Women work office quotas Businesswomen adjusting makeup

Independent: ‘More than half of women are discriminated against at work’

Our thanks to Greg for pointing us to this gem in the Independent:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/more-than-half-of-women-are-discriminated-against-at-work-9029535.html

Greg asks:

What are they whining about? I thought that last year 98.7% of women were discriminated against in the workplace, and 45.2% of them experienced sexual harassment twice daily, after they’d made tea for their male colleagues? Things are clearly picking up for women in the workplace… it’s almost as if they LIKE whining!

The article, by Emily Dugan, might just get our vote for the most stupid newspaper article published this year relating to women in the workplace (and there’s lots of competition). Female journalists have a near-monopoly on reporting on this topic, and most of their articles are so absurd and divorced from reality they’re almost beyond parody. Almost. Let’s analyse the whole piece, which starts:

Almost a fifth of the women surveyed so far say that their careers have stalled because managers failed to promote them or offer training opportunities.

Let’s put that another way, shall we?

Over four fifths of the women surveyed so far say that their careers haven’t stalled because managers failed to promote them or offer training opportunities.

Hmm, that’s not quite so bad, is it? But of course it leaves aside the issue of women who haven’t been promoted because either:

There aren’t positions to be promoted to; or

They’re not well-qualified for promotion (never a problem for Entitlement Princesses)

The article continues:

The scale of workplace inequality still faced by millions of women has been laid bare by a survey that suggests more than half of female employees have experienced some form of discrimination at work.

The finding comes from the interim results of the most substantial survey ever conducted into the experiences of Britain’s female workforce. Project 28-40, undertaken by Opportunity Now, has already been completed by more than 25,000 women and aims to get to 100,000 before publishing its final results.

Hmm, I wonder what kind of woman would spend her valuable time completing such surveys? That’s right. The whiny kind. We hadn’t heard of ‘Opportunity Now’ before – it’s so difficult to keep up with the multitude of women’s whiny initiatives, and who in their right mind would try to? – but the strapline under the organisation’s logo is ‘Men – Women – Workplace’ which is obviously ironic given what their website says the organisation aims to do:

Opportunity Now is the campaign on gender diversity from Business in the Community. Opportunity Now aims to increase women’s success at work, because it’s not only good for business but good for society too.

Both ‘good for business’ and ‘good for society’ are plain wrong but I don’t need to explain why to regular visitors to this publication. Let’s look at the Leadership team, which has the sort of balance we’ve come to expect when women run things:

http://opportunitynow.bitc.org.uk/about-opportunity-now/leadership-team

With a deep visceral groan, I note the chair of the Advisory Board is Helena Morrissey, CEO of Newton Investment Management. I do wish she’d spend more time at home with her nine children instead of working 24/7/365 in her bid to destroy the British business sector. She runs The 30% Club which aims to get major companies to increase female representation on their boards, regardless of the evidence showing financial decline will result. A third of FFTSE100 chairmen are members of the club. Why, those damnable patriarchs, keeping women down! The deputy chair of the Advisory Board is also a woman. Of the 16-strong Leadership team, 12 are women, including the Group HR Director of the Guardian Media Group, who looks more cheerful than you might expect of someone working for the Guardian. Back to the article:

Almost a fifth of the women surveyed so far say that their careers have stalled because managers failed to promote them or offer training opportunities. Just over one in 10 experienced sexual harassment. The insight follows the news that the gender pay gap is widening for the first time in five years, according to data from the Office for National Statistics released earlier this month.

There’s no evidence that any gender pay gap widening has anything to do with firms paying women less than men for the same work (which I take to be the inference from this paragraph). Year after year it’s explained that the gap is fully accountable by differences in the professions men and women go into, levels of seniority, sizes of organisation, industry sectors, blah, blah, blah. I’m too tired to comment further on that matter. So, did the Independent go to a respected organisation to comment on the interim findings of the Opportunity Now report? No, they went to the Fawcett Society. Hmm, I wonder what those upbeat gals had to say?

