I'm all man, baby.

April 18, 2013 4:42 PM

Corners of the world where women have yet to tread. Visuals of leadership positions and organizations that are currently and historically boys' clubs. Some of it surprising, some of it expected. All of it sad.

If you can overlook some of the pixelization and less than ideal design, it's an interesting exhibit of how deep and pervasive the gender gap is in a high level positions.

posted by erstwhile ungulate (52 comments total)

I actually posted this to Facebook yesterday:

After a few months of consideration, I have reached two conclusions about the economy.

The first is that women and men are equally capable of starting and growing companies.

The second is that venture capital should mirror that.

Thus perhaps the solution to our malaise is more women venture capitalists.

Eight women, and two men liked it. Men be hella insecure when you start speaking about a gender equal world, yo.
posted by nickrussell at 4:50 PM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]

I'm confused. The graphic states "The 40 richest jews"....
posted by aclevername at 4:50 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

Just really admirable, the way they open the page with "Richest Jews in the World". I mean, really, that's just fabulous. Very good idea. Can't see anything wrong with that, no sirree!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:50 PM on April 18, 2013 [8 favorites]

And after three posts, two completely gloss over the women issue and go right for the religious issue. Post: 1, The Two Of You: 0.
posted by nickrussell at 4:52 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

Eight women, and two men liked it. Men be hella insecure when you start speaking about a gender equal world, yo.

Hey, maybe it's just the men among your FB friends!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:52 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

And after three posts, two completely gloss over the women issue and go right for the religious issue. Post: 1, The Two Of You: 0.

I didn't gloss over anything. The post here says historical boys clubs, the link says 40 richest jews. I truly thought there may have been a mix up in the links. But hey, thanks for the score.
posted by aclevername at 4:56 PM on April 18, 2013 [7 favorites]

The post here says historical boys clubs, the link says 40 richest jews.

If you continue scrolling there are more examples of groups without women in them.

Also, notably, without many people of color either.
posted by rabbitbookworm at 4:59 PM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]

I think things like this are good at speaking truth to power, but some of the targets look like small financial businesses. I welcome a list of top CEOs and Presidents and major religions and organizations where the gender ratio is skewed all the way to 100%, but a handful of bankers in a single office being all male doesn't have the same punch that photos of a huge organization/conference/etc showing all males does.
posted by mathowie at 4:59 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

If you continue scrolling there are more examples of groups without women in them.

Oh. Yeah, my bad totally. Cheers.
posted by aclevername at 5:04 PM on April 18, 2013

Just really admirable, the way they open the page with "Richest Jews in the World"

The original article from Forbes Israel, run through Google Translate.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 5:05 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

And after three posts, two completely gloss over the women issue and go right for the religious issue. Post: 1, The Two Of You: 0.

Pointing out the stupid and disappointing tone-deafness of singling out Jews in a list like this (and having it be the very first of the list) does not I repeat not equal glossing over "the women issue".

And the scorekeeping bit is just really poor form, friend.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:08 PM on April 18, 2013 [8 favorites]

but a handful of bankers in a single office being all male doesn't have the same punch that photos of a huge organization/conference/etc showing all males does.

Unless you are a woman trying to get a job there. Then it has plenty of punch.
posted by ambrosia at 5:13 PM on April 18, 2013 [4 favorites]

The real message here seems to be that you have to look a level or two down from the very top to see how firmly-in-place the glass ceiling is.
posted by roll truck roll at 5:14 PM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]

Note that the last man in the "Richest Jews" list is Philip Green. Green is very much into "tax efficiency" and helped by his Monaco-based wife who just so happens to own most of his companies. So maybe there is a woman in this list after all (though I've no idea whether she is Jewish of not).
posted by Jehan at 5:17 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

On Tumblr the most recent post is at the top.
It's not singling out Jewish people- it's saying "here is an article about the richest Jews in the world, according to this magazine. None of them are women!" The article is from Forbes Israel, so I don't think it's trying to be anti-Semitic.

