Recently in Work Category

Per my previous post on this subject, I have a job problem. The problem, actually, is that I do not currently have a job, because my last boss fired me because I called him out on his discrimination against me due to my failure to put out (oh, noes!).

I got some great and very sympathetic input from the Feministing community, and decided to contact the EEOC, in lieu of the fact that I'm a college student (English majors for the win!) who can't afford attourney fees.

So, I called the Dallas EEOC. About five times. Every time I called, I got a message about how all the lines were tied up, and I should call later. So, finally, I caved and called the national branch. After holding for about 40 minutes, I finally got a hold of someone, gave them my name and information, and gave them a brief rundown of my story. They told me that, yeah, that sounds like harassment and discrimination (uhuh...), and asked whether or not my employer had more than 15 staff members. I said I didn't think so, and they told me that, if the company has less than 15 employees, they can't help me.

For the last several months, I was having a problem at work. Besides the standard lack of motivation and associated maladies, my boss was harassing me. The guy is a total creep: he pursued me relentlessly, which made me very uncomfortable, for a long time. He constantly made comments such as "I really love you in that dress." and "That tattoo on your foot drives me crazy." (yes, it is a badass tattoo, but that's still out-of-bounds!) He would also send me text messages, over and over again, saying inappropriate, non-work-related things, and asking me why I wouldn't respond to him. Every time I was firm with him, he blatantly sulked (which also made me really uncomfortable) until I gave an inch and was a little nice to him, and then it would start all over again.

Normally, there's no way I would have allowed this to continue to occur. Unfortunately, though, I was trapped in the situation. Now, I have sympathizers in the office, but, in the beginning, I almost always got responses like: "Why don't you just go on a date with him? You might like it." and "You're just too mean."

Of course, that's what women always hear when they are honest when they turn a guy down. Instead of "No way. You're old and creepy and have a muffin top." We make the mistake of saying things like "You're a nice guy, but I just can't." This is because, if we express the fact that we are uncomfortable, a man will just default to "I was just kidding/trying to be friends/some other lie. You're such a bitch!"

Anyway, post-tirade, about a month ago, my boss found out that I was dating a guy, an acquaintance of both of ours. He sent me a very derogatory text message, saying something to the effect of "I never would have though that of you - don't worry, you've succeeded in getting me to leave you alone." As if that were a privilege! Ever since then, he looked for reasons to reprimand me. For instance, he would chastise me for using my phone, when my coworkers were using their phones right next to me.

Eager to see what the Shriver Report has to say about women over 50, I paged through my electronic copy, wishing in my over-50 way that I had physical pages to flip and leaf through. But despite my failure to find any chapter or essay specifically dedicated to those of us who remember only too well the plight of women that Betty Friedan described so well in 1963, I could not stop reading. The study codifies what many of us know to be true, and it also reveals facts about American society that both encourage and dismay. The statistics are eye-openers; they describe a social landscape much changed in fifty years. In 1969, a third of all workers were women. Now the labor force is 50 percent female.

Heather Boushey, an expert on women and workforce issues and an editor of the Report, calls this change "certifiably revolutionary--perhaps the greatest social transformation of our time." As Gloria Steinem writes, "it should end forever the debate about women's place in the labor force; women are the labor force."

Read more and share your thoughts at Women's Voices For Change.

Do you feel like you have an issue? Like there are a lot of things you care about, but that there is just one thing, above all the other ones, that is your issue? I started to feel that way about choice issues in college.

The big thing for me when it comes to choice is that I feel like I'm necessary. While in actuality there are many young, pro-choice women, it doesn't always feel that way. I felt like I needed to become an advocate because there may not be someone else to step up in my place. Is this really the case? Maybe, maybe not. But it's enough to make me get involved in the movement.

So what happens when your issue becomes your job? I work for a pro-choice organization and I love my job. I'm blessed to get to do work every single day that matters to me, and makes me feel like I'm making a difference. My mind is stimulated, my dedication is challenged and my soul is inspired every day.

But when I get home, I'm exhausted. I am so personally invested in the mission of the work I do that it has become more than a job. The books and blogs I want to read are about feminism and choice, the discussions I have are about this - even the blog posts I want to write, and I'm tired. When someone has a problem with where I work (which happens a lot in my part of the country), it doesn't roll off my back. It seems like an incredibly personal attack, because it's about so much more than just my job.

Anyone else out there in a similar situation? How do you balance when your passion becomes your work? How do you set boundaries that allow you to relax and rejuvenate? How do you avoid the burnout that seems to be inevitable in this situation?

Cross-posted on "Quarter Life Feminist"

The subtle art of misogyny, by Bidisha - via Illusionists on Twitter:

"Do I think it's a misogynist conspiracy? ... No. It's worse than that: it's a coincidence, demonstrating just how ubiquitous and automatic misogyny is."

I hate to say this, but I agree with her. It's true, and to the point that we don't realize it ourselves half the time.

This made me wince:

"Both sexes unquestioningly perpetuate the boys' club through the invites issued to men, the opportunities, associations, deals and chances offered. The talks, readings, colloquia, special trips, lectures and guest spots are organised by women for the benefit of men's careers. "

And this part really hit home:

"Misogyny is not something forcefully, loudly imposed by a mighty superpower. It is constantly, silently, automatically enacted by all the people present, including those who feel perturbed but don't speak up."

It's gross, to say the least.

An interesting perspective from a female competitor in the male dominated world of professional poker. Everything from the positives:

Nobody is setting your salary. There aren't a lot of the negatives that happen in business where you won't get promoted because your boss is a chauvinistic ass-hole, or you are getting paid less than your male colleagues, that stuff doesn't exist here because you are playing by your own wits, it's our own money, and you're just winning money according to how much better in the game you are.

I got called very bad names on a daily basis. I would win a hand and it would be just a random hand, and the person would look at me and say, "You fucking cunt." I'm not kidding. That happened to me pretty much every day, which is an interesting reaction to losing a hand of poker. What you would consider sexual harassment or things that wouldn't be okay in every day interaction become fair game in a lot of player's minds at the poker table. Some how they feel like because you have agreed to sit down at the table that they are allowed to treat you however they want because it was your choice to sit down in their world. They seemed to think that it was okay to be using those words in relation to me.

Hi all,

Miriam suggested we post this here. Please, please apply ! We would love to get some good Feministing-ers into paid internships with independent media outlets.

Cheers,

The Media Consortium Team

The Media Consortium is now accepting applications for the Spring 2010 session of the Independent Media Internship program. IMI is a full-time program that places undergrad and graduate students committed to smart, independent journalism with Media Consortium members for 3 months. The Media Consortium provides interns with a $2,000 stipend for their work.

Interns will be placed with the following organizations in Spring 2010:

The American Forum
Applied Research Center
LinkTV
Ms. Magazine
The Uptake
The Washington Independent
Yes! Magazine

This is a great opportunity to support the next generation of independent media -makers! Please share the below application with any students or teachers you know. We’re looking to recruit a diverse groups of interns with that are experienced with everything from blogging to vlogging; audio to video. More information about the program is below, but the deadline for Spring 2010 applications is October 16th.

We had outstanding responses from our summer interns and participating member organizations and have had a great start with the fall interns.

I work at a well-known department store in the city; a lot of people, especially the elderly, come through my counter. I love my job as a cashier. Everyone is really friendly, and they make me feel welcomed, but one of the major rules that I was directly told during my interview, that employees are not allowed to argue or yell at customers.

Perhaps I am over exaggerating, but I can’t get it out of my head and I must tell someone.

Today I found it hard to keep me from losing it at one individual. He was waiting in line, and it was very busy so there were a lot of line ups, I called the man over to my counter and without saying a word he pushed his daughter in the back so hard that her necked jolted back and she almost went head first onto the corner of my counter. He then yelled at her, in his native tongue, very loudly as she stood shocked at the experience, I was shocked myself. I felt a sensation of anger and frustration from this a-holes abuse in public. I saw the daughter’s face, she was quiet and stared into a corner of the floor as the man threw his crap onto the top of my counter, I kept thinking, “If he acts like this in public, how does he act behind closed doors?” After a few minutes of staring at the floor the daughter went beside her mom, who came from behind me, while she continued to looked down at the floor. I then turned looked at the guy who tried to intimidate me as he stood tall, his hands were on his waist, his chest puffed out, his chin was up high, his eyes met mine and he tried to make me look down at him, but I refused to. Even when I rung in his items I didn’t look down at him, not even in the slightest, I wanted to yell at him so bad, but I can’t get fired from my job, especially in this economy.

In the past I yelled at an old man at my former job that strangled his eleven-year-old grandson in front of me. I almost made the man cry from the angry speech I gave him, back then I didn’t care if I got fired or not. Now I feel so useless. I tried talking to my friend about it, but she kept saying that it’s not my problem, and I shouldn’t worry about it. Just to worry about me. Well, I can’t. It will slowly eat me inside if I don’t do something, if I don't think of a stratagy for next time it happens. Is there a solution to this problem that will not cause my job to be on the line, but at the same time make it so people like him don’t get away with such treatment?

Via <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/10/the_end_of_the_man-cession.html">Ezra Klein</a>, an article for anyone tired of hearing about <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2009/10/06/the-myth-of-the-man-cession/">how hard guys have it in the current recession</a>:

The reason that men are more sensitive -- to recessions at least -- is that they are overrepresented in highly cyclical sectors. Nine out of 10 workers in construction, and seven out of 10 in manufacturing, are male. These sectors generally take the biggest tumble when the economy declines. Women, meanwhile, dominate the most cosseted portions of the economy: healthcare, education and government.

Despite this, the current downturn has been no cakewalk for women. While women have been better at clinging onto their jobs, they have not done so well holding onto their salaries. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, women in full-time work saw their annual earnings fall at twice the pace of men in the early stages of the recession -- losing almost 2 percent last year.

The news actually gets worse for women. Most measures of employment and salary suggest the gender revolution has stalled. The gulf between male and female salaries, which narrowed dramatically in the last 25 years, has started to widen again.

The topic in general has been broached here before, but this is a pretty solid article to throw at whiners.  Assuming they're willing to read it.  Or know how.

The Dave Letterman story has brought up an issue I feel is central to women's lives: how our success is interpreted in the world.

Too often when a woman succeeds in the presence of a famous man, the public assumes she "did it on her back". No one seems to think that maybe she's the one with all the brains, but getting none of the credit.

No one has speculated that Dave might be the one who has sought out talented, intelligent women, and got them infatuated with him to advance his own career. That certainly seems to be what happened with Merrill Markoe, who has publicly stated she only stuck around on the show (which btw she helped create with her own genius) because she was Letterman's girlfriend.

Markoe is a five-time Emmy award winner. She doesn't need Letterman and she didn't need him then. In fact, she's the one who came up with Stupid Pet Tricks, which helped put Letterman on the map.

So: how many women out there are still seriously underestimated and underappreciated, not to say *underpaid*, for creating male stars by letting them pick their brains?

I bet we could write a book. No: an encyclopedia.

Oh yeah - it's called Herstory. And it's still being written, or rather not written, to this very day.

A tweet alerted me to the reason for the persistence of the gender gap and to studies about the true reasons for it. Quite instructive. The Washington Post article states:

Bowles and her colleagues divided 119 volunteers at random into different groups and provided them with descriptions of male or female candidates who tried to negotiate a higher starting salary for a hypothetical job, along with descriptions of applicants who accepted the offered salary. The volunteers were asked to decide whether they would hire the candidates -- who were all described as exceptionally talented and qualified. While both men and women were penalized for negotiating, Bowles found that the negative effect for women was more than twice as large as that for men.

Subsequent studies used actors who recorded videos of themselves asking for more money or accepting salaries they had been offered. A new group of 285 volunteers were again asked whether they would be willing to work with the candidates after viewing the videos. Men tended to rule against women who negotiated but were less likely to penalize men; women tended to penalize both men and women who negotiated, and preferred applicants who did not ask for more.

Like most people I've had my personal space invaded on a number of occasions. On public transport or the dance floor where everyone's packed in like sardines, you tend to just deal with the fact that there are strangers standing a lot closer than you would normally allow them. When the crowds are absent however, someone who gets inside 'your bubble' (as my sister's call it) can cause a great deal of discomfort.

For me, invasion of the bubble has happened a few times in the past but never with serious consequences, and not always explicitly. Every time there has been a justification for not making a scene; sometimes it is fear of offending, others uncertainty as to weather the person realises they are making you uncomfortable, or the difficulty of proving that they are deliberately trying to upset you. Regardless of the circumstances, I have yet to find a means of dealing with these people that I'm satisfied with.

Unfortunately, this invasion of personal space has lately become a problem at work. One of my superiors has a habit of standing so close that he will repeatedly bump into you during the course of a conversation. When sitting next to you at the computer, he will claim the arm of your chair and lean in towards you. Furthermore, my desk is hemmed in on three sides so that if he comes to speak to me whilst I'm sitting there, I'm boxed in.

I could have written off this guy's tendency to stand so close as a hearing problem, if it weren't for the sexist jokes that he also makes. This was almost bearable until last week when I was standing next to him as he sat at his desk. He was holding a map between us at the height of my pelvis and when he went to show me a direction on the map with his pen, well the repeated movement also implied a number of other things . . . I don't think he was oblivious to the connotations of what he was doing, but it would be very hard to convince anyone that he wasn't just innocently showing me something.

Now, once again I find myself not wanting to cause a scene and get one of my superior's in trouble. Every time he does something that bothers me, the question pops up "was that deliberate or unintentional? Is he standing close because he's awful or because he can't hear me? If it's a deliberate attempt to upset me, how do I prove that?"

So empowered members of the feministing community, my question is how do I handle this man? What tips do you have for keeping someone out of my space without making a scene?

I've been job hunting for months. I've applied at hundreds and hundreds of places, online and in person.

I've only had 4 interviews in my entire job search.

Not one of them hired me. The last job I interviewed for was a new In-n-Out  Burger close to my house. 4,000 people applied for only 40 positions. (I live in San Bernadino county, one of the most recession prone areas in the U.S.)

There was a new strip club opening this weekend that was hiring for (fully clothed) waitresses, and so I applied. I got an on-the-spot interview and was hired the next day.

I was happy, but it was a bittersweet happiness. I texted my sisters, who know very well how hard I've been trying to get a job. They told me they were okay with it, but afraid for my safety and that I was supporting the very thing I fight against daily. 

They told me that I was willing to put aside my morals 'for a quick buck.'  And that I am supporting the idea that women are sex objects.

But beggars can't be choosers, right?

Regardless of what my family thinks, I'm still the one that's trying to make money to pay for my own college text books. My own money to pay for my own food for once. I'm 21 years old and cannot afford to buy new clothes for myself.

But now I feel conflicted on whether I should start the job or decline the offer.I agree with my family but I'm also not willing to go jobless for another two years.

Thoughts?

The Hyatt hotels in Boston have elminated 100 of their housekeeping staff, replacing them with employees from a company called Hospitality Staffing Solutions. 

Not surprisingly, it is both the laid off workers and the workers from the outsourcing company who lose the most in this situation.  From the Boston Globe today :

“It’s unbelievable,’’ said Lucine Williams, 41, who has worked at the Hyatt Regency Boston for nearly 22 years and was making $15.32 an hour plus health, dental, and 401(k) benefits when she lost her job. “I don’t know how they can treat people like that.’’

The new housekeeping staff will make $8 an hour with no benefits.

Equally disturbing as this news is a comment in the article from Paul Sacco, president of the Massachusetts Lodging Association.  He claims that the staffing change will save the hotel money and guests won't be able to see an change,

“If you stayed at the Hyatt last night and you bumped into the housekeeper, would you notice a difference?’"

His comment gets at the heart of this issue: these housekeepers are seen as invisible.  They can be fired and replaced by lower paid workers and no one will notice. 

Please let the Hyatt know that you do notice by not patronizing their hotels.

Full article from the Boston Globe.

As we prepare to celebrate Labor Day on Monday, it is a great opportunity to reflect on the labor movement globally.  In this time of global economic crisis, worker organizing and labor unions are more important than ever to protect workers and ensure that economic recovery plans benefit working people and their families.

The global economic crisis has deeply affected workers who face massive job losses -- plunging millions of families into poverty and leading to questions about the sustainability of our economic policies.  At the same time, many workers are experiencing violations of their right to organize labor unions to protect their interests.  Women workers, in particular, can benefit greatly from a democratic voice at work.  Unfortunately, employers around the world have systematically violated international human rights standards to deny workers their right to organize on the job.

Today, many women work under hazardous working conditions in sweatshops and in fields, for long hours, for low wages, few benefits and occupy the most unstable jobs  The ability to join unions gives women more power over decisions about their lives. Unions have been an important partner in the fight for women’s rights at the work and some of the first unions were formed by women who decided to stand up for better working conditions.

Pop Quiz: How many Black female sex workers do you have to kill to get some national media coverage ? Apparently 5. Jarniece Hargrove. Ernestine Battle. Jackie Thorpe. Taraha Nicholson. Melody Wiggins. A sixth body has been found and 3 more are missing.

They’ll call a North Carolinian murderer a potential serial killer, but they won’t call it a potential hate crime on race, gender and sexuality lines. After all, if the last season of The Wire taught us nothing, it taught us that social concern rises when the headlines are about a serial killer instead of someone who is a murderer of the marginalized. See, because then it’s just another news cycle. This somewhat explains why these murders have been happening since 2005 and many of us are just hearing about this now.

Dear Readers of the Community Blog, I need to rant.  Any suggestions are welcome. 

I work at a gym.  When my boss hired me as a "desk girl" (yes, that's what he calls them, even though you have to be 18 to work for the company), I was his favorite.  He routinely told people what an assett I was to the gym and how he wished I wasn't leaving for school in the fall, so I could be a membership counselor for him.  Believe me, I had a terrible time reconciling this with my feminism. After a few weeks, he fired a bunch of people and promoted me to sales, or membership counseling as we call it.  I was so excited - counselors make crazy good commission.

Within a few days, it was obvious that my place in the gym had changed.

The sales manager quite literally said to me he didn't like me anymore now that I was taking money out of his pocket. The boss began hounding me - harder than ANY of the men - to go out and generate business.  I have told him that it makes me uncomfortable to be walking around putting fliers on cars by myself, because if someone gets angry I may not be able to defend myself.  He refuses to send another staff member with me.  There will be times when all the male sales people and the managers will be sitting around a computer shooting the shit and when I join the conversation, he says go make some phone calls. 

I knew that I was hired because I was cute and enthusiastic (literally, he said that) but it was just a summer job and I knew I could do well at it, so I took the opportunity. Now, I feel as though I am completely reaping what I sowed. I am "the girl." I am the butt of every joke.  In my first month, I did the 2nd most volume of all the sales people, but when asking a question about my (perpetually incorrect) commission, the sales manager says to me "You don't sell anything, so you don't even count."

I'm leaving this job in a few weeks to go to school, but I am miserable every minute I'm there (6 days a week).  I'm coming back next summer hopefully to be a personal trainer and not a counselor, as there is no sales component to training.

Should I say anything about it? How do I get the respect I deserve in the work place? Help me!

Just to clarify - the sales manager and the boss are different people.  There is one other membership counselor who is a female, but she is treated like one of the boys.

Apologies for this post lacking the theoretical framework I often try to include. This is an issue I've been thinking a lot of lately, and wanted to generate some open and honest discussion about the nature of feminist work and its problematic areas.

What is the proper monetary compensation for feminist work? Are feminist activists getting properly compensated for the work they put forth to create a better world? Further, what are the ethical and power implications of making money and getting rich off feminism? More explicitly, what are the connections between how much feminists are paid for their work, and what does it say about how feminism is viewed?

Time and time again, I've heard many young feminists, having graduated from college, express the desire to devote their lives to feminist work, but are also hit with the realization that within such work, little money is made, and that often times, the salaries paid within feminist communities simply do not compare to those with other careers. I've experienced it myself, previously having worked for a non-profit that paid me $1,900 a month to work six days a week, 12 hours a day, and having to drive about an hour each way to work.

As far as I could tell this hadn't been posted yet. Basically, a man working as a town manager in Fort Myers Beach, Florida, was fired when the Mayor found out his wife was a porn actress. By his employer's own admission he was good at his job and got along with everyone and his wife was the only reason he was fired.

My VP is very high on the communication training programs offered by the organization Speakeasy. It's fitting that I was going through their intro course this week as Judge Sonia Sotomayor was answering critics who accuse her of being a "bully."

[In my job at a small college, I handle most of our media relations, and also write for and edit our publications. On any given day, I'm responding to media inquiries, assigning stories to freelance writers or interviewing past students for a marketing-style "outcomes" profile.]

On the first morning, each of us had to give a short talk to act as a baseline. The instructor taped it, and then we got to watch ourselves. I was horrified. I'm a professional communicator with a metric ton of experience speaking in front of others. Anyone who knows me would say that I'm assertive and confident in my statements. But on the tape, I saw a flighty young woman who giggled to break the ice, shifted from hip to hip and spoke as quickly as possible. My whole demeanor said, "I'm not one bit threatening - please like me!" I was floored to see how I came across.

Throughout the course, my instructor talked about the paradigms of thought that can interfere with the way we present ourselves. One person might think of every communication as a battle to be won, for example. Me? Deep down, I was terrified that the people I supervised would think I was a pushy bitch, or, conversely, that I was weak and incompetent. When I worked at entry level, I didn't have that issue. But the more authority I gained in my career, the more I worried about being likeable. And it just made me look un-credible as a leader.

When I told all this to our group, the instructor told me I wasn't alone. In every course, she said, at least one woman said the same thing. Women in leadership positions have to walk such a fine line, and in many ways we can't win. Interestingly, every one of the men in my group said that, not only were they perfectly comfortable with female leaders, it really bothered them to hear male colleagues trash those women as "bitches" or "ball-busters." The men thanked me for letting them know how a lot of the women they work with must feel on a daily basis.

On the last day, the instructor gave me an exercise designed to push me out of my comfort zone. I had to role-play a situation where I had to tell my team that they weren't cutting it and needed to step it up. When I finished, the instructor asked, "So, do you think Sara seemed unreasonable, or bitchy?" To a person, they said no. I just made them want to bust ass.

Before leaving, I had to develop a mantra of sorts to help me remember what I'd learned and how it felt to demand accountability from the people under my supervision. Keeping in mind my earlier performance, when I rushed through my remarks for fear of being interrupted and unconsciously tried to appear to be non-threatening, what I came up with was this: I will own my time and space, and I will not apologize for my authority.

When I got home tonight, I watched the highlights of Sotomayor's confirmation hearing. As we all know, she's been criticized for being too temperamental or tough on the lawyers who've argued before her. I can understand why Sotomayor might want to downplay her leadership style in order to get through the hearings (something a man would never have to do). But I hope she doesn't.

Own your time and your space, Judge Sotomayor. You don't have to apologize for anything. And neither do the rest of us.

A few weeks ago I was sitting behind my desk at work when I overheard several of my co-workers making some comments that really saddened me...

A copy of that year's yearbook had been left out on the desk and the conversation began with a rousing session of mocking aimed at individual senior head-shots contained within. I began to grow uncomfortable here as several fat-phobic and generally mean comments were made, sometimes even about people I knew. This alone, however, was not enough to spur me into action as the people involved were my supervisors and I worried about how the would respond.

(Warning: the presence of triggering and hurtful language follows.)

Then, they moved on to the section of the yearbook that detailed campus events over the course of the year: specifically, the section with pictures from Walk a Mile in Her Shoes . "So much f*aggy sh*t goes on here," one of my superiors exclaimed, "look at this one; men actually put on women's shoes and walk around like f*ags."

This is where I started to really get angry... but again, what could I say? Every time I opened my mouth I found myself at a loss for words. I was at that event conveyed part of my anger, but left out the real issue: the slurs being used; that word makes me uncomfortable didn't seem like a strong enough statement; shut up was not nearly eloquent enough; and so it went until way too much time had passed for me to actually say something.

A big Friday Feminist FUCK YOU to Knoxville, Tennessee and the Knoxville News Sentinel!

Knoxville, Tennessee, even with its groups pushing for progressive movements, is still a town of Good-old-boys.  This is extremely evident with a web gallery on the city paper's site in which visitors can rate women convicted of prostitution a'la Hot or Not.

Additionally, the paper seems to be searching for some action among the prostitute population with recent articles, one titled "Addictions to drugs, thrills keep Knoxville prostitutes on the streets."

Another, which states that Prostitution is not a victimless crime st arts to touch on the idea that not all prostitutes *want* to be in that line of work, and that many of them ("them" being the prostitutes arrested walking the streets or advertising on the street corner, not sex workers who are able to be more discrete or cautious) are in a cycle that they have difficulty getting out of.  The article even goes so far as to *almost* state that the Johns are also legally responsible.  The article is, still, about shocking the readership about how these women are "bad."

Wanted to share an internship opportunity at my organization, Women's Funding Network.

Contact me if you are interested!

As a new grad school grad and aspiring non-profit professional I am meeting much stiffer competition than I ever imagined. Of course, we are in a recession and the market is indeed flooded. However, the job search process has raised some questions about how hiring inequity can affect many of us in subtle ways.

I recently joined an online group where job-seeking members can post their resumes for progressive employers to browse for potential candidates. Upon browsing them myself, out of sheer curiosity, I was forced to confront what I - as a fellow job seeker - was lacking.

I have education. I have professional experience. I have life experience. However, I have not spent my summers and school vacations racking up a two page unpaid internship catalog. See, unlike many college and grad school grads my age, I have had to work...for money, both during the semester and through summer and winter vacations to ensure my ability to stay in school and complete my degrees. It isn't that I haven't wanted to participate in internship opportunities; it is that I haven't had the luxury of putting unpaid work before paid work. Moreover, while many businesses and for-profit companies offer well-paid internships to develop their future workforces - non-profit organizations rarely do (we could get into a discussion of budgets and funding, but not today), leaving students who want to do non-profit work with few options. Bottom line: if possible, have your parents support you while you intern or, if that is not an option, add another 8 hours to a full day of paid work. As feminists and progressive intersectional thinkers, do we not recognize the raced, classed, and even heteronormative implications here?

