time I’ve attempted a language that uses an alphabet different from my own. Interesting!
This is a brilliant post, Venessa. Thank you.
I particularly like what you wrote about working with men as allies. Why wouldn’t we want men as allies (provided those men want women as allies in the truest sense of the world: as equal partners).
We certainly don’t want women to feel that they have to adopt any of the boorish, self-aggrandizing behaviors that women have tended to avoid (because those behaviors feel unnatural, dishonest, and set you up to be someone you are not). Nor do we want to ramp up the everyone-is-in-it-for-himself/herself spirit of competitiveness (which tends to lead to increased bullying between women when men hold most of the power). What tends to lead to the best outcomes in groups (families, organizations, societies) is cooperative power-sharing and mentoring; ethical leadership; and working for the greater good — the very types of values you’re writing about and trying to live by.
I seek to collaborate with people who share my philosophy and values, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. etc. etc. because I want my circle of potential collaborators to be as broad and diverse as possible.
I’m amazed that others deliberately shut themselves off from others because they don’t take the time to figure out what another person is about. They just can’t be bothered — or they pre-screen on the basis of some pre-conceived idea that denies themselves and the other person a world of opportunities. How sad.
totally. i love that i’m seeing so many articles now in the Harvard Business Review & Fast Company etc that are talking about the path to innovation happening when a diverse range of perspectives collaborate on solving a problem. now just take that line of thought a little further, and hopefully the light will switch on that the values and philosophies women can bring to the table will help create new solutions & new systems that just might be a little better than what currently exists.
Top notch, as usual Venessa! Gender is such an interesting topic. I’m very supportive of female power and plan on being a bit of a pompous blowhard about it throughout my life. 🙂
Thanks for writing!
Venessa,
Your post is rich and inspiring. The road back to a balanced consciousness is long and filled with strange twists and turns. Ever since the dominator hierarchies that Riane Eisler writes about so eloquently retold the stories of gender and identity–i.e., Eve pulled from Adam’s rib with the womb wholly absent from the most influential creation story of the Western world–we have all struggled to see clearly.
As you and others you quote suggest, the way forward is not to play by old rules but to re-imagine and reinvent a more cooperative and compassionate view of who we are in a deeper sense than gender. In this regard, I am reminded of the discussion of power versus force. Power is an inner strength that does not require domination of others in any sense; force is the deliberate application of coercive means to get others to do what you are convinced is right. Many men have a large lesson to learn today as women gain real power and old notions of force fail because we are coming to see they only create havoc and despair.
We are just learning–re-learning–what this means. Your eloquence and passion provide a model for discussion and engagement.
Kudos!
thanks Barry
Venessa,
I just found your post through Twitter (@readtoday) Excellent conversation you have started! Great comments. Often people forget to look at the data.
Women in business are at a disadvantage. Even saying this sparks loud protests. When I started my company less than 5% of all venture funding went to women-owned businesses. Ten years later it is around 7%. Following the Internet bubble bust, I asked a panel of Venture Capitalists why they didn’t invest in women-owned companies since they are less likely to go bankrupt. I am 5’2″ and soft spoken. One man became so unglued he almost jumped off the stage. One journalist was so surprised at this vitriolic response and at the fact that no one stopped him from raging on and telling me “people like me were responsible for 9/11” that he wrote this article about it. http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2004/09/27/focus7.html Another Venture dude told me I should be spanked hence my often quoted quote.
Women asking simple questions are called arrogant self-aggrandizing jerks. We don’t need to be self promoting. We just need to be standing up for what is right.
When will this change? When women entrepreneurs have equal access to funding. Money not behavior is the deciding factor. We will know that our society has changed when we have outside blind examiners at universities so the best ideas and not personalities win. Technology is helping level the playing field but it can’t do it alone.
Best wishes,
Linda
hi linda!
so, i know there is progress being made with microfinancing efforts for women (like kiva.org), but that’s not the same as VC funding. what do you think it will take for women entrepreneurs to have equal access to funding? what do you see as steps towards that equality?
