Skip to content

Lipstick jungle culture clash…UPDATE

March 16, 2010

During the Democratic primaries leading up to the 2008 Presidential election, I  received an unsolicted email through an informal network of women at the company I worked for. An individual was ‘kind enough’ to forward a NY Times piece by either Ms Dowd or Ms Ferraro talking about how they were voting for Hillary (and we should too) because ‘it’s a woman’s turn to hold the highest office.’  My response was “stop sending me political opinion pieces at work” and “since when is the Oval Office a kindergarten slide where everyone waits in line to get a turn?”

The emails stopped – but listening to women who were from the next generation ahead of me who supposedly did so much to advance women’s rights in the 60’s during meetings, the sense of illogical entitlement just became silly. Since when does having female reproductive organs give them a pass from showing up as often and working as hard as the guys – haven’t they considered the fact that the guys might want a pass to be home being dads just as much? 

UPDATE : Welcome to Cassy’s blog viewers (thanks for the link Cassy!) – feel free to poke around – hopefully you’ll see we’re kindred spirits, albeit part time bloggers (we’re full time nerds)

As a woman, I find that gender preferences always generate shades of “yeah, but…”. “yeah, but, you really got that job because it helped balance the statistics more favorably.”  The only strategy to deal with that is work twice as hard and just as intense – then choose your battles well. The only other alternative is to remove affirmative action completely &  let the chips fall where they may. While managers tend to have affinities for people who are similar to them, there is a lot of training available to explain what is helpful/good about having differences (Meyer’s Briggs, Strengths Finders, etc). Are we SURE statistical enforcement and the potential entitlement mentality it creates are the only way to change priorities?

Today’s latest? The Speaker of the House resorts to a ‘girls only’ meeting to (from Michelle Malkin)..powder their nose? Burn their underwear in effigy – just like ‘the good old 60’s?’ Light a pillar of incense to the “bill that shall remain unnamed” in hopes of bringing it back over to this side – like Voldemort in Harry Potter?

It’s very possible that there is a generational AND culture clash happening – per the Hot Air posting on the “crisis of culture“. There is a cultural difference between those nostalgic for the 60’s, the Hollywood-can-pay-to-be-illuminati, the coastal Ivy Leaguers and the X’rs/Millenials/get-their-own-data-intellectuals/Nascar fans.  That’s ok. In the overall equation compared to world history I’d much rather be a visigoth than a Roman in the third centry….UPDATE: Pajamas Media’s Victor Davis Hanson has very similar thoughts – except his article points out I might have gotten my Roman century wrong – could be 4th century wrt “visigoths.”  Forgive me on the lapse – history is a hobby 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: