In the defense of white folks

[sealybobo]

True. In fact, studies show that in the early years out of college, before marriage and children, women earn the same or MORE than men, on average, in the same fields.

Part of the discrepancy is that women major in liberal arts and soft sciences, like sociology, or early education, than men, and these fields pay less.

The roles with the largest nominal gains in female representation from 2019 to 2020 were human resources (HR), legal and administration, with 5.5, 5.1 and 3.4 percentage point jumps, respectively. These boosts are unsurprising given the already high prevalence of women serving in these functions. HR executive roles especially have been held by women in the highest frequency of all studied roles over the last 10 years. Women accounted for nearly 58% of HR executives in 2020. However, as noted in The Journal, these types of “functional” leadership roles, while important, do not typically lead executives down the path toward becoming CEO. Relative to their previous levels, roles surrounding information/IT, technology and legal saw the greatest percent changes from 2019 to 2020. While these increases are encouraging, the overall prevalence of women in information/IT and technology executive roles is still low.

One of the hurdles for women in the C-Suite remains the lack of female representation in positions that deal with profit-and-loss (P&L). The three executive roles with the lowest prevalence of women are, in fact, P&L roles—investment, sales and heads of division. Furthermore, there are fewer women in Investment executive roles in 2020 (2.4%) than there were at the start of the study in 2011 (7%). These and other P&L job functions are significant in that they often lead to other high-ranking roles. Heads of divisions, for instance, frequently become CEOs. Only 8.2% of division heads were women in 2020. Additionally, many P&L roles tend to correlate with higher levels of compensation than more functional roles. For instance, chief financial officers (CFOs) typically fall within the top two or three highest-paid executives at a company, and in 2020, only 12.3% of CFOs were female.

 

[otto105]

Women are the mothers of our children. We've been through this with wage disparities. They take off a year or so to give birth, take off when the child is sick sometimes for a week or two. Women have to attend school to address behavior problems. Is if fair to promote them over a white male that has an outstanding attendance record, kept up on all the latest technology or strategies of his company, able to work 10 or more hours a day because they don't have to rush home to be there before that bus drops off their children?

YEAH! White conservative men have that barefoot white bitch in the kitchen ready for all that children, cleaning and cooking things white conservative guy won't do....

Is ray still in an Mad Men episode?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Maria was in her 40's, had no kids, and still it was like pulling teeth to get the company to name her VP. They came up with every excuse why she wasn't the right person for the job. Finally they named her VP and she's been doing great ever sense.

Turns out if you just give women, or blacks a chance they can do just as good of a job as a white man can.

Less and less women are having kids nowadays. So your excuse why so few are in the executive boardrooms is getting weaker and weaker.

Women under 30 have become much less likely to have children. Since 2007, the birthrate for women in their 20s has fallen by 28 percent.

And fewer are getting married too

Women Are Getting Married Less And Less — And The Reason Why Might Shock You

Ever wondered why people are refusing to get married? Here's some explanations as to why the constitution of marriage has changed.

www.bolde.com

Correct. More women are having children at a later age which is partly responsible for our increase of birth defects compared to other countries. And what metrics are you using that "Maria" was the best qualified candidate for VP? Do you know who she was up against? Are you privy to her work history or success?

This automatic assumption that women or minorities don't get ahead because of their race or gender has zero evidence to support it. "She's been doing fine ever since" is not good enough for some companies. They would assume to get people that do the best job.

 

[otto105]

Look, you're talking to a former professional driver. I live in a black neighborhood. Blacks are just terrible drivers on average, that's all. I'm on a main street and often they tear out of here at 80 MPH in a 35. In fact it's the most frequent complaint in our Facebook forum of our suburb. They often crash stop signs, traffic lights, and it got so to the point I had to put security cameras on my house. I can't help they can't drive within the law.

I saw a white person (a guy too) speeding on our highway yesterday, so I assume all white drivers are horrible drivers.

 

[sealybobo]

And women excel men in grade average as well. It's a choice they made to be a professional like all of us make choices. Either be a parent or be a professional administrator. Anybody who wants both just have to make some sacrifices.

Is Lisa right? I read this: The three executive roles with the lowest prevalence of women are, in fact, P&L roles—investment, sales and heads of division.

These are the jobs that lead someone to becoming CEO. So is Lisa right? Women aren't going to school to learn profits and loses?

