Be a woman. Don't try to be a man.

So I've been having this discussion a lot lately. And I've been reading a lot of articles from entrepreneurs and other women who feel similarly.

Women in the workforce have an amazing advantage over men but often are too afraid of utilising it. No I'm not talking about their ability to bake, clean a toilet or show off their kickarse cleavage. I mean the way we think. It's different from men. Not in a weakness but as a strength. And what's worse is I'm seeing too many women terrified of utilising this part of them as a strength because its somehow anti feminism. Why is it that when our children grow we read books on how boys and girls are different, and it's ok to separate the two genders when talking about emotions, development and parenting styles. But suddenly when we grow up its not allowed. Don't mention the differences between the sexes or you are somehow feeding the inequality. Don't be a woman. Be a man. You can do a better job than him. You are just as good at that as him. And yes I don't disagree but I think sometimes our differences make us more awesome and they should be celebrated as much. Our differences bring new ways of thinking, different perspectives and different problem solving techniques that all compliment dominantly male environments. And no I'm not talking about the cliche of a woman put her feminine touch on a man cave, I'm talking about high end management roles. I think there are women who realise this and utilise these strengths. Reading about female CEO's and entrepreneurs this is often mentioned. That what they bring is vital and extremely valuable. We think differently, we feel differently. And yes sometimes it doesn't have to do with the fact we have a vagina, sometimes it's our life experiences that bring a different perspective. But I don't think we should discredit our vaginas for giving us an advantage. And I often wonder if we were just ourselves and tried less to be "men" we would see more people realise how valuable our differences are.

So true Rouge.

I love being a woman. We have so many other qualities that a man doesnt (and visa versa), that make us different and unique and this should be celebrated.

I personally hate the competition between man and woman. If we all just worked together with respect it would make such a difference. Even in a marriage each partner brings in qualities to complement the relationship. I dont want to be my husband and he doesnt want to be me.

The same is in a work place. We have abilities and qualities that another wont have. We dont have to fit into a mould!

I think the main message I see missing from the mentoring of women is that if you try to compete with a man by trying to emulate their skills, instead of using the best attributes that you have at your disposal as a woman, then you're fighting a losing battle, because you aren't utilising the best of you to achieve the outcomes required.

I think the argument should be less about what I bring to the table as opposed to what a man brings to a table because that insinuates that somehow he will be deficient, or I will be. I think that especially in the corporate world, there are many ways to 'skin a cat' and depending on the circumstance, a different approach can facilitate as good, if not a better, outcome. And that doesn't necessarily denote a lack of skill in other areas, either.

I work in a predominantly male profession. It's white collar so it's not about physical aptitude. But I guess you could say that the view that someone in my profession needs to be hard nosed and authoritarian.

And I can be if I need to be (which is what I mean when I say you can't assume that being a certain sex means you won't have that skill-set), but my natural preference in my approach is to build rapport, work alongside instead of command from above, and very often, that is seen as a weakness (because I'm a woman?). Strangely enough though, I have developed a reputation for delivering where others haven't. And I believe it is because my well-honed skills in different areas are able to provide an outcome where the traditional 'hard nosed' approach has failed. A man, should he was so inclined, could easily take the same approach, if he had similar skills.

So I absolutely believe that any person should work to their best skills and attributes and to do any less would be a disservice to them and to the work they do. Where the fork is the road happens though is that traditionally, a woman's skills have been considered "weaknesses", and that's the issue I take most with all the 'work like a man' bs that's spouted often. That somehow being a woman with a woman's skills are seen as a hindrance. Both men and women in the corporate world believe this. This is where the inequality stems from.

I am very pleased to work like a woman and achieve outcomes as well as any man, and achieve in situations where 'working like a man' hasn't worked. Recognition of the specific skills I bring (as a woman and a unique human being), in as much as as you would recognise a man's skill in a similar situation, is where true equality comes from.

I agree completely. Maybe my post wasn't worded well enough (or maybe we are on the same page lol) but I hope it didn't come across as though I was saying that men's and women's skills she be defined as better or worse than the other. More so complimentary. Just like any relationship irrespective of gender.

And I don't think approaching any situation as "well I am specific gender therefore I'm better at this than you" is any way helpful. And I don't think competitiveness in gender specific way is ever helpful. But I think we as people, and in this instance I was being specific to women, should be able to applaud our differences rather than seeing men's traits as negatively oppressive or women's as negatively passive.

And I find it exciting that people are starting to see this.

No absolutely not lol. I'm absolutely agreeing with you. I think I was more commenting on the fact that women are often seen to 'complement' rather than bring their own unique and completely kickarse skill-sets to the table. That somehow their skills are deficient without a man to bring some other quality in that the woman will lack. That a woman is unable to be complete either without having a man there, or behaving like a man. That's the myth that most prevalent, and the one I take most issue with. Because that's not seen to be true in the reverse - a man can be completely 'accomplished' without the help of a woman or in any way behaving like a woman. Even though they often fail because they lack those specific skills, it's still not seen as a deficiency in the man. That, to me, is where the inequality really lies.

And that's not a go at what you said either, little-O, I'm speaking more generally about how society views men vs women in the workplace.

Ahhhhhh ok. Well I think that can be a play on words too. Complimentary to me can be said either way. Anyone can stand alone in their skill set regardless of gender. I'm more talking about how women see themselves in an environment where they feel they need to change who they are in order to be seen as an equal. And sometimes that can be women alongside women too.

