What was it like for exec women & mothers 20+ years ago?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a 23 and 21 year old.

In 1999 I was pregnant and up for a promotion. My boss said “you are clearly the most qualified but since you are pregnant I think your energy and attention will be elsewhere “ and he gave the promotion to a male who was way less qualified.

At the time it was legal to discriminate because of being a new mom. It was illegal to discriminate against me as a pregnant person but as a new mom it was legal.

I was recently promoted on maternity leave! We are making progress.

Yes. It turns out all that corporate training that we all think is common sense DOES ACTUALLY SINK IN at some point.

[Anonymous]

Was a fed in the early 2000's when I had my kids. I was mid-career in an office full of white male engineers. My boss actually told me he wouldn't promote me bc I couldn't travel bc of my babies. I never said I couldn't and in fact had plenty of help (including a DH who was fully capable of handling the kids.) Plus I was given the key to a broom closet as the "lactation room".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ChatGPT and other AI advancements will have a huge impact on women's careers. This is not going to be pretty.

How so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ChatGPT and other AI advancements will have a huge impact on women's careers. This is not going to be pretty.

How so?

Let's ask ChatGPT. LoL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ChatGPT and other AI advancements will have a huge impact on women's careers. This is not going to be pretty.

How so?

Yes, why will this impact women more than men? IMO, many many of us of any gender are screwed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2003, I was a young mom and turned down for a job in favor of a less-qualified single woman because she didn't have children.

Oh, and fwiw, the boss who did this was a woman - a single woman but a woman. There were women bosses who echoed the misogynistic corporate behavior.

I didn't have children. That doesn't mean I didn't have family obligations with parents and sibling and large extended family nearby. At the peak of my career, my mother had terminal cancer and she only had so much time to live. I was caring for her and my father who was self-employed in a blue collar field. He couldn't really afford to take off work. He didn't even know how to set up an answering machine. I did all of that, as a woman. He didn't have a cell phone. When my mother needed at home care, I paid for it, and I was the point of contact for all emergencies.

I was a SIPRNet room, where I couldn't bring my cell phone.

Would you have been able to manage that? Maybe. I don't think having children is necessarily the most challenging, most daunting experience in care giving a working woman could have.

[Anonymous]

Look how messed up their adult kids are now!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look how messed up their adult kids are now!!

The most messed up people I know were homeschooled by their SAHMs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the 1980s my mom was the first woman in her very large consulting firm to make partner.

She hid her pregnancies from colleagues. They never knew she was pregnant. Scheduled a c-section on a Friday, back to work on Monday. I met some of her colleagues when I was ten and they were shocked she had kids, they’d known her 20+ years and she never talked about us.

I also never, ever saw her. She never had dinner with us. She was gone when I woke up in the morning, and not home from work when I went to sleep. She’d often go to work on the weekend. She never attended a school event. I had holidays with her, though I remember she’d get home at 6 pm on Christmas Eve and would seem exhausted.

She also says she was constantly sexually harassed but she has no patience for the #me too movement because she thinks women just need to suck it up (!).

Who raised you? A grandparent or bunch of Nannies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the 1980s my mom was the first woman in her very large consulting firm to make partner.

She hid her pregnancies from colleagues. They never knew she was pregnant. Scheduled a c-section on a Friday, back to work on Monday. I met some of her colleagues when I was ten and they were shocked she had kids, they’d known her 20+ years and she never talked about us.

I also never, ever saw her. She never had dinner with us. She was gone when I woke up in the morning, and not home from work when I went to sleep. She’d often go to work on the weekend. She never attended a school event. I had holidays with her, though I remember she’d get home at 6 pm on Christmas Eve and would seem exhausted.

She also says she was constantly sexually harassed but she has no patience for the #me too movement because she thinks women just need to suck it up (!).

Who raised you? A grandparent or bunch of Nannies?

Or her dad could have stepped up? Rare at that time but still possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2003, I was a young mom and turned down for a job in favor of a less-qualified single woman because she didn't have children.

