Yahoo and the Objectification of Women
praetorianprefect.com
praetorianprefect.com
This article has two parts-- someone flipping out about something that's normal in Taiwan, and then a list of dire statistics about the US. It doesn't make much sense.
Throwing in the ".69 cents on the dollar claim" that ignores hours worked, experience and profession eliminated what little credibility remained from the rant at the top of the article.
The .69/dollar claim is as old as time, cited all over the place. Has nothing to do with any external factor like hours, experience, etc.: it demonstrates that all other things being equal a woman is paid less for the same work.
Don't question my credibility when you don't understand the foundational facts.
That's just not true. That statistic ignores all other factors such as hours of work per week, experience, danger, and a host of other factors. It quite literally compares the salary of people with years of experience who are working 60 hours a week directly with new hires of the same job title who are working 40 hours a week. It lumps them all together. The 76 cents (or 72 cents or X cents) on the dollar myth has been debunked very thoroughly, though it still enjoys popularity amongst feminists.
Study after study which has actually controlled for factors such as experience, hours worked, travel required, etc have found very little pay disparity. There are a number of more forceful articles on the subject on BW, the Cato Institute and other similar sites. This NCPA article is a gentler explanation of The Wage Gap Myth:
Thank you for taking the time to educate me on this.
But the article doesn't even go there. There is no general condemnation of this activity in Taiwan, frankly we don't care that much. What's objected to are the actions of an American company in Taiwan.
Sorry, no agenda here, no axe to grind with Yahoo. Yahoo is an American company (like it or not), and takes ownership of anything it slaps its brand on abroad.
You really believe that Americans regularly bomb other countries as a matter of custom? Or was that just a bit of hyperbole?
'Cause it makes your entire argument sound tilted.
I've never, ever heard a politician or political commentator recommend bombing simply because it is a custom, like shaking hands or putting up Christmas trees.
Taken out of context it means nothing. Taken in context it means that as an American I acknowledge our actions around the world aren't always right and don't always make sense.
But this doesn't take away from the validity of the U.S. point of view in this case. Too often arguments bring in outside factors with generalized phrases: "Americans are always trying to control what happens abroad" and other such irrelevant phrases.
Put another way, if you accept that conference dancers are Taiwanese custom, you should also consider accepting that Americans would view this in a poor light, and object not that it happens in Taiwan, but that a U.S. company supports it.
I try not to get emotionally worked up about something bad, say the absence of women in IT, and then go on a rampage about some other tangential thing, like American companies playing into the cultural norms of some other country. In fact, I would expect American companies to be sensitive to local norms even if such actions were unpopular back here.
Haven't we had enough of telling other people what to do? Or are you specifically focusing on just the American company aspect of it, in which case how would you expect an American company to act overseas? How would you act? You personally? Would you go and tell the naked women dancing that they are degrading themselves? Would you protest the various phallic parades and such that other countries have? Would you make a scene over airlines that still only have women flight attendants in cutesy uniforms? Are you going to sacrifice your life's work because some other people do things that the folks back home think or strange or distasteful?
What I see -- not from you personally, but from a lot of commentators -- is people following a script for what to be outraged about.
I know I wouldn't feel comfortable with the dancers. So guess what? I'd leave. Easy problem. Easily solved. No need to wring your hands, blather on at length about sexism, or any of that other belly-button-gazing nonsense. If you want more women in IT, hire some.
I also think American acceptance of what American companies do abroad can be stretched beyond reason, as in a case where it is not a company accepting the existence of norms that would be controversial at home, but rather promoting them. I think that's whats happening here, as people are quick to let this case off the hook under the reasoning of cultural differences.
Yes, we shouldn't be telling other people what to do. No I don't walk up to women in strip bars and tell them anything (nor do I think anyone else should). Having been abroad, I don't attempt to convey any belief system on another culture, rather I attempt to learn while I'm there.
But this isn't about anyone's personal actions, its about an American company sanctioning something it should not have in another country, irrespective of that society's norms. It is that American company realizing that a critical mass of its consumers will be uncomfortable with what they're looking at, and heading issues like this off beforehand. Its about being smart when it comes to your global brand.
So I agree with a number of your points, but I didn't argue against them in the first place. You hit the nail on the head that the specific objection this article cites is with the "American company aspect of it". That is the problem. They set up the corporate karaoke bar, they didn't just go to one. That means that examples such as cultural parades and local clubs don't work in this case. Further this is not an American business man or woman attending an event at a Taiwanese company (where local customs would have to be respected).
Yahoo realizes this, and thus they apologized.
I think the article is fairly clinical in its analysis. It makes three points: A. this is what happened B. an American company has to understand that its brand image at home can be affected abroad when those at home will react negatively to what they're seeing C. Women are discouraged from careers in IT, this doesn't help, we would be better off with more women in IT. The only mildly baiting word is objectifying: treating something as an object, which is what goes on at strip clubs and the like (male or female). So no one went on a rampage (I don't think), or a rant, or is emotionally worked up.
However you clearly state you are reacting to what a lot of commentators are saying and the issue at large, as well as what you see as a script for people who outrage easily. I may be lumping reactions together, if I am let me know. I respect that point, and in part share that opinion. Some of the arguments being put forth either way are too simplistic, and ignore or fail to consider nuances such as the cultural differences in play.
This is an aside in my opinion, but a corporate gathering, is not so easy to leave. Its why so many financial firms face these after the fact lawsuits in the US from women who were made, or feel they were made, to attend meetings in strip clubs or put up with degrading behavior in order to survive in the workplace. I don't think that's related to this case, but it answers your point about just being able to leave.
In other to hire more women in IT, we need more women studying IT, which we don't have. Yahoo's portrayal of its corporate culture in Monday's news doesn't help that cause. That is the relationship between the two. Its not our original observation, we picked it up as a sentiment viewing the discourse on Twitter and related sources. We agree that creating a workplace environment that is not hospitable to all will affect all companies ability to attract workers.
As more being omphaloskeptic or navel gazers, its an IT blog, what's there to it if not reflective analysis of things that go on in IT?
I think you are exactly correct -- as long as you separate a moral case from a practical one.
I was a bit cranky the other day. Sorry if I went over-the-top in my argument. I'm genuinely concerned about things like Google cooperating with finding Chinese political dissidents and things like this seem to dilute the cause of bigger problems, at least in my mind.
That it happened in Taiwan doesn't make it right, but it does mean that it has basically nothing to do with the gender balance of computer-related fields in the US.