Perhaps this system need not be a problem, but my impression through this search process is that entry into the non-profit sector often depends on one's ability to start with unpaid internships or volunteer work. If so, wouldn't this mean the non-profit sector (including even the most progressive and feminist organizations) are shutting out a lot of talented, educated and capable workers simply because they are not privileged with the means to work for free?

*This same argument can also be made for Hill jobs in DC, where there has been recent debate regarding the lack of minority staffers. See Reid Wilson's article "U.S. Capitol is too white, critics say."

In my book, "The Female Brand: Using the Female Mindset to Succeed in Business (June, 2009)," I cited "empathy" as the number one aptitude for women and personal branding, and showed how empathy could be a powerful business tool for women in building consensus and relationships.

Little did I know President Obama would chose Sonia Sotomayor as his nominee for Supreme Court Justice and cite "empathy" as the key factor in the selection process. President Obama spoke of his desire to find a judicial leader with "empathy" - one whose wisdom on the bench was not gained just through a study of the law, but even more so through personal experience, cultural background and understanding average men and women. Empathy is a distinct strength of women, so it's no wonder the four finalists on his short list for the next Supreme Court justice were all women.

In introducing Ms. Sotomayor as his pick for our next Justice - the first Hispanic and only third woman to be appointed - President Obama explained his thinking: "Experience being tested by obstacles and barriers, by hardship and misfortune; experience insisting, persisting, and ultimately overcoming those barriers. It is experience that can give a person a common touch of compassion; an understanding of how the world works and how ordinary people live. And that is why it is necessary ingredient in the kind of Justice we need on the Supreme Court."

Yet since Sotomayer's selection "empathy" is not only setting off a firestorm with conservative critics, it is fueling a national debate about whether empathy is a good thing or not.

But, really, can empathy be a bad thing?

Female brokers at a Bank of America in Manhattan are suing the company for offering them lower bonuses than their white male co-workers. The company is defending itself, claiming that the amount of the bonuses is "merit-based and implemented fairly and equally for men and women" and that BofA "will not tolerate discrimination," but one woman, Jaime Goodman (who brought about the case to begin with) says that even though she's worked there for 17 years and has been a top-quintile employee the whole time, she received a lower bonus than male counterparts.

Like other before me this is also my first posting with feministing but I have been reading it daily for the past year and have been thinking about posting for a while.

So, I work in a non-profit construction organization in New Orleans and have been struggling with how male dominated it is. Don't get me wrong most of the employees and volunteers are female but many of the men I work with still seem to feel this entitlment. Whether its taking over the use of power tools or not helping when cleaning up the men I work with are very dominanting and can be very imposing. I consider myself a strong well-spoken woman who can stand up for herself but how many times do I have to say something?

This past weekend I ran a women's only workshop to teach some women how to use power tools. It was awesome, we had such a good time. 7 Women came and we walked them through these awesome and exciting tools and they all said they learnt a lot. I felt really good about it and my supervisor (a male) was very impressed and respectful of the space. On Thursday of last week a male co-worker approached me about having a women only space and how he thought we were excluding males and how would we feel if he ran a mens only workshop. I tried to explain to him that I didnt see it as exclusion but rather including women into a male dominated field that can be very intimidating and wanting to facilitiate a safe space for women to learn these skills. After the workshop my beliefs on women on spaces were solidified. These women were all so comfortable and supportive of each other.

The week prior to this workshop was the first time in my year of service that I had a crew of all women and what a difference it made. We all had jobs and completed them, asking for help when we needed and offering encouragement to each other. We celebrated each other victories and aided when we needed to and were asked to. So different from times I have had mixed crews. Where males assumed they would be doing the "strong" work, using power tools or carrying heavy things. and the women were expected to do the cleaning up and menial tasks.

It joys me to spend time in a women only space. I love surrounding myself with the support of my sisters but it also saddens me to not feel this around men. Is there a way to carry the positive into shared spaces? Any thoughts?

By Deborah J. Vagins, Legislative Counsel, ACLU Washington Legislative Office, and Rachel Marshall, 2009 Summer Law Clerk, ACLU Washington Legislative Office

Wednesday, June 10, 2009, marked the 46th anniversary of President Kennedy's signing of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 . That historic act signified our nation's commitment to ensuring that women are not paid less than men for equal work. Upon signing the bill, President Kennedy proclaimed that the bill "affirms our determination that when women enter the labor force they will find equality in their pay envelope." Indeed, the bill helped women make significant strides towards equality in the workforce. Unfortunately, over time, loopholes and weak remedies have made this historic law less effective than Congress originally intended. Therefore, there is no more fitting way to commemorate this historic anniversary than to push for passage of S. 182, the Paycheck Fairness Act , a necessary update to the Equal Pay Act.

There is no doubt that updates to improve the effectiveness of the Equal Pay Act's protections are needed. Forty-six years after President Kennedy signed the Act, women, on average, continue to earn only 78 cents for every dollar earned by men – that's only 18 cents more on the dollar than when President Kennedy signed the bill in 1963. For women of color, the progress has been even slower. This bill would enable President Kennedy's vision to be fully realized, albeit several decades late.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would give employees legal tools to close the wage gap that has held women's economic progress back for so long. For example, the bill would require employers to demonstrate that disparities in pay between men and women working the same job result from factors other than sex. It would also prohibit retaliation against employees who inquire about their employers' wage practices or disclose their own pay to their colleagues. Furthermore, the Act would deter discrimination by strengthening the penalties for equal pay violations and would authorize additional training of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission staff to better identify and address pay violations. Through these steps, the Paycheck Fairness Act would allow our nation to finally move forward in closing the unlawful wage gap.

Last January, the House of Representatives recognized the need to update the Equal Pay Act and overwhelmingly passed the Paycheck Fairness Act with bipartisan support. Recently, Senators Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) announced that they will take the lead on the fight to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act. Over 31 senators and counting are cosponsors. The bill now has more cosponsors than in any other previous Congress. There is momentum, but more work is necessary. The 46th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act is a good reminder that the Senate needs to follow the House's example of working to finally secure equal pay for equal work for all American workers.

In 1963, President Kennedy recognized upon signing the Equal Pay Act that "our economy today depends upon women in the labor force." This is even truer today. During this financial crisis, women are a critical part of the economic engines that will drive this nation's recovery. However, under no circumstances should women, single-mother households, and families dependent on two wage earners have to struggle to live on less than they rightfully earn. The impact of these pay disparities is felt even more during these times of economic hardship. Now more than ever, passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act is essential not only for women, but for all working families.

Let us celebrate the 46th anniversary of President Kennedy's signing of the Equal Pay Act by pushing for the passage of S. 182, the Paycheck Fairness Act. Passing the Paycheck Fairness Act is the only way we can fulfill President Kennedy's assurance that American women will "find equality in their pay envelope."

In all the furor surrounding President Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, I’ve been struck by the discussion of what “empathy” is, to what degree it’s a gendered quality, and whether it’s a good thing in the professional world.  President Obama spoke of his desire to find a judicial leader with “empathy” – one whose wisdom on the bench was not gained just through a study of the law, but also through personal experience, cultural background and understanding average men and women.

Since research suggests that empathy is a distinct strength of women, it’s not a surprise that the four finalists on his short list were all women. In the professional world, this quality can only be considered a strength—I research and write about personal branding , and I’ve found empathy (when combined with assertiveness) to be an incredibly powerful business tool for women in building consensus and workplace relationships.

In introducing Ms. Sotomayor as his pick for our next Justice – the first Hispanic and only third woman to be appointed – President Obama explained his thinking: “Experience being tested by obstacles and barriers, by hardship and misfortune; experience insisting, persisting, and ultimately overcoming those barriers. It is experience that can give a person a common touch of compassion; an understanding of how the world works and how ordinary people live. And that is why it is necessary ingredient in the kind of Justice we need on the Supreme Court.”

Yet since Sotomayer’s selection “empathy” is not only setting off a firestorm with conservative critics, it is fueling a national debate about whether empathy is a good thing or not.

But, really, can empathy be a bad thing?

Empathy is the ability to understand and connect with other people through finding a sense of similarity – the ability to walk in their shoes as it were. In business, empathy can be a powerful tool for understanding others, building consensus and establishing working relationships. Empathy is particularly relevant for today’s modern, global companies in which people from different cultures and backgrounds need to work together as a team to solve problems and reach important company goals. For 21st century companies, empathy can make the difference between success and failure of the business.

I began working at my office job when I was eighteen.  Two months out of high school (before the economy crashed), I was fortunate enough to become hired as a computer operator for my local system of higher education thanks largely to a friendly disposition and a willingness to learn-- and work odd shifts.

My office has a decent female vs. male ratio.  My boss is a woman and I was replacing a female operator who moved to technical services.  Many of our programmers and managers are women, and the only department that is all-men is telecom (but it's a fairly small department, so I think it's by accident and not design).  The decent gender equity in employment made me suspect, right off the bat, that I probably wouldn't have any issues with sexism.

Indeed, the problem began as what appeared to be ageism.  Everyone immediately assumed I was a student worker right off the bat, which was forgivable, since I was (and still am) the youngest full-time employee.  Since most people at my job are old enough to be my parents (or grandparents), I was frequently treated like a favored daughter.  Things I would do were "cute."  When I displayed superior technical skill to a coworker, it was novel.  I became the fashion standard for the office (which is bizarre, considering I'm a gender-bender and alternate dressing butch and a femme depending on my mood).  To be fair, the latter is odd, but probably nothing discriminatory.

I rarely volunteered my age except to say, "No, I'm not a student worker," and it eventually came to my attention that most people thought I must have been in my late twenties.

That was when I began to wonder.

Would anything I did be "cute" if I was a man?

Would people be comfortable putting their hand on my chair as we talk if I was a man?

Would people be so fixated on my "fashion" if I was a man?

Would it be novel when it turns out I'm intelligent if I was a man?

In general, would I be treated in such a diminutive fashion if I was a young male rather than a young female?

For the most part, I have been treated with total fairness, and I've been at my job long enough that I'm a fixture now.  People do seem to think that they have to talk about my clothing or hair when they see me, and while I still don't understand it, an equilibrium has otherwise been reached.  I'm only reminded of the strange way people behave around me when there's a new hire or an outside consultant, and then it starts all over again-- standing closer to me than they would a male colleague, acting like I can't possibly be as competent as someone else, asking for a male coworker when I'm the first to respond to a problem, having conversations with my chest.

If I was a young man, would this happen?  I doubt it.

I work "in production" behind the camera, in the film industry. It's a male dominated industry.  The dept I work in is especially male dominated (I don't do make up, hair, wardrobe and I'm not a personal assistant).  Time and again, I find myself realizing that I am surrounded by men who think they are much more talented and skilled than they actually are.  Their egos, possibly fueled by testosterone, actually help them get work, get their work seen, allows them to play in the boys club and of course negotiate for more for themselves- regardless of whether the production can afford what they ask for or not.  I see their sub standard work, that they truly believe is not just festival worthy, but, Oscar worthy - seriously.

Time and again, I find the opposite to be the case with myself and other women.I hear women taking the production budget into account before pay negotiation.  Most of the women I work with, like me, have doubts about our work. We say and think,  "Did we do a good enough job?  Who are we to think this money should be spent on our vision?  Shouldn't we have put the money towards more responsible things?"

For those who are unfamiliar with him, Ross Douthat is a columnist with the The New York Times. He is refreshing when compared to the columnist he replaced, Bill Kristol, but I'm still very much at odds with his political views.

His newest article is about two trends: the various forms of equality that women have achieved and rising levels of unhappiness among women

I'll assume that the findings in the economics paper he cited, "The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness", are accurate. But I'm wary of what people might conclude from them.

Ross offers his conclusion based on what he thinks feminists and traditionalists have gathered from it:

The feminist will see evidence of a revolution interrupted, in which rising expectations are bumping against glass ceilings, breeding entirely justified resentments. The traditionalist will see evidence of a revolution gone awry, in which women have been pressured into lifestyles that run counter to their biological imperatives, and men have been liberated to embrace a piggish irresponsibility.

There's evidence to fit each of these narratives. But there's also room for both.

Pray tell, Mr. Douthat, what the biological imperatives of women are when it comes to embracing or shunning certain lifestyles. Hmmm?

As it turns out, the "embrace-the-happy-medium" approach isn't always the best thing to do, especially if you don't have evidence that it's the best approach. The traditionalist claim demands evidence, and again, there is none for it here.

This was irksome, but it was nothing compared to this:

They should also be able to agree that the steady advance of single motherhood threatens the interests and happiness of women. Here the public-policy options are limited; some kind of social stigma is a necessity. But a new-model stigma shouldn't (and couldn't) look like the old sexism. There's no necessary reason why feminists and cultural conservatives can't join forces -- in the same way that they made common cause during the pornography wars of the 1980s -- behind a social revolution that ostracizes serial baby-daddies and trophy-wife collectors as thoroughly as the "fallen women" of a more patriarchal age.

Yes, you read this correctly; we should embrace social stigmatization of single mothers! Why? Because public-policy options are limited. So instead of suggesting that we should, you know, push for more comprehensive public-policy options for single mothers, we should stigmatize! How do we do this? By implying that they're just as bad as trophy-wife collectors!

