Sheryl Sandberg Wants Us to "Lean In"

Avatar for Cmmelissa
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2008
Sheryl Sandberg Wants Us to "Lean In"
101
Mon, 03-11-2013 - 3:57pm

There is a lot in the news regarding Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg's new book, "Lean In", in which she is trying to empower women to be more aggressive in the workplace.   It's interesting to read the different viewpoints on the debate, ranging from ABC News to CNN and the New York Times.  

From an iVillage article:

But time is exactly what's holding many women back. The time investment required for women to move ahead in their jobs at all levels -- not just the C-suite spots -- is a deal breaker for many women who aren't willing to sacrifice those hours with their family. All of Sandberg's brilliant plans for redefining how working women are viewed and how they network hinge on the point that women need to want these jobs. And if the current formula of working longer and harder for career success doesn't change, many women won't. 

http://www.ivillage.com/sheryl-sandberg-will-women-want-lean/6-a-526612

The articles discuss various issues that have been debated here before, such as if women can truly have it all and why women aren't as aggressive as their male counterparts to get what they deserve in the workplace.  Detractors feel that with her work history, education and success, she's unable to understand the average working woman, she's not up against the same obstacles.  

What do you think needs to change in the work place in order for women to succeed, and maybe find an easier balance between their work and home lives?  Do you think that encouraging more women to be aggressive about moving up the corporate ladder is realistic?  

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-20-2013

thardy2001 wrote:
<p><blockquote class="quote-msg quote-nest-1 odd"><div class="quote-author"><em class="placeholder">reginageorge2005</em> wrote:</div> I guess I just fail to see the need to pay someone to do something I can do perfectly well myself. The days I mow the lawn, I skip the gym. Cleaning is a part of life. It isn't difficult or even particularly time consuming. If I WOH FT, perhaps I would need to hire someone. But I've got 40-50 hrs a week to get the cleaning done that a WOHM doesn't have. Time management, I guess...</blockquote></p><p>Why do you assume sahms must clean toilets?  I don't "skip the gym."  Exercise is a priority for me.  Clearning is not "particularly time-consuming for you," but it is for me.  It's possible the size of your house is different than my house.  It's never been a question of time management.</p>

Exercise is also a priority for me. I wouldn't be a size 0/2 if it weren't. As it turns out, mowing the lawn with a push mower is an excellent workout. My yard has never looked better. As to house size, I don't exactly live in a mud hut. My house is about a 1000sq ft larger than the national average. Which is why I completely fail to understand what you women with hired help are doing all day. Obviously YOU spend a lot of time online...but I like a clean house. A weekly cleaning would not be sufficient to keep the house up my standards of cleanliness. Obviously it works for you.

I have a friend who lives in a 10000 sq ft house. She works FT. And she cleans her own house. So it isn't always about square footage...

On Wednesdays we wear pink.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Tue, 03-12-2013 - 6:51pm

bordwithyou wrote:
Yes, Thardy, I was responding to a post about yard work when I was talking about yard work. I was responding to a post about SAHMS with housekeeper/Nannys when I mentioned Nannys. I am sorry to be so confusing.

S'alright.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-22-2009

 OK, so I am only more confused. Which Ph.Ds, in your experience, throw their titles around?</blockquote></p><p>What does it mean to "throw your title around" anyway?  I do, if an undergraduate student refers to me by my first name or as "Mrs. X," gently and nicely point out that it's "Dr X" or "Professor X."  I prefer that my graduate students call me by my first name.<br /><br />Just for perception....My office is three doors down the hallway from the main office, and I am the only woman on the floor outside of the secretaries.  Students will routinely walk past two offices with open doors with men sitting at the desks, and then pop their heads into my office to ask where the bathroom is, or can they use my stapler.   Students almost always will address my male colleagues as "Dr X or Professor X," but will occasionally address me as "Mrs X."  I had an e-mail today addressed to "Mrs X."  The subject of the e-mail was the student hearing from "Professor Y" that I was teaching a class on the Vikings in the fall, and asking whether he would be eligible to take it.   I don't think that students maliciously assume that I am a secretary rather than a professor, or that they consciously address their male professors by their titles but sometimes call me "Mrs X."  I think it's a cultural thing, a kind of unconscious sexism that is quite alive and well.</p>[/quote]

A neighbor the father of one of DD3 best friends is a professor.  DD3 calls him Dr. first name.  She says the doctor out of respect for what he earned and first name because they are close enough to be in first name basis.  The friend just got into graduate school.  I asked  her if she was going to call her Dr. first name when she gets her PhD.  She says she will have to or her friends will end their friendship contract.  LOL.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Tue, 03-12-2013 - 6:49pm

chestnuthooligan wrote:
  I didn't claim to be an authority, but I do have experience, unlike you and Jams. I don't believe your husbands are female, so I discount their experience as having knowledge of how it works.

Like most sahms, I worked before I sah.  My education is complete, so I also don't take your word on "training classes" as the last word on education.  My experience in the workforce and in the classroom was that there were more women then men making 6 figure salaries, and in my graduating class, more women then men again.  My husband has some interesting tales about the dynamics of a workplace much more demanding than any I've ever worked in.  There is a lot more money and power involved, though it's a private corporation.  Still, the dynamics between the men and women are very interesting; his recounting workplace dynamics is very telling about this Lean In/Mommy Wars subject.

chestnuthooligan wrote:
  Women did not attend because they are not deemed "leaders". It is by invitation only. The company has been rated in he top 10 of diversity ratings for at least the last 10 years and it rated as one of the best companies for women to work.

Again, keep women in lower level positions flies in the face of a stellar reputation for being diverse.

chestnuthooligan wrote:
  I was identified as a leader, therefore invited to the class, not the other way around...I do mentor women in STEM and have been for years, but that are 45 more men "leaning in" than our pathetic 5. Opportunities are still not equal, but as I've said before, they are much better than when I started. The journey is not over.</p>

Mentoring may be a start. I wouldn't know.  But getting women invited to this same conference, or the next one, or the next one, would be you reaching out a hand, Leaning In.  And MEN can and should be *Leaning In* too.  It could be a movement and it can't be done without men.  Unlike your job, the fields I worked in and my husband works in do have equal opportunities for men and women.  I'm sure computer tech geeks never envisioned Sheryl Sandberg and Marissa Mayer but there it is.  Equal opportunity.  Your company doesn't sound like it's at the forefront of diversity where women are concerned.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-08-2009
Tue, 03-12-2013 - 6:40pm
Yes, Thardy, I was responding to a post about yard work when I was talking about yard work. I was responding to a post about SAHMS with housekeeper/Nannys when I mentioned Nannys. I am sorry to be so confusing.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Tue, 03-12-2013 - 6:32pm

bordwithyou wrote:
  My earlier post was about NANNYS.  Not gardeners and housekeepers.

Your post about Evil Caregivers was in immediate response to Jams and mine about cleaning ladies and hired help.  Jam may have called them house ladies.  Still not only referring to nannies by any stretch.  And you were quick to follow up with how much help you "delegated" to your sons in the yard and gardening, etc.  And that your husband gave up any household chores years ago.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-08-2009

rollmops2009 wrote:
Jams, OK, so I am only more confused. Which Ph.Ds, in your experience, throw their titles around?

What does it mean to "throw your title around" anyway?  I do, if an undergraduate student refers to me by my first name or as "Mrs. X," gently and nicely point out that it's "Dr X" or "Professor X."  I prefer that my graduate students call me by my first name.

Just for perception....My office is three doors down the hallway from the main office, and I am the only woman on the floor outside of the secretaries.  Students will routinely walk past two offices with open doors with men sitting at the desks, and then pop their heads into my office to ask where the bathroom is, or can they use my stapler.   Students almost always will address my male colleagues as "Dr X or Professor X," but will occasionally address me as "Mrs X."  I had an e-mail today addressed to "Mrs X."  The subject of the e-mail was the student hearing from "Professor Y" that I was teaching a class on the Vikings in the fall, and asking whether he would be eligible to take it.   I don't think that students maliciously assume that I am a secretary rather than a professor, or that they consciously address their male professors by their titles but sometimes call me "Mrs X."  I think it's a cultural thing, a kind of unconscious sexism that is quite alive and well.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-08-2009

thardy2001 wrote:
<p><blockquote class="quote-msg quote-nest-1 odd"><div class="quote-author"><em class="placeholder">bordwithyou</em> wrote:</div>  Really?  That's what you are seeing?  I am seeing one SAHM who doesn't have hired help and one who does, and one who occasionally hires out something.  I am seeing one WOHM who has cleaning help, and some who don't (I don't).  We don't have a gardener, but I did hire someone to take out a couple of dead trees recently.  I'm seeing the use of "help" to be a matter of personal preference/style, not a function of WOHM/SAHM status.&lt;/p&gt;</blockquote></p><p>Then you're completely contradicting your earlier comment: <blockquote class="quote-msg quote-nest-1 odd"><div class="quote-author"><em class="placeholder">bordwithyou</em> wrote:</div> I thought the whole point of SAHM was to keep your kids away from Evil Substitute Caregivers. Now SuperMom SAHMS need Nannys. Sheesh. Makes me glad my kids are nearly grown. The rules are getting way too hard to keep up with. </blockquote></p>

My earlier post was about NANNYS.  Not gardeners and housekeepers.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-13-2009

<From your posts, I can tell you're no authority on the subject.>

I didn't claim to be an authority, but I do have experience, unlike you and Jams. I don't believe your husbands are female, so I discount their experience as having knowledge of how it works.

<ll you're basing your theory on is one training class.  And in a company which you claim prides itself on diversity, there can be many reasons the women employees did not attend. And attending a training class does not in and of itself equate to a leadership role.>

Women did not attend because they are not deemed "leaders". It is by invitation only. The company has been rated in he top 10 of diversity ratings for at least the last 10 years and it rated as one of the best companies for women to work. I was identified as a leader, therefore invited to the class, not the other way around.

<You're in a leadership role ~ this is exactly what Sheryl Sandberg is talking about.>

I do mentor women in STEM and have been for years, but that are 45 more men "leaning in" than our pathetic 5. Opportunities are still not equal, but as I've said before, they are much better than when I started. The journey is not over.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Tue, 03-12-2013 - 5:06pm

bordwithyou wrote:
  Really?  That's what you are seeing?  I am seeing one SAHM who doesn't have hired help and one who does, and one who occasionally hires out something.  I am seeing one WOHM who has cleaning help, and some who don't (I don't).  We don't have a gardener, but I did hire someone to take out a couple of dead trees recently.  I'm seeing the use of "help" to be a matter of personal preference/style, not a function of WOHM/SAHM status.</p>

Then you're completely contradicting your earlier comment:

bordwithyou wrote:
I thought the whole point of SAHM was to keep your kids away from Evil Substitute Caregivers. Now SuperMom SAHMS need Nannys. Sheesh. Makes me glad my kids are nearly grown. The rules are getting way too hard to keep up with.

Pages