Do Women Really Want Equality?

Not one imagined strictly by numbers

  • Share
  • Read Later
Getty Images

The fall season in gender-gap news has started early and with a bang. A study released yesterday in the Journal of the American Medical Association shows that male doctors earn over 25% more than female doctors. Why am I not surprised? There is a constant stream of stories showing gender disparities like this: that Obama gave only 35% of Cabinet-level posts to women, that men still write 87% of Wikipedia entries, that they are approximately 80% of local news-television and radio managers, and over 75% of philosophers.

After decades of antidiscrimination laws, diversity initiatives and feminist advocacy, such data leads to an uncomfortable question: Do women actually want equality? The answer seems transparently, blindingly, obvious. Do women want to breathe fresh air? Do they want to avoid rattlesnakes and fatal heart attacks?

But from another perspective, the answer is anything but clear. In fact, there’s good reason to think that women don’t want the sort of equality envisioned by government bureaucrats, academics and many feminist advocates, one imagined strictly by the numbers with the goal of a 50-50 breakdown of men and women in C-suites, law-school dean offices, editorial boards and computer-science departments; equal earnings, equal work hours, equal assets, equal time changing diapers and doing the laundry. “A truly equal world,” Sheryl Sandberg wrote in Lean In, which is still on the best-seller lists months after its spring publication, “would be one where women ran half our countries and companies and men ran half our homes.” It’s a vision of progress that can only be calculated through the spreadsheets of labor economists, demographers and activist groups.

It would be silly to deny that equality-by-the-numbers researchers can deliver figures that could alarm even an Ann Romney. There’s the puny 4.2% of female Fortune 500 CEOs, the mere 23.7% of female state legislators, the paltry 19% of women in Congress. But while “numbers don’t lie,” they can create mirages that convince us we see something we don’t. Take, for example, the JAMA study about the pay gap between male and female doctors. The study seems to capture yet another example of discrimination against women. But because it fails to consider differences in medical specialty or type of workplace, that appearance may well be an illusion. Surgeons and cardiologists, who have long been in the ranks of the top-earning specialties, remain predominantly male. Meanwhile, as women flooded the profession, they disproportionately chose to become psychiatrists and pediatricians, specialties that have always been among the least lucrative.

(MORE: The Pay Gap Is Not as Bad as You Think)

There are reasons for this particular wage gap that are gender-blind. Surgeons need more years of training, perform riskier work (at least that’s how malpractice insurers see it) and put in more unpredictable hours. Unsurprisingly, according to surveys, women who become doctors approach their work differently than men. They spend more time with each patient; when choosing jobs, they are far more likely to cite time for family and flexible hours as “very important” and to prefer limited management responsibilities. Male doctors, on the other hand, are more likely to think about career advancement and income potential.

This hints at the problem with the equality-by-the-numbers approach: it presumes women want absolute parity in all things measurable, and that the average woman wants to work as many hours as the average man, that they want to be CEOs, heads of state, surgeons and Cabinet heads just as much as men do. But a consistent majority of women, including those working full time, say they would prefer to work part time or not at all; among men, the number is 19%. And they’re not just talking; in actual practice, 27% of working women are on the job only part time, compared with 11% of men.

(MORE: Let’s Not Forget, Many Working Moms Want to Work Less)

Now, a lot of people might say that American women are stymied from pursuing their ambitions because of our miserly maternity leave, day care and workplace-flexibility policies. But even women in the world’s most family-friendly countries show little interest in the equality-by-the-numbers ideal. In Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland, according to the OECD, women still work fewer hours and earn less money than men; they also remain a rare sight in executive offices, computer-science classrooms and, though the OECD doesn’t say it I’m willing to bet, philosophy conferences. Sweden, the gold standard of gender equality in many minds, has one of the highest percentages of women working part time anywhere in the world. Equality-by-numbers advocates should be thinking about women’s progress in terms of what women show that they want, not what the spreadsheets say they should want.

