Why Women-Only Workplaces Just Don't Work

Rush87

Hummingbird
Catholic
CynicalContrarian said:
Being familiar with the drama from that British all female production company, having read that Daily Mail article before.
Once I heard that prominent Australian actress Rose Byrne had established her own / joint female production company, I was curious to see how it would fair.

& while admittedly it has not collapsed since first announced back in April 2015, can't say it's produced jack shite on the other hand...

http://www.the-dollhouse.com/projects/

Can't say I've seen much fanfare about "The Dollhouse Collective" since & can't say it's a tour de force either...

Film production in Australia is about the worst of anywhere on earth. Australian cinema is largely government funded, and the biggest funder is Screen Australia. They actually have a policy whereby, a project can only gain funding if 3 of the 4 key positions are occupied by women [Producer, Director, Writer, Acting lead]. Co-incidentally, the industry in Australia is on tax payer funded life-support. In other words, we're paying for the latest production of "Rosemary's period" or something similar.
 

CynicalContrarian

Owl
Other Christian
Gold Member
Rush87 said:
Film production in Australia is about the worst of anywhere on earth. Australian cinema is largely government funded, and the biggest funder is Screen Australia. They actually have a policy whereby, a project can only gain funding if 3 of the 4 key positions are occupied by women [Producer, Director, Writer, Acting lead]. Co-incidentally, the industry in Australia is on tax payer funded life-support. In other words, we're paying for the latest production of "Rosemary's period" or something similar.

I take it they don't see the hypocrisy in bemoaning "patriarchy" despite requiring "patriarchy" for their coffers & comforts...
 
kosko said:
Sooth said:
This is how you do it: Give them all a "manager" or similar important sounding title so they can tell their friends they're managers but they're all equally under the thumb of male directors.

4 Accounts managers and 3 accounts staff hahaha

meet-the-staff7-e1384368823807.png

There is maybe four women in that spread that have real jobs. Many of those titles are phony and just boost up sales staff and client relationship staff as you mentioned into thinking they are important.

The solo woman on Sales support is likely a hawk who performs well but is either to inexperienced, or not good with other women to be put in a supervisor or management position. I say this because she is floating on a island within the organization chart so something is clearly different about her, unless of course she is just the glorified secretary.

Probably because she is the best looking one, most likely the rest are jealous of her.
 

Ski pro

 
Banned
Sooth said:
This is how you do it: Give them all a "manager" or similar important sounding title so they can tell their friends they're managers but they're all equally under the thumb of male directors.

4 Accounts managers and 3 accounts staff hahaha

meet-the-staff7-e1384368823807.png

WNB WNB WB WNB WB

WB

WB WNB WNB WB

WNB WNB WB WNB WB

WNB WNB WB WNB WNB

WBRAGP (would bang repeatedly and give promotion)

WNB WNB WNB

WB WNB WB


Can't believe no one did this yet. You guys are losing your touch.
 
Sooth said:
This is how you do it: Give them all a "manager" or similar important sounding title so they can tell their friends they're managers but they're all equally under the thumb of male directors.

4 Accounts managers and 3 accounts staff hahaha

I looked at that graphic and, heaven help me, but the first thing I thought was, "Man, those four guys have it lucky!"
 

CynicalContrarian

Owl
Other Christian
Gold Member
Heh.
I've thought / joked in the past, that if NASA sent an all lesbian team to Mars & they were cut off due to a major crisis (Matt Damon Mars movie style).
That small colony would die off in one generation.
Of course, that's if they lasted long enough for one generation... :rolleyes:


@Daddy_Warpig 2h
Daddy Warpig Retweeted The Independent
Proof that people at NASA have never even MET a woman.

@Independent
Nasa 'considered all-female Mars missions to stop impure thoughts about sex' http://ind.pn/2xRrUXL
 

Green-On-GO

Woodpecker
I once brought up all female combat units to chicks I was working with in the Army reserve when I got posted there.

Being Infantry at the time I'd really not worked with women.

The chicks said it was a bad idea as they would get bullied and chicks would kill each other.They were dead against it.

I once dated this chick that played soccer nationally the shit she told me especially about the lez in power positions.Chicks be tackling her hard cause of her looks.I use to fume on the side line.

I was talking to a young stripper and she told she could not stand out too much as the other taller strippers would bully and sabotage her.Shit like steal her stuff her money makeup or hide her outfits break her high heels.

I got more issues at work with actual females bullying other females.

And more issues dealing with my daughters in fighting with other girls at school than my son.I just send my son to kick boxing.

When women fight they fight to scar for life.
 

Suits

 
Banned
mensch said:
Suits said:
mensch said:
Mercenary said:
mensch said:
I'd not refer to a specific instance. In my reckoning women have very specific capabilities, and can indeed thrive in certain industries and environments.


Unless you start backing up your statements with examples, you won't last long here with these sort of claims.
Eh? I'm sorry to state the plainly obvious, but I'd never wish for men for carry the running of my children's kindergarten. Some jobs require the softness and shrewdness of women.

You'd be surprised. Here in China, due to a shortage of women willing to live and work in a sexual desert with a minimum of alpha males willing to let them date up, the majority of the foreign kindergarten staff members are male and many are absolutely excellent with children and great at their jobs.

I'm sure it's possible. But women are hardwired to care about children.

I've literally seen no evidence of this.

While it may have appeared to be the case in previous generations with more defined gender roles that both encouraged women to develop skills related to nurturing children and discouraged men from doing the same, at the present time, particularly in more liberalized western countries where gender roles are no longer strictly defined and men are encouraged to take a great share in parenting activities, I see far more evidence that men are superior to women in this regard.

From what I've observed, women are hardwired to stand around holding infant children (preferably children who lack the desire to explore their surroundings and are satisfied serving the role of a prop for a woman) and talking in great detail about their past pregnancy experiences.

Trips to the park for women and children usually involve the women standing in a semi-circle, trying to impress each other with their child-labour* stories and knowledge of pregnancy. They keep an eye on their kids, but there is very little nurturing going on.

When modern dads, who in part a product of a feminist upbringing take their kids to the park, they take a much more active role. You'll see them pushing their kids on the swings, encouraging them to engage in activities within a safe range of risk (such as sliding down the slide or for older youngsters, climbing trees) and will often physically partake in said activities where appropriate and where their asses fit into said slides.

When I was a kid, my dad did more of the breadwinning, but when he was home, he taught me to play baseball and took all his kids on long Sunday afternoon walks or swimming Saturday afternoon. He clearly enjoyed doing these activities.

What was my mom doing when all this was going on? Isolating herself with a book and a cup of tea.

Not that my mom didn't share the burden of parenting. As a homeschooling family, she did plenty. But she clearly wasn't hardwired to try to teach skills or engage in activities with her children. She preferred to be present as necessary and supervise activities, but rarely participated or taught skills. For example, my mom is an excellent cook and baker, but never made any efforts to pass those skills on. My father, on the other hand, couldn't have been more happier to teach carpentry to his sons and French to his daughter when she was struggling to pass ninth grade. After that experience, he started taking one day off a week to teach French to his younger children so that they would face the same struggles when they finished homeschooling and re-entered the regular school system in the ninth grade. My mom, by comparison, had been satisfied to have us learn French by simply listening to language tapes and not much more.

The definition of nurturing isn't clear, but regardless, I'd absolutely argue that men are better nurturers when they choose to be. Of course, if your definition of nurturing means standing around uselessly with a child in your arms, then I guess you're right. Women are more nurturing.

*Note that child-labour in this case refers to that act of pushing infant children out of the female vagina and not to unethical activities involving the use of children as labour.
 

Bienvenuto

Pelican
Gold Member
Know a Vietnamese chick who runs part of her Dad's business empire.

She has a largely female workforce that she manages.. Guess what?

They all started fighting and bringing their squabbles to her.
So she instituted team leaders and department heads to sort the BS out.

Guess what happened next, given that these were also women?
They all started fighting with each other rather than cooperating and brought all their squabbles to her.

Further to that story..


.....

......



The shit these women come out with..

17:23 in the video they start justifying why they have not sat down face to face with Pelosi.
"We are new members of Congress!"
"Why should we go to her?? She should come to us!!"
^Well, She's your BOSS?

Rashida Tlaib keeps interrupting the interviewer and saying things along the lines of "Sorry, Im just VERY PROTECTIVE of my sisters" King:"She doesn't need protection.." Roll eyes and look away, angry voice "A'ight!"

They keep complaining about their work load.. plus..

Perfectly insincere fake friendship performance. Any bets on how long their sister-hood will last?

Also the constant interruptions, bitchy arguments and victimhood claims.
"Im not laughing at you Gayle, I'm just y'know.. laughing.."

The comments are gold:

"A WHOLE INTERVIEW because of a tweet, yikes. Is this high school?"

"The Squad can't even get along with Gayle King maaaaan."

