<story><title>Speaking While Female</title><url>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/opinion/sunday/speaking-while-female.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>drzaiusapelord</author><text>This also opens the door to having one or two self-promoting types control the conversation by commenting early on and to never stop talking. I find its helpful to interrupt people sometimes as it helps cut the BS in meetings.&lt;p&gt;I doubt there&amp;#x27;s an easy fix here.  My take is that there&amp;#x27;s a larger aspect not addressed in the article: women simply aren&amp;#x27;t socialized to be socially aggressive. The same way women often won&amp;#x27;t negotiate salary and then we wring our hands over women&amp;#x27;s salaries.  How about of instead changing everything to suite these women, we encourage them to be more socially aggressive?  Its not like these things are pleasant or easy for men either. I feel like if I didn&amp;#x27;t learn how to act this way, I wouldn&amp;#x27;t be competitive at my job. The same way I see loads of shy male techies who never speak up and don&amp;#x27;t contribute much and don&amp;#x27;t end up promoted or appreciated. I think its a skill that can be learned and things like &amp;quot;oh I&amp;#x27;m INTJ, oh I&amp;#x27;m a woman, etc&amp;quot; are excuses. Why aren&amp;#x27;t some people motivated to learn the proper social skills? As a previous shy person, I know that this is just a learn-able skill.&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#x27;t think we need to make meetings longer and &amp;quot;nicer&amp;quot; and if we did, it would just lead to resentment and fleeing of talent to  company B where that talent can thrive without a lot of politically correct baggage holding them back.  Now company A is a bunch of quiet milquetoast types unable to engage in argumentation and eventually not be competitive against a more aggressive company.&lt;p&gt;Lastly, a lot of the more quiet people I&amp;#x27;ve worked with are so because they just don&amp;#x27;t have a lot of good ideas. They&amp;#x27;re bureaucrats and desk jockeys or are ultrafocused on their little niche of the world and add the same things over and over regardless of context. Yeah, the TPS reports might be slow to load, but this isn&amp;#x27;t the time or place for it, yet the TPS manager has literally nothing else to add. Maybe those without much to add should be quiet.&lt;p&gt;The Harrison Bergeron-ing of all things really isn&amp;#x27;t the way to go. I really wish more people understood that.</text></item><item><author>sosuke</author><text>&amp;quot;When female executives spoke more than their peers, both men and women punished them with 14 percent lower ratings.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve seen similar comments before and even going as far as saying women were harder on women than men when moving up in a career. It&amp;#x27;s deeper and more complex than men versus women. I&amp;#x27;ve heard my share of anecdotal stories from women who say the same thing, women are their harshest critique and most difficult challenge. It seems daunting, how do you even begin to change that.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;He announced to the writers that he was instituting a no-interruption rule while anyone — male or female — was pitching.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;That is excellent, and sad, that we have to go back to grade school etiquette to let people find a voice. It&amp;#x27;s true though, if a team member isn&amp;#x27;t trusted to have a voice they shouldn&amp;#x27;t be a part of the conversation. If they are a part of the conversation they should have the respect of the rest of the team enough for them to shut up and listen, then respond. Spirit sticks!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>frandroid</author><text>&amp;gt; women simply aren&amp;#x27;t socialized to be socially aggressive&lt;p&gt;The article makes the point that women are socially penalized when they are aggressive. It&amp;#x27;s not a lack of socialization into aggressiveness, but rather an active socialization into passiveness.</text></comment>
<story><title>Speaking While Female</title><url>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/opinion/sunday/speaking-while-female.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>drzaiusapelord</author><text>This also opens the door to having one or two self-promoting types control the conversation by commenting early on and to never stop talking. I find its helpful to interrupt people sometimes as it helps cut the BS in meetings.&lt;p&gt;I doubt there&amp;#x27;s an easy fix here.  My take is that there&amp;#x27;s a larger aspect not addressed in the article: women simply aren&amp;#x27;t socialized to be socially aggressive. The same way women often won&amp;#x27;t negotiate salary and then we wring our hands over women&amp;#x27;s salaries.  How about of instead changing everything to suite these women, we encourage them to be more socially aggressive?  Its not like these things are pleasant or easy for men either. I feel like if I didn&amp;#x27;t learn how to act this way, I wouldn&amp;#x27;t be competitive at my job. The same way I see loads of shy male techies who never speak up and don&amp;#x27;t contribute much and don&amp;#x27;t end up promoted or appreciated. I think its a skill that can be learned and things like &amp;quot;oh I&amp;#x27;m INTJ, oh I&amp;#x27;m a woman, etc&amp;quot; are excuses. Why aren&amp;#x27;t some people motivated to learn the proper social skills? As a previous shy person, I know that this is just a learn-able skill.&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#x27;t think we need to make meetings longer and &amp;quot;nicer&amp;quot; and if we did, it would just lead to resentment and fleeing of talent to  company B where that talent can thrive without a lot of politically correct baggage holding them back.  Now company A is a bunch of quiet milquetoast types unable to engage in argumentation and eventually not be competitive against a more aggressive company.&lt;p&gt;Lastly, a lot of the more quiet people I&amp;#x27;ve worked with are so because they just don&amp;#x27;t have a lot of good ideas. They&amp;#x27;re bureaucrats and desk jockeys or are ultrafocused on their little niche of the world and add the same things over and over regardless of context. Yeah, the TPS reports might be slow to load, but this isn&amp;#x27;t the time or place for it, yet the TPS manager has literally nothing else to add. Maybe those without much to add should be quiet.&lt;p&gt;The Harrison Bergeron-ing of all things really isn&amp;#x27;t the way to go. I really wish more people understood that.</text></item><item><author>sosuke</author><text>&amp;quot;When female executives spoke more than their peers, both men and women punished them with 14 percent lower ratings.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve seen similar comments before and even going as far as saying women were harder on women than men when moving up in a career. It&amp;#x27;s deeper and more complex than men versus women. I&amp;#x27;ve heard my share of anecdotal stories from women who say the same thing, women are their harshest critique and most difficult challenge. It seems daunting, how do you even begin to change that.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;He announced to the writers that he was instituting a no-interruption rule while anyone — male or female — was pitching.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;That is excellent, and sad, that we have to go back to grade school etiquette to let people find a voice. It&amp;#x27;s true though, if a team member isn&amp;#x27;t trusted to have a voice they shouldn&amp;#x27;t be a part of the conversation. If they are a part of the conversation they should have the respect of the rest of the team enough for them to shut up and listen, then respond. Spirit sticks!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>DanBC</author><text>&amp;gt; Its not like these things are pleasant or easy for men either.&lt;p&gt;So the system doesn&amp;#x27;t work for women, nor for minority groups, nor for many men.  Doesn&amp;#x27;t that suggest that we should be trying to fix the system?</text></comment>