4 ms·
This article is acting like men can. Except that pretty much every guy I know who has a really high ranking job could give me a litany of family sacrifices he'
by DerpDerpDerp 13y ago
This article is acting like men can.
Except that pretty much every guy I know who has a really high ranking job could give me a litany of family sacrifices he's had to make to get there. Missed recitals, sporting events, and just generally being absent from quite a lot of family life.
If women - people in general - want to opt for that path, I completely support them. But don't act like you're doing as much for the company as the person who makes the opposite choice - that you're on equal footing with someone willing to make those sacrifices - if you do.
I agree that there are lots of things in society that can change, and perhaps people would be happier if they did, but the idea that you can split your efforts and still deserve to be at the top seems silly to me.
(And there's at least one full generation of men who have had a serious look at the balance guys typically face between family life and professional life that aren't satisfied with the current status quo, which this article seems to be largely ignoring.)
- pja 13y agoThe available evidence shows that for ordinary jobs output turns negative once you start working more than 40 hours a week or so. I personally doubt that decision making by executives is an exception to this rule: quite the contrary in fact. Unfortunately career development can often be an arms race: those who put in the longest hours are perceived to be more committed and effective and are promoted in preference to their colleagues who may be just as effective but are "only" in the office 40 hours a week. Arms races are pernicious things that benefit nobody, but can be very difficult to eliminate unfortunately.
- DerpDerpDerp 13y agoI completely agree that it's not necessarily a good thing; I was just pointing out that it's am arms race that impacts both genders.