SEE ALSO:  The Big Surprise of Martin Luther King’s Speech 

235 comments
SaraHello
SaraHello

This is a really great article. The feminists will say, "well all that doesn't matter, because: patriarchy" but the problem is, "patriarchy" is a conspiracy theory that doesn't really exist.

Take for example, some of the privileges I have as a woman. Feminists will say that men are more privileged than we are, and that we are held down, and oppressed victims. But not only is that belittling to women, it's just plain wrong.

I experience privilege every time I interact with the police. They are much less likely to hassle me or charge me with a crime because I am a woman. Privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege if I do get charged. I am much more likely to be charged with a more minor charge because I am a woman. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege if I go before a judge. I am likely to be given less than half a jail sentence of a man for the same crime. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege when applying for college or university. I am given preference in applicants, even though my gender is the majority of college students. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege if I am a victim of rape or domestic violence. There are a slew of shelters and services specifically for me and my gender. A privilege men don't have, even though men make up half the victims of domestic violence.

I experience privilege in applying for STEM jobs. Studies have shown that people prefer female interns to male interns by a 2 to 1 ratio. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege in family court. I have an 80% chance of winning child custody, even though studies show that single fathers make more stable homes. A privilege men don't have. I also am almost guaranteed to have child support payments from a father enforced in my favor, but if I deny visitation illegally, that's rarely enforced. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege in businesses. Many businesses offer "ladies nights", and special discounts to women. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege where if I am raped, or even simply claim to be, I will have those claims taken seriously, often without even serious inquiry into the facts. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege in that my gender controls the majority of the household finances in the US. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege in that my gender is the majority of the electorate. A privilege men don't have.

I experience privilege in that I can dress as feminine as I want, and be as emotional as I want, and cry publicly, and nobody looks at me as abnormal. A privilege men don't have.

So, we as women have an enormous amount of privilege. Privilege men don't have.

And yet the feminists will still cry "Patriarchy!" as though we're just a bunch of helpless victims, held down by an evil conspiracy, even though in actual reality, we largely have it better than men and boys.

Especially in the legal system, we are treated as a wholly better class of citizens, given an entire level of preferential treatment. Studies shown that the gap between how women are treated better than men by the legal system is larger than the gap of how white people are treated better than people of color.

And that should say something.

So, no, we don't live in a patriarchy, and the studies show, that the gaps largely are, just our own preferences and choices in life.

Feminists complain about the lack of female politicians, and I say to them: "Well why don't *you* run for office then? After all, no one's stopping you. And studies show we women do just as well as men when we run for office."

But the truth is, she just won't want to run. Why? Because campaigning is a pain. It's a lot of hard work, and hours on the road, and shaking hands of business leaders, and getting endorsements, and making all the right friends in all the right places, and making promises, and deals with the right people. It's a huge pain, and the feminist doesn't want to do it, just like most of us women don't.

But then, the feminist will either blame other women for not making the same choice that she chose not to make, or she will blame men, and a "patriarchy" as though it's a "patriarchy's" fault, that she choose not to run for office.

I call baloney on that.

cwilcox333
cwilcox333

I really think this is the worst article I've ever seen in Time.  I'm going to write some of the comments I made to an anti feminist woman's comments below and expand on them.


As a person who has actually worked in high levels of corporations I will tell you, women not getting into high level positions is not happening because women just don't want these positions.  It's because they can't get them.   They can't get them because of discrimination.  It goes on because there is no feminist movement demanding equality.  In fact, this particular aspect of inequality is one of the most difficult things to even get feminists to fight for because there aren't many women who work at these levels to even see what is going on as is so clearly evident from the publication of this article.  The proportion of women who have worked at this level as a proportion of the women in this country or even as a proportion of feminists is so obscenely small that it is very poorly understood.  Since few people understand it, where is the necessary groundswell of support supposed to come from to change it? 

Statistics sited that demonstrate inequality are writtne about in an attempt to get people to understand what is happening. 


I am not alone.  I live in Silicon Valley and have the luxury of being able to be around many other women in similar fields and at the same level.  I say luxury because this was not the case before I moved here and I know it is not the case for most women around the country.  Many of the women that I associate with are engineers and/or have MBAs from the likes of Stanford, Berkly, Columbia, Harvard, etc. We are all experiencing the same thing.  It's not something we lament about very often but when I have joined other women at professional networking events it's something that is either discussed as a side topic as in how do we deal with these impediments in gender issues that create a wall of a barrier in our careers or it is what we organized our meetings around.  We would have a different speaker at each of our meetings or Career Fairs that deal with various ways to combat the problems we face.  Despite all of these efforts and regardless of how well organized these meetings were, they were not really very helpful.  On a few occasions we did actually lament about how impossible it is to advance or even just stay in the careers we have.  It was very rare and spontaneous.  I was greatful for these moments because it was the only times when we all could realize that these experiences were not unique to any of us, we were all going through the same thing. 


I have been studying these issues for over a decade now.  There is some truth to women gravitating to fields or work that involves more interaction with people.  Hence the tendency for women to pursue careers in Psychiatry or Pediatrics over Surgery for example.  Dr Louann Brizendine wrote several books including The Female Brain and the Male Brain.  They are fascinating books that go a long way in explaining differences in the behaviors of males and females.  The sexes are clearly different in many behaviors and these are hard wired differences between us.  This explains why women may gravitate to certain types of work but this does not mean that all women do not ever want to work in higher paid positions.  There is a hell of a lot more going on here than just differences between the sexes. 


Also I'm not buying the argument that women want to work less hours means they do not want higher paid positions.  Where do I even start with this.  First of all, who are you polling?  Women who work unfullfilling jobs for low pay probably are going to want to work less hours.  If this were not the case, you might get a different answer to that question.  Second, if there was more equality in taking care of families and households, you would also probably get a different answer to that question.  In other words, if there was more equality, more women would be able to have more high paying jobs. 


Then the author goes on to say that in fact more women are working part time jobs, concluding that this is evidence that this is what women want.  A lot of people today are working part time jobs not out of choice.  Where do you get off drawing these conclusions?  


I really wish the author would have spent some time actually talking to women who work in these fields about the "choices"  they have made rather than making assumptions and drawing conclusions on their behalf and reporting on this in Time magazine in an attempt to persuade readers that women really don't want higher paying jobs. 


The argument that women are not achieving equal numbers in high level professions therefore they must not want these positions is not only the most ridiculous, illogical statement I have ever heard uttered in an article in a publication as respected as Time magazine in 2013 no less, I am truly disgusted that Time could publish such an unintelligent and dangerous article.

SaraHello
SaraHello

@cwilcox333 
That we women want to work less hours, is supported by overwhelming evidence, in all countries.

In the United States, Pew Research did a study on this:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/08/19/mothers-and-work-whats-ideal/?hc_location=ufi

As well as a Department of labor study shows that men on average work 8.4 hours per day, whereas women work an average of 7.8.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf

And even in Europe, for example, official data from the Netherlands backs this up:
http://www.scp.nl/dsresource?objectid=22165&type=org&hc_location=ufi

A study in the UK also found this, and in fact found that women even without children, were happier working part time, whilst men were happier working full time:
https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/research/publications/509746

There's an article on that here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1563943/Women-happier-if-they-work-part-time.html

So yeah, there's a lot of data that backs that up. It's not some myth.

SaraHello
SaraHello

@cwilcox333 


There's also studies that have found, that we women simply have more life interests than men, and that men have fewer, and that power and money is less important to us, and that men prioritize it more than women:
https://hbr.org/2015/09/explaining-gender-differences-at-the-top

So, again I don't think this can be dismissed as "unintelligent" there's a lot of data that backs this up, from a lot of very respectable and credible institutions.

And a lot of the researchers who found this were female researchers at that.