His reference to public-policy options does imply that one of the reasons he supports stigmatization of single mothers has to do with the fact that they're not as financially safeguarded as married couples with children. That part seems true enough, but being the uber-liberal that I am, I'd say that fact warrants stigmatization of our limited public-policy options instead of the single mothers who go through these hardships as a result of these limitations.

And now for the climax:

No reason, of course, save the fact that contemporary America doesn't seem willing to accept sexual stigma, period. We simply don't have the stomach for permanently ostracizing the sexually irresponsible -- be they a pregnant starlet, a thrice-divorced tycoon, or even a prostitute-hiring politician.

Yes, Douthat. Your implication that single mothers are generally "sexually irresponsible" was received loud and clear.

Fuck you.

I found this article from Elle Magazine to be surprisingly insightful. 

I would be delighted to hear thoughts from the community, especially on the suggestions given to address this type of sabotage. 

The advice on how to communicate about the problem seemed good.

From the Article:  “You’ve got to push on,” Real advises. “You have to say, ‘Hey, this is the third time you’ve done such and such, and I think you’re picking a fight with me because you’re threatened.’ ” But it’s crucial to combine that challenge with an affirmative message, one that’s “strong and loving at the same time,” Real says. “Tell him, ‘I love you to pieces, and you will always be my first priority. Let’s work this out.’”

I'm not a fan of the "have sex and the problem will go away" schtick, although it might have some benefit for some people and I believe the author is approaching it the right way (as part of a healthy sex-life and the author does not seem to bring it up in an anti-feminist way at all).

From the Article: "Real also suggests some old-fashioned sexual validation; it’s worth finding your own version of “You’ve got to knock this off, because I’m not tolerating it. Gosh, you look hot tonight—let’s go to bed!” he says. Such reassurance quells a common male fear that “the more powerful women get, the less they’re going to care about or need you, because under the system of patriarchy, power and connection are mutually exclusive. But the next step for both men and women is integration and wholeness—strong, bighearted guys and strong, bighearted gals.”

So, what do you all think?

My last post** was about my search for a job, and finding my GWS major a bit of a liability.  I asked if it was a sound measure to leave that major off of my resume (I have another major and a minor) when applying for certain jobs.

The response was largely supportive, and I am thankful to the feministing community for the consistently good advice and good wishes.  Some of the responses, however, brought up an issue that I think is overlooked.

Some comments suggested that to leave my major off of a resume was "selling out" or even "anti-feminist".  It was also suggested that "no job is worth" having to edit your politics and principles. 

I can be sympathetic to this line of thinking.  I do think that there is such a thing as selling out and that whenever possible ethics and principle have to come first.  But I think that we feminists have to continue checking our privilege , and realize that not everyone is lucky enough to be able to live according to their principles all the time. 

I have an aquaintence who spent a summer working at a country club.  It was locally known that that establishment does not admit Jewish or African American people as members or guests (YES! Places like this still exist! I was also shocked to find this out).  She was using the job for spending money, as her bills were taken care of by her parents (one of whom is a Jew and accordingly wouldn't have been admitted to the club).  She didn't need that job.  She didn't need that money.  She was lucky enough to have option of refusing to work there or support that racism, but she didn't.   And I don't consider that choice ethically sound. 

I have another friend that has similar politics to me.  She is lucky enough to be very very intelligent and is recognized as such by various Universities, several of which have afforded her opportunities to learn and travel for free.  She has become very worldly and informed and conscious of her actions.  She doesn't have to work, and is generous enough to volunteer her time, pursue activist work, and work part-time at jobs she finds interesting while she studies.  Instead of seeing how lucky she is, she seems to consider herself more of a feminist, more of an activist, and more informed than the rest of our social group even as we struggle to educate, feed, house, and clothe ourselves (often taking unfulfilling, corporate, or demeaning jobs to do so). 

My point is, living one's ethics is to a certain degree a PRIVILEGE.   And when it is a possibility, I think it is an obligation .  But when it isn't (and for most people it isn't, completely) it doesn't mean that someone is a sell out.  It doesn't mean that someone is anti-feminist.  And it doesn't mean that someone has mixed up priorities.  It just means that not everyone is LUCKY ENOUGH to be able to choose. 

I get it, I see the point.  Ideally, I would be able to proclaim my feminism to anyone, anytime, and not have it compromise my ability to earn a living.  The sad reality is that this is not the case.  I am luckier than many (one has to be incredibly lucky to be born into this country AND end up with a college education) but I have no fall back plan.  I don't have parents that can pay my way until I find a feminist employer.  Most people don't.  So we have to find jobs, even if it means not fully expressing ourselves. Because having a job is worth a hell of a lot to most people. 

* Apologies for the length of this post, and for fueling it with several glasses of wine (which have done my writing no favors).

** Previous post was not in any way intended to discourage WGS scholars from their studies.  I find my WGS major very rewarding, even if it's not doing me any favors in the current job market.

I have found my self on the prowl again for a new job.  I'm wondering if anyone has come up with the same predicament I am in. 

I double majored in college in English and Gender and Women's Studies, minored in Philosophy.  I am going to start working toward a Master's in Women's and Gender Studies this fall, and am a very commited feminist scholor.  I have found, however, that in job interviews my interest in Women's and Gender Studies is quite a liability.  I have had several interviews where the interviewer asks about my GWS major and seems rather preoccupied with it.  The line of questioning tends to revolve around my idea of what sexual harassment is, and whether or not I am inclined to bring frivolous lawsuits. 

The reality is that I have had experiences, very real ones (ie stalking), with sexual harassment, but have never brought a lawsuit about it.  Not that I don't think such suits are valid, but I am all for solving problems as they can be solved, and have always been fortunate enough to work in places that were able to take my complaints seriously. 

My question is this: as someone who needs a job, badly, would it be permissible (as a feminist and just as an honest human) to leave my second major off of my resume when I apply for certain jobs?  I know that I would feel like I was disowning myself a bit to do it, but I really need work, and I know how competitive the market is right now.  I happen to live in Kentucky, and a lot of the people who are in a position to hire/pay me don't have a very clear concept of what Gender Studies is all about. 

The ethics here are a bit cloudy to me, and I would be happy to hear any advice that this community has for me.  I would also like to hear whether anyone else has had this issue come up in their job searches.  Thanks.

I think an important part of feminist activism is playing a watchdog role. I'd like to use that roll to call out one grocery store chain in the Midwest that seems partial to white men when it comes to hiring store directors. Hy-Vee. Yes, the percent of white people in Iowa, where the store was founded, is about 94 percent, but there is not a shortage of women. Looking at Hy-Vee's store finder on their Web site, however, you would think the Midwest has a dangerous problem with its chromosomes. Where are all the female store directors?

I took sample of 58 of the store directors, and only 6 were female; 1 was black. There were no female minorities in the 58 I counted. So that means about 10% of the directors are female. If the hiring were fair, we would assume about half of the store directors would be female. Instead, the hiring favors white men. This situation would be akin to flipping a penny 10 times and getting "tails" only once. In other words, it's very hard to say that this situation exists by pure chance.

Why is this important? Because right now, Wal-Mart stands as the largest grocery chain in the U.S., and Hy-Vee sets itself up as the "alternative" to Wal-Mart, where humans are held above profit. If Hy-Vee really is different than Wal-Mart, and doesn't want to have to settle any class-action lawsuits, it needs to change its policies now, while its still a relatively small chain.

While I appreciate the chain is honest about who it hires as store directors, there needs to be more of an effort to hire women. I know many of you have never heard of the chain because it operates only in IA, IL, KS, MN, MO, NE, SD and WI, and most of the readers here at feministing.com are likely from progressive states, but if you are a female who has applied for a Hy-Vee store director position or know of a female who has, please leave your experience in the comments.

1. quickfacts.census.gov

2. hy-vee.com/storefinder

Looking for an opportunity to work at an upcoming feminist magazine in Chicago and beyond? KEEP READING! Wisecrack is looking for college students across the nation(and especially in Chicago and the surrounding area!) to be Campus Liasons in the upcoming school year.

Wisecrack is a new independent quarterly publication, designed to support female comedians, discuss gender and comedy and use humor as an agent of social change.
As a Campus Liaison, you would:

-Connect potentially interested students,professors and campus groups with Wisecrack (through flyers, word of mouth and informative emails)
-Help us stay "in the loop" with what's happening at your campus relating to gender and comedy (to possibly be featured in Wisecrack)
-Gain valuable experience and get involved with a new feminist publication

-Be interested in gender and comedy (gender studies, theater and journalism students encouraged to apply)
-Be available to help for the duration of 2009
-Have an hour each week to dedicate to helping us out (whenever you're free)
-Be motivated and reliable

Today is Equal Pay Day in the U.S., which marks the point in 2009 when the average woman’s wages finally catch up with those paid to the average man in 2008.

My first job was as a hostess at a steakhouse in my hometown — the kind with a giant all-you-can-eat salad-and-baked-potato bar and a bestselling Tuesday night half-priced-prime-rib special. I made $4.75 per hour, which I thought was excellent, since at that time the minimum wage in Virginia was $4.25. I thought that, anyway, until I found out that the busboys at my restaurant made $5.25 an hour — plus, they got tips.

The busboys were all male. The hostesses were all female. Both of us spent our shifts running around trying to accommodate temperamental customers and even more temperamental managers. But they got paid more than I did.

Was that fair? I have no idea. Maybe the fair market rate for steakhouse busboys in Roanoke, Virginia, in 1995 was indeed higher than that for hostesses.

So I wouldn't really consider myself a feminist but I have a very close friend who is.  I have been having some issues at work and she recommended that I post something on here because she said it would make me feel better so here it goes...

I have been working the same job for 4 years.  I recently switched shifts, but not positions.  I went from evening shift to day shift at the begining of this week.  I now work with 2 men.  These 2 men have worked together for probably close to 20 years.  They very obviously do not want me there.  It isn't necessarily that they are harassing me or even being mean to me, they won't even give me the time of day.  Everything I do they do over, if I ask if something has been done they say yes even if it hasn't been just because they don't want me doing it, I will say something then they will say it 5 minutes later like I never pointed it out earlier.  They think I am a complete idiot!! 

I have 2 bosses, one male one female.  My female boss is very supportive and is doing everything she can to help my situation but they just talk down to her too when she tries to help me out.  I have been in my main boss' office, the male, 3 times in my 4 days on this shift.  He has told me that these 2 men are "just very old fashioned."  That they are not used to working with a woman and that I just need to let them know that I am not going anywhere and that they need to learn to work with me.  He is the boss, why can he not fix this problem???  Why is it even a problem?  I have been doing this job for 4 years, I am not an idiot and I don't deserve to be talked down to everyday.  It is making me miserable.  I considered going back to my old shift but that is exactly what they want, then they win.  I shouldn't have to go to work and defend my position everyday because they are "old fashioned" and don't like working with a woman.  I am just as good at my job, if not better, then they are.  They just won't give me the chance to prove it.  It's wearing me down...and it's only been 4 days.

There is a fascinating discussion going on at the Chronicle of Higher Ed right now about family leave, gender, and the rights of childless people.

An untenured male professor wants to use FMLA to care for his soon-to-born child. He was essentially told by his chair that this would amount to career suicide, as would not coming in regularly during the summer, even though he is on a 9 month contract.

The comments go on for many pages, but some interesting questions arise:

Is FMLA a "benefit" to parents that is thus unfair to the childless, even though it is government madated and unpaid?

Is it ever okay to bring a child to work? If so, when and how often? Does bringing your child entitle the childless to bring in dogs and talking parrots?

Should the childless ever make any concession of sacrifice whatsoever for the benefit of those with children?

And finally, should fathers be considered parents, as epitomized by this comment:

I don't mean to be snarky--well, OK, maybe a little--but I don't get it. I know I come from blue-collar country folk, and maybe that's the difference, but how the hell is it that my dad never had to take off work when my sister and I were born, way back in the stone ages of 1950 and 1960? And my husband didn't take off work when I had our girls in 1988 and 1991, save the days I actually gave birth. Even when we were discharged from the hospital, we arranged it so he could get us after he got off work. (And no, I didn't have a house full of help--my mom stayed 4 days after the first was born, because I had a C-section, and not at all after the second, who wasn't a section.) And for the record, my dad was extremely close to both of us girls, as is my husband with our daughters, so apparently life went on and both men bonded just fine with their children. Seriously--I'm just asking. I honestly don't get it. Would it have been nice to have the dads around for us? Sure, but it was OK the way things worked out, too.

There is a fascinating discussion going on at the Chronicle of Higher Ed right now about family leave, gender, and the rights of childless people.

You can read the whole thread at here.

A new online job board seems to promise better jobs to ATTRACTIVE people. Not modeling jobs, but regular jobs (sales, marketing, etc.). What is this, the 1950s and "Mad Men"? Thoughts???

This is not exactly anything particularly new, but I saw this news piece on BBC news and thought I would post it here.

Women earn up to 60% less than men in the finance sector, an Equality and Human Rights Commission report says.

The research indicates that although numbers of men and women in the sector are equal, the pay gap is more than twice the national average.

As if it wasn't worrying enough that there is a national average pay gap between men and women. 

The study also points to a 79% gender gap for annual incentive pay for full-time workers.

