04 May '17 — Getting on par with men
"The leaders of Hidden Champions are also more likely to come into power at a young age and are more often women than in larger companies." - hbr.org
I was reading an article on what makes Germany's economy strong (it feels good to live in a winning country). Hidden Champions are companies that are mid-sized world market leaders, which Germany has a disproportionate number of. They're smaller than companies you hear of, but they're leaders in a specific industry, like manufacturing of a medical device.
This was another instance where I found women leading, naturally, without initiatives pressuring them into leadership as there are in Fortune 500 companies.
Everyday there are headlines on how women aren't getting paid equally, aren't on company boards, aren't in leadership positions despite tenure. The endless list is routinely presented. Each time, it reinforces the idea that women aren't equal.
'Let's look at all the places where there aren't as many women as men. Computer science. Formula 1. Boxing. Let's just list them all and show how much women lag behind men. Draw attention to where they should be, and say that's how it should be in a perfect world. In fact, let's create programs to help them get on the same page as men.'
How about listing all the places women are excelling where men aren't? Perhaps it is homemaking...or knitting. Is it too politically incorrect to highlight such skills? Is it such a threat to feminism? The whole movement reinforces the idea that the areas women tend to be good at are not substantial enough. The skills and positions women are predominant in are 'not-worthy' of being achievements.
Contemporary attitudes perpetuate the subordination of females. Money seems to be the measurement in determining which skills matter. I never thought feminism could be so entrenched in capitalism.