(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-19 05:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] o-lucky-man.livejournal.com
I work as a "processing assistant" which is essentially an administrative assistant. There's also another male asst here. My bosses are all female. It's pretty cool.

Of course, I work at a liberal University, not in the corporate world so that might have something to do with it!

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-23 01:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] novapsyche.livejournal.com
Yay for liberal arts!

Where I work, there are several high-level female executives, and the corporate culture is such that everyone is encouraged to succeed and advance. I'd like to hope that other corporations (at least some) operate in a similar manner.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-19 05:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] atdt1991.livejournal.com
blah, can't comment

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-19 05:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] novapsyche.livejournal.com
Why not? I love your insights.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-19 06:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] atdt1991.livejournal.com
*smiles* Thank you. I mean I literally can't comment in the entry.

What I was going to say there, which I suppose I could as easily say here, is that in my office there are two administrative assistants. One, that I call Crazy Secretary Lady, is kinda insane. The other is a middle-aged black dude. He's the best thing since sliced bread - capable, quick, never complains, with a great sense of humor that makes the day go easier.

The main (editors, publishers) executives around here are male, but every other position (copy editor, reporter) seems to be an even smattering of male and female. I'm not sure what kind of insight that can provide into a business, but maybe it's this: head staff (particularly the owners of the company) may be typically sexist, but those under them (who make non-executive hiring decisions) seem far more pragmatic about hiring whoever is best for the job.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-19 07:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dionysus1999.livejournal.com
Bunch of stereotypes, more like. I was going to post, since that's my job, but I'm not a member. Fuck it.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-23 12:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] novapsyche.livejournal.com
Like I said to [livejournal.com profile] atdt1991 above, you can always post your opinions here. [livejournal.com profile] feminist is a closed community, ostensibly to keep the trolls out. However, both men and women are members; you just need to ask to be let in.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-19 08:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jennkitty.livejournal.com
Our "receptionist" (who also assists on audits) is male. And gay, but I don't think that's relevant, as it was unknown when he was hired.

Our HR is also technically the bosses' Assistant, and is female and fetches coffee for them, etc. She fits the old school secretary paradigm.

Ryan is technically an admin asst/tier 1 tech, but likes to call himself a Secretary, b/c his job entails keeping his boss on track.

All of the following is opinion and off the top of my head.

I think the trend runs towards hiring females for these jobs, possibly due to tradition, but more likely due to communication style/appearances/lack of aggression towards work seen in male employees. These are stereotypes, yes, but most of the women content in receptionist/sec'y positions are the people who will apply for those jobs. And many of them either don't want the responsibility of a job higher up the food chain, or are more comfortable in a support role (this again ties strongly to stereotypical gender roles and communication styles).

My supe just added that more women are less willing to put in the time required for executive positions if it takes away from primary caregiver/family roles. which is also interesting. And partially explains why many female executives have no children or distinctly choose career over family.

Please give me feedback. Fascinating topic.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-23 12:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] novapsyche.livejournal.com
My supe just added that more women are less willing to put in the time required for executive positions if it takes away from primary caregiver/family roles.

I think this is a stereotype/myth, as it can't be backed up by stats. In fact, this idea is what keeps women's pay at a lag behind men's: executives assume that women won't be around, that they will get pregnant and need to take time off. So, in anticipation of that, they will 1) pay females less than equivalently qualified male co-workers and/or 2) not advance them in the company but instead keep them in these typically "feminine" work roles.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-07-23 06:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jennkitty.livejournal.com
i have thought about how spawning will affect my job. truth is, there will be some things i can do from home, and Ryan will prolly stay home with the kid(s) anyway, so it's kind of not an issue, career-wise.

and men take time off, too, with family leave. so you're right, this is a bullshit reasoning.

Profile

novapsyche: Sailor Moon rising into bright beams (Default)
novapsyche

October 2014

S M T W T F S
    1234
567891011
12 131415161718
192021 22 232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags