Women in the Workforce

LaPrincipessa's picture

Her beliefs hurt women

Christine O'Donnell: Believes Creationism should be taught in schools and given equal time to Evolution. Believes a woman does not have the right to choose and should submit to her husband. That's right, she's advocation for a 1950's social model which oppressed women greatly.

CNN debate with opponent Chris Coons - Transcript:

BLITZER: Let's give you a chance to respond to some of the things she said because in a television appearance back in 1998 on Bill Maher's show you said evolution is a myth. Do you believe evolution is a myth?

O'DONNELL: I believe that the local -- I was talking about what a local school taught and that should be taught -- that should be decided on the local community. But please let me respond to what he just said.

BLITZER: We'll let you respond but answer the question. Do you believe evolution is a myth?

O'DONNELL: Local schools should make that decision. I made that remark based on --

BLITZER: What do you believe?

O'DONNELL: What I believe is irrelevant.

BLITZER: Why is it irrelevant?

O'DONNELL: Because what I would support ...

BLITZER: Voters want to know.

LaPrincipessa's picture

You're Too Sexy For Your Job

Women face obstacles in the work place that prevent them from climbing the corporate ladder. Women make less than men for equal work, women of color make less than white women, dark haired women are shown to make less than those with a more fair complexion and blond hair, women who are thin will advance more frequently than those who are "overweight", and women that are considered to be closer to society's version of beautiful will be paid higher than those who are not.

All of this most already know, yet there is one more we can add to the grim list: women can be reprimanded or even fired for appearing to be "too provocative". You see, if she is too beautiful and too well-endowed, she could be seen as a distraction for male coworkers in (unintentionally) arousing their uncontrollable libido. Other women who wear the same clothing but aren't as "pretty", do not have the same affect upon men, the plaintiff in the case argue.  Of course, it makes no sense to blame women for the unprofessional considerations of her male co workers, but that is fruitless to point out.

This news is more proof that fighting for wage equality and gender non bias in the workplace are not enough. Beauty norms exist, duh, seeing them work against women in this way is a huge problem and frankly, its getting much worse.

LaPrincipessa's picture

Major Corporation Loses Millions for Discriminating Against Female Employees

Those looking for recent evidence that the wage and treatment gap in the workplace still exist need look no further than this recent judgment in which a New York Judge awarded more than 200 million dollars in damages to upwards of 5000 women who worked for Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. The company was found guilty of discriminating against women in offering less lucrative pay and benefit packages, not offering promotions because of gender and pregnancy.

LaPrincipessa's picture

Getting Women in Boardrooms, By Law


NICOLA CLARK of the New York Times examines the law in Norway that requires 40% of women to occupy company boardrooms. Clark makes sound and interesting arguments from both sides of issue, concluding that the quota is not negative or bad for business, rather just a reversal of old gender roles and norms, albeit in a more conspicuous manner; revealing that although the gains in female board members is encouraging, there is still a gender gap that remains.

LaPrincipessa's picture

NPR on Women Who Now Make More: The Rise of the Sugar Mama


Jennifer Ludden of NPR

contends that when it comes to the economics of marriage, the roles have been reversed as women are now more likely to earn more than their husbands or prospective husbands. Her commentary was based upon a new study from The

Pew Research Center.

The study compares marriages in 2007 with those in 1970, when few wives worked — and it's no wonder why. Until 1964, a woman could legally be fired when she got married. Even a woman with a college degree likely made less than a man with a high-school diploma.

The title of this NPR story is enough to make bile rise in my throat: “Modern Marriages: The Rise of the Sugar Mama”. To label or judge the raising wages of women in the work force directly in proportion to their role in a heteronormative marriage is only the first thing I take issue with. The second is the insinuation that if women are now “sugar mamas”, the man was at one time a “sugar daddy”. This dismissal of the undervalued and under acknowledged role of women of my mother’s, grandmother’s , and great-grandmother’s era, whose labor at home is just as valuable as the labor of the man but is not rewarded-offends me.

Syndicate content
Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system