"I would LOVE to hear the private conversations between those four .."


:banana:
 

tugofpeace

 
Banned
These types of threads are reasons why I take everything with a grain of salt here at RVF.

Women are just as competent as men in many, many corporate roles. Biologically speaking they are the weaker gender and therefore have had to strenghten their non physical traits in order to survive. They needed to be able to read body language and communicate very well, better than men, because men were the ones they needed to defend themselves against (rape, unwanted advances, etc) in primitive times. They needed to be socially savvy because this is what would secure them a higher position in the social hierarchy that gave them access to higher quality men from whom they would seek commitment. Why do you think the term "women's intuition" is a thing? They literally have a sixth sense when it comes to sniffing out a person's traits.

These all translate to a business setting in fields like consulting and sales, as well as fields like law and medicine which don't require much critical (left brain) thinking. Take a field like management consulting - this field is HUGE on high level communication, being able to gauge body language, negotiating, and being politically savvy. Not to mention being organized, which women are extremely competent at because they take tons of notes and like to make everything neat. Then consider something like sales - women naturally are excellent communicators and they have an incredible ability to read others. That's in their damn biology - when was the last time you met a female incel or a socially retarded female, or a woman without "women's intuition"? And finally, law/medicine - law is mostly memorization and being socially savvy in terms of persuasion. Medicine is just memorization. Neither of which requires significant critical thought.

The amount of accomplished women I've seen in even non sales and consulting fields is huge. The valedictorian of my college's biomedical engineering program was a woman. In my sister's med school program, the majority of students are women.

The only place where women tend to really suck is in academia, fields where there is a lot of technical work, and managerial roles. I would argue that this is true in general, but there are exceptions where women excel. The reason being, biologically speaking this puts them at a disadvantage because you do not need to be socially savvy, you do not need to communicate well, and you do not need to be able to read body language to do high level software engineering jobs, engineering jobs in general, research related jobs, or higher level finance jobs. And fortunately, these jobs are a plenty and still male dominated. In regards to managerial roles, this requires dominance and emotional intelligence to be truly effective. Hard for many women to dominate men and even harder for them to control their emotions when it comes to decision making. Ergo, management will pretty much always be a male dominated field. Inspiring leaders are dominant on the whole (not necessarily intimidating) and are people whom others want to follow. Not many men would like the idea of heading into battle with a woman leading them.

The fields in which women are basically just as competent as men are consulting, sales, law, and medicine (since medicine doesn't require critical, left brain thinking typically). Furthermore in those positions (I am assuming here), I would say that at the higher level it's mostly men doing the managing. In high level consulting/sales/law, I would imagine that everything else being equal, dominance and connections would get you to managerial roles instead of rote merit.
 

questor70

 
Banned
"These types of threads are reasons why I take everything with a grain of salt here at RVF."

Huh? What exactly is it about the OP from two years ago that you reject? That was her real-life experience.

The moral of the story is that men should not be scapegoated, that women can and are capable of causing conflict in isolation. The style of conflict may differ, but it will be conflict nevertheless.

I fully expect if an Office Space style movie were to have been produced that merely recreates all the negative anecdotes from the OP that feminists would riot in the streets over it, because they have put their gender on a pedestal and are living in complete denial of their foibles.
 

Solitaire

Robin
It's one thing for a woman to be intellectually capable of getting through medical school (and btw, where the hell did you get the idea that the fields of medicine don't require critical thinking? That's a completely ridiculous statement). I'd rather work with male physicians and male nurses, techs - hell, even the janitorial staff - versus having women around in the hospital, in any capacity. My best shifts on the units are when I'm in charge, I have all male staff except for one or two females to help the female patients with female things. I can tell a male nurse to go do something, and he'll just go do it; I won't hear three men bitching around the corner about how I asked someone to do their job. Guys will come out of report and start doing their jobs; women will spend twenty minutes with "hey, how you BEEN since I saw you twelve hours ago?!?" etc etc.

When it comes to the gay guys, I just have to pretend they're one of the girls because it's exactly how they act.
 

tugofpeace

 
Banned
questor70 said:
"These types of threads are reasons why I take everything with a grain of salt here at RVF."

Huh? What exactly is it about the OP from two years ago that you reject? That was her real-life experience.

The moral of the story is that men should not be scapegoated, that women can and are capable of causing conflict in isolation. The style of conflict may differ, but it will be conflict nevertheless.

