I'd like to tell Sheryl Sandberg to STFU.

[Anonymous]

sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

[Anonymous]

Thank you!

And the same to tge next rich person who writes a book for profit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow OP. I feel the same way about her. She acts like she's had it hard. Well, her father was a doctor and they grew up very well off. She has no idea what most of us go through trying to pay for college when we're middle class (parents make "too much" for aid but can't pay a dime to help) and we all don't have fancy jobs.

Her telling women to "lean in" is so full of doo doo. I feel bad her DH died, but she acts like she's the only one in the world who has experienced loss.

All I can saw is "EWW: and I thought I was the only one. You made my day OP.

Didn't she have an amazing mentor who basically gave her the golden kiss and then everything was handed to her? Of course she had to work hard, but some of us never even get that "in" and are stuck with never getting a chance or battling for every position, promotion, etc.

larry summers.

it doesn't get much more connected than that as a mentor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

What is with the references to her religion? This is the second post. Thankfully the first was deleted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

What is with the references to her religion? This is the second post. Thankfully the first was deleted.

jewish people have a very strong network through their ethnicity/religion that others might not be able to tap. you are very naive if you don't know about this.

note, this isn't just about jewish people. it would be about any ethnicity that has a tight knit networking relationship.

amy chua talks about how this is one aspect of successful minorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

What is with the references to her religion? This is the second post. Thankfully the first was deleted.

jewish people have a very strong network through their ethnicity/religion that others might not be able to tap. you are very naive if you don't know about this.

note, this isn't just about jewish people. it would be about any ethnicity that has a tight knit networking relationship.

amy chua talks about how this is one aspect of successful minorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

What is with the references to her religion? This is the second post. Thankfully the first was deleted.

jewish people have a very strong network through their ethnicity/religion that others might not be able to tap. you are very naive if you don't know about this.

note, this isn't just about jewish people. it would be about any ethnicity that has a tight knit networking relationship.

amy chua talks about how this is one aspect of successful minorities.

go ahead and roll your eyes at me. this board is about unvarnished truths so that we can all help each other out. but if you want to day dream about being able to follow sandberg's path, more power to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

What is with the references to her religion? This is the second post. Thankfully the first was deleted.

jewish people have a very strong network through their ethnicity/religion that others might not be able to tap. you are very naive if you don't know about this.

note, this isn't just about jewish people. it would be about any ethnicity that has a tight knit networking relationship.

amy chua talks about how this is one aspect of successful minorities.

go ahead and roll your eyes at me. this board is about unvarnished truths so that we can all help each other out. but if you want to day dream about being able to follow sandberg's path, more power to you.

I'll keep day dreaming before becoming a racist like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow OP. I feel the same way about her. She acts like she's had it hard. Well, her father was a doctor and they grew up very well off. She has no idea what most of us go through trying to pay for college when we're middle class (parents make "too much" for aid but can't pay a dime to help) and we all don't have fancy jobs.

Her telling women to "lean in" is so full of doo doo. I feel bad her DH died, but she acts like she's the only one in the world who has experienced loss.

All I can saw is "EWW: and I thought I was the only one. You made my day OP.

Didn't she have an amazing mentor who basically gave her the golden kiss and then everything was handed to her? Of course she had to work hard, but some of us never even get that "in" and are stuck with never getting a chance or battling for every position, promotion, etc.

larry summers.

it doesn't get much more connected than that as a mentor.

and work for Facebook, one of the leading supporters of mass immigration, claiming lack of US talent.

more privilege saying screw you to low skilled women. good example of what is wrong in US today, elite MBA privilege, from leading US business school, making money off temporary guest workers who are shipped back to their home countries after 3 years of service.

Facebook is legally certified as ‘H-1B visa-dependent’, reports Reuters, citing Labor Department filings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love her.

I didn't agree with every word of Lean In, but I think the book did a lot to open up the public dialogue about the challenges women face in the workplace. I'm grateful for the conversations it started around me with both male colleagues and female friends.

The organization related to the book does a lot of good educational material like the McKinsey study that shine a spotlight on these issues.

I think the loss of her husband is devastatingly terrible and, regardless of her privilege, I found it admirable that she spoke so publicly about it throughout the grieving process - and now in a book just 2 years later. I've learned a lot from the book and her posts that has helped me better support grieving friends.

So yeah, she's not perfect and sometimes out-of-touch, but I think she's a pretty impressive person that's done some good in the world.

FWIW, it's not like she started these conversations or was the first to give voice to them. But her position probably did give broader voice to these conversations. At the same time, whatever her personal relationship with him, Larry Summers is not a woman's advocate and it's inexcusable for her not to discuss it. The comments he made about women in science were made in a room where the MIT professor who was the first person to study workplace inequality by doing things like measuring the size of offices. She has benefited tremendously from the work that her "mentor" denigrated publicly.

But my bigger beef with her, and I think it's what bothers many, is that her entire brand of feminism is a form of corporate apology. She tells people to pushback against workplace culture, but she doesn't really suggest ways to truly change it. I think Anne Marie Slaughter's book (which also reflects a certain privilege) provides a valuable counterbalance to Sandberg's perspective.

FWIW, I'm a woman who works in tech. I've seen Sandberg speak at the biggest annual conference for women in tech, Grace Hopper Conference, and she comes across as a fool sitting on the stage with women who have fought extreme bias and also worked to transform culture the hard way. This was before her DH died, and I do understand she's changed her thinking a bit. But it felt at the time like she was happy to be given credit for others' hard work in the trenches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

What is with the references to her religion? This is the second post. Thankfully the first was deleted.

jewish people have a very strong network through their ethnicity/religion that others might not be able to tap. you are very naive if you don't know about this.

note, this isn't just about jewish people. it would be about any ethnicity that has a tight knit networking relationship.

amy chua talks about how this is one aspect of successful minorities.

go ahead and roll your eyes at me. this board is about unvarnished truths so that we can all help each other out. but if you want to day dream about being able to follow sandberg's path, more power to you.

