Sexism in 2017
Hello,
I am a female and want to work on Wall Street. I believe I am just as capable as other candidates to the jobs I want to apply to, and have never to this point been discriminated in school.
When reading articles regarding Wall St. culture, all women talk about having suffered abuse on the jobs. Even some men talk about the "prevalent 'bro' culture". Every time I read those I feel like an industry worker reading reports on artificial intelligence development: hopeless. Instead of motivating me, those articles make me question whether a corporate career is right for me.
So, I wanted to hear from unbiased insiders (men and women alike) if that sexism is a thing of the past brought up again by Hilary and her desire to be POTUS or if it still exists and cripples women's finance careers. I don't care about research on salaries, those are subjective to performance and the characteristics of the majority of women polled, I just want to hear personal accounts.
Thank you.
Hillary lost because she was so unlikable and untrustworthy. The best take away for her and you: work hard enough they don't notice your gender. BTW, I'm a black guy from a non target / top 30...
Now, I will concede, some women are viewed as unlikable because of bro culture and skepticism of your competence. But, that will fade if you do your job and aren't petty/vindictive over modest slights and teases. Most of the issues women have in male dominated culture aren't overt sexism or harassment. Women just generally take a very different approach to work, which can cause miscommunication.
Arent you getting it at night. Isnt the guy giving you good nights sleep sweetums.
@HazelJ" is right, there is a real men are from mars and women are from venus difference in communication. In work culture people respect hard working, honest and trustworthy people regardless of gender. If you are under 26 there will probably be more of a "fratty" vibe in finance.
Also I think you should re-read the salary disparities you quoted. At the highest level there are disparities that are related to performance. But for a majority of women the "pay gap" can be boiled down that more women are in nursing and more men are in construction/finance/stem jobs. More women in careers that are not finance of STEM does bring the average down, but looking at salaries of same position men and women there is not a real difference. In fact highly educated women in men dominited fields make more.
Yes, and I read something by Thomas Sowell where he concluded pay gaps exist because most women focus more on raising their children, but the minority that remains single and/or childless is paid the same (or sometimes even more) than their male peers.
Nail on the head. Also, if women truly make 25% less than men (as claimed by 3rd wave feminists who complain about mansplaining but don't utter a word about Islamic oppression of women) then why aren't big, bad, greedy companies loaded with women? After all, 25% savings on labor would be great for margins. I've yet to hear a feminist answer this.
If you are reading Thomas Sowell, you're doing something right.
You read a few articles and wonder if the corporate career is still right for you?
Seems pretty weak. Do you want this?
There are HR policies that determine if behavior is against company. Some companies enforce HR standards tightly, others let it slide. Most firms are well known on the street for where they stand.
You'll be fine
ehhh I don't know about traders though - yeah wouldn't recommend that group of people for you.
What area interests you?
I really want this, but sometimes those arcticles paint such a dystopian feature that instead of leaving readers appalled and willing to change that, they leave people thinking about baby names and support groups for stay at home moms.
I am not sure about the exact area, because every time I find out about a new one and pick up a book about it, it interests me a lot. I think I'll just intern at different places and see. On the top of my list I would quote IB and real estate.
Just understand where the information is coming from. Are you reading huffington post, cnn, slate etc. These sources write hit pieces on wall street all the time because it fits their agenda. That communist english major from Wesleyan who wrote the article has no idea what high finance is like and has no interest in the truth.
Sexism exists. Anyone who tells you it doesn't is as ridiculous as those who say it's ever-present. Sometimes it works in your favor, sometimes it doesn't. It rarely, if ever, will be overt, but it'll probably be there in someone's subconscious.
It's far more important to focus on things you can control - your individual personality and your work output. Everyone has to earn respect. It might be a bit harder for you with some or a bit easier for you with others, but you still have to earn it.
Look, here's the hard truth about school: it isn't the real world. Most people in the real world are not PC all the time (or with some people, any of the time), they are not always considerate of your 'feelings' and they won't have different expectations for you because you are female (in the social sense, not the work sense). People have more experience here, are more jaded and cuttthroat and will take whatever advantage they can get, even if that includes gender. Yes unless they are a complete shitbags, they are not going to BE sexist, but they will often unconsciously or consciously take advantage of it. Even if its a male employee who does worse than a female employee and they have a male boss, if the guy gets along better socially with the boss (talking sports, banging some attractive girl last week, etc.), he may be seen as the better employee/ more likable, which often equate in many people's minds.