The Trade Union Commission says the figures are evidence that the London is failing to shed its "impenetrable" glass ceiling.

Women working in the fund management, stockbroking and future trading areas suffer the largest pay gap, the commission says.

Trevor Phillips, who chairs the commission, thinks the industry is missing out on women's valuable input.

"We are losing or not taking advantage of talented women from a crucial industry - something we can ill afford in these troubled times," he said.

Too right.

"The city is failing miserably to shed its macho reputation and impenetrable glass ceiling," said Brendan Barber, General Secretary of the union.

The TUC is calling for the sector to tackle this culture with more pay transparency and more family-friendly career paths.

I'm glad that the commission is finally trying to tackle the problem of inequality in City jobs. I hope trade unions in other cities start to do the same thing.

Read an article about plastic surgery being used by more job seekers to increase chances of getting hired. Sad people feel getting cosmetic surgery will be the solution to get a job. The article also mentioned some are taking out loans. In this day and age, why would people take out loans for something they cannot afford? Isn't this what started the recession? Interestingly, more men are opting for plastic surgery. Legally, workers cannot be discriminated based on age, but realistically its happening. The term fresh faced translates to someone younger. As Americans, people are so consumed with how much they have, look, and feel they have to resort to mutilation.

April 28 will mark Equal Pay Day — the point in 2009 when the average woman’s wages finally catch up with what the average man earned in 2008. 

And on that day, we’re asking you to raise your voices in support of fair pay for women by blogging, tweeting, and posting on Facebook about this crucial issue. Please sign up to Blog for Fair Pay on April 28, and help us spread the word!

Last year, more than 80 bloggers took part in Blog for Fair Pay Day 2008. You can check out their posts here.

And things have definitely changed since then! In January, Congress passed and President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, marking a critical step in giving women the ability to challenge unequal pay. 

But despite this success, pay equity is still a major issue in the movement for women’s equality. Women still earn only 78 cents for every dollar earned by men — and for women of color, the numbers are even worse. African-American women earn 69 cents and Latinas earn 59 cents for every dollar paid to men. We need to make sure that once women challenge pay discrimination, they have the tools they need to prove their cases and hold their employers accountable.

A bill currently before the Senate, the Paycheck Fairness Act, would build on the success of the Ledbetter bill and deter wage discrimination against women. The bill has already passed the House this year, and there's strong momentum to move it forward in the Senate. Please write to your Senators and urge them to support the Paycheck Fairness Act -- and please sign up for Blog for Fair Pay Day on April 28! 

A Guardian Article reports that the Equalities and Human Rights Commission "in the UK will tell the government today that the economic climate is too fragile to impose equal pay reviews on business."

The article continues:"Pay audits are unpopular with businesses both because they are expensive and because revelations of pay disparities often unleash legal action by women who had not realised they were underpaid."

Apparently the way to get out of a recession is to promote discrimination.  I really don't know what to say that most readers here probably aren't already thinking.

Any UK Feministing-ers want to expound on this?

By Tammy Sullivan

As a soldier in the National Guard, I believe that my job is to fight for freedom, including the freedom to stand up for what's right. That's why I decided to speak out about the mandatory pregnancy tests and discrimination against women soldiers at the New York National Guard.

I enjoy serving in the National Guard. I was originally a member of the Mississippi National Guard, and then I transferred to the New York National Guard. I am still enlisted in the Guard. I work as a broadcast journalist in my unit and in January 2008 I started working on a state active duty mission patrolling the airports. That's when I first learned about the Guard's practice of requiring women soldiers to take pregnancy tests.

After I had been on the state active duty task force full time for a few weeks, our superiors had all the women take a pregnancy test and told us we would have to take one every three months. In some ways, what was worse than the pregnancy test was having to sign a form — a "Statement of Understanding" — in which we had to agree that, if we got pregnant while we were on active duty, we would be released from duty — in other words, lose our jobs — and lose the medical benefits that families of soldiers are entitled to. Not only that, but our positions would not be guaranteed if we wanted to come back after the pregnancy.

Kevin Burg posted a 1938 rejection letter from Disney to his grandmother who applied for a position as Inker/Painter. The letter really speaks for itself, and the beautifully printed Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs plays excellent irony on the man -made dreamland.

/also posted on Fortissimo /

There comes a time in a young woman's life when she finds herself...

UNEMPLOYED.  Yeah. It sucks.  I try to tune out everyone saying how atrocious the job market is, how brutal and competitive it is, etc. and try to listen to my dear ol' dad saying, "Why, when I was out of college and in the recession in the 80's, that's when I got my first big break!" Then I come across articles like this.  Kind of brings out my ostrich-like tendencies and makes me wanna stick my head in the sand.

I lost my amazing job with a women's health non-profit (in online media) this winter, and have since been on some kind of self-searching inner-healing warrior crusade, involving lots of meditation and writing, to discover what I truly want to be doing. In the meantime...I HAVE to find something to pay the bills!  But it's just so rough finding work these days...I mean, I COULD find random craigslist ads and live gig to gig, or throw myself into finding a sales or receptionist position, but spending the majority of my day using .001% of my brain capacity, and the left side at that, I'd kind of rather be pulling out my hair strand by stand.

Any other NYC/Brooklyn Feministing readers in a similar sitch? Instead of just seeing each other as the competition, we gotta support one another!  I'd be happy to share any job hunting resources and tips, or just job ideas in general, in return for the same. Or just share our unemployment woes.  Leave a comment and I'll get in contact with you!

Hey all. I'm a daily reader and first time poster, so if this is not the appropriate place to post this, I apologize!

So here's the deal: Three years ago I started a project called And It Was Wrong after a friend of mine was sexually assaulted by a friend of hers. It's a project where people can submit their experiences of self-defined sexual assault with the hope of compiling all of these experiences together and re-defining sexual assault as what actually happens to us, rather than the stranger-in-a-dark-alley-rape image so prevalent in public consciousness.

I'll be graduating in June, so it's time to extend this project outside of my campus. I think the best way to do this is a website, except I have no idea how to make one. I'd like to hire someone within the feminist community to build this website rather than go through a generic organization. It would be a simple site, just with basic information about the project, links to more information, and a link to submit a story (the stories themselves would not actually appear online).

So if there's anyone out there in this feministing community with website-building experience who's into this idea, please contact me at rgoodman@knox.edu.  I am meeting with a Dean on Friday to request funds to pay someone to do this, and it would be really helpful if someone could quote me a ballpark price.

Thanks in advance. In community,

Rachael

Hello lovely Feminists. I want to first thank you for your intriguing posts which keep me occupied, engaged, and thought-provoked when I have the occasional break at work. I thank you for making me feel the presence of a real community of people who understand the world in a similar way (and this is such a rarity).

And now, on to my problem.

I work in a high-profile publishing company. Periodically, I wo(man) the front desk. We're on a high floor, so sometimes messengers come to deliver packages and they're escorted by the building's security guards up to our floor. Now one guard in particular has come up to our floor during my shift several times, and every time he does he sort of looks me up and down and looks almost as if he's going to lick his lips. I feel violated with him just being around.

Now just when I thought I might be crazily paranoid, he arrived today, escorting another messenger, and while I was signing the slip, entering the package data, and answering phone calls, he managed to ask me if I had AIM--to which I lied and said no. Then he looked down at his phone and said, "Well then why don't you give me your number so I can text you." I was stunned but still trying to be professional so I said, "That's ok, thanks." Then he left.

Now this was six hours ago. I'm angry. Angry that I could be at work, acting as the face of a company, and a building (but not company) employee could come right up to me, unaffected by our being at work, act as if we were out on the street or in a store (though I'd be just as outraged) and just try and get my number. This guy didn't even know my f***ing name! And I felt exposed and uncomfortable. I didn't say anything to the other, main receptionist when she returned from lunch, because I didn't know if it was legitimate or if she'd say anything.

This issue brings up greater problems to me--like the fact that all messengers and guards who come through our doors throughout the day are men. I'm one woman at the desk. That he clearly thought it was all right to proposition me while I was working is unacceptable. That I have worried that it might happen with other messengers/guards in the past and that I happened to be right this time is even more unacceptable.

I wanted to share this because I wanted the reactions of other women. When I told my mom, her immediate response was, "he likes you," to which I angrily responded, "I don't give a shit what he likes...I'm at work"...and then of course it became a stupid cycle of "don't use that language in front of me." When I was so pissed that my own mother didn't feel my violation, I asked, "If I had been attacked, would you still be reprimanding me for my language?" and she said "You should respect that I don't like that language."

Ok, tangent over. But anger--still simmering. And even some fear and disappointment.

Any consoling thoughts?

"With this bill in place, we now can move forward to where we all hope to be -- improving the law, not just restoring it."

— Lilly Ledbetter, On the signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act at the White House on 1/29/09

On January 29, 2009, I shared an amazing moment with Lilly Ledbetter as President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — the first bill he signed into law. It was a truly moving morning and the culmination of years of struggle by Ms. Ledbetter. A struggle that began at Goodyear Tire, where she worked for 19 years, overtime and double-shifts, being paid less than her male coworkers and withstanding degrading treatment. And then a struggle that continued, as she challenged the pay discrimination though a hostile appellate process that reversed decades of law that would have protected her. While she will never regain the years of wages pocketed by her discriminating employer, Ms. Ledbetter, a broad coalition of organizations, and many concerned Members of Congress worked successfully to undue the Supreme Court's injustice for other workers.

It was an important struggle and a hard fight. Last year we could not garner enough support in the Senate to move the legislation and former President Bush threatened a veto. But we prevailed in righting this wrong. I wish I could tell you, however, that we established a new and groundbreaking anti-discrimination law. I wish I could tell you that we protected new sectors of employees, removed unfair limitations on remedies for our workers, or created new protections for a new workforce.

But I can't. We fought for just a restoration of rights. Don't misunderstand, however. It was a vitally important fight — one that gives all employees their day in court as long as their employer continues to discriminate against them — but a fight to just preserve the rights we had already won early in civil rights laws. Despite all the arguments and assertions to the contrary by opponents of this legislation, the protections in this new law are not groundbreaking. Far from imposing a new rule on employers, the legislation reversing the Ledbetter decision merely restores the well-understood law that prevailed in the majority of federal circuits and the policy of the EEOC under both Democratic and Republican administrations before the Supreme Court's ruling.

This restoration of rights was very important, but there is now more to be done. As Ms. Ledbetter noted at the White House, our work now turns to improving the law.

Over 45 years ago, Congress passed the Equal Pay Act to fix the disparity in wages between men and women, but over time, loopholes and weak remedies have lessened its effectiveness. Another piece of legislation, the Paycheck Fairness Act , makes several common sense changes to strengthen the Equal Pay Act — putting in place enforcement tools needed to make real progress on pay equity.

There should be little doubt that such improvements are necessary. According to the U.S. Census Bureau women who work full time still earn, on average, only 78 cents for every dollar men earn. The figures are even worse for women of color.

The consequences of this discrimination are severe and predictable. The pay disparity forces single-mother households and families dependent on two wage-earners to live on less than they rightfully deserve, while simultaneously reducing women's retirement earnings. In short, unfair pay disparities perpetuate women's economic dependence and deprive them of economic opportunity and equal protection of the laws. Moreover, and a critical factor today, women tend to be hurt first and worst during economic downturns.

The Paycheck Fairness Act is an important and measured approach to eradicating wage discrimination and is another critical weapon in the battle against sex discrimination in the workplace. The bill already passed the House of Representatives this past January, but is yet to be taken up in the Senate. As Ms. Ledbetter noted : "…you can count on my continued commitment to fighting to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act — and to make sure that women have equal pay for equal work, because that's what this country is all about." Indeed, fundamental fairness should be what this country is all about and, when it is not, like Ms Ledbetter has done on our behalf, we should work to achieve it. By signing the bill bearing her name, President Obama restored the right of employees to have their day in court to challenge any unlawful wage gap they uncover. Now we all must set our sights on the next step — improving the law — by closing, for once and for all, the wage gap itself.

Click here for the ACLU's letter to Congress regarding the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act.

By Deborah J. Vagins, ACLU Legislative Counsel

I'm a graduate student working in a lab with a faculty advisor. This advisor is also in charge of my thesis, other classes, and whether I get into a serious, competitive program next year. This advisor has a history of being inappropriate but I have been brushing it off to get by.

Today, it happened again although at a different level. It was not "sleep with me or else" but definitely some sexually explicit stuff about me in front of about 12 people. I felt mortified, horrified, violated, etc. I am so enraged and fed up that I want to do something but am hesitating because of the enormous cost that could befall me and my career. If I "stick it out" for a few more months I should be able to get out of his authority on my own accord.

But do I have an obligation to suck it up and make sure he gets what is coming? (Assuming he even will?) Should I do it for the future women in his lab? Or should I just try to get out as soon as possible without making my life a living hell?

What's a committed, empowered feminist to do?

Compare this picture (of Bush taking away our rights) ...

To this picture (of Obama protecting them)

It's almost as if our government is starting to look like its people.

Please accept my personal thanks.  I am writing this note to you.  Today, the President of the United States is going to sign his first piece of legislation and place into law that it is illegal to pay people differently based on gender.  He, with the legislative branch of the US government are going to do what the US Supreme Court did not do.