Daisy Sands, policy and campaigns manager at the Fawcett Society, said: “Today’s findings present a stark reminder of the raft of deep inequalities that women continue to face in the UK labour market, well into the 21st century. Women continue to dominate in low-paid and undervalued work – two-thirds of those in minimum-wage jobs are women. Conversely, women are sorely lacking at the top tables of power – only 25 per cent of senior managers in the UK are women.”

Back to the article:

Some 81 per cent of women believe having children will affect their career progression…

No shit, Sherlock… sorry, Emily. Would men who took the same time out of the workplace have the same problem? Of course. Moving on:

… and more than two-thirds say society expects women to put their family before their job.

Hmm, no mention of Dr Catherine Hakim’s Preference Theory (2000). Her research showed that while four in seven British men are ‘work-centred’, just one in seven British women is. Let’s move on:

Susan Himmelweit, an economist for the Women’s Budget Group, which analyses how women fare in the workplace, said: “Whenever there are pressures on people, as there are now – such as high unemployment – employers are in a better position to put more pressure on staff. Women with caring responsibilities have more difficulty with this [pressure]. Very often they’ve juggled things just to work and it’s more difficult for them to respond to changes. If it is a competitive environment then employers will think it’s not worth bothering with them.”

Professor Himmelweit said she believed the key to improving the gender gap lies in better rights for those who work part-time or flexibly. “What we really need is flexible working that the worker doesn’t have to pay for in some form,” she said. “The legislation on flexible working needs to become tougher so that those who have to use it are not discriminated against.”

Cool. In the interests of gender equality, should men who want to work flexibly not be discriminated against, too? Back to the article.

The Project 28-40 study found that 48 per cent of women had witnessed bullying or unfair treatment of a female colleague, but just 28 per cent said they had seen male colleagues suffer such abuse.

I’m losing the will to live now. We move onto some comments from a notorious gender feminist:

The TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady said: “The battle for equality in the workplace is far from over. The gender pay gap got worse this year for the first time in many years, and spending cuts have hit women hard as many work in the public sector.”

Whoa, hold the horses. Two-thirds of public sector workers are women. Should the spending cuts have hit women less hard than men, so the proportion of women in the sector would increase? We can’t see any flaws in that argument. The genius continues:

“What really sets back women at work is becoming a mother. Career breaks, a period working part-time or simply the need to work sensible hours hold women back and limit job opportunities and promotion.”

‘What really sets back women at work is becoming a mother.’ Well, don’t become a mother, then.

Simples.

About Mike Buchanan

Mike Buchanan is a British men's human rights advocate who leads the political party he launched in 2013, Justice for men & boys (and the women who love them). He was a business executive for 30 years before taking early retirement in 2010. He's written nine books and is also a publisher. His last three books have being concerned with gender and gender politics, the most recent being 'Feminism: the ugly truth' (2012).
In 2012 he launched The Anti-Feminism League and Campaign for Merit in Business. He runs a blog demonstrating that men and boys suffer far more grievously from sexism than women and girls, The Alternative Sexism Project.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • donzaloog

    I love it when women blame other people for their own choices. You chose to become a mother now you have to deal with the consequences. It’s your body, your choice right? You can’t blame men for your own biology.

    Maybe if more of you did it the responsible way, by having a partner to support you during this time you wouldn’t feel the pinch as much.

  • Shortcircuit

    “Almost a fifth of the women surveyed so far say that their careers have stalled because managers failed to promote them or offer training opportunities.”

    I’ve noticed this with feminists and the feminist-minded. It comes up frequently with them.

    A woman doesn’t get promoted or proper credit for her contributions, possibly because she is too timid to speak up, and it is gender discrimination.

    A man doesn’t get promoted or proper credit for his contributions and it is business as usual and nothing to comment on.

    It is like they think men exist in a world consisting of nothing but chivalry in their favor, every door is held open and every hurt is tended to and protected. What feminists and so many women seem unable to get is that on the contrary men experience NO chivalry. None at all! They don’t now and they didn’t before.

    It is like listening to a princess complain that she doesn’t get cake for every meal, those peasants have it so lucky!

    • comslave

      Unless you have access to your confidential employee file, you have no right to simply “assert” that it was discrimination. “Being a total bitch” could just as easily been the cause.

      This is really bullshit reporting they’re doing.

    • Jotty

      I like, especially, how they don’t even survey men for these to get a baseline comparison. It’s entirely women’s subjective experiences being reported on.

      Just ignore the male perspective, right? Obviously, men just don’t know how good they’ve got it because they have the privilege of being oblivious to their privilege, therefore their responses are useless.

  • napocapo69

    The “indipendent” produced a really embarassing article

  • Kimski

    And how many british men were laid off from work due to recession, while the proven non-existing wage gap allegedly widened for british women, who were far less influenced by the economic situation?

    How many hours did those men spend in the workplace, on a daily basis and per anno, compared to any similar group of women in any profession?

    How many of those men still had to pay to ex-wives, besides more in income tax than what is extracted from women in top positions, after having been fired?

    How many of those 48 percent of women that had witnessed bullying or unfair treatment of a female colleague specifically named a male co-worker as the bully, when studies show that women and female CEO’s are more likely to engage in such behavior, overall, which is why most women don’t want female CEO’s in the first place?

    How many men started their rise to the top of the financial ladder by saying: ‘Gee, I think I’ll get myself a woman and some children, and demand to be able to take half the day off to be with them, ’cause I’m sure it will substantially hasten my way to fortune and fame?’

    -Or do it, even when they’ve reached their goal?

    Could it be that Emily Dugan just got passed over for promotion by someone better at their job, who doesn’t substantiate their claims by referring to sources they know agree in advance, when presenting a proven invalid claim on the gender gap, as well as shitty journalism in general?

    You know, someone more nuanced and _professional_?
    Perhaps even a male??

    That it pissed her off to such a degree that she feels the need to project her anger onto “millions of women”, who basically employ mostly fabricated jobs, that are not influenced by the recession to the same extend that most male occupied jobs are?

    I’m just asking some rather obvious questions that pops up from reading this, that’s all..

  • Ali Mehraspand

    The Project 28-40 study found that 48 per cent of women had witnessed bullying or unfair treatment of a female colleague, but just 28 per cent said they had seen male colleagues suffer such abuse.

    This sort of flinging numbers around like throwing punches blindly at an imaginary enemy and then standing on its illusory shadows to roar victoriously a non sequitur has lost its amusement to the knowledge that there is funding for this sort of brainless “findings”.
    What could possibly be wrong with a “study” that asks “women only” a question; phrased suitably for the sheer purpose of eliciting just the goal of the study itself. This level of scientific dishonesty right on the peel where it is visible is an indication of what is at the core of this funded “study” where it is invisible. Smart money goes to bet that the “researchers” probably went to workplaces and asked “women who are worried about discrimination” to answer a questionnaire. So much for a random population when you read right off the bat that “48% of WOMEN witnessed…”
    With what passes for science these days, these “researchers” can prove we are not living on Earth, there is only one country on the planet, sharks are actually birds, take your pick.
    How about a study with the same scientific method that concludes: “90% of men felt their female peers were treated nicer.”

  • tango

    “The Project 28-40 study found that 48 per cent of women had witnessed bullying or unfair treatment of a female colleague, but just 28 per cent said they had seen male colleagues suffer such abuse.”

    I wonder if these women are working in female dominated jobs? Like the low-paid flexi-hours jobs they keep mentioning. If your collegues are mostly women of course you see more bullying/unfair treatment of women if any bullying goes on, right?

