Dear Prudie: Excessive Feminists

[charminglife]

I don't read her chats as much as I used to after she told college women to just stop getting drunk to prevent rape - but this might be the last straw.  

Feminists aren't interested in facts.  



Subject: Excessive feminists

Dear Prudie, I'm a woman in a very masculine scientific field, and I've found that many women involved in feminist circles want to hear about my experience. I absolutely agree that there are biases against women in the workplace, and love a good discussion, but I have never really suffered from sexism. First, I'm young enough (27) that I'm not eligible for senior positions anyway, and second, I've never been flirted with in an appropriate manner, or felt I wasn't listened to. Maybe I'm just awesome at playing the man's game (or in denial and don't have an eye for sexism?). More probably, I landed in a great environment that just suffers from a dearth of females because there are too few candidates. But even quite reasonable and pleasant women get aggressive when I don't have anything to contribute to their list of crimes committed by the patriarchy. I don't want to lie, but I'm not sure how to handle inquiries when I can't give them the story they want.



Emily Yoffe 2 hours ago

How strange that people who say they are fighting for equality are dismayed when they encounter it. How sad that they don’t want to hear the good news that you have been welcomed into this traditionally male field, that your male peers and bosses treat you wonderfully, and that you are thriving. It’s exciting this has been your experience -- what a great ambassador you can be for younger women seeking to enter your field. There is an unfortunate strain of obsessive grievance-mongering in feminism today. It’s a kind of sport for these self-proclaimed guardians to venomously attack those they feel don’t precisely toe their line. You’re a scientist who lives in the world of facts. You are finding that ideologues aren’t interested in facts, thus they go after you when your reality trumps their ideology. My general advice is that it’s best not engage with unpleasant people, especially those who seek to lecture you about your own experiences. Feel free to extract yourself and say, “You’ll have to excuse me, but I’ve got to get back to the lab.” But if you feel like it, you can also counterpunch by saying something like, “It’s funny, but the only people who try to bully me are women who aren’t in my profession.”

[charminglife]

And here's a follow-up question:


Subject: RE: Excessive feminists
Is the letter writer actually experiencing excessive feminists or expecting them? Because my experience with feminism has had most of the negative reactions listed by both the letter writer and you come not from the actual feminists but rather people thinking that is what a feminist is and projecting it…

Emily Yoffe 1 hour ago
So you’re suggesting that the letter writer is having a delusional break with reality. That would definitely be more concerning than being attacked by feminists!

[charminglife]

Final follow-up.


Subject: RE: excessive feminists
I am also a young woman in a male dominated STEM field, and while it is great that the LW has had nothing but positive experiences, it is important not to downplay how rare that is and the huge problem of the dearth of women, which is why it's important to continue supporting programs designed to help women consider STEM degrees. It might seem like unjustified complaining, but that's like saying anyone who feels discriminated against based on race is just playing the race card because you've never experienced it yourself. Sexism in male dominated fields exists and should be given attention to, whether you have been unfortunate enough to deal with it or not.

Emily Yoffe 1 hour ago
No one is saying sexism doesn’t exist, and the letter writer is not saying others may had had experiences different from hers. The letter writer is describing her own positive experiences, and the responses I’m getting are universally discounting this. How focused should she be on negative experiences she hasn’t had? If she’s going to encourage younger women to follow her, why not tell them she has been welcomed and supported?

[smock]

What a terrible answer from Prudie. But the letter writer is also misguided.

I haven't personally experienced much overt sexism as a professor, but that doesn't mean that I haven't been affected by systemic sexism. For example, it's great that my department has hired 4 female professors in the last 4 years--and it's sad that these junior faculty members make up over 50% of all women in our department. That means we have a lot of tenured men who are making a lot of decisions in our department.

So, yeah, I've only been harassed overtly once in my current position (from an old tenured man who complained about my pregnancy), but guess what? My male colleagues don't get called "Ms." or "Instructor," and they don't across the board receive lower teacher evaluations because of their gender. They don't miss out on free lunches because they have to pump (I'm kind of bitter about this one). They don't get "jokes" about pregnant women being airheads. So . . . feminism matters.

[jeaniebueller]

I am guessing the letter writer is one of those "cool girls" who relates better to men than women anyway.

[Deleted]

Sorry, sweetheart. I didn't experience sexism in my field when I was in my early 20s either. It wasn't until my late 20s when I realized a lot of my peers who were my age OR YOUNGER and male were making more than me or being promoted in to management and I wasn't.

I'm currently in the running for a management position. If I get it, I will be the only female manager in the entire organization. Also the youngest at 30. That is systemic sexism. You're trying to tell me there just weren't any other strong female candidates for the other 12 positions? No.

[downtoearth]

Feb 9, 2015 15:25:34 GMT -5 @silver said:

Sorry, sweetheart. I didn't experience sexism in my field when I was in my early 20s either. It wasn't until my late 20s when I realized a lot of my peers who were my age OR YOUNGER and male were making more than me or being promoted in to management and I wasn't.

I'm currently in the running for a management position. If I get it, I will be the only female manager in the entire organization. Also the youngest at 30. That is systemic sexism. You're trying to tell me there just weren't any other strong female candidates for the other 12 positions? No.

Ditto - I didn't see much early on either, but once I started having kids and needed to take time off and such, all of a sudden big PM projects weren't coming to me anymore, but to my colleagues, who were male and would only take maybe a week off after their SAHW's had their kids or could travel at the drop of a hat b/c they had a spouse that was the more flexible caregiver who could accommodate the kids more, so they "would be more available to clients."

[Deleted]

I'm not in a male-dominated field, but my H is. During a dinner with his boss and some coworkers (all male; 95% of his company is male), they were utterly shocked when I knew what they were talking about. As if a woman just couldn't possibly know.

I think the letter-writer is in for a rude awakening, or is just suffering from the same condition that has befallen Kaley Cuoco.

[aurora]

I have definitely experienced more sexism as I've gotten older; I think that's pretty common even without the parenthood complication.

I have a support network at work of people I'll talk to when I'm feeling overwhelmed by the sexism. However, I also have some younger female colleagues and I never initiate these conversations with them; I'll discuss it if they bring it to me, but I'm not going to aggressively try to turn their positive experience upside down.

[secretlyevil]

I'm just tired.

[FloFTW]

I call "Excessive Feminists" as my band name.

[wackadoo]

Feb 9, 2015 14:19:44 GMT -5 charminglife said:

Subject: Excessive feminists

Dear Prudie, I'm a woman in a very masculine scientific field, and I've found that many women involved in feminist circles want to hear about my experience. I absolutely agree that there are biases against women in the workplace, and love a good discussion, but I have never really suffered from sexism. First, I'm young enough (27) that I'm not eligible for senior positions anyway, and second, I've never been flirted with in an appropriate manner, or felt I wasn't listened to. Maybe I'm just awesome at playing the man's game (or in denial and don't have an eye for sexism?). More probably, I landed in a great environment that just suffers from a dearth of females because there are too few candidates. But even quite reasonable and pleasant women get aggressive when I don't have anything to contribute to their list of crimes committed by the patriarchy. I don't want to lie, but I'm not sure how to handle inquiries when I can't give them the story they want.

Yeah, I doubt this happened even once much less so often she needs advice to deal with it.  I can see some being surprised she hasn't seen or experienced issues, but aggressive?  And the idea of someone with this perspective and attitude having regular social interactions with women in 'feminist circles' is absurd.  pffft

That specific comment actually makes me think this whole "problem" is made up by someone (probably male) with an ax to grind.  But I might just be the one fabricating things, cause of my feminist outrage.

[emilyj]

How nice for her.

