Upper class men are rewarded while upper class women are punished?

[Anonymous]

From the Harvard Business Review:

https://hbr.org/2016/12/research-how-subtle-class-cues-can-backfire-on-your-resume


I found this really shocking. It's amazing that what works as a huge, trump-card advantage for men, is held against women.

[Anonymous]

"A woman who competes with men lacks ambition."

Marilyn Monroe.

[Anonymous]

OP, I know this is a women majority forum but please be accurate otherwise it makes you look biased and dim-witted.

Lower-class men in the article are shown to have a similar magnitude disadvantage as their SES peer women just as upper class women do with respect to upper class men.

And you wonder why Trump won? lower class men according to the HBR review had the worst call back rate by far of the four groups.

If I made a thread with the title saying "lower class women from TTT schools have 6x the callback advantage that lower class men do", many would disagree with the data.

Anyways, the moral of the story is - don't go to TTT law schools.

That said, I would never interview or hire an 'upper class' person that went to a TTT. I would immediately question why didn't go to a t14 if not t10.

I would not have the same question with a lower class man or woman.

[Anonymous]

To be clear... Upper class men are given an advantage over upper clasis women because lawyers assumed upper class women will quit working eventually and SAH, because they will marry rich or don't need the money.

Lower class women have and advantage over higher class women because it is perceived they will not quit working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be clear... Upper class men are given an advantage over upper clasis women because lawyers assumed upper class women will quit working eventually and SAH, because they will marry rich or don't need the money.

Lower class women have and advantage over higher class women because it is perceived they will not quit working.

and lower class women have a large advantage over lower class men ceteris paribus because......?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I know this is a women majority forum but please be accurate otherwise it makes you look biased and dim-witted.

Lower-class men in the article are shown to have a similar magnitude disadvantage as their SES peer women just as upper class women do with respect to upper class men.

And you wonder why Trump won? lower class men according to the HBR review had the worst call back rate by far of the four groups.

If I made a thread with the title saying "lower class women from TTT schools have 6x the callback advantage that lower class men do", many would disagree with the data.

Anyways, the moral of the story is - don't go to TTT law schools.

That said, I would never interview or hire an 'upper class' person that went to a TTT. I would immediately question why didn't go to a t14 if not t10.

I would not have the same question with a lower class man or woman.

You mention that's why Trump won. The problem is that law firms still won't work with lower class men. Trump won't change that. As a matter of fact, it may get worse. People like to blame dems for Hillary's "deplorable" remark, but having practiced at both a large law firm and been an investment banker, no one hates and disrespects poor white people more than upper class white people - conservatives included! They are merely a means to an end. I was fascinated by it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be clear... Upper class men are given an advantage over upper clasis women because lawyers assumed upper class women will quit working eventually and SAH, because they will marry rich or don't need the money.

Lower class women have and advantage over higher class women because it is perceived they will not quit working.

and lower class women have a large advantage over lower class men ceteris paribus because......?

They aren't part of the good old boys club and they aren't any good for dating so have even less value.

[Anonymous]

"The differences in the call back rates for higher-class women, lower-class men, and lower-class women were not statistically significant."

I guess they don't teach data analysis in law school...

[Anonymous]

I went to Harvard and had classical piano, sailing, yoga and travel on my resume. I got invited to almost every job I applied for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to Harvard and had classical piano, sailing, yoga and travel on my resume. I got invited to almost every job I applied for.

I guess H doesn't teach reading comprehension anymore. The paper discounted data from t14's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"A woman who competes with men lacks ambition."

Marilyn Monroe.

Lol!!
You forgot to quote Coco Chanel

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I know this is a women majority forum but please be accurate otherwise it makes you look biased and dim-witted.

Lower-class men in the article are shown to have a similar magnitude disadvantage as their SES peer women just as upper class women do with respect to upper class men.

And you wonder why Trump won? lower class men according to the HBR review had the worst call back rate by far of the four groups.

If I made a thread with the title saying "lower class women from TTT schools have 6x the callback advantage that lower class men do", many would disagree with the data.

Anyways, the moral of the story is - don't go to TTT law schools.

That said, I would never interview or hire an 'upper class' person that went to a TTT. I would immediately question why didn't go to a t14 if not t10.

I would not have the same question with a lower class man or woman.

You mention that's why Trump won. The problem is that law firms still won't work with lower class men. Trump won't change that. As a matter of fact, it may get worse. People like to blame dems for Hillary's "deplorable" remark, but having practiced at both a large law firm and been an investment banker, no one hates and disrespects poor white people more than upper class white people - conservatives included! They are merely a means to an end. I was fascinated by it.

Can you go into greater detail? This sounds very interesting