The Leadership Gap

[Sunstone]

What, in your opinion, accounts for or explains the gap between the number of women in leadership positions and the number of men in leadership positions?

To me, it's likely to be a little more subtle than simply "discrimination". I think it might instead be an outgrowth of the patriarchal mindset or culture. Put rather simply, women are not encouraged to think of themselves as leaders, and sometimes their leadership styles -- which may vary from men's leadership styles -- are not appreciated for what they are. That is, a woman may be a strong leader in her own right, but fail to get promoted into positions of authority because she is not perceived as a strong leader by people who expect leaders to have a different style of leadership than her own.

But what causes do you yourself see for the leadership gap?

 

[Aquitaine]

I think it's to do with multiple different things, including how we enforce Gender Roles. Women still aren't taken as seriously when it comes to leadership IMO, it's always been "I'm not taking orders from a woman!". Even when they do get into positions of leadership, they get so much flak to deal with, purely because of their sex.
Hell just look at all the stuff Julia Gillard had to put up with.

Not only that, but even in Media woman are rarely depicted as leaders. Whenever there's a survival series/movie, the women are usually depicted as the frail helpless ones, and although there may be one token "Action hero" female, it's the males who truly lead the pack.

How many people do you reckon would allow a female mechanic to fix their car?

EDIT: Whoops! I didn't realize this was the DIR, feel free to boot me if you want.

 

[Sunstone]

EDIT: Whoops! I didn't realize this was the DIR, feel free to boot me if you want.

You don't consider yourself a feminist?

 

[Aquitaine]

You don't consider yourself a feminist?

Well, I think it's more down to a technicality: I don't really like labeling myself as part of large groups, for fear of misinterpretation/misrepresentation etc. I don't even really like labeling myself an Agnostic/Atheist. Plus, I haven't read any literature from any prominent Feminists, so I don't know if I would be able to call myself one.

The way I see it is that I tend to just explain my core principles/values and let people decide "what" I am. If that makes sense?

 

[Sunstone]

Well, I think it's more down to a technicality: I don't really like labeling myself as part of large groups, for fear of misinterpretation/misrepresentation etc. I don't even really like labeling myself an Agnostic/Atheist. Plus, I haven't read any literature from any prominent Feminists, so I don't know if I would be able to call myself one.

The way I see it is that I tend to just explain my core principles/values and let people decide "what" I am. If that makes sense?

Makes eminent sense to me. I don't usually label myself either. But I've tended to get away from that rule on RF, for the sake of posting in the DIRs. In my opinion -- and I speak for myself -- you should post in the Feminist DIR until the staff kicks you out. You seem largely in alliance with feminists, even if you don't like to label yourself one.

 

[Aquitaine]

Makes eminent sense to me. I don't usually label myself either. But I've tended to get away from that rule on RF, for the sake of posting in the DIRs. In my opinion -- and I speak for myself -- you should post in the Feminist DIR until the staff kicks you out. You seem largely in alliance with feminists, even if you don't like to label yourself one.

Thanks for the advice, will do!

 

[MissAlice]

I am not as educated on the matter as most here on RF but it has for a long time been my question as well. I was of course brought up and am still reminded in my community/country or whtatever that women have won their rights and should be satisfied to even get the priveledge to be leaders....as if to say or imply (and maybe I interpret it wrong) they should take it like a man. However, I can't help but find many derogatory comments that're usually aimed toward women in leadership as opposed to men in terms of their sex, looks and names ie the c-word, b-word, s-word, aboritionist, witch and all other labels I don't seem to find toward men when their actions and roles are criticized. What's more puzzling is the overwhelming women who do it as well. I'll tell you one thing, despite my belief in genders to be equal, I don't think I could take such leadership (like a man) apart from not having the money or education as many despite their gender. But I would think with girls like my nieces who see this (and she's only 12 who has also up to recently noticed this) one can't help but wonder if it discourages women from being leaders. That's putting it generally and again, I'm only going by my own vague view. I certainly hope my niece who is highly intelligent in my opinion for a 12 year old does not think her gender should get in the way of role of being a leader at anything she does...so long as she doesn't become a leader that bathes in the blood of her victims.

 

[LuisDantas]

(Not sure I qualify as a Feminist either, but what the heck; I count on your willingness to tell me I'm misreading my place.)

Leadership, IMO, has very little to do with the person herself (or himself) and a whole lot to do with the predisposition of others to perceive that person as some sort of reference. In that sense, maybe leadership is in fact a specific form of discrimination.

Some people are simply not prepared to accept that a woman may be competent and knowledgeable. In fact, they may not care about those specific characteristics when looking for a leader.

 

[Aquitaine]

(Not sure I qualify as a Feminist either, but what the heck; I count on your willingness to tell me I'm misreading my place.)

Leadership, IMO, has very little to do with the person herself (or himself) and a whole lot to do with the predisposition of others to perceive that person as some sort of reference. In that sense, maybe leadership is in fact a specific form of discrimination.

Some people are simply not prepared to accept that a woman may be competent and knowledgeable. In fact, they may not care about those specific characteristics when looking for a leader.

Indeed, and wouldn't it be fair to at least suggest that the fact many people are unwilling to to accept a female as a leader be a symptom of Gender Roles and sexist attitudes ingrained in one's culture/society?

 

[LuisDantas]

IMO? Yes, definitely.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I believe things are changing although slowly. We see many more women in leadership roles but still not enough.

The last two Secretaries of State have been women and we recently had a woman speaker of the house a few years ago. It is just a matter of time and we will have a woman President.

