This pattern of research undermining stereotypes is getting to be a nuisance. Once upon a time, it was much easier to batten the blame for the glass ceiling on the victims, and now they keep telling us it’s our fault!
The research focused on career paths of high-potential men and women, drawing on thousands of MBA graduates from top schools around the world. Catalyst found that, among those who had moved on from their first post-MBA job, there was no significant difference in the proportion of women and men who asked for increased compensation or a higher position.
Yet the rewards were different.
Women who initiated such conversations and changed jobs post MBA experienced slower compensation growth than the women who stayed put. For men, on the other hand, it paid off to change jobs and negotiate for higher salaries—they earned more than men who stayed did. And we saw that as both men’s and women’s careers progress, the gender gap in level and pay gets even wider.
Our findings run counter to media coverage of the so-called phenomenon that “women don’t ask.” Instead the problem may be, as some other research has shown, that people routinely take a tougher stance against women in negotiations than they take against men—for example quoting higher starting prices when trying to sell women cars or making less generous offers when dividing a sum of money. Catalyst research has shown a number of ways that talent-management systems can also be vulnerable to unintentional gender biases and stereotypes.
Given past experience, though, I’m sure someone will come along in the comments and helpfully give us a new excuse that pins the blame squarely where it belongs, on women themselves.
“Given past experience, though, I’m sure someone will come along in the comments and helpfully give us a new excuse that pins the blame squarely where it belongs, on women themselves.”
Is it possible that, on average, men are better at this kind of job than women?
There. Happy now?
Oops. I didn’t actually blame it on the womins, did I? Let me rephrase…is it possible that, on average, womin aren’t as good at this job as the mens?
Obviously, the women aren’t asking right.
The whole paper is available for download. On the To Read stack you go!
Now, now. It will take the real skeptics a little while to parse the data so that it agrees with their own worldview. Give them a little while to go through it with their fine MRA-issued comb.
You left out an important bit. Probably because you were menstruating.
But two anonymous women told me they knew they weren’t really pushing for that raise as much as the men were.
I don’t disagree with the findings, but aside from awareness building, are there any suggestions for what one might do about it?
There will always be people who’s biases are so strong or who’s powers of self-analysis are so weak that they won’t be able to accept that systematic bias like this exists.
I would rather channel my energies into looking for solutions to the problem than lashing out at the clueless though.
Could someone explain what an MBA is actually for?
Oooo, oooo! It’s because they have uterii and will get pregnant immediately when they get hired. Also, ladybrains, menstrual periods and natural docility, blah blah.
Why keep ball-busters like that around? Don’t need women challenging your authoritah like that, being all uppity and asking for raises and such.
Lashing out at the clueless is more productive than posting a comment telling the lashers that their energies are ill-spent.
You just lost 1 min. of time that you could have spend “looking for solutions”, shame on you.
carlie: Yeah, don’t they know that giving a woman a raise means that you lose to her? It’s obviously emasculating.
And of course, the glass ceiling is down to evolution, obviously: women can’t be as good as men at ambitious endeavours because in prehistoric times, they had to be able to pick fruits and berries, not hunt mammoths and other big beasts! Right? Right?
Irene: I forgot the magic cavemen, shame on me. Yes, let’s not forget cavemen, mammoths, berries and the little (cave)woman.
Since the effects we are talking about are subtle and often unconscious effects – ones that render people unaware of their privilege – ‘lashing out at the clueless’ in fact a central part of the solution.
You allow them to work and soon they dare ask to get payed fairly.
Women are never satisfied. *shakes head sadly*
Mattedlesfen,
I have been told by my managers that my male co-worker who hired in at the same time as me and received the same performance score deserved a higher raise because he was married and clearly had more expenses. When I got married, my raises did not get bigger, because I was expected to rely on my husband for the extra income. He was expected to get the raises.
The solution to that problem IS lashing out at clueless people in charge of compensation. If they can’t figure out when told that it’s not fair (what your perceived expenses are should not dictate your compensation) then the only options are to leave, grin and bear it, or fight for fairness!
I’m confused – can this be summarised as “when women and men with comparable experience and ability asked for comparable recompense and with equal assertion during interviews, women were still made lower offers?”
I haven’t read the original article, so I’m relying on someone cleverer than me to summarise,
Bloody women! With their qualifications and asking!
Why can’t they just keep quiet and polite and not upset anyone? Don’t they know that women asking for money makes men uncomfortable? Why can’t they wait for people to give them pay rises?
After all before those suffragettes came along women were just about to be given the vote and full rights and that sort of thing. Bloody suffragettes ruined it all.*
Louis
*See also: Stonewall, Martin Luther King etc.
Louis: Ah yes. History is littered with those examples. Things were going to get better (eventually), but some people just can’t learn to wait. :D
Everyone knows women are much more nurturing than men, therefore the best way to use their knowledge is, instead of giving them promotions, to hire in a new guy for the higher position and then get her to train him in everything she already knows (in addition to her normal duties, of course). At least that’s the way I’ve seen it work in a few places.
@chigau:
An MBA or Masters in Business Administration is usually a short, easy graduate program designed to demonstrate a person’s ability to disassociate his or her actions from the real-world consequences of those actions by teaching the candidate how to erect a wall of red tape, plausible deniability, and self-serving excuses between the two.
