« McCarren Pool update | Main | What of the Bronx? »

July 10, 2012

Comments

Women entering workplace = the end of efficiency in the workplace?

hmmm.

This is actually proven to be true. Many men of power do abuse their positions and seek sexual relations with their subordinates since they can usually get away with it. I'm surprised its often condoned and if the male manager is fired, he has no trouble getting a similar position in another firm.

I would think the firm would be subject to blackmail by a rival firm and what stock holder would want their management under media scrutiny and suffer bad PR?

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-08-25/strategy/30037940_1_female-executives-affair-work-life-policy

It seems like you ought to be forming some informed opinion about the quality of her photographs compared to those of other photographers at the New York Times and lesser papers rather than just assuming her photographs are not very good because she went to the University of Georgia.

I worked for one guy and if you were a woman, and worked for him, you had sex with him. It must vary with the industry, region, and level of job competitiveness, so any number is meaningless. In highly competitive industries with aggressive personalities, it could anywhere from very common to almost the norm.

Half,
you need to read the Daily Mail more often. Plenty of HBD material

A woman who became Britain's youngest mother after a one night stand at the age of 12 says she had no regrets about becoming a teen mum.
In fact, Amy Crowhurst advocates having children early as she admits that at the age of 22 she now has 'the freedom to meet mates and go clubbing when my mum babysits.'
Amy, who is on benefits and lives in a council house, told this week's Closer magazine: 'Having kids young was the smartest thing I ever did.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2171070/Britains-youngest-mother-Amy-Crowhurst-insists-getting-pregnant-aged-12-smartest-thing-I-did.html#ixzz20HNgh52w

A few problems with this theory:

1) There are huge legal and career risks to any man who offers advancement to a woman for sex.

2) There are also career risks for women who would offer sex in return for advancement, particularly given the number of women in senior positions - how do you think a female editor would treat a female photographer she suspected got her job through offering sexual favors?

3) Another risk for a woman inclined to go this route is that once she has sex with the man he doesn't fulfill his part of the bargain.

This isn't to say that women never use their charm to boost their careers, but I can't imagine many actually have sex with their bosses to get ahead.

"Consider some data from the CWLP study: Thirty-four percent of executive women who participated in the survey that underlies the new study claim that they know a female colleague who has had an affair with the boss. (Indeed 15% of women at the director level or above admitted to having had such an affair themselves!) They also perceive that these liaisons sometimes yield a payoff: of those who know of an illicit affair, 37% claim that the woman involved received a career boost as a consequence. "

http://blogs.hbr.org/hbr/hewlett/2010/08/how_sex_hurts_the_workplace_es.html


In Russia sleeping with the boss is more or less an expected part of the job:


"Ladies, if you think your job is bad, be thankful that you don't work in Russia. A recent survey of female professionals in that country finds that 100% of them have been subjected to sexual harassment by their bosses. That is not a typo - One Hundred Percent. 32 percent say they have had intercourse with the boss at least once and another 7 percent say they have been raped on the job."

http://www.parentdish.com/2008/08/02/sexual-harassment-just-part-of-the-job-in-russia/

Well, women who sleep their way to the top are certainly creating value for *somebody*.

On the flip side, the percentage of women who've done their careers more harm than good with this kind of behavior is also > 0.

It can backfire on men, too. Remember how Fred Durst claimed that Christina Aguilera slept with him to convince him to duet with her? Where is he now?

It doesn't even have to culminate in sex. If a woman can "reward" powerful males (or lesbians) with sly flirtations and leading mannerisms which give the appearance of inevitable sexual intercourse, she can still curry great favor. In fact, women are in a position to maneuver into favorable situations merely by indulging in this behavior across all levels of the workforce. Many married, otherwise faithful men, are liable to reward the illusion.

15-25% seems like the right range in the English-speaking world. Going by both admitted acts and expressed willingness.

Britain
"A poll of 1,003 UK employees by employment website hirescores.com shows 18% would rather prove their skills in the bedroom to their boss than their skills in the office, 26% would kiss their boss to improve their career and 17% would consider it ‘if the money was right'."

http://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/hro/news/1016851/sex-boss-preferred-career-development-route-workers


America
"Adecco Staffing U.S. commissioned a survey of 1,000 American workers, and reports that.......9 percent "completely agreed" and 7 percent "somewhat agreed" with a question asking whether they would consider having a fling to get ahead at the job"

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Savings/17-percent-fling-boss-career-advancement/story?id=11872980#.T_zxbnChBSV

"However, I think that this type of thing happens a lot more often than naïve libertarian blogosphere types realize."

How old are you? 10? Of course this happens all the time.

"Maybe the real number is even higher. 50%? 75%? Does anyone have any ideas? "

It's hard to come up with any good statistics because what constitutes "sleeping with the boss" covers a hard to categorize, normally distributed spectrum of behavior.

Some women may sleep with a guy who is clearly on his way to a big promotion, but who is not yet senior enough to offer her a job, so that she can deny to herself and her friends that her future promotion was due to her giving him favors because she slept with him while he was still at a lower level.

Does this constitute sleeping to the top?

Other women may have both career and legitimate emotional grounds for sleeping with their boss because they are attracted to their boss' power while also being attracted to the possibility of a higher paycheck.

Is this sleeping to the top?

How can anyone quantify such grey phenomena?

"This totally screws up the libertarian viewpoint that everyone’s income is based strictly on how much value they created."

No it doesn't.

Women will also sleep their way to the top in a redistributive economic system.

And, God damnit, would you stop knocking libertarians as being naive.

Most libertarians who don't work for DC think tanks will agree that there are flaws in human nature and free market economics. But they support the free market because there are no better alternatives to capitalism.

"1) There are huge legal and career risks to any man who offers advancement to a woman for sex."

There are risks *if* women report it.

But in the private sector, much of the sexual escapades of the bosses go unreported because business women are more tolerant of some non-threatening level of flirting than they will admit.

In the corporate sector women tend to be have a more straightforward and materialistic country club Republican mentality to dating wealthy men than SWPL women. Grungy SWPL men with lib arts degrees and no job are often a turnoff to these country club types.

As long as their man (married or single) is able to provide them with money, a great car (or two), enhanced social status, and a good time many women in corporations will put up with more aggressive flirting than one would think because (A) they can gain financial and social benefits by snagging a rich husband or being a rich guy's mistress and (B) they are legitimately and, by women's standard's, openly attracted to wealthy and powerful men.

I know for a fact there's quite a bit of "sexual harassment" at more macho corporations such as Goldman and Booz Allen than is widely known because the women there are willing to put up with the come-ons of the type-A personalities who work there because they *enjoy* the attention.

Another thing about women in big corporation's is that they tend to have more testosterone than average and this higher T level makes them more willing to put up with a "boys will be boys" environment because they can more easily relate to the mentality of men.

The more feminine corporate women aren't as driven as the more competitive ones and will likely end up getting married and become wealthy hausfraus.

On a separate topic, what the fuck happened to OneSTDV? I believe he moved to wordpress. Not sure though

http://onestdv.blogspot.com/
http://onestdv.wordpress.com/

Once again HS prefers to attack strawman libertarian arguments. He's pretending that if any person got their job through nepotism or favoritism then somehow it proves the entire notion of capitalism is broken.

Of course under-qualified people get jobs. The point is in a free market organizations that are unable to control this will fail as they won't be able to compete against more meritorious organizations. Free market competition punishes this. No such punishment of favoritism exists in socialism or government mandated monopolies.

I'll always believe TUJ over anything some liberal or feminist says!!

The sleeping with the boss thing happens a LOT at small companies - small business owner hires a hot, young secretary who gets the job because she's easy on the eyes. A lot of the time that small business owner eventually gets a divorce and ends up marrying his former mistress/ho/secretary.

"I know for a fact there's quite a bit of "sexual harassment" at more macho corporations such as Goldman and Booz Allen than is widely known because the women there are willing to put up with the come-ons of the type-A personalities who work there because they *enjoy* the attention."

Eh, I don't know about that, TUJ. I worked a temp gig at Goldman and didn't see anything like that. I also know a couple of guys who worked there full time and never mentioned that sort of thing either. It's really not worth the risk for a guy at Goldman. It's not like they can't get women outside the firm. And it's not worth the risk to Goldman itself.

