If Women Want to Lead, They Must Also Deal With Responsiblities.
Christina Hoff Sommers reviews the new book Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead in the Atlantic:
There is much to admire in Sheryl Sandberg’s book, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead. It is full of funny stories about her brilliant career and helpful advice for workplace success. As former chief of staff at the U.S. Treasury Department and vice-president of Google, and now COO of Facebook, the 43-year-old billionaire and mother of two has a lot of worldly wisdom to share. She is right that many women sell themselves short and pull back too early from their careers. Sandberg urges them to man up.
But this otherwise likeable and inspirational self-help book has a serious flaw: It is mired in 1970s-style feminism. Nation magazine columnist Katha Pollitt compares Sandberg to “someone who’s just taken Women’s Studies 101 and wants to share it with her friends.” What Pollitt intends as a compliment goes to the heart of what is wrong with Lean In.
Sandberg envisions a time where gender roles all but disappear. “A truly equal world would be one where women ran half our countries and companies and men ran half our homes.”
If men ran half the homes in our country and women ran half the countries, would 50% of men gain custody of their children or half of the wife’s assets in a divorce? Because until the legalities of marriage are equal for men, these words are just grandstanding.
Like.
Like.
At that time, she was making so much money that my father's entire salary couldn't cover her taxes, and he was the president of a computer company. One of his coworkers asked him, "How does it feel to know that your wife makes more money than you?" He said, "How does it feel to know that my wife makes more money than you?"
It was all community property, community funds, so he didn't care. He just did his job, and she did hers. They were faithful to each other and loyal. They never failed to support their children, of which they had four. She was out of the... (show more)
At that time, she was making so much money that my father's entire salary couldn't cover her taxes, and he was the president of a computer company. One of his coworkers asked him, "How does it feel to know that your wife makes more money than you?" He said, "How does it feel to know that my wife makes more money than you?"
It was all community property, community funds, so he didn't care. He just did his job, and she did hers. They were faithful to each other and loyal. They never failed to support their children, of which they had four. She was out of the workforce for years, until all of her children were in school. He built his career. Then she went into real estate and made so much money that she bought the company. My father died of cancer eleven years ago. They were married for 45 years. It broke her heart. I resigned from teaching high school and college to help her run the company.
Today, she is one of the most respected businesswomen in the South Texas, and one of the most respected brokers in the state. She's an incredible woman. Never went to college, made millions, what's not to love? I promised my father on his deathbed that I would look after her, so that's what I do. I hate working in real estate, it's so freaking boring, but it pays well enough. I cook dinner for her every night.
Who cares who makes more money? It's all community funds. My mother makes like 4x what I make. I'm not complaining. I'm the executor of the estate. I'll inherit the company and the millions it's worth.
Actually, what I'll probably do is shut the whole thing down. My father built ADAP, and it collapsed when he retired. My mother built BIC, and it will collapse when she retires. I'm not about to sell it for pennies on the dollar to some loser who rode on her back his entire career. No, I'll just walk away with nothing, except for the land which is worth at least $2.5 million.
It's not about equality. It never has been. It's about supremacy. It's about exploitation. That's the feminist motive.
When was the last time you ever heard a woman argue for changing marriage law? Particularly presumptive paternity. Answer: NEVER.
Because the law gives her POWER.
Some guys are so stupid that they actually buy her BS. She's very good at feigning affection, isn't she. And that makes her worth 50% and presumptive paternity, exactly how? She's been bouncing in and out of be with every guy who lights her fire for, what, fifteen years? That alone makes her NOT MARRIAGE MATERIAL.
The sacrament is pure. The contract is corrupt. Marriage, in its current construct, is out of the question. (show less)
B. She's been, essentially, a highly paid staffer. COO, Chief of Staff, Vice-President; these are not positions of absolute authority. She's a talented and highly paid employee.
So, bottomline: her advice is really not worth much. If she's advocating for women to be in charge, well, why hasn't she been in charge? I'm sure there's been tons of opportunities for her. And yet, she continues to be someone's employee.
B. She's been, essentially, a highly paid staffer. COO, Chief of Staff, Vice-President; these are not positions of absolute authority. She's a talented and highly paid employee.
So, bottomline: her advice is really not worth much. If she's advocating for women to be in charge, well, why hasn't she been in charge? I'm sure there's been tons of opportunities for her. And yet, she continues to be someone's employee.
"At home she has two children – a son born in 2005 and a daughter two years later – with husband David Goldberg, the chief executive of online data firm SurveyMonkey. They juggle their schedules so one of them is always home to feed the children. "The most important career choice you'll make is who you marry," she said in a speech last year."
Looks like she's got two kids of her own.
"At home she has two children – a son born in 2005 and a daughter two years later – with husband David Goldberg, the chief executive of online data firm SurveyMonkey. They juggle their schedules so one of them is always home to feed the children. "The most important career choice you'll make is who you marry," she said in a speech last year."
Looks like she's got two kids of her own.
The equality we need to promote maximum freedom is equal opportunity with the rules and laws applied equality to all. Feminists don't believe in that.
The equality we need to promote maximum freedom is equal opportunity with the rules and laws applied equality to all. Feminists don't believe in that.
Who will insure that men are not kicked out of those homes?
Who will insure that men are not kicked out of those homes?
Then she could be herself just like her sister under the veil , the beast man could not control her with his eyes and she can come up with a better plan
Then she could be herself just like her sister under the veil , the beast man could not control her with his eyes and she can come up with a better plan
Uh, I don't know, I can't make value judgments on her choices or her character, I don't know her personally, but I'm old-fashioned. I think that sacrifice and humility are good things. I have a knee-jerk reaction to someone advocating raw ambition, the pursuit of money, and "me-ism." If men admit to these goals they are heartless pirates; if women do, they are “empowered.” I hate the hypocrisy.
Uh, I don't know, I can't make value judgments on her choices or her character, I don't know her personally, but I'm old-fashioned. I think that sacrifice and humility are good things. I have a knee-jerk reaction to someone advocating raw ambition, the pursuit of money, and "me-ism." If men admit to these goals they are heartless pirates; if women do, they are “empowered.” I hate the hypocrisy.