And lol @ compliment/complimentary *facepalm*

I understand what you mean Sushee. I agree with Rouge, i mean complementary in the sense that a man complements us too. As in everyone’s skills together works for the greater good.

The saying "no man is an island" applies to both sexes. I think you are right in what you say about a man being viewed as fine without a woman but not the other way round. Im of the opinion we all need someone. In the work place its hard to kick at it by yourself, but if you have a supportive team we can all do wonders. Everyone needs to be appreciated for their uniqueness and abilities.

I work in a male dominated field too (well prior to children ;)) and it drives me nuts being spoken down to and the assumptions that i wouldnt know what i was talking about. This was even in university prior to working! However, in the end my skills spoke for themselves, and my human touch and people interaction was something that the he-men could never do. In the end they have to respect you for your skills or they look like the idiots :). That being said there some other aspects that i would need to ask them about. In the end working together the results were way better, without me having to man up or them get in touch with their feminine side!

And this is because in most cases, a man who is in senior management will assume that another man will have the skills to do the job. A woman has an unknown quality about her (to a man) that poses a risk. So he will hire a man over a woman. Or he will hire a woman who behaves like a man as a second choice. So that woman who behaves like a man gets hired, and so what she teaches the women she mentors is that to get ahead, THEY have to behave like men. And so the vicious cycle continues. I've had ringside seats all my working life.

It takes women who get into senior positions to change their mindset, because it starts with them. They should put value on the skills of the women under them and promote that. That's the missing piece at the moment. And the conversation that needs to keep taking place so it does eventually change. Which is why I'm so glad you posted this.

Interesting. Today we have a male student teacher at kinder. I wonder if there is any pressure on (perceived or otherwise) to be more like his peers who lets face it are overwhelmingly female.

I hope not. His strengths will always be different and appreciated.

That's a good point although at our school the male teacher (the only one in the whole school) was applauded and if not fawned over by colleagues and parents because he was the token "male role model". So I'm not sure.

I'm in an industry that predominantly favors males over females. In all areas. From the first year of leaving university up to the top barristers - men are invariably paid more than women.

Victorian women Lawyers commissioned a report a few years back which set out exactly the differences between men and women. I found it appalling.

In my industry, I tend to do a different job than a man because I am different. We focus on different aspects of the job. Doesn't mean we don't get the same outcome - we just do it differently. We all have different strengths and weaknesses.

I try not to be masculine but I do generally come across that way. I think that's more about personality though.

So I generally agree :)

I tend to have a few male traits and often are put in situations where I am expected to be 100% female. In my current job it caused some conflict in the past, as I was expected to be friendly and chatty with a work colleague, when I was not she perceived I had a problem with her. I did not personally, I just wanted to get on with my job, basically tell me the problem and let me get to it! What got me, was that she did not expect that same level of friendliness from the men in the work place. I was never referred to by my role or department by her, just one of the "girls". I found it really offensive after awhile.

I suppose what I am getting at is, yes, as a female don't try to be male, but at the same time if you don't possess all the "female" traits, don't try to be 100% female either. On the other hand, don't expect certain behavior from other based on their gender either.

Maybe more women would stop trying to be more like men if they were paid the same as men.

I get both your and Div's points, Astrid, that you may not necessarily have what is is stereotyped as 'feminine' traits but a woman's traits are exactly that, it's a woman's traits. You're a woman, you're behaving like you, so you're not 'acting' like a man, you're acting like a woman, because woman are capable of being diverse and unique because we're not all stepford wives. if you're really just being yourself then it's not a 'male' trait at all, and that someone sees you as having a 'male' trait is sexist.

:

---

Maybe more women would stop trying to be more like men if they were paid the same as men.

---

I think pay inequality is definitely mixed in with the idea that the contribution of women are of less value, but I also think it's up to women to break out of that belief themselves if we ever want to achieve pay equality. So which comes first? I say no one is going to respect us if we don't respect ourselves first.

I agree.

Sadly, I think some women think to be treated as an equal to a man, they have to emulate them. Some men think that too.

Lots of women believe it. And lots of men. That's what this whole thread is about.

Truth is society values masculine traits more than feminine ones. Sad but true

I agree Rouge. I don't think there would be a moment where he would look around and think, damn, i'm going to have to act more womanly to get ahead around here (jokes aside). In fact he might be such a rare commodity that his gender gets more recognition than his actual output, ITMS.

I went to a seminar about gender differences, and it did actually make me think about doing some things differently.

Eg: it suggested one way men sometimes get promoted over women is because they toot their own horns more - if a project goes well, a guy will tend to say, "cheers - yes, I was rather awesome." whereas a woman will tend to say, "thanks, Jack did this, and Mary did that, and the dinglehopper was Janie's idea - it was a great team effort."

I think that some of the things that were said were overly simplified and overly stereotyped, but some things resonated in terms of negotiating pay rises and marketing and networking - whether it is "male" traits or "business" things, there were several things which made me think, "hey - I don't do that ... but I should."

Some other things that guys do is really different from what I would do ... so I do what I do.

Because I'm a big believer in putting your efforts in making your 7/10 skills into 9/10 stills, and not spending all that effort on getting your 4/10 skills up to a 6/10. People are going to pay and promote you for your 9/10 skills - the things that you're stellar at, by being who you are and doing what you do best.

I just saw a presentation at a conference today on this very topic. It was from Dr Lois Frankel who wrote See Jane Lead - you might be interested in it.

I love the fact it's being talked about. Whether or not there's more to be done etc every discussion helps IMO.

I'll check that out Nai. I read another article on Zite this morning which is why I posted.