babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » Women and competition

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Women and competition
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 October 2004 01:55 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Are you competitive? Do you compete? Does competing bother you?

For instance, did you win the job that you have, and are you ever aware that others would want to have it?

Or in discussions/debates with others, are you aware of different styles of discussion? Does it bother you to sense that other debaters are out to win, or do you like the feeling of winning yourself?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 October 2004 03:11 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I came in second for my current job. The person who came in first took another offer, so they called me. They, of course, now realize that I was the shining star that they should have chosen first. Guffaw.

I used to be a lot more competitive than I am now. Life's too short to compete against other women (or men), or to harbour jealousies, although I still sometimes do, being human. I find myself a lot less inclined, for instance, to compete for affection or love (not just in romantic relationships but in other relationships as well). I think it's best to make the most of the relationship you have with someone instead of trying to compete against other people for that person's affections, or compare yourself to other people they love, or might potentially love. The example that comes to mind is my son. I have managed to let go of the urge to compete with his father for his affection, and I just try to give as much love as possible and focus on MY relationship with him. The same could go for romantic relationships - why compare yourself or your relationship with your S.O. with their past partners or relationships? Why be jealous when you see them talking to or smiling at someone else? I didn't think I'd ever be able to let go of relationship jealousy and competitiveness, but for the most part, I have, and it's incredibly liberating.

I think that can also apply in other areas of life, too. Why feel competitive with the other 50 people in the class for the top mark? Focus on what YOU'RE getting out of it as long as you're passing and learning. Why feel bad if you were an employer's second choice? There will always be someone better than you and someone worse than you, and chances are, they just might apply for the same job you do.

I think the other reason people feel competitive or insecure/jealous is because they think maybe something good is going to be taken away from them somehow, and they don't want good things to end. In romantic relationships, I think people feel competitive against their lover's old partners because they want to be the best that person has ever had otherwise their partner might change their mind, or find someone "better". With parenting, perhaps the fear is of the end of intimacy with your child if your child starts to love the other parent "better". With jobs, you might feel competitive because someone "better" might come along and steal your job, or make you look bad.

I find that it helps to look at "endings" differently. If you're not so scared of things ending, then you won't feel so desperately jealous or competitive, because you won't constantly be worried that you will be dumped/fired/become less intimate with someone. It helps me a lot to try to think in those terms. That way I can focus on and enjoy relationships, jobs, and education for what they are, instead of always comparing them to what they could be with other people, or worrying about whether they're going to find someone "better" than me.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 October 2004 04:11 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Michelle, you've obviously done a lot -- I mean it: a lot -- of thinking about this problem, and about healthy ways of facing the insecurities. Well, it seems to me that it is insecurities that you've thought of, that that is the way that you conceive of the problem, and you've therefore gone on to think them through and work them through in practice.

I ask you now to think about ... other people.

Are you aware of competitive styles in the ways that other people behave or talk or argue? And if you find yourself facing a determined competitor, what do you do?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 17 October 2004 04:38 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'd like to "weigh in" a little here. There's an aspect of competition that I would like to draw attention to: cheating.

Cheating is done all the time, in all sorts of situations. We see it in competitive sports...and we see it in something as simple as a card game among "friends". There are differing attitudes towards this phenomena but I would just like to note, for now, that many people (I would say more men than women, but that is just my opinion.)consider cheating completely acceptable. But cheating modifies competitive situations drastically and changes my view about the usefulness of competition in many situations.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 October 2004 04:47 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
N.Beltov, how do you know that or when people consider cheating acceptable? Serious question: this is an interesting facet I hadn't thought of.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 17 October 2004 05:06 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
N.Beltov, how do you know that or when people consider cheating acceptable? Serious question: this is an interesting facet I hadn't thought of.

i draw attention to this issue precisely because of the differing attitudes towards cheating.

I know that some people consider it acceptable because (a)when I catch someone cheating they sometimes reply indifferently, trivializing it; (b) if people cheat then in a certain sense they DO consider it acceptable, whatever they may SAY about it.

The financial rewards associated with cheating in competitive sports is well know. Using performance enhansing substances is only one, albeit a large, part of this. In many sporting activities the difference between the highest calibre player and the next level often includes the ability to go right up to the edge of the rules, sometimes crossing over..sometimes not, bending them where only the most skilled official can tell the difference between cheating and not cheating. Hockey is a great example. Bobby Clarke of Philadelphia, formerly of Manitoba, has publically commented that he would still be in Flin Flon if he didn't learn how to skillfully injure an opponent (without getting caught or suffering only a bearable penalty) by...say...slashing them across the leg. Clarke made this comment in relation to the atrocity he carried out against Kharlamov in the 1972 Canada-USSR Series.

But sports are not the only domain where cheating takes place. People cheat on each other all the time in their love relationships...so much so that infidelity is, I think, the leading cause of divorce. One could go on.

There is an advantage to a cheater who conducts themselves on the premise that cheating is acceptable (especially if you don't get caught too often!) versus a person who "plays fair" and expects others to do the same. So the person who "plays fair" needs, if the competition is important and meaningful, to think a little about how they might deal with cheating, what their counter-strategy would be, and so on. That is in addition to the usual requirements of competitive activity. Of course, in many situations, we have no choice but to compete against cheaters in all walks of life.

Forewarned is forearmed!


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 October 2004 05:32 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
N.Beltov, I don't have time to do that justice, or even to explain fully why I asked my first questions above, so what follows is unfairly telegraphic, but:

You ask what the person who plays fair would choose as a counter-strategy. You're not gonna wanna hear this, but the one I've always chosen -- in real life, mind, not necessarily in discussions on babble -- is to walk away.

I think that a lot of women are going to show up here, sooner or later, and confess that.

I'm not about to claim that I have no competitive impulses myself, but this is something I have felt deep conflicts over all my life, and I think that many women have. My way of dealing with any hint of competition in real life is ... to walk away. I have a track record. I have put my money where my mouth is on this score.

When you end your post by saying "Forewarned is forearmed!" -- and I'm not complaining or criticizing, N.B -- you are still assuming that anyone facing such a person would want to fight back, or respond effectively, or something.

I suspect that there are large numbers of women who don't react that way. Even when angered by people who will do anything to compete, they swallow hard and shut up or walk away.

Well: I know that that is a bald claim, and I can't elaborate it any more right now. Perhaps some other women will come along to do that for me.

And yes, I'm sure that this is not just a male/female divide, although like you, I am suspecting that our sex-role-socialization comes into play here.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 17 October 2004 05:47 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Walking away from a competition involving cheaters seems entirely reasonable to me. I would add, as well, that noisily advertising the reason why you choose not to compete is useful, especially for other people that are wrestling with the same issue themselves. i can find no fault with this approach.

Permit me to give an example near and dear to me. Competitive chess. It is my experience that some competitive chess players view cheating as acceptable and normal. It might be something as simple as drumming their fingers on the table as a means to distract their opponent during a move...to moving the pieces on the board when the opponent is away from the board or otherwise under duress. (Duress might be, e.g., having to catch up on a scoresheet, being behind in recording the moves, things like that)

My remedy is to noisily demand the enforcement of the rules. I make such a big fucking scene that the Tournament Director will intervene because I am distracting other players from other games. It seems to be the only thing that works.

There was a recent controversy in Canadian chess competition...the Manitoba champion was caught, cheating, in one of the premier events in Canada...the Canadian Open. The manner in which this was handled has encouraged me to continue to ...stay away from competitive chess for the time being. Besides, babble is so much more fun...and the ability to cheat is very restricted indeed. Hooray!

However, what to do when competition is unavoidable? Walking away ...sucks. Hence the necessity for...a counter-strategy. Plan "B", sister!


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 October 2004 05:50 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"Tomorrow," brother!
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 October 2004 06:51 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't really see relationships on the same level as sports. The main point of competitive sports where the object of the game is for one team or one person to win over the other is...well, competition.

Relationships, on the other hand, I don't view in the same light. Therefore, "cheating" at cards is not substantially the same as infidelity in a relationship, and the fact that we even call infidelity "cheating" (which is so common that I often call it that too) shows an underlying framework of relationships that has competition as a defining feature.

But when I stop viewing relationships of any kind as competitive events (needing to be "the best" my lover has ever had, or needing to be the only person he turns to for anything, or agonizing over whether or not he will "cheat") then I stop thinking about "cheaters" and "non-cheaters".

Infidelity is just one thing that can go wrong in a relationship. There is a tendency to view infidelity as the granddaddy of all relationship sins, as the ultimate breaking of the rules. When in fact, I would be willing to bet that in most cases, infidelity is the product of a whole bunch of rule-breaking, on both sides, that leads to the breakdown of the relationship to the point where infidelity occurs - but no one ever wants to see where infidelity fits in context to those other relationship sins.

This is why I can't compare infidelity to cheating at sports. I'm not saying that infidelity is okay; I'm just saying that when it's viewed in such simplistic terms, and when only infidelity is called "cheating", and when a couple can commit all sorts of relationship sins against each other, but that the first person who turns to someone else after all the rest of those relationship destroyers is suddenly the "cheater" and the one at fault - well, it doesn't lead to a very good analysis of how relationships break down.

It's much easier for me to view relationships in a non-competitive framework, seeing my relationship with someone as separate and non-competitive with other relationships, and the relationships that the people I love have with other people, whether it's my child's relationship with another of his parents, my sibling's relationship with my parents, or my lover's relationships with other significant people. If the relationship breaks down, I look at all the reasons rather than labelling certain actions in competitive terms like "cheating".

Skdadl, I'm not sure if this is off your intended topic or not (it was an answer to N Beltov) but if it is, apologies. . I'm not trying to come off as all Zen here, and above all this competition stuff. I'm not! But you were asking how women deal with competitive urges, and this is how I deal with mine. I try to find another framework and not put myself through the emotional agony of always competing.

You were saying something about how you react by walking away when someone tries to be overly competitive with you. Is it possible that you're engaging in something similar to my strategy - refusing to play on those terms? I guess the difference being that refusing to compete is not the same thing as simply refusing to see it as a competition at all.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 October 2004 07:10 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh, I just realized, skdadl, that you've been trying to steer it towards the idea of people who see conversations or political discussions as competitions. Apologies for taking it off track.

I have found myself once in a while in a tit-for-tat debate where I start to get somewhat emotionally invested in staring down my opponent and driving their arguments into the ground. It's funny though; when it happens, it doesn't feel all that great, although sometimes it can relieve anger somewhat to get in a good "shiv" (as Contrarian calls it) when someone says something that pisses me off. I often walk away unless I'm in a bad mood to begin with, or, if I catch myself in the middle of a pissing match and I don't want to continue it, or I feel I was in the wrong, I'll extricate myself by apologizing for my part in it, or walking away.

There is the age-old generalization that men's conversations are competitions and women's conversations are emoting. Of course, neither are completely true, and I think that it's becoming less and less true the more women are becoming assertive, and the more men are no longer afraid of showing "weakness" through sensitivity. I think it was Phil Donahue who joked about how women in his audiences would often commiserate with the guests and offer support or say how they FELT about what was being said, whereas men would stand up and lay down the law, telling the guests exactly what they should do, or they try to "top" someone else's comment with, "You think that's bad? That's nothing, THIS is bad..." etc.

I think that's an overgeneralization and both sexes engage in both styles to a varying degree. But I find most of the time with women in conversation, even when one person sharing an experience triggers other women to share their experiences, it's often done in a spirit of sharing, as in, "Oh, I'm so sorry for what you're
going through - I know how you feel because I felt the same way when x." As opposed to sharing your own experience in a way that "tops" someone elses, such as, "Oh you think THAT'S bad, wait till you hear what happened to ME: x." It is said that men often do the latter when talking to each other; I wouldn't know, I'm not a man, so I don't know how men talk when they're alone. However, while I've had both men and women engage in that kind of "topper", I feel I have experienced it more often with men. However, I don't know whether I have that impression because it's actually true, or because I've swallowed the stereotype and only notice it when men do it.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 17 October 2004 07:39 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
There is the age-old generalization that men's conversations are competitions and women's conversations are emoting. Of course, neither are completely true ...

I don't have the citations at hand, but I have read many management and psychological studies, or at least reports of them, that find that women are much more "I win / you lose" or "my story tops yours" than are men.