DeniseElle
DeniseElle

"Equality" isn't defined by the profession you choose -- even if that role is a stay-home mom. Equality means being treated gender-neutrally in his or her chosen role.

ØsamäVita
ØsamäVita

That's not a profession, that's just sitting on your ass all day letting kids do what they want, since baby sitting isn't a challenge anymore due to technology and the various amounts distractions. Also you wouldn't pay a McDonald's worker the same amount as you do the president, professions do matter, idiot.

DuckworthAnn
DuckworthAnn

I have a feeling many white collar positions will slowly change to Female majority.  It is not because women are working harder, longer, or more intelligent but due to both deep differential treatment of Male and Female children from a young age and also changing structures of class in society.  The differential treatment of boys and girls has always created very different academic outcomes for boys and girls, later men and women.  In the past, girls could make the better grades and still be content with having a family, homes, and love from society.  Today, more and more women are now choosing to use their skills to move on to higher academics and success in the information as there are now many more positions available.  Still for women, innersecurity is easier to obtain (much love, honor, and respect from society) and so many more women are satisfied with various jobs that may not be in the elite but sill very comfortable positions.  This then leaves fewer women seeking those higher positions and requiring more time in lower positions to move up.. This is slowly occurring but "only due to more innersecurity afforded us by society that allows to not be as pushed into those higher positions.  

As for Males, the more aggressive, less supportive treatment to make them tough is leaving the vast majority of Male children with higher average stress; higher muscle tension that hurts writing/motivation; more activity for stress relief; lower social vocabulary along with higher average stress that hurts reading/motivation/and writing; along with much more distrust and lack of positive communication are now as in the past, due to more aggressive treatment, unable to obtain the education and have a place in the information age.  This is leaving those Male students from more stable, better supported, and most often those from more knowledgeable, middle class families to supply those Male students who are able to go on college to earn higher positions in society. 

Males are also driven by a kind of double edged sword that helps those boys and men from  middle class families and hurts those boys and men from working class families.  The belief boys should be strong also uses love, honor, and respect as a large carrot only given from some success, achievement, status, etc.  Boys not achieving are given more ridicule and discipline to make them try harder.  This leaves many Males from working class families and some middle class families who are very poorly conditioned for academics giving up early to seek out love and honor outside school. However, for those middle and upper class families with more support this support, stability, knowledge, and skills provided then leaves those boys and men in more of a position to gain love, honor, and respect.  This also pushes those boys and men to achieve and keep achieving so as to maintain love and honor from society.  So they are more continually driven to higher positions, where as women, we are not as pushed.

However, now, as the middle class begins to drop in many areas of the world, this is leaving fewer and fewer Males in the pipeline for college and competition in the information age.  As more and more Males drop into the lower, working class areas, the more anxiety, more aggression given them, with less knowledge and support are taking its toll as is seen in the number of Male and Female students going to college today.  Since we as girls are not given the more aggressive treatment and enjoy much more positive, mental/emotional/social/verbal interaction an support from infancy, we are able to perform quite well, even coming from working class families.  We are given love and honor simply for being girls and women. So, we are really talking about two very different conditions creating very different outcomes in terms of top management, skills, and earnings.  Still -- I see women slowly, due to better treatment beginning to take over all fields in society, including the higher positions due to more attrition of Males due more mistreatment and many more Females taking their places as more and more women gain seniority and some few, seek out higher positions.  I feel this change would already be much more acute if there were not so many Male students from other countries striving for success here in the united States.  I feel unless we understand what is creating this change, those seeking equality simply by numbers will end up with a huge monopoly favoring Females in time while ignoring the vast differential treatment that is creating many problems now for society but somehow gone unseen by everyone.  http://learningtheory.homestead.com/Theory.html 

benjaminbrowne06
benjaminbrowne06

When I'm on a construction site, women are scarce to be seen. Just hundreds of dirty men slaving away. There is no discrimination when a woman does comes to work at said job site. She is treated like one of the guys and expected to perform to the same standards. If she fails to produce at the level of her male coworkers, she is demoted to lighter (lower paying) duty. This isn't gender bias, it's meritocracy... The same thing happens to male workers. When women perform to the same standards at the same jobs as men, then they are paid equally. The statistics of men vs women in life threatening jobs is overwhelming and hard to ignore.