But make no mistake, you and generations of people before you made this happen.  Most of you were hard at work before the President had begun grade school.  Maybe the editorial staff of MS Magazine thinks that President Obama is superman or that they even need superman but, for me, the Women's Movement has been all about not needing superman.  Or, lets say, Lois Lane was paid 76 cents on the dollar earned by Clark Kent and that would not have changed if she hadn't been insistent, honest, risked it all by taking it to court. 

I believe the cover should have been true Superwomen ~

• Generations of working women organizing to demand equal pay.

• Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg who sent a note to Congress asking them to right the error of the Supreme Court.

• Lilly Ledbetter, who gave us her life force to change the course of history for working women forever.  

You made this happen.  Yes, President Obama will sign it today but that piece of paper was milled on the backs of millions of women and their families.  I am proud to say - YOU ARE WHAT A FEMINIST LOOKS LIKE.

Via the Sydney Morning Herald.

According to the article, flight attendant Karin Keegan, 37, was denied entry to a flight she was working on because her outfit was not "provacative enough," and is now suing Delta and JetBlue.

Says the lawsuit,

Keegan changed into more provocative clothes, but (the employee) told her she was too late to board the plane and should have dressed like that before.

Just wanted to bring this story to light, amidst our celebration of repro rights this week.

As an inquiring feminist and a woman on the cusp of a professional life, I spend a lot of time pondering my relationship to the professional world; where I see sexism, what I find personally rewarding, and perhaps how I will handle the challenges of being a woman in a field dominated by men.  A friend recently directed me towards this article, recently in the New York Times, I was interested, and honestly, immediately a little  put of by it's focus.  

The article, or opinion piece, rather, titled, "A Sisterhood of Workplace Infighting," was written by Peggy Klaus, who runs corporate training program, and it examines, somewhat superficially, the practice of woman-to-woman conflict and competition in the workplace.  I was immediately ruffled by the article, because I think that many stereotypes or assumptions of women as catty or nasty to each other are pretty over-blown and generally propagated by men.  My experiences as a desk-jockey are pretty limited, but my experiences waiting tables and working retail, as well as being a woman aren't, and I honestly haven't found that women's own cattiness and destructive behavior towards each other is in anyway "one of the last remaining hurdles to gender parity."

This isn't too say that it isn't an issue or that it shouldn't be considered in light of more important workplace discrimination (or that my experiences are universal), but rather, if we are going to examine the woman-to-woman infighting in male-dominant or co-ed working environments, isn't is crucial that we look at the overall patriarchal nature of the environment rather than making sweeping assumptions about the emotionality and reactive behavior of women?  The article is heavy-handed on both of these and relies heavily on theories sourced to "some people" unquestioningly.

I think that the article raises many important questions, but mostly indirectly.  Reading behind the type, one has to wonder: really how prevalent this is, does it really exceed unproductive competition between men (and men and women), and is focusing on it as a primary reason to why women often have trouble in the workplace (without context) really productive? Unfortunately, the article is not introspective or self-examining, and instead chastises women without supporting their indictment, ultimately greatly undermining its usefulness and productiveness.

Feministing readers, I'd love your thoughts!

What a wonderful idea - photographer Sarah Lyon is selling 2009 Female Mechanics Calendar featuring photos and profiles of female mechanics. It's inspiring to see women succeed in a traditionally male field, and a great feminist alternative to more girly calendars (which all seem to feature puppies and babies).

Earlier this week on GWS (Yahoo! Answers Gender & Women's Studies), someone asked a question I thought would provoke far more thoughts than it did.

"Would you rather be the director of an institution and make 36K a year, or be a mere VP of a corporation and make 200K a year?"

I was disheartened to see so many people take the VP position. Most of their reasons followed along the lines of "Well, it is TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS . . ." That, combined with my recent aversion to the corporate world, was actually the push factor for me.

But I felt better after watching an ABC News clip of people who had find new career paths after being laid off. One worked for a medical supply company, then went to cooking school; another worked in marketing, then became a Starbucks barista; another one did something mundane that I forget, then achieved his childhood dream of becoming a "treasure hunter." None of them are making a whole lot of money now, but they said that the intrinsic rewards (feeling of being valued, friendly working atmosphere, etc.) were worth it.

This follows what I've been saying this whole time. For our economy to get back on track, we must abandon the pursuit of excess (of which the results have been proven once and for all) and take on the pursuit of survival. In the end, what good is a copious amount of money if earning it doesn't make you feel alive?

Current features this video clip that briefly highlights the rise of male sex workers, or "moneyboys" in China, introducing it by writing that "China's rapid economic growth over the last two decades has seen the emergence of many new industries, including the sex industry. This pod explores this issue through eyes of two male prostitutes, immersed in this secret world."

Today I realized I work for a pro-feminist. I work as the assistant for the CEO of a privately owned firm (hence, the company is just him), and he has always been very understanding, laid back, respectable, and non-judgmental (I got lucky). Even though my job is gendered and can be seen as sexist, it's a good part-time job while in school because I am learning about the finance field at the same time.

One example of his pro-feminism: When making mailing labels for his clients, if it is for a married couple, he always puts the woman first. He said he does this because if he were the woman and it said, "Mr. & Mrs. Whoever" he would feel offended (that was the first time I noticed his pro-feminist tendencies).

Our office is in a suite that we share with a couple other small firms. This past week, we have had a temporary tenant who used to work there come in to use his old office space. Immediately I did not like this man. I was doing work in my boss's office (he was out most of the week for meetings), and this man came looking for my boss and was like, "Wow, your boss always hires beautiful assistants." I was too caught off guard to even say anything back. Then he would make comments about me being pretty or looking nice and I was just like EWWW.

This morning my boss was in the office for the first time since this visitor has been there and he closed the door and was like, "I need to talk to you. Have you met Charles? He is..." (pause) "...sort of a creepy old man. And he makes comments to young girls, I have seen it before and it is very inappropriate. If he says anything to you and you feel uncomfortable, please tell me." (So I told him about the comments he made the other day). My boss replied, "Quite frankly, don't feel ashamed to tell him to shove it up his ass."

I was like WHOOO! I am so lucky to work here. It made my day. Hopefully my future jobs will be the same (although, sadly, I doubt it because the business world is the "man's world" and the god damn glass ceiling still exists... but they can go shove it =] One day I hope to shatter the ceiling.... just my feminist goals!)

However, in the elevator later, two men were talking about some mutual friend who is a woman. They said, "Oh, I am sure that she has found a husband who can take care of her; she is such a pretty woman." I wanted to throw up on them.

But I don't know them and will never see them again and am just reveling in my no-tolerance-for-sexual-harassment workplace.

Hi guys I need help on my Senior project which in on how purity pledges do more harm than good. But since Jessica book isn't out until may, bad luck for me since my Senior project is due around spring. I was hoping you guys could help me as did with the last person who asked for help. Thankfully this cite has helped me greatly.

Thanks

I am a long-time reader of Feministing and finally decided to get an account on the new Community system. I wanted to share an incident that is both amusing and an indicator of just how much being an actively reading feminist has helped me to stand up for myself and for all women -- for all people, really.

I was working a temp job as a stocker for a traveling liquidation sales event that happened to have stopped in my city. I met some fun people and enjoyed the work, not minding at all that I was assigned to work mostly with men. One of the main supervisors, however, was a bit of a prick. I was packing the stuff into the boxes neatly and tidily, as I believe that integrity applies even when it has nothing to do with keeping a job or impressing anyone. I mean, why not do good work when you're being paid hourly for it? It does take longer than sloppy work and that leads to an increase in your paycheck at the end of the day.

One of the fellow stockers working with me was doing a bad job. Another stocker noticed the difference and graciously complimented me. I joked that it was all in the spatial reasoning. The supervisor said that it was nice that a woman exhibited any kind of reasoning at all.

Now, the me before I'd read up on the history of the oppression of women and current news on how bad sexism still really is would have shrugged it off in the moment, but then would have regretted it later. I would have kicked myself for not having stood up to someone who was abusing his power to mock me and half of the entire human race. I know this because I endured 3 months under the thumb of a boss at a loan company who did nothing but make sexist remarks, turn a blind eye to the perverts in the office who harassed me merely for being a young woman, and undermine my successes by insisting that I attained them because it was easier for women to do so. I didn't even have the courage to quit -- I had to underperform and be fired in order to leave the god-awful place (is it bad that I am pretty happy that he is now most likely bankrupt?)

The me now? Not so much.

In a tone rife with sarcastic comraderie, I remarked, "I see what you did there, a little bit of sexual harassment in the workplace, eh?"

He paled a bit at the comment and for the rest of the event, was nothing but respectful.

It only took a small bit of bravery to speak up in this case, as I had little to lose, but it felt significant to me in two ways. Firstly, I am sure the supervisor in question will think twice before belittling anyone else out to make a bit of cash by working one of the events. Secondly, I feel more confident and less scared to speak up for my rights.

fireincarnation commented: "I never understood why an actor could be paid to have sex on film for a movie, but it was illegal for a woman to have sex for money directly. Only thing I know of that becomes legal when cameras get involved."

the entry.

If a Bikini Bar Dancer is a Sex Worker, so is a Model.
If a Stripper is a Sex Worker, so is the Actress that simulates sex, kisses someone she is not in love with and performs in the nude.  In fact, she is more a Sex Worker than most strippers, certainly more so than any table dancer, most lap dancers too.

So, Halle Berry, Julia Roberts, Richard Gere, just to name a few, are all sex workers.  That is,  IF dancers are.    Certainly what we saw in Monsters Ball far exceeds what a stripper performs in the average strip joint.

So I thought I would bring the question here.

Who is a sex worker?

This article just makes me angr Vodafone does not allow housewives to buy their phones (I assume househusbands as well, but the article doesn't talk of them). A woman coming in to buy a new blackberry was turned away because she couldn't provide a work number as she's a stay at home mom. Apparently Vodafone is trying to weed out out of work people who might not be able to afford their bills. It obviously is not working.

And get this: they told her to get her husband to buy it for her. Can you imagine? Does anyone thinks this stinks of old school rights where women were not allowed to own property?

First blog entry!

Though it's common knowledge that the wage gap between men and women in the workforce is alive and kicking, the American Psychology Association has released a study from the University of Florida that shows men who hold traditional views of women actually earn an average of $8,500 more annually than men who support gender equality. It seems men who hold traditional views not only look to keep women earning less, but also the men who believe men and women are equal.

Also interesting (but certainly not unexpected) is that a wage gap exists between women who don't hold traditional values of gender roles and those who do: basically, those with traditional views earn an average of $1,500 less than those with egalitarian views. It makes sense (and I apologize for inevitably oversimplifying) in that women who don't value traditional gender roles are more likely to work toward breaking through the "glass ceiling", while women of more traditional values are more likely to "accept" their perceived position in the patriarchal system. 

Since this my first entry ever (yay), I'd like to leave the analysis to those who have read through the article (and maybe the entire study). I am always amazed (and humbled) at the analytical prowess of this community. I am far from good at it, but I take pride in learning more every day by reading posts. So... post!

Also, I may have messed up the links above, so to ensure the article can be accessed, here are the links in full redundancy.

APA Press release.

Full study.

Thanks!

Hey all,
Just read an interesting piece at alternet. Thought you might be interested.
Cheers!

Women lead better than men, studies say, so by voting for women politicians, buying products from woman-owned companies, and funding woman-led research we will improve our society. For example, Lawrence A. Pfaff conducted a five-year study that found that female managers scored significantly higher than their male counterparts in 15 of 20 management skill areas but men didn't score significantly higher in any skill area.

The nineteen-state study of 2,482 managers from 459 organizations used the Management-Leadership Practices Inventory (MLPI) tool to measure the managers' performance. The MLPI asks managers to rate themselves but also asks the managers bosses and employees to rate them as well to get an all-around picture of how well the manager performs. All three groups rated women higher than men. But it's one thing to score high on leadership tests and another to actually produce concrete results like profit. Do women's better scores on leadership tests produce better results than men? Yes, MLPI results have correlated to a manager's workgroup productivity. Other studies support Pfaff's research:

Edith G. Orenstein of Financial Executives International reportsthat, "A study in 2001 by Roy Adler, 'Women in the Executive Suite Correlate to High Profits,' published by the Glass Ceiling Research Center, found that the 25 Fortune 500 firms with the best record of promoting women to high positions are between 18 and 69% more profitable than the median Fortune 500 firms in their industries."A 2004 study conducted by Catalyst, "The Bottom Line: Connecting Corporate Performance and Gender Diversity," examined 353 Fortune 500 companies from five industries--consumer discretionary, consumer staples, financial, industrial, and information technology/telecommunications services. The study found that, "Companies with the highest representation of women on their top management teams experienced better financial performance than companies with the lowest women's representation. This finding holds for both financial measures analyzed-ROE, which is 35% higher, and TRS, which is 34% higher."

Hence, it is reasonable to conclude that women are better leaders than men overall. I believe this difference is because of the way females are raised and not due to genetics. Thus, men can learn to be as good at management as women. But the most important thing now is to recognize that women are better leaders overall because that knowledge will motivate people to give women the opportunities and respect that we deserve. It's tragic that men who are worse leaders are given most of the leadership jobs. Since studies show that the majority of the best leaders are women, we should get at least 50% of the top leadership jobs. That will benefit society by improving our institutions due to having better management and help women achieve political, social, and economic equality with men.