I'm not saying this as a "better or worse" thing, but I would say that in at least the business and professional world, that fits my own perception. Of course, all sorts of uncontrolled variables factor into that. For example, could it be that because of the "glass ceiling" reality, only those women who are the most combative even get to those situations ? Could well be.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 October 2004 09:05 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by James:
I don't have the citations at hand, but I have read many management and psychological studies, or at least reports of them, that find that women are much more "I win / you lose" or "my story tops yours" than are men.

Oh yeah? You think those studies are good, you should see the studies I'VE read...

Seriously though, I had no idea. That hasn't been my experience. But maybe, as I say, I've been influenced by the stereotype and only notice it when I see men doing it, and write it off as an "exception" when I see a woman doing it.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ravenscript
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6803

posted 22 October 2004 03:38 PM      Profile for Ravenscript     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
James writes: "I don't have the citations at hand, but I have read many management and psychological studies, or at least reports of them, that find that women are much more "I win / you lose" or "my story tops yours" than are men."

I would like to know the source of this, not because I'm questioning its validity per se, but because it's incredibly important to know what type of study and in what context the study took place becfore I can give it credibility. This is especially true of psychological/management studies where the values of the scientist/medical professional conducting it can have a profound effect on its outcome. It's a myth that "science" is neutral.

Aside from than, I can honestly say I work in a male-dominated profession where I was frequently the only woman at the table, on the job, or in the classroom. I've long since come to understand that while people (gender neutral) are competitive, most women are far more likely to carefully follow the rules and most men are more likely to regard subverting them as fair play.

This is, of course, a very broad generalization, but in my particular experience as a technical writer/advisor/researcher for large engineering and humanities grants (which is basically competition writing as these are juried), I find myself constantly explaining to male collegues why the rules MUST be followed. This seldom comes up with female collegues who arrive with their guidelines in hand and are frequently meticulous in making sure they address the criteria.

I often find myself puzzling over this: male or female, they are equally desirous of being successful in the competition. However, having watched men in particular work their government contacts when in search of funding, I can say that the old boys club definitely exists and is doing well. Many deals are made outside of the official competition for funds (ie/ outside the official rules) over coffee, lunch or other ad hoc contacts that I think it's reasonable to assert there is a kind of masculine culture involved.

Women are socialized quite differently: this is really evident in female film students when they first arrive at university. Although equally competative as the male studes, women often don't think of seeking out an "exception" to the rules (say in terms of accessing equipment above their level) and are quite annoyed when the find a male student doing so. They don't see it as fair play (which it isn't) but because this type of networking seems ingrained in male students and instructors, they often seem quite puzzled at the charge of unfairness. Most female students go through quite a transformation in their first year because of this...

I say "masculine culture" because, while looking after my goddaughters, I caught an episode of a television program called "Max and Ruby." Ruby, the older sister, is always trying to teach her younger brother the proper rules of conduct. Max is always trying to subvert them, and usually succeeds in doing so without consequence. This program is directed at 3-8 year-old range. It gave me shivers, really, to think that even at this early age, we are already shaping boys and girls in specific behaviors.

[ 22 October 2004: Message edited by: Ravenscript ]


From: Regina | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Puetski Murder
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3790

posted 24 October 2004 01:38 PM      Profile for Puetski Murder     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
women often don't think of seeking out an "exception" to the rules (say in terms of accessing equipment above their level) and are quite annoyed when the find a male student doing so. They don't see it as fair play (which it isn't) but because this type of networking seems ingrained in male students and instructors, they often seem quite puzzled at the charge of unfairness.

This is so completely unfair, as well as the story of my university career. Somehow it is "okay" for the boys to do things which give them an unfair advantage, but I can't do the same. I ask those same boys if they think it would be fair if I went in to my professor's office in a form revealing outfit and was flirtatious with the intention of receiving something other students would not get. Of course they find it unfair, because they cannot compete with that. Somehow they can't connect the dots, and see my example as "dirty play".

Since I am competitive I often have a difficult time reconciling my own desire to get it (whatever it is) with my perceptions that someone else might be far more deserving. I do not compete with girls because I don't think this is necessary. Instead I compete with my male peers who have received an extraordinary amount of undue privilege. If I can rank with them in the face of asymmetrical advantages, I feel like I accomplished something.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 October 2004 01:59 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, we're a slow but interesting group here, yes?

PM, I'm proud of you. I suspect that women like you have overcome what I struggled with all my working life. The contradictions that Ravenscript has described are much closer to my experience in the deep past than the reports that James refers to. When I was young, my sense of what must be "right" simply overpowered every other interest, to the point that I became accustomed to dealing with all conflicts of any kind by ... walking away from them.

Fast way to get poor, in my experience.

And it isn't smart, either; and it isn't all that virtuous, either. It doesn't help anyone else that we keep preserving our virtue by refusing to compete, even to assert, to fight back. I can see that logically; and yet still it is true: recognizing that I am suddenly on competitive or contested ground makes me feel physically ill, and I am probably now too old to get over that.

The reports that James refers to must concern a very select group of women, those women who, by the mid-1970s, had decided that networking and dressing for success are fun -- if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, etc. I can believe that some of those women became competitive with a vengeance, outdoing the men, partly out of a kind of self-consciousness that male inheritors of a tradition would not have felt, of course.

Statistically, I suspect that those women are close to being irrelevant; but I'm sure they all have nice wardrobes and financial portfolios.

One of the things I watch these days is the way that women post to babble. It is interesting in this context.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ravenscript
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6803

posted 24 October 2004 06:37 PM      Profile for Ravenscript     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Puetski Murder writes: "This is so completely unfair, as well as the story of my university career. Somehow it is "okay" for the boys to do things which give them an unfair advantage, but I can't do the same. I ask those same boys if they think it would be fair if I went in to my professor's office in a form revealing outfit and was flirtatious with the intention of receiving something other students would not get. Of course they find it unfair, because they cannot compete with that. Somehow they can't connect the dots, and see my example as "dirty play"."

I spend a lot of time thinking about this issue, since being successful at my job is really dependent on understanding and successfully competing in a highly masculine culture... you wouldn't think this is true in this day and age in a university/professional setting, but since the two areas I work in are male-dominated professions, I am routinely the only woman at the table or, during my film production education, the only woman in my class from the second year on.

Withdrawing from male culture doesn't really help... in fact, it's career-ending for women in film and in engineering, when a huge percentage of your clients and collegues are male. No matter how much one rails that the system and desires a more "female-oriented" workplace (whatever that may be), the fact is that you either learn to navigate the ocean or go under the waves. It's really that simple.

In defence of my male collegues, they generally do not regard this as "cheating": it's just the way they have learned to network as part of their socialization, which is why they often look blank when they are called on it. Once, when in a management seminar, I was asked to describe how men and women view rules differently: I said, and still believe, that for women, rules are non-negotiable endpoints and for men they are the place where they start negotiating. It's really a very different way of thinking about power.

This is not to say that women can't crack the "code": I've watched the rise of some very powerful women in my time who have adapted the old boys' network by very successfully building their own, negotiated their own exceptions and have sat at the table as true equals, all without compromising their beliefs. They've simply leaned a different way to communicate and added it to their competative arsenal.

I can say that, at least for me, the process of understanding male competition systems was aided by genuinely liking men and having an appreciation for their style of communication. This may have devived in part from my experinces as a theatrical and film director: the key to getting any grip, actor, or camera person (male or female) to do what you want is understanding how they communicate and putting your goal in a way that they understand and can sign on to with enthusiasm. It's exactly the same with engineers.

One can argue about whether or not we, as women, should be obliged to learn these skills in the workplace, but ultimately, it's a numbers game. Unless there's a way to surround onself with women only as clients and/or collegues, learning male competition culture is just part of moving through the workaday world.


From: Regina | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 October 2004 06:52 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I've watched the rise of some very powerful women in my time who have adapted the old boys' network by very successfully building their own, negotiated their own exceptions and have sat at the table as true equals, all without compromising their beliefs.

Abject confession: I do not know how this is done.

I'm speaking from the end of a long career, and with a lot of love for women friends who have bitten bullets that I finally couldn't.

I would never judge what they have done with their beliefs, whatever those were. All I know is that it cost us all a lot, whichever side we came down on, finally.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ravenscript
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6803

posted 24 October 2004 07:08 PM      Profile for Ravenscript     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Skdadl writes: "Abject confession: I do not know how this is done. I'm speaking from the end of a long career, and with a lot of love for women friends who have bitten bullets that I finally couldn't."

