Women, Work, and Leadership

Sunday's NY Times magazine contained an article discussing what we and our daughters should learn  from the fact that opposition to Sen. Clinton's candidacy has included some expressions of sexism and misogyny (e.g. the "Life's a Bitch, Don't Vote for One" T-shirts) along with, the author recognizes, legitimate grounds for opposing her.  The author then talks about the obstacles women still face in entering "male" occupations like firefighter and in rising to the top as large-company CEOs, large-firm law partners, etc.  I was struck not by the article's emphasis on obstacles -- it took a pretty middle position recognizing the "possibilities" for young women and the "vitriol" they may face in working to realize them -- but by the fact that all the obstacles described were flat-out sexist expressions or attitudes (facing "the b- and c- words," surveys showing lots of men prefering to have male bosses etc.).  There was no mention of the structural obstacles that exist because women remain the dominant family caregivers while also trying to provide the long work hours and intense work availability that it typically takes to rise high in a workplace.  Again, I don't discount the sexism or misogyny aspect of the problem, and maybe the article focused on sexist expressions because it was trying to draw lessons from the Clinton candidacy (or maybe the author as a contributing (free lance?) writer hasn't experienced the structural workplace-demands problem herself).  But it struck me again how often the structural side of the "glass ceiling" problem is ignored -- that if we value both mothers' caregiving and women's professional leadership, then changes in the competition-driven workplace are needed -- and therefore how important are the ideas discussed in this symposium, at St. Thomas Law last year, to which Lisa, Susan, and Michael S. (see link on symposium page) contributed.

Tom