Effectively negotiating away the Gender Pay Gap.

Many studies have shown that women don't tend to negotiate staring salaries, raises and promotions as much or as well as men do, and that this gap produces cumulative salary differences that can cost women well into six figures after just a few decades of work. One woman's seminars training women to negotiate effectively are now reaching thousands, with positive results. Her advice?

"Women learn never to name a salary figure first, and to provide a range, not a number, if they’re pressed about it. They are coached not to offer up a figure from their last job, unless explicitly asked. The use of terms like “initial offer” — it’s not final! — is pounded into them. And, perhaps most important, they learn never, ever, to say yes to an offer immediately." To avoid the unique risks that women face of being branded as pushy or aggressive, she counsels them to smile, and to be warm and friendly while being firm.

Want to make a difference in 2013? Make sure your friends and family get this training. They will thank you for their greater self esteem and pay checks. Follow on Twitter: @UpsideDownBook

The End of Men?

David Brooks, conservative columnist at The New York Times, praises Hanna Rosin’s new book. The End of Men? Hardly. Brooks and Rosin’s selective exclusion of obvious data is suspicious, and risks encouraging those who say we live in a gender blind society. Some say women are doing fine, it is boys who need help, so we can abandon efforts to help women succeed.

Looking first at the data cited by Brooks or Rosin: “Twelve out of the 15 fastest-growing professions are dominated by women.” Those jobs are in service sectors and health care, and are not generally high paying. Men “stink” at communicating “smoothly”? That would explain why men constitute 83% of Congress and 77% of state legislatures – the later percentage having stayed flat for the past dozen years. Women are “pioneering” hook up culture? Even a cursory look at popular culture strongly suggests that men still regard women as sex objects and that young women still regard sex primarily as a vehicle to please men.

Looking at some key data from my recent book Upside Down: The Paradoxes of Gender in the New Century (www.upsidedownbook.NET), shows that that since the dawn of the new century women’s progress has stalled. Women’s median income as percentage of men’s? Flat The pay gap between men and women with four-year degrees? Increased. Women’s percentage of directors of large corporations and of partners in large law firms? Flat. The extent of occupational gender segregation in various professions dominated by one gender? Unchanged. Women’s representation in statewide elective offices and as mayors of large and medium sized cities? Down.

Are women more adaptable than men? Perhaps, but as the subordinate gender in a patriarchal world, of course they have to be to make any progress at all. But a wealth of data shows that women in developed nations are less happy than they were forty years ago, both absolutely and compared to men. We need to change that.

How Republicans will support some women at their convention better than Democrats.

Despite all the complaints about the Republican War on Women – efforts to restrict reproductive choice and healthcare, inhibit discrimination lawsuits and roll back protections from violence – there is at least one way in which Republicans are much more supportive of a segment of women in the workforce. You guessed it. In strip clubs, Republicans outspend Democrats at national conventions 3 to 1. Statistics on comparative spending on prostitutes are harder to find.

Why Pussy Riot matters.

In the middle of a summer rife with the insults of a Presidential campaign and punctuated by the excitement of a quadrennial international sports festival in London, the fate of three young women on trial in Moscow probably signals more about the future of Russia than who wins the U.S. Presidency or the Olympic medals count. In an act of inspired political satire, these three women, calling themselves Pussy Riot, gave an impromptu performance at a Russian Orthodox Cathedral in which they beseeched the Virgin Mary to rid Russia of President Putin. That their request included some obscenities further inflamed the government's argument that the performance amounted to religious hate speech.

Madonna, Sting and Bjork are among those who have protested the government's request that the members of Pussy Riot spend three years in jail for "hooliganism." The case demonstrates how Putin, a former KGB (secret police) official in the atheistic USSR, is able to use the Church to his advantage. Even more importantly, the case shows how activist women are reviled in Russia, and gender equality is not on the radar. The greatest risk from the trial is that it may encourage those committed to change to leave Russia and join the world's political refugees living in exile because of the persecution they face from oppressive governments at home. The verdict on Pussy Riot and Russia will be released on August 17.

Have we outgrown maternity leave?

The latest view of work/life balance for mothers is that maternity leave is an outmoded institution for high achievers with schedule flexibility. CEOs now boast of taking just two weeks off to recover from birth and to bond with the baby. Is maternity leave to be only for those with lowered career aspirations?

Some of these high flying mothers may be able work from home part of the work week, and thus have the baby close at hand for some bonding time. But others may not, and their children may be primarily in the care of a succession of nannies. I have a bias about this because I work directly with foster children, many of whom have attachment disorders caused by not having an available parental figure with whom they could bond during the critical period for this - 6 to 36 months of age. These emotionally crippling disorders often cannot be repaired.

Many working mothers in low wage jobs can't afford to take maternity leave. California has led efforts to remedy this with a family leave program financed by payroll deductions. But what will be the consequences of female role models creating the expectation that maternity leave - a right women fought so hard to attain - is passé?

The unavailability of part time work affects us all.

The Atlantic’s widely read July 2012 cover story, Why Women Still Can’t Have It All, observed that workplace structures make it almost impossible for mothers to have high pressure, long hours careers. Author Anne-Marie Slaughter wryly noted that, “In Washington, ‘leaving to spend time with your family,’ is a euphemism for being fired” for men, but is often the truth for women. Writer Anand Giridharadas responded that America may actually be worse off for being governed and managed by “single-minded, obsessive, fierce, hurried … self-serving [and] less-than-empathetic” alpha career types who largely “ignore their families.” He rightly wondered what biases affect policymakers who “have prioritized the making of social policy over their own families.”

Biden's mistake?

Much has been made of Vice-President Joe Biden's speaking out of turn – at length – in announcing his support of gay marriage, and how that "forced" President Obama to proclaim his support. In spite of Biden's reputation for uncontrolled discourse, that is almost never how things are done at that level. In fact, Biden was not alone among top administration officials making this position public. His and others' alleged errors were almost certainly trial balloons released to soften the President's inevitable statement on the subject, planned for sometime in the coming weeks. This both lessened the shock to voters still uncomfortable with gay marriage and gave the President some cover as he made this move to energize avid supporters of gay marriage and their substantial wealth to work for his re-election. The challenge was to make the gains from this shift outweigh any losses from more conservative potential supporters. He seems to have convinced two-thirds of voters that political gain was his main reason for announcing the switch.

Except for black voters, those strongly and steadfastly opposed to gay marriage are not likely to vote for Obama anyway. His problem in announcing his support was to avoid alienating those who view gay marriage as immoral, but possibly tolerable, because they feel compelled to accept – or at least not reject – the actions of gay friends or relatives. So the Biden scenario likely was calculated to help those with reservations about gay marriage see the President's predicament as similar to their own. In this view, Obama's thinking evolved because of the actions and prodding of friends, as he said in his statement. And, he spoke about it only because someone else forced his hand.

Make no mistake, Obama took a high road in finally coming out on this politically charged issue that some think cost John Kerry the Presidency in 2004. But few Presidential policy positions or their timing in a election year are an accident, despite Biden's apology and Obama's chastisement of his number two. The White House apparently decided that public sentiment has finally evolved to the requisite threshold. (But see this caution.) So any praise due also should go to the millions of Americans who contributed to that change.

[Note: why do I use NY Times' articles here and in the book? Two reasons: They are fact checked and corrections always posted if found later. Unlike most other news sources, the Times provides permanent links that will not expire.]

Making the truth believable

Author Tracy Kidder said “I think that the nonfiction writer’s fundamental job is to make what is true believable.” I agree. In nonfiction that relies on the anecdotal stories of composite characters, I immediately distrust the expansion of “facts” to a truth about a larger universe. I need to know that the author relied on verifiable data or peer reviewed studies, and sometimes I want to see the raw data myself so I can draw my own conclusions.

Questions or corrections only

Please note them in the comments section of this post, including any errors found in the manuscript. Corrections will be made and acknowledged in future editions of the book, so please include your name if you want an acknowledgement. In print editions of the book, please include a page number. In eReader editions, please included the phrase of at least ten words surrounding the error.
To express an opinion about the book, please comment at amazon.com.