So not enough women are going into P&L? The things that make the company money? Like sales and engineering?

 

[Dirk the Daring]

That's all black people and women want too.

A level playing field is a situation in which conditions are fair for everyone, where opportunities are equal for all involved, where no one has an advantage over the other. Level the playing field means to alter conditions in order to provide an equal opportunity for all of those who are involved, to change the conditions of a situation in order to make things fair for everyone.

Today, there are five Black CEOs in the Fortune 500.

With 41 women on the Fortune 500 list, women leaders hold just 8.1% of Fortune 500 CEO spots.

So your saying things aren't fair for us whites? LOL

You keep pointing to the outcomes as proof somehow that the equation is flawed. I think the equation is just fine, I think the problem is within the individual components that make up the equation to begin with.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I saw a white person (a guy too) speeding on our highway yesterday, so I assume all white drivers are horrible drivers.

And if they get caught they get a ticket like anybody else. It would be stupid for me to claim he was pulled over only because he was white. WTF would a cop care about the skin color of a traffic offender? They don't. They just want to do their job and go home safely.

 

[sealybobo]

Correct. More women are having children at a later age which is partly responsible for our increase of birth defects compared to other countries. And what metrics are you using that "Maria" was the best qualified candidate for VP? Do you know who she was up against? Are you privy to her work history or success?

This automatic assumption that women or minorities don't get ahead because of their race or gender has zero evidence to support it. "She's been doing fine ever since" is not good enough for some companies. They would assume to get people that do the best job.

Well another company stole her and pay her double what she was making so I'm assuming she's going FABULOUS.

But VP of HR will never get her to be the CEO. VP of HR is nice, but those people are never named CEO. It's one of those departments that women can do.

This is interesting Chart: The percentage of women and men in each profession - The Boston Globe

Shows what jobs women do a lot and which jobs women don't do very much.

 

[sealybobo]

You keep pointing to the outcomes as proof somehow that the equation is flawed. I think the equation is just fine, I think the problem is within the individual components that make up the equation to begin with.

That plays a part in it. But not entirely.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Is Lisa right? I read this: The three executive roles with the lowest prevalence of women are, in fact, P&L roles—investment, sales and heads of division.

These are the jobs that lead someone to becoming CEO. So is Lisa right? Women aren't going to school to learn profits and loses?

So not enough women are going into P&L? The things that make the company money? Like sales and engineering?

There are probably a lot of women that don't get into that field of work. Much of my family has been to college and none of them went after executive positions, and I have a very large family.
Unproven assumptions is all you have. Companies look for the best regardless of race or gender. They won't dare get out of line in fear of a sexist or racist lawsuit. These people are not dumb.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well another company stole her and pay her double what she was making so I'm assuming she's going FABULOUS.

But VP of HR will never get her to be the CEO. VP of HR is nice, but those people are never named CEO. It's one of those departments that women can do.

This is interesting Chart: The percentage of women and men in each profession - The Boston Globe

Shows what jobs women do a lot and which jobs women don't do very much.

But it can't be because they made that choice on their own? Maybe you watch too much television. Maybe you believe that CEO's sit in their office all day with the large breasted blond secretary sitting on their lap. All they really do is practice putts on their indoor putting green.

CEO's often lose their job. I don't know if they still have it, but if they do, look at Crane's business paper and see all the people who left their last company or entered a new one. They have to travel all over the country and sometimes world, permanently move for a couple of years. It's not a job for everybody and not most people either.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You keep pointing to the outcomes as proof somehow that the equation is flawed. I think the equation is just fine, I think the problem is within the individual components that make up the equation to begin with.

They do the same with race issues. Just look at the end result and draw conclusions from there.

 

[YoursTruly]

So trying to help blacks

Why TF do blacks always need help? Most of the ones I know, aren't stupid. They live the lives they were handed and don't complain about it. At least that the way it is for the older ones. Some of their kids are as worthless as a lot of white kids. Always "entitled" to things they will never have, because they're worthless.

Seriously, you're making blacks out to be "special needs" or something. Funny, the black millionaires and billionaires made it. Why can't the rest of them. Hell, they only make up 12% of the country.

 

[YoursTruly]

YEAH! White conservative men have that barefoot white bitch in the kitchen ready for all that children, cleaning and cooking things white conservative guy won't do....

Is ray still in an Mad Men episode?

You got something against housewives?

 

[jc456]

Why would I? For one, marching doesn't do shit, and two, there is nothing to march about.

People will hate each other for various reasons including race. But as a structure, no, there is no racism in this country.

You and I both went to a public or private school.
You and I had the opportunity to not have children we couldn't afford.
You and I had the opportunity to gain employment.
You and I had the opportunity to learn a trade.
You and I had the opportunity to attend college.
You and I were able to avoid harsh drugs and not get hooked on them.
You and I had the opportunity to join the military for college and house loan benefits.

So where does this racism exist at?

outstanding post, Thanks Ray!!

 

[jc456]

Lisa558 doesn't realize that women have benefited the most from affirmative action. Without it, they'd be doing just as poorly as black people.

Lucky for white women white male CEO's don't mind hiring white women VP's to head up the housekeeping department, accounting, finance, hr.

There is still a “broken rung” at the first step up to manager. Since 2016, we have seen the same trend: women are promoted to manager at far lower rates than men, and this makes it nearly impossible for companies to lay a foundation for sustained progress at more senior levels. Additionally, the gains in representation for women overall haven’t translated to gains for women of color. Women of color continue to lose ground at every step in the pipeline—between the entry level and the C-suite, the representation of women of color drops off by more than 75 percent. As a result, women of color account for only 4 percent of C-suite leaders, a number that hasn’t moved significantly in the past three years.

Women continue to face a broken rung at the first step up to manager: for every 100 men promoted to manager, only 86 women are promoted (Exhibit 3). As a result, men outnumber women significantly at the manager level, which means that there are far fewer women to promote to higher levels. The broken rung likely explains why representation of women at the senior-manager, director, and vice-president levels has improved more slowly than the pipeline overall.

and yet you aren't in here advocating for women? why is that? but treat them blacks as inferior is demofk 101.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Communism.

I know, I know. I used to think it was the grand conspiracy. "It'll never happen here." But it's already happening. This whole race issue is just part of the playbook of strategies.
What makes it so unbelievable is that we can't put a face on it. It's my opinion, it's people that are so rich, that their names & faces will never be allowed to aired on TV or the internet. At least not with a communist label.
Ever seen that picture of all the news outlets, TV stations and radio, that's all owned by like 5 people (corporations)

I don't see any other reason why so many people would get so worked up over about 20 unarmed black guys getting killed by cops, out of over 300 million. And so many people believing the entire system is racist, when soooo many blacks have become upper middle class to the billionaires. If racism was so dominant to blacks, there wouldn't be one American billionaire. Obama would've never got elected once. Much less twice.

There's something or someone behind all this. I know way too many black people who feel the same way. That this is all been hyped up for a reason. And not because of racism.

Social Darwinism Applies to Races, Not at All to Hereditary Classes

You're trapped in it if you swallow the race-traitors' dogma that racism is always wrong. It is very dangerous to society to think that way, because in many cases racism is part of the Survival Instinct. Racial judgments may be rational or not, depending on how much evidence leads to them. Anti-Social Socialists, who say racism is never right, are always wrong.

 

[jc456]

Maria was in her 40's, had no kids, and still it was like pulling teeth to get the company to name her VP. They came up with every excuse why she wasn't the right person for the job. Finally they named her VP and she's been doing great ever sense.

Turns out if you just give women, or blacks a chance they can do just as good of a job as a white man can.

Less and less women are having kids nowadays. So your excuse why so few are in the executive boardrooms is getting weaker and weaker.

Women under 30 have become much less likely to have children. Since 2007, the birthrate for women in their 20s has fallen by 28 percent.

And fewer are getting married too

Women Are Getting Married Less And Less — And The Reason Why Might Shock You

Ever wondered why people are refusing to get married? Here's some explanations as to why the constitution of marriage has changed.

www.bolde.com

I've been working as a white male in my company for 44 years and I am just a Project Manager/ Customer Advocate. No one offered me a VP position? wtf? I got me no privilege I guess.

 

[Faun]

Bottom line is I was correct. More Republicans voted for it than Democrats per capita.

Not by region, they didn't. Per capita, more Democrats voted for it than Republicans in the Union states. Whereas more Republicans than Democrats voted for it than against it in the Confederate states.

It was a regional split, not a political party split.

 

[otto105]

You got something against housewives?

No, I have something about white conservative bigots.