It's hard for me to see Sheryl Sandberg's "Lean In" as anything other than a cynical exercise in self-promotion by an already-known public figure. It's also difficult for me not to feel a bit of resentment towards a person whose cycle of privilege and good fortune has now reached a dizzying apex, whose book launch was promoted on Oprah and the cover of TIME magazine. (Remember when Jonathan Franzen's "Freedom" got the cover of TIME?) I also wonder what she's going to do with her share of the money from the book sales.
None of these factors make me dislike Sheryl Sandberg or see her as anything other a canny businesswoman who has seized the right opportunities with skill and aplomb. But it also means I don't see "Lean In" as the cri de coeur that is it being presented as. Plenty of people have done excellent research on the challenges that face women in professional life, and Sandberg stands squarely on a lot of shoulders in order to present her grand vision. I hate to draw a possibly specious comparison, but her book might as well have been called "Eat, Pray, Work."
Women's Economic Opportunity
None of these factors make me dislike Sheryl Sandberg or see her as anything other a canny businesswoman who has seized the right opportunities with skill and aplomb. But it also means I don't see "Lean In" as the cri de coeur that is it being presented as. Plenty of people have done excellent research on the challenges that face women in professional life, and Sandberg stands squarely on a lot of shoulders in order to present her grand vision. I hate to draw a possibly specious comparison, but her book might as well have been called "Eat, Pray, Work."
But I'm reading it anyway, and here are some things that come to mind:
Women's Economic Opportunity
A while back I remember being part of a debate over what the incoming Indian government's priorities should be. The presenter asked us to choose which was more important: economic growth or women's rights.
Oh boy.
Reading "Lean In," I'm reminded of the emerging school of thought - promoted by the World Bank, the Economist and the Half the Sky movement, among others, that a sustainable vision of either requires the pursuit of both. I also remember a quote from a young male protester in Tahrir Square, who was asked why the number of sexual assaults in the Square is rising. He said something like "Men are frustrated and have no jobs, what do you expect?" His quote - so disturbing! - links economic opportunity and women's safety. It's not a link that we - particularly in India, these days - can afford to ignore.
In India, a surplus labor country, the conventional argument goes that the biggest challenges to growth lie in expanding education and access to opportunity among men. Equal access for women is still a few generations down the line. If this argument is somehow taken as normative (not that it should be) it still ignores the documented differences in how men and women lead. It also ignores the fact that building an employment structure that excludes women, and then attempting to invite women into that structure later on, is exactly the foolish thinking that leads to the hyper-competitive, family-unfriendly professional environment that both men and women in the developed world find increasingly alienating.
Sexism as Competitive Workplace Adaptation
Early on, Sandberg mentions Warren Buffett's famous quote that part of his success comes from only having had to compete with half the population. Then, on page 15, Sandberg tells the following story:
"I was recently reminded that these patterns persist even when we are all grown up. Not long ago, at a small dinner with other business executives, the guest of honor spoke the entire time without taking a breath. This meant that the only way to ask a question or make an observation was to interrupt. Three or four men jumped in, and the guest politely answered their questions before resuming his lecture. At one point, I tried to add something to the conversation and he barked, “Let me finish! You people are not good at listening!” Eventually, a few more men interjected and he allowed it. Then the only other female executive at the dinner decided to speak up—and he did it again! He chastised her for interrupting. After the meal, one of the male CEOs pulled me aside to say that he had noticed that only the women had been silenced. He told me he empathized, because as a Hispanic, he has been treated like this many times."
I have had the same experience in previous workplaces, and can safely say that on every occasion, the sexist men were clearly using sexism as a competitive strategy. Kind of how basketball players will foul a member of an opposing team if they think that'll take the opponent out of the game and help their team win. That's essentially what happens with some of these nastier forms of professional sexism - they provide a way for one group to reserve choice assignments, promotions, etc for themselves, on a basis other than merit. Usually, sexists (like all oligarchs) fear meritocracy. To paraphrase Ruchir Sharma (another great hustler of our times), there is greater enemy to true capitalism than the well-connected incumbent.
What Would You Do If You Weren't Afraid?
Sandberg begins Chapter One with this question, and I'll end with it for now. What a lovely question. Let's talk about fear for a minute. Fear applies equally to the woman who refuses to push for the corner office and to the man who refuses to leave it because he thinks it defines his value in the eyes of society. What would we all do if we weren't afraid? If the answer is "demand a promotion" that's great. If the answer is "walk away from something meaningless", well, all the greater.
Oh boy.
Reading "Lean In," I'm reminded of the emerging school of thought - promoted by the World Bank, the Economist and the Half the Sky movement, among others, that a sustainable vision of either requires the pursuit of both. I also remember a quote from a young male protester in Tahrir Square, who was asked why the number of sexual assaults in the Square is rising. He said something like "Men are frustrated and have no jobs, what do you expect?" His quote - so disturbing! - links economic opportunity and women's safety. It's not a link that we - particularly in India, these days - can afford to ignore.
In India, a surplus labor country, the conventional argument goes that the biggest challenges to growth lie in expanding education and access to opportunity among men. Equal access for women is still a few generations down the line. If this argument is somehow taken as normative (not that it should be) it still ignores the documented differences in how men and women lead. It also ignores the fact that building an employment structure that excludes women, and then attempting to invite women into that structure later on, is exactly the foolish thinking that leads to the hyper-competitive, family-unfriendly professional environment that both men and women in the developed world find increasingly alienating.
Sexism as Competitive Workplace Adaptation
Early on, Sandberg mentions Warren Buffett's famous quote that part of his success comes from only having had to compete with half the population. Then, on page 15, Sandberg tells the following story:
"I was recently reminded that these patterns persist even when we are all grown up. Not long ago, at a small dinner with other business executives, the guest of honor spoke the entire time without taking a breath. This meant that the only way to ask a question or make an observation was to interrupt. Three or four men jumped in, and the guest politely answered their questions before resuming his lecture. At one point, I tried to add something to the conversation and he barked, “Let me finish! You people are not good at listening!” Eventually, a few more men interjected and he allowed it. Then the only other female executive at the dinner decided to speak up—and he did it again! He chastised her for interrupting. After the meal, one of the male CEOs pulled me aside to say that he had noticed that only the women had been silenced. He told me he empathized, because as a Hispanic, he has been treated like this many times."
I have had the same experience in previous workplaces, and can safely say that on every occasion, the sexist men were clearly using sexism as a competitive strategy. Kind of how basketball players will foul a member of an opposing team if they think that'll take the opponent out of the game and help their team win. That's essentially what happens with some of these nastier forms of professional sexism - they provide a way for one group to reserve choice assignments, promotions, etc for themselves, on a basis other than merit. Usually, sexists (like all oligarchs) fear meritocracy. To paraphrase Ruchir Sharma (another great hustler of our times), there is greater enemy to true capitalism than the well-connected incumbent.
What Would You Do If You Weren't Afraid?
Sandberg begins Chapter One with this question, and I'll end with it for now. What a lovely question. Let's talk about fear for a minute. Fear applies equally to the woman who refuses to push for the corner office and to the man who refuses to leave it because he thinks it defines his value in the eyes of society. What would we all do if we weren't afraid? If the answer is "demand a promotion" that's great. If the answer is "walk away from something meaningless", well, all the greater.
No comments:
Post a Comment