"Another thing about women in big corporation's is that they tend to have more testosterone than average"

It depends on the position. In sales, that can be the case sometimes. I remember chatting with a reasonably pleasant woman at a conference when I was a financial wholesaler (someone who sells to stock brokers/financial advisors). She was a wholesaler too. When she got up to give her presentation (in front of an audience of brokers that was 95% male), she sounded like a football coach. I've also seen saleswomen who were more feminine, but that one seemed to be trying to overcompensate for being a woman by being more aggressive.

TODAY a student who has not been to class the last couple weeks suddenly shows up. She's a nine and a real bitch. Nothing's her fault. Ever.

She talks to me to explain her absence: She was hired for a management position -- "her dream job" -- so she planned on dropping out of school ("I bought a new wardrobe and everything.") But the job wasn't for her and she quit.

"Why?" I asked.

She complained about the commute to Los Angeles, the hours ("I'd have to wake up at five in the morning!"), and the training for what seemed like demanding, unglamorous work.

Since college really is a waste of time, especially her B.S. major, I said she should've stuck with it. Companies are always hiring managers, and the experience will help with her next job (she could also take time now to earn a BUSINESS degree). You don't pass up that kind of work in this economy.

Eventually it comes out that a friend had offered her the position and he started getting "handsy." Engaged, she said that stuff's a no-go, and he apparently fired back "you work for me now..."

While smart and hot, she's a complete cunt with no people skills and probably no job experience. Small wonder she got a sweet offer, but her "friend" definitely expected something in return.

------------

I think how often this happens is limited by the percentage of hot chicks in the work force. A fattie's prize is suckin' the big man's mushroom tip. Also, powerful men are less likely to squander reputation and a high-paying job on low-grade tail, though I admit that's sheer speculation (Clinton's a counter-example).

Besides, a woman could always rationalize her whoring by virtue of the fact she's already attracted to her dickbag boss.

Dude, would you stop calling all sorts of stuff "libertarian" that has nothing to do with libertarianism? It's really getting annoying.

"Women who offer sex to get promoted are stealing the job from someone more deserving."

That is the less significant side. What about the people with power to grant the promotion? They make more money, have more power, and have more responsibility, yet they abuse their position for personal gain. The bulk of the problem lies here.

DaveinHackensack: 3) Another risk for a woman inclined to go this route is that once she has sex with the man he doesn't fulfill his part of the bargain.

That isn't much of a risk for the woman in question. After all, they enjoy sex too...

---

As for the general topic, Penelope Trunk has clearly stated she has slept with men who have helped her career. She won't admit to a quid pro quo, though.

What I saw in graduate school and in the professoriate suggests that women using sexual liasons to further a career is not uncommon, but also not as simple as sleeping with a supervisor. Most of the use of p.... power that I observed was oriented toward securing political allies who could further the woman's career.

1) obviously they are providing "value".

2) one of the best scene's in girls shows women accepting light sexual harassment in exchange for small job favors, and being very happy about it

They're creating value for the men they sleep with. Men are willing to exchange quite a bit of money for women to sleep with them, both directly in prostitution and in the short-term dating market, so evidently sex has value to us.

Is it any different from an entertainer making money off his songs, movies, or books?

[HS: If the man is giving away his employer's largess and not his own; then it's just a kickback.]

"This totally screws up the libertarian viewpoint that everyone’s income is based strictly on how much value they created. Women who offer sex to get promoted are stealing the job from someone more deserving." - Half Sigma


This is why women were forbidden from entering trades and many other jobs. Our ancestors knew the dangers unlike us.

Sleeping with the boss can't be that effective in the corporate world since I still see very few women in positions of real authority. It is supposedly the norm in Hollywood - including men being forced to offer sexual favors to men (if you believe Travolta).

"It doesn't even have to culminate in sex. If a woman can "reward" powerful males (or lesbians) with sly flirtations and leading mannerisms which give the appearance of inevitable sexual intercourse, she can still curry great favor. In fact, women are in a position to maneuver into favorable situations merely by indulging in this behavior across all levels of the workforce. Many married, otherwise faithful men, are liable to reward the illusion." - An Unmarried Man


Absolutely. When I was younger I always wanted to work at GameStop (a video game retailer) but the jobs were impossible to get. The obese, middle aged, neckbeard, manager always preferred to hire teenage and twenty something babes. They didn't know shit about gaming but that wasn't the point. These were the type of girls who wouldn't give this dude the time of day but it made him feel good that they answered to him.