It’s like a graduate degree in sociopathy.
So the study suggests that, given the same starting position and the same attempts at increasing their pay, men will tend to be offered more than women.
I’m now curious about whether or not this implication is true, or since it most likely is, what the numbers are. I’d like to see what the offers were and how they compare.
I also wonder if female employers are offering men more money than women, or if it is only male employers, or indeed if there is any bias when comparing gender, race, et cetera of employer and employee. That would be some interesting data.
Seems perfectly natural to like men who are “go-getters” and dislike “pushy” women.
daniellavine
That’s kinda what I thought.
It’s called reading the study?
And finding that they verified that it was true, because of the later salaries?
And that you can see how the increases compared by looking at the data in the study?
How is it that actual data isn’t even seen to be actual data, but rather “implications”?
Carli said,
“…therefore the best way to use their knowledge is, instead of giving them promotions, to hire in a new guy for the higher position and then get her to train him in everything she already knows (in addition to her normal duties, of course).”
It’s been my experience that this applies regardless of gender (although admittedly more often to women)
Mouthyb,
Well what we have to understand, and I feel Mattedlefsen is providing us with a nice example of this,* is that disturbing any form of status quo by challenging the unthinking prejudices and privilege of people is wrong.
Of course all of you, your fine self included Mouthyb sadly, have it wrong. I shall explain precisely what is behind the issue and what the problem is. Ahem.
{Composes self}
{Straightens tie}
{Clears throat}
{Deep breath}
WOMEN ASKING FOR MONEY AND EXPECTING EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK AND BEING TREATED LIKE THEY ARE REAL PEOPLE HURTS MY MAN FEE-FEES.
MY MAN FEE-FEES MUST BE RESPECTED AT ALL TIMES.
ONLY MANS WITH MAN FEE-FEES ARE PROPER AND REAL. WOMEN WITH THEIR WEIRD GIRLY “FEELINGS” ARE NOT EXPERIENCING PROPER FEE-FEES LIKE MANS DO.
RESPECT THE MAN FEE-FEES!!!! RESPECT THEM!!!!
I hope that’s all clear for everyone now. Oh and by the way, I have testicles and therefore am right. So nurr.
Louis
* Sorry Mattedlefsen, I am sure you are a nice guy, a decent human being and an all round good egg, but saying that people shouldn’t bother to challenge the terminally clueless when the terminally clueless are one half of the problem and the other half is that they go unchallenged….well….I have been moved to sarcasm. SARCASM! And no one wants that.
catalyst has done a number of really good reports like this. I have a few of them on my site already, and shall be adding this one, too.
we can’t do anything other than raise awareness. But these reports aren’t for us, they’re for businesses; because not having enough women is not a cool thing anymore, and some business leaders actually do grok that gender imbalance likely means some very good talent is being lost in favor of the mediocre from the other side. So: these reports exist so that businesses know what to change, should they want to change. From that perspective, what we can do is to not do business with businesses who don’t, in favor of those businesses who do. But good luck figuring out which are which *sigh*
well, that’s one way to minimize activism. what has consciousness-raising ever done for us, after all?
Sadly, I think men simply feel safer being aggressive with women than with other men. My opinion is that while our relationships in any civilized setting are not based on physical dominance, we still take unconscious cues from it. It seems to me from experience in the corporate world that big, tall guys command more respect simply because they are physically imposing. Even though there’s no real chance of getting into a fist fight with them as a result, people fuck with them less. I think women feel the brunt of that the worst. A manager is less uncomfortable with taking a hard line with a woman because they don’t seem as physically intimidating.
I call it the “bully instinct”, taking liberties with those who we feel comfortable asserting power over, and being warier with those who seem stronger.
It’s a difficult one to counter because it requires one to examine one’s own behavior and look deeply at how they feel emotionally in situations of negotiation, power, etc. People who don’t want to be self-aware will be able to rationalize it away as having a reason that they gave man Y a raise but not woman X, even when the situations were virtually identical in every other way.
Unfortunately our concept of bullying is essentially how children do it. What we fail to realize is that bullying can be subtle, even unconscious. People don’t know they are doing it because they are just acting on emotional cues that influence how much favor and deference they bestow on someone.
I remember a Dateline NBC or one of those shows where they got an average looking guy and a big, strapping, model-looking guy interviews for the same stock broker job with essentially the same resume. If I remember right, they even made the average guy come across as more knowledgeable and skilled in the interview. The model guy of course got the job. When they confronted the boss with their ruse, he was unapologetic, saying, “he looks like a stock broker!” It just makes me wonder what would happen if we were able to reveal the hidden biases that affect how we treat people…even showing them such ugly truth, would they want to change, or would they just rationalize more brazenly?
Louis:
Er… Yes, we do!! :-)
therefore the best way to use their knowledge is, instead of giving them promotions, to hire in a new guy for the higher position and then get her to train him in everything she already knows…
Grr. Bonus points if you can get away with originally hiring that woman as a consultant (and thereby not have to pay whatever passes for Canada Pension/Employment Insurance contributions and benefits where you are), hire the guy to replace her at twice her earnings and on salary, and then lay her off because of “financial difficulties.” Grr.
