I know this is true; but I don't think biology should justify imposing expectations that in turn affect employment. This can happen very subtly, and can also be difficult to diagnose. For instance, that some employers hire fewer women because they factor in the potential for a future pregnancy.
That might be specifically more of an American problem, here in Australia there is paid maternity leave in (I'm pretty sure) all businesses.
But at the same time, businesses aren't charities so can you really blame or condemn a company for taking that into account? Other businesses do it with men, for example jobs that require empathy or have an emotionally sophisticated dimension to the job will tend to prefer women.
Especially when women were beginning to enter the corporate workplace they were dissuaded from being proactive in seeking promotion. This wasn't done explicitly or intentionally, but there was a sense that women should feel lucky to be part of the workplace. Women were expected to act modestly, a strategy that's counterproductive to seeking promotion. Women who did seek promotion were viewed as immodest and pushy, behaviors which could get them reprimanded or fired. So many women actively avoided such behavior.
This still exists to some extent.
And women like Margaret Thatcher bulldozed this kind of environment all the way to power and leftist women who claim to want women to be more like that demonize her and even write articles about how she didn't do anything for women.
I think in many ways people want women to continue to have this problem so they can continue to make bank on the victimhood industry.
I'm not sure why you see this as an insidious ploy to drive women into positions of power. Shouldn't women who've been working a position for 4-5 years want to earn a promotion?
Specifically the people who claim equality as their driving ideal I think are insidious with how obsessed they are that there aren't enough female CEOs, politicians, presidents etc. It's a strange power obsession that I feel inherently creepy about, especially since at the same time these people are shitting all over men.
I just fucking tire of corporatists and their progressive pretenses that are just a veil for power-seeking. Takes a lot to make me cry and corporate workers struggling to gain even more power isn't something that triggers my emotions.
It would strike me that if they didn't, you'd criticize them for a lack of ambition. See, this is the kind of attitude I'm talking about. It sounds like if a woman has a self-promotional drive, you'd criticize her for immodesty; but if she exhibits a lack of self-promotion, you'd criticize her for having no ambition.
I'm not saying you think this, but language kind of makes it sound that way.
When it comes to corporatists I don't care about gender. I've worked for female managers many times in my life and many of them I would follow into a damn mine shaft haha. I'm not someone who shames women for being driven and immodest, most of my relationship wreckages have been due to women being too submissive, I like dominant women etc. (TMI sorry.)
Corporate women
should drive for promotions, but I'm simply saying I don't care that much about the corporate world.
Also, I really don't have a heart that bleeds for men who feel like they're victims of women's successes. And plenty of men who do suffer at the very bottom of society blame women for their lot in life. Pretty pathetic.
I agree but I'm not talking about those men, I'm talking about the brutally dropping success rate in the education system with males, the suicide rates, the men working unsafe, dangerous jobs that the powers that be and the politicians don't notice. Especially the left because traditionally they're the voice of the poor and working class but all they ever do now is rant about how there aren't enough female corporate powerhouses in the world.
Women who are educated and driven enough to enter the corporate realm to begin with don't need a victim cult constructed around them.