"And, God damnit, would you stop knocking libertarians as being naive." - TUJ


No. They deserve all the mockery coming at them.


"Most libertarians who don't work for DC think tanks will agree that there are flaws in human nature and free market economics." - TUJ


No. I frequently see their drivel repeated here and elsewhere.

"But they support the free market because there are no better alternatives to capitalism."

The Scandinavian nations would beg to differ (admittedly, their system of government is much more dependent on the Germanic characteristics of the people)

"everyone’s income is based strictly on how much value they created": surely only a lunatic could believe that?

also consider the women that use the threat of filing sexual harassment charges in order to get ahead.

i know a woman that:

-sued her employer for sexual harassment and used the settlement to start her own consulting firm
-had at least one c-level executive 'by the balls' for some things that he said/did to her (which im sure were unprovoked). this, according to her, guaranteed that she would always get her contract re-newed

I know it happens. One young, attractive female employee essentially offered herself to me in order to obtain a promotion. (And I know it wasn't because of my movie star good looks.) I didn't bite, but as a consequence of this interaction, I found it impossible to focus and get work done when she was in my rough vicinity. Fortunately she's gone now. Talk about loss of workplace efficiency...

Anon E. Mous says,
"It seems like you ought to be forming some informed opinion about the quality of her photographs compared to those of other photographers at the New York Times and lesser papers rather than just assuming her photographs are not very good because she went to the University of Georgia."

I've had stories I've written run in the NY times, carried by A.P. and other wire services. And I went to a Big 10 undergrad school, probably considered very unhip in the beltway!
Seriously, the idea that college rank finely correlates with professional skill level is one of the more absurd yet frequent beliefs I've encountered in the pro-white blogosphere. That shibboleth often comes in the form of a introductory set-up leading to a critique of Affirmative-Action (which I don't support in theory, though I've probably benefited from it at times).
In fact, there are tons of jobs, at every job-level imaginable, in which there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of equally qualified candidates----- rather than the ridiculous conceit that every job candidate can be measured and compared to their potential job duties by finely tuned and precise increments of merit.
The idea that photojournalists, or for that matter, journalists, that attended Harvard and Yale, are going to turn in work, say, a few decimal points better than journalists from, say, Rutgers, Cornell, Boston College or some other respectable but second-tier school, is ridiculous.


And for that earlier post that suggested this Luce-family woman benefited from nepotism, thus working her way quickly to the Times? That I'll sign on to; nepotism in that industry is, for some reason, widely expected, even accepted ------ and doesn't as much anger as you find in other fields, when family connections lead to someone getting ahead.

And back, precisely, to the topic-at-hand? The paper I worked for employed a junior-level reporter who, within a few years of working there, married the paper's publisher, who was at least 25 years older than her.

Does that qualify as 'sleeping to the top?" It does in my book.

"That isn't much of a risk for the woman in question. After all, they enjoy sex too..."

With someone they like, sure. In a quid pro quo situation, where there's no "quo", not so much.

"Penelope Trunk has clearly stated she has slept with men who have helped her career."

Penelope Trunk has some serious psychological issues. Maybe she's not the most representative example.

"These were the type of girls who wouldn't give this dude the time of day but it made him feel good that they answered to him."

They probably also drove foot traffic into the store.

["But they support the free market because there are no better alternatives to capitalism."

The Scandinavian nations would beg to differ (admittedly, their system of government is much more dependent on the Germanic characteristics of the people)]

"Free market" versus Scandinavia is a false dichotomy. All first world economies are capitalist, with varying levels of government participation. Part of what distinguishes Scandinavia isn't its policies per se, but the competence and lack of corruption in its government (which is a function of its people).

Women are a distraction to guys everywhere. If you are a good looking dude with serious career goals, being around hot women in school isn't gonna help your cause, unless you can prioritize sex and study which is hard. Ugly guys know they have less of a chance to get it on, so they focus on their studies more.

Thank god there are very few hot women are in the STEM field and trades in general.

How about men who sleep their way to the top? Now that's how I plan to make partner in my firm.

