Though she denies that she is judging any woman's decisions, and acknowledges that she struggles with the work/family balance every day, there is a planted assumption in her advice to women that work should prevail over family. Noting the small numbers of women in top executive positions at Fortune 500 firms, Sandberg says, "The problem, I am convinced, is that women are dropping out."Bravo to Ms. Charen for calling out the Sisterhood's--stereotypically UMC and white, as is the case here--vanity and chauvinism. As for a better world being one where half of countries and companies are run by women, well, we already have a preview of what such a world would look like in the materiel and moral poverty of female-headed families in America. One out of four families in the United States was headed by a single woman in 2009...and our society is collectively reaping the consequences of this rash and foolish societal choice, in the form of a humongous burden on taxpayers, higher crime rates, lower academic achievement, and unwed childbearing, to name a few.
Many more women than men prefer part-time work or no work when their children are young. There is doubt as to whether this constitutes a problem. Women students at Yale Law School, for example, have published a guide to top law firms that rates them on family-friendliness. As students, these women, who can certainly command some of the highest salaries in the American economy, are thinking ahead about finding workplaces that permit flexibility. Sandberg sees this phenomenon, and appears to condemn it. "Don't leave before you leave," she advises, warning that women forego promotions and more challenging assignments because they're thinking about having kids. This, she argues, makes it less likely that the woman will have a fulfilling job to return to. "I'm here to tell you that once you have a child at home, your job better be really good to go back, because it's hard to leave that kid at home."
Leaving the kid appears to be the goal. But why? "I think a world...where half our countries and half our companies were run by women, would be a better world."
Maybe. But I haven't noticed that women heads of government or women heads of companies behave differently from men. She's treating her preference as an assumed good. This is one of those little vanities that is permitted to women but would be unacceptable coming from the mouth of a man. No man would dare to suggest, for example, that the field of nursing or teaching would be improved if men were more equally represented.
If past performance helps predict future outcomes, given the steeply negative impacts of female-headed households, why would anyone take seriously the claim that more countries and more companies run by women would yield a better world, when the present level of female-run, father-absent families is nothing less than an unmitigated disaster? That is, anyone for whom the criteria for "better" includes anything other than personal autonomy or self-fulfillment?
Just sayin'.
5 comments:
Sheryl Sandberg? another of babyon's 101-percent merit-free Poster Girls, feeding off the largesse of lizards
what did Sheryl Sandberg invent again? originate? create? thunk up? do?
uh and EW why does every recent disaster in america start with s-a-n-d? hello sheryl inquiring minds wanna know
looking forward to the Answer meantime stay Elusive
"...every recent disaster in america start with s-a-n-d? "
...and end with g-a-t-e? lol.
Where having spent time reading your blog and The Spearhead makes this informaation redundant, I'm superbly glad a woman is the one making that point.
I really hope the female back-lash to feminism's poison rises with teeth bared and is felt like a cat o' 9 tails on a bare behind.
Plato covered this--in this case about women in the military, but applicable to the workplace as well. Quote from The Republic:
"The law, I said, which is the sequel of this and of all that has preceded, is to the following effect, –’that the wives of our guardians are to be common, and their children are to be common, and no parent is to know his own child, nor any child his parent.”
heck, aristotle baldly stated that women are totalitarians and rule over men
jesus said the same thing, thru isaiah
so here we are, thousands of years later, and the subjugation has been fully codified, with our enslavement enshrined as "law" and our derogation a constant, and increasingly hateful, feature of our governments, schools, workplaces, and homes
sheryl sandberg and company illustrate that in order for satan to maintain this evil, it must be artificially lauded, funded, "legalized" and enforced . . . lest human relations turn to some form of sanity, or horrors! even worse, towards Godliness
in light of the intractability of the problem of subjugation by women and colluding males -- as evidenced by isaiah, aristotle, etc -- we must make a final end of this rebellion against God and against nature here, in the Whomeland of Whoredom, where fatherhood and masculinity are considered diseases to be "cured"
we must NEVER allow ANY future generation of boys to live under cultures which despise, use, and destroy them
Post a Comment