When I worked in television, sexism and sexist 'jokes' were the norm. Either you didn't make waves and went along with it, or you were that person who complained. When I finally complained, you better believe I was drilled right out of that television station (a Fox owned/operated station...go figure). I believe my last review there said I wasn't a 'team player.' Yes. I wasn't a team player because I finally complained about someone making daily and nasty comments about my breasts.

What I deal with now is systemic sexism. I've have one male professor make inappropriate comments to me, but other than that, I deal with lower pay than the men in my department, students calling me Ms. or Mrs. (despite every reference to me on our websites/literature says "Dr.", and snide comments on my teaching evals at times.

[aurora]

Feb 9, 2015 23:46:55 GMT -5 Stan said:

Feb 9, 2015 23:04:15 GMT -5 emilyj said:

How nice for her.

When I worked in television, sexism and sexist 'jokes' were the norm. Either you didn't make waves and went along with it, or you were that person who complained. When I finally complained, you better believe I was drilled right out of that television station (a Fox owned/operated station...go figure). I believe my last review there said I wasn't a 'team player.' Yes. I wasn't a team player because I finally complained about someone making daily and nasty comments about my breasts.

What I deal with now is systemic sexism. I've have one male professor make inappropriate comments to me, but other than that, I deal with lower pay than the men in my department, students calling me Ms. or Mrs. (despite every reference to me on our websites/literature says "Dr.", and snide comments on my teaching evals at times.

It's interesting and sad to me that it's the exact same shit, regardless of the organization. If you complain, you're oversensitive or not a team player. I don't have to deal with less pay than my male counterparts, well, unless you count the fact that I have a harder time getting promoted (I personally certainly did) and my female colleagues do not currently have the same opportunities to engage in tasks that make them more competitive and promotable. 

I cannot believe you have students calling you anything but Doctor. WTAF. I am so disgusted by that. 

Like emilyj, I get Ms. all the time. It wouldn't be as big a deal if it didn't come with all sorts of other sexist issues.

In a lot of ways the students sexism is harder to manage than that from higher up. There's just no good way to get them thinking about it without coming across poorly, IMO.

[derp]

Feb 9, 2015 15:47:58 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

Feb 9, 2015 15:25:34 GMT -5 @silver said:

Sorry, sweetheart. I didn't experience sexism in my field when I was in my early 20s either. It wasn't until my late 20s when I realized a lot of my peers who were my age OR YOUNGER and male were making more than me or being promoted in to management and I wasn't.

I'm currently in the running for a management position. If I get it, I will be the only female manager in the entire organization. Also the youngest at 30. That is systemic sexism. You're trying to tell me there just weren't any other strong female candidates for the other 12 positions? No.

Ditto - I didn't see much early on either, but once I started having kids and needed to take time off and such, all of a sudden big PM projects weren't coming to me anymore, but to my colleagues, who were male and would only take maybe a week off after their SAHW's had their kids or could travel at the drop of a hat b/c they had a spouse that was the more flexible caregiver who could accommodate the kids more, so they "would be more available to clients."

There are several instances of sexism described in this thread, but this isn't one of them. If your job description requires you to be available to travel at the drop of a hat, and you can no longer perform that function of the job, then it makes sense you would be taken off of big projects. That would go for a man or a woman. If you want to be able to travel at the drop of a hat in order to be able to excel at your job, then negotiate with with your co-parent that they are the one to be more flexible so that you are available to excel in your job. As you've described it, you are taking off extended periods of time from work (if not beyond what is medically necessary, I would agree with you on that point), you aren't available to travel, you aren't as available to the clients as you once were. If you aren't performing your job up to your previous standards, then your employer is correct to assign projects accordingly.

To say otherwise is actually quite sexist - that women should be able to perform their jobs at a lesser quality than men but still receive the same perks. That's special treatment, and asking for that and couching it as feminism just sets feminism back.

There are real problems with women being mistreated in the workplace. Let's not confuse the issue by throwing stuff like this into the mix that only makes women and feminism look foolish.

