Editor’s Note: This post was originally published on Seattle 2.0, and imported to GeekWire as part of our acquisition of Seattle 2.0 and its archival content. For more background, see this post.
By Alyssa Royse
The chicken and egg conundrum aint’ got nothing on the whole “women in the workplace” thing, much less the “women in tech” thing, much less the “women entrepreneur” thing. Do we hand women golden opportunities in the hopes that they will rise to the occasion, and with that occasion rise all women on the golden tides of equal opportunity? (Women, after all, need the hand-out, right?)
Or do we pay extra attention to educating little girls about math, science and business? Or do we focus on celebrating women role-models….? Do we owe today’s women reparations for the mistreatment of women before them? Or do we……?
This one just never gets old, even when we’re sick of it. It never gets old because it never gets resolved. It never gets resolved, in part, because we are so hell-bent on the idea of “equality” meaning “sameness” that we won’t stop until we achieve homogony.
Ugh.
I loved Sasha’s recent post about women in tech, partly because of the comments. But, as someone who wrote exclusively about women in business for a while, I don’t see anything new here. Yet, I wanted to respond. So I was thinking about it, and a jumble of thoughts occurred to me, one of which was truly novel:
What if we educate men about not working?
In every paradigm in which we discuss women in business, we discuss the leadership-in-business role as the pinnacle to be achieved. When we do that, we give all other decisions – from receptionist to homemaker – short shrift. As if no woman would CHOOSE that, if they had equal opportunity to run a business or have a successful tech career. We position it such that women are not in those positions, but that they SHOULD be, or COULD be, if only…..
However, we also have great role models of homemakers, not to mention a decades-old debate about whether women should be working-mommies or stay-at-home mommies. That means that no matter which camp they choose, there is a camp for them. Women have far more opportunity to justifiably opt out of the rat race than men do. Women are often lauded for achieving work / life balance. Men? Not so much.
What if the problem isn’t that we don’t create enough opportunity for women in business, but rather that we don’t create enough opportunity for men in life? What if, from day one, boys are told that they need to be star athletes, president and the next Bill Gates, while girls are told “you can be anything?” Anything includes not working. What if by virtue of having a larger spectrum of opportunity – one that includes CEO and stay-at-home – fewer girls are choosing tech and business opportunities because they have other choices?
Personally, given the choice between working 80 hours a week and being stressed out vs. being supported by a guy who loves my home-cooked meals and other “wifely” talents, while allowing me the opportunity to be purely creative with my writing and business ideas, I’d take the supportive guy any day of the week. And I can do that. Not because I am not capable of working 80 hours a week in any field, but because it’s a pain in the ass. A guy can’t do that so easily. The guy who chose not to support himself would just be considered a “slacker.” I, on the other hand, could be the talented and creative, free-spirit wife of a nurturing husband whose love…. You get the picture.
Moreover, as a woman, I can choose to be anything from a chef to an artist to an athlete to a CEO and still slide nicely into an accepted societal archetype. Men? Nope. There is no accepted “Susie Homemaker” archetype for men.
Simply put, I think women have far more opportunity than men, and many of them choose not to be business leaders because leading a business sucks. And that’s ok. I wish men had the same opportunity.
Yes, we need to do a better job of educating little girls about math, science and business. But we also need to do a better job of educating little boys about baking, childcare and art.
We need to educate ALL people about the fact that there are myriad ways to be successful, and money is only one.
If Alyssa Royse makes tons of money on her next startup, she’ll be looking for a guy who’s a great cook, kind soul and awesome lover and will happily support him. Until then, the reverse sounds just as good (and more socially acceptable.) She used to write about women in business, exclusively, and was trying to find a way to work sexual manipulation into this post, so she could link to an old piece called Quid Pro Blow: Sexual Enticement To Close The Deal. Sex and manipulation is just so much more interesting than this touchy-feely follow your bliss stuff.
