Quote:
Originally Posted by AENeuman
Yeah, I didn't mean for the politics example to be the focus...
I think many women (nearly as many men) have had access, income and time to be creative in the last 50 or so years. with this new opportunity i'm just disappointed with the results.
|
With regards to the "slowness" of advancement, it's all about infrastructure, in many fields. There's sexism in the higher ranks- no doubt about it- and part of that comes from not having women in higher number in higher ranks.
However, eventually, pink or blue doesn't matter in business- green does. If there's a better, more competent woman out there, some company is going to hire her and beat that competitor who passed on her (I realize this is in a perfectly competitive situation- which we don't have, however).
But the bigger thing is that there isn't the working infrastructure out there. It takes time to work your way up the corporate ladder and there just hasn't been that much time. Heck, overt sexism was still very prevalent even into the 90s in most fields (then sexual harassment suits went crazy) so that limited the level of advancement.
Not only that but with few fields thought of as being acceptable for women to go into, it's going to be hard to get to get women to the top of fields where there is only 5-20% participation. If it's 4 or 19 qualified men to every one qualified woman, those are long odds.
It's one of those things, similar to racism, that just takes time to die out. You can artificially try to adjust things (affirmative action, etc), but otherwise, it's just going to take a few generations of people dying and younger, more tolerant ones being brought up to equal this out.
SI