Though interestingly, the original article goes past 40- the 41s is a woman.
posted by insufficient data at 5:21 PM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]

I'm Jewish and I'm outraged, too. Why are none of the 40 wealthiest Jews women?
posted by threeants at 5:21 PM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]

This is a Tumblr. In Tumblr the most recent post is displayed first. In this case the most recent post featured an article from Forbes Israel. If you scroll down to older posts, they do not involve Jews at all. When another post is posted, that post will be moved down and eventually off the front page. We can put away our smelling salts and fainting couches now.
posted by Anonymous at 5:23 PM on April 18, 2013

Though interestingly, the original article goes past 40- the 41s is a woman.
posted by insufficient data at 17:21 on April 18 [1 favorite −] Favorite added! [!]

Truly eponysterical!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:26 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

I think things like this are good at speaking truth to power, but some of the targets look like small financial businesses. I welcome a list of top CEOs and Presidents and major religions and organizations where the gender ratio is skewed all the way to 100%, but a handful of bankers in a single office being all male doesn't have the same punch that photos of a huge organization/conference/etc showing all males does.

Hmm, disagree. I'm not known for my math prowess, but isn't the likelihood of randomly selecting people for an 8-person board and coming up with 8 men just under 0.4%?
posted by threeants at 5:28 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

Not to escape criticism: the White House and its press corps.
posted by ambrosia at 5:29 PM on April 18, 2013

It actually blew my mind that not 100% of them were white dudes either, only say, 99%
posted by emptythought at 5:36 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

The first is that women and men are equally capable of starting and growing companies.

The second is that venture capital should mirror that.

Thus perhaps the solution to our malaise is more women venture capitalists.

On the other hand, Forbes (again) says that women entrepreneurs are increasing as a percentage and that they tend to out-earn their male counterparts.

On the other hand, other statistics claim women start more businesses than men (which makes some kind of sense - of dual salaried couples, chances are the male is earning more, and thus a safer plan B if the woman's new venture doesn't work out). These businesses, however, tend to be smaller. I found this interesting.
posted by IndigoJones at 5:37 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

Part of the takeaway, IMO, of this blog is that patriarchy reproduces itself not by specific means but by most means. The selection methods represented by these groups even just on the first page are diverse-- selected by individual people/groups (mayoral IDEASCITY panel); non-discrete assemblages "picked" by social realities (40 richest Jews); hired (Charterhouse Capital Partners, principals of strategic communications firms, papal conclave, etc.); elected by large constituencies (president of France, chancellor of Austria, etc.).
posted by threeants at 5:38 PM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]

No women, and no black dudes either.
posted by Autumn at 5:39 PM on April 18, 2013

Pointing out the stupid and disappointing tone-deafness of singling out Jews in a list like this (and having it be the very first of the list) does not I repeat not equal glossing over "the women issue".

Are you being wilfully obtuse, flapjax, or do you really not understand how blogs work?

(And, oh my yes, what raging antisemites the folks at Forbes Israel must be!)
posted by Sys Rq at 5:51 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

It's an awkwardly presented site and that can contribute to reader confusion.
posted by Drinky Die at 6:03 PM on April 18, 2013 [4 favorites]

and no black dudes either

That's not a accurate statement. Just from the first two pages, and skipping those without photos:
Papal conclave: Cardinals Onaiyekan, Sarah, and Turkson
Airline senior management: V. Kona
LDS General Authority: Elders Sitati and Dube
Boston candidates for mayor in 2013: Clemons and Dorcena
Secretary General of the U.N.: Annan
NY Comedy Festival: Buress
US Presidents: Obama
posted by Houstonian at 6:09 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’s senior leadership council, along with every Secretary of Defense, every director of the Central Intelligence Agency, every director of the National Security Agency, and every director of the Federal Bureau of Intelligence, ever.

This is telling.
posted by DoubleLune at 6:10 PM on April 18, 2013

It's an awkwardly presented site and that can contribute to reader confusion.

If you don't know how a blog works in 2013, the problem isn't the tech.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:15 PM on April 18, 2013 [5 favorites]

Although some of these are skewed. It would be a lot more effective if it presented it differently. Giving a few schools with male presidents doesn't show what comparable schools have female presidents. It's like presenting the argument without refuting the counter-argument.
posted by DoubleLune at 6:25 PM on April 18, 2013

(And, oh my yes, what raging antisemites the folks at Forbes Israel must be!)

It's all about context and presentation. In the context of a Forbes Israel article, not antisemitic. In the context of this presentation, questionable judgement, at best.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:27 PM on April 18, 2013

If you don't know how a blog works in 2013, the problem isn't the tech.

Yes PG obviously anyone who finds the design of one blog site awkward has no idea how blogs work. Totally reasonable statement.
posted by Drinky Die at 6:43 PM on April 18, 2013 [5 favorites]

It's all about context and presentation.

Indeed. So scroll down and look at the context, and you'll see that it's not at all what you made it out to be.
posted by Sys Rq at 6:53 PM on April 18, 2013 [4 favorites]

The layout sucks. I know this because I read several blogs.
posted by Brocktoon at 7:10 PM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]

I looked through every photo, and seeing a sea of pale men peering back at me is disheartening. The Morman church one in particular looks like my high school annual, aged 50 years (in a class of 400 graduating seniors, I believe we had one black person--east side of Seattle in the 1980s).

In this day and age, having 100% all-white-dudes, or one-token-woman + one-token-non-white (bonus if they're the same person, allowing another white dude to score a position!) and the rest white men, is, frankly, bullshit.
posted by maxwelton at 7:23 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

It comes as zero surprise to me that the world is run by fat, old white men.
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 7:55 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’s senior leadership council, along with every Secretary of Defense, every director of the Central Intelligence Agency, every director of the National Security Agency, and every director of the Federal Bureau of Intelligence, ever.

This is telling.

It's also very narrowly written. As Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Michele Flournoy was part of the Defense Senior Leadership Council (PDF, see Enclosure 2) until Feb 2, 2012, when she stepped down to work on Obama's reelection campaign.

Furthermore, it seems that Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Jessica L. Wright is a current member. In another picture from the same meeting, there's literally a woman at the table.
posted by Jahaza at 8:19 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

Everyone to play the New York Comedy Festival.

Nope, " Among the many comedy luminaries who have performed as part of the NYCF are Denis Leary, Dane Cook, Bill Maher, Tracy Morgan, Joy Behar, Ricky Gervais, D.L. Hughley, Steven Wright, Brian Regan, Howie Mandel, Kevin Hart, Andy Samberg, Louis C.K., Joel McHale, Sarah Silverman, Damon Wayans, Artie Lange, Craig Ferguson, Mike Epps, Bill Burr, Steven Wright and Drew Carey, to name a few."
posted by Jahaza at 8:27 PM on April 18, 2013

Pritzker Prize jury.

In 2013, but the Executive Director (since 2005) is a woman and there were female jury members continuously from at least 1987.
posted by Jahaza at 8:34 PM on April 18, 2013

Marion Hammer was the first President of the NRA from 1995 to 1998 and Sandra Froman from 2005 to 2007.
posted by Jahaza at 8:52 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

On the one hand, it is uncool that such a small fraction of the global power elite is female. On the other hand, only a tiny fraction of anyone is part of the global power elite, so this tumblr doesn't have much relevance to real people's lives.

(in other words, I can't relate to someone who is trying to become a partner at a private equity firm, glass ceiling or not. People like that are already super privileged and are already living cushy lives)
posted by grahamsletter at 8:55 PM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]

On an unrelated note, it's worth noting that this:

In this day and age, having 100% all-white-dudes, or one-token-woman + one-token-non-white (bonus if they're the same person, allowing another white dude to score a position!) and the rest white men, is, frankly, bullshit.

i.e. assuming that any woman or person of color in a high-level position is there because of tokenism, is frankly bullshit.
posted by grahamsletter at 9:02 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]

On the one hand, it is uncool that such a small fraction of the global power elite is female. On the other hand, only a tiny fraction of anyone is part of the global power elite, so this tumblr doesn't have much relevance to real people's lives.

Given the global power elite tend to set the rules that govern the rest of our lives, I would rather like a diverse global power elite rather than a completely narrowminded one. It is to the benefit of the non-elite to have as many perspectives in the boardroom as possible.
posted by Anonymous at 9:21 PM on April 18, 2013

I'm a little confused about why there are so few women in positions of power at the heads of companies. The market is a highly competitive place, and companies which have the best leaders will make the best profits and outcompete other companies. If there is a large pool of excellent but under-promoted women, why wouldn't a company promote them and become more profitable? It makes no sense to me that a company would make itself less competitive by not employing the best leaders just because they're women.
posted by DrRotcod at 12:24 AM on April 19, 2013

It makes no sense to me that a company would make itself less competitive by not employing the best leaders just because they're women.
It could be simple bigotry, could be something more complex (in-group out-group power dynamics). An even stronger case for meritocracy can be made in sports, and performance can be relatively easily measured. Nonetheless, all sorts of irrational biases persist. Lookism [1], racism [2-3], homophobia [4], sexism [5], etc. Perhaps one cause of its persistence is that top management is hardly meritocratic [6]. The push for analytics is probably speeding up the enlightenment in sports, so I think there's truth to competition reducing bias, but it is not enough to entirely sweep away cultural associations of athletes as the pinnacle of manhood. Now assessing leadership skills is hardly an exact science, and as such it's easier to hide bias in all the noise. Thus, although the boardroom and stadium are rather competitive arenas, you can be pretty sure that neither are blind to race, sex, etc.

[1] Moneyball and 'The Good Face'
[2] Of course, many early examples such as the Negro League of Baseball. Ugh, and as a side note what's with all this banana throwing.
[3] Despite dubious protestations, soft (i.e. deniable) racism is a factor in major sports. Jeremy Lin is a prominent recent case.
[4] There's a lot here. Here's one fact: there has never been an openly gay active player in a Big Four sport.
[5] Gender divisions in sports are intended to keep things, well, sporting. We have only a few instances of women clearly able to cross the division by merit: Jackie Mitchell an early example not turning out well, and in modern times, Danica Patrick's experience perhaps a more promising sign. I can't think of others, but welcome any other examples.
[6] Sports teams are the favourite playthings for the rich. Naturally, they are propped up by a great deal of public subsidy.
[PS] I was going to throw in a whole bunch of interesting academic research in gender gap and employment, but I'm too tired. Research on women executives is rare due to difficulty collecting data, but I feel this is a fascinating paper. Look up and down the citation chain for a good start on the topic.
posted by helot at 2:50 AM on April 19, 2013 [1 favorite]

It makes no sense to me that a company would make itself less competitive by not employing the best leaders just because they're women.

Your mistake is assuming that people do things for purely rational reasons.

You can get into a lot of trouble working on this assumption.
posted by IndigoJones at 3:59 AM on April 19, 2013 [1 favorite]

Yay casual antisemitism!
posted by miyabo at 6:35 AM on April 19, 2013

If there is a large pool of excellent but under-promoted women...

Well, there isn't. I mean, there is, but they are not accessible for recruitment. If you want to hire a president, you go scouting among the vice-presidents. If you want to hire a vice-president, you go looking among the less senior execs. Etc.

As long as there is a slight residue of discrimination, there is an Inverse Square Law of Promotion that will mean drastically fewer women at the top than at the bottom, even if the top is theoretically no more discriminatory.
posted by forgetful snow at 6:55 AM on April 19, 2013 [2 favorites]

I was going to post a snarky comment, but then remembered that all of my boyfriends have been men.

Thank you, Social Justice Tumblr, for helping me to recognize the now glaringly-obvious error of my ways.

This is mainly in response to the Moon landing post. The blog should separate "misogyny is a huge problem today" from "misogyny was a huge problem in the past." It's unfathomable that NASA would send an all-male crew on any major mission today. With these things, it's important to note both the progress that has been made, as well as the remaining work that still needs to be done.
posted by schmod at 12:54 PM on April 19, 2013 [1 favorite]

Snark aside, the Mormon leadership's website looks like it could have come from the Onion. I'm not sure if I could come up with a less diverse group of 50 people if I tried (and I work for congress!)

I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry.
posted by schmod at 12:59 PM on April 19, 2013 [1 favorite]

It's unfathomable that NASA would send an all-male crew on any major mission today.

How about this?
posted by naoko at 7:40 AM on April 20, 2013 [1 favorite]

Snark aside, the Mormon leadership's website looks like it could have come from the Onion. I'm not sure if I could come up with a less diverse group of 50 people if I tried (and I work for congress!)


Wow, no kidding.
posted by sweetkid at 10:46 AM on April 21, 2013