[downtoearth]

Feb 10, 2015 0:03:31 GMT -5 derp said:

Feb 9, 2015 15:47:58 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

Ditto - I didn't see much early on either, but once I started having kids and needed to take time off and such, all of a sudden big PM projects weren't coming to me anymore, but to my colleagues, who were male and would only take maybe a week off after their SAHW's had their kids or could travel at the drop of a hat b/c they had a spouse that was the more flexible caregiver who could accommodate the kids more, so they "would be more available to clients."

There are several instances of sexism described in this thread, but this isn't one of them. If your job description requires you to be available to travel at the drop of a hat, and you can no longer perform that function of the job, then it makes sense you would be taken off of big projects. That would go for a man or a woman. If you want to be able to travel at the drop of a hat in order to be able to excel at your job, then negotiate with with your co-parent that they are the one to be more flexible so that you are available to excel in your job. As you've described it, you are taking off extended periods of time from work (if not beyond what is medically necessary, I would agree with you on that point), you aren't available to travel, you aren't as available to the clients as you once were. If you aren't performing your job up to your previous standards, then your employer is correct to assign projects accordingly.

To say otherwise is actually quite sexist - that women should be able to perform their jobs at a lesser quality than men but still receive the same perks. That's special treatment, and asking for that and couching it as feminism just sets feminism back.

There are real problems with women being mistreated in the workplace. Let's not confuse the issue by throwing stuff like this into the mix that only makes women and feminism look foolish.

No, my job description does not require me to travel at the drop of the hat.  My job description requires "up to 20% planned travel", but those who can do more than the 20% and drop everything to respond to a client within a day get the PM jobs... nothing in my job description about either of those.  It's not an overt instance of sexism, but isn't it a systemic sexism in my profession?  I think there is a reason that this career is primarily men.  There is 1 woman VP in my company out of 12+.  That is very typical in my profession - rarely do you see a woman in a decision area and/or women owned companies.

The PM jobs I have been passed over for are jobs that I was the assistant PM and doing most of the work, but when I went on maternity leave, someone else took over my work during 6 weeks and then I didn't get them back or considered to be PM, even when I asked for them.  In one instance I was on the job for 5 years and then it went to a new hire guy because "he has more time to devote to the project," which I pointed out wasn't true since I had no other projects when I returned.  I disagree that these aren't sexist decisions at some level, although it's hard to prove.  But isn't that the problem with subconscious sexism in professional settings?

ETA: I also have been told to "slow down missy" when talking at times, that I "wasn't assertive enough when I asked for a raise" when I realized that I was paid 10% less than a male colleague with 5 less years of experience (the HR person accidently sent our salaries out in an email attachment) - following that I asked for a 15% raise and they negotiated "10% - we can't go any higher."  But it's the jobs that I continually ask to be PM or the manager of and they find another reason to give it to someone else that make me the most pissed. I know I'm good at my job and maybe everyone has to fight for jobs all the time, but my office-mate (less schooling and less experience, male) bills out the same as me and just complained that they "gave him another PM job without even asking if I wanted it."  That is not my problem here.

[tacosforlife]

Feb 9, 2015 20:56:20 GMT -5 FloFTW said:

I call "Excessive Feminists" as my band name.

LOL. I had the same thought! Except I already decided on Agressive Pedestrian, so I'm glad someone can use this.

[jillboston]

Feb 9, 2015 15:25:34 GMT -5 @silver said:

Sorry, sweetheart. I didn't experience sexism in my field when I was in my early 20s either. It wasn't until my late 20s when I realized a lot of my peers who were my age OR YOUNGER and male were making more than me or being promoted in to management and I wasn't.

I'm currently in the running for a management position. If I get it, I will be the only female manager in the entire organization. Also the youngest at 30. That is systemic sexism. You're trying to tell me there just weren't any other strong female candidates for the other 12 positions? No.

sing it sister. things can look pretty rosy right out of college in your first job. I can remember how horrified I was when I realized that the male attorney I worked with could never have supported a family of 4 on what I made and challenged my boss on it. He does "different" work was the answer. That was 18 years ago. I'm sad to say I doubt things have changed a lot.

