"lukne" (laurann{at}sprintmail.com) writes:
> Much of the press coverage simply reinforced the gender stereotyping
> evident in Harvard University president Lawrence Summers' comments.

Sure: He was *right*. Thats what has the Festering Femmeroids' panties
in a bunch.

> Readers of the New York Times, for instance, learned interesting -- but
> irrelevant -- facts, such as the existence of sex differences in green
> spoon worms. But those who still don't understand why the Summers
> controversy represents a setback for women's equality,

ROTFLMAO ! Yeah, " women's equality " is best served by NOT testing
women the same way that men are tested in such positions:

By *positive results*.

She didn't provide, so she doesn't... stay. Because she *didn't earn
it*...

> need look no
> further than the media's coverage of Carly Fiorina's dismissal as CEO
> of Hewlett-Packard last week, which more than anything else linked her
> firing to the fact that she is female.

No proof offered ? Claptrap claim fails.

> USA Today's headline screamed "Did Glass Ceiling Just Slam Down?" The
> paper quoted an industry analyst who asserted that if Fiorina had
> succeeded in her position, it could have "opened wide the doors for
> women, but now any board director on the fence has an excuse to not
> take the chance."

Operative words "... IF Fiorina had succeeded... "

Clear *proof that she... FAILED*.

Thus, as with any male CEO who failed, she got the well earned boot.

Thats... equality.

" You're a liberated woman. Learn to *lose* ! " Danny DeVito, " Other
People's Money ".

> Did I miss the coverage of how board directors were
> going to think twice about hiring male CEOs after Kenneth Lay, Gerald
> Levin, Michael Eisner and countless other men were fired from their CEO
> jobs?

Why ? Do they have a *100%* failure rate ?

No, so this " question " is a misandrist and victimist Straw Woman.
Change her diapers on your own time and furniture.

> USA Today further reported that "the stock of the eight Fortune 500
> companies run by women rose 2.2% in 2004 vs. 9% in all S&P 500 stocks."

Wow, eight companies. What an amazingly wide sample, thus obviating
any sample bias, or error weighting.

Uh, no, not.

> It is gimmicky, and statistically meaningless, to compare the stock
> earnings of eight companies with the stock earnings of 500 companies.

Then, this extremely *stupid* writer ought NOT to have displayed her
own " gimmicky " nature. Since " gimmicky " writers
tend to do so with
lies, its safe to take none of their claims seriously. Due to *their*
gimmicks.

> I'm just a girl, but even I know that that sample is skewed. When male
> CEOs preside over low stock earnings, nobody raises gender issues, nor
> do their failures have broader implications for other male leaders.

Indeed.

> If only this view had been limited to one newspaper. The Los Angeles
> Times referred to Fiorina as the "high-gloss chief executive," and the
> New York Times informed readers that management specialists say "it is
> naive to pretend that Ms. Fiorina's downfall will not have an impact on
> women's aspirations."

Of course: The Feminist NYTimes is loath to admit that a woman can
fail, without it having anything to do with " women's progress ".

So, as with this stupid and " gimmicky " writer, they create another
Feminist Straw Woman, one that bears no relation to the... facts.

> That 20 percent of positions in science, engineering and technology
> development are held by women, as noted in the New Republic, proves
> nothing but that 20 percent of those positions are held by women.

It also proves that men out perform women at this area, 4-1.

> As any sixth-grade science student knows, the effect is the not the
> cause.

One presumes that the " gimmicky " idiot who wrote this cowshit meant
to type in " case " as the final word in that sentence. Oh well, it
just shows how " gimmicky " writers equals poor writers.

> So one would hope that university presidents, journalists and
> scientists would know better than to equate the two.

One would, if one was a man hating sexist " gimmicky " idiot.

> Consider that not so long ago, the prospect of a female president or
> secretary of state was unthinkable. Now we're up to two female
> secretaries of state, and Sen. Hillary Clinton is a leading contender
> for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008. As has been widely
> noted, women were once believed to be inferior musicians -- until
> orchestras began blind auditions behind a screen, hiding the gender of
> the musician.

No proof offered ? Claim fails.

> Until they can cite a supporting body of evidence, Summers and others
> shouldn't make comments that disparage all women. If you aren't
> convinced, replace the word "Jew" or "black" for
"woman" in the
> coverage of Fiorina.

Why ? She was bounced for being a lousy CEO. If she were a black
man, and was a lousy CEO, she'd still be fired for proper cause.

But, Festering Femmeroids like to try to hoist their coat-tails
unto actual cases of civil rights, which Feminism has AbZero to
do with.

> Summers' defenders have offered some alternative explanations to
> genetics for the dearth of women in science, such as discrimination
> that leads to stereotyping about women's abilities and the lack of
> adequate child care, which would allow women to pursue careers while
> raising children.

And, studies such as the one about UK female med students, showing
that 80% of them never intend to work full time, speak mightily
and accurately as to women " discriminating " agsinst *themselves*,
when they overwhelmingly choose home over work.

Don't work full time, don't expect full time pay, or promotions.

> And in more rigorous careers such as science, many
> women are unable or unwilling to commit to the years of education and
> training that are required to reach the top echelons because of their
> family obligations.

Thanks for proving Mr. Summers... RIGHT. 

> With all these other factors indisputably
> contributing to the dearth of women in the sciences and at the higher
> levels of other professions, the desire of Summers and his supporters
> to tie the phenomenon to an inherent lack of ability is perplexing.

Only to " gimmicky " idiots...

> One irony in all this is that HP's board, which watched closely as a
> woman failed to run the company effectively, has included a woman on
> its shortlist of internal candidates to take over where Fiorina left
> off. If this well-established company is able to separate Fiorina's
> performance from her gender, then is it too much to expect the media
> and the analysts they quote?

Wah wah wah. When the media focuses on femaleness, when trying to
create false praise, you don't hear of any Feminists complaining.

" Turn about is fair play ". Old English proverb.

" You're a liberated woman. Learn to *lose* ! " Danny DeVito, " Other
People's Money ".

> Hewlett-Packard apparently knows that many factors account for
> Fiorina's failure that have nothing to do with her genetics. She was
> the first outsider brought in to run an insular company that was
> accustomed to doing everything the "HP way," and she has
been described
> as a cultural mismatch. She was bold and charismatic but by most
> accounts better at the big picture than at day-to-day management.

Yet, still a.... FAILURE.

> Fiorina's situation recalls that of Steve Case when he became chairman
> of AOL Time Warner after orchestrating the disastrous merger with AOL.
> But when Case was pushed out, nobody attributed it to his gender.

Of course: There was no upside to such a spin by misandrous Feminists.

> And
> when Gerald Levin -- the other half of the duo who orchestrated the
> merger -- was fired, he was quickly replaced by another man, and nary
> was a word mentioned about men's inherent inability to run major
> corporations.

Ibid.

> Equality also exists when a female CEO loses her job for bad
> performance and it is treated the same way as a male CEO who loses his
> job for bad performance. We clearly still have a long way to go.

Indeed; The primary culprits are *Feminist " gimmicky " idiots*.

Take it up with them. So, post this claptrap on soc.feminism.

Its clearly off topic on soc.MEN.

Idiot. Next.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/9/05 8:08:53 PM ---