This is a perfect reflection of an incredibly pervasive sexist attitude in our culture concerning women. Somehow a woman's job-performance is always thought to be tied to her family obligations (or lack thereof). Nobody ever asks these kinds of questions about men. I often point to this kind of thing as an example of deep systemic sexism, but it seems like most people in our culture are in complete denial about this. How can anyone not see the profound disparity here? It's mind-boggling.

Karen Kornbluh is Obama's chief policy advisor and I found this CNN article that includes an interview with her. In addition to talking about how she became his chief policy advisor, she talks about the need for family friendly workplace policies and related topics. This excerpt is from a section where she is talking about how the one bread winner, one stay at home person model doesn't work for most families anymore and the CNN person is asking how to fix this.

"Kornbluh: It's a really great question. The way to think about it is we need not new policies but reform of existing policies -- for the new economy and the new family. Programs were put in place by FDR that were built around the breadwinner and the homemaker. Now the family is different, and the economy is different. But the policies haven't changed.

So health insurance and pension coverage are dropping; we don't have early childhood education or child care, and we're one of two developed countries that doesn't offer paid maternity leave. And we also need to have a discussion about how important parenting is, the challenges parents face, and what can be done in the workplace to make that easier. Many companies have figured this out, and we need to share those lessons more broadly. And parents shouldn't feel alone -- they should feel that what they're doing is of national importance."

She also talks about the challenges of being a high ranking female employee and a mother. It's worth a read. I didn't know about her before and now I'm going to look up some of the articles she's written.

EQUAL PAY COALITION NYC

cordially invites you to attend a breakfast forum

FAIR PAY:  THE TIME IS NOW!
A roundtable discussion on strategies
to end the wage gap and build our economic security

Moderator
Maria Hinojosa, PBS Journalist

Panel

Ellen Bravo - Author and Former National Director of 9 to 5

Lilly Ledbetter - Supreme Court Plaintiff
Hon. Carolyn Maloney - Congresswoman NY- District 14
Edward Ott - Executive Director, NYC Central Labor Council

Donna E. Pedro - Diversity and Compensation Expert

________________

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2008
8:00 - 10:00am

HUNTER COLLEGE
Faculty Dining Room­ - West Building, 8th Floor
Lexington Avenue at 68th Street (southwest corner)

RSVP by Nov. 10th  -  CALL:  212-937-2411 or  ONLINE

CO-SPONSORS: Hunter College and the New York Women’s Foundation

PARTNERS: National Council for Research on Women and Demos

HOST: EQUAL PAY COALITION NYC , a consortium of civic organizations, advocates and experts working together for Pay Equity in NY. Members include: A Better Balance ? AAUW–Manhattan ? AAUW–NYC ? Catalyst ? Center for the Women of New York ? Coalition of Professional Women in the Arts and Media ? CUNY-Howard Samuels Center ? Junior League of the City of New York ? League of Professional Theatre Women ? League of Women Voters of the City of New York ? Legal Momentum ? Manhattan Chamber of Commerce-Women's Business Committee ? NOW-NYC ?  NOW-Brooklyn/Queens Chapter ? National Association of Female Executives ? National Association of Women Business Owners NYC ? New York Coalition of 100 Black Women ? New York Women's Agenda (Coordinator) ? 100 Black Men ? Roundtable of Food Professionals NYC ? Women in Development-NY ? Women in Health Management ? Women on the Job Taskforce-NYSPEC ? Women's City Club of New York ? Women's Center for Education and Career Advancement ? Zonta Club of Greater Queens ? Authors Ellen Bravo, Debra Condren, Barbara Ehrienrich (in formation) EPCNYC was created in 2007 by NYWA, a coalition of women professionals and community activists who support the diversity and interests of New York women through collaboration, advocacy and education. NYWA is a New York nonprofit charitable corporation.

I am a college Teaching assistant, teaching a diversity in education class to preservice teachers. The other day someone brought up a bunch of arguments he credited to Warren Farrell, supposedly a self-identified feminist (Wikipedia identifies him as a men's rights activist) So I checked out the guy's website, and yep, he's got a doctorate, and has written a book about the wage gap being bunk...but are there any academic responses, critiques, explanations about him?

Please help!

Thank you!

I’ve been meaning to post this for a while, so here it goes.

It's not a reflection of the world at large, but it’s the world I work in.

I’m a civil servant, I work for the ministry of agriculture. Now, my minister (a Christian-Democrat, I'm a member of the Green party) is a very capable woman, married to another woman. And it is accepted. She often jokes that although she is the first female minister of agriculture in this country, the institution of the minister’s wife still stands.

Then the top of the department. Half of them women. One of them not pretty by traditional standards. All very capable.

 My boss. A brilliant woman that I adore. She is a very good boss, as reflected in very low rates of illness among my colleagues and my colleagues all successfully juggling work and family.

And then my colleagues. Fine people of different sexual orientations, different religious beliefs -if any. Getting along, getting the job done.

As much as there’s wrong in the world, in this part of my world something is right.

I work as a CNA (certified nursing assistant) in a nursing home. It's dirty work, it's hazardous (it exposes you to bodily fluids and it ruins your back, among other things), and it's physically and emotionally demanding. For all this, we are definitely underpaid, and I think it's because it's "woman's work," both in that it's a female-dominated career and it consists of hands-on care.

After studying art at in college, I  - surprise! Could not find a job in my field. So I took a less exciting job working retail for a natural beauty company, whose products where actually something I used. It is incredibly boring but for the most part painless, except for the occasionally rude/sexist customer who makes it their job to ruin my day.

Anyway...for new product launches we have "events" to get the word out and sell as much of the new stuff as posible. At a recent meeting to discuss and uppcoming event for the new men's hairgel, I was shocked to hear what my young, female manager had to add: she proposed that for the event, all of us girls should dress sexy (she suggested in push-up bras or corset tops) to attract male attention and sell more hair gel. WHAT?!

To artist Joe Mullins, recent history appears ready to repeat itself. Mullins was hired nearly 10 years ago to sculpt a statue to honor West Virginia’s female veterans. But a fight over the design all but derailed the project five years ago. Mullins now worries that a new attempt to complete the memorial is headed toward the same fate.

The Division of Culture and History has refused to fill its two seats on a new, 13-member committee assigned to assess the project and find it a permanent home. Mullins says that could leave the committee dominated by older veterans who dislike his statue, which was developed and approved by a different committee at the beginning of the decade. These critics have argued that the statue is too masculine, and should be wearing a skirt instead of fatigue pants.

We've come a long way from Mad Men -style office secretary groping, but make no mistake--the boys' club is still alive and well. Is there "Girl Power at School, but Not at the Office" ? Hannah Seligson raises that question in her recent New York Times article .

Seligson writes that she grew up feeling empowered in the classroom, but faced a rude awakening when she left college and found herself outside of the "cocoon of equality." After lasting just nine months in her first job, Hannah went on to write New Girl on the Job , a great (in my humble opinion) guide that helps women navigate the areas of the work world that aren't so egalitarian. She urges young women to learn the value of taking risks, to ask for feedback from supervisors, and to flex their bragging and negotiating muscles.

Her tips for women are excellent. But perfectionism and gender stereotyping exist long before that first resume is carefully crafted, at least according the girls I interviewed for You're Amazing . Seligson is right--the women's movement has created more opportunities for girls than they've ever had before. Today, girls' report cards, extracurricular pursuits, and internships are much more likely to match or even outshine the guys' gold stars. Unfortunately, a "cocoon of equality" spun from achievements and accolades is not the safe haven it appears to be when girls are unable to celebrate their successes.

Girls might be playing at the same level as the guys at school, but can we really claim equality when so many of them never feel like they are good enough, smart enough, thin enough, or pretty enough, despite what they accomplish? The perfectionism that leads girls to diet obsessively and others to stay up all night studying (and some to do both) will also hold women captive when it comes time to ask for that raise (Did I work hard enough? Did I do everything I was supposed to do? Do I really deserve this? ). Supergirls will continue to emerge from that cocoon as superwomen until we start working towards an equality that empowers girls and women to own our amazing qualities while we strive to reach our full potential--at school, at the office, and in every aspect of our lives.

I have also seen young women — myself included — getting in the way of their own success. I have found that we need to build a new arsenal of skills to mitigate some of our more “feminine” tendencies. Having lived in a cocoon of equality in college, we may have neglected these vital, real-world skills.

NEWS FLASH:  Hannah Seligson repeats the same advice I got in college --  Act Like A Man.

Whenever I first read these things, I first hear a little voice in the back of my head saying, but if I'm good enough as a woman to do the job, why should I have to change so much just to let people know that? 

The answer, of course, is presented at the end of Seligson's article -- the workplace is not a meritocracy.  This is correct, no doubt about it.  No matter how much anyone wishes it were, politics are at play in every workplace.

So I dig a little deeper.  What really gets to me is the assumption that all men have the necessary qualities to succeed and all women lack them.  We (not we as women, we as a society) are conditioned to adopt the accepted gendered social relational traits as we grow up.  Instead of shy people are uncomfortable promoting themselves in the workplace, we get WOMEN are uncomfortable promoting themselves in the workplace.  All of  a sudden you as a woman get a message about what is appropriate for your behavior, regardless of whether you were previously comfortable with self promotion. 

Finally, can we wonder why some people feel conflicted about family and work?  The one-step-further message is that women either need to shape up to be in the workplace, or find something else to do like raise a family.  It doesn't surprise me here that our current image of suburban mom-hood is the self sacrificing mother who always puts her children first, sometimes to the detriment of her own well-being.  Just look at programs like How Do I Look, How to Look Good Naked, and What Not to Wear.  They are chock full of women in "mom jeans" and t-shirts who have spent so much time on their children they have forgotten how to look good, as the hosts tell them -- and if we connect the dots, possibly because they never learned to promote themselves in the workplace. 

Elizabeth is a science teacher who focuses on gender and science education.  She is  a little bitter because of the sexism she experienced as a physics major in a college. 

Went out to dinner at the teppanyaki restaurant* last night with my relatives visiting from abroad. (At a teppanyaki restaurant, the eating surface surrounds a large griddle, and the chef cooks your food in front of you.)

*Often called in the U.S. a hibachi restaurant or Japanese steakhouse.

Nowadays, teppanyaki is a mixture of cookery and performance art. The chef prepares the food, but also juggles utensils, tosses eggs with his spatula-thing, stacks rings of an onion into a volcano shape and sets it on fire, catches things in his hat or pocket, things like that. It's really pretty neat.

But something I noticed this time: teppanyaki chefs* are exclusively male. The restaurant employs women, but they're the ones who bring your soup and drinks and take away your dirty plates - in short, waitresses; the waitstaff is all female. Women don't get to do the cool stuff.

This letter is a to a private school in which I interviewed for a job that I did not get. I have had enough with the shoot to kill privileged elite folks in this world. So here is my letter to them. In the letter you will notice that there is no mention of the school, cities or anything like that. Because for me, this is just venting. As a feminist I have interviewed for over 80 jobs since finishing graduate school. I have made nothing beyond poverty level wages. I am very tired of looking for jobs and interviewing for them. I have been discriminated many times in a job and I feel the privilege folks in the job world keep trying to shoot and kill me.

I drove 500 miles round trip in my 14 year old rusty car to inteview for a job that I got rejected from. I asked for reimbursement on the gas that I paid for, roughly $70 dollars and they said no. You might find this funny. When she said no I said, "do you want me to send you some rust from my car?" I was going to do that. Why not take some rust with your privilege?

With all this said here is my letter....

To Whom It May Concern:

Your privileged and elite private school is something that I do not want to be a part of and I am glad I did not get the job. You can't reimburse someone who came all the way up north but you can take money from "economically" privileged families in your city to line your pockets and your salary. Excess is a demise of a nation and you play a part of that excess. Go ahead and think you are living your idealistic lifestyle working at a private and elite school. Remember people in the inner cities (15% unemployment in the major city near me) who are suffering in a reality of homelessness, poverty, depression, violence, pollution and environmental racism because of your failure to understand the interconnectedness of this failed capitalistic system. You should feel guilty.

With your costs of education for an infant or toddler costing more than one year of college is absurd. You should be ashamed and disgusted with yourself considering you can't reimburse someone who drove a round trip of 500 miles.

I would rather work in an inner city helping children who really need help. Or better yet I would rather work on a reservation where Native American children are the brunt of this terrible system. Since my Native American heritage is a huge part of my life and today I am your brunt in your excess and thinking you live an idealistic life.

Open your eyes for a change!

Sincerely,

The Angry Native Woman

The new ad campaign by Mark Ecko "Hot Girls Make Great Clothes," left me nearly speechless when I saw it this afternoon. I am appalled that Ecko Unltd has the nerve not only to exploit and objectify women by putting only traditionally "beautiful" and skinny women in bikinis in their "factory," but that they would dare to mock the real women and girls who actually DO work in sweatshops around the world under nearly unbearable conditions. I find it utterly disgusting that this clothing company has gone one step further than ignoring the problem of sweatshop labor, they are now pretending that the people making their clothes are happy, gorgeous, scantily-clad bikini babes. It's almost impressive the amount of offensive material they were able to squeeze into one ad.