[ijack]

I think she's just naive. There is no way that she's in a male dominated field and hasn't experienced sexism in some way. Maybe she doesn't think that being called "hun" or whatever is sexism but I can absolutely guarantee that even at her "young" age she's experienced it.

[One Girl In All The World]

Feb 10, 2015 11:13:16 GMT -5 ijack said:

I think she's just naive. There is no way that she's in a male dominated field and hasn't experienced sexism in some way. Maybe she doesn't think that being called "hun" or whatever is sexism but I can absolutely guarantee that even at her "young" age she's experienced it.

This reminds me of an account manager I worked with at my last job. I was really new in the role and he called me "sweetie" on the phone. I went off and you bet your ass he never did it again.

More recently, I was addressed as "Mrs." in a work email and everyone looked at me like three heads when I grumbled about how inappropriate that was (the message was from an external contact that would have no idea if I were married or not). 

Back to the OP, just wait until little 27-year-old starts getting passed over for promotions. Man's game indeed.

[aurora]

Feb 10, 2015 0:03:31 GMT -5 derp said:

Feb 9, 2015 15:47:58 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

Ditto - I didn't see much early on either, but once I started having kids and needed to take time off and such, all of a sudden big PM projects weren't coming to me anymore, but to my colleagues, who were male and would only take maybe a week off after their SAHW's had their kids or could travel at the drop of a hat b/c they had a spouse that was the more flexible caregiver who could accommodate the kids more, so they "would be more available to clients."

There are several instances of sexism described in this thread, but this isn't one of them. If your job description requires you to be available to travel at the drop of a hat, and you can no longer perform that function of the job, then it makes sense you would be taken off of big projects. That would go for a man or a woman. If you want to be able to travel at the drop of a hat in order to be able to excel at your job, then negotiate with with your co-parent that they are the one to be more flexible so that you are available to excel in your job. As you've described it, you are taking off extended periods of time from work (if not beyond what is medically necessary, I would agree with you on that point), you aren't available to travel, you aren't as available to the clients as you once were. If you aren't performing your job up to your previous standards, then your employer is correct to assign projects accordingly.

To say otherwise is actually quite sexist - that women should be able to perform their jobs at a lesser quality than men but still receive the same perks. That's special treatment, and asking for that and couching it as feminism just sets feminism back.

There are real problems with women being mistreated in the workplace. Let's not confuse the issue by throwing stuff like this into the mix that only makes women and feminism look foolish.

Can't you see how the regular removal of women from leadership positions post-children, even without documented performance evaluations showing that Woman X is not meeting client needs but rather purely because she is perceived to be *likely to be* less available, is an example of systemic discrimination?  (I'm not talking about handing over projects to someone else during the actual time she is out on maternity leave; that's a different issue.)

[jeaniebueller]

Feb 10, 2015 11:13:16 GMT -5 ijack said:

I think she's just naive. There is no way that she's in a male dominated field and hasn't experienced sexism in some way. Maybe she doesn't think that being called "hun" or whatever is sexism but I can absolutely guarantee that even at her "young" age she's experienced it.

She is flattered when they call her hun or sweetheart! They are just being nice when they compliment her looks and her physique, no doubt!!!

[derp]

Feb 10, 2015 11:43:45 GMT -5 aurora said:

Can't you see how the regular removal of women from leadership positions post-children, even without documented performance evaluations showing that Woman X is not meeting client needs but rather purely because she is perceived to be *likely to be* less available, is an example of systemic discrimination?  (I'm not talking about handing over projects to someone else during the actual time she is out on maternity leave; that's a different issue.)