Now I'm not saying this is right.. Just the objective truth, and for your sake, I hope you take a moment to just absorb this. As a recent (male) graduate in IB, I can commiserate with your situation (to the extent that I was in the same environment back in college and I understand it). However, you have to recognize the mechanics of the real world.
For example, I was at lunch with my director and 2 other guys last week and one girl. The director maybe 10 minutes in talks about banging Sharapova one time vs banging a $30 dollar hooker every day for a month. I have no fcking clue what is going through his mind, but it didn't really phase me as a guy since this is definitely the type of crap guys talk about. But, I did recognize that it made the girl uncomfortable, and I steered the conversation towards general tennis by asking if the girl played (subtly since I don't want to piss of my director who is managing to look quite proud of himself for coming up with this scenario). From my perspective, I'll do my best to be sensitive about this since I understand everyone deserves a fair shake regardless of BS like race or gender, and I think a good portion of our generation will try to do the same. Just understand sometimes this will not be possible, and you will have to deal with these frustrations in finance especially since it draws so many Type A men. I wish you the best of luck, just food for thought
Yeah there is sexism in the world. When a woman cries rape everyone believes her, when there is a domestic dispute the man is arrested, when a married woman sits on her ass and then a divorce occurs she gets half, when there is a physically demanding job a woman gets easier tests to pass.
You know where real sexism AGAINST women occurs? Muslim countries.
+1
Oh please. MS throwers, provide a counter argument and prove me and those giving me SBs wrong. We eagerly await you to prove us all wrong. Thanks in advance guys, or, erm, gals, don't want to be a misogynist. /sarc
social justice warriors bro. you talked about rape, islam, divorce, wifebeating, and the workplace all in one post. they're all probably still writing essays in response.
Wait what? How do you know?
I don't really get your point. You named a few instances were being male is a negative (rape, divorce, domestic abuse) - false accusations are rarer than women not reporting rapes at all so that is advantage to males, it's your responsibility to get a prenup and women don't get 50% in a divorce every time and you ignore the males' future earnings potential where a woman might not have any (a man could still earn money 20 to 30 years after getting divorced if he has a solid career whereas the woman might have no career skills to speak of), an arrest means nothing a conviction is what matters and tons of domestic abuse cases go unreported so it is advantage to males. Also, the cases you mention do nothing to refute sexism in the work place, you see the shit coming out of silicon valley right now? Those awkward neck-beards are sure not the alpha "slap a female on the ass type" but somehow there seems to be a pervasive sexist culture there. Your statement on Islam, while true, also does nothing to refute the subtle sexism that can go on in the US. It is like saying since Jim Crow wasn't really a thing up north there was no racism in Boston in the 1950s (or now for that matter). So in review, you brought up a few instances where being male is a detriment while doing nothing to refute the idea that sexism can be a problem in the workplace then brought up "we're better than them" as if there's no room for improvement. All in all, pretty much what I'd expect on this website.
Judges can throw out a prenup with a snap of their fingers, and women basically do get 50% every time, even if she's wealthier. And as you say a woman may have no career skills to speak of but the man does, why is that his fault and all the obligation has to go to him to support her for the rest of her life?
Also, in almost all domestic abuse cases, the man will get arrested 99% of the time basically, even if he was the one to have made the call. Completely ridiculous. And to say that an arrest means nothing, are you fucking joking? Do you think you'd have no problem being arrested for no reason, spend the night in jail, have your mug shot taken for the world to see? Come on man, you can't be serious with that.