My new job is remarkably egalitarian for an IT company; about 30% of the workforce is female, and lots of them are technical line staff and/or managers (ie. not just the clerical, HR, marketing, and payroll people).
Oh, goody. Beat everyone who even agrees with you in the wrong tone of voice into submission.
It’s important to push this issue with companies and legislators, to the extent that there is a possible legislative or regulatory solution. But it’s even more important, when you’re talking to an actual woman with an MBA (although I find most people with MBAs aren’t interesting to talk with) it’s actually okay to tell HER different choices and behaviors that can improve her odds. Obviously not a different gender, unless she REALLY wants to invest in her career, but telling her different behaviors that will improve her odds is not the same thing as telling her she is wrong or bad.
since men and women are treated differently in the work place and as noted in hiring and compensation might it be wise to along with trying to enlighten the ignorant find some other ways to help correct the problem.
Are there other ways to negotiate the pay than the same way that has been advised which has been developed and advocated by male dominated hiring practices?
There is another aspect to this which involves self image and self knowledge. Many women of my acquaintance seem to accecpt less more easily then men when it comes to the work place. Conscious raising to the real problem and work on self image have always been necessary in civil rights justice issues.
you can’t win justice or civil rights on your knees
uncle frogy
An example of a successful someone who was a holder of an MBA is our former president G. W. Bush
the best degree money could by
uncle frogy
I live in the corporate world. Speaking in wide generalizations, women have to sacrifice more and fight harder than men to be at an equivalent level with them (in terms of promotions or pay). They are held to different standards (asshole males are “driven”, driven females are “bitches”; terrible fathers are “driven”, driven mothers are “terrible mothers”).
And what many of them fight for (other than the right to be just to be members of the old boys’ club) are things that, if males got their heads out of the asses, would benefit everybody equally (especially with respect to reasonable work/life expectations).
Right, PZ. I’d wager you wrote this post at the behest of your controversialist superiors.
Louis: I shall respond to that screed with all the dignity it deserves.
I’m rubber and you’re glue. Everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you.
Also: sticks out tongue
Mouthyb,
You are not respecting my man fee-fees*. The Man-Fee-Fee-Enforcement-Police will be calling to give you a pay cut.
Good day. I SAID GOOD DAY!
Louis
*IMPORTANT!
Louis wears a tie?
Chigau,
I never said I was wearing anything else. And on THAT disturbing mental image….
Louis
“I have been told by my managers that my male co-worker who hired in at the same time as me and received the same performance score deserved a higher raise because he was married and clearly had more expenses. When I got married, my raises did not get bigger, because I was expected to rely on my husband for the extra income. He was expected to get the raises.
The solution to that problem IS lashing out at clueless people in charge of compensation. If they can’t figure out when told that it’s not fair (what your perceived expenses are should not dictate your compensation) then the only options are to leave, grin and bear it, or fight for fairness!”
It gets worse than that. I was told in one case that the man needed more money because he wanted to get married IN THE FUTURE, and at that time, I was a single mother trying to raise a child. So, I had the same needs as a man with a wife to support (or more, because my child couldn’t go out and work at the age of 14), but he needed more money in case he needed to get married someday! (He did eventually get married to a woman who had a very good job, and could have provided the extra income, while I – went on food stamps – thereby becoming a “welfare queen”).
MBAs, like lawyers, are a class of people who earn professional degrees in order to engage in a career they find interesting. The lure of high-stakes / high-compensation is a driving force for many involved. They are universally scorned by the rest of the population, as it is clear to everyone who did not choose these professions that MBAs and lawyers are unethical scumbags denying society the inevitable utopia that would exist in their absence. Yet somehow the vehement disdain towards these scumbags that is trumpeted by the masses is always set aside when the individuals from the angry mob want help managing their retirement funds, turning their ideas into viable business ventures, navigating bankruptcy, funding research, publishing and distributing creative work or protecting their legal rights.
Let me know when your profession is ready to stand up to a constant barrage of straw-man criticism, hypocrites.
Probably it’s because women can’t psychologically deal with offices not being pink enough. *eye roll*
IOW, not regardless of gender. Contradicting yourself within a single sentence is quite an achievement.
*looks down*
Louis – so the foo-foos don’t equal out to the fee-fees? But the foo-foos get their own expensive wired pieces of clothing and everything! *pouts*
Louis: I couldn’t get paid less to teach, at this point. Bring your man cops on. I’ll larn ’em.
Let me know when your profession is ready to stand up to a constant barrage of straw-man criticism, hypocrites.
Like the barrage you just aimed at everyone who has primary motivations other than profit and competition?
And, sweetie, I have a humanities degree. Want to talk about popular targets for popular condescension?
I played music for a living for 15 years. Of course no one ever assumed I drank and took drugs and screwed around.
But then everyone has a right to look down on musicians, ever since we inadvertently brought down the economy by writing and playing a bunch of really shitty songs.
Killed By Fish
M Groesbeck
The barrage was aimed at the asshat commenters, not everyone – I’m pretty sure I listed several items that apply equally to individuals and non-profits. Take your MBA prejudiced glasses off and re-read my statement at face value.