CWinters
CWinters

I can't find a conclusion to the article. Did someone forget to write it? What type of equality do women want, then?

liquidboy
liquidboy

@CWinters The conclusion is the last line in the article. "Equality-by-numbers advocates should be thinking about women’s progress in terms of what women show that they want, not what the spreadsheets say they should want."


The author should have put this in a separate paragraph and fleshed it out a bit. I think by including it in the paragraph about the dearth of working women in the world's most female-friendly countries, the author is suggesting that women want the choice to work full-time, part-time, or to stay at home, and don't want to be dictated to make the choices that by-the-book gender feminists want them to make.

JuliusCaesar
JuliusCaesar

If the women want equal rights then they should take equal obligations. When is peace everything is nice and dandy, but when somebody is attacking your territory where are the females? How many have you seen in the trenches on the front lines? Yes, they stay "home" and take the man's jobs and does not give them back when they return if they return from war.

Is not the male fault that the Nature or God made the female smaller and weaker. The male fault is that they let themselves dragged thru the mud by them after all the sacrifices he does for the country including the ultimate sacrifice. Is like in the book In Fifty Years We'll All Be Chicks.

I am curious who will defend the chicks when everybody will be a chick.Maybe robots?

I am open to  honest discussion and answers from women.

BrookTrout
BrookTrout

@JuliusCaesar I'd love to live in a society w/ no men. You guys want to be so territorial, and control everything and everyone, control each other- and see how long ya all last. Sick of your garbage. You destroy everything you touch. "The idea that women need men to protect them is ridiculous, for without men, what would women need protection from?" You idiot!!!!

txxjbyym
txxjbyym

@BrookTrout @JuliusCaesar Society without men? 

You'd last 3 or 5 days at most. Who grows food and breeds cattle? Who works the fields? Who works in abottairs and processes the meat that you eat? Who delivers food to your grocery store with trucks? Who loads and unloads the heavy loads of food and EVERYTHING that ends up in a store? Who setup the entire computer system, not just so you can pay, but so you can do anyhting at all? Who takes away your garbage? Who insures there is electricity, running water and plumbing working in your home? Who made your car? Who fixes your car when it breaks down? Who make the spare parts? Who built the building you live in? Who made 99% of all scientific discoveries, progress, solved philosophical questions, created THE best work of arts through the entire human history? 

Who created THIS ENTIRE CIVILIZATION?


MEN.


Best of luck trying without us.


Within 3 days (time how much it takes to die from dehydration) you would be lying dirty and soiled in your dark, smelly apartment crying as you die a miserable death.

cwilcox333
cwilcox333

@txxjbyym @BrookTrout @JuliusCaesar 

Actually women do two-thirds of the world's work, receive 10% of the world's income, and own 1% of the means of production.  This is a quote from Richard H. Hobbins, Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism, (Allyn and Bacon, 1999), p. 354.


According to the Inter Press Service, "On a global scale, women cultivate more than half of all the food that is grown.  In Sub Saharn Africa and the Caribean, women produce up to 80% of basic foodstuffs.  In Asia, they account for around 50 percent of food production. In Latin America, they are mainly engaged in subsistence farming, horticulture, poultry and raising small livestock.”  Yet women often get little recognition for that. In fact, many go unpaid. It is very difficult for these women to get the financial resources required to buy equipment etc, as many societies still do not accept, or realize, that there is a change in the “traditional” roles.

You must be thinking of countries like the United States where more men work in these fields, that's because they get paid a wage for their work.  Women perform this work in places where don't get paid or get paid very little.  

