What I was trying to say was that some people seem to think the average workplace is a big 1980s Scorpions video where time slows down and the men all start gathering around, tripping over themselves and drooling (and the older women glower in the background) whenever a young woman enters the picture. (She has all the power, man!)
That is so alien to anything I’ve seen in any workplace that it might as well be on another planet. There’s really no relationship I’ve ever seen between women’s workplace power and age. Older women are often smooth, polished and professional (and can pull in the $) while younger women can often be grumpy gum-chewing types who need a lot of patience. The attractiveness gap is also way overrated in my opinion - here’s an older and younger politician from the same party.
There is a minority of men who fixate on younger women but they’re more likely to get eye-rolls from everyone else. And any office flings I’ve ever seen were between people of very similar demographics.
I’m seeing a lot of Boomer women making arguments that strike me as similar to all their uproar over women not being allowed membership at Augusta National. That it’s vital for the cause of gender equality that elite women get the same privileges as elite men, that such symbolic achievements somehow lift all women up. Personally, that whole debate struck me as a bunch of smug, spoiled hippie horseshit. Not that it was right for Augusta National to exclude women, I just didn’t think Condi Rice being let in was cause for women everywhere to stand as one with a tear in their eye.
Maybe, just maybe, these young women believe that while it’s important to fight for things like paid family leave and contraception and protecting abortion rights, not putting another Wall Street neoliberal in charge is more important.
I disagree. Young good looking guys might have an advantage over ugly guys but the disparity is not nearly as pronounced as it is with women. Hot women live ins a different world than the rest of us. And when they lose their looks and they get thrown into general population with the rest of us, a lot of them get bitter and accuse young hot women of being cute&little.
She had no choice, the President is the President.
Bill would have been President no matter whom he married. Its undeniable that Hilary would not have been where she is had she not been his wife.
If she had not followed her heart (and Bill) to Arkansas, she would not be standing for the top job as a former Senator and SecState.
As for the OP, I suspect that Mrs Clinton’s major issue with younger voters is that she is establishment, First Lady for 8 years, US Senator for 8 and SecState for 4. She is heaviy linmked with policies which are percieved to have failed. Rather than some weird feminine instinct.
But seriously. While I agree with your assessment of senior professional women, the only young women I meet at work are happy, smart and ambitious AND know how to make use of their young age and associated ‘cuteness’.
Being good looking can of course help, but it can also easily turn against them if it crosses the boundary between ‘nice girl’ into the turning heads, drooling coworkers and bosses talking to their boobs zone.
I find this argument completely unassailable. Young people strongly go left, and they’re going Sanders because they go left. It would be a remarkable thing, worthy of discussion around the role of gender and feminism, if young Democratic women were NOT disproportionately likely to support Sanders.
Making this a gender issue is failing to see the forest because one has literally run into a tree.
[QUOTE=Anarcho Liberalist]
… the only young women I meet at work are happy, smart and ambitious AND know how to make use of their young age and associated ‘cuteness’.
[/QUOTE]
Not that I am minimizing the real barriers women face, but the fact is that basically anyone who is both ambitious and socially adept will make use of their physical advantages, or minimize their disadvantages, to advance themselves. We have all, I am sure, seen how men in executive positions tend to be tall, fit, and have Executive Hair. That’s not a coincidence.
Did I say “good looking”? I said attractive. For young men in the workplace, this has a lot to do with confidence and an ability to project a certain image.
I’m not sure I agree with your assessment of who is bitter.
My company does hire a lot of them for our Mecha-suit & Giant Fighting Robot Division.
Then it sounds like you have graduated from the “cute & little” phase where women often equate “guys wanting to get in their pants” with “guys wanting to do business with them”.
I think there is a male equivalent to this as well. Not sure what you would call it. “Hot shit d-bag know-it-all” phase maybe. Think Ryan the Temp from The Office or Dan from Veep. These are young guys who think they know everything about business, show up to work hung over after spending all night clubbing and trying to pick up “cute & little” girls who work at places like Conde Nast or Ralph Lauren and think they will make Vice President by 28 (just like every other associate in their MBA start class).
It doesn’t sound like a great argument to me no matter what it’s supposed to convey. If I wanted to get young women to vote for a particular candidate I’d be telling them about how their future career prospects are better than ever and how important their decisions now are instead of telling them they’re wasting their time and being foolish.
In addition, on this topic, and the ‘race’ issue, I’m a little tired of the implication that Bernie is some kind of male chauvinist racist pig. The Hillary team seems to be resorting to their general election tactics against a Republican candidate. Seems to me Hillary doesn’t think much of the party she wants to represent.
Is it young women no longer get treated fairly as they get older or is it they no longer get EXTRA special treatment because they are younger and cuter?
IMO a fair number of older women are more upset that the later has happened. We don’t really get excited about you as a sex object anymore. You need to do a better job on those TPS reports like Bill does.
Or it could be the queen bees just dont like another younger queen bee coming along. Same way that older males try to knock off any young upcoming males.
It definitely seems to be a very insulting argument to young women, even if one were to stipulate that the premise about how life changes as women age is completely true. Personally it strikes me as more ageist against young women, and completely disinterested in whatever men are doing, than it is sexist against young women.
On the other hand, it’s not like it needs to be insulting for only one reason.
Most are fine, but some of them still haven’t got that memo…
I like men, and I believe that a little bit of “opposite sex” oil works well for smooth interactions. Everyone likes to be thought worthy of attention. Some get it by looks, by a nice rack, by money, by intelligence, work ethic, or wit. But there is a big difference between day to day communication oil and outright blatant sexism/groping/pat on the head/stare at your boobs.
When I am walking down the street with my college age daughters, they’re turning heads, not me. No great loss I promise, but I do want to punch the guys 30 or older for being dirty old goats. They’ll at least get the look of death, if not a snarky comment. It’s not because I’m bitter at not getting attention myself, rather it’s the Mama Bear telling them to fuck off.
I still have mojo, but age has taught me to use it much more judiciously. Scalpel, not shotgun. Just like any other asset.
Young confident women who are reasonably attractive can be more attractive by virtue of their confidence and charisma as well. The point is that the difference between how guys are treated is an order of magnitude less than how women are treated. Attractive women live in a different world in a way that attractive men do not.
The ones who feel the need to belittle younger women based on their age and looks certainly sound bitter.
I was in no way implying it was otherwise. Just saying I think I understand wat type of person she is referring to with that epiteth c&l. But I dont follow the next step in that blog to whch candidate you should or will favour.
I have seen.
But Please elaborate…why is that no coincidence?