Hi Venessa,
The efforts with micro financing are very positive–especially for underdeveloped areas. But, these sorts of investments will not lead to the next Twitter, Facebook, or Google.
Base-line investments in the technology space are $5M or more. Venture firms usually ban together and make a long-term commitment to increase funds as the company grows. In a down economy, venture firms retreat and give even less money to women and minority company owners. Money is hard to come by so it is easy to justify this discrimination.
There is an SBA program that I recently discovered called SBIC. I was shocked to learn that the US government gives venture companies and investment banks money to invest in companies. I have not been able to find enough data on this program. I suspect SBIC money represents a substantial portion of venture investment in our companies but will keep you posted as I discover new information.
Federal law prohibits discrimination based upon race or gender so any firm that takes federal money would be subject to opening their books and proving that they are giving equal access to women and minorities. If this were happening, then we would see investments follow other things like law/business school enrollment, medicine, science, etc. When the playing field is level women actually compete exceptionally well. Without outside funding, women-owned businesses represent half the small businesses in the USA. We already are an important demographic.
I am still doing research and encourage anyone familiar with the SBIC program to help me find more out about the rules. I checked with my bank and they have never heard of the program.
We need to hold our government accountable. If our nation is to compete in an increasingly global market, we need every great mind we can grow.
Best wishes,
Linda
Right on Venessa!
No matter what gender you are, you may get the floor for a few minutes, or shut everyone else up for a while, but you will NOT get anyone’s long term support by being an “arrogant self-aggrandizing jerk”
”
An “arrogant self-aggrandizing jerk” has moved to our town to show us the way to “digital nirvana” … no one is listening. Original message is fine, but the jerk delivery has turned most off. Problem is most jerks just turn up the volume when initial blasts don’t get results.
Be yourself and continue to blossom!
paldies!
I find this presentation a great counterpoint to what Shirky has written:
http://www.slideshare.net/sachac/the-shy-connector
i loved the presentation!! i can totally relate, thank you
Venessa,
Brilliant post. Weaving innovation into your argument was amazing, and right on. We need more women, and men thinking this way. It is an exciting time for women like us to re-imagine how this can all work and then lead the charge in making it happen.
Kirstin
thanks, Kirstin.
p.s. – i like the ideas you’re putting out on your brand engagement blog!
The fact of the matter is that women are pulling up stakes from the male dominated economy and starting their own economy. There they are playing by their own rules. And may have more success in a knowledge economy where it’s highly effective to work in teams of peers. Check out the stats about the number of women starting businesses. The last time I did they started 2x more businesses than men over a 4-5 year period. I wonder if there are other areas where women are breaking away?
i think it’s awesome. it’s interesting that you use the phrases “pulling up stakes” and “breaking away”…. to tie in an earlier comment by linda hahner, she says that women are at a disadvantage because they don’t have equal access to funding by VCs. are most VCs men? (i don’t know, i’m asking). if so, it would kind of make sense then…. women have a harder time being successful when they’re having to play by the rules of a “male dominated economy”, and so they’re trying to do their own thing.
i think we’ll probably see more women entrepreneurs doing that ‘breaking away,’ but i think it’s a move that will help to bring about a new mindset about the role of women in business, and then things will shift again so an equilibrium will be found, where it’s not so much that women need to start their own economy, but that we can find a common ground in business practices where both sexes can work equally & respectfully side by side.
Your post and followup comments provide a marvelous model of how “empathy, altruism, and collaboration” can be effectively used to address problems.
In reading your initial response to Clay Shirky’s provocative essay, I was reminded of the description of inattentional blindness I read in Tom Vanderbilt’s book, Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do. Drivers of cars often fail to see motorcycles, in part because a motorcycle “does not fit their mental picture of the things they think they should be seeing”. [I’ll also briefly note that Vanderbilt comments on men’s relatively more aggressive driving style, noting – among other things – that men tend to suffer more traffic-related fatalities than women in the U.S. (1.3 per 100M miles vs. 0.73 per 100M miles) … so aggressiveness has a cost.] I suspect that for some men, the failure to see or acknowledge the [potential] contributions of women is due to a similar tendency.
