Sunday, April 12, 2015

Where Successful Lean In Ladies End Up

Lean In, Ban Bossy, brogrammer culture, Ellen Pao, German board rooms creating quotas for women, am I missing any progressive women in the workforce memes? Work ladies. It's the only good way to live. Don't betray what those feminists fought for, but don't worry, a man and a kid will be waiting for you at 37. exactly what is the drive here? What is the end result? The average American household earns +/- $50,000 a year, but the average American salary is closer to $37,000. Say it is a decent job, so it is $50,000 per year, but what is it? What is the sacrifice for? I have pointed to the end result for selfish carousel riders before, so now let's look where those readers of Lean In will end up.

It is very obvious women do not want high paying jobs or else they would gravitate towards IT, oil, gas and even mining, and when they go into medicine, would work over 30 hours per week >eyeroll<. What women truly want is to work jobs where they can wear a suit, give presentations and lead meetings while they recount numbers or spit out buzzwords, earn 75K or more and maybe get the brass ring of an executive position that they think means huge money but less work with occasional business trips to sexy cities like NYC, LA, Miami and Chicago. Maximize compensation, feel strong and independent and minimize grunt work. Being able to dress snazzy when they want is a key because just doing white collar production work would mean they couldn't peacock. This is the Lean In crowd. They want the COO of Facebook job, but have zero chance at it. What they will still shoot for is 75K and above, doing scheduling, training, marketing, coordinating and other vague jobs that someone else builds the basics for and they just find a way to pretty up and deliver.

Lean In girls are not ready for it. They can work their way, if competent and especially if cute, to the 75K job, but an incredibly small sliver will hit meaningful six figures. It is not sexism, that is a small sliver for all Americans. The annual income 1% line starts at $250,000, and a lot of value transference sales people are in that 1%, but sales involves hustle so fewer women go into it. Many that do are cute, marry and opt out. Who stays? The flakes will fall off, the women who balance work and home will make it in incredibly small numbers, the fashionable grrl power types will opt out, but the steady Peggy Olsen types can make it. They might marry. If they do, kids won't enter the picture. They can be competent, great workers, but they hollow out emotionally. Their career death rattle is a death screech.

I resigned last week, as I prepared for my new job. I worked for ten years under an end result that the Lean In types would love: a woman with vice president in her title, who spent the last decade earning 1% annual income. No kids. Business trips were to second tier cities. Long hours. No kids, so not taking vacation days due to how stressful work is hurts no one but the cat. The competition got intense for her because at a certain level politics enters managing your job, and self-preservation kicks in. No kids, so the department she built is all she has. People have been leaving and complaining when they go, so will they yank her? Will they take away her baby? No kids, so employees became her surrogate children, adding an emotional element to any changes at work. Work becomes the family, and that can be dangerous. You're leaving, why are you rejecting me? I resigned and watched a 61 year old act like a 16 year old in her office. No kids, so she never learned that sometimes you don't have an answer and there are things more important than work.

The employees who had the worst relationship with the childless Boomer female boss were working moms. While the childless boss could not comprehend an employee not being as invested in something as her or leaving early for family reasons, the friction with working moms was palpable. There was that unspoken intra-female "the cause" argument being lived out in real time. Her favorite female underlings were those without kids and those married who kept their name. A working mom asking for help with work-life balance? "Go back to your desk, figure it out and cry in a stairwell if you have to." You hear that story when you take the stairs to sneak out to lunch early and catch a peer crying. Once you see it in one, you see it in others. The best thing kids do for your career is that reminder that it... is... just... work. Not all childless employees or managers are like that, but there are enough that like a SWPL dressing a cat and putting it in a stroller, these people have turned work into their everything.

This is where you end up if professionally successful Lean In girls. You're working on your career hard in your 20s? If things go well, you'll be making 50K a year not 200K a year, so don't wait until 35 for a husband to show up. The unsuccessful or average don't even get the big bucks to buy trinkets and provide cover for emptiness later in life. Blowing small work related things up into the most important focus of the week only to be replaced by another come Wednesday. No family at home. Eventually evaluating every working relationship as to how people may challenge or usurp you. No family to see you in old age. I'm sure >eyeroll< your subordinates who you favored will visit you in the nursing home. No woman can have it all. Even getting success in that work realm is a materialistic success and fraught with dangers. Think of where the road ends. Choose wisely.

8 comments:

Take The Red Pill said...

Although this article would be excellent 'required reading' for all young women nowadays, I believe that they would ignore it and prefer to listen to the "Grrrrrlll Power" screeching of the feminist harpies instead.
The young women preferred not to listen back in the 60's or 70's, so why would they listen now? Let them learn their lesson and see the light in their 50's, when it is "too little, too late".

Pvt. Jaybird said...

Unfortunately, I don't believe any women read your blog, haha.

I don't have any female friends, but when I meet my wife's upper middle class SWPLy girlfriends and hear them going on and on about their careers, I ask, "Why?" Work stinks and I couldn't imagine defining my entire existence by it.

From Mencken's IN DEFENSE OF WOMEN:

"The late Charles Francis Adams, a grandson of one American President and a great-grandson of another, after a long lifetime in intimate association with some of the chief business "geniuses" of that paradise of traders and usurers, the United States, reported in his old age that he had never heard a single one of them say anything worth hearing. These were vigorous and masculine men, and in a man's world they were successful men, but intellectually they were all blank cartridges."

At your funeral no one will ever say, "Gee, he/she was really the best at filing TPS reports."