I've had the amazing learning experience of watching a highly principled woman move right up the power ladder. She set an uncompromising standard early and, when necessary, fell on her sword over a line she wouldn't cross and then got right back up and started again.

More to the point, I guess, she looked at every failure as an opportunity to learn and never gave up at a closed door until it opened and let her in. She once told me that when navigating a university hierarchy, it was really helpful to think of it as doing research in male academic discourse. She always knew the rules and exploited them only when absolutely necessary.

This doesn't mean that she wasn't shafted, which of course she was, but all through it she kept her integrity intact. It was a slower path to power than she might have otherwise taken, but in the end she got there on her own terms. It's weird, but the very integrity that slowed her down in the beginning has provided her with an excellent power base in the end.


From: Regina | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 October 2004 07:41 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ravenscript, I have never seen that done.

I have seen women of my cohort pay the price, whichever choices they made.

For me, it is more important to record what happens to us than to exhort, I guess. It is important that younger women believe that they can become equal -- yes, it is.

But it is also important to record what has really happened to the women who claimed equality in the abstract when they were young, then ran up against the real barriers of the real world, and then chose, and paid for the choice. Because so far, most of us have.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Puetski Murder
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3790

posted 24 October 2004 08:15 PM      Profile for Puetski Murder     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
PM, I'm proud of you. I suspect that women like you have overcome what I struggled with all my working life.

Thanks so much sk. That means a lot. I don't know if I've overcome but it is something I aim for. The desire to walk away from what seems insurmountable is tremendous.

quote:
I've watched the rise of some very powerful women in my time who have adapted the old boys' network by very successfully building their own, negotiated their own exceptions and have sat at the table as true equals, all without compromising their beliefs. They've simply leaned a different way to communicate and added it to their competative arsenal.

This is why I would like a mentor. Someone who is the end result of what I want to accomplish. A woman who is in the same field, has been through the grad/post grad studies, knows the kinds of challenges I may face and how to help me deal. I think I can grapple competently enough but to have a network is very encouraging.

quote:
But it is also important to record what has really happened to the women who claimed equality in the abstract when they were young, then ran up against the real barriers of the real world, and then chose, and paid for the choice.

I think about this a lot. Because if we all just claim abstract equality and eventually find it did us no good, where's the progress? Where's the justice for those who paid dearly? Those who refused to adapt to a male style of competition.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hailey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6438

posted 24 October 2004 10:00 PM      Profile for Hailey     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I have a very strong competitive streak academically and in certain sports that are one on one. I don't tend to be competitive in team situations so I'm not competitive at work though I always do my best and I'm not competitive in team sports. I don't know if I would say I am competitive in relationships or not. I can't really comment on that.
From: candyland | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Ravenscript
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6803

posted 25 October 2004 03:36 PM      Profile for Ravenscript     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
PM writes: "This is why I would like a mentor. Someone who is the end result of what I want to accomplish. A woman who is in the same field, has been through the grad/post grad studies, knows the kinds of challenges I may face and how to help me deal. I think I can grapple competently enough but to have a network is very encouraging."

Mentorship is a thing that my boss works at avidly. I think that it's as important to have success stories as it is to mark the difficulty of the past. Understanding history is crucial to changing it, but it is also possible to become burned out from the constant struggle or the burden it entails.

I think Skdadl is right: the feminists of the seventies (which are a powerful force on academia), did have a specific abstract view of freedom that is perhaps not entirely shared by feminists of this generation... hence the dreaded, "I am a feminist, but..." or "I am not a feminist, but.."

In age, I belong to the seventies feminists, but I went to university with this generation. I can see both sides of the argument. I do see an increasing number of powerful women in the academy that have entered the upper stratosphere in terms of holding positions of power. And they remain feminists, and true to their beliefs, and they do bring that agenda to the table every single day. But we seldom celebrate these breakthroughs from some reason... they are always looked at as too little, too late, which is a weird sort of dismissal of their accomplishments.

I'm certainly not contending that a university is a "normal" workplace by any means: nor am I saying that there isn't any cost at all to moving up (for men or women, for that matter)... even the most saavy woman will find herself a victim of the machine from time to time (and likely at great cost)... But it is possible, and I think that hope should be held out at least.


From: Regina | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca