Just because not all women get breast/uterine/cervical/ovarian cancer doesn't mean that cutting that research wouldn't be bad for women.
Just because not all women are mothers doesn't mean that something that works against women's ability to make choices about maternity leave isn't bad for women.
WUT
This doesn't make a lick of sense.
All women are at risk for getting cancer at some point.
Not all women are mothers or pre-mothers. In fact, treating them as such is damaging to some women. (but that is a different topic)
I am a woman. You'll have to explain to me how Marissa Mayer's maternity leave length is bad for me.
Otherwise I don't know what else to say you. This is nonsensical.
I think it's that having a culture that maternity leave isn't terrible helps women. We're not punished on the assumption we'll have kids, whether we plan to or not. Something that's expected AND accepted is preferable.
Just because not all women get breast/uterine/cervical/ovarian cancer doesn't mean that cutting that research wouldn't be bad for women.
Just because not all women are mothers doesn't mean that something that works against women's ability to make choices about maternity leave isn't bad for women.
WUT
This doesn't make a lick of sense.
All women are at risk for getting cancer at some point.
Not all women are mothers or pre-mothers. In fact, treating them as such is damaging to some women. (but that is a different topic)
I am a woman. You'll have to explain to me how Marissa Mayer's maternity leave length is bad for me.
Otherwise I don't know what else to say you. This is nonsensical.
So you're saying that if something doesn't affect 100% of women, it can't be considered a "women's issue"?
That's like saying that equal pay laws aren't "good for women" because not all women will have paid employment.
All women are at risk for getting cancer at some point.
Not all women are mothers or pre-mothers. In fact, treating them as such is damaging to some women. (but that is a different topic)
I am a woman. You'll have to explain to me how Marissa Mayer's maternity leave length is bad for me.
Otherwise I don't know what else to say you. This is nonsensical.
I think it's that having a culture that maternity leave isn't terrible helps women. We're not punished on the assumption we'll have kids, whether we plan to or not. Something that's expected AND accepted is preferable.
Explain how that culture helps women who will never be mothers? Who is the "we" you are referencing?
Maybe flameful, but I would presume that if I want to be a CEO I'm not going to have the luxury of taking an extended maternity leave in this country.
Unless someone can show me where Yahoo has now changed their policy to essentially eliminate maternity leave based on what this woman is doing, then I don't think this should be a discussion.
If you're an hourly worker at Yahoo and see the CEO taking a short leave and feel like that means you need to take a short leave even though the policy says otherwise, then I think that's on you.
The thing is, policy is not the same as practice. A company might have a policy to offer maternity leave, but there's an unspoken rule that if you take all 12 weeks, you're considered "uncommitted" and will be passed up for promotions and next on the list when layoffs occur. Same with vacation time and other personal time - there's often a feeling that yes, they're offered, but you're not *really* supposed to take them.
This is totally anecdotal, but IME in tech this is not at all an issue. Vacation time maybe, and there's certainly pressure to be available on vacation. Actually I was much more available on vacation than maternity leave. My career, pay, promotion and options have taken off before, between and after my leaves. We've had a few senior level directors take some leaves of absence, I think there's some kind of rolling sabbatical going on with senior engineering management.
Netflix, FB, Google, all of top tech has been making family leave and family-friendly policies a key part of their HR strategy. This is just not an industry that penny-pinches you into squeezing as many hours as they can get. They'll take over your life, and willingly, but they'll let you live it side by side with your family.
"Since my pregnancy has been healthy and uncomplicated and since this is a unique time in Yahoo's transformation, I plan to approach the pregnancy and delivery as I did with my son three years ago, taking limited time away and working throughout,"
What is troublesome to me is that she feels the need to address this in this way. What sort of horrible culture is she in that people are pre-emptively judging her ability to do her job when her babies aren't even here yet.
Did you read the article about Amazon on here recently? Granted Amazon sounds especially cutthroat. But I think generally, the culture of SV tilts towards the more demanding, long hours side of things.
I actually don't think maternity leave is a woman's issue, I think it is a SOCIETAL issue. Meaningful maternity leave doesn't benefit just the delivering mother, it benefits her whole family construct, and it also benefits the larger society. People can argue that it doesn't benefit business but I would argue that every other developed country in the world can prove that it can, at the very least, not be entirely detrimental to business. Last I checked, all those other countries still have viable economies.
Having a family is necessary to everyone, I totally get that. But unless you want humans to die out, it is a societal NEED. It isn't about giving mother/families more than other people, it is about recognizing that bringing a life into this world requires support and it is about the system providing support.
But my views shouldn't be surprising, #canadiansocialist
I'm still waiting to hear how Marissa Mayer's maternity leave is bad for me.
Well it is all about you...
This is the title of the thread: "Yahoo's CEO's plan for maternity leave bad for women..."
I asked in my initial post for a distinction to be made between women/mothers, otherwise somebody's going to need to explain this to me. Then you made that ludicrous comment about women's health in an effort to derail.
The reason that maternity leave is relevant for all women is perception. When a hiring manager evaluate's the best fit for a job the perception that a woman is a future mother exists. It is not always a conscious decision but how society perceives maternity leave can affect the decision making process. Most women will be employed at some point during her child bearing years so it matters that maternity leave might be seen as a weakness of character rather than a medical recovery.
Because its not really a decision. Its our culture of working women until they fall apart that is pressuring her to PLAN to not take MEDICAL leave. And she is a prominent figurehead in the US and internationally, so what she tells everyone, on a public forum, matters a lot.
She had her first child a couple years so, right? And nothing changed wrt leave policies, that I'm aware of. I work for a tech company and there have not been any changes based on what Marissa Meyer is doing. Also, she changed the policy at Yahoo after she started, so if anything, she's a positive influence on the greater issue of parental leave, and her decision for herself is a drop in the bucket.
Also, I think it's a bit much to assume this wasn't her choice; obviously she has to take her job into consideration, but we have no idea what planning and thought went into the decision to not take an extended leave. Plus, she may very well end up in bed rest or with babies at the NICU, and she may change her plan at that time.
AFAIK nothing changed in regards to leave policies, but Marissa Mayer DID eliminate most telecommuting benefits, IIRC. This was after she had a nursery building onto her office so she could be close to her son while working, but presumably any other women working at Yahoo who wanted to work from home at least part of the time and perhaps be close to her children while they were being taken care of by a nanny is SOL.
Also, as an aside but relevant to this conversation, I once worked for the President of a company whose assistant took 2.5 weeks of maternity leave. TWO AND A HALF WEEKS. And she was working from home at least part of that time. That was what was expected of her. His assistant. Who was not even close to making 6 figures a year in salary. So yes, the expectations of upper management, and what they can get away with and see others doing (both men and women, as this president mentioned to a male employee, "well, your wife gave birth two weeks ago and YOU are back at work") is highly relevant.
CEOs and other business leaders tend to be VERY type A. And it takes a special kind of empathy to be very open and willing to let your very close associates take a full/longer leave under similar circumstances when you yourself were able to KOKO.
This is the title of the thread: "Yahoo's CEO's plan for maternity leave bad for women..."
I asked in my initial post for a distinction to be made between women/mothers, otherwise somebody's going to need to explain this to me. Then you made that ludicrous comment about women's health in an effort to derail.
Still waiting.
Whether or not a woman plans on having a child/children, hiring managers often see it as a possibility for any female candidate they are considering aged 20 - 45. The idea is that maternity leave is a very real possibility and is this big, debilitating crisis that should factor into long term hiring decisions. So unless you are going into job interviews and announcing what steps you have taken to control your fertility, maternity leave policies in this country affect you.
Should they? No. But they do. This should change, but I don't think we'll see real change until we see more women in positions of power, such as Mayer.
See my post above. I've mentioned this several times now - the notion that "woman" and "mother" are interchangeable is damaging to some women. Also, some CF women do make note of their CF status in job interviews. This is admittedly a minefield, and it sucks, but it can be necessary due to my previous point.
Also, I'm still not seeing a reason why Marissa Mayer's short maternity leave is bad for me.
If anything, if she works hard, keeps Yahoo afloat, and maintains her position as CEO, that is something I would see as good for all women.
AFAIK nothing changed in regards to leave policies, but Marissa Mayer DID eliminate most telecommuting benefits, IIRC. This was after she had a nursery building onto her office so she could be close to her son while working, but presumably any other women working at Yahoo who wanted to work from home at least part of the time and perhaps be close to her children while they were being taken care of by a nanny is SOL.
Also, as an aside but relevant to this conversation, I once worked for the President of a company whose assistant took 2.5 weeks of maternity leave. TWO AND A HALF WEEKS. And she was working from home at least part of that time. That was what was expected of her. His assistant. Who was not even close to making 6 figures a year in salary. So yes, the expectations of upper management, and what they can get away with and see others doing (both men and women, as this president mentioned to a male employee, "well, your wife gave birth two weeks ago and YOU are back at work") is highly relevant.
