Tuesday, July 25, 2006

We used to hire women, but not any more

I work for an American IT company, but I am based in London. There are very few women where I work. There are not that many women in IT anyway, but in this company, the lack of women is even more pronounced.

A few years ago there was an incident involving a female employee, an American I believe. She used to go around sexually taunting men in the office. One day, she went up to one of her male colleagues and said "You've got nice tits". He, rather nonplussed, replied "Er...Yes, they're bigger than yours". She sued the company for sexual harassment. The company contested it. There was an expensive and protracted court-case. I'm not sure what the legal outcome was. However, the company now has an unofficial policy of never hiring women. The perception is that they are too expensive and they cause too much trouble. It's easier and cheaper just to hire a man.

A company that used to employ women on an equal basis with men, now does not hire women at all. Another glorious victory for feminism. In case you're reading this, feminists, this kind of thing is known as 'the law of unintended consequences', or 'policy blowback'. Although it happens all the time, the concept doesn't seem to enter the feminist universe. Maybe it's an evil male language-game put there to silence women's voices.

If any feminists came to the company and saw how few women were working there, what do you think they would say? "Typical patriarchal-capitalist Old Boy Network, sexual discrimination, denying women opportunities, keeping all the jobs for themselves, misogynist conspiracy, blah, blah, blah".

No. We used to hire women, but not any more. Because of feminism, they are just too much trouble.

7 comments:

ddumping said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

Anonymous said...

My Alpha Unit, aka. Second Wife worked for a major US Law firm in Labor Law. You would be stunned at how many Women make a career of entrapment of Corporate Officers to get a big settlement for Sexual harrassment. It happened at an eCommerce Company I worked at in 2000. Turns out that the Female employee was using her Maiden Name.

She had filed harrassment complaints at 8 previous employers. She threw up her Dress and showed her see through Thong panties to our CTO. And then claimed Sexual Harrassment.

You would be stunned if you realized how much Legal expense and HR time is spent on this nonsense.

Khankrumthebulgar

expat said...

I've stopped taking on female clients in my web software development business. I have had too many bad experiences where they use emotional manipulation in the working relationship. They are far worse than men at trying to push the boundaries to see what extra work they get out of me free of charge. It's this sense of entitlement.

I have procedures where I carefully work out specs with clients before I start work on a project. Any changes, I require the details in writing before setting to. My male clients comply with this with no problem. EVERY female client has struggled to work with me to produce a logical spec -- and then they have change their minds back and for so much, it's been a disaster.

I know my limitations -- and I have realised that I just can't work successfully with female clients.

It's not that I don't like women. I enjoy female company ... but I'm happy for my competitors to have them as clients ...

bdfytoday said...

I say briefly: Best! Useful information. Good job guys.
»

Anti Misandry said...

I recall one place i worked for where i had a female boss and supervisor.

The short of it comes down to the fact that my g/f was sacked for creating a syndicate against another employee (which she hadn't - she was simply complaining).
I complained to my supervisor who then went to the boss and explained my complaint. She returned, thinking I hadn't seen her talking to the boss, and asked if she could scrounge a cigarette from me. I lied, realising what was coming, and so she asked me to follow her to the office...where I was promptly sacked for having dared to suggest they had broken the law by sacking my g/f in the manner which they had.
We took it to a solicitor, and the boss called us both in for a 'quick chat'. During the 'chat', she (the boss) spent a huge amount of her resources trying to convince my g/f that she should break up with me. I was pretty disgusted that this professional person would resort to emotional warefare rather than sticking to the facts.
As it was, we didn't split (well, not until many years later for entirely unrelated reasons) as both my g/f and I saw straight through the manipulation of what this woman was all about.
I saw her a few years later in a clothes store. She was behind me in a queue at the cashier's desk. She tried to converse with me, asking how the kids were and my g/f. Initially I didn't recognise her (and had no interest at that time with gender issues). Once she reminded me of who she was, my facial expression and manners dropped quicker than her undies when discussing promotion with her superiors.
I simply stated "Oh, yeah.. I do remember you, now... bye" and promptly walked off muttering about what a bitch she was.
I saw not too long after - oddly enough, she seemed less inclined to speak with me this time :)

Heretic said...

Dear anti-misandry,
The case you describe is bad, but not surprising. Once you get wise to these methods, it's surprising how common they are. A lot of women have nothing else to use except emotional warfare. They learn it during adolescence. Your g/f was obviously a lot smarter than my ex, who fell straight into the trap, and we split. If you piss feminists off, they will attack your personal life, especially your relationships with other women, your reputation and your mental health. This is how they operate. One of the most important things men can do is to get wise to how much women use emotional manipulation. It is their weapon of choice.

Dave said...

As an entrepreneur of a very small company I simply can't afford to hire a woman. I should say any more women.
Obviously the maternity leave is an issue but there are other massive risks in hiring a woman.

Hiring anyone presents risks. It is just that women present unacceptable and unnecessary risks.

The risk of a false sexual harassment claim. Although this is not common, this is common enough and the impact is devastating on a small business. That risk goes away with men. And I am simply far too busy in my 60 - 70 hour week, to walk on egg shells looking over my back at some one I am paying to work.

The catty, emotional, gossip crap that goes on daily with most women means most are not employable for a small professional company. Most are simply incompatible with a small professional company culture, although that may not be apparent until after you have hired them.

I need people that can do almost everything. And do it effectively. That's the reality of a small business. Men are either capable and willing to do this or they are not. I can only think of one woman who was willing to do this. All the others that had the capacity to do this, were too self entitled.

Most women aren't interested in working in my industry to start with. So it is male dominated to start with. Due to political correctness in this industry, the vast majority of women know that they can get a good paying job doing less work and more perks than males because these companies want to be seen to be employing females. Hence they don't want to take a higher risk job with a small company even though they have less commitments than males who are willing to take risks.

So there are less female candidates to begin with. There is simply a much smaller pool of them that have anything like the skills of the male candidates. However the ones that exist are of less value and much higher risk.

There would be about 1 in 500 that would even be worth considering.
I was interviewing one yesterday and in dawned on me during the interview that I was wasting my time. I think it was while she talked about her inability to motivate others and the tasks that she didn't enjoy doing which were vital for the role she was applying for.

If I had to pick one word why not to hire any more women it would be 'entitlement'. Their sense of entitlement presents far too much risk.

In summary, it is simply far too risky to hire a feminised woman. A full blown feminist would be suicide for a small company.