Oh, and fwiw, the boss who did this was a woman - a single woman but a woman. There were women bosses who echoed the misogynistic corporate behavior.

I didn't have children. That doesn't mean I didn't have family obligations with parents and sibling and large extended family nearby. At the peak of my career, my mother had terminal cancer and she only had so much time to live. I was caring for her and my father who was self-employed in a blue collar field. He couldn't really afford to take off work. He didn't even know how to set up an answering machine. I did all of that, as a woman. He didn't have a cell phone. When my mother needed at home care, I paid for it, and I was the point of contact for all emergencies.

I was a SIPRNet room, where I couldn't bring my cell phone.

Would you have been able to manage that? Maybe. I don't think having children is necessarily the most challenging, most daunting experience in care giving a working woman could have.

No, I couldn’t have worked, taken care of my kids and sick parents at the same time - but I could take care of my kids and work full-time. As a matter of fact, I did.

It’s interesting how having kids has been held against women but other family responsibilities are not considered, for either men or women. Then again, fewer women leave professional or managerial jobs to take care of their parents compared to a few generations ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2003, I was a young mom and turned down for a job in favor of a less-qualified single woman because she didn't have children.

Oh, and fwiw, the boss who did this was a woman - a single woman but a woman. There were women bosses who echoed the misogynistic corporate behavior.

I didn't have children. That doesn't mean I didn't have family obligations with parents and sibling and large extended family nearby. At the peak of my career, my mother had terminal cancer and she only had so much time to live. I was caring for her and my father who was self-employed in a blue collar field. He couldn't really afford to take off work. He didn't even know how to set up an answering machine. I did all of that, as a woman. He didn't have a cell phone. When my mother needed at home care, I paid for it, and I was the point of contact for all emergencies.

I was a SIPRNet room, where I couldn't bring my cell phone.

Would you have been able to manage that? Maybe. I don't think having children is necessarily the most challenging, most daunting experience in care giving a working woman could have.

No, I couldn’t have worked, taken care of my kids and sick parents at the same time - but I could take care of my kids and work full-time. As a matter of fact, I did.

It’s interesting how having kids has been held against women but other family responsibilities are not considered, for either men or women. Then again, fewer women leave professional or managerial jobs to take care of their parents compared to a few generations ago.

The most challenging women I've worked with were women who were taking on a considerable role in helping with their grandchildren. I worked with a woman who often brought her young grandchildren to the office. Yet, as a single woman without children in my childbearing years, she was adamant that I wouldn't be able to keep my job if I chose to have children, or that I was too old to have children in my early 30s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was a junior associate in Biglaw in 2000, a male partner in my practice group praised one of the female partners who had waited until she made partner to get pregnant and only took six weeks of maternity leave (and worked at home during that time). There was also the legendary NY partner who was back in her office running deals three days after giving birth. The clear message was that work was first, health and family second at all times.

I switched to government, and even there it was not super family friendly in the early 2000s and 2010s. I worked for an older female boss without kids, and I traveled extensively and worked long hours when my daughters were young toddlers into elementary school.

It's really only in the past five years that I have felt comfortable turning down work and declining events for kids' activities. My default until probably 2018 was to sneak out if I had to leave early and pretend any absences were not kid-related.

These are the worst for family-friendly policies. The best scenario is involved dad with wife who earns/works more than him.

Yes, agree. Hierarchy in order of most flexible bosses, IMO:
- man with working spouse and kids
- woman with working spouse and kids
- man with spouse but no kids / woman with spouse but no kids
- man with no spouse or kids - sometimes more flexible if they had a working mom
And far the most rigid, unfortunately:
- woman with no spouse or kids

Careful. Your misogyny is showing. As an older woman, I didn't typically have any bosses who didn't have children. 80% of women will have children. The rest will most likely marry a man with children.

You left out on your list the most typical boss:
A man with a SAHM and children. LoL. Where is he on your list?

Man with a SAHM is far and away the worst in my experience. SAHM with nannies and housekeepers? Forget about it. It's like they can't understand why you're there in the first place and definitely don't get that you might need to, you know, earn money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was a junior associate in Biglaw in 2000, a male partner in my practice group praised one of the female partners who had waited until she made partner to get pregnant and only took six weeks of maternity leave (and worked at home during that time). There was also the legendary NY partner who was back in her office running deals three days after giving birth. The clear message was that work was first, health and family second at all times.

I switched to government, and even there it was not super family friendly in the early 2000s and 2010s. I worked for an older female boss without kids, and I traveled extensively and worked long hours when my daughters were young toddlers into elementary school.

It's really only in the past five years that I have felt comfortable turning down work and declining events for kids' activities. My default until probably 2018 was to sneak out if I had to leave early and pretend any absences were not kid-related.

These are the worst for family-friendly policies. The best scenario is involved dad with wife who earns/works more than him.

Yes, agree. Hierarchy in order of most flexible bosses, IMO:
- man with working spouse and kids
- woman with working spouse and kids
- man with spouse but no kids / woman with spouse but no kids
- man with no spouse or kids - sometimes more flexible if they had a working mom
And far the most rigid, unfortunately:
- woman with no spouse or kids

Careful. Your misogyny is showing. As an older woman, I didn't typically have any bosses who didn't have children. 80% of women will have children. The rest will most likely marry a man with children.

You left out on your list the most typical boss:
A man with a SAHM and children. LoL. Where is he on your list?

You’re right, I did miss them. I would say just above (but quite a bit above) women with no spouse or kids. No, it’s not misogynistic. Women put up with a lot. It changes what they think they are supposed to put up with, which then changes what they expect of others. They’re not trying to be hard, they just have had to put up with more and it feels like that’s normal to them. Men in this day, even if they don’t want to be more flexible, at some point decide either - hey, I’m not a woman so I don’t know what they’re going through or I don’t want to get accused of discrimination so let me not be a jerk.

+1 absolutely agree with your ordering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was a junior associate in Biglaw in 2000, a male partner in my practice group praised one of the female partners who had waited until she made partner to get pregnant and only took six weeks of maternity leave (and worked at home during that time). There was also the legendary NY partner who was back in her office running deals three days after giving birth. The clear message was that work was first, health and family second at all times.

I switched to government, and even there it was not super family friendly in the early 2000s and 2010s. I worked for an older female boss without kids, and I traveled extensively and worked long hours when my daughters were young toddlers into elementary school.

It's really only in the past five years that I have felt comfortable turning down work and declining events for kids' activities. My default until probably 2018 was to sneak out if I had to leave early and pretend any absences were not kid-related.

These are the worst for family-friendly policies. The best scenario is involved dad with wife who earns/works more than him.

Yes, agree. Hierarchy in order of most flexible bosses, IMO:
- man with working spouse and kids
- woman with working spouse and kids
- man with spouse but no kids / woman with spouse but no kids
- man with no spouse or kids - sometimes more flexible if they had a working mom
And far the most rigid, unfortunately:
- woman with no spouse or kids

Careful. Your misogyny is showing. As an older woman, I didn't typically have any bosses who didn't have children. 80% of women will have children. The rest will most likely marry a man with children.

You left out on your list the most typical boss:
A man with a SAHM and children. LoL. Where is he on your list?

You’re right, I did miss them. I would say just above (but quite a bit above) women with no spouse or kids. No, it’s not misogynistic. Women put up with a lot. It changes what they think they are supposed to put up with, which then changes what they expect of others. They’re not trying to be hard, they just have had to put up with more and it feels like that’s normal to them. Men in this day, even if they don’t want to be more flexible, at some point decide either - hey, I’m not a woman so I don’t know what they’re going through or I don’t want to get accused of discrimination so let me not be a jerk.

+1 absolutely agree with your ordering.

Agree. I’m interested to see how it changes in the next generation.