In today's western world, there is institutional sexism against men and in favour of women.
just like racism, sexism does exist, but it's calming down. you gotta remember that just 25 years ago, people were grabbing secretaries' asses in the office. some of those same men are still employed today. it's unfortunate that sometimes when a woman is assertive she's seen as a bitch whereas a man seems like a go getter, but I think that will continue to change.
you ought to read up on sallie krawcheck, she's done a lot in this space and is someone who I think has a great combination of tenacity, no bitchiness, and femininity. the problem with feminists is they demonize women who desire to be feminine and strong. the strongest women I know don't try to be part of the boys club nor are they man haters.
just like I commented in the thread about racism, the worst thing you can do is play the victim. yes, you may encounter sexism, but you can't control who you come in contact with, you can only control how it affects you.
as to your career choice, never shy away from something because you read a study that makes you think it will be an unfriendly environment. the exception here is the military. if you don't want to be trained to kill people, don't enter the military. a corporate career may not be the best place for you, but that has much more to do with your aspirations and skillset than which brand of fun parts you have down below.
because I know your age, I'll just say spend the next several years getting through school and learning as much about yourself and the world as possible. study hard, hit the books, but also have some interests outside of the world. learn about issues like you've asked today, but don't worry about them.
best of luck
listen to this advice OP
I most certainly will.
Apply for a job in HR. They love people like you.
Sexist PE recruiting message from a Penn listserv (Originally Posted: 09/20/2012)
I was shocked to see this email posted on a Penn student listserv. The person who wrote this email was some dumb Wharton b*tch. Le sigh.
That was me...
Interesting. Does that mean the entire pool of current and past female US-based applicants to CITIC PE and/or the recruiting company (Falcon Talent?) now have the right to lawyer up and sue under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? If so, there are a bunch of my old classmates that need to see this.
Anyone familiar with international lawsuits who can chime in?
I'm not a lawyer, but.....The recruiting agency, FalcolnTalent and CITIC are both Chinese companies. And the job is in China. No US court would ever hear this case. (I suppose you could sue this "wharton b*tch", but that sounds like a stretch- she could say she's just passing on information.)
Go to most of these developing BRIC or Middle East/Africa economies and gender discrimination in the workplace is a fact of life.
brb writing my cover letter
Eh, I'd think a US federal court would at least hear it. I've got a friend who's a federal prosecutor and he does this all the time. Surely a competent lawyer could come up with the argument that it's a violation of US federal law on US soil affecting US citizens, aided by US institutions.
I'm actually not too surprised. I have seen another CITIC job posting that specifically requested people of Chinese ethnicity only. I can just picture these guys sitting in their offices in Beijing wading through reams of resumes and trying different strategies to make sure people understand that the jobs are really meant for good Chinese boys only.
Anyway: you can sue across borders; recovering the damages is the issue. I'm no expert, but I would guess that some smart law firm will build this thing as a class action and see if they can find any CITIC assets or earnings in (or passing through) the US to attach.
I wonder if Penn or any of the many other schools CITIC recruits at have any liability for knowingly helping CITIC do this.
The hiring company is Chinese, so no EEOC law would apply, especially for a foreign enterprise in a foreign office. Even if you make the argument that there are minimum contacts vis a vis CITIC, CITIC may get immunity under FSIA. Come on. I expected more from you Bankerella! I'm not saying you need to have a legal mind here, but I would expect even you to consider the possibility that a foreign company named CHINA INTERNATIONAL TRUST AND INVESTMENT CORP might be a state-owned entity and thus subject Foreign Sovereign Immunity on certain issues - like foreign employment issues of an FSI. As to liability against Penn, I don't think you can make a liability claim on an FSI, but I'm not sure about that.
The biggest issue is going to be establishing whether or not they violated the US federal law on US soil. Does sending that email from an office in China to someone in the US even count as "US soil?" If not, the case is probably DOA.
This is very common thing in China, even in HK. Last time a HH contacted me for a potential PE opp based in HK, he said the same thing. The partner, who is a woman herself (and actually she is an European), wanted to hire an associate and the candidate must be a male. Lol.
Hah. That's so tone deaf. Don't these guys understand that the legitimate and time-honored way to discriminate is to interview everyone but only hire the men?
TIC: This Is China. Things work a bit differently here than they do back home. Yeah sure it's sexist, but that's just part of life here. And it's also probably the tamest form of sexism you'll find.
That part is actually legal. Under EEOC, Foreign employers in the USA can have preference for hiring their own "nationals". I bet they used the word nationality instead of ethnicity.
this thread shows how incompetent bankerella is on the most simple topics
another common Chinese recruiting term is 五官端正...
translation: doesn't look like a monstrosity
I agree they really need to learn the US way of interviewing people and discriminating with who they send to the second round/give offers. Much simpler haha
Yeah, if they want to hire our graduates, they need to learn our methods of discrimination.
