BBC Online debate on women in top jobs

[Oneinthree]

BBC News - Are women their own worst enemy when it comes to the top jobs?

I've posted this in the good news section for a couple of reasons. Yes, there are some shockingly ignorant and self-serving quotes from some of the women involved, but check out the comments section.


comments.jpg
Almost exclusively, the "pro-feminist" comments have been smashed / massively downrated by all the other posters, while the anti-misandrist comments are rated very highly, and have made the editor's choice. A hell of a lot of people out there are thinking what we're thinking.

There are many flaws with this article but some hope in it. The editorial tone at least doesn't excuse women for their failures, or actually explicitly blame a male conspiracy for women's failure to flood boardrooms - but sadly puts them down to a lack of confidence (NEVER a lack of ability), and there are a lot of quotes from women about "how men think". (Why are women so sure they know what we think?)

There is a lot of unsupported / unsourced rubbish from some of the women who have been invited to comment, and that isn't challenged by the article's writer, but my main point is about the comments. BBC.co.uk is about as mainstream as you can get. People out there are getting off their backsides and showing the BBC that they won't just let this pass anymore.

[Yan Yan]

How about a parallel discussion?

Are women their own best friend when it comes to avoiding the bottom jobs?

A miniscule percentage of women do dirty and dangerous jobs. Workplace deaths and serious injuries are overwhelmingly male.

We should ask every feminist we encounter why they are not doing more to encourage more equality at the bottom.

[Percy]

How come we do not have Aboriginals in the top Australian jobs? Is Oz racist as well as sexist?

Perhaps we should throw an Abo at these feminists who demand the top jobs by virtue of their gender.



AND Abos have a solid track record in 'entitlement'.

Ot, alternatively, perhaps we should send all the feminists into the Simpson Desert and give them a taxpayer-provided spear (on loan, signed-for and witnessed by three civil servants from a new 'Department of Femi-Abo Opportunity')

[Oneinthree]

Yan yan, are you the "Beebalert" poster who got 204 positive votes on the BBC discussion? (See picture above). I ask because they said virtually the same thing you did! ;-)

[Marx]

We should ask every feminist we encounter why they are not doing more to encourage more equality at the bottom.

I actually did ask that when I was in college a few years back... she ignored it.

[Oneinthree]

I actually did ask that when I was in college a few years back... she ignored it.

This is a problem I have noticed many times when I raise Men's Rights issues. A lot of the time, feminists don't actually have any response at all, and yet somehow they get away with simply ignoring the point I make.

I might be guilty of an over-generalisation here, but is it because the world expects men to act when confronted with an issue, whereas no such expectation is placed on women? Is it this pressure that results in us having the top jobs?

[Marx]

Is it this pressure that results in us having the top jobs?

I don't know - but just as I'm not a rapist, I'm also not in a top job.

Hell, to accounts & purposes, I just wipe dirty bottoms all day.

[paul parmenter]

The comments from the women in the article are the perfect example of why women don't succeed in business like men. They lack the ability to analyse what is happening and why, find practical solutions that will actually work, and implement them in order to make improvements. And all in an atmosphere totally devoid of emotional irrelevancies, a desire to embrace victimhood, or a whining subservience to accepted orthodoxies that have been proven inadequate. The most successful people ditch all that baggage, think for themselves, come up with innovative ideas and have the energy, drive and stamina to take them through to a conclusion. That is how the top men have succeeded in business for centuries. But these are attributes that don't occur in anything like the same measure in the female population.

Which is why the only answers they can come up with instead are the ones that will never work: like changing the rules, focussing on "soft" skills that are supposed to suit women but often don't, and will certainly never make any money; enforcing stupid, stupid quotas; or shoe-horning young women with spurious "superior" educational qualifications into jobs they can't do and sooner or later discover they don't really want. And blaming the non-existent universal male conspiracy instead of facing up to the reality about the differences between the sexes.

Men are simply not going to step aside and let women take over what they can do perfectly well themselves, and usually better; and there is absolutely no reason why they should. Especially when there are so many other women who don't provide enough for their own wants but insist instead on a man doing it for them; and who will only pick men who are good breadwinners and consistent providers. All the while such women are in the majority, and their demands are never satisfied no matter how hard men work for them, the position won't change.

I would have thought that should be apparent after 30 years or more of artificial manipulation, male-bashing and endless tinkering, which has still only succeeded in elbowing small proportions of women into top jobs, where most of them have simply proved not up to it. It seems the population at large has started to figure that out for themselves, while the lethargic, blinkered and feminist-infested monoliths like the BBC still continue to trot out the same complaints year after year when the stats stubbornly refuse to move to where they want them to be.

The point about the similar dominance of males in the lowest rungs of society is equally valid. Women congregate in the middle ground, with few at the extremes of top or bottom. But men are spread across the spectrum more evenly, with fewer in the middle and more at the top and bottom. That's not anybody's plan, or anybody's fault; it just seems to be the way we are made. It would be sensible to recognise that as a starting point at least.

[byslexic_danana]

Apart from the fact women make up half of the population of Britain, girls outperform boys at school and make up 60% of university graduates.

Gotta love the lauding of INequality, to promote an idea of EQUALITY, hey?

[Oneinthree]

Gotta love the lauding of INequality, to promote an idea of EQUALITY, hey?

Happens surprisingly often, dontcha find? As these women are in the business of finding excuses for poor performance, how about this one?

Girls outperform boys at school* because two-thirds of teachers are women, who lack the emotional capacity to connect with their male pupils or appreciate a male perspective, so they can't convey knowledge to their male pupils effectively.

It's often remarked that women fail to translate academic success into business success. That's because a lot of academic success involves rote learning and a bovine acceptance of what you're told. There is usually a right answer, and a support framework to guide you towards that answer. You can produce something that is utterly useless to society and you will still get top marks if you do it in the correct way.

In business you either overcome problems, or you go out of business. Tutors, textbooks and other support mechanisms are more rare, and you have to pay for them yourself. Not with money you earn from being a waitress or a pole-dancer in someone else's organisation, but from money earned by your own ideas and solutions.

Academia is state-funded, so there is an indefinite entitlement to support and you can complain that the rules aren't fair and that they need to be changed for you. In business, if you don't do something directly valuable, you're out on your ear.

Certainly there are women who are good at business. There just aren't as many good businesswomen as there are good businessmen, because most women aren't very good at it.

Before anyone asks, I have a science degree and I have also done consultancy work in over 100 businesses in the UK and overseas, so I've seen both sides of the coin.



*Only in a few subjects, not by much, and the gap is closing.

[FloatyBoaty]

In the past, boys learned from men and girls learned from women. Probably why there was less "sexual inequality".