Them ladies mean business(?)

Alright, I know myself to be a bit of a lazy, impatient sod.I have a way of not doing ''what I should be doing'' in regard to my goals. Sometimes it is because I got stuff I am worried about, sometimes it is because I am simply lazy.

However I've learned from higher instances, ones I should look up to actually that women generally ''give'' less than men and so, have a harder time reaching high positions;
this in terms of competition I'd wager.

So basically, the said reason to why women are less present in many business institutions (game industry being one of them).
Now, I myself am not entirely sure what to say to this, I can't exactly look at myself and then say '' this is true! '' or ''this is false! '' . I do not represent the entire female population, and I get that the escapist forums doesn't do that either. However, I do need the input. Thoughts n' stuff.

Now... I've met plenty of women who are obviously much MUCH more ambitious than I am and should be a natural threat to their male counterparts (despite sometimes having to work twice as hard). So, is this a question of fairness or truth? Surely we have all already heard of unfairness (means of salary from bad behavior) on work places towards women, but what does it take to overcome that beside hard work?

I like the idea of less whining and more doing, but I am also for diversity and I'd like women to be given as much space to make mistakes as men gets when new in an organization. And if the women with power to change and inspire others chooses only to look out for their own goals and ignore the fact that they - whether they like it or not, get to represent their gender in that certain organization, they'd actually let younger women down.

~Or could it be a counter reaction to the assumption that women always have a harder time.
I hope this makes any sense.

Thoughts?

Ps: Myes, I'd like to know mostly in regard to the gaming industry, so if you are a lady and work in the game industry your opinion would be (EXTRA) valuable!

Now ya'll stay civil.

A bit hard to make out what you mean, but...you're asking if women are discriminated against in employment in general[1]?

And, if so, if something should be done to fix this[2]?

[1] to which the answer is either "yes" or "but the patriarchy hurts men too!!!!", depending on your point of view
[2] to which the answer is either "yes" or "but the patriarchy hurts men too!!!!", depending on your point of view

There are some legitimate issues that are (mostly) exclusive to females that businesses inevitably deal with when promoting females into higher positions. For example, pregnancy. As far as a business is concerned, a female worker who is pregnant means lost money to them. If a woman is young and married, then some companies might consider her a ticking timebomb of sorts. They might avoid promoting her or pass on putting her on a long-term project because they're afraid she might get pregnant and pop off for nearly a year.

Also, there's the theory of implied gender roles. Yes, most young women aren't told these days that they can't be scientists or astronauts, but what toys are they given when they're young? Baby dolls, kitchen sets, and cleaning supplies. And what toys are boys given? Legos, muscle cars, construction sets. Girl toys are geared toward domesticity while boy toys are geared toward building and creativity. Which means girls are essentially raised with the pretense that the kitchen is where they "belong." They might go to it willingly when they are mature, but if that's what they were told and shown from the day they were born, can you really call it a choice of their own volition? Also, to bring it back to the business part of the subject, one can also argue that girls are discouraged from fighting and engaging in altercations more than boys. They are prized for being "good little girls," quiet and well-behaved, while boys are prized for "just being boys" as they roughhouse and stand up for themselves. This mindset, if brought into adolescence, and adulthood can cause them to be less assertive, and thus can affect the way they would perform in certain business situations.

And those are the abstract issues of women and gender roles/business. Have fun~

I know plenty of women that are lazy, I know plenty of men that are lazy, I know plenty of women that are highly active and ambitious, and I know many men that are highly active and ambitious.

The only discrimination argument against women that I've ever heard that holds (a little) water is the pregnancy argument. From personal experience I just joined a computer programming company along with 7 other people in a recruitment drive; 5 guys and 2 girls. We're all in our early twenties, two of the guys are married and one of the girls is married. We've only been at the job about 6 months and the married girl has just gone off for maternity leave.
If I were an employer I think that from a purely economic perspective I would be a bit apprehensive about employing a 20-something girl because there would be a high chance that she would have to take some months off for maternity and that loss of manpower can be a headache to fill.

That said, I've had two team leaders since I've been working, both have been woman, and both were excellent. Attitude and business savvy is not gender-specific

Lazinizz aint gender specific n' neither be ambition.

Illest ly what tha fuck a thug will become is down ta dem n' they willpower. Shiiit, dis aint no joke. Plenty of playas chizzle ta settle fo' mediocritizzle yo, but there is also a gangbangin' fair amount of playas dat don't, thug n' female.

Lilani:
There are some legitimate issues that are (mostly) exclusive to females that businesses inevitably deal with when promoting females into higher positions. For example, pregnancy. As far as a business is concerned, a female worker who is pregnant means lost money to them. If a woman is young and married, then some companies might consider her a ticking timebomb of sorts. They might avoid promoting her or pass on putting her on a long-term project because they're afraid she might get pregnant and pop off for nearly a year.

Also, there's the theory of implied gender roles. Yes, most young women aren't told these days that they can't be scientists or astronauts, but what toys are they given when they're young? Baby dolls, kitchen sets, and cleaning supplies. And what toys are boys given? Legos, muscle cars, construction sets. Girl toys are geared toward domesticity while boy toys are geared toward building and creativity. Which means girls are essentially raised with the pretense that the kitchen is where they "belong." They might go to it willingly when they are mature, but if that's what they were told and shown from the day they were born, can you really call it a choice of their own volition? Also, to bring it back to the business part of the subject, one can also argue that girls are discouraged from fighting and engaging in altercations more than boys. They are prized for being "good little girls," quiet and well-behaved, while boys are prized for "just being boys" as they roughhouse and stand up for themselves. This mindset, if brought into adolescence, and adulthood can cause them to be less assertive, and thus can affect the way they would perform in certain business situations.

And those are the abstract issues of women and gender roles/business. Have fun~

To add to the pregnancy thing, not only are businesses afraid that women might get pregnant, but women who actually do get pregnant and go on maternity leave (or worse, quit work for a few years to raise their kids) skew the numbers a bit because they've gone off work for an extended period of time, while the male counterparts they're being compared against typically haven't done anything of the sort, giving them more time to earn promotions and pay raises. It's not enough to completely explain the glass ceiling, not by a long shot, but it is a factor that tends to get left out of the analysis.

I don't think I've ever really encountered such an idea, that women don't try as hard as men. I'm not saying such an idea doesn't exist, but just my personal experience. Where I work at least (graphic design agency) the ladies work circles around the guys.

I have although encountered the pregnancy issue, where I've had an employer who was livid because the lady he hired was pregnant and she didn't say anything about it during the interview (for fear of not getting the job), then she went on pregnancy leave and afterward quit. I could see how a few too many experiences like this could lead to something more extreme, such as refusing to hire any ladies within that age group.

Owyn_Merrilin:
To add to the pregnancy thing, not only are businesses afraid that women might get pregnant, but women who actually do get pregnant and go on maternity leave (or worse, quit work for a few years to raise their kids) skew the numbers a bit because they've gone off work for an extended period of time, while the male counterparts they're being compared against typically haven't done anything of the sort, giving them more time to earn promotions and pay raises.

On top of that, since babies are expensive, out of those kids you named who have two parents, the father has likely doubled down on overtime where possible to make up for being shy an income and having an extra mouth to feed. Which skews things further, because doing those things will tend to lead towards increasing odds of promotions and pay raises.

I'd suggest OP look up the definition of "glass ceiling". No matter how much kyriarchy apologists shout "But maternity leave!", there's still the troublesome problem that even women who forsake kids or only take minimal time off pregnancy and post-natal care still end up being passed up for promotion and get disproportionally lower raises. From what people like Schadrach seems to think, that one year a woman, on average, takes to raise kids is really the most important year in their entire career. So important it completely surpasses whatever happens in the remaining 46 or so years between high school graduation and retirement.

Hero in a half shell:

The only discrimination argument against women that I've ever heard that holds (a little) water is the pregnancy argument. From personal experience I just joined a computer programming company along with 7 other people in a recruitment drive; 5 guys and 2 girls. We're all in our early twenties, two of the guys are married and one of the girls is married. We've only been at the job about 6 months and the married girl has just gone off for maternity leave.
If I were an employer I think that from a purely economic perspective I would be a bit apprehensive about employing a 20-something girl because there would be a high chance that she would have to take some months off for maternity and that loss of manpower can be a headache to fill.

That's an issue with the culture. My sister recently had her first child, and both she and her husband took off paternity leave. (Not on the same time, first my sister, and then her husband)

But if you're in a situation where the other parent earns more, it's understandable why they'd want to stay at work, and usually this is the man.

I think this is one of those things where you should get the government involved, supporting the companies if their employees have children.