The advertisement is politically incorrect. However, at the other extreme should we continue with the positive discrimination for females, easy promotions, no all nighters, no pitches etc. especially within BB banks it is beneficial to be a woman.
I can't read it and when I download it it's too small to read. What does it say?
Click the image then click original.
so fucking what? women have a ton of advantages through different women only initiatives anyway. let men have our scraps here and there.
Well when I was in China, I have seen more BS things than this. Those things could be enough to even fire the president of a company in the greater china region. It is just their way to do business. I guess Penn and other schools can just ban CITIC from their OCRs.
Women CEOs - Sexism, Does it Exist? (Originally Posted: 04/14/2014)
Link to Article http://www.businessinsider.com/locket-ceo-email-2014-4
Locket Founder/CEO Yunhua Kim writes a post in her blog on the cons, harassment she's received as well as the pros, easier to network, in the tech start-up scene. I thought it would be a reasonable discussion to bring into WSO given the polarity in the topic, especially on a finance, male dominated forum.
This this a legitimate piece on the status of women in the industry? Or a bit of a #humblebrag?
Thoughts?
Definitely exists, people will always say that they slept their way to the top, etc. It could be true, it could not be true, IT DOESN'T MATTER. These rumors will always be something women CEOs/employees have to deal with.
No one hates Sandberg because she's successful, they hate her because shes a bitch.
They hate her because she's bossy.
The only good woman consists of a chick with a little hard body, who will satisfy all sexual demands without being too slutty about things, and who essentially will keep her dumb fucking mouth shut.
Of course there's sexism. Stupid question.
Augusta National Gender Discrimination, CEOs have few comments (Originally Posted: 04/09/2012)
I'm sure you've all read about this topic in some form over the last few days. If you've been living under a rock, the short and sweet version is that it is tradition for IBM's CEO to wear the club's green blazer at the tournament, but IBM's CEO is a woman, and women are not allowed to be members of the Augusta National Golf Club.
Now some CEOs of related companies have issued statements that they have no comments on the matter and that questions should be relayed to Augusta directly. One might argue that this particular instance of gender discrimination is trivial, but it does bring up a larger point that we are familiar with as a society. I don't mean to start a fire, but there hasn't been a discussion about this topic yet, and I think it's worth talking about.
Understandably, this is tournament and club tradition (whether one agrees with it or not), is a private affair of the organization, and in this manner, there isn't anything legally objectionable to the rule. Overall though, I have to say that, as the Bloomberg article poins out, it's unsettling to have a bunch of CEOs praising diversity at their respective companies sit by the wayside on this one.
What do you guys think? Should Augusta change its policies? Will it ever?
Link to Bloomberg article
It's a private organization so I think they should be allowed to do what they want.
Should they be allowed to do what they want as an organization with private membership? Sure. That being said, it does bother me that sexism still exists for no good reason.
@Jackie: Rethought it as soon as I posted
When the girl scouts let boys join or when Chi Omega Sorority lets males join then I'll start complaining about Augusta. It's a private men's club. Hearing the liberals complain about this issue is utterly laughable. In one breath they're bitching about the 1% and in the other they are bitching on behalf of the top 1 percent's women.
Given that I'm a 20-something male and think about sex virtually every moment of the day I find the idea of an all men's golf club to be physically repellant. But why should anyone care if a rich, privileged woman can join a men's club? Rich women have all kinds of organizations. My mother, for example, is a Red Hat. It's women only! Where's the protest from Barack Obama on this? Or from Mitt Romney, for that matter (and I'm a HUGE Romney supporter)?
But the bigger question is, how many women would even WANT to join a club like this? 12? 20? It's such a manufactured issue.
Chi Omega is a fraternity. ;)
Can you do what you want in the privacy of your own home? Same thing with PRIVATE businesses.. Why should Augusta be forced to let someone in because it isn't fair? I can't be a girl scout or play woman's basketball or go into the dressing room at Victoria Secret.
This is actually a non issue as Vtech said, Private club can do as they wish.
No, it's not. They're mostly called fraternities formally--Chi Omega is for females, however.
http://www.chiomega.com/
[quote=Virginia Tech 4ever]No, it's not. They're mostly called fraternities formally--Chi Omega is for females, however.
http://www.chiomega.com/[/quote]
I was referring to the formal name - Chi Omega Fraternity.