When introduced to a stranger, I never ask, "What do you do for a living?" It doesn't matter a whit. I do however get a secret satisfaction from the looks I get showing up in my multicolored '92 F150 or my wife's sedan with 285K miles on it knowing that I frequently break six figures in a job that doesn't even require a high school diploma. And the wife? She stays home with the kids.

PA said...

I'm thinking of your recent phone call with Richard Nixon, and how he tipped you off to the fact that the prog/Roosevelt coalition has no actual master plan or coherent goal or vision. This is in contract to various more or less earnestly-expressed theories about there being, in fact, an endgame to all we've been seeing.

I myself vacillate between one and the other theory. Occam's razor can go either way:

(A) all the evil, the destruction, the strangulation of great nations is little more than bean-counters maximizing their quarterly figures. It's sort-term thinking elites not giving much thought to the future of white (or any other kind of) children.

Or (B) -- white genocide in order to create a one world government of elite families ruling over mud that will shoot one another over sneakers rather than hang tyrants. And throw in the alleged ancient Jewish animus.


And circling back to women and careers... I was just leafing through some school-related memos and saw something about congratulating some school girl on her science project, including a Future Women in Science award or such.

And this scales up to the corporate world (women achieving this, women achieving that), and to the highest levels of social organization, as you noted re. German quotas for female execs.

And all this makes me ask... WHY?

Is it mere niceness, "let's encourage the girls"?

Does anyone actually believe that women are an untapped tsunami of genius, only held back by sexism? I'm sorry, but you have to be a fucking moron to sincerely believe this.

Is it about routing women away from their domestic and reproductive talents for (a) an evil disgenia project or (b) a retarded monomania about maximizing female opportunity just because?

Anonymous said...

this is a great blog. brilliant stuff.

My theories on why society tolerates the madness of women in the workforce and reduced fertility - take your pick:

CULTURAL:

#1 - sexual revolution - powerful men like having women under them. Ceteris paribus, for many entry level white collar jobs, they'd rather have a good looking woman.

#2 - slow regression to african-style alpha-culture norms. Women do all the work in africa, men lounge around and impregnate them without much regard to paternity and investment.

ECONOMIC:

#3 - keeps the cost of labor down. More workers = lower wages. Any field with a lot of women will be lower wage.

#4 - due to inflation, wages are stagnant over 30-40 years, cost of living is way up. it takes two average incomes to produce what one did 40 years ago. ergo, women work because they have to.

SELF-ACTUALIZING

#5 - the most talented and unattractive women want to do whatever they can; they have the time, energy and persuasiveness to get society to allow them to do whatever they want.

Anonymous said...

100 years ago, the American labor movement was fighting for "a family wage". Women and children did sweatshop work for long hours, and more than anything else the women wanted men to get a higher salary (the "family wage") so women could stay home with the kids and be a homemaker.

And then came feminism.

I say fsck 'em. Let them work like dogs doing moronic PowerPoints for bitter female bosses, and let them die alone with no man and no kids.

I am 60, old enough to have seen this stupidity up front and in my face for almost 50 years. I have no sympathy.

peterike said...

Second wave, post-suffragette feminism was largely the creation of affluent Jewish women with beta husbands that couldn't keep them in line at home. Of course, being affluent and graduates of fancy colleges they were able to go into "fulfilling" careers like journalism, academia and government (often spent in churning out yet more feminist propaganda), while dooming the vast majority of middle class women to work jobs of endless drudgery.

Of course, as the oligarch class in America was shifting from the noblesse oblige WASPs of old to the newer, crasser Jews, occasional Catholics and newer money WASPs, the passion for "the working man" rapidly faded away. They were no longer useful as a route to power. Instead, since the earlier generation of labor agitators were now the new capitol class, it served their interests to nearly double the work force by inciting women to leave the home. What a great way to put a cap on wages! When the female wage lowering effect started to tail off in the 80s thanks to a robust economy (and a still very strong manufacturing base providing a lot of male jobs), they turned to outsourcing and immigration.

It's no surprise at all that American wages began to stagnate in the 70s, which is precisely when the old WASP order was overturned and the new oligarchs began taking over. The Left abandoned the working man entirely, other than as a prop to beat Republicans with every election cycle, and took up whole hog with Cultural Marxism. Meanwhile, the Republican idiots missed a perfect opportunity to become the new party for white labor by embracing idiot "free market" ideas (you know, that giant sucking sound that Ross Perot warned about) and being entirely intimidated on any issues of race or gender in regards to labor or anything else. To this day, the Republicans will still yap about "free markets! free markets!" as if that meant anything other than white destruction in a world where labor competes globally.

Pat Buchanan's 1996 presidential campaign was the last real hope for the American white working class. He won New Hampshire and then the media simply destroyed him with an aggressive smear campaign and the Republicans tossed up Bob Dole as the sacrificial lamb. Since then, every President has been nothing but a flunky for the oligarchs.

nikcrit said...

To this day, the Republicans will still yap about "free markets! free markets!" as if that meant anything other than white destruction in a world where labor competes globally.

Pat Buchanan's 1996 presidential campaign was the last real hope for the American white working class. He won New Hampshire and then the media simply destroyed him with an aggressive smear campaign and the Republicans tossed up Bob Dole as the sacrificial lamb. Since then, every President has been nothing but a flunky for the oligarchs.


Here's this year's traitorous republican stooge:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/leslie-marshall/2011/02/23/wisconsin-gov-scott-walker-is-a-koch-brothers-puppet

Jenny said...

I figured it out during my second year in college when I was trying for an engineering degree. The thought of staying at work till 5:00 every day and leaving my kids at daycare ate at me so much I decided to switch majors.