I fully expect if an Office Space style movie were to have been produced that merely recreates all the negative anecdotes from the OP that feminists would riot in the streets over it, because they have put their gender on a pedestal and are living in complete denial of their foibles.

In hindsight my statement was an overreaction at one person's post, but it was in response to the idea that women are completely incompetent and incapable of higher level jobs as compared to men.

I'm not a white knight and I certainly don't put women on a pedestal but at the same time I think that they do have the capability to achieve highly (although this is a minority of them). They're people just like anyone else, and not all of them are manipulative scumbags who screw their way to the top.

It's one thing for a woman to be intellectually capable of getting through medical school (and btw, where the hell did you get the idea that the fields of medicine don't require critical thinking? That's a completely ridiculous statement). I'd rather work with male physicians and male nurses, techs - hell, even the janitorial staff - versus having women around in the hospital, in any capacity. My best shifts on the units are when I'm in charge, I have all male staff except for one or two females to help the female patients with female things. I can tell a male nurse to go do something, and he'll just go do it; I won't hear three men bitching around the corner about how I asked someone to do their job. Guys will come out of report and start doing their jobs; women will spend twenty minutes with "hey, how you BEEN since I saw you twelve hours ago?!?" etc etc.

When it comes to the gay guys, I just have to pretend they're one of the girls because it's exactly how they act.

Medschool is pretty much memorization. Sure, you have to understand complex processes, but how many times do you have to actually create something using a concept? Most of what I've seen in the medical field is people who learn a ton of information during their education and then just have that as a database of subjects in their mind that they can refer to in their professional career. Even my sister, in a 6 year medschool program, thinks it's mostly just memorization. I'm sure this varies based on the field but for the most part that is the case.

If you put a med student in an engineering program, they would be humbled very quickly, in my opinion. You can't just grind your way into a perfect GPA in electrical engineering, for example. There was one kid in my EE courses who was high IQ, I literally saw him sleep in all the lectures and he would ACE the test with ease. Graduated with a 4.0 in a school where that was considered impossible, and got crazy job offers, but in the end he went the PHD route. Fields in which such things happen are where women can't easily excel because you can't get by through right brain thinking. Your best efforts will only take you so far because your intelligence will surely check you. I don't think I could get a 4.0 if I had all the time in the world to study. Makes sense when you consider how engineering is male dominated, yes?
 

MrLemon

 
Banned
tugofpeace said:
questor70 said:
"These types of threads are reasons why I take everything with a grain of salt here at RVF."

Huh? What exactly is it about the OP from two years ago that you reject? That was her real-life experience.

The moral of the story is that men should not be scapegoated, that women can and are capable of causing conflict in isolation. The style of conflict may differ, but it will be conflict nevertheless.

I fully expect if an Office Space style movie were to have been produced that merely recreates all the negative anecdotes from the OP that feminists would riot in the streets over it, because they have put their gender on a pedestal and are living in complete denial of their foibles.

In hindsight my statement was an overreaction at one person's post, but it was in response to the idea that women are completely incompetent and incapable of higher level jobs as compared to men.

I'm not a white knight and I certainly don't put women on a pedestal but at the same time I think that they do have the capability to achieve highly (although this is a minority of them). They're people just like anyone else, and not all of them are manipulative scumbags who screw their way to the top.

It's one thing for a woman to be intellectually capable of getting through medical school (and btw, where the hell did you get the idea that the fields of medicine don't require critical thinking? That's a completely ridiculous statement). I'd rather work with male physicians and male nurses, techs - hell, even the janitorial staff - versus having women around in the hospital, in any capacity. My best shifts on the units are when I'm in charge, I have all male staff except for one or two females to help the female patients with female things. I can tell a male nurse to go do something, and he'll just go do it; I won't hear three men bitching around the corner about how I asked someone to do their job. Guys will come out of report and start doing their jobs; women will spend twenty minutes with "hey, how you BEEN since I saw you twelve hours ago?!?" etc etc.

When it comes to the gay guys, I just have to pretend they're one of the girls because it's exactly how they act.

Medschool is pretty much memorization. Sure, you have to understand complex processes, but how many times do you have to actually create something using a concept? Most of what I've seen in the medical field is people who learn a ton of information during their education and then just have that as a database of subjects in their mind that they can refer to in their professional career. Even my sister, in a 6 year medschool program, thinks it's mostly just memorization. I'm sure this varies based on the field but for the most part that is the case.