You see it's not that women are incapable of the work you sited, they are just denied the opportunity to do so if it pays a decent wage.  I guarantee you that if the wages go down in a particular field, you will see more women represented in the field because they will be the only people taking those jobs.  A case in point, the insurance industry in personal lines of insurance.  A generation ago, that field was very male dominated and companies had a stanglehold on the information required to be an agent.  Once wages started coming down so significantly the field opened up to women.  Women now compose a significant portion of insurance agents. 

SaraHello
SaraHello

@BrookTrout @JuliusCaesar 

Yeah you should read a little bit about what a female-only company is like.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1168182/Catfights-handbags-tears-toilets-When-producer-launched-women-TV-company-thought-shed-kissed-goodbye-conflict-.html

No thanks. I'll steer clear of the cat-fights and cliqueyness and petty mean girl, grudge holding.

Women don't work in harmony together in large groups. We largely constantly bicker and gossip about each other and are petty and mean.

JuliaCallahan
JuliaCallahan

Is it so fascist of me to wholeheartedly find agreeable interest in this controversial article promoting the general ideology of gender-profession equality rather than my practically expected protest for female empowerment? Maybe I just feel strongly about this because I hold a firm belief in concentration on the bottom line when it comes to business. Either way, this is an insightful read .. gets you thinking.

MarcusSG08
MarcusSG08

@JuliaCallahan your not wrong to feel that it cant happen. the whole thing she is only saying is that if it doesnt dont go blaming men or the government first. maybe its an internal difference amongst women that dont want it. we are built different. not less important. so thats really what i have already been thinking and also what i took from it.

hopevarnes
hopevarnes

Of course, I want equality, but not as feminist advocates are screaming about. I definitely don't want to be in the boardroom just to make up numbers, so that a company can say that 50% of their decision makers are women. I want to be valued for what I can do, not for my gender. What I want is for society to see that parenthood, raising children, keeping families together, budgeting the family's income are as important and as difficult than running a company or a country. It doesn't matter who does the work, be it man or woman. What I want is the freedom to choose. I feel that men are having a tough time too. A lot of men I know, my husband included, have stalled their career for the sake their family. Two of my friends were house husbands for awhile, while one is still is, to allow their wives to pursue their careers. It takes a lot of guts for them to it  because, let's face it, despite all the equality talks, men are still expected to be the breadwinner in the family. My husband, has refused many time opportunities for promotion and higher salary because he wants to be a hands-on father. And I'm sure there are many men out there who have done the same, and yet they are still being blamed for the so-called gender inequality in society.

JuliaCallahan
JuliaCallahan

@hopevarnes  Great comment! "I want to be valued for what I can do, not for my gender." My point exactly.

cwilcox333
cwilcox333

@hopevarnes 

On several points you made, I couldn't agree with you more.  I agree that work women do taking care of a family lacks and really needs respect for the difficult and noble work that it is.  Also men should be able to spend more of their lives being involved in taking care of their families.  Many feminists today are very big supporters of increased paternity leave as well as maternity leave. In fact, men needing to be able to spend more time taking care of their families is considered to be one of the biggest impediments to women being able to achieve equality outside of the home and family.  I also think that work women do in traditionally female held positions should be respected and paid more.  They are often jobs that require more customer service and human interaction, frankly I think women do these jobs because they are better at it and gravitate to it, not because it's less valuable work. The work just isn't paid as well because women are willing to work for less pay for a variety of reasons I won't get into here or I'll be typing this all night.  

However, feminists do not want equal opportunity in the board room just to state a fair statistic.  We live in a patriarchal society.  Women are underrepresented in every aspect of our culture that involves power, influence and money and we have been since the beginning of time.  This includes business, politics, religion, science, education, the media, even health care, most industries, etc, etc.  The consequence of this have been and still are dire the world over. In the US alone, women and their children compose the vast majority of people in poverty, they have worse health care.  Women and their children are much more likely to be the victim of domestic abuse when they are financially dependent on their partner.  Don't believe me, look it up in the Shriver report.  We live in a society that objectifies and values women far more for their appearance rather than their accomplishments which leads to lower self esteem, etc, etc, etc.  I could go on and on and on.  And of course let's not forget that in the US, we have it relatively good.  In many developing countries and third world countries women face issues like genital mutilation, honor killings, female infanticide, women are put in prison for being raped, they aren't permitted to leave their homes without being chaperoned or even at all.  That subject I could and probably should spend a life time writing about.  Just in case you don't know what third world really means, it means that two thirds of the world lives in developing countries that have not developed socially and in many other ways as the developed world has (although on many issues of gender inequality quite a lot of developing countries are also far outpacing us). 

You see, unlike other groups of people that have been oppressed, women have a more difficult time trying to change their circumstances.This is because the very people that oppress women are their brothers, fathers, boyfriends, and husbands. Women are inextricably linked to their oppressors, they are not a separate group that can unite together against a common entity. And I’m not saying that all men oppress women, frankly I think women do far more to hold each other back than men do.I am saying that still today there are a lot of men and women that want women who ever complain about such things to just shut up.They refuse to listen to the women in their lives, they will ridicule them and even ostracize them.When those people are your very closest family members, it becomes pretty difficult to stand up for yourself.

Also, where do you see feminists screaming about this or any other topic?  I don't here them at all.  They aren't screaming anywhere near loud enough.  The only way people get rights is by fighting for them, not by shutting up.  Clear evidence of this is how women were able to achieve getting rights when they fought for them like when Suffragists fought for your right to vote hopevarnes or when women in the 60's and 70's fought for your right to own property and have a credit card in your name. Not only have women not made any progress since the 1960s and 1970s after which women went away and just shut up as you would have us do.  We are going backwards.  The republican party is trying and succeeding at taking away our access to birth control, access to abortion, we have achieved no substantial equality in the work force with regard to equal pay.  There are extremely few women waiting in the wings to move up to the top levels in corporations which is what this discusssion here is about, etc, etc.  

As a person who has actually worked in high levels of corporations I will tell you, this is not happening because women just don't want these positions.  It's because they can't get them.   They can't get them because of discrimination.  It goes on because there is no feminist movement demanding equality.  In fact, this particular aspect of inequality is one of the most difficult things to even get feminists to fight for because there aren't many women who work at these levels to even see what is going on as is so clearly evident from the publication of this article.  The proportion of women who have worked at this level as a proportion of the women in this country or even as a proportion of feminists is so obscenely small that it is very poorly understood.  Since few people understand it, where is the necessary groundswell of support supposed to come from ? 


I haven’t even begun to scratch the surface of what’s going on with these statistics.But the argument that women are not achieving equal numbers in high level professions therefore they must not want these positions is not only the most ridiculous, illogical statement I have ever heard uttered in an article in a publication as respected as Time magazine in 2013 no less, I am truly disgusted that Time could publish such an unintelligent and dangerous article.


KerryGiangobbe
KerryGiangobbe

I don't think women deep down want equality because they feel inferior to men. This is sad. I thank my father even more than my mother for raising strong, independent minded girls. He was my greatest support. He never discriminated against me and taught me as much if not more than his son. I got the message early on from my father that I could be as smart as any boy. He prepared me well for life and supported education for girls as much if not more than for boys. I owe him a great deal especially in the self-esteem department. Women must have good relationships with their fathers to develop good bonds with men. The female bonding is also important, but because mothers come from another generation behind, it can create conflict. Women and girls have greater opportunities now and sometimes other generations vocally resent it. It is a team effort  and life must be about compromise, balance and give and take, which is more important than equality. Also the French say, Vive La Difference!

ronlle
ronlle

Come on, girls, let's hear a justification for the discrimination against men who want to stay at home to raise their family while a women goes off to work.

The truth is women can do either - go to work or stay at home and no one judges them.  Men do not have that choice.  We're treated like crap if we want to stay home and no attractive women will have anything to do with us, much less trudge off to some a$$-kissing job to support us and the kids.

If a man doesn't feel like grubbing for money, he better get used to being single or dating only ugly obese women.