There are lots of professions that take crap, but only a reserve few are constant fair game for the type of BS comments posted earlier in this thread. I’m tired of letting them go unchallenged.
@ liebore
Okay – my profession is ready to stand up to constant barrage of criticism. You need to recognize your profession’s flaws in order to improve things for everybody. Sure: straw-man criticism is one thing, legitimate criticism is another.
I’m vaguely familiar with this. I’m a “scumbag” lawyer. And I help people for damn good compensation.
And I’m the first one to say my profession has flaws that need fixing. Especially when it comes to gender equality.
Mine is also in need of criticism, which is why I do.
You might not know this, but it’s totally possible to criticize your own profession AND someone else’s.
Sorry, @ liebore should have been at the beginning of my comment.
How do the lawyers feel about being lumped-in with the MBAs?
oh honey. don’t get into that pissing contest with me; I’m a commercial artist who works on the internet.
@ chigau
The humourous answer to that is “I threw up in my mouth a little and nearly crashed into the ambulance I was chasing”.
Especially since my undergrad degree is an awesomely commerce-impaired Humanities degree.
I’m not saying my profession is beyond criticism, nor is it without serious flaws that need correcting.
It is not, however a “degree in sociopathy,” there is not enough said about it that George Bush possessed the degree, and the degree itself is not a good indicator that the person is uninteresting to talk to. These comments are bullshit, and the asshats that feel the need spew them deserve to be called out.
@liebore:
First of all, an MBA is a degree, not a profession. So most of your screed doesn’t even make sense.
Second of all, your list is hilarious for anyone paying attention to current events. You may have noticed a few short years ago there was something of a “financial disaster.” From what I can tell, the people primarily responsible for the negligent handling of the financial economy were…lawyers and MBAs. This makes your first example either utterly hilarious or deeply depressing (maybe both). MBAs manage people’s retirement funds…by suggesting they go with 401Ks and pension funds that, when these same MBAs explode the market a few years later, become almost entirely worthless. But it’s a good scam; they just get more fees when all the broke suckers come out of the woodwork to start new retirement accounts.
Viable business ventures? Can you name a company, any company that got a lot of interest from MBAs before it was already successful? Of course not. Business types are bandwagoners. They don’t help anyone who can’t help them, i.e. anyone who isn’t already successful. Bankruptcy proceedings are pretty much irrelevant to the argument, but the “publishing and distributing creative works” is pretty hilarious. We used to have people on the radio called “DJs” who were usually very knowledgeable about obscure music so that you could actually hear new music and learn things about music by listening to the radios. It was the MBAs pushing radio station formats and focus groups that ended that. In fact, MBAs taking similar measures have largely crushed everything vital and interesting about music and writing out of the music and publishing industries. Now because the internet poses threats to their monopolies over distribution channels the business types and lawyers are taking aim at it with SOPA and the like.
Protecting legal rights is just a laugh. I bet you were running around defending SOPA until you saw my take on what an MBA is.
@daniellavine
Since you lack the intelligence to make the connection between the MBA degree and the business profession, let me do it for you. A person who earns a Masters of Business Administration is often referred to as an MBA (the person, not the degree), and is classified as a business professional. Generally speaking, semantics makes a poor setup for any argument.
I was considering responding to your “MBAs ruined our economy” statement (because I’m really tired of this canard), but based on the six other versions of the “Evil MBA Conspiracy” you used in your argument, I think it would be too much like trying to reason with Glen Beck.
Don’t forget to break down and cry when you make these claims, the audience loves it!
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to go figure out how many single moms I need to fire to maximize my annual bonus.
Well, PZ, the problem is that women have a built in -2 to their CHA score. We just can’t expect them to use the Intimidation, Bluff, and Diplomacy skills as well as a man. They’re at an inherent disadvantage when it comes to negotiating for higher pay.
Their inherent +2 CON, however, makes them much more capable of withstanding minor burns and cuts, like, say, from cooking. Of course, this also helps immensely with childbirth.
I think the conclusion to be drawn is obvious: Give all of the heavy armor and magic items that boost physical stats to women. They’ll need it to tank.
The post is about a survey showing that women exhibiting identical behaviors to men still get lower compensation.
Did you even fucking read it?
+1 Internets. Thank you
XD
@24
Printed and cubicle hung!
@liebore:
Believe it or not, genius, not everyone with an MBA works as a business professional and not every business professional has bothered to earn an MBA. My original post was about the sorts of things one learns in an MBA program. It was obviously too subtle for you, but then it wasn’t really meant for you in the first place.
As for the “MBA conspiracy,” I don’t have to prove anything. You’re the one who pointed out the fruits of the values and knowledge provided by MBA programs are most evident in financial and publishing industries (music, books, film, TV), venture capital, and IP law. I’m happy to leave the argument right there on finance and IP and let everyone come to their own conclusion about whether MBAs are a net benefit or net drag on society.
Don’t leave the rest of us hanging like that!
Yeah, but what’s the use of quietly feeling superior?
I’d be interested to see the outcomes when women were the managers i.e. do they treat women fairly, positively or negatively?
Blockquote fail. Sorry.