If you put a med student in an engineering program, they would be humbled very quickly, in my opinion. You can't just grind your way into a perfect GPA in electrical engineering, for example. There was one kid in my EE courses who was high IQ, I literally saw him sleep in all the lectures and he would ACE the test with ease. Graduated with a 4.0 in a school where that was considered impossible, and got crazy job offers, but in the end he went the PHD route. Fields in which such things happen are where women can't easily excel because you can't get by through right brain thinking. Your best efforts will only take you so far because your intelligence will surely check you. I don't think I could get a 4.0 if I had all the time in the world to study. Makes sense when you consider how engineering is male dominated, yes?


I don't care if women have the "potential" to be great performers.

I only care, if I hire 10 new people (just as an example), what are the odds they WILL be great performers.

In business, your business will live if you have better proportions of high performers. You die if you have low numbers.

If I hire 10 new poeple, and 7 of them perform well, then my company makes money and survives. If 3 of them perform well, and the other 7 are losers/parasites, then most likely, I'm dying as a company. Certainly my profit for the month has taken a major hit.

The point is, if you hire 10 women for management roles, 7 of them will be parasites. If you hire 10 men for management roles, 3-4 of them will be parasites. That average will hold true in most industries.

So I don't hire women for important management roles. I am more likely to see my company prosper. I've done my job as a leader.

Also, men don't file sex harassment lawsuits for trivial reasons, and women do. A single sex harassment lawsuit can destroy your business, ruin you finanically, and throw all your other employees into the street to starve. The woman filing will NOT CARE about destroying the lives of every other person at that company. Again, as a leader I'm protecting my employees and investors if I avoid hiring women.

I also don't use female doctors because I'm a mature (60) male and women consider mature men expendable. Women doctors NEVER make the extra effort to help older men. They only care about other women, and children. This is true of 90% of female docs. I've met a lot of them and it's so easy to see.

That's why you don't hire women for anything important in life, if you are a a man. No matter if they are competent or not, the point is, they won't be competent for YOU.
 

Zagor

Kingfisher
tugofpeace said:
The fields in which women are basically just as competent as men are consulting, sales, law, and medicine (since medicine doesn't require critical, left brain thinking typically). Furthermore in those positions (I am assuming here), I would say that at the higher level it's mostly men doing the managing. In high level consulting/sales/law, I would imagine that everything else being equal, dominance and connections would get you to managerial roles instead of rote merit.

Your argument about women in sales makes sense on paper, but in the end male competetivness gives us the edge. Law and medicine are vast fields and different branches in those field are not of the same value. There are many good female dermathologists, but how many heart and brain surgeons? Not much. And to know all skin conditions is not that hard, while navigating through a complex surgery on the other hand...
Consulting is so vague a term I can't even call it a field of work.
 

Captain Gh

Ostrich
Atheist
Gold Member
I've seen this structure for mostly females company / department work under ONLY in Customer Service, with mostly minority women carrying the workload. With barely having time to carry out a convo, and having mostly non western women...things were getting done with no drama.I've actually had a good time in these 2 companies.

Of course the 3 leaders of these 2 departments I was part of knew what they were doing: having worker bees doing all the heavy lifting for them, while knowing they were non drama producing women who wouldn't challenge them... and these managers were EXACTLY like the Women from this company... especially the part about taking off for beauty treatment and not even bothering covering it with a lie!

The worst I've actually encountered was from a Woman of HR who was in charge of inspiring s new hires for a Call Centre position, and saying that she SHADOWED (just listening to someone take calls) for 30 MINUTES... and said " how courageous of you since I could never do this Job". I was still in my David D Cocky Funny stage... so I didn't Facepalm right in her face!
 

Garuda

Pelican
Protestant
Bienvenuto said:
17:23 in the video they start justifying why they have not sat down face to face with Pelosi.
"We are new members of Congress!"
"Why should we go to her?? She should come to us!!"
^Well, She's your BOSS?

Rashida Tlaib keeps interrupting the interviewer and saying things along the lines of "Sorry, Im just VERY PROTECTIVE of my sisters" King:"She doesn't need protection.." Roll eyes and look away, angry voice "A'ight!"

They keep complaining about their work load.. plus..

Perfectly insincere fake friendship performance. Any bets on how long their sister-hood will last?

It's a perfect modern version of Aristophanes' The Assemblywoman.
 

DogLover

Sparrow
Heinrich von Geobbels said:
Sarah, a thirtysomething high-flier who would stand up for herself momentarily - then burst into tears and run for the ladies.

LOL. Every "strong" woman i've ever met in the office.
 
Top