Women are hypocrites.

steverific
steverific

@thecrazyfem @ronlle Maybe he is single, maybe he's even single by choice. 
Ever notice that a woman who chooses to be single is "empowered" while a male who is single is always cast as a looser, regardless of his choices?
How is it that a man is only valued by his service to a woman? Female supremacist much?

For the record, I am not single, so you'll have to find some other ad hominem to silence my voice.

cwilcox333
cwilcox333

@ronlle I realize your comment is old and is not likely to read by you ronlle but I'm responding to this and other comments anyway for whoever will read them.  I for one at least, would absolutely date a guy that wanted to stay at home and take care of the family and there are other women who feel the same as I do.  I think you would be surprised at how many women would like a guy that would do that.  And I am not obese.


Your comments are not lost on me though.  There is a really big stigma associated with a guy being Mr. Mom.  There is little support for it and I and others strongly believe that this needs to change.  It is a big part of the problem.  There are some men out here in Silicon Valley that are starting to challenge this belief though.  


cwilcox333
cwilcox333

@steverific @thecrazyfem @ronlle 

Where I live, lots and lots and lots of men and women are single well into their 50s and beyond.  I saw a statistic lately that there are more single heads of households in the US today than married.  That's a first so people, men and women, are moving in the direction of being more single not more married.  

ronlle
ronlle

Women don't want equality.  Sure, they want equal pay and equal employment opportunities, but when it comes to personal relationships, that don't want, won't tolerate, and will avoid any semblance of an equal relationship.

In the last 5 years, I've gone out on first dates with no less than 50 women who were very interested in me up to the point when I bring up the subject of economic equality in the relationship.  They've all bailed after than and none of them would go out with me a second time. 

Caveat:  these were not ugly obese women.  I expect those women would accept a truly equal relationship.  

Women also expect men to pursue them like they are priceless treasures, pay for all dates, and otherwise prostrate ourselves before them in the hopes of eventually having sex.  Even if the woman makes more money than the man, it doesn't matter - he still has to pay.  It makes me feel like a "John" dating a hooker.

At my age (56) more than half of the women don't even want to have sex - but they won't tell you that.  Instead, they will pretend to long enough to lure you into an emotional attachment and then, once you're hooked,  dole out sex as if it's a valuable commodity for which something of value must be exchanged.

Women don't want equality, they want to be more than equal.  They  want to be superior.

Penguin0719
Penguin0719

Are you a woman? No? Then how can you say this?

J.L.Jean
J.L.Jean

@ronlle 

It's not our fault that a man won't take a woman seriously if she sleeps with him too soon. It's not like I don't want sex, too, but if I actually like a guy and want him to stick around, I HAVE to make him chase me for a bit before I sleep with him, otherwise, adios, I'm never gonna hear from him again afterwards (and so many women including myself have learned this the hard way). He just doesn't find a woman interesting anymore after she has sex with him too soon, even if there's nothing wrong with her and he would have been interested in her if she had waited. This is a known fact that's been written in countless articles and advice columns. Women are forced to play these silly hard-to-get games only because men wouldn't find them desirable if they didn't.

And I WANT to pay for dates. It feels belittling for men to automatically assume that they're more financially capable than I am, so I feel empowered when I get to pay for dates. But when I do, the guys no longer want another date. They get offended, they feel emasculated, and one guy said my behavior was "unfeminine" when I tried to pay for our first date. I never meant to offend any of those guys, I just simply don't believe men should by default be expected to pay.

Eventually, I gave up on principle, and decided it was just more practical to conform to the traditional dating rituals of letting the guy pay and making him chase. Men like to complain about having to pay for dates and work hard for sex, but they wouldn't accept it any other way. Just like most women don't truly want equality, most men don't want equality when it comes to dating either.

If you disagree and think that most men are progressive enough to accept a woman who pays for dates or a woman who doesn't withhold sex like it's a "valuable commodity" (and still be interested in a serious relationship with her), by all means, do speak up.