@Azkyroth:
That’s the pharyngula way! Assume your interlocutor is an idiot, as he obviously is if he doesn’t agree with you in the right tone of voice!
The study does not actually describe identical behaviors. Did the men or the women or both have a shark-hungry smile when presenting their salary requests? Did the women or the men take classes specializing in the particular predatory practice needed for the new positions? Were their demands 10%, 12%, 15%, or 80% over their current salaries?
Did you even read the article yourself? You know, the part where it says that different behaviors from women may produce different results?
Now, go read the article again, and then read my comment again, and this time assume I’m smarter than you are, rather than what you did this time.
@BubbaRich
There are a few problems with this. First, you seem to be suggesting that it’s just the right and proper way of things for everyone to exhibit alpha-male behavior in order to seek advancement. Yet even the article says:
In other words, they are explicitly trying to eliminate the biases favoring hyper-aggressive people. They recognize it’s a problem with the system, not a problem with the individuals seeking advancement.
Second, even if you are well-meaning, the notion that “yeah, things aren’t ideal, but if you just change your behavior, you can still get ahead…” provides a rationalization for those responsible for perpetuating these problems. It provides those who see it around them an excuse not to stand up for others, “well, it sucks that she didn’t get promoted, but you know, she has to learn how to play the game…” In the end, it always gets used to blame the victim, no matter what the original intent.
Third, are you seriously suggesting that women on average asked for higher increases than men, and that’s why more were rejected? This seems highly implausible to me. I would think that if there was a difference, that women asked for lower % increases on average, but in the absence of data, you really can’t say that.
Yay! Another one who can’t read! Why, here’s how I began response #35:
And yes, that’s EXACTLY what I would say to a woman (say, my daughter) as I mentioned in #35. It turns out that my daughter will be looking for a job in the real world, and I hope she won’t be as stupid as you suggest and refuse to modify her behavior (within her own ethical bounds) to improve her outcomes.
Remember, honey, you may have to suck a lotta cocks in order to improve your outcomes.
/snark
@liebore
The unsuccessful have a special sort of scorn for the successful. Lots of people fail at making money and then immediately assume that because they failed at making money, everyone who has succeeded has somehow cheated.
I’m not talking about institutionalized bias as demonstrated in this article. If people with equivalent credentials and negotiating schemes are getting different compensation, that is clearly a problem which needs to be addressed.
I’m talking about people who pick stupid majors in college and then later end up going “WAAAAAAAAH!!!! Why doesn’t my Film/Lit/Social Studies/{insert random social group here} Studies degree lead to jobs that pay as much as jobs which require an MBA/Computer Science/Math degree? UNFAIR UNFAIR UNFAIR!!!!!!! I got a degree too, why is my future full of being a cashier at Walmart while yours is full of expensive restaurants and nice things?”
Fuck you so much.
Ing, BS
I mean it’s not like we had a financial collapse that was caused by stupid and bad business practices where those responsible cashed out and the rest of us science majors have to scramble to look for any job.
Sigh. My fault, obvious troll is obvious.
WordsofaWizard: I’m going to have to go with Ing here. Me and my twp English degrees, and pending two more degrees in Sociology: all together, we’d like to tell you to fuck yourself.
equating success and money is pathological, but whatever makes you feel superior to the people actually creating a liveable society…
@BubbaRich
You’re basically reinforcing the “just world hypothesis” which says, if you didn’t get the job/promotion/raise/etc., it’s because you didn’t do this or that. You say you would give your daughter the advice to essentially “play the game”. Do you have any idea how stressful and unhappy that makes many people? They are made to feel they are worthless if they don’t succeed, and they won’t succeed unless they conform to an alpha-male model. Are you sure you want to take the chance that you’ll make your daughter miserable by putting that pressure on her? Saying, “oh yeah, I’m for reform too” is bullshit because what you’ve for the short term (as you tell yourself) effectively undermines any reform. The thing is, if the way things are truly seemed that unjust to you, you would never say that that you would give that advice to someone you care about. That’s why you are getting what you perceive as a hostile reaction, because it’s obvious you don’t really give a damn.
this one is also a very interesting piece of idiocy. forget the all the evidence that shows the structural shifts that have occurred (primarily in the USA, secondarily in the other Anglo-Saxon countries, and only moderately in the rest of western society), which have shifted monetary benefits to those who actually destroy wealth and away from those who create it, away from those who research how to improve our future and teach future generations, etc.; forget about the structural changes that promote income inequality and remove any chances at social mobility; forget about the causes of several of the most recent economic downturns.
forget about all this inconvenient reality; saying that rigging the game is “cheating” is just jealousy. Because everyone is a money-hungry sociopath, so they can’t possibly have other motivations for their dislike of MBA’s than money-envy
pathetic little projection/self-justification
@BubbaRich —
What exactly are you planning to tell your daughter to modify about herself?
What is your real world advice to her?
Also hilariously a confirming data point to the MBA==entrenched sociopathy.
I really hope you didn’t take on any debt for those.
Obvious troll is boring.
It’s hard to get an education without taking on debt.
I managed it…and am still not in the promised land. I’m better for dodging that but probably will need to go into debt to get higher ed if I decide to continue a career in the sciences…or decide that “fuck it, I’m not gonna get a good work anywhere” and focus on learning something I love instead.