As for promotions, who is in charge of the promotions has much more to do with this than anything else. This is not a lack of leadership on the women's part, this is still a male dominate world we live in.

More women than men are receiving advanced degrees, so this should improve over time.

I don't agree that people are not ready to be lead by women, the truth of the matter is, no one usually likes their boss and what subordinates think about the situation matters little.

Being boss is not a popularity contest after all.

 

[Aquitaine]

I don't agree that people are not ready to be lead by women, the truth of the matter is, no one usually likes their boss and what subordinates think about the situation matters little.

Being boss is not a popularity contest after all.

That's a good point actually, regarding private businesses where popularity isn't much of an issue.

I will say though however, that at least in terms of Government (i.e Presidency, Administration etc) the aforementioned problem relating to having a voter-base raised with certain Gender Roles may still occur, when it comes to the polls.

 

[Sunstone]

Being boss is not a popularity contest after all.

As an aside, I once knew a boss who actually thought it was a popularity contest. That person eventually suffered a huge melt down from trying to be both a boss and popular with everyone. It just doesn't work that way.

 

[Reverend Rick]

That's a good point actually, regarding private businesses where popularity isn't much of an issue.

I will say though however, that at least in terms of Government (i.e Presidency, Administration etc) the aforementioned problem relating to having a voter-base raised with certain Gender Roles may still occur, when it comes to the polls.

But current trends go against this opinion. There are more women being elected than any time before. You cannot expect a light switch solution here. The bottom line is, are things improving or not?

You cannot reverse 100's of years of discrimination over night or in one election. I believe women's advancements are being well received for the most part.

It would be sad if there were a backlash or something like that.

 

[Aquitaine]

But current trends go against this opinion. There are more women being elected than any time before. You cannot expect a light switch solution here. The bottom line is, are things improving or not?

You cannot reverse 100's of years of discrimination over night or in one election. I believe women's advancements are being well received for the most part.

It would be sad if there were a backlash or something like that.

Aye, it's definitely improving that's for sure - slowly but surely. As you said before, with more women graduating than men in many academic fields, things can only get better.

 

[Reverend Rick]

My biggest issue is the income gap.

 

[Alceste]

I've seen incredible progress in my short life. Women only won the right to vote in the year my grandmother was born. When she was growing up, there were basically only three non-domestic jobs a woman could get. Teacher, nurse or secretary. Take your pick!

When I was born, there had never been a single female provincial premier (our version of a governor). Now almost half of the provincial leaders are women.

I think progress is being made surprisingly quickly. I think American women are suffering from some major setbacks due to the political power of the religious right, but I also think they will win that battle eventually.

I think it's important to consider what we're teaching young women and girls. When I was in school, women simply never came up, apart from one week in high school when we had a unit on Nellie McClung and the famous five. That ****** me off. No wonder I ended up feeling weird about women in leadership roles! We need to be teaching girls about George Elliott, Marie Curie, Madam Chang, Indira Gandhi, Hildegard von Bingen etc. The history I was taught was almost entirely a history of men. Wars and conquests. Boring as hell.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Initial thoughts:

1) Culture and history tend to favor imparting what was gained through specific means. It's why the assumption remains that the only relevant history and culture is white, straight, protestant, and male.

It doesn't make white straight protestant males bad. It just is how society assumes is the default status of what is normative. With that in mind...

2) When it comes to women in particular in regards to leadership, we have certain ideas of how males have acted in leadership roles, but those ideas rarely translate to what is real. Males in leadership encompass a range of personalities and approaches, but that tends not to be imparted on to future generations when wishing to tell the tales, history, myths, and legends. If a society highly regards imperialism and conquest of real estate and conquest of people, these traits will be vocalized more in the myths and legends of how communities have come to thrive.

IOW, who tells the stories of the construction brigade? Where are the engineers, the scientists, the artists, the nurses? For the most part, they are background noise. It's much sexier to learn about war and "Old Blood and Guts" Patton than it is to learn about the hunger strikes of the suffragettes (and had to endure forced feeding while incarcerated).

3) People as a group hate change. They hate hate hate hate HATE change. We still think things are better back in the day as compared as to now. We romanticize the past regardless of how things might have been on a societal level overall for all races. Did I mention how people hate change overall as a group?

 

[Alceste]

Initial thoughts:

1) Culture and history tend to favor imparting what was gained through specific means. It's why the assumption remains that the only relevant history and culture is white, straight, protestant, and male.

It doesn't make white straight protestant males bad. It just is how society assumes is the default status of what is normative. With that in mind...

2) When it comes to women in particular in regards to leadership, we have certain ideas of how males have acted in leadership roles, but those ideas rarely translate to what is real. Males in leadership encompass a range of personalities and approaches, but that tends not to be imparted on to future generations when wishing to tell the tales, history, myths, and legends. If a society highly regards imperialism and conquest of real estate and conquest of people, these traits will be vocalized more in the myths and legends of how communities have come to thrive.

IOW, who tells the stories of the construction brigade? Where are the engineers, the scientists, the artists, the nurses? For the most part, they are background noise. It's much sexier to learn about war and "Old Blood and Guts" Patton than it is to learn about the hunger strikes of the suffragettes (and had to endure forced feeding while incarcerated).

3) People as a group hate change. They hate hate hate hate HATE change. We still think things are better back in the day as compared as to now. We romanticize the past regardless of how things might have been on a societal level overall for all races. Did I mention how people hate change overall as a group?

I heard an ancient Egyptian tablet was found that, when decoded, turned out to say something along the lines of "kids these days are lazy and they've got no respect - we used to be so much better off".

Lol.