|
|
|
|
|
by macspoofing
3292 days ago
|
|
>you are correct, the optics do not seem to be an issue when secretaries are hired to manage the private lives of male CEOs, but the optics of investing in personal life management of the CEO do appear to be an issue of optics here. We agree. No. We don't. We aren't close. I think you're so tuned to view the world through a particular ideological bent that you are blind to anything else. This just reminds of dealing with conspiracy theory nuts like the UFO guys, like the 9/11 truthers. With them (and you) it's a constant barrage of red herring and non sequiturs arguments. You yourself are bringing out every single example of what you think is misogyny. All we're talking about is whether or not Marissa deserves to be criticized for her job as CEO. You live in ugly world governed by sexism and I wish you find yourself out one day. |
|
I don't entirely live in an ugly world governed by patriarchy and sexism. I work with and under plenty of great men and a few awesome women, as I've stated previously in this thread that you have chosen to ignore (a blind spot on your part maybe?) but I do somewhat agree that there are facets of society that seem to have some overarching elements of patriarchy and sexism.
and I appreciate your best wishes, I have every intention of finding my way out of these situations.
It seems that the more women "talk" according to David Bonderman, the more people like David Bonderman "resign" or get fired, so I do think there is definitely light at the end of the tunnel for overcoming sexism and the patriarchy.