Friday, May 27, 2005

Female leaders deserve better

I was quite dismayed at this post on the Future of Work blog. The post is based on a link to a Matt Miller article from the New Your Times. In it, Mr. Miller makes some interesting points:
If the most interesting and powerful jobs are too consuming, Jody says, then why
don't we re-engineer these jobs - and the firms and the culture that sustain
them - to make possible the blend of love and work that everyone knows is the
true gauge of "success"? As scholars have asked, why should we be the only
elites in human history that don't set things up to get what we want?

Instead of writing about talent, job reengineering and such, the writer at the Future of Work blog decided to hi-light the following:
And he ends with a reminder of the story line from Aristophanes' play
"Lysistrata," where the women got their men to stop making war by withholding
that one thing that men want so desperately from women. As Miller puts
it: "Jody [Miller's wife] thinks that's a promising model. Talk about

By skipping all the interesting parts of Mr. Miller's commentary, and taking his conclusion out of contect (it was clearly a joke), I found the blog's writing to be offensive and sexist. By writing about that one line, you insinuate that women will be leaders simply by wittholding sex. There was real content that was ignored between his humorous one line opener and one line close. Am I overreacting? Perhaps, but if you are going to refer to someone, please note their thoughtful comments rather than diluting their message and misinterpreting a one line joke.