A similar pattern holds for car drivers not seeing bicyclists, but he notes that Gainesville, Florida, has both the highest cycling rate in the state of Florida, and is the safest place to be a cyclist. The lesson he draws: “When you see more of something, you’ll be more likely to see that thing.” So I am hopeful that as more women “speak up” – or simply become more willing to be true to themselves, engage their passions, and express themselves in whatever mode is most appropriate to them – more of us men will be more likely to see – and appreciate – their contributions.
that’s a really good point. the whole shirky thing was just a nice segue into all of us being able to address this topic & have this conversation. the reason i wanted to contact him is already moot, so it’s not that i’m angry or anything like that. and who knows, maybe he truly never saw my correspondences, or like you say, didn’t even bother looking closer to see who i was or what i wanted, so my emails just got glossed over.
i think this concept of blindness is an important one, because it seems that so many of the problems we have don’t get fixed because people can’t *see* all sides of the problem, and can’t make the connections to the corresponding opportunities to fix them.
one of my main goals with this blog is to discover how we can incorporate more “metathinking” into our daily lives – of thinking about thinking, thinking about the process of knowing, of being able to look sideways at problems. this is something that has been looked at for ages, but we’re not an ideal society yet, so there must still be room to put a fresh spin on those age-old questions to see if they might “stick” and resonate with a new audience.
the great thing is, the discovery is a process in itself, and over the past few months, i feel like everyone who reads these posts and contributes their thoughts is a part of that learning process. so welcome, and thanks for being a part of it!
pretty interesting. could do more to break ‘women’ out into ages, places, cultures, cash on hand. also, beyond patriarchy, it needs to be said that hoarder-type people DESPISE harmonized, interconnected level playing fields. what looks like male-caused – brashly competitive – could be from thievery.
so, do you think that hoarder-type behavior is inherent, or a product of society?
I think both nature and nurture plays a role in this – sometimes one exaggerating the effect of the other and sometimes cancelling it. There are definitely inherenent societal differences between cultures – especially as one moves from one part of the world to the another. But what I find more interesting is the osmosis of new values and perceptions as folks get supplanted from one culture to another and how new perceptions evolve.
Anyway, the treatment of a societal cluster or a change thereof (whether it based on gender, color, race, sexual orientation ..) is organically a slow-evolving process and sometimes can take a generation and might even neccesitate a change in the ethnic mix. But (I think) it is really up to us/the society to provide the catalyst to accelerate a mind-shift on a perception if we collectively feel it is the right thing to do.
Vanessa,
I really love what you are doing here. First, boldly taking on an untenable position for women and second, offering a healthy alternative. All the comments have been useful and have contributed to the conversation. (I keep posting this to Twitter so more can read and participate.)
Please allow me to clarify one point: the VC world represents a much bigger and more insidious problem. Yes. These are primarily men but they are attempting to bring in highly qualified women which is commendable. This has not translated into more dollars being directed to women entrepreneurs. I believe because most guys (loud mouth and otherwise) don’t want to sit on BODs with women. I see it every day in my design business. New companies with management teams that are 100% male.
By now, half the graduates from business schools must be women. Half of successful businesses are indeed started and run by women without outside funding. They call it boot strapping. (Ha!) The failure rate of male-owned companies is higher so the success of women-owned businesses is much more laudable. In the Hispanic community, the data is even more shocking. Hispanics men and women are most likely to work two or three jobs to ensure their businesses succeed. They are least likely to receive outside funding of all minority owned businesses and the least likely to go bankrupt. Hard work is a good thing and America was built on it. If I were handing out money, I would go with the data and put it where it is most likely to succeed. But, alas, women are whistle blowers. Most of the biggest corporate scandals have happened because women had the guts to say this is not right. We tend to like playing by the rules because that is the only way we can guarantee success.
Last week a guy wrote to me, “we need more women like you”. I laughed and said no we don’t need more women who can beat the odds. We need more women who have a fair chance at BOD seats. A fair and equal opportunity to grow their businesses. If women and minorities pay equal taxes, they should have equal access to business opportunities. But they don’t. So, to have a professor tell his female students they should be arrogant and aggressive is not only counter-intuitive, in business, it is suicide. These students should ask for their tuition back.