  • freey

    Interesting response from the comments section when this was published in the daily mail

    Top rated comment

    Miranda, London, 5 hours ago
    I worked for a few years in a large mutual building society in the UK and found bullying by women supervisors to be worse than that given by their male equivalents.
    529

    more toast, Mugla, Turkey, 3 hours ago
    The female inundated HR departments take an awful lot of beating for bullying the workforce and in particularly men. The law only appears to work one way and that is in their individual interests, if you dare to challenge them and show them up when they are acting illegally, they will move heaven and earth to destroy your career, get you the sack or close your department no matter how good you are at your job or if the organisation suffers because of it.
    82

    Jema Lilliput, Liverpool, 3 hours ago
    I totally agree and Ive recently left an organisation to escape the snide bullying of a Line Manager – never did anything to upset her she just chose people to dislike then made their lives hell … to this day she gets away with it !

    FictionFighter, The Funny Farm, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
    So they get treated like crap like the rest of us, welcome to equality ladies.

    I look forward to seeing the recommendations of the report being that women should be removed from HR and management because they are not suitable for such roles.

    That should cut down the ‘bullying’ stats nicely.

    I bet there’s a correlation between female entry into the workforce and the ‘bullying’ stats that clearly indicates that women are to blame.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2530704/Half-women-bullied-harassed-work-quarter-believe-overloaded-tasks.html

  • freey
    • greg

      That’s from June 2012.

  • Tundra Woman

    What a shit-tacular piece of “Reporting” based on self-report and is representative of who again? Oh, that’s right-those females who CHOSE to respond. What a bunch of useless, inherently biased crapola.
    It appears the media Feminazis are becoming more frantic yet to inflict themselves on those who do think critically and without gender bias. In their attempt to “Rebrand” Feminism and “support” their dying Agenda they’re becoming more ludicrous by the article.
    In the meantime, the MRM/MHRM is clearly making significant inroads as underscored by such desperate drivel.

  • Billy

    This is just another boohoo story to get more sympathy for women. 25,000 responded and there are how many millions of people in the UK? I would like to know how many women are just pissed off at their bosses and just wrote on the survey that they feel discriminated against. It’s just another news story of a woman who jumped the gun on a story and made it out to be ten times worse than it is. It’s very frustrating seeing those kind of articles.

  • Alessandro

    Concerning real gender discriminations at work, in Italy there is a law (92/2012) that tells: if you hire a woman instead than a man, the state will give you money

  • gateman

    On a positive note, articles like this one in the Independent are like recruitment posters for men’s rights activism.

  • farkennel

    eight fourths of feminists agree with this survey.

  • Andy Bob

    Yet another piece of feminist propaganda that reeks of the desperation that has seeped into their public discourse. One can sense their struggle to keep their narrative on track in the face of mounting skepticism towards the core tenets of feminist ideology. This pitiful attempt to create a sense of national emergency based on the feelings of disgruntled women is particularly transparent. Judging by the comments attached to the article, people are beginning to see through it.

    One of the biggest mistakes that feminists are making is that their assertions simply don’t correlate to people’s own experiences. Ask the women you know about their personal experiences with workplace bullying. They will tell you, very promptly, that other women are usually the culprits, and that men are just as likely to be their targets as women. Only an ideologue with an disintegrating agenda would try to tell fibs about such a universally acknowledged truth.

    Workplace bullying is a very serious phenomenon which can have devastating effects on those who experience it. Another opportunity has been squandered to discuss an important issue honestly and seriously, because a feminist journalist decided that contributing to war-on-women hysteria was more important. They take the same wantonly irresponsible approach to other issues, especially domestic violence.

    Many gender feminists, like those cited in the article, are quite explicit about their belief that any setbacks – in terms of salary and advancement – experienced by women who become mothers are due to the patriarchy’s desire to punish women for having wombs. I’m not making this up. This is actually the stated belief of many influential and highly placed Australian feminists who hold lucrative positions in publicly funded organizations.