Gethsemani:
I'd suggest OP look up the definition of "glass ceiling". No matter how much kyriarchy apologists shout "But maternity leave!", there's still the troublesome problem that even women who forsake kids or only take minimal time off pregnancy and post-natal care still end up being passed up for promotion and get disproportionally lower raises. From what people like Schadrach seems to think, that one year a woman, on average, takes to raise kids is really the most important year in their entire career. So important it completely surpasses whatever happens in the remaining 46 or so years between high school graduation and retirement.

The reasons are more complex, true, but it's not just the fact that the woman takes a year off, it's that when an employer has to choose between a woman and a man, hiring the woman has the risk (or they think so) that she will cost the company.

So young women won't as easily get employed. (Or they will have harder time getting permanent work or promotions)

Raffian:
snip

I'm sorry but I tried reading this like 3-4 times and I'm still having a hard time interpreting what you mean. So...what do you mean?

Because from what I'm trying to understand are you trying to figure out the reason why women aren't seen in prominent roles in a business or workplace? That's what I've seem to have pulled from here and that's a very complex answer that really can't be simplified.

You have to consider how employers promote employees to which more often than not you have to apply for the position and go through the interview cycle again making yourself the sole pillar of success. But if I remember a recent 60 minutes interview with one of the female leaders of Facebook she stated that more women are more likely to contribute their success as being part of the team while men basically contribute the success to themselves. She also asserted that women don't sell or show off their core skills as a reason to be hired to be noticed. If you can find that episode it was recent like February or early March. And of course she was promoting her own book so she would be making more money :P.

I mean that's just one factor to be considered that I mentioned and it is a lot more complex that you can't really generalize. Personally getting a job or promotion in this job market is incredibly difficult without a network and when you stop working be it by choice or cause you can't get a job it really does hurt your potential to advance and actually earn a higher margin of living. Something both men and women have been dealing with for a very long time since the manufacturing economy is fading away.

I'm not 100% sure I understand exactly what you're asking, but I'll try to share some insight as a female game developer.

I work at an FPS studio. The percentage of women working at studios that make these kinds of AAA games is somewhat lower than in some other genres, such as casual and kid's games. My best guess as to why that is has nothing to do with how competitive these jobs are or how hard you have to work to get one. In order to seriously want to make then and focus your art/design work/whatever towards the production of FPS/AAA games, you have to enjoy them immensely, despite the fact that they're pretty much universally created with no regard for your demographic whatsoever. And many of us do strongly enjoy them, and our work reflects that, and that's where we end up working.

I'm a really ambitious person. I have set some pretty extreme career goals for myself, and I'm confident that I'll be able to achieve them. Given how time consuming my job is, how much pressure there is to constantly be growing my skills and remaining current, I really don't see how kids can fit into that. That's fine, though, because I've never considered having them and I don't see myself as making any huge sacrifice for my work. Although I do know plenty of people in my job who have kids, they're mostly all dudes, and they mostly all have a wife who is responsible for a huge chunk of the childcare.

Given my personal goals and the fact that my work is more or less the most important thing in my life right now, the idea that someone would pass over hiring me because I'm female and appear to be within that "childbearing range" despite never wanting kids is pretty upsetting to me. I don't think most people would be pleased to know that they could be discriminated against in such an easy way, and never really know for sure.

As for my actual job, most of my financial success and artistic opportunities have come from projects that I've personally pursued (still within games), and that is a source of occasional frustration for me. I don't think that has anything to do with my gender, just how I'm seen as an artist to other people within the company. Hopefully time and experience will help resolve those issues.

ChemicalAlia:

As for my actual job, most of my financial success and artistic opportunities have come from projects that I've personally pursued (still within games), and that is a source of occasional frustration for me. I don't think that has anything to do with my gender, just how I'm seen as an artist to other people within the company. Hopefully time and experience will help resolve those issues.

I'm sorry but question...

For your last sentence. What issues? Reading this post I really don't see you having any sort of issues as if it was a negative. You made it very clear that your work is the most important thing and you should be proud of all the hard work you have done and will do. Certainly there might be a time in your life where you would want something different but that isn't an issue either but just a change of priorities to which every person has.

Working in the software industry (not games) I find a lot of big companies are "equal opportunity employers" or whatever and are so hilariously skewed with a ton of male workers. So much so, that females with the barest of credentials that meet the job description (usually just a degree) will get picked over more experienced male candidates. This, of course, has a limit; no one is going to pass up a guru that is exactly what you're looking for, regardless of gender, but I've seen fresh female graduates get picked over people with 3+ years experience from a better school because, well, they're female.

Anyways, this was my personal experience working at a fortune 500 and helping my manager pick candidates. I can't claim it's the same for all companies everywhere.

