Comments on: The G-20 is Complete BS for Women http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/ Advice at the intersection of work and life Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:14:08 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Ryan Cadden http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-189696 Ryan Cadden Sat, 25 Jul 2009 07:49:39 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-189696 This is a generation where women are stepping up to the plate ready to hit one out of the ball park. For example Hilary was running for US presidents and was well prepared and looked like she was going to Win. She stepped up with all the big boys and battled it out with them. It doesn't matter if she lost or anything, it just goes to show that women are becoming more and more powerful today. Pretty soon women are going to be running this world and men are just going to be sitting at home smoking Cuba's finest cigars. Hell they deserve a good break since men have been running this world since we call all remember. It just makes sense for them to sit back and relax with a Cohiban Cigar rolled to prefection. This is a generation where women are stepping up to the plate ready to hit one out of the ball park. For example Hilary was running for US presidents and was well prepared and looked like she was going to Win. She stepped up with all the big boys and battled it out with them. It doesn't matter if she lost or anything, it just goes to show that women are becoming more and more powerful today.

Pretty soon women are going to be running this world and men are just going to be sitting at home smoking Cuba's finest cigars. Hell they deserve a good break since men have been running this world since we call all remember. It just makes sense for them to sit back and relax with a Cohiban Cigar rolled to prefection.

]]> By: Tyler http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-185762 Tyler Sat, 16 May 2009 22:05:02 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-185762 Wives' Clubs are pretty much a stagnant entity among western nations that appears lingering in its past like heirlooms as it stands today an under-utilized institution, not necessarily over-rated. It's the Wife, not the Club concept that's the problem. In many developing eastern nations, Wives' Clubs are often the most politically accepted and 'politically-correct' avenues to managing, dodging, surviving deep corruption in government circles. Wives' Clubs are also a physically safe way (meaning you 'might' not get murdered) to increase power of political families or maintain a basic level of influence and protection for entire family bloodlines. This isn't history; this stuff goes on today. Do not knock Wives' Clubs. I thank my late aunt or else I would've never known my uncle. He survived more than a couple assassination attempts as a govt official. It took my aunt to convince a wife to convince her husband to convince the opposition to convince the assassin to lay down arms. Wives' Clubs are pretty much a stagnant entity among western nations that appears lingering in its past like heirlooms as it stands today an under-utilized institution, not necessarily over-rated. It's the Wife, not the Club concept that's the problem. In many developing eastern nations, Wives' Clubs are often the most politically accepted and 'politically-correct' avenues to managing, dodging, surviving deep corruption in government circles. Wives' Clubs are also a physically safe way (meaning you 'might' not get murdered) to increase power of political families or maintain a basic level of influence and protection for entire family bloodlines. This isn't history; this stuff goes on today. Do not knock Wives' Clubs. I thank my late aunt or else I would've never known my uncle. He survived more than a couple assassination attempts as a govt official. It took my aunt to convince a wife to convince her husband to convince the opposition to convince the assassin to lay down arms.

]]> By: Indian Wedding Story, Part Five | Gori Girl http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-185214 Indian Wedding Story, Part Five | Gori Girl Wed, 06 May 2009 21:40:01 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-185214 [...] live in those sort of complaints are as needed as the well-intentioned-but-nonetheless-patronizing G-20’s Wives Club or those “top 100 women entrepreneurs” or “top 20 women bloggers” lists. [...] [...] live in those sort of complaints are as needed as the well-intentioned-but-nonetheless-patronizing G-20's Wives Club or those "top 100 women entrepreneurs" or "top 20 women bloggers" lists. [...]

]]> By: Around the web in the last few days « La Vie Quotidienne http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-183755 Around the web in the last few days « La Vie Quotidienne Tue, 14 Apr 2009 08:36:08 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-183755 [...] whose upper arms were being discussed!), smiles and photo-ops. And it has upset columnists and bloggers alike. They complain that singling out wives for inane photo-ops is insulting to their professional [...] [...] whose upper arms were being discussed!), smiles and photo-ops. And it has upset columnists and bloggers alike. They complain that singling out wives for inane photo-ops is insulting to their professional [...]

]]> By: Pigs at the trough - a rundown of the SSF funding proposals « The Arizona Desert Lamp http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-183641 Pigs at the trough - a rundown of the SSF funding proposals « The Arizona Desert Lamp Mon, 13 Apr 2009 18:28:55 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-183641 [...] we mean when we refer to a dearth in the diversity of ideas. Both of these links are courtesy of Penelope Trunk, whose heresy would certainly not merit her a place at the WRC [...] [...] we mean when we refer to a dearth in the diversity of ideas. Both of these links are courtesy of Penelope Trunk, whose heresy would certainly not merit her a place at the WRC [...]

]]> By: Wendy Carberg http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-183491 Wendy Carberg Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:49:08 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-183491 This particular post, like many that cover the experiences, struggles, and perceptions of women, is a roller coaster of inconsistency. At first, it appeared that you were calling woman to arms to not be paraded around...then, oh but a few sentences later, recognized that there is a game to be played. No doubt that we face our own set of challenges, but the most successful (and admirable) women define themselves not by their gender but by their sense of self...whether that be supporting their spouse, wearing a skirt in a room full of pants, or climbing their way to top in the same way everyone else does. I'll have to ponder this a little and make it my next post on my blog www.LeadershipSoup.com. This particular post, like many that cover the experiences, struggles, and perceptions of women, is a roller coaster of inconsistency. At first, it appeared that you were calling woman to arms to not be paraded around…then, oh but a few sentences later, recognized that there is a game to be played.
No doubt that we face our own set of challenges, but the most successful (and admirable) women define themselves not by their gender but by their sense of self…whether that be supporting their spouse, wearing a skirt in a room full of pants, or climbing their way to top in the same way everyone else does.
I'll have to ponder this a little and make it my next post on my blog http://www.LeadershipSoup.com.

]]> By: Yvette (in Boston) http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-183476 Yvette (in Boston) Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:36:27 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-183476 Hm. Emphasizing gender differences is a lot like being anti-affirmative action. Ideally, of course, we should all be treated fairly, our differences celebrated and not discriminated against, and equal opportunity for all. I think some of us really are "color blind" and "gender nuetral" (in the best sense of the words). I agree with PT, just ignore the gender references (and/or racial/ethnic ones) when you can, politely point out the rudeness of them if you feel you must, and play the game (i.e. watch our for your own interests first) as best you can. Ultimately, there are differences, big ones, but we have more in commen (men and women) than not (and much more in common between people of various amounts of melatonin in their skin). Whatever. Happy Spring/Passover/Easter, everyone. Hm. Emphasizing gender differences is a lot like being anti-affirmative action. Ideally, of course, we should all be treated fairly, our differences celebrated and not discriminated against, and equal opportunity for all. I think some of us really are "color blind" and "gender nuetral" (in the best sense of the words). I agree with PT, just ignore the gender references (and/or racial/ethnic ones) when you can, politely point out the rudeness of them if you feel you must, and play the game (i.e. watch our for your own interests first) as best you can. Ultimately, there are differences, big ones, but we have more in commen (men and women) than not (and much more in common between people of various amounts of melatonin in their skin). Whatever.

Happy Spring/Passover/Easter, everyone.

]]> By: Ann Witbrock http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-183470 Ann Witbrock Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:43:12 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-183470 I think the real problem is that it is labelled a 'wives' club'. In this day, anything other than a partners' club is political idiocy. I remember being horrified as a teenager in mid 70's reading about a major british organisation (I think BBC) having a wives agenda during a symposium. The assumption is explicit, the institution expects the bystanders to be female. It would be nice to think that our political figures had the respect to put an open label on the position, so that by comparison we know we are expected to also be a part of the decision making group. On the other hand, a communal group where a subclass voluntarily comes together for a mutual need (not for exclusion purposes) should be able to be accommodated, in imperfect times. I think the real problem is that it is labelled a 'wives' club'. In this day, anything other than a partners' club is political idiocy. I remember being horrified as a teenager in mid 70's reading about a major british organisation (I think BBC) having a wives agenda during a symposium. The assumption is explicit, the institution expects the bystanders to be female. It would be nice to think that our political figures had the respect to put an open label on the position, so that by comparison we know we are expected to also be a part of the decision making group.

On the other hand, a communal group where a subclass voluntarily comes together for a mutual need (not for exclusion purposes) should be able to be accommodated, in imperfect times.

]]> By: Lucille Hall http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-183452 Lucille Hall Thu, 09 Apr 2009 16:49:21 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-183452 Just a question - Why do you assume a subset implies inferiority? If you say someone is one of the top-10 Harvard grads in a year, no one would assume you mean that, as a subset of the rest of civilization, Harvard grads are inferior. You would certainly be implying that of the already high echelon of Harvard grads, this person ranks among the top. Subsets help us break down information; they do not ascribe rank by their mere existence. Frankly, I would be pleased to be among the top 100 women anything. Heck, even bloggers is a subset. Why not complain about not having been named as a top Internet writer, instead of just a lowly blogger. Just a question – Why do you assume a subset implies inferiority? If you say someone is one of the top-10 Harvard grads in a year, no one would assume you mean that, as a subset of the rest of civilization, Harvard grads are inferior. You would certainly be implying that of the already high echelon of Harvard grads, this person ranks among the top. Subsets help us break down information; they do not ascribe rank by their mere existence. Frankly, I would be pleased to be among the top 100 women anything. Heck, even bloggers is a subset. Why not complain about not having been named as a top Internet writer, instead of just a lowly blogger.

]]> By: Shefaly http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/04/05/the-g-20-is-complete-bs-for-women/comment-page-2/#comment-183448 Shefaly Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:19:14 +0000 http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/?p=2351#comment-183448 Penelope If we are going to complain about these practices, then there is probably a better question to ask. Why is it that men in high corporate or political positions seem to need women to validate their positions/ virility/ X-factor-du-jour, whereas women in similarly high positions seem to do well _without_ the need for such arm candy or photo-ops? So while Mr Obama needs a Michelle, Dr Singh needs a Gursharan Kaur, Mr Brown needs a Sarah, while Dr Angela Merkel does fine without a Joachim on her side, and Mrs Cristina Kirchner does not need a Nestor (of course, you completely missed noticing there were two women leaders at least one of whom got where she did without the patronage of her father or husband!). Besides, if some women get to pose in designer dresses, while the rest of us are content with blog posts or billing clients (some of us in our DvF and Thakoon gear we bought!), why complain at all? Are we jealous that we did not marry similarly powerful men whose positional upgrades in their jobs insure for us lifelong privileges that we can cash in over and over again? (Case in point: Cherie Booth Blair). Next time, some more research please :-) Politics isn't everyone's forte especially when writing about it in a business context. PS: I take it you won't be at BlogHer then? And should it ever come to pass, that Queen Rania invites you, you will turn her invitation down? After all what can be the possible use, eh? Penelope

If we are going to complain about these practices, then there is probably a better question to ask.

Why is it that men in high corporate or political positions seem to need women to validate their positions/ virility/ X-factor-du-jour, whereas women in similarly high positions seem to do well _without_ the need for such arm candy or photo-ops?

So while Mr Obama needs a Michelle, Dr Singh needs a Gursharan Kaur, Mr Brown needs a Sarah, while Dr Angela Merkel does fine without a Joachim on her side, and Mrs Cristina Kirchner does not need a Nestor (of course, you completely missed noticing there were two women leaders at least one of whom got where she did without the patronage of her father or husband!).

Besides, if some women get to pose in designer dresses, while the rest of us are content with blog posts or billing clients (some of us in our DvF and Thakoon gear we bought!), why complain at all? Are we jealous that we did not marry similarly powerful men whose positional upgrades in their jobs insure for us lifelong privileges that we can cash in over and over again? (Case in point: Cherie Booth Blair).

Next time, some more research please :-) Politics isn't everyone's forte especially when writing about it in a business context.

PS: I take it you won't be at BlogHer then? And should it ever come to pass, that Queen Rania invites you, you will turn her invitation down? After all what can be the possible use, eh?

]]>