Best wishes,
Linda
Vanessa,
Most excellent post! I started my career in the oil business at a time when women were still trying to gain stronger positions. And I went through my whole dress for success, play the political game phase.
What I learned with experience and maturity is to put games aside. People who tend to achieve lasting success — that they also enjoy — are folks who show up as their genuine selves.
For me personally, when I started doing that, I gained much more satisfying results. My voice is also much stronger now due to a combination of confidence, honesty, and insight mixed with compassion. And it works much better because it aligns with who I am on the inside.
thank you Kathy-
it’s funny, most commenters on posts have been men – this is the first time that the ladies are coming out of the woodwork and adding their voice to the conversation. i appreciate your input. it’s inspiring to see confident, successful women out there who stay true to themselves.
Vanessa,
Good post (I read the original, and without knowing the person I could not decide if it was tasking the change in society, or the fact that women are inferior — I still sit on the fence on that one).
You have done a good job of balancing the matter, a little attack up front never hurts (with facts, not just mud-slinging – well done), and I think you raised the discourse to the next level. The fact that most comments here and in the original post have been women means that the sentiment is shared — which I was hoping it was not the case.
I was hoping that in this age we would be so over the whole issue of “Me Tarzan hunt, you Jane clean” that there would be sufficient people telling him to hush, and you could’ve add more examples of the power that women wield in today’s society. I think that there is a little bit of shyness in the expression of most women comments, no one wants to express a strong “shut up, let me show you why you are wrong”… and I know there is sufficient data points to do that.
Am I wrong? maybe, but I do believe that Women today have a lot more power that they express and use… I wish we could make that be the same across the genders.
Great post, good way to elevate the conversation. Thanks for writing this, and for the conversation.
I have an advantage of having living in Sweden and the US. So many of the essentialist arguments or memes we have about gender aren’t really all that useful when you develop a truly fair playing field. As mentioned and explained by many here, we’re very far from having that where and when it counts.
A truly fair playing field is one where both men and women are encouraged to be full parents, to take full care and leave sometimes for a year for both parents! (For those who have chosen parenthood) When the material conditions are evened out for both sexes, when both are expected to take days to perhaps take care of a sick parent or kid – things even out.
How about if we give men the room and time to keep those sort of commitments too?
Power is simply self determination. Some people have it without being judged and others don’t. Write truly fair rules and have truly reasonable expectations – understanding that everyone suffers when a family system is unanchored, imbalanced — when any member is carrying too much 0r is too disconnected. I’m not interested in ‘expressing my womanly power’. I want a work life that makes sense and I want self determination. To me that is almost completely tied up with humane work/life systems that encourage EVERYONE to have a real life, a real family life, a balance between time on and time off work.
The whole system needs revamping. Change those material conditions of work life, and the struggles between men and women in the US – will become much less distorting of gender relations…at work and at home.
Also – I just have never had patience with claims about gender that are essentialist. I know there are differences but I tend not to fit into a lot of categories in all contexts… These sorts of discussions just – chafe. I am certainly a ‘shy connector’ in many contexts – have tremendous fun bringing people and ideas together. Always introducing people… but I am also extremely analytical, strategic, brash…and occasionally – an ass. It’s absurd that those elements must be considered masculine because we accept the terms of the dualist framing in the first place… leaves me cold.
I am less interested in discussing “masculine and feminine ways of being” than I am about discussion rational community building, health ensuring, resilient communities with fulfilled humans in them. And that is not about gender balance but about where we all put work in the big schema of our national life. Force material changes – and your relationships at work and at home will improve.
….all that said – it still bites when I send out an RFP and get something that begins:
Dear Sir,
(Happens a lot but it’s a great way to weed out the idiots!)