WordsOfAWizard whines:
Oh, poor you! Having to be acquainted with people who – gasp! – aren’t rich even though they tried to “play the game” and got a college degree! Silly them, they didn’t know about the sooper-seekret roolz that not all degrees lead to the top of the social ladder!
Hear that, kids? Don’t try to do the sensible thing and major in your strongest subject! Just follow the $$$ and get an MBA/Comp Sci, whatever. Even a lousy one will bring you riches… What? Even if you are last of the class? Yes, of course, it’s guaranteed! The seekret l33t club told me so! And no, of course, you won’t fail. It’s, uh, it’s because of the True World Order or sumthin’.
So, your advice boils down to “act whiter” – do I read you right?
Oh, we were talking about a different inborn source of societal bigotry. Totally different thing… never mind me, carry on.
WordsofaWizard: Here, let me give you the unemployment rate in my field, since you seem to believe a business degree is sooper awesome and better than other occupations.
Here you go, asshole: median average wage, $72,360. The upper end is around $129,000. The growth rate in the next six years for the occupation is estimated to be 21%, much faster than the national average. The sector I’m specializing in is technology, which has a median wage of $88,000. If I chose to go into executive research (which I might, because my subspecialty is organizations), my median wage will be around $99,000.
Sourced here: http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes193041.htm
And if all you have in life is looking down on other career paths with what appears to be no research, I feel quite sorry for you.
And, may I add, the business majors I’ve taught (also some of the Computer Science and Physics majors) have had the same flaw you seem to: the refusal to research.
Let’s just say you won’t be my competition in the market, if you’re technology oriented, and it won’t just be because of your charming personality. Even with the pervasive perception that women will be paid less, I’m still way the hell more competitive. I can edit, write, do layout work, fix pictures, program, analyze social statistics, gather information, talk about and write persuasively, analyze what is persuasive, talk about rhetorical history, design experiments, read several languages, contextualize social statistics and provide modest predictions. Over half of that is a result of those English degrees you are sneering at.
You’re all making me feel bad. I guess a biology degree is one of those stupid majors, because we don’t make that much money.
Oh, wait…who said the metric for a happy, productive, useful life was the amount of money you make? Probably an MBA.
You know, I forgot to give the unemployment rate. This information is slightly dated (social stats tend to lag behind because of the volume of data which has to be analyzed.
According to the ASA, the unemployment rate is .5% of PhD candidates.
There was a roughly 25% dip in employment in 2010, but it went back up 31% in 2011, so you’ll pardon me if I’m optimistic.
Sourced here and here:
http://www.asanet.org/research/stats/employment_trend_data/unemployment_rates93-03.cfm
http://www.asanet.org/research/Moving_Toward_Change_2010_Job_Bank_Survey.pdf
PZ: But being a biologist is probably super cool. Especially if you get to study Octopodidae.
Don’t worry PZ, money can only help you be happier to a point. Around $75K more money won’t make you any happier day to day. What’s striking is that it is a fairly modest amount, certainly not wealthy. Just enough to pay the bills, save a little, and not have to worry about a car repair taking food off the table.
My SO is reading a book about seeking employment in white collar industry and the scams of motivational speakers and all that.
This is avarice, but it isn’t like the normal avarice I know. My grandfather was more of the type who enjoyed haggling and business. He had greed in a desire for resources so he could do what he wanted to, which I understand and he probably instilled some of that in me to be honest. I don’t understand the avarice where you don’t acknowledge someone if they don’t make a certain amount, and make people pay to get resume advice or have tiered conferences based on what people expect to make. This I can’t get…it isn’t about the money. It isn’t about having the power to change your environment…it just….is.
We Are Ing:
It seems that some people use money not only (or not mainly) for the things they can buy with it, but as a metric for accomplishment. The more they make, the greater they are. Kind of a financial equivalent of comparing penis length.
(cough) I don’t mean it to sound that way on my end. I admit I was quite happy to find out that my interests could potentially be lucrative, and that I really want the cushion that kind of money can provide.
I have a family to support, and it’d be nice not to work two or more jobs to do it. And at some point, damn it, I want a vacation.
Also IIRC Archdoucheahol Trump carries horrendous debt and has on numerous occasions use bankruptcy and debt forgiveness to get out of it while being a huge asshole. Somehow the perception that he has money is enough to hide the fact that he should be seen as a economic pariah.
How about a life of crime? Can I, as a woman, make as much knocking over liquor stores as a man with comparable experience (entry-level)? It seems like I won’t be able to advance in the business world, and crime pays, so…
Or should I work out a good Ponzi scheme instead?
@Anri (#89):
Exactly what do you mean by “act whiter”? Do you mean it in the context of a paternalistic white person criticizing some behavior or speech pattern as being less conducive to success? Or a hateful white person criticizing something that’s different from them, or even not very different from them based on criticisms I’ve heard in my life from other Southerners? Or do you mean the most common current usage, from one person perceived as African-american to another person similarly perceived, as a criticism for doing so?
EXACTLY what behaviors are being criticized, or suggested change? In many, many cases, it’s good advice. In many cases, I would also fight against it, even while suggesting that it’s a better path for an applicant or worker. But you’ve got to be more specific, you don’t get to “win” just by calling me a racist.
@BubbaRich re:#101
I can only assume you are being deliberately obtuse about this. The point is that you would be willing to tell someone to “act whiter” in another era. You’re perfectly OK with the status quo, regardless of the injustice of it. So your solution is to instruct the victims to just stop bringing it on themselves. You’re not a racist, but that’s because the surrounding culture doesn’t ask much of you. You can tell yourself that you of course would have stood up for people being discriminated against, but you wouldn’t. Because your first reaction is to tell the victim to fix their behavior, and maybe we’ll get around to doing something about the real problem.
I’m not entirely convinced that was sarcasm.
I apologize if I was not as clear as I may have been.
You appeared to be saying that, instead of (or at least along with) attempting to work for a more accepting set of workplace attitudes for women, your advice to your daughter would be to act more in line with the current expectations – that is to say, act more ‘masculine’.
I was drawing a direct comparison with telling a child to ‘act whiter’ if they found that being black held them back in the coperate world.
I hope that clears things up. I wasn’t calling anyone a racist – I have no idea what your views on race relations might be.
@Seabisquick:
You need to get the money back from your education, at least the part where you “learned to read.”
Get somebody to read #35 to you. And maybe #75, where I repeated it. I should probably be more polite, but this menagerie is as bad as a bunch of creationists, never even apologizing when you arrogantly skip what I’ve said and accuse me of not saying it! Will your God forgive you, since you’re mocking for a Good Purpose?
I can also happily tell you that the rest of your screed is wrong in nearly every single detail. What was the point of that rant? Do you say that to everybody who disagrees with you?
Here’s another one for you: my kids are leading the Pledge of Allegiance at the city council meeting next week, AND THEY’RE GOING TO SAY THE “UNDER GOD” LINE.
See, I’m just part of the problem. It doesn’t matter anyway, since most of our city council isn’t real politicians, just women.
@Anri (#104):
BubbaRich sed:
Anri responded:
Yes, along with. Absolutely. When _I_ go to a job interview, I actually wear a suit and avoid any controversial topics of conversation, like religious belief, controversial science issues, or which college football team I support. Yes, they’re idiots if they oppose global warming science, but no, it won’t help me or their company if I say that in an interview. I don’t normally wear a suit; in fact, the only times I’ve worn a suit in 10 years have been for job interviews. I’m really a different person for job interviews, although I try to keep it a fundamentally honest presentation of myself.
That’s why I asked what you mean by “acting black”; chewing gum in a job interview would be a bad idea, even if it is my daughter’s “thing.” Can she learn to negotiate more effectively, even if it means she has to say something a man would say? I really don’t understand why any of you think this is a bad idea. I’m happy, though, that my daughter might be competing against some of you in the job market in the future. :)
BubbaRich:
So… a fundamentally honest presentation of yourself results in really being a different person to your normal self.
(Pig in a poke, eh?)
BubbaRich:
I’ll ask you again: What specific changes to her behavior/personality would you tell your daughter to make in order to achieve parity in the workplace.
I am asking you this very seriously. Do you have a list of things? Because I think I know a lot of people who would love this secret of success, including myself.
I get what you’re saying (I think), which is that until institutional and social changes have taken place, women have to live in the real world as it is, and it would be helpful to make adjustments accordingly.
But what are these adjustments that we haven’t already made?
That wasn’t dancing away from the question, that was shooting yourself out a canon right into “Irrelevant Bullshit Valley”
Young Americans PSA announcer: “Be sure to work on your lip and tongue skills”
Ah wait the quote was “Use plenty of lip and tongue action”
I was sure that was too naughty
Good grief, it was an analogy.
But you can google for this kind of thing. One example that springs to mind: hairstyle. Go looking for information on hairstyles and how anything with a natural kink is listed as “unprofessional”, and how many black woman have to have their hair straightened to get taken seriously, and how black men have to keep theirs cut very short (look for the recent Nivea ad for an example).
Let me tackle a few items here.
Were MBAs responsible for ruining the economy? I won’t deny the banking fiasco was one of the main contributors, and it is prime MBA stomping ground. But to end the explanation there is grossly inadequate. We have a crappy tax code that gives extra incentives to financial gamblers, a country full of people that think it’s OK to spend 15-20% more than they actually make, and (IMHO, most importantly) we are paying for two decade-long wars.
Does money provide happiness? No, but the correlation between poverty and misery at least suggests money isn’t something you want to ignore. Still, if you believe the pathological use of wealth as a life-worth scorecard is limited to Wall Street, you’re being willfully ignorant. “Keeping up with the Jones” happens in every social stratum.
Is the study and practice of economics, finance, operations and law important to our society? Fuck yes. In fact, I’ll make the argument that if more people had high level training in this area, our economy, and each citizen participating in the economy, would be much better off.
My original diatribe was against the “All MBAs are Donald Trump Wannabe” stereotype. Before you go spewing this kind of crap, you may want to take a minute to understand who the majority of us are, what we study and what we do for a living.
Yeah because you all contribute and produce so fucking much.
Why don’t you just go Galt yourself?
