Finally! A story about women's lack of advancement in the corporate world that doesn't gloss over the fact that outright discrimination is largely to blame.
Many other women end up in dead-end staff positions, says Ilene H. Lang, president of Catalyst. “Women are almost two and one half times as likely to be channeled into staff jobs like H.R. and communications than into operating roles where they would be generating revenue and managing profit and loss,� Ms. Lang says. [...] Analysts and executive women also say that one of the biggest roadblocks between women and the c-suite is the thick layer of men who dominate boardrooms and corner offices across the country. “The men in the boardroom and the men at the top are choosing and tend to choose who they are comfortable with: other men,� Ms. Bartz says.
Kudos to the Times for not doing its standard "opt out" piece. Lucky for us Louise Story (author of one of the more egregious pieces of non-reporting on this issue) was busy putting her anecdote-gathering skills to use on this harmless story about wedding registries, and they were able to assign a decent reporter to write about women (not) moving up the corporate ladder.
This is also a great excuse to show the visual breakdown of how women disappear the closer you get to the top:
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: NY Times admits there's a corporate boys' club.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/4480
HalleFuckingllujah!
HalleFuckingllujah! The NYT actually does some reporting on an issue germane to women AND doesn't do a wash on it. One can only guess that it's penitence for their many sins of omission on this score.
HalleFuckingllujah! The NYT actually does some reporting on an issue germane to women AND doesn't do a wash on it. One can only guess that it's penitence for their many sins of omission on this score.
Wow. Are you sure this isn't a hoax? Because more often than not, the NYT seems genuinely surprised by the mere existence of women, to say nothing of their presence in the public sphere.
Sorry for the multiple comments: premature annunciation.
I just sent the article to a business prof who supports training where I work. He's always telling me I "worry" too much about sexism in the workplace. What an easy thing to say from the power seat. Happy to see this get some decent press.
It's good that this is being recognized; so many people are under the false impression that sex discrimination in the workplace has somehow disappeared.
I'd also be interested to see a breakdown of women in high end technical positions. There's beginning to be more women in engineering, but it seems like women never rise to more than mid-level positions.I've seen women as project leaders, but I don't think I've come across a female head of rearch and developement.
The bottom line is we still have a long way to go and the general perception is that women can not handle high end positions. I am a clinical engineer (we manage medical equipment) and the only female engineer at my office. I still feel like I need to be at least twice as good as the guys to be taken seriously - both by my co-workers and by my customers.
I'm glad to see this article, but I can't help but point out that that graph is terrible. The statistics are shocking enough, there's no need to be misleading about them. (Specifically, the percentages match with the vertical linear dimension only, not the areas on the side of the pyramid facing us and not the "volume" that is implied.
I've seen women as project leaders, but I don't think I've come across a female head of rearch and developement.free games