Liz,
thanks for your awesome comments! i think you’re so right – it should be about balance in life and self determination.. having the gender discussion shouldn’t even be “an issue”. i like your thoughts about how people should be allowed to just be people, and express the full range of emotions/behaviors without having them labeled as male/female. but this probably has to happen in steps…. maybe we need to work on equality before we say, “now everyone, it’s ok if you act a little gay!” (whatever that even means). but i think i understand where you’re coming from.
i’ve always been interested in visiting sweden and knowing about how the system works there. can you tell me more about it? it just seems so much more progressive/advanced/intelligent.
p.s. love the locavore stuff you’re doing. i started a locavore group on our town’s ning network, and a lot of people are definitely getting into gardening and raising chickens and co-ops and local food. it’s great!
Not to get too serious – in response to the “act a little gay” frame – but that’s the issue. We have this idea that to be/act masculine means this and that for straight men…and this and that for everyone else – advantage always to the white, the straight, the male, and the protestant – because they waaaaaay back when (present company excluded) determined the mores by which we are all judged… sometimes unconsciously. Is Obama ‘too Black’ – or are Michelle’s arms “too masculine” – is Liz too aggressive or strident…is Joe too demonstrative, is Venessa too gentle…or Bob a little too fey – with any of these judgments the advantage accrues to those that do not cross any of these invisible lines — and are generally unspoken except when you notice how we all need to work to make ‘everyone’ else comfortable…
Sometimes we reinforce those lines by conformity and making it clear that we are also uncomfortable with too much this or too much that…
Anyway those lines are really harmful to all of us – including the people who don’t even know they are accepting and reinforcing them…
All that aside though – back to the material conditions…. here are parental leave stats: (look especially to US, Norway and Sweden)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave
I don’t want to imply that all trouble between the genders or sexes disappears entirely with serious parental leave and vacation time – But it becomes a completely different discussion more grounded in the reality of individual lives and not norms forced on us by corporations. I think no one can point to Sweden or Norway and suggest that they are hurting too bad.
Building real choice into our lives is where the fight needs to be – not between men and women, straights and gays etc etc etc…
Supposedly with all these leaps in productivity we are developing through innovations are supposed to make our very human lives – more human – and instead we keep ratcheting up the insanity and pointing the finger at ‘the other’…We SHOULD be creating new freedoms and new cultures…Which is kind of happening on the edges…with all this ‘lifestyle design’ stuff..a personal rather than political jujitsu – an “i got mine escape hatch.” No disrespect intended – I’m woeking on my own!
I think we have this discussion as if the differences we see acted out by the genders – aren’t a result of pressures put on people from the outside – blamed on chromosomal difference, instead of OBVIOUSLY the life styles we validate in this country – ie – workaholics, helicopter parenting, disconnect of the generations, extreme mobility for jobs, cookie cutter burbs – which mean it really does not matter at all where you live… all things which corrode our lives, connections, identities – to the point that we live – many of us merely as conduits for visa point of purchase charges and wonder why life sucks so much…
Thanks Venessa for the comments about the site – it’s not so much about being a ‘locavore’ as it is about reviving neighborhood life through “yard sharing” or growing together, block parties, potlucks, produce and seed exchanges… the icing on the cookie is super fresh local produce you grow with your friends and neighbors. Wow, I should get a horrible metaphor of the year award for that… My aim is to remake our neighborhoods one homegrown tomato at a time…
GREAT discussion!
Also I should say – I love how you ended your post. Yes. THAT is what matters. I think the way we have done things has diminished the human capacity of the genders and to be clear the full range of gender expressions in between the poles. (An aside – the discussion suffers grievously from a hetero-normative bias towards a very binary gender framework….)
A big hello Venessa
I’m so glad I found your site inadvertantly through searching on discussions around fundraising for a tech business I’ve cofounded – FundRazr.com
As a female entrepreneur in the tech world I’ve seen a ton of gender inequality around the make up of Boards, panels at conferences, funding and investors which is precisely why I started my blog WomanzWorld so that I could engage and connect with more female entrepreneurs!
That’s truly my passion and encouraging more women to start their own business as I think we have so many great and unique talents to contribute to the business world and need to step up and make the most of them.
I’d also read `the rant’ and was fascinated by all the comments after it as I am with those following your post. It’s incredible to see the depth of thinking behind this and the insights shared by both genders. On the whole it’s been tremendously encouraging and I can’t wait to write a blog about it myself and try to encapsulate the points raised above.