Has anyone here said otherwise? Seems a bit straw-manny to me. Of course having barely money to buy food will get you pretty unhappy. I even bet most people here would agree that people should have at least enough money to live comfortably.
The word wasn’t “happiness”, it was “success” and there’s a perfect example up there from some idiot who just equated success with money, who by the way, is a perfect representative, down to cliche-levels, of what people mean by “sociopathic”.
Yeah because you all contribute and produce so fucking much.
Brilliant. You’ve figured out that people working in the service sector don’t produce real goods. I’ll contact the Journal of Economics for you.
…Seems a bit straw-manny to me.
Let me put a finer point on it then. I take a measure of pride in the fact that the fruits of the last 15 years of my efforts have translated into an upper-tier salary, and I enjoy the financial stability and perks that come along with it. That doesn’t mean I measure my self-worth in dollar signs. Just because someone has, seeks or desires wealth does not mean they assign undue value to it.
there’s a perfect example up there from idiot who just equated success with money, who by the way, is a perfect representative, down to cliche-levels, of what people mean by “sociopathic”
Idiots are everywhere. Their existance does not justify the proliferation of sterotypes. Assuming that everyone in the business / financial sector automatically makes this connection and needs to be labled as such is horse shit. I’m not claiming you’ve necessarily made this connection in your post, but there are more than a few examples of it in this thread.
The problem with the success thing is that we’re bombarded with it, not just from some random idiots on the internet. If you ask an average person to name successful people, it’s likely that they’ll name rich people, many of them whose only “virtue” is being rich. I can understand why someone like Trump has money, what I don’t understand is why someone like him (or Kardashians, or any other reality TV people) have admirers.
@BubbaRich
I read #35. Here’s the juicy part:
(emphasis mine)
Oh yes, this injustice is something we need to look at, but it’s “EVEN MORE IMPORTANT” (your exact words) that women be told what they need to do to act more masculine. So I don’t think anyone is misreading you. So it’s clear that your priorities are to first blame the victim, then maybe we’ll do something about the larger problem if we get around to it. You’re just pissy because you got called out on it. And that maybe your opinion isn’t as enlightened and intelligent as you imagined. Sorry you aren’t getting the affirmation you had hoped.
How offended might you be if I offered you some tips on how to modify your behavior so that you could gain more acceptance here?
So far, you’ve proven yourself pretty prickly and easy to take personal offense. And you’re the one who’s wrong.
Now imagine yourself with an actual grievance of being unjustly treated, not to a virtual tongue-lashing by a bunch of commenters here, but by your boss, or coworkers, or a shady contractor or salesman.
Then imagine some jerk coming up to you and telling you how, in reality, you fucked up, and if you had only done this or that you could have gotten your way.
Then make your argument again.
Could PZ or someone explain the meaning of the word “batten” as used in this post? A short look at the dictionary shows me two definitions for the word as a transitive verb: “fatten” and “to furnish with battens,” a batten being “a thin narrow strip of lumber used especially to seal or reinforce a joint” supposedly. What does it mean that it was easier “to batten the blame for the glass ceiling on the victims”? Neither of those definitions makes any sense to me.
halfspin, “battan” is a word in the dialect of English known as “Youbetcha”, spoken in the Dakotas, Minnesota and parts of Wisconsin. It’s the past pleasant tense of the baseball term “bat”.
Usage:
COACH: Bobby, it’s your turn to bat.
BOBBY: But Coach, I batten already this inning.
@Seabisquick —
Also note the underlying assumption that ALL of these women who share this experience are too dense to know how to modify their behavior in a way that is perfectly obvious to BubbaRich (and presumably other men).
And there we have a representation of The Problem.
Without even realizing it, he
1) Assumes women are naturally incompetent, interpersonally
2) Assumes women can’t testify and analyze their own experiences
I don’t even disagree with the notion that in the real world, people have to make compromises to deal with bullshit. But I strenuously object to the notion that women don’t know how to make these compromises, despite our real life experience, yet magically (the magic of having a penis, I assume), he does.
It’s these assumptions that people make without thinking about them that have everything to do with real life sexism (and racism) in the workplace.
BubbaRich @106:
Ok, to start with, the bit where you quoted yourself isn’t anything I quoted you as saying. I checked three times, just to be certain I wasn’t having a massive FAIL.
So, please don’t characterize what I was saying as responding to the bit you posted, as it wasn’t. If you think I should address that bit, fine, say so, but that’s not what I quoted you as saying, and not what I was responding to.
Secondly, I really don’t think what I initially said was particularly opaque. Other prople appear to have gotten what I was saying, even before I explained it. So, maybe your comprehension problem isn’t inherent in what I posted.
However, entertaining the possibility that I’m just not being clear, I’ll continue. You said:
The assumption appears to be that if an interviewer is judging a woman based on whether her responses were ‘appropriate’ to her gender or not, the onus is on the woman to change her responses.
I attempted to put this in perspective by drawing an analogy with race – if we assume an interviewer was looking for (either positively or negatively) specific ‘black’ behavior from a black candidate, whos behavior should we seek to modify? The interviewer or interviewee? Either solution might be effective in getting hired, but one combats prejudice and the other accomodates it.
I’m running out of ways to make this clearer.