This is my first post, and I’m sorry that it is a little long. I should start out by saying that I am relatively new to feminism (a couple of months of being interested in any meaningful way) and I do not feel empowered AT ALL, but reading about it is helping.

I felt like for you understand how I am feel everyday at work, I should give an overview of what has been my experience here for the last four years. I also needed to get this off my chest, which I feel able to do now that I am leaving. I work on the public services staff of the law library at a major university. One might think a law school would be more concerned with how they deal with some of these issues, given their first-hand knowledge of the litigious nature of American society, but alas, at least at this institution, the needs of (argumentative, paying-buttloads-of-money-to-receive-their-education) law students will always trump those of the non-professional staff members trying to serve them.

Saturdays are typically pretty boring for me at my job as an "Admitting Represenative" at a hospital Imaging Center, so I bring a book with me. Last week I had a woman co worker gawk at me for reading a book on feminism.

What REALLY ticked me off, was the male who gave birth to a beautiful baby girl and everyone talked about how SICK and DISGUSTING it was and that we will "not be seeing him in heaven, thats for sure."

Tattoos? AND Piercings?! Well then, I must be a whore.

I know it is their opinion and I respect it, but I know they would not respect mine. And its a place of work..I dont want to get involved with my private life,especially with the comments they make on things that I support. So I keep my mouth shut..but its getting much harder and I just want to scream in their faces OPEN UP YOUR MIND!!!!!!!!!

I worked for Borders before the hospital and I was just accepted for who I was. But the hospital pays me way more. I would love to quit and be able to be myself but right now, financially, that cant happen.

I know Im not the only one who goes through this crap at their work. What do you all go through and do you stand up for yourself? Its so hard not to.

Yes, that could be me.  If I didn't have parents to lean on is these so called "tough" economic times I would have to go the welfare office and do the whole dehumanizing process of applying for welfare, food stamps and whatever else I need.  On some website I read that good people have bad things happen to them too. 

Now I sit hear in my childhood room at age 26 (almost 27) and wonder where the heck my life is going.  On my desk is a book about nonprofit information as I am supposed to be gathering information on starting a nonprofit.  Although I feel completely unmotivated.  I have some flyers on powwow's in my state.  I also have these two books out, "The Adult Children of Alcoholics Syndrome, by Wayne Kritsberg," and "Resolving Unfinished Business: Assessing the Effects of Being Raised In A Dysfunctional Environment, by Anthony S. Dallman-Jones, Ph.D."  I have my planner but not much is filled out in there, three books of poetry I have filled out in the past three months and some other things like a ceramic cup of pens and pencils.  I have plenty I can too but I am bored and tired.  I am bored because I am a very energetic person who needs various outlets to channel energy into.  I am tired because of this situation of being broke, living with my parents, feeling confined in my childhood room in more ways than one.  I feel confined sexually like I have an energetic chastity belt preventing me from having any sexual life or even enjoying my own sexuality by just being with me.  Not only am I dealing with all of this but I have those two books on my desk for a reason.  Although my family and I have done an amazing amount of healing and inner work to heal the effects, challenges, wounds and traumas of being on the same ship of the alcoholic family system there are still some things within me I feel are unfinished business.

The employees at the Women's Center of Ramapo College of New Jersey prides itself on being a fun and feminist place to work. We have a pretty cool position available and I thought there would be no place better to find an excellent candidate than on feministing, since we all know and love the site! Below is the ad for the position:

The Graduate Assistant for the Women's Center is a paraprofessional position on the Student Development team and reports to the Coordinator of the Women's Center. The Graduate Assistant will have primary responsibility for the day-to-day operation of the Center, assisting the Coordinator with the supervision and training of staff, the organization of all events, as well as presentations on responsible intimacy, body image, gender issues, and healthy relationships. The Graduate Assistant will work 25 hours/week plus limited evening and weekend event supervision.

Well, now.

So this new job at a restaurant which I've recently signed on to, has enlightened me as to how different it is to have men as your working superiors than it is to have women. I've worked for women who were amazing and inspiring, and truly good employers, and I have worked for women who are awful. So men certainly don't have a monopoly on treating their employees like shit. However, this is much different than anything I've experienced under even the most difficult female employers.

Why do the NYTimes, BBC and CNN love to look at the results of small studies or interviews with 4 wealthy white women and call them trends? Remember all the articles about how the trend was that more and more highly educated women were "opting" to stay home when they had kids? Now CNN is reporting that it's a growing trend for childless wives to stay home. The only research cited to justify this assertion are the following statements (by men, I might point out):

"Dr. Scott Haltzman, author of 'The Secrets of Happily Married Women,' says stay-at-home wives constitute a growing niche... While his research is ongoing, he estimates that more than 10 percent of the 650 women he's interviewed who choose to stay home are childless.

Daniel Buccino, a Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine clinical social worker and psychotherapist, says stay-at-home wives are the latest 'status symbols.'"

Great, just what women always wanted to be, status symbols. I can't believe this justifies an article. If they had at least cited real studies and/or real trends. Especially in this economy, how many people can really afford to choose to stay home?

Okay, I keep writing and deleting additional thoughts on this but I don't want to make the post too long so I guess I'll end saying I think this article is silly and, look out, this trend is coming for you! (haha) Your thoughts?

I recently graduated from a pretty liberal college. After being surrounded by like minded peers for 4 years I have been surprised by the amount of ignorant comments from smart, nice people I encounter. I just started a new job and a few weeks ago I spent a week at one of the main offices being trained. During these training sessions, colleagues would make what seemed like innocent enough comments but I would find myself becoming angered by their inability to see how these comments could offend. One comment was about race and the other about sexual preference. Both were white men and I assume both were straight but their comment revealed how they viewed their race/sexual orientation as normal and how they viewed those different from them as "other".

Here are the two comments:

This is so disturbing. A Russian Judge said that if there wasn't sexual harassment, there wouldn't be babies. The stats included are horrendously frightening. 100 percent of women surveyed said they had been sexually harassed.

You can read the story here.

Just wanted to give a shout out that the House of Representatives is scheduled to discuss the Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338) sponsored by Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) tomorrow, Thursday July 31st at 10:00am.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would update and strengthen the Equal Pay Act of 1963, closing loopholes and improving the law's effectiveness. H.R. 1338 would, among other things, deter wage discrimination by strengthening penalties for equal pay violations, and by prohibiting retaliation against workers who inquire about employers' wage practices or disclose their own wages. The bill also requires employers collect better data on wages, reinstate activities by the Department of Labor that promote equal pay, and develop training for women and girls on salary negotiations.

You can watch the proceedings live on C-CSPAN. I will try to provide a summary and some feedback after the hearing for those that are interested.

I am a feminist. I have been (consciously) since age 4. I've educated myself and taken my share of Women's studies classes. I've been an activist since age 11. I had a safe house, have been trained by feminists to defend myself and  payed it forward teaching others the same techniques. I've taught women assertiveness. I've been in business with women and have always ascribed to the "One hand up and one hand down" philosophy. I do my best to not judge other women. Instead, I take a step back and do my best to employ compassion. When I find myself being competitive or jealous of another women in my industry, I check myself.

When I read "Feminism VS Sex Workers" at the community blog and read some of the arguments, my B.S. radar went off. I quieted it down with the memory of my own perception pre strip industry experience. I entered the strip clubs at age 29 and worked on and off as a stripper until age 37.  Before that, my perception was not very different from many I've come across on feminist blogs and journals.  I was prejudiced against "those" women too.  It's important for me to remember that while I ask for understanding.  I ask women to suspend their judgments until they have at least imagined a walk in my shoes. I know that is asking a lot because I didn't do that before I actually walked in those shoes myself. How dare I expect that from anyone now? I don't expect it, I hope for it.

As someone who was told by a supervisor at a recent job with a national company that "women with small boobs are offensive", I am reluctant to jump into any position that comes my way now that I'm again on a job hunt. 

Unfortunately, as I've just graduated college and moved back to my hometown of Louisville, Kentucky, I have to find something to pay the rent and the student loans. 

Due to, I suppose, the economy, many of the non-profits that I've applied to can't afford to hire anyone right now, though they have positions that desperately need to be filled. 

I really hope to be able to find a job that will help me advocate for and activate women.  I want my feminism to be practiced.

Has anyone else run into this problem?  Does anyone have suggestions for me regarding finding feminist work?

    I have a frustrating problem.  I just graduated from college in April and am desperately trying to find a job in Washington, D.C. with a Women's Studies focus.  I'm really open to anything. However, it seems that the only available positions within larger organizations are unpaid internships, which obviously I can't take and pay rent in the city.  It gets me thinking about how undervalued and taken for granted recent college grads are in the current job market (outside of nursing and education majors).  Sure, the economy is not the best right now no matter where you're looking for jobs.  And sure, a recent college graduate with no real work experience doesn't look as good on paper as another person several years out.  But I still think it is ridiculous that college graduates should have to take unpaid internships just to get them in to the 'real' world.  More and more I'm seeing this amongst my friends and wonder how I can break in to these organizations I really admire and want to work for without submitting to an internship which, let's be honest, is definitely the short end of the stick.  Now, I completely understand having to start somewhere, and not landing your dream job right out of college.  But what I really want to know is, do I have to stick out 2 or so years in some job perhaps with an organization or office I care nothing about just to land an entry level position with an organization I have a passion for?  I hope not.  I hope that's just not my idealism taking. It's a tough call these days.  Most days I'm frantically searching the internet for jobs, but others I give up, knowing that in cities like DC it's "who you know" not "what you know" and most likely answering a job announcement on idealist.org isn't going to get me anywhere.

    I'll keep trying. One of the wisest pieces of job advice I've received is to "trust the process." Who knows, I might be surprised one day by a kick ass job.  But when you get down to it- unpaid internships certainly can be fantastic things and real growing experiences; but when you're fresh out of college and need something to pay the bills, they certainly fall short.

This article was in USA Today:

Women break to front of tech

SAN FRANCISCO — The glass ceiling finally seems to be shattering.

Hillary Rodham Clinton nearly snagged the Democratic presidential nomination. Danica Patrick became the first female winner in IndyCar history. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has emerged as a major figure in world affairs.

Eva Chen smiles at the comparisons. As one of the tech industry's top female executives, she is already accustomed to strides in her own profession.

"It's gratifying to see more women in prominent roles in tech," says Chen, co-founder and CEO of Trend Micro, the third-largest computer-security company in the world, behind Symantec and McAfee. Its market value is $5.5 billion.

Okay, I think it is great that women are breaking through to the top in the high tech industry, but it begs the question why not in other areas as well.  This article posits that in the less structured field of computers and internet there is less sexism:

The Internet boom created a lot of opportunities, says Michelle Peluso, who, as CEO, has fashioned a turnaround at travel site Travelocity. "The entrepreneurial path became easier and more inviting."

"Anecdotally, I do think that there are more opportunities generally in technology for people who may not look or match up to traditional definitions of, say, what an engineer or someone in product management should look like," says Gina Bianchini, CEO of social-networking site Ning. "This is a direct result of the fact that creating things online today is basically free and requires very little direct coding experience to create real businesses or new products."

Also, the article points out that more women are pursuing engineering degrees and  other degree paths that traditionally were male dominated, yet, how often do we read about a women subjected to sexism in the hard sciences and even choosing to leave her first career and doing something else?

Fueling the growing ranks of C-level executives (CEO, chief operating officer, chief information officer ) are more engineering and computer science graduates. The number of female engineering graduates in 2005, the last year for which statistics are available, was nearly 13,200, up 8% from 2000. The number of female computer-science college graduates rose 7%, to 11,235, in the same time frame, according to the National Science Foundation.

I can only hope that the high tech industry might serve as the leading edge of a growing trend of more women rising to higher and higher positions of leadership in society.

This post is particularly poignant for me, as I am sitting here at the Richmond Military Processing Center, now a seasoned veteran, watching young kids joining the military, knowing that many of the women, in their careers, will face a great deal of challenges because they happen to be women.

Yet, I logged on to CNN this morning and saw this story.

I'd say it's the beginning of a very critical start in the equalization of genders in the military.

One of the reasons I decided to stay in after eight years of service, almost to the date, is because I realize that in society where rank does matter, that those who have a bit of rank can affect the people below them.

Patriarchal as it is, the military leaves some room for change - and it is up to those in the military,with what little bit of rank they have, to change the culture.

I've already seen the positive effects in changing the mindsets of the "young soldiers" with whom I work. And I believe that the more of our voices are heard in the military (we meaning progressives and feminists), the more the culture will change.

After all, you don't beat patriarchy by recoiling into your own feminism. You beat it by taking it head on.

So, with this story, it seems to me yet another door has opened for feminist discussions and ideals - no matter how little the opening to this door is.

I am not a yeller - yet, just a few hours ago, I had to go "hockey" on a recruit, for making some very objectifying comments and whistling at a female recruit as she walked passed. We work with the tools and power that we have - no matter how small those tools or power might be.

What are your experiences, as both males and females in the military, especially as progressives and feminists?