Before going any further - I am all for women who are ambitious. So there's no debate needed on that. My problem is with women's movements that focus completely on how women "should be" ambitious, how women are "not doing enough", why women should "aim higher" and yada yada. Specially a plethora of literature of late focusses on how we must catch up with the men, how we should not let go of opportunities in favor of family etc. It just leaves me more fatigued than energized.
Don't get me yet? Read the latest bestseller - Lean-in. For some reason, I wasn't convinced about the messaging in the book. Maybe it is just me but I don't buy this propaganda about pushing ourselves to be ambitious on every turn. That's the first red flag on your way to stress-ville. And it just got worser when it became women specific (it is quite clear that on average, women have more responsibilities in most households than men do). All that argument to be treated as equals with men, in my opinion, is now being abused and creating more stressful conditions for working women.
I understand where this is coming from - there are still plenty of women facing equal opportunity issues at work. I don't deny that. And so far as this movement is aimed at helping women realize their strengths and moving forward, I am all for it. The problem comes when it conflicts with family and personal health.
When did we last have fun and do something just because we enjoyed it?
When did we last sleep a full 8-9 hours without anything about work/personal issues on mind?
When did we last prioritize family over work or other personal pursuits?
In short, when did we women, last feel like a human and less of a robot?
As it is being a woman, and supporting family and kids and doing a great job at work should get us gold stars.
So in this context I want to ask the Sheryl Sandbergs of the world who are hell-bent on "doing it all" - "Why isn't being good enough, good enough?" Going after something and pushing ourselves is a matter of personal choice. If that works for some, that's good. If that doesn't work for some, that's good too.
An average working woman might not have the money nor the inclination to put her child in a day care. She (hopefully) loves her children as much as she loves her work. And she wants her time to be divided equally. Nothing wrong with that. It is that tad little thing called balance and women are hardwired for it. Making compromises is not necessarily bad either, if you know what you want. And in such cases it is a healthy choice to make. Not all of us have supporting partners, families or kids - so it is quite clear that every woman's life is distinct and doesn't need to revolve around maximizing career prospects.
Instead of recognizing the already fantastic jobs that women do, we suggest she start focussing on work & career (regardless of whether she wants it or not) and put herself up as a leader. I want to ask - is being a mother less of a leader? Is rearing a family a chore? Some women find meaning in taking care of their family. They want to spend time with parents, spouse and kids, they want to keep their home happy, healthy and joyful. They are celebrating life just like other women who love their lives in a high flying corporate job. And there is nothing wrong with either. It is a personal choice we make.
Women shouldn't feel less of a leader if they are not overachievers or ambitious. Like anyone else - men or women - they should aim to do what makes them happy. It serves as a good reminder that life is not a competition, it is a celebration. If being good enough makes women happy, so be it. If living a contented life and doing meaningful work and investing in family is what women like to do, so be it.
So to all the women out there, I want to tell you this - You are doing a great job!
Because guess what is the single most important leadership job (performed under incredible pressure and constraints and the most hard to perfect)? Its motherhood.
7 comments:
It's interesting that as soon as I read the title I was thinking of Lean In.
I agree with your intent overall. I haven't read the book so can't comment on what it says but have watched interviews and read several articles such as this and yet I am inclined to think that I will find the book useful....that maybe because I think I do a good job and it is hard for anyone to make be think otherwise!!
P.S: Note that not every woman want to/can be a mother...that doesn't mean they can never be considered equal to the person doing the 'single most important leadership job'.
I both agree and disagree to the content in the book. It is of course useful in many aspects. My critique is on the other side of things - that is rarely touched upon/celebrated in media. It is sort of a reminder that hey, successful women don't just exist in corporates, they exist right around you, at home. To keep saying that success can be measured only by your career trajectory is not true.
Hey Manju,
I haven't gone through the whole book yet... I just got done with chapter 1.
But, I saw her interviews and TED talks... I don't think she says that not being career oriented is bad..
Infact, she mentions in her TED talk that everyone should do what they want.. be it, stay at home or work.
I think, she is just giving ideas on how to go up the ladder , if you choose to work and if you do want to go up the ladder
Not sure if she says something in the later chapters of the book that give out a message that its not ok to be as aggressive at work..or to stay at home..
Hey Kalyani - thanks for writing in your opinion:). Of course I don't deny the benefits from creating awareness for women to rise up in their career. The other side to it is just my perspective. I think women who are increasingly involved outside of workforce also need to be given a honorable mention and what they do is nothing less of formidable leadership and success. I have a problem with the modern day interpreted definition of "success"; I am sure a lot of women grads are going to read this book and think "Oh that's the only way I can be successful". I have seen even extremely smart people falling in this trap of cut-throat competition and I just feel that it is not a healthy way of living. It is also not easy to have a really career focused life if you dont have enough support network and/or have personal obligations. In such cases, some of her suggestions don't help. Basically her book should not be followed like a bible.
good points Manju..really liked your post.
Oh well here I am playing devil's advocate again. I personally think Sheryl S, needs to be thankful that a certain Mark Z hired her at his fledgling company. For all the gloating, she didnt really take a huge risk and should be happy that good luck got her where she is now. My own feeling that women don't put in everything in the manner guys do. It could be due to a variety of reasons - chief ones being women like being well rounded and balanced, as opposed to men who can just go all in on one thing without a care for anything else. The main exceptions are artistic careers & sports.
You have gone on a different tangent now :) I have to disagree with you on the comment that good luck got her to where she is. To be fair, you and I have no clue abt the kind of risks she might have taken to get here. Women deal with a different set of constraints and have been historically under-confident and discouraged from taking risks. So that leaves a wide gap to be filled. That will probably take a few more generations. And when that will happen they will be on the same leveling field. Then it would be interesting to see who is more competitive :)
Post a Comment