This was my initial reaction: If enough bad publicity is the result of this, Augusta will cave in to the pressure and women will be allowed to become members, wear green jackets, and do whatever else they want.
I now believe that Augusta will be more resilient to maintain the status quo than I had originally thought.
Let's see whether this issue fades from view now that the Masters tournament is over, at least for another year. IBM's new CEO, Virginia Rometty, was pretty in pink, as a photo of her from ESPN's website reveals. Will this photo and others like it make this issue of overt discrimination linger for weeks or months?
It should be noted that this is not the first time that efforts have been made to end the gender-bias at Augusta. As ESPN reported:
"The issue of female members at Augusta was a hot-button issue in 2002, when Martha Burk, then the chair of the National Council of Women's Organizations, campaigned for Augusta National to end its all-male membership and threatened to boycott companies whose executives belonged to the club. Hootie Johnson, Payne's predecessor, responded by cutting loose corporate backers and the Masters was televised without commercials for the next two years.
A planned protest before the 2003 Masters was a dud and the issue slowly receded.
When Payne replaced Johnson as chairman of the club and of the Masters tournament in 2006, he said there was "no specific timetable" for admitting women. The question was raised at the 2007 and 2010 Masters. Both times, Payne rebuffed questions, repeating the club's policy on privacy relating to membership issues."
Would anyone refrain from watching the Masters next year if this issue isn't resolved by then?
It's called the 1st Amendment. We have the freedom of association in this country. A private club is not serving the public--a private club services private individuals who get together and agree to associate with one another under a set of rules. In the United States of America you have freedom of association, hence why women have Red Hats, Girl Scouts, sororities, etc. and why men have fraternities, golf clubs, cigar clubs, etc.
@illiniPride
Is a restaurant a private organization?
So, illinipride, you have a problem with Delta Delta Delta sorority or Red Hat? What about women's bible studies or bachelorette parties?
The truth is, the Augusta thing just bothers me whether or not I have a good reason. A 'no women' rule at a supposedly civilized club seems out of place to me in this day and age.
Yeah, you're right--finding a golf course in Augusta, GA is like finding a needle in a haystack...
I think that the club is well within their rights to not allow women to be members, however it could hurt them in a few ways. 1. It makes them look like sexist bastards. Although this might not be the case, it looks like that on the outside. 2. In the future, we will most likely see more and more women CEO's, some of which might be at companies that currently sponsor the Master's.
I would also like to point out that all-girls clubs, like sororities or the girl scouts, have male counterparts, which brings about the question, why would a male want to join these all-girl clubs if they had all-guy clubs of their own? I don't think there is anything close to a female counterpart to Augusta, so it makes sense that a powerful women would want to be in such an elite group.
If I was another CEO I wouldn't have commented either seeing as how even the smallest, most insignificant quotes can be (and have been) used to smear somebody... especially with issues like these.
I think this should be left up to the PRIVATE club... up to them: what has more tradition? being mens only? or having the IBM CEO there?... I couldn't care less what they do.
It does seem weird that they're still guys only, but it's golf for f's sake... guys use golf to get away from women sometimes, nothing wrong with a "boys club" imo.
It's just golf.
Ukraine, are you kidding me? Girl Scouts and Sororities do a lot of things that males would want to do that the male counterparts don't do nearly as well, by and large, such as service and cookies and cleanliness. Many sororities even have much better houses with live-in help.
As has been pointed out, this isn't a new controversy to Augusta National Gold Club. They don't give a f*ck and they shouldn't--this policy doesn't prevent any woman from playing golf. Go to Google Maps. There are a dozen country clubs within a few miles of Augusta National! Not one woman is being denied ANYTHING by not having membership to this club. Very few women could even afford the price of admission to Augusta--these are only RICH women we're talking about. Hardly a discriminated group.
Should Augusta be guilted into admitting women and then be guilted into lowering their membership fees to $100 per year so everyone can afford to join? Where does the ridiculousness end?
So women are entitled to membership in Augusta National because men used their own private money to make it one of the nation's best clubs? I'm sorry, but your logic simply does not hold up under any kind of scrutiny.
Girl scouts and sororities are good at these things because their members choose to be. A fraternity could certainly be good at these things if they wanted to. I've seen many a sorority where a lot of the girls just smoke a lot of weed, drink a lot, and have a lot sex. These are things fraternities are known for. Anyway, the woman in question is the CEO of IBM and IBM happens to be a big sponsor of Augusta. She is caught in the crosshairs really. To be honest, if Augusta doesn't want IBM's business, it's their loss.
Ukraine, that's the point! Thanks for making my point. As illinipride is pointing out, it's unfair to him that women don't have access to Augusta National because it's the best golf club around. Women DO have access to country clubs, just not to the best one around. Men DO have access to fraternal organizations but, frankly, men don't have access to the best ones at every school. If women cared about golf--and very few do--then they could very easily make a competitive women's only country club. But just like men don't give a damn about selling cookies by and large, women by and large don't care enough about golf.
And here we have it, folks--males and females are fundamentally different. I know that's a shocker to the American Left, but there ya have it!
What I am saying is that if it was in my power to make the decision, I allow female members into Augusta. Not because they were "entitled" to it, but because I believe it is the right thing to do. It bothers me that the persons in charge have not come to the same conclusion; however, I recognize that is their decision to make.
How about it VTech; if you were in charge would you allow female members?
If I were in charge I would let women in because I'm heterosexual and I enjoy the company of women.
What you're transparently and incorrectly ascribing to this situation is "right" and "wrong." You're saying it's the "right thing to do." Huh? How does that even make sense. Based on what morality? The Bible? The Qu'ran? The U.S. Constitution? No on all counts.There are millions of Americans--likely tens of millions--who belong to gender specific clubs and organizations. There's nothing "right" or "wrong" about it. Men and women have different needs and interests.
Let me point you to this thread started by a female and responded to mostly by females:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101008050055AARoHBc
Most women, I would argue, have no problem with men-only clubs. In fact, it's intellectually indefensible to deny men the right to have their private clubs when women do this in high school, college and in the workforce all the time. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotamayor was a member of a women's only power broker club prior to joining the Supreme Court. That's just life.
Girl scouts and Sororities are good at the things you described because they choose to be. If a Fraternity wanted to be good at cooking and cleaning, they most certainly could, and there probably are fraternities like this. The same goes for sororities. There most definitely are sororities with girls who like to drink, smoke, and have a lot of sex. Augusta, however, is less of a social club and more of a merit club. The CEO of IBM earned the right to be in the club by A. having a lot of money, and B. earning the role of CEO at a company that anually gives money to Augusta. She earned it, and they didn't offer her membership. Like I said before, not only is this ethically wrong, it will hurt them in the long run. Nevertheless, they have the right to accept or deny anyone they choose.
You can't "earn" the right to be part of a private club. That's a ridiculous statement. Is it ethically wrong that my mother tells me to fuck off on Thursday nights when she goes out with her women only club? I mean, after all, haven't I earned being part of her group? I call her 3 times a week, buy her gifts on her birthday and Christmas, and am a loyal son.
Oh wait, the private club has a membership requirement that I be a woman if I want to join. Dang. I guess that means I can join one of thousands of other clubs.
@VTech: I get your point. And I probably should just disagree with the decision rather than be bothered by it. It just bugs me, what can I say.
Sounds like we have the same basic position anyway: Would I let women in? Yes Should Augusta be forced to? No
Augusta did not allow black people to join until 1990. Also, they required that all caddies be black. So, knowing this track record, you can see that Augusta's policies are traditionally prejudice. It's obvious that their unwritten rule of membership is "white males only" and arbitrarily because "they are white males." Unlike other clubs, they have made this blatantly obvious. Ok it's their right to do as they please, but it still isn't right. They would also benefit from having a more diverse group. So, it's their loss. I think it's fair to say that the Master's wouldn't still be at Augusta if they had not allowed black people in their club back in 1990, and I think it's safe to say that in the future the Master's won't be at Augusta if they don't allow women to be members.
Haha, sorry I accidentily posted that twice.
I dont believe its sexism. Their not implying women are inferior, its just a mens club. I think all would agree that an all male vs mixed environment is very different and changes the whole atmosphere of the club. Some men dont feel as comfortable talking freely in front of women or feel restrained by them. I can understand situations where men just want to hang out uninterrupted by women, its not that they view them as inferiors, its just that they want to be in an all-male environment. Men and women are not the same and acting as if they are is unrealistic.
If a woman's biggest concern is how shes going to get into Augusta, i would say that woman has a pretty awesome life.
As has been stated above, this is such a non issue. The most prestigious private club in the country is allowed to do whatever it wants. I bet that if anyone of you who is complaining about gender bias was a member, you would feel differently.
How can you compare being able to go into a dressing room at VC to being a member at a club of CEO's if you're a CEO? There is a reason dressing rooms are seperated. The reason for excluding women from Augusta is completely arbitrary. It isn't like these guys hang out all the time and are just in the club to get away from their wives. Everyone knows the club means power, elitism, and honor. I'm not arguing that they shouldn't have a right to accept who they want, but don't say they exclude members for any reason other than prejudice.
When looking at gender only organizations, one has to look at INTENT
The INTENT of female only organizations is to bring a sense of community and empowerment toward an otherwise discriminated group (ex: Girls club when Boys and Girls club was formally only the Boys club for children)
I have no problem with a Men's Club if those are the reasons. However, if the INTENT is to be power whoring toward an elitist "old boys club" then THAT IS malicious.
It's legal, sure. However, it's reprehensible and corporations should be ashamed of turning their back on this issue when they "promote" diversity initiatives.
You all are thinking about it way too much. You think the CEO's of the companies that sponsor the event are going to pull out their sponsorship over this? Get serious. The Master's, just like the US Open for tennis, is used as a HUGE marketing campaign for these companies... targetting guess who? The seriously disproportional number of men in executive positions across the globe. Who primarily watches golf? Men. These companies know that and use these events to get their name out there... rub elbows with the executives in attendance... and hopefully get that next big deal signed and out of the way before the end of the weekend for their 2Q results. Oh and I can guarantee you (knowing from past experience w/ one of the 'major' sponsors') that there were far more executives than just the CEO's of these companies strolling around with potential clients.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/08/virginia-rometty-ibm-augusta-eileen-bu…
Interesting article that related on TechCrunch.
I thought you had to be good at golf to play at the Masters... Remember, Ernie Els wasn't invited to play. What woman is better than that golf legend?
We can discuss this issue in a few hundred years when we cross that bridge.
jesus christ, this world gets softer by the day. Lets break it down this way, tradition means everything. and tradition states that males are the only ones allowed in there. heres an idea instead of getting butt hurt about tradition, why dont they go ahead and create their own women's golf club right next to augusta. they are ceo's right im sure they can pool their income together and create their own private club. on a seperate note: since women are finally starting to do halfway decent in the corporate environment, why dont they create their own constant. they can wear a different color blazer.
Does Augusta even have red tees?
Gender Discrimination - Why are you so scared of us? (Originally Posted: 06/27/2016)
So I have been working in the city for the past year and have noticed how woman treat me while in public spaces - for context, I am a normal white guy.
I have noticed, while going home late at night, woman walking to the other side of the street, woman clutching their purses when we are the only ones on the subway, and just a general reluctance to converse when on public transportation.
I have asked my girl friends and they tell me they must be really aware and cautious around men because you never know what could happen. This kind of thinking is analogous, in my opinion, to a racist who crosses the street when there is a black person walking down it. Its insulting to think that girls group me with sexual predators just because we are of the same gender, just like a black person would be insulted if you thought he was a gangster/drug dealer.
Thoughts?
First time to a big city?
Visited but never lived - thought people would be more willing to converse in public. We are literally touching each other squished like sardines in this cart, might as well start a conversation than awkwardly stare in silence.
There have been a lot of stories about women being attack by men who simply started off by asking innocent questions. If you really want to meet women, you have to make sure that they are in a comfortable / safe environment - e.g., with a group of friends / surrounded by other people.
Cities tend to have a lot of crazy people / people that are overstressed - surprised you haven't seen any as yet to give you pause. Give it time
I understand why woman do so - I definitely encourage my sister to go about it the same way - guess I am more curious why there isn't the same stigma attached to is as someone who is racist.
There have been stories of Muslim terrorists, but you would be considered bigoted to walk around assuming every Muslim was a terrorist. There are stories of woman who are bad drivers but you would be considered sexist to be afraid to get in a female drivers car. So why is it that society doesn't condemn woman for doing the same with men?