    Feminists have finally overreached themselves. It must be enormously frustrating for them to realize that people are starting to call them on the absurdity of their beliefs, as well as their vast sense of entitlement. If Emily Dugan thinks she’s helping them out with her article, then she’s as deluded as they are.

  • tamerlame

    I love how all this self pitying waffle is taken completely out of context. Women practise hypergamy and enforce the gender role of being a burden to be supported by men as the price of a relationship with them.

  • Laddition

    “only 25 per cent of senior managers in the UK are women.”

    I have decided that my response to such statistics will be, “So?”

    The inevitable response is going to be, “Because it’s unfair”

    “Why is that unfair?”

    again, inevitably, “because it should be 50%”

    “Why? Who says?”

    I refuse the frame that anything less than 50% is unfair, basically for all the reasons that have debunked the bullshit “gender wage gap”.

    Especially as we’ve seen when college attendance went from 60/40 male/female (unfair! take action! need laws! quotas!) to 40/60. What do we get from the “feminism is for men’s issues too” brigade? crickets or discrimination! we need more laws! quotas! action etc etc – Cunts.

    These scumbags need calling out on their bullshit “it’s so unfair” arguments that would make a three year old blush. There’s no lack of laws forcing equal pay for equal work. If you aren’t suing over your claimed discrimination then either you’re dumb or you know damn well you’re not doing equal work.

    If you want the wages of an oil worker with twenty years of experience doing sixty hour weeks in the middle of nowhere, go be an oil worker with twenty years of experience doing sixty hour weeks in the middle of nowhere (and be as strong) – the law will be on your side if you are paid less. It’s not men’s fault that you’re a part time nail technician just out of ‘training’ (whatever that amounts to).

    • Kimski

      “part time nail technician”

      I fucking love that one, bro’.
      I’m stealing it for future references.

      However…

      • Laddition

        That is SUCH a cool video! It says so much about modern inter-sex communication.

  • http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com Mike Buchanan

    Just a quick note to thank you all for your comments! More on men and women in the workplace coming your way soon hopefully.

  • Mr. Sungame

    “There aren’t positions to be promoted to”

    This affects everyone equally. Now if someone could show that all positions above them were filled by men, who only got the job because of penis, then we have a debate.

    Heck in small companies there are maybe one or two positions between you and the CEO, so if you have been promoted once chances are your next step would be CEO.
    Now ask your self is every middle manager qualified to be a CEO? Not at all. End of line, you reached your potential in that company. Your career has stalled.
    Would a CEO/Board of directors put money into training an employee to be a CEO? No. So no training given.

    Now let’s look at at a bigger company. No wait, let’s look at a company I worked for, it was 10 people when I started there, it was a little more when I left.
    In a company like that you have almost no department structures, as most “departments” are one person that answers to the CEO.
    There were two “departments” that were bigger, and they had department heads. So if one of those heads left a position opens up, but does that mean the rest of us have the rights skills to do that job?
    No, not always. And if then an employee comes along who have the experience from earlier jobs (s)he will be more likely to get the position.

    This goes for large companies too. When I changed jobs I often got a feeling that companies wanted people with more skills than just the bare minimum, because they could potentially fill more roles in the future.

    Companies don’t want to spend a dime more on you than they have to. So if your career stagnates a lot of other things might be happening:
    1. Someone else has the existing skills to get the promotion
    2. You didn’t work hard enough to get the required skills
    3. Someone else got different tasks than you, and gained the needed skill, because of point 1.
    4. Gender discrimination
    5. Times change, and the skills you had are no longer as important, and you are left out to pasture

    I really doubt 4 is as common as people think. But due to biology and if it’s true that men work longer hours in general than women then it is logical that men more often than not comply to 1, 2 and 3.

    I know the reason I was a victim of 5 in my last job. My role used to be important, but due to changes in our market the roles I had been given had given me out dated skills. So instead of a promotion I got canned :P (Not that there were room for promotions)