USA Today published an article today blaming the lack of “Women in the Boardroom” on Bro-Culture, or men associating in ways that feminists disapprove of.
“Bro Culture,” the exclusionary, male-centric vibe at some companies that’s led to a spate of powerful men such as Uber CEO Travis Kalanick losing high-profile roles is under heavy assault.
Misogyny is the new blasphemy.
However, many women remain skeptical that their complaints and the recent outcomes will make a dent in what they view as long-standing issues of inequality and harassment in the business world.
Women will rarely succeed in outperforming men, but they always succeed at out-complaining men.
Why is this?
Because females are rewarded for being weak.
A female’s tears and complaints get her what she wants.
A man’s tears and complaints get him scorn and derision.
“Will people stop sending memos about what kind of sex is appropriate at a company party? Likely,” says Jessica Rovello, CEO of interactive content company Arkadium, referring to a memo that Kalanick once wrote. “But will this change the way people operate? Probably not.”
Ingrained male habits die hard, Rovello says, recalling countless meetings where, as the only woman in the room, questions she asked were answered with the speaker addressing a male colleague.
I wouldn’t address her either. Females in the corporate setting have successfully turned every word, every glance, every gesture, into an actionable offense that could cost the offending party and the company millions of dollars and one or more people their jobs.
Origin of the species
The word “bro” is a white appropriation of the African-American greeting derived from “brother.”
But as a term describing an ethos, bro culture has come to represent a testosterone-charged group reminiscent of a sports team or frat house, and for some harks back to powerful white privilege that has caused women and minorities to struggle for equality since the founding of the country.
It’s a passive-aggressive slur used by Feminists and Social Justice Warriors against any white male who offends them.
At its core, bro culture aims to create a space where boys can be boys, says Michael Kimmel, founder and director of the Center for the Study of Men and Masculinities at Stony Brook University and author of Angry White Men: Masculinity at the End of an Era.
What we mean when we say ‘bro culture’
“It’s a reaction against the entry of women into virtually every public space, which they see as an invasion,” he says. “Once upon a time, every place was a locker room.”
Why is the “locker room” such a magical, forbidding place to these feminists? Here’s a free clue from someone who has been in the locker room:
Locker rooms fucking stink. Sweat-stained clothes, sweat-stained gear, sweat-stained towels, dirt, grass, mud, and blood are the wonderful bouquet of smells you get to enjoy in a locker room. Showers that rarely get cleaned. A couple of vending machines if you are lucky. No normal person would just want to hang out in a locker room.
But when your friend and teammates are in the locker room with you, the guys who you have just played a three-hour game against another team, guys you have trained with, played with, fought with, laughed with, cried with, bled with, then the locker room is not that bad of a place.
When feminists sneer about “locker rooms”, the thing they are actually attacking is male camaraderie, friendships between men born out of mutual respect and shared experience. It is evident in the feminist attacks on male spaces. The desired world of feminists is one where men scramble for the approval of females rather than the respect of other men.
Echoes of Wall Street
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which battled Wall Street on the behalf of women decades ago, says women continue to come forward even though the agency hasn’t filed any major financial industry sex discrimination cases in New York City in recent years.
“That doesn’t mean similar discrimination is not occurring. We certainly have continued to see allegations like that,” says Raechel Adams, an EEOC supervisory trial attorney who worked on one such case 13 years ago.
Every female is a lawsuit waiting to happen. She is a frag grenade with tits.
Naturally, she runs to the biggest, baddest alpha male on the block to punish men who have offended her: The government.
“Culture at work is so long-standing, and it’s just impossible to beat it down,” says Allison Schieffelin, who won a Wall Street discrimination settlement a decade ago in a case that showed bro culture is hardly a new phenomenon.
Case-in-point: Schieffelin worked for Morgan Stanley and later sued the company for “sex bias” (wah! They aren’t promoting a strong, independent woman like me at the speed I deserve!). She ran to the EEOC to defend her feminine honor against Morgan Stanley. Morgan Stanley saw the writing on the wall and settled for $54 million of which Schieffelin received $12 million. Where did the rest of the money go?
$42 million went to the government, thanks a female pointing the finger at the company she probably told an interviewer she would love to work for and would be an amazing employee of and it was her dream to be at.
A female protects no secrets but her own and holds faith with no one but herself.
Serious consequences for bad actors
Even so, women working in Silicon Valley have made men think twice about the potential consequences of indecent behavior.
Venture capitalist Justin Caldbeck was forced to resign from Binary Capital after being accused by many women of inappropriate advances during business negotiations.
Former Uber engineer Susan Fowler wrote a detailed blog post in February about the ride hailing company’s sexist environment. Her charges started a cultural tailspin that led co-founder Kalanick to resign in June after eight years of helming his $70 billion startup.
You continue doing business with females, you get what you get.
And Google fired engineer James Damore Aug. 7 after he questioned the tech giant’s diversity program.
Questioning the official narrative gets you shit-canned. Misogyny is the new blasphemy.
Emily Martin, general counsel and vice president for workplace justice at the National Women’s Law Center, a nonprofit organization that champions equality for women, says there is no question that sexual harassment is rife in all types of workplaces. Nonetheless, outrage over bro culture has not been unanimous.
Men and women in the tech industry stood by their embattled colleagues, characterizing their downfalls as witch hunts. “How is it that men should pay with their careers for a moment of weakness?” asks Michael Petraeus, a start-up entrepreneur who calls McClure’s ouster a “crucifixion.”
Loyalty? Surely not! Haven’t these infidels heard to the good news of “Listen and Believe Her”?
Wall Street’s cautionary tale
History suggests that it may take far more than a paper billionaire’s demise to clean up bad behavior.
A few decades back, Wall Street was riddled with the same sexual discrimination issues as junk bond and derivatives wizards reinvented investing much the way today’s tech entrepreneurs have disrupted the taxi and lodging sectors. Their success often bred a feeling of invincibility and supremacy.
But some women wouldn’t stand for it. In 1996, Pamela Martens and two other women filed a federal complaint against Smith Barney, which had doled out 95% of its brokerage jobs to men, according to the lawsuit.
The case became known as the Boom Boom Room lawsuit, after a Smith Barney basement party room from which women were barred. Because all employees had signed agreements to take any claims to mediation, trial revelations were avoided in exchange for mediated settlements for nearly 2,000 women.
Irony of ironies, the Boom Boom Room case came about because of women signing arbitration agreement, and then failing to abide by it.
The settlement in that case called for Smith Barney to hire and train even more women, which is akin to inviting even more snakes into your house after one bites you in your sleep.
Feminists complain mightily about Wall Street being a No Girls Club and not being invited to off-hours excursions with male co-workers. Surely such strong, independent creatures could start their own All Girls Club.
Why the hell would they? It comes back to loyalty. There are hundreds of articles of women triumphantly crowing about how they “stuck it” to their former employer for millions of dollars for the glory of womankind. Why would any man bring a female along when any part of a conversation might become the basis for her multi-million dollar EEOC discrimination lawsuit?
Females have become personal and professional liabilities to most men and men are limiting their liability by keeping their professional and personal contacts with females as limited and public as possible.