Personally, I like walking in my own space. I would rather walk on a sidewalk alone, rather than a sidewalk with people all over it. There's a lot of crazy people out there and honestly, nobody understands why people do the things they do. Just be yourself and if they don't want to walk near you then that is their prerogative. People gonna people.
Never Happened.
Never miss an opportunity to shut the fuck up.
It's a basic survival instinct. You shouldn't let it bother you. The media reports on the horrors that go on in the city and that's all we hear about. You can't blame some people for being afraid/fearful because that is all they are exposed too.
I do blame those people, regardless of who they are prejudice against; if you believe that the news is an accurate representation of the world you're nieve and your ignorance effects others.
Man kicked off plane for doing math
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2060047-guido-menzio-world-famous-econo…
Crime rates at historic lows despite media reports
http://www.npr.org/2015/12/23/460851046/despite-grim-media-reports-crim…
To ty this back to the OP, I realize why people are scared - with the advent of technology we hear of crime all around the country and world. While the crime rate was much higher in the 80s, we didn't readily have access to the stories being reported on said crimes so it was a situation of ignorance is bliss. But knowing that, it's harmful to let the access to these reports cloud your judgement on others and assume things about them because they belong to a category you heard a story about.
Sounds like the dream to me. Clear sidewalks, no handbags dangling taking up free space. #MalePrivilege
Blame modern feminists who have conditioned women in to thinking that they are going to be attacked anytime they leave the house.
You could just be hideously ugly or carrying yourself poorly.
Or stink. Smell is a big one.
Ut deleniti omnis veritatis aut et. Et nihil voluptatem sed nostrum illo perspiciatis.
Tempore eos quos voluptas quasi. Consequatur libero ipsum dicta dolorum eveniet officiis magni.
Minus veritatis vel in. Velit harum perspiciatis consectetur nemo maxime. Sed quaerat sit dolorem vel eligendi omnis. Quaerat magni corporis qui occaecati rerum et.
Laborum et dolores eum est nostrum. Ab maiores ratione ullam exercitationem illum nulla ut. Quo provident consequuntur ut neque ex. Quod nulla aliquid consectetur.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Voluptatem accusantium accusamus libero. Numquam non dicta atque magni. Rem neque inventore at.
Nesciunt enim autem perferendis. Unde necessitatibus libero magnam eius. Ut aut et nihil. Consequuntur dolores hic eveniet et necessitatibus.
Quas fugiat quaerat iusto sunt. Illo quisquam enim accusantium atque odit. Incidunt magni ab adipisci nihil et voluptatem. Ratione officiis cum nemo nostrum. Consequatur quae id reprehenderit ipsum explicabo.
Rem voluptas quis consequuntur labore. Sint qui qui qui voluptatem. Tenetur eos necessitatibus corrupti sint totam omnis.
Veniam tenetur sint deserunt dolor at aut. Accusantium tenetur et eum quisquam sed voluptatem provident est.
Rem et non ex illum voluptatum. Necessitatibus aut et optio aut est quibusdam. Dolore dicta dolores temporibus facere. Suscipit dolores nesciunt reprehenderit illum. Corporis modi assumenda expedita dolorem quo.
Neque rerum autem doloribus. At voluptatem voluptas voluptatum cum. Perspiciatis at quo aspernatur voluptate. Quis et quae eos omnis numquam. Provident laborum corrupti et et.
Voluptatibus eos vel est voluptatem excepturi. Dolorem sapiente omnis dolorem molestias quas enim. Ad ipsa eius quam nihil vitae dolorum quidem dolor.
Cumque quasi voluptas assumenda eos qui porro. Quis ab officia consectetur odio qui quasi.
Voluptatem eveniet quas possimus laborum. Sunt ipsum consequatur odio est voluptas. Quis corporis at quas rerum suscipit. Ut adipisci aut voluptatibus. Iusto molestiae qui nemo est deserunt illum repellendus.
Voluptatem doloremque similique tempora reiciendis et et modi. Distinctio sint et vel delectus perspiciatis.
Possimus animi est perspiciatis doloribus quia in recusandae suscipit. Est qui voluptates cum necessitatibus atque autem aut. Fugiat aut dolorum veritatis. Quae rerum facere aut dolorum.