That's not what I'm talking about here. I responded to downtoearth, who stated this:

Feb 10, 2015 10:55:10 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

No, my job description does not require me to travel at the drop of the hat.  My job description requires "up to 20% planned travel", but those who can do more than the 20% and drop everything to respond to a client within a day get the PM jobs... nothing in my job description about either of those.  It's not an overt instance of sexism, but isn't it a systemic sexism in my profession?  I think there is a reason that this career is primarily men.  There is 1 woman VP in my company out of 12+.  That is very typical in my profession - rarely do you see a woman in a decision area and/or women owned companies.

If I'm the boss and I have 2 candidates up for a promotion:

Candidate A: can operate within the stated bounds of the job description
Candidate B: can and does go above and beyond the stated bounds of the job description

I know who I'm going to pick, regardless of their gender. There isn't anything subconscious going on.

There is so much sexism in the workplace (i.e. the way downtoearth was spoken to in her ETA), but this isn't it. This is performance based.

[downtoearth]

Feb 10, 2015 11:49:05 GMT -5 derp said:

Feb 10, 2015 11:43:45 GMT -5 aurora said:

Can't you see how the regular removal of women from leadership positions post-children, even without documented performance evaluations showing that Woman X is not meeting client needs but rather purely because she is perceived to be *likely to be* less available, is an example of systemic discrimination?  (I'm not talking about handing over projects to someone else during the actual time she is out on maternity leave; that's a different issue.)

That's not what I'm talking about here. I responded to downtoearth, who stated this:

Feb 10, 2015 10:55:10 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

No, my job description does not require me to travel at the drop of the hat.  My job description requires "up to 20% planned travel", but those who can do more than the 20% and drop everything to respond to a client within a day get the PM jobs... nothing in my job description about either of those.  It's not an overt instance of sexism, but isn't it a systemic sexism in my profession?  I think there is a reason that this career is primarily men.  There is 1 woman VP in my company out of 12+.  That is very typical in my profession - rarely do you see a woman in a decision area and/or women owned companies.

If I'm the boss and I have 2 candidates up for a promotion:

Candidate A: can operate within the stated bounds of the job description
Candidate B: can and does go above and beyond the stated bounds of the job description

I know who I'm going to pick, regardless of their gender. There isn't anything subconscious going on.

There is so much sexism in the workplace (i.e. the way downtoearth was spoken to in her ETA), but this isn't it. This is performance based.

As a supervisor, I know it's never as straight as this...

It's more like this...

Candidate A: can operate within the stated bounds of the job description, has 10 years experience + masters degree, 4 published articles, leader in her field for this particular work that we are looking to for a PM for, has been the assistant PM on the job and has a great relationship with the client, has brought in 5 new jobs in the last year, but most are little and she has done the majority of the work (i.e. hasn't needed a team), has gone over and beyond responding quickly to clients and meeting deadlines, but does only work the 40 hours required and will say "no" to working weekends or after 4pm (but job description says you need to be in the office core hours of 9am to 4pm and have to work 40 hours - does not require weekends), worked 65 hour weeks for 2 months to get a job done when she realized it was that or not finish the field work in time, manages her own schedule and other people, very efficient  [Did I mention she has a very rigid schedule since she has 3 kids and a husband with an inflexible job, plus she has to say no to last minute schedule changes b/c her kids would be left in the parking lot if she or a hired sitter wasn't there to get them after 4pm?]

Candidate B: new to this company - new masters degree (same school as candidate A),  does a great job, works about 60 hours a week (was told to please get approval to work overtime b/c he is very ambitious), does not manage anyone, has published 2 papers, working on bringing in jobs, getting more efficient, but new to the organization and the position and asks for a lot of guidance [Did I mention he has a SAHW who takes care of his kid and doesn't need to be rigid on work hours due to not needing outside childcare?]

Candidate B gets the PM job, but since he doesn't have the experience, Candidate A gets to be the task manager for the biggest portion of the job and she will manage that.