CEOs and other business leaders tend to be VERY type A. And it takes a special kind of empathy to be very open and willing to let your very close associates take a full/longer leave under similar circumstances when you yourself were able to KOKO.
If MM worked 9-5 M-F with 12 weeks of maternity leave like the majority of her staff, I doubt she'd need or want the nursery in her office. And if she were asking them to work 24/7, I imagine she'd be ok with some of that from home. In fact, I believe I remember reading that when the story first broke that it wasn't even restricting the odd off-hours email or WFH sick day, just the actual your-regular-desk-is-at-home type deal. Again, we're talking about apples and oranges.
Post by downtoearth on Sept 1, 2015 13:55:57 GMT -5
I have to admit that I was much more in arms about this 3 years ago when she started at Yahoo and then took a non-existent maternity leave with her first. I was mostly mad b/c of what the pps said about how women are perceived when they take time off. I felt pressure from my male bosses every time when I took off for each of my kids. Even if it was subtle, it sucked that I didn't feel that taking the leave the company provided was really "ok" as far as performance. I know that's a feeling and not a policy, but a lot of figuring out your way through a male-dominated field is feeling it out and not just following policy. Plus I had a baby about the same time and was getting a lot of questions about "how are you going to get all your work covered?" and "can't you just work from home with the baby?"
Plus let's not forget that it was almost a year AFTER having her kid that she changed yahoo's maternity policy and also after Google had given a generous package. I'm guessing it was a combination of realizing that having a nanny in-office was not something every woman can do AND the changes in the industry. Either way, I think her policy change (after her own maternity leave) did more for the industry and acceptance than her own leave.
I said this then and want to say it again, Melissa is a role model and someone to aspire to be if you're a CEO track woman, but I also wish she could use some of her power for direct evil-stick-it-to-the-man business. She can't b/c she's still a minority in the CEO world and has issues with Yahoo now, but it would be awesome if she even just said, "I'm having twins and it's hard to be a working parent, but I realize I have it easier since I have a lot of in-office and nanny help that most women in the US don't. "
This is the title of the thread: "Yahoo's CEO's plan for maternity leave bad for women..."
I asked in my initial post for a distinction to be made between women/mothers, otherwise somebody's going to need to explain this to me. Then you made that ludicrous comment about women's health in an effort to derail.
Still waiting.
Whether or not a woman plans on having a child/children, hiring managers often see it as a possibility for any female candidate they are considering aged 20 - 45. The idea is that maternity leave is a very real possibility and is this big, debilitating crisis that should factor into long term hiring decisions. So unless you are going into job interviews and announcing what steps you have taken to control your fertility, maternity leave policies in this country affect you.
Should they? No. But they do. This should change, but I don't think we'll see real change until we see more women in positions of power, such as Mayer.
Is this going to be affected by the length of MM's maternity leave? No.
It's an area where we can't and will never be "the same" as men. Pregnancy, Childbirth and a newborn will always take a huge physical and emotional toll on a mother compared to on the father. It's just biology. Instead of powering through because your job is difficult, demanding and you are not easily replaced even temporarily, it would be great if there were accommodations for what is simply part of being a female for a large amount of women, and what is necessary for the human race to continue
Post by tacosforlife on Sept 1, 2015 15:35:24 GMT -5
Isn't derp the same poster who once said that feminists don't care about childless women because they push for better maternity leave? Or was that someone else?
Isn't derp the same poster who once said that feminists don't care about childless women because they push for better maternity leave? Or was that someone else?
Post by tacosforlife on Sept 1, 2015 15:52:40 GMT -5
I'm simply trying to save people time. Who needs another 27-pager on this? Especially when you never answered my very straightforward question from the prior thread regarding what policy initiatives you would like to see feminist activists to address in order to benefit childless women.
Isn't derp the same poster who once said that feminists don't care about childless women because they push for better maternity leave? Or was that someone else?
It was ringing a bell for me too ..
She has infamous resentment and bitterness towards parents and children.
That was a 27 page thread that took place in March. I don't remember the details of what took place in that. But hey, I'm not getting my question answered in here, either.
I'm not looking to go 27 pages on this one.
But to answer your question, I'm quite sure there was a really long thread at some point where I had a proposal that got skewered, even though it was generous and egalitarian. Not really looking to revisit it. You're welcome to go find it yourself.
You're not welcome to instruct everyone else not to interact with me.
I feel some kind of way about holding a female CEO to some standard that we don't hold one of her male counterparts to.
But the truth is that aspiring female professionals are never going to look to male CEOs as an example for maternity leave and how much they "should" take. There's just no equivalency there.