I'll keep day dreaming before becoming a racist like you.

Np here and the child of immigrants. That's not rascist. It's a pretty basic fact - immigrants have communities that support each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love her.

I didn't agree with every word of Lean In, but I think the book did a lot to open up the public dialogue about the challenges women face in the workplace. I'm grateful for the conversations it started around me with both male colleagues and female friends.

The organization related to the book does a lot of good educational material like the McKinsey study that shine a spotlight on these issues.

I think the loss of her husband is devastatingly terrible and, regardless of her privilege, I found it admirable that she spoke so publicly about it throughout the grieving process - and now in a book just 2 years later. I've learned a lot from the book and her posts that has helped me better support grieving friends.

So yeah, she's not perfect and sometimes out-of-touch, but I think she's a pretty impressive person that's done some good in the world.

FWIW, it's not like she started these conversations or was the first to give voice to them. But her position probably did give broader voice to these conversations. At the same time, whatever her personal relationship with him, Larry Summers is not a woman's advocate and it's inexcusable for her not to discuss it. The comments he made about women in science were made in a room where the MIT professor who was the first person to study workplace inequality by doing things like measuring the size of offices. She has benefited tremendously from the work that her "mentor" denigrated publicly.

But my bigger beef with her, and I think it's what bothers many, is that her entire brand of feminism is a form of corporate apology. She tells people to pushback against workplace culture, but she doesn't really suggest ways to truly change it. I think Anne Marie Slaughter's book (which also reflects a certain privilege) provides a valuable counterbalance to Sandberg's perspective.

FWIW, I'm a woman who works in tech. I've seen Sandberg speak at the biggest annual conference for women in tech, Grace Hopper Conference, and she comes across as a fool sitting on the stage with women who have fought extreme bias and also worked to transform culture the hard way. This was before her DH died, and I do understand she's changed her thinking a bit. But it felt at the time like she was happy to be given credit for others' hard work in the trenches.

the women i know that work in west coast tech who are on the engineering side of things HATE sandberg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love her.

I didn't agree with every word of Lean In, but I think the book did a lot to open up the public dialogue about the challenges women face in the workplace. I'm grateful for the conversations it started around me with both male colleagues and female friends.

The organization related to the book does a lot of good educational material like the McKinsey study that shine a spotlight on these issues.

I think the loss of her husband is devastatingly terrible and, regardless of her privilege, I found it admirable that she spoke so publicly about it throughout the grieving process - and now in a book just 2 years later. I've learned a lot from the book and her posts that has helped me better support grieving friends.

So yeah, she's not perfect and sometimes out-of-touch, but I think she's a pretty impressive person that's done some good in the world.

FWIW, it's not like she started these conversations or was the first to give voice to them. But her position probably did give broader voice to these conversations. At the same time, whatever her personal relationship with him, Larry Summers is not a woman's advocate and it's inexcusable for her not to discuss it. The comments he made about women in science were made in a room where the MIT professor who was the first person to study workplace inequality by doing things like measuring the size of offices. She has benefited tremendously from the work that her "mentor" denigrated publicly.

But my bigger beef with her, and I think it's what bothers many, is that her entire brand of feminism is a form of corporate apology. She tells people to pushback against workplace culture, but she doesn't really suggest ways to truly change it. I think Anne Marie Slaughter's book (which also reflects a certain privilege) provides a valuable counterbalance to Sandberg's perspective.

FWIW, I'm a woman who works in tech. I've seen Sandberg speak at the biggest annual conference for women in tech, Grace Hopper Conference, and she comes across as a fool sitting on the stage with women who have fought extreme bias and also worked to transform culture the hard way. This was before her DH died, and I do understand she's changed her thinking a bit. But it felt at the time like she was happy to be given credit for others' hard work in the trenches.

she really is textbook example of Liberal Elite. Highly educated, wealthy, out of touch with average american. How she changed after experiencing adversity tells the story of many in her position of privilege. They always think they know better than other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:sandberg's advice is not very applicable to non elite school women. especially non elite school non-jewish women.

without H - > HBS -> McKinsey -> Larry Summer's protege she doesn't get on the right path to give her the opportunities she needs for the flexibility/lifestyle she has.

Sandberg's book has value for young women in HS or in college who are on those types of traintracks.

It is wholly inappropriate for your typical state school grad to read.

What is with the references to her religion? This is the second post. Thankfully the first was deleted.

jewish people have a very strong network through their ethnicity/religion that others might not be able to tap. you are very naive if you don't know about this.

note, this isn't just about jewish people. it would be about any ethnicity that has a tight knit networking relationship.

amy chua talks about how this is one aspect of successful minorities.

go ahead and roll your eyes at me. this board is about unvarnished truths so that we can all help each other out. but if you want to day dream about being able to follow sandberg's path, more power to you.

I'll keep day dreaming before becoming a racist like you.

NP. It really was not racist. Jewish religious and cultural institutions invest a ton in networking. I'm not saying it's some Elders of Zion cabal, but there is a middle way between conspiracy theories and your feigned obliviousness.

[Anonymous]

This will probably should bad, but to be honest, I give her a bit of side-eye for dating less than a year after her husband died. Her kids were young, I just can't see having the bandwidth for that on top of her job and her kids. There's a lot to be said for getting through a full year, and the grief that comes with anniversaries and such. I lost my mom young, maybe that's why it bugs me.