Obviously, I'm Candidate A and I am butt-hurt b/c this has now happened at least 5 times in my career - big PM positions that I ask for and am qualified for and every time they have gone to a guy who is younger than me with less experience.  Twice they told me that they would make a decision at a certain time and then when I was out on maternity leave, just gave it to a guy with less experience.  Twice does not feel like a coincidence.  I'm assertive and every time I ask why I was not giving the job and I get stupid answers like, "we need you to manage X task and that work speaks to your strengths" or "we didn't think you wanted to be a manager, but instead more on the technical side." Is that a sexist answer, no, not really.  But when I see 2 business unit leaders that are women out of 20+ and then 1 VP woman out of 12+ in my company, it's starting to feel a little biased. 

I just don't think we are going to agree on this.  I think it's subconscious or systemic sexism and you just see it as based on performance and the ability to go "above and beyond."

[ringstrue]

Yeah she's just in a dead end low paying job that few other women wanna apply for. That's what I call equality!

[derp]

You're right - we're not going to agree on this. Because when you give me a more detailed description of candidate A and candidate B, what I see is that while candidate A is very competent and qualified, candidate B is very competent and more ambitious. Over the long term, I'm going to want the ambitious one in the PM position. That candidate will gain more experience over time. Candidate A has already proven to me that there is a lack of ambition, regardless of the reasons.

I understand that you're frustrated, but this isn't sexism. In fact, it hurts women as a whole when a large chunk of women dial back their efforts at work, or drop out of the work force altogether, and then this is what men expect of us, and treat us this way accordingly. It's very frustrating for those of us who do put in equal time and effort to our male counterparts.

As for your situation - you say your H has an inflexible job. What would happen if you told him that your job has become inflexible, because you're gunning for that PM job and you need to put in extra time? Why can't he dial back on his career, if you really want to succeed in yours?

[downtoearth]

Feb 10, 2015 12:21:55 GMT -5 derp said:

You're right - we're not going to agree on this. Because when you give me a more detailed description of candidate A and candidate B, what I see is that while candidate A is very competent and qualified, candidate B is very competent and more ambitious. Over the long term, I'm going to want the ambitious one in the PM position. That candidate will gain more experience over time. Candidate A has already proven to me that there is a lack of ambition, regardless of the reasons.

I understand that you're frustrated, but this isn't sexism. In fact, it hurts women as a whole when a large chunk of women dial back their efforts at work, or drop out of the work force altogether, and then this is what men expect of us, and treat us this way accordingly. It's very frustrating for those of us who do put in equal time and effort to our male counterparts.

As for your situation - you say your H has an inflexible job. What would happen if you told him that your job has become inflexible, because you're gunning for that PM job and you need to put in extra time? Why can't he dial back on his career, if you really want to succeed in yours?

I want to fucking drop kick you!  Because women are doing their job well, asking for advancement, getting their work done on time (or earlier) within the hours required, adding technical insight and good client relations to their positions, and still wanting to advance, but won't work extra hours or sacrifice their personal life's time to "put in equal time and effort to our male counterparts" those WOMEN are the problem that are hurting your advancement and frustrating you - not the systemic sexism or the men in charge?

[derp]

Feb 10, 2015 12:27:31 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

I want to fucking drop kick you!

I'm trying to keep this polite, but I see no reason to further engage with you.

[LoveTrains]

Feb 9, 2015 16:34:29 GMT -5 incogneato said:

LOL at a 27 year old, whom I'm assuming is still child-free, being the be-all, know-all about sexism or the complete lack thereof in the workplace. Let me know how that future mommy-tracking goes, or whether you or your husband is expected to take the most kid sick days in a decade, mmmmmmkay? Or maybe you'll just find that, 10- years from now, suddenly younger men are getting promoted above you despite less time in the field?

What does being child free have to do with it? Please don't insinuate that those of us that are child free don't experience sexism. 

[pixy0stix]

Feb 10, 2015 12:31:42 GMT -5 derp said:

Feb 10, 2015 12:27:31 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

I want to fucking drop kick you!

I'm trying to keep this polite, but I see no reason to further engage with you.

Oh please.