Yeah I've been starting to believe this too. Especially with probably all the famous movie stars, male and female. Who did Clark Gable blow to get his break? Hollywood has been full of queers since the beginning. It's been part of the glamor, how those murky pre-stardom histories were swept under the rug by the PR machine.

Then you have the high-flying network news types - what about those female news babes? It wouldn't be unusual that they would just happen to find a powerful superior attractive.

And on down into other less dynamic industries. It's kind of a security blanket, to have a "secret" with the boss.

does anyone know whats going on with onestdv's blog?

@Dana

Google must have censored his blog, or someone may have reported him. This happened to Whiskey not too long ago, and Mangan before that. All of his posts are up at http://onestdv.wordpress.com/

Scratch that - It's marked as a 'private blog' now. It was up yesterday.

"This totally screws up the libertarian viewpoint that everyone’s income is based strictly on how much value they created. Women who offer sex to get promoted are stealing the job from someone more deserving."

Actually HS, having sex with a man is very very valuable to that man. It might even be more valuable than whatever the hell that women was supposed to be doing. Clearly it is also very profitable for the woman if used correctly.

When the current president of Harvard was a grad student, she divorced her first husband and married the head of her department. That didn't hurt her career.

Interesting, Steve. And checking her Wikipedia bio shows she kept her first husband's name. I had assumed Faust was a lesbian (possibly because of your posts about lesbians in academia).

'Women who offer sex to get promoted are stealing the job from someone more deserving.'

That's just an assumption.
It's possible that the woman was more, or at least as, deserving, but never would have received a promotion because of her gender.
It's also possible that the woman, though competent in her own right, happens to enjoy men of power and sleeping around---not out of character for a modern woman.

"Another thing about women in big corporation's is that they tend to have more testosterone than average and this higher T level makes them more willing to put up with a "boys will be boys" environment because they can more easily relate to the mentality of men."

Do you have documentation for the higher testosterone levels or are you just making this up? It sort of reminds me of the common blogospheric claim that black men have more testosterone than men of other races - which is *not* true.

"This totally screws up the libertarian viewpoint that everyone’s income is based strictly on how much value they created. Women who offer sex to get promoted are stealing the job from someone more deserving."

In many companies hiring and promotion decisions are based more on who you know rather than what you know. High level managers tend to hire and promote people they have worked with before. A lot of this is just human nature. They know these people abilities from working with them before, so they are a safer choice than someone they don't know. Senior managers also want direct reports they can trust to not try to undermine them.

It is not uncommon to see a senior VP come into a company and then over the next year or two replace most of the VPs and directors under him with "his or her people". These people are usually available because they are being pushed out of his/her previous company by his/her replacement. Sometimes they are from 2 or 3 companies back.

These kind VPs almost never promote internally. They always go outside the company for people they have worked with before.

I have worked in groups where these kind of people got installed as directors. In the recent case the director was a woman and I don't think she was sleeping with anyone to get the job. She was a very smart woman and from conversations with people I knew at her previous company, she was the best marketing person they had. Unfortunately, she was a engineering director at the company I was at with almost no marketing responsibilities. Several of the engineering group managers were able to pull the wool over her eyes and keep some hopeless engineering projects going, because she was just a deer in the headlights when it came to engineering. The reason she got the job was the senior VP of engineering knew her from previous company. She resigned just days after the senior VP resigned.

Many years ago I worked at a company that hired a president from outside the area. He relocated to the area to become president. Part of his employment contract with the company was that his long time live in girl friend would also be given a job at the company and at a very good salary. She was a competent woman. While he was president, she held a number of positions in HR and management training. No one complained about her work, but her salary was considerably higher than anyone else doing those jobs, which people did complain about. I think she had to leave a well paying job for them to relocate, so he wanted to make sure she had a well paying job. This whole arrangement was sort of an open secret.

The idea that income is based on the value you create is only vaguely true. I have seen some of management types that go through a series of companies moving up from director to VP, then to president. They never stay for more than a few years, and they leave a real mess in their wake. They seem to fail upwards.

Mister Contrarian :

Thanks for the excellent updates on the McCarren pool situ.

Please consider blogrolling and/or following us over at :

crimesofthetimes.com

Thanks,

- Arturo

ps: Do you know what happened to Onestdv?

It's easy to see why you don't actually handle cases. You'd just assume that every judge was sleeping with your opponent, especially in employment cases, where women are usually defending.

I am a stay at home wife/mom. Having sex with my boss always advances my career. 100% of the time. *grin*

sorry, this thread just needed a bit of truth with humor...

I haven't read any of the comments yet so someone might have mentioned this. But apparently this is very common in the entertainment and fashion industry. Of course, in those industries its just as likely to be men getting promoted for sexual favors. Just ask John Travolta. I actually feel bad for Vinnie Barbarino as well as those Corey boys -- Feldman and Haim.

This brings me to a somewhat related issue I've noticed -- homosexual philandering. I've noticed that when a business gets a homosexual manager that it is often accompanied by a surprising number of homosexuals being hired and promoted. I worked at a business in high school in which that happened. I've seen it happen at restaurants, discount stores and even large corporations. It's pretty obvious when it happens. At least its obvious if you have "gaydar". I used to live in the Bay Area so its obvious to me, anyway.

When she was a junior editor at a well-know publisher, my future wife received what she interpreted as a lesbian come-on from the editor in chief. Would have meant major career advancement, I guess.

HS, give this some deeper thought. It makes sense that a man with some power over a woman would try to use that power to get sex. So it makes sense some woman would have sex with men in power with the expectation of a reward, or at least the hope of avoiding punishment. But how would the woman enforce that? Why would the man do anything different than he otherwise would have done, once he'd gotten what he'd wanted? In fact, why wouldn't he want to get rid of her?

I've heard this phrase from men more than once to explain a woman's leaving a law job: "She probably fucked some guy and got fired." Not "she probably turned some guy down and got fired."

I've blogged before about the married lech boss I had a few years ago at a mid-sized law firm. I never had sex with him, but he acted inappropriately with me and I didn't see what I could do about it. Then when a higher-ranking, older woman (still younger than him) set her sights on him, and got him to file for divorce, I was toast. And he'd kept me to himself, so I had no other relationships to protect me. I got fired, they got married, now they're divorced.

I think it's about time someone brought Race into this thread.
I used to work in a college in a pretty rundown (largely black) part of London that catered almost entirely for African students. The college was also located in a rundown building. The principal and his hangers on were all Nigerians.
What was striking was that the two young women at the front desk were (white) dolly birds. What could induce them to work here, I thought. In my naivety I never twigged what was going on, until I learnt, a while after I left, that the college had got into trouble because a couple of the black female students had managed to achieve the highest marks in the world in the Law exams (and the same exams were taken in places like Singapore), and that the exam board had suspected fraud. The Principal had been rewriting the girls' essays in return for sex.

It is quite easy to slip into this kind of thing, however. Subsequently, in another college I have known attractive young Chinese women getting into extreme difficulty with essays owing to their lack of English and the promise of sex - either to other students or staff - is often a means of solving these difficulties.

""But they support the free market because there are no better alternatives to capitalism."

The Scandinavian nations would beg to differ (admittedly, their system of government is much more dependent on the Germanic characteristics of the people)

Posted by: Eugenick | July 11, 2012 at 06:35 AM"

Quite the contrary.

Scandinavia and the Germanic countries actually prove libertarian/free market economics is the optimal economic system for Northern Europeans.

Sweden's economy has been booming for the past 10 years or so because their economic ministers have cut taxes, reduced regulations, and opened their markets to free trade. 20 years ago, when Sweden was more socialist, they were economically stagnant.

As for other Germanic nations, Germany's economy improved after they loosened labor market regulations.

Switzerland - which is culturally Germanic but ethnically a cross between Italians, French, and Germans - is both the most powerful Western economy per capita and the most economically libertarian Western nation.

"Do you have documentation for the higher testosterone levels or are you just making this up? It sort of reminds me of the common blogospheric claim that black men have more testosterone than men of other races - which is *not* true."

I don't have documentation but I've observed successful and competitive businesswomen have both subtly more masculine facial features and more masculine personality characteristics (e.g. aggression, remaining cool under pressure, being able to think strategically) than more psychologically feminine and physically attractive women.

The comments to this entry are closed.