There are still women here bemoaning glass ceilings and demanding more presence on Boards of Directors. They overlook this gradual stacking of numbers which will eventually propel women into those top jobs in the same way that men were propelled into them. Networking among the 'old school tie' contacts.
These days more and more young women are making those old school ties too and will eventually stop 'catscratching' each other and form their own mutually career boosting networks. One day they will attain that strived for position of Chief Fat Pond Toad at the head of the Boardroom altar where every chair is occupied by a corporate Brunhilde. All will be universally hated by the population in general and their staff in particular and that day we'll have made it,... sisters!
I wonder if nature has some trigger point that when a species reaches a level where muscle alone fails to further it's progress then adaptability kicks in to take over? Even elephants are under the control of matriarchs who hold the memories and lessons and pass them on to the younger generations. They don't need constant male protection and scoot them out of the way to fight among themselves until needed for breeding.
That sounds a bit harsh doesn't it?
I don't believe there's an IQ difference between men and women but there does seem a pronounced difference in attitudes. Maybe it's too much of that testosterone they're all chasing, but men tend to be more singularly focused and slower to change a stance than women.
In all I think women are more adaptable to a situation and many ways more practical despite men's observations to the contrary.
Men's reaction is to stand and fight shoulder to shoulder with his brothers in arms for some cause right or wrong. They see it as heroism.
Fine. Dead heros don't feed their kids. Women's seemingly harebrained and disloyal switching of opinions and tactics are really an adaptability which suits their own ends. They don't need to be heroes, they just need to be the winners who get to feed the kids.
Not all of course, we are talking generalisations here. There are always exceptions to basic behaviours and that goes for both genders, but just generally, and historically speaking.....
Generations of men have become used to following set patterns of behaviour to achieve goals. Those were the tactics that worked for their mentors and grandfathers and they haven't yet seen the reason to change that thinking. They saw their fathers as head of the family and never for one moment wondered why, they just presumed that it was the man's role and failed to realise that the plot was changing.
Young boys must be confused, perhaps that's why they act out so violently? They're seeing a world that doesn't gel with what they expected and which they no longer seem to fit. The ones who can adapt will do so, the ones who can't, join gangs, gangbang stray girls, shoot up whatever irks them or turn Moslem where they can still pretend to have some status.
Women are born devious. We play mind games from the cot. We had to or we'd have been no more than cattle to the men.
We had to make them need us. We did it while we had to, when we needed their muscle for protection, by holding their kids to ransom really. Treat us nice and we'll raise you some DNA. We are still doing it that way even while competing in the workforce. Why else don't women, however busy or high they rise in their careers ever relinquish total control in the home and child raising to their stay at home husbands?
It was and still is their Ace in the hole, and they seem to instinctively know that. They're still hedging their bets until they're sure they have total control of their lives. Maybe one day Mum will come home drunk put her feet on the coffee table, demand dinner as ask casually how many kids they have now. But not yet.
Women, unlike men seem to have noticed the shift in gender power due to less need for muscle, and are adapting to take advantage of it while they can.
We were taught how to be deviously adaptable by watching our mother's get their way with words, sweet nuthins or tantrums. That actually transfers to the workplace very well, against the men in it. It doesn't work on other women but as I said we're adaptable, we are changing those tactics to more 'bonding' type behaviour which benefits the whole group.
The world is changing but whether women are changing it or it is changing women is a moot point so far.
That's a pretty brutal take on it all. I could pretty it up but the bare bones are easier to understand, for me anyway. I seem to have misplaced my rose-coloured glasses.
This caption on one of the photo gallery '14 points' seems to indicate I'm not the only one who sees it that way
Discussing recent cases of female chemists poisoning their husbands, Rosin reflects, "Singular and exotic though these cases may be, they raise the broader unsettling possibility that, with the turnover in modern gender roles, the escalation from competitiveness to aggression to violence that we are used to in men has started showing up in women as well ... For some people the rise in female violence must come as a great disappointment. Many of us hold out the hope that there is a utopia in our future run by women, that power does not in fact corrupt equally. But that vision ... has always had an air of condescension behind it. The most distinctive trait of women is not necessarily that they are kinder or gentler or will do anything to protect their young ... it's that they ... bend their personalities to fit in what the the times allow."
Yeah, more adaptable.