Y'know, just because a woman becomes pregnant doesn't mean she fucks off the moment she finds out. In an industry where most of your work is going to be done sitting down, you can theoretically stay working pretty much until your hit labour. I'm not entirely 100% certain on what happens when games are made, but I imagine a lot of it happens in front of computers. A woman can be out of the workforce for only a few months if she so desires (think of it as a slightly extended vacation) and I highly doubt that will cost a company that much money.

And hey, to make it easier, why not make them able to bring their babies with them? After the first few months babies settle down (or so I hear) and spend most of their time conked out. Have a "family room" set aside for the parents, both male and female. Their kids could have THE BEST CHILDHOOD EVER and spend their not-learning years getting to see how their games are made. Or that's completely implausible *shrug* My university has such a thing for students who are parents, and I know some workplaces do.

And men do take parental leave as well, so wouldn't they be costing the company money as well when they do so? I know they don't do it too often, societal norms and all that, but it does happen and the frequency is rising from what I hear, so...

All of this is more or less hypothesising based on the various bits of information I've gotten over my life, so if anyone wants to mention some corrections or clarifications, I'm all for it. So long as you're respectful, y'know.

The best place I ever worked was gender segregated (no, I'm not recommending that by saying so, that's just the fact of the matter at this point in time, personal experience here) with women in the office, men at the front sales, and men in the warehouse. It was a family business. The oldest son was the President, oldest daughter was the VP, second daughter was the Office Manager, and second son was the Assistant Manager of Sales - then all us peasant staff. I started on phones, strict reception and nothing else - I left making $5 more an hour than they'd ever paid an office worker without children, running payables, doing all the advertising (fliers, mass mailings, banner/event designs, company cards, and everything on down), had partnered with the VP to get the company prepped and into a buying/paying group that granted additional discounts of almost 100k a year. I made myself invaluable because I was driven as hell to be doing something way more challenging than "Good afternoon, XYZ company, how may I help you?" They were amazing too - encouraged me to go back to school, let me change my hours every semester, let me work part time at full time pay, held my job for me when I went abroad for a semester. Then the economy took a dump and they had to get rid of pretty much anyone non-family to keep the doors open, recovering slowly. Of course, they encouraged me to go to college because I could never go any further up there than I'd gotten, it was a family thing for company officers of course. We still talk, they're my "office mommies" (they're all twice my age).

In my experience, women do better in small companies where the team effort is super appreciated and makes a visible impact on the situation and where you are not a statistic on a page marked with an F instead of an M.

My mother-in-law, for example, works at a massive credit checking company, has for 15 years, gets the same crap raise every year because they always find one bad thing to say to excuse it, has worked under a parade of men who she swears are dumber than boxes of rocks, and will never get promoted above the title she's on, which is a modified 'secretary' even though she's learned 6 different department's jobs and procedures by virtue of being there forever and having been moved every time another department gets eliminated/shipped overseas. She's great, she's enthusiastic, she's the nicest person in the world and very smart, but she doesn't self promote, she's a mouse, and even if she wasn't, she's had more than a dozen bosses, none of whom get a chance to appreciate her before either they move up or she moves over.

My professors who are women say it's getting more comfortable for them at least, and that's where I would like to end up. Especially in the Liberal Arts and Humanities they seem pretty content with their ability to advance - this year the first African American Woman to receive tenure at our school is one my favorite teachers (been cheering her on for two years).

It seems to vary widely by field and by situation how much movement anyone can do.

Thanks for reading & answering!

I can't give much of an in-depth explanation right now on what I meant for those who found it a tad unclear, but I'll try to get back to it when I have the time.

All I can say now is that I am pleased to see that the general opinion doesn't seem to revolve around a common idea that women would be less dedicated than men, however the pregnancy issue was something I haven't even thought about ( probably due to my age )and is something I'll be sure to look in to.

~Riffraffraffian

Owyn_Merrilin:

To add to the pregnancy thing, not only are businesses afraid that women might get pregnant, but women who actually do get pregnant and go on maternity leave (or worse, quit work for a few years to raise their kids) skew the numbers a bit because they've gone off work for an extended period of time, while the male counterparts they're being compared against typically haven't done anything of the sort, giving them more time to earn promotions and pay raises. It's not enough to completely explain the glass ceiling, not by a long shot, but it is a factor that tends to get left out of the analysis.

This. My family owns a business and one of the biggest problems that we have is pregnancy.
It is a bit unfair to expect men who have been there everyday, and women who have been on extended leaves to be treated the same.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked