EconoMan

What a Week!

What a Week!

The Senate Judiciary Committee members forget about their female “assistant” and also common decency.

Women's Day Is Not Just a Magazine

Family Values

50s vacuum 2.jpg

Tomorrow, March 8, is International Women’s Day, a good time to take stock of how far we women have come. But wait—what do you mean we’re headed backwards? Laura Liswood with the World Economic Forum points out in an article that worldwide, women’s funding for reproductive health has been reduced, and family planning is harder to come by.

There is also a glaring “under-representation of women and minorities in US cabinet-level positions.”  Pale male EconoMan rules Washington’s swamp these days.  https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/03/womens-rights-sexual-equality-in-revers

In Russia, Liswood reports, the Duma just voted 380 to 3 for decriminalizing domestic violence, so long as it doesn’t cause “substantial bodily harm,” and occurs less than once a year. Seriously?!

According to The New York Times, most in the US agree this is a better time to be a man than a woman in our society—except for Republican men. They say it’s a better to be a woman than a man, despite evidence to the contrary. No doubt, they also believe they do their fair share of housework. 

Most disturbing though was Liswood’s report on women’s voting patterns. In France, women are backing Marie LePen and her far-right nationalism, on a par with Trump here in the US. Let’s not forget that 53 percent of white women voted for Trump. Is it fear and greater job insecurity? Is it threats of nuclear holocaust cause women to hope for a strong man?

But 53 percent is still a minority of our sex, especially when you add in our savvy African American sisters. And here’s a salute to Tanya Plibersek, who is running as “minister for women” in Australia. She promised if elected her Labor party would re-establish the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ time use survey, which hasn’t been done there since 2006. Time use is an important measure of the value of unpaid work and gender inequity in household work. In 1997, Australia’s unpaid work was valued at $261 billions or almost half of Australia’s GDP that year.

Seeing what is typically invisible helps informs policy affecting parental leave, childcare, transport, education and workforce participation. Women’s groups in Australia have long argued for the survey’s re-establishment, and Plibersek put it simply: “[T]he Australian economy [and] Australian society rests upon women’s unpaid work.” US women could do a great deal more with time studies here. 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/mar/06/labor-to-restore-survey-measuring-mens-and-womens-unpaid-housework

 

Lean In, Gentlemen

20121088-10213410958178159-1236584377-n-1_orig.jpg

Here's a new report from LeanIn.org, the nonprofit founded by Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook, who in the past has advised us women wanting to be appreciated at the workplace to speak up for ourselves, and yes, to make a case for a raise. But "Women in the Workplace 2017,"  based on surveys from 70,000 employees at 222 corporations, shows a more complex picture of gendered and cultural perceptions.
 
Women of color have a tougher time making headway, and it’s not for lack of trying or for asking for raises. And the numbers of female leaders in relationship to our numbers in the population show a consistent underrepresentation, regardless of the occupational field. Men tend to believe women are doing better advancing on the job front than they in fact are.  Men also believe they are helping their female partners more than their female partners report they actually do. So guys, lean in and take initiative in cooking and childcare, and look around you to notice whether women are well represented in your department's leadership—and whether work policies include support for having an actual everyday life. Without a wife.  
 
We admire this report but still have to point out that the numbers given for consumer banking in this do NOT represent investment banking on Wall Street, where EconoMan still rules and the numbers of women leaders remain strikingly low and lower paid than peers. And its focus is strictly on big-corporate America, not where most women tend to work, and where the same obstacles and misperceptions about race and gender persist.
 
This image is from Chris Skinner’s blog, from an article titled “Banks’ Leadership Teams Are Fatally Flawed.” https://thefinanser.com/2017/05/banks-leadership-teams-fatally-flawed.html/. We’ll just add to his good article that the bigger the bank, the more their boards look this way.

Here’s a story on Lean In's report from Fortune. It’s worth a read.
 http://fortune.com/2017/10/10/women-in-the-workplace-2017/
 
 The 37-page Women in the Workplace 2017 report itself is here, with an apt headline, "Getting to gender equality begins with realizing how far we have to go": 
womenintheworkplace.com/

So What Exactly Is Screwnomics* ???

sc-icon_orig.png

Screwnomics* is the unspoken but widely applied economic theory that women should always work for less, or better, for free. 

And who thought he didn't have to talk openly about this, or stop taking us and our Mother Earth for granted?

EconoMan is my Screwnomics' name for the money guys in charge of how we live. Let's change his attitude, shall we?