One of the biggest things I’ve found is that women can be their own worst enemy by accepting these `barriers’ and `limitations’ imposed on them by the man’s world – we can use it as an excuse sometimes to not become the best that we can be and truly be the change that we want to see.
I was humbled when featured on the Women 2.0 list you mentioned above because the women noted on there are doing remarkable things and I’m not sure I’m there yet by any means.
I look forward to connecting with you and many of the above commentors as we explore the way this world is changing right before us.
Natalie
hi natalie,
i think your point about women being their own worst enemy is so important. i’m finally coming to really internally understand all those things i’ve read before about how to live a life…… from all the different perspectives, whether it’s spun as a business leadership book or a philisophical text or a lifehack. your personal reality is truly a product of your mind. yes, we all are living in the “system”…. the social reality of civilization that’s built up around us….. but i’m really beginning to believe that you can choose to play the game by the rules, or you can make your own and chart your own course. people who believe in themselves are……well, believable. i think this concept is what needs to be embraced if humanity is going to move forward in a positive way. it goes beyond gender issues. it’s about creating a world we want, that’s determined by our intentions. i think we can actually shape it ourselves, not be slaves to how things are.
People might enjoy this in light of our discussion here…
Pingback: Accidentally in Code » A Random Collection of Cool / Useful Things I Found on the Internet
“Gender” Self-Absorption Paradox: All the gender metrics are moving in the right direction (females in college %, growth jobs) — EXCEPT a sustainable fertility rate 😀
It’s a bitter sweet progress that invariably leads to extinction (hard fact: fertility rates below break-even 2.1 per woman — lead to extinction ) 😦
I recently got an email from a (male) (American – I’m a Canadian) blogger with whom I don’t usually interact – except for the fact that I’d left a couple of comments on a couple of his posts more than a year ago. Never added his blog to my reader; no longer read it; didn’t find it of great value but had wanted to check it out. He, like many, positions himself as a social media guru, and of course advocates the culture of reciprocity and sharing – commenting on and reading others’ blogs rather than just blogging oneself and replying to comments. He’d installed some sort of tracking/capture software widget that made it possible for him to email everyone who’d ever commented on his blog. And he did so. Not being quite as smart as he thinks he is, the email was fairly gauche, and he chose to use the rather unfortunate term lurker – as in, I notice you’ve been lurking on my blog for quite some time now – come back and comment some more.
Have to say it infuriated me. And after stewing over an appropriate response for a couple of days I emailed him back and said, the possibility that I’m no longer reading your blog doesn’t seem to have occurred to you – oh and by the way, when you have EVER visited my blog and read a post, much less commented on one? I did get a reply from him – which I didn’t quite understand. He apologized in one breath and made a crack about the infrequency of my posting in the next. I considered explaining that I had bought a condo and arranged to haul myself and my furniture over the Rocky Mountains in the last six months and so had been a tad busy in the life (vs blogging) department, but then thought – no – I don’t have to justify myself to this person, who is probably even more socially inept in person than he is virtually.
I mention this incident because it’s in stark contrast to way people – like David Meerman Scott, for instance – who really get social media behave. I think I blogged about a great Marketing Profs seminar he’d delivered – and lo and behold, the same day he left a sweet little comment on the post saying how glad he was I’d found it helpful and informative.
So I don’t know what you’ll have to do to get Clay Shirky’s attention. Personally, I’d stop trying, because he’s already proved it’s all about H*I*M.
hi ruth,
thanks for your story. i’ve noticed that too – that a lot of ‘social media gurus’ don’t answer back in the comments section. i don’t understand. i guess everyone has their own style, but for me, i can’t wait to finish a post so that the comments can start coming in and conversations get going! this blog has become so valuable to me to share ideas with other people and hear what they have to say too! and people respond to that! i mean, just look at the quality, length, and thoughfulness of comments on this blog! i absolutely love it. there are no ads here, just conversation. i hope that they community here continues to grow, as we share our thoughts and basically gain a better understanding of each other and the world around us.
Venessa,
No. Women are not their own worst enemies. Black, Hispanic, American Indian people are not their own worst enemies. When half the children in the United States don’t read at an appropriate level in grade three (numbers are worse for children of color) and we look closely at the data we see there is no achievement gap only an opportunity gap. The same is true for women.
When women throw phrases around like: “we are our worst enemies” then nothing changes. Might as well write a letter to every every corporation and say: “Yes. Of course you want an all white male management team and board of directors. Women are their own worst enemies. They have hormones, babies, and are too emotional. Your greatest fears which have lead to sexist/racist behaviors are absolutely correct.” Carte Blanche.
I don’t know about you, I am my friend and I am an advocate for women being their own best friends and for giving women an equal opportunity to achieve their highest goals because this is NOT a man’s world as your title suggests. This is our world, too.
Thanks!
Linda
well, what i said was that we are all our own worst enemies, not just women. and what i meant by that is that we’re living in a cultural hypnosis in thinking that because the system exists, it’s right. i’m suggesting we all need to wake up and decide to reconstruct the system differently. as you put it, to “close the opportunity gap” and open channels for creativity and creation.
To my knowledge, there is no opportunity gap for white men.
Unemployment is highest in African American men–even with an African American man in the White House. If we gloss over the data with nice platitudes then we will have nice discussions but we will never see real change.
Change start in grass roots not in ivory towers.
Until every child is afforded equal access to the same high-quality education, we will continue to see the opportunity gap. We are not the enemy. A system that affords one class of people more rights is clearly the enemy.
IMHO An intelligentsia that uses new and evolving media to placate a broken system is part of the problem and not the solution.
yes, i agree with you! i’m also saying that the system is broken, but the system is not not us. i mean…. we, humans, we are the system. those in power are keeping it going as it is, but it is being run by people. why are they doing this? aren’t the people running the system also its slaves? aren’t the detriments affecting the masses also inherently affecting the masters?
i tweeted this quote the other day by J Krishnamurti: “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
The “elite” of the country aren’t doing themselves any favors.. we’re being eroded, and eventually everyone suffers. Yes, the system is the enemy, but who’s running the system?
i mean….. it’s overwhelming. and i think it will happen like you say, in grassroots, because the system is just too big to overhaul overnight. in the meantime, people need to take control of the situation the best they can. think of new ways to do things. i mean, even your statement about every child having equal access to high-quality education….. that itself is debatable, as we come back to the issue of the system. the educational system also is in trouble, and even people of privilege who have access to a “high-quality” school…… is a high quality school the equivalent of a high quality education? i hear laments from parents all the time in regards to the actual learning that’s taking place in the classroom. if you look at this through the lens of the industrial era, and go back 100 years, you’ll see that schools were not designed to teach people to think, they were designed to teach people to comply and get prepared for a job in a factory. we’re now in a post-industrial society, but many of the structures of the educational system are still based on the old way, and so are creating mental models in children that prepare them for jobs that no longer exist.
i’m not sure how you’re interpreting the tone of these words, but let me assure you they’re coming from a place of frustration. the system is oppressive. though you say unemployment is highest among african americans, i think there are plenty of white men who very much experience an opportunity gap because of financial situation, educational level, and any number of circumstances. i don’t think it’s fair to say that being white automatically gives every white person a clear competitive advantage over someone non-white. but regardless, the system is oppressive. i think it’s intentionally designed that way. i think it’s a model that’s outrageous and unjust, but designed to be so. i think that “the masses” (and i put myself in that category) are getting pissed about it, and it’s time for equality. how dare you tell me because i’m a woman i can’t? how dare you tell me because i’m black i can’t? how dare you tell me that because i was born into a certain class i can’t? well, probably because those reasons were sufficient in themselves at one time, and people had very little room to express agency within societal constraints. but that’s unacceptable. we refuse to accept it anymore. and so we have to start doing something, because if we wait on the system, we’re just going to keep waiting. for a class that has always been in power to willingly relinquish it in the name of ‘equality’ is just too painful. there is greed, ignorance, selfishness, and fantasies of glory and conquest standing in the way. we need a groundswell.
Amen. Great post Vanessa! You do understand the issues and I am very proud of you for creating a forum where they can be discussed.
Others who are interested might want to join a new Twitter chat group on Thursday Nights 9PM EST called #BlackEd . This group includes some amazing thinkers and it is growing very rapidly.
The subject is close to my heart and our work: the opportunity (achievement) gap.
Cheers,
Linda
I was blessed to grow up in Ghana, W.Africa where there are over 80 tribes. I was a little brown, really brown, white by race kid running around from group. The Ga were matriarchal and held ALL power. The Twi were completely Patriarchal.
My point it’s really the community that decides. I have never paid much attention to anything society (uh, that’s people right? )had to say about roles or boxes perceived or real.
I have worked in the corporate world – yuck. My wife now works at a major a major bank(please don’t boo). We’ve both started businesses. It’s my personal belief that we are totally interdependent on each other and really just to get really basic about it just think of biology.
As hard as it might be to believe it takes two to multiply. And I can hear foul being shouted already but I have always believed that the most magnificent role of women is the ability to multiply.
Not to say women have constant fantastic original ideas. That’s not what I am implying. But I know in my life if I stay open and connected often with my wife of 31 years all I have to do is say into the air an idea I am having and like magic it compounds and grows into something sometimes scary but always MORE than I that is beautiful great and bigger than me.
hi jake,
sounds like you have a very close connection with your wife….almost a symbiotic relationship. that’s great that your ideas amplify when you’re with her.
Says C. Shirky:
“It’s tempting to imagine that women could be forceful and self-confident without being arrogant or jerky, but that’s a false hope, because it’s other people who get to decide when they think you’re a jerk, and”
(let’s split the sentence to allow different options in the reading… making sense -you need two to tango-)
(let’s focus on this part – – > ” .. trying to stay under that threshold means giving those people veto power over your actions. ”
..how about LETTING GO giving so much power to a ONE person who seems to be ignoring your attempts to communicate – do business together… There’s always a choice … of not staying under any threshold that exerts “VETO POWER over your actions” (in as much as possible, for many people don’t have that luxury, granted)
IME moving on when a door remains shut after you’ve made sure there’s someone in there and that someONE IS NOT ready to allow you right of passage, may also open up your vision to MANY other OPEN doors you may have been missing… And so, you can keep on doing cool stuff and sharing and building elsewhere with others… which you seem to be doing pretty well in any case 🙂
hi marina,
yea, the reference to attempting to get in contact him was to try to take/audit one of his classes last year and share some of my ideas with him, but he never responded and life moved on. don’t worry, it doesn’t keep me up at night. 😉 when i read his piece originally, i felt compelled to write this post, b/c to me it felt like i had a first-hand example of him not actually living the message he so forcefully put out there. it doesn’t matter how confident or interesting or intelligent you are – if the person at the other end isn’t listening, your efforts fail. it would give me some satisfaction to think he read this post and thought to himself, “oops.”
Being a “Born again Christian” since the age of 15 (I’m 46 now), and being a male (Obviously), I find the chauvenist attitudes of most other men to be insulting to my heavenly father, as well as to me.. and all you ladies out there. God created ALL men equal (In the Much broader sense) and no-one should have to Lie or strutt around like a cretinous Peacock to be accepted for who they are in this life.
When are humans going to get it through those thick cells that the world in which we live works at it’s best when we “Do unto others..etc.
I’ve been surfing online more than 4 hours today, yet I never found
any interesting article like yours. It is pretty worth enough for me.
In my opinion, if all web owners and bloggers made good content as you did,
the internet will be a lot more useful than ever before.
Hi, i think that i saw you visited my blog thus i came to “return
the favor”.I’m attempting to find things to enhance my site!I suppose its ok to use some of your ideas!\
I enjoy, lead to I discovered exactly what I used to be
taking a look for. You’ve ended my four day
lengthy hunt! God Bless you man. Have a nice day. Bye
We are giving out free samples of quality Belgium chocolates.
To be allowed, simply just respond to our comment along with your
address and we will mail it out over the following business day.