General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy Women Are Bullies At Work
Woman-on-woman harassment is on the rise. Thirty-five percent of Americans reported being bullied at work, according to a 2010 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute. Female bullies more frequently engaged in under-the-radar behaviors such as sabotage (53.7 percent of female vs. 39.9 percent of male bullies) and abuse of authority (50.2 percent vs. 44.7 percent), as compared to the more observable form of verbal abuse engaged in by more male than female bullies, at 57.5 and 47.1 percents, respectively.
http://www.businessinsider.com/women-are-bullies-at-work-2013-6
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)for men to be in power and for men to abuse power and for men to be bullies.
monmouth3
(3,871 posts)HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)
monmouth3
(3,871 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)then- try and rat each other out for stabbing me in the back. It was funny, except they often wasted so much time they got very little done. But my boss liked them, even if they never pulled their weight.
The women I managed, somehow always just let me know what was going on and if they had problems or needed help, and did their share + 30% compared to the average guys output. Go figure.
Orrex
(63,203 posts)I've seen a wide range of behaviors along these lines, and it's my experience men and women are equally adept at working the system to their own benefit.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)palling around and banding against "the girl". Very open with schemes and criticism, that everyone was ratting out their mutiny (including my bosses and other reports) but they didn't realize that they were also stabbing each others' backs too.
I've had run ins with jerks of both sexes for sure, but these guys made it clear they didn't like a woman telling them what to do from day one.
Orrex
(63,203 posts)I've never experienced the "ganged up on" thing, but I absolutely don't doubt that it happens exactly as you've described.
One surprising (though admittedly anecdotal) trend that I've noticed is that women (in my 25+ years in the workforce) are overwhelmingly more likely to engage in workplace-inappropriate conversation, speaking unambiguously about that guy's butt or that woman's breasts.
Not sure what explains that, exactly, and it doesn't really come across as bullying per se, but it's notable all the same.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I work,now, in an industry dominated by men ... though I do have a lot of friends I will say: working with and for women was GREAT!
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)almost as if they were individuals... 
Squinch
(50,949 posts)"I've worked for both black and white people. Give me a white person any time. The black people...ugh."
"I've worked for both gay and straight people. Give me a straight person any time. The gays...ugh."
"I've worked for Christians and Jews. Give me a Christian any time. The Jews...ugh."
Seems pretty disgustingly bigoted, doesn't it? See the problem there?
Drale
(7,932 posts)"They have been kept down by the man"? Bullshit, no one no matter their gender should be allowed to bully another person.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)That's pretty radical. Let me try: so, Drale, in your opinion it's OK for men to bully all their employees because they are men? And to make soup out of small children? Huh? Bullshit! No one, no matter their gender should be allowed to make soup out of small children!
Interesting! We can just put any old words into each other's mouths we want to! 
snooper2
(30,151 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Woman-on-woman conflict is rife at my job. Settling scores and demeaning words are a daily occurrence.
My women bosses and I get along well. The other young women who were hired with me, not so much. They seem to hate each other.
RobinA
(9,888 posts)I work in a medical situation, but I am not medical myself. I am a female. These nurses (female) treat each other horribly. The male nurses not so much, although there are fewer of them. I have not been bullied much by bosses, but when I have it has been by females. Not all females have been bully bosses, but all bully bosses were female. Generally I'd pick a male boss over a female, all things being equal. I generally feel that a mixed situation is the best. Keeps the worst characteristics of both genders under control.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)In all male groups, you get the alpha male shit too. Mixed is best.
My boss and my team are women; unless someone is brought in, I'm usually the only guy. So this works out well.
I'm a nurse (female)and we have an awesome crew, a variety of ages a few males and very little backstabbing. We have one or two bitter persons, but we try to be supportive and understand what's beneath their dysfunction, rather than talk shit, or allow them to indulge in toxic behavior--we don't get all of it, but we get most of it.
Here's what I notice; male or female, it only takes one or two toxic individuals to pollute a work place culture. A good workplace will have interventions in place for that. (Usually a good union as well)
I don't see much gender difference in the handling of power positions. I work in a female dominated profession, but I've had male and female managers. I don't get the gender difference thing.
tridim
(45,358 posts)It's lot like high school. I just try to ignore it, but damn... That stuff must suck to deal with every day.
My #1 office rule, don't gossip. Ever.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)you are participating in gossiping by listening to her.
tridim
(45,358 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)She's ancient. She still wears long nails and you can hear the click click click of nail on keyboard.
Total troublemaker, complete gossip, but you can't help but listen! 
antigone382
(3,682 posts)The report it references actually found about twice as high a rate of male bullies as female bullies, overall. That seems like the big story to me...why isn't it discussed at all?
Personally, I don't think either gender is intrinsically more likely to bully. I think there are social and cultural factors that allow different types of bullying at different rates for both genders
(I'll note given what we are learning about the diversity of gender expressions, I really don't like using the word "both," but given that the study assumes a gender binary I will go along with its terminology.)
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)They may also be trying too hard to prove to THEIR bosses that they can be tough .
The most demanding boss I had was a women. We were told more than once, that WE reflected on HER performance reviews and we would be under a microscope (by her).
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"Many times, women who rise through the ranks have "scores to settle", and may be harsher bosses. They may also be trying too hard to prove to THEIR bosses that they can be tough..."
Seems to me that would apply to either gender. And in my own anecdotal experience, it does indeed.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)and will attract scrutiny.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)need to point out that women do it, and you felt the need to hypothesize that it is because the women "have scores to settle."
In your theory, do the men who do it have scores to settle?
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)so i just shut the door.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Nasty, mean and demeaning co-workers with petty jealousy issues. I finally left one of my jobs because of it. The other - I just took a later lunch, and avoided them as much as I could. To be fair, my boss at that job was a woman who hated the bullies as much as I did. We did our jobs and kept to ourselves, which just made them worse. I never understood what they thought they would accomplish with this crappy behavior. They only made themselves look bad. I'm still pretty wary of female co-workers.
ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)And did you see 'follow the leader' type behavior or just a perceived gendered dysfunction? As I posted up thread, I work with mostly great people mostly women, but I also work at a top hospital with a good union and continuing education.
One free workshop presented every year is 'how to deal with difficult co-workers' when I went, nurses generally complained about doctors. I saw what generated complaints was a lot of poor communication (doctors will complain about nurses as well)
Some of this has been worked on and corrected with computerized orders and changed language. Indeed, one legitimate criteria for an ICU transfer is based on a nursing judgement (obviously it's not the only criteria, but it's there) when rounding, doctors are taught to ask nurses for their input. It makes communication much better. Once good communication is established, then it's easier to find problem areas and address them immediately.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)I would say that a good 80% of those women were bullies. They were divided into little warring groups. The first thing they did was spread vicious rumors about me and one of the attorneys. One of them got fired over that, as this was an on-going problem with her. Shit went downhill fast after that. I was told I was stupid, they made fun of my clothes.... yup, they were paragons of nuturing and virtue. This wasn't 'perceived' at all. It's easy enough to hear what's being said over the cubicles. There's no doubt either when these things are said to your face. An eye opening experience for somebody just out of high school.
The other job was at an ad agency. About half of them were bullies to varying degrees. When you won't take their bait or sign on with their clique, they get peeved and try to make your life miserable (imo). I was a little older and a bit better equipped to deal with it. I did my job well and managed to move up despite their bullshit. My boss and I had one another's backs.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)I worked temp for many years and was in well over a 100 office situations. Looking back, I think management and structure is what made the difference between a generally positive versus generally hostile work environment. A good manager won't tolerate these things and can keep them from becoming the norm. But if hostile is the norm then there is only so much any employee can do to change that and it can sap all the energy of even a great manager/supervisor with little to show for it.
"The oppressed oppress." -Socrates
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)the VAST majority of men wouldn't even recognize it when it happens to THEM much less when women hit each other psychologically.
men frankly, don't even understand the level that they don't understand.
CokeMachine
(1,018 posts)
AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
At Thu Jun 13, 2013, 05:05 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
alot of bullying by females is done with a smile and other subtextual communication.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3010883
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
Yet more sexist drivel from galileoreloaded. Men are fully capable of understanding in and even engaging in all kinds of deceptive behavior. Anyone who's worked in sales knows this is not a talent that's unique to either sex.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jun 13, 2013, 05:10 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: "Anyone who's worked in sales knows this is not a talent that's unique to either sex." Really that's your best? Well, guess what not everyone is as life experienced as the alerter and not everyone has worked in sales!
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Sorry, I don't see anything sexist here. Move along to the next outrage of the day!!
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)but i'm up to it. must be all that acidic testosterone i carry.
CokeMachine
(1,018 posts)Did you say testosterone? Now you are really in a shitload of trouble.
Have a good day!
antigone382
(3,682 posts)Just ask Hedda Nussbaum!
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Bringing me in as the supervisor mostly fixed the dysfunctional workplace dynamic. Both of the women in the office have said as much.
They know their jobs and do them well, so I don't understand why they can't get along professionally.
My wife works as the bookkeeper in a machine shop. She says she loves it because she is the only woman.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)And while the 38% of bullies who are female overwhelmingly target women, the 62% who are male target both genders at an almost equal rate (taking into account the margin of error). You can read the summary of the original study's findings here: http://www.workplacebullying.org/wbiresearch/2010-wbi-national-survey/
This seems to confirm that women are recognized as the safer target, and the article confirms this:
Why are we picking on our kind? Well in some ways, it is because we are own worst enemies. One reason women choose other women as targets “is probably some idea that they can find a less confrontational person or someone less likely to respond to aggression with aggression,” said Gary Namie, research director for the Workplace Bullying Institute.
Now why might a woman be perceived as less aggressive or confrontational? Moreover, as the article describes it a large reason that female bullies target other women relates to their perilous position in relation to men in the workplace:
Now, this behavior is partly because it took women such a long time to make progress in the workplace and we don’t want to go backwards but this is actually really hurting us. According to Catalyst, women make up more than 50 percent of management, professional, and related occupations but only 15.7 percent of Fortune 500 officers and 15.2 percent of directors were women. This lack of support is part of the problem.
(snip)
Michelle Duguid, PhD, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Olin Business School and author of Female Tokens in High-prestige Work Groups: Catalysts or Inhibitors of Group Diversification? identifies two forms of value threat she thinks affect the behavior of female tokens in high-status work groups in the context of promotion and selection — competitive threat and collective threat.
“Competitive threat is the fear that a highly qualified female candidate might be more qualified, competent or accepted than you are,” Duguid writes. “Women also might be concerned about bringing in another woman with lower qualifications, who could reinforce negative stereotypes about women and impact others’ impressions of them. This is collective threat.”
The woman bullying program is really due to the bullying. A study from the Netherlands found that if a woman was in a sexist environment she was far more likely to behave like an alpha female or Queen Bee. The woman would actually become more sexist than her male counterparts as a result. “These women are concerned that if they are seen to be helping other women rise to the top or supporting other women in the workplace, they will be derided by the men at work, and will be seen as operating counter to the culture rather than acting like one of the boys,” according to research. [/i}
http://www.businessinsider.com/women-are-bullies-at-work-2013-6
So in sum, this article seems to make the case that women are bullies to other women at least partially because they feel vulnerable about their gender in the workplace and are anxious to maintain a positive perception among their male coworkers. I don't assert or deny that this is the case, but if your conclusions are not in line with the data or the conclusions presented in article, you cannot very well use the article to support your position.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)groups of younger or less senior females teaming up to utterly destroy a higher up.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)This was a cook position (ironic that a woman belongs in the kitchen unless she's getting paid to do it). Or there was the boss who groped my breasts and smacked me (at a different workplace), or the one who pretended to hump me behind my back in view of the other workers (I only found out because a female coworker told me)...I'll note that all of this occurred within the last ten years
Going a few years back, there was that time my mother lost out on a job opportunity in the medical field because the boss who was supposed to sign off on her clinicals refused to do so unless she slept with him/gave him a blowjob...
and branching off to high school bullying, the female preponderance of which was all the rage in the "Mean Girls" era to which the article refers, the worst high school bullying I ever experienced was maybe the guy who pinched my ass and lolled his tongue at me in an imitation of oral sex (I should note that I was 5'2" and maybe 110 pounds, while he was at least 6' and about 200 pounds with a full beard). Or there was the guy who slapped my face and told me to suck his dick. Or there was the guy who grabbed my breast. I had some pretty wretched female bullies as well, but none of them ever did anything that touched on what the guys did. So there's some anecdote territory...
Speaking of statistics derived using scientific principles, there is the fact that the research report which this article rather ineptly references finds that overall, 62% of bullies in the workplace are male.
But I am glad to see elsewhere in the thread that you are an unbiased proponent of "equality."
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)As well as people from both genders in collusion doing the same thing. I think it's just human nature, and the only reason gender becomes involved is because people of the same gender often pal up with each other.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)do -- in a very petty & stupid way.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)very distant 2nd in my professional life. the most pressurizing element at work was always the petty backbiting, gossip, & brown-nosing of women, as well as women who used their sexuality to get favors from men.
in only one workplace did i ever see anything approaching a culture of solidarity among women. or among workers, for that matter.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)And that overall, women get more bullied than men do. Takes a really twisted view to say what's significant here is that women target other women more frequently. Much easier pickens if you're a woman yourself.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Woman-on-woman harassment is on the rise.
Thirty-five percent of Americans reported being bullied at work, according to a 2010 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute.
Female bullies more frequently engaged in under-the-radar behaviors such as sabotage (53.7 percent of female vs. 39.9 percent of male bullies) and abuse of authority (50.2 percent vs. 44.7 percent), as compared to the more observable form of verbal abuse engaged in by more male than female bullies, at 57.5 and 47.1 percents, respectively.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)...and the one referenced in the article, though it chose not to discuss these particular stats:
Gender & Workplace Bullying
Gender of targets:
58% are women;
42% are men
Gender of perpetrators
62% men;
38% women
Men are more frequently the perpetrators; women are more frequently the targets. Yet the article focuses exclusively on the behavior of female bullies. Why do you think that is?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)men are & women do the majority of bullying of women.
why do you think that is?
in fact, the survey page highlighted the same thing the article did, which was the fact that woman on woman bullying was *increasing*. From the survey page:
What tends to make news (based on the 2007 WBI findings) is that women bullies target women in 79.8% of cases; men in 20.2%. In 2007, the woman-on-woman bullying prevalence was 71%. Now it is 80%. Looks like the American workplace is grower ever more toxic for women, at the hands of women.
http://www.workplacebullying.org/2010/09/05/2010_wbi_gender/
antigone382
(3,682 posts)I would direct you to my response to lumberjack jeff if you want to see my thoughts on this (I believe it is post #112), as well as some quotes from the article about this phenomenon. I don't deny that it is a problem.
However, I dispute your assertion that women do the majority of bullying to other women, particularly because you must factor in the margin of error, which is listed in the research report as 2.2%. Let's break it down numerically, albeit in a somewhat rough manner which doesn't take into account significant figures, etc..
Based on this report, given a hypothetical population of 100 bullies, 62 are going to be male, and 38 are going to be female, give or take one or two for either gender. Of 62 male bullies, about 46% target women; this translates to 28.52 men, which conventionally will be rounded up to 29 men, plus or minus one or two due to the margin of error. of 38 female bullies, 79.8% are going to target women; This adds up to about 30.324 women who target other women, again, give or take one or two.
It is very important to consider the margin of error when you are discussing statistics which are as close as these two are. I won't get into the details of probability theory, because it's pretty boring unless it's your "thing." In any case, as it happens, the difference of 1.804 people is within the margin of error (which again is 2.2) and cannot be assumed to be more than the result of chance variations in this particular sample. Thus, it seems that women who are victims of bullying are equally likely to be victimized by men as they are by women. However, men are far more likely to be bullied by male coworkers.
Now why do you think that is?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Gender & Workplace Bullying
Gender of targets:
58% are women;
42% are men
Gender of perpetrators
62% men;
38% women
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)antigone382
(3,682 posts)Women bullies may be more likely to target women, but there are more male bullies, so a lower rate of female targeting by male bullies can result in an equal likelihood that a woman will experience bullying by either gender. I break the statistics down more clearly in a separate reply to you, but in either case, out of a population of 100 bullies and taking into account the margin of error, about 30 male bullies will target women, and about 30 female bullies will target women. Statistically it is an even split.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)of the truth here. I tried to explain, but you did a much better job. Women get bullied by roughly an equal number of men and women-
men get bullied MUCH more often by other men- but they apparently moan about it much more frequently when it's a woman. Gosh, you;d never know it from the whining going on here though.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)enough so that women do most of the bullying of women, even though men do more bullying overall. If you're a woman, you're more likely to be bullied by another woman than a man.
The frequencies of all gender dyads of all bullying:
34% male perp/male target;
30% female perp/female target;
28% male perp/female target;
8% female perp/male target.
http://www.workplacebullying.org/2010/09/05/2010_wbi_gender/
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)34% male perp/male target;
30% female perp/female target;
28% male perp/female target;
8% female perp/male target.
http://www.workplacebullying.org/2010/09/05/2010_wbi_gender/
and the likelihood of women targeting women has *increased* since the last survey.
men do more bullying, but they are more likely to target other men than women. (55%)
women are more likely to target other women overwhelmingly. (80%)
antigone382
(3,682 posts)(and actually, those are stats that have been rounded down a few decimal places. The percentages are actually closer than what is displayed, as I explained in a separate post to you (I'll find the specific number later, I think it's #159). The margin of error is 2.2%. A barely 2-point difference cannot be assumed to be more than the result of chance variations in this sample, and the findings must be understood as equivalent. This is not me playing around with numbers, it is the core of probability theory.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)more likely to target other women.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)And I have used quotes from both the article and the researcher to support my position.
But another way to present the question is this: why are so few female bullies targeting men? Women are about equally likely to be victimized by a man as by a woman. However, men are far more likely to be victimized by another man than they are by a woman. I don't propose that we need female bullies who will attack men. But it does seem that men hold a power over women that women do not hold over men, if women are so unlikely to bully men. Is there a line that women are afraid to cross? If so, why does that line exist, and what does it say about the power relations between men and women in our society?
On edit: I am logging off now and will be unlikely to access the internet this weekend, as I am working at a local music festival. I would be happy to continue this discussion, but it seems I will be unable to.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)differential power (men being more likely to have more power than women on average).
i have no doubt that's the case in some general sense. but it applies to women too. Women won't bully women who they perceive as more powerful than they are, just as men won't bully men they perceive as more powerful.
Because "bullying" is about power relations, not about gender. Attacking the powerful is not perceived as 'bullying'.
So by discussing it in terms of gender, one is falsifying the issues involved.
The fact remains, women are more likely to bully women than men are.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)themselves because they WISH it said something bad about women. Funny how that works.
the fact you keep missing is that men bully 2X more frequently- so women aren't more likely to bully ANYONE.
women get bullied by men and women with equal frequency. Not 80% of the time by women.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)they bully other women 80% of the time.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)this whole thread is filled with exceptional anecdotes - of behaviour that passes for normal everyday shit for men.
Wow, what a load of crap.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)assertions like 'much more frequently'.
women are more likely than men to bully women (30% v. 28% total bullying & 80% v. 45% frequency of bullying).
fact. why don't you quit trying to rationalize it?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Women are the bullies in 38 of 100 cases, men the bullies in 62/100.
38/62 = 61% = women are 61% as likely to be the bully as men.
http://www.workplacebullying.org/wbiresearch/2010-wbi-national-survey/
But women bully other women 80% of the time. Which means women are responsible for more of the total bullying of women than men are.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)are still confused- when you are trying to compare the two - compare the % to each other- not an idividual stat to 100. LOL.
Nice try though.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)more or less equally by both sexes. Because the MUCH FEWER women who are bullies, are more likely to go after another woman.
And these women bullies much more rarely- despite the BS in this thread- go after men.
ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)And the exact opposite of my experience
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)females, even though men do more bullying overall.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)About thirty percent of all bullying is women targeting women, whereas about thirty percent of all bullying is men targeting women. Women are equally likely to be targeted by either gender.
midnight
(26,624 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)
kiva
(4,373 posts)The best bosses I've had (and observed) in academia are women. I've worked for small businesses with male and female bosses, and think it's pretty equal.
The horror stories about women bosses that I've heard have generally been in larger companies/corporations (not somewhere I've worked) and the comments I've heard is that these women try to out macho the men in those positions.
ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)Should have done that first.
An article that uses 'The Devil wears Prada' and 'Mean Girls' to make a point, and doesn't break down statistics although their source does, isn't one I'm going to place faith in, so the source;
New research findings from the 2010 Workplace Bullying Institute national scientific survey regarding gender and workplace bullying.
Gender of targets: 58% are women; 42% are men
Gender of perpetrators: 62% men; 38% women
Men bullies target men in 55.5% of cases; women in 45.5%
What tends to make news (based on the 2007 WBI findings) is that women bullies target women in 79.8% of cases; men in 20.2%. In 2007, the woman-on-woman bullying prevalence was 71%. Now it is 80%. Looks like the American workplace is grower ever more toxic for women, at the hands of women.
The frequencies of all gender dyads of all bullying: 34% male perp/male target; 30% female perp/female target; 28% male perp/female target; and 8% female perp/male target.
For our set of alternative explanations for this phenomenon, read this. and a UK story and the Today Show.
All of the above results are from Survey 1 (details below). The results below are from Survey 2 (details on page 2).
It would be helpful to know what workplaces this occurs in, whether they are union or not and an actual gender breakdown of the percentage in manager/boss in each field.
Nontheless regardless of gender this should not be allowed.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)of bullying in general than men are. And the article attacks women in the workplace. Typical.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)the men bullying women is STILL a more frequent problem than women bullying each other.
There, I've wrapped it in a bow and remarked it "man problem" to make it simple for everybody, LOL.
Response to bettyellen (Reply #34)
HiPointDem This message was self-deleted by its author.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)thanks for pointing out how much less frequently women are the perpetrators.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Last edited Thu Jun 13, 2013, 09:56 PM - Edit history (1)
repost.
Never mind, it's in the data:
Women bullies target women in 79.8% of cases, men in 20.2%.
In 2007, the woman-on-woman bullying prevalence was 71%. Now it is 80%.
Women do most of the bullying of other women: 30% v. 28%.
http://www.workplacebullying.org/2010/09/05/2010_wbi_gender/
and according to the article, most of the male bullying is verbal (raising voice, addressing disdainfully) while most of the female bullying is behind-the-back shitstirring, the worst kind (IMO), because it's hard to figure out what's going on, who's doing it, who's in the loop, and what the issues are.
ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)At best, unprofessional.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)about women.
So telling.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)davidn3600
(6,342 posts)I've seen this several times at different companies.
And I've seen the same attitude in women stretching all the way back to high school.
More often than not, it is usually against other women.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)davidn3600
(6,342 posts)My last job I had 3 female bosses that had a never-ending rivalry. It was like trying to navigate a minefield.
Literally the minute one would walk out the door, another would start trashing the woman.
I've never dealt with men that were like that.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)Which seems to be thankfully fading away; I used to ask, so what do you call men when you don't like their driving?
Men drivers?
Squinch
(50,949 posts)Moronic poster number one: "Have a problem with your boss? It's 'cause she has lady parts!"
Moronic poster number two: "Yeah! I have a problem with my boss, and she has lady parts! It MUST be all about the lady parts."
Moronic poster number three: "There are people in my office who don't get along... AND THEY HAVE LADY PARTS!!! Woooooo! Mine eyes are opened!"
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)You may not like it, but it is what people are experiencing.
Nothing wrong with people sharing their experiences.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)antigone382
(3,682 posts)Say, a different race, or a member of the GLBT community? Would that be OK?
And if those experiences failed to line up with one of the key findings of the actual research report on which this less-than-scholarly article is based, which found that overall, 62% of bullies were men, would that handful of Internet anecdotes outweigh a study carried out according to scientific principles?
And if the actual article, deficient as it is, described a situation where woman-on-woman bullying occurs precisely because women feel vulnerable due to their lack of power relative to men, their fear of having negative stereotypes invoked against them, and their beliefs that other women are more vulnerable targets than men, would that play a role in how you apply the article's findings to your personal experience?
Would any of this play a role in how you interpret a thread that very quickly accumulated a collection of opinions that women are meaner, more conniving, and more malicious coworkers and bosses than their male counterparts--even when the actual scientific evidence suggests precisely the opposite?
In a context where a U.S. lawmaker just today asserted that pregnancy from rape is not a big problem; in a context where a team of scientists in Ireland just concluded that a woman there died because saving her life was less important than keeping her dying fetus in her body even as it poisoned here; in a context where just in the last few weeks multiple elected US officials have asserted that women are mysteries that don't even understand themselves, and that the "male brain" is more rational and more capable of rejecting "free stuff" than the female brain, could it possibly be concluded that we live in a profoundly sexist society which systematically devalues and oppresses women? Would you consider that possibility under any circumstances?
Squinch
(50,949 posts)description for "female" in many of these posts? The barely suppressed fear and hatred are pretty foul. But nothing new.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)Evidently when statistics are presented in a way that has negative implications for women, they are solid evidence of a common-sense reality. When statistics are presented in a way that has negative implications for men, they are not valid or notable topics of discussion, except to prove that the entire field of social science is a misandrist plot to make men look like monsters.
The logic is confounding.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)antigone382
(3,682 posts)But none of that came through or was worthy of comment. And if the OP presented it that way, I'm pretty sure it would have been roundly attacked by the same people who are enthusiastically embracing it.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)That is exactly what it is.
The past few years have seen an increasing awareness by many of just how fucked up things are, and with each step forward there is a vicious, nasty backlash.
I posted a thread asking for signatures to remove a page called Creepshots from tumblr and it was hardly noticed here. On tumblr, which skews much younger, it got thousands of responses.
The world is changing, and for those who are used to the way it is now -- those who can't imagine it ever changing, who are made uncomfortable by the idea of these changes, or who flat out prefer the way it is now (MRA types, the most vile and hostile of them all) -- it is a scary, upsetting time.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)their fear and the MRA movement (which is really nothing more than strong backlash, an attempt by men who feel powerless to take back the unearned advantage that traditional male domination gave them) is a realization that changes are inevitable and they need to either change or become obsolete.
I am so happy to hear of the tumblr response to the Creepshots. The kids give me hope.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)More encouraging signs from the younger generation
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=23221
Squinch
(50,949 posts)We've raised a nice generation right there!
And isn't Andover a kind of bastion for the scions of Republican families? That makes it even better.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)I saw a post shared by a (self described) white, middle class high school guy who didn't give a crap about feminism or any of that ... er, 'shit', I think is the word he used... where he insisted that EVERYONE should see Miss Representation because he had simply never noticed it but our culture was being warped by the media's portrayal of women and girls.
This was me: 
Seeing that was what got me started on tumblr. 
Squinch
(50,949 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)According to AAA, the answer is yes… and no. Here’s the scoop:
Plus: 11 Crazy Things We Do While Driving
Men take more risks. In studies, men as a whole display less cautious behavior than women, such as driving at higher speeds and closer to other cars, not wearing seat belts, and driving while intoxicated more often. They even make riskier turns and take less time when parking (although they do a more accurate job, says Tom Vanderbilt, author of Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (And What It Says About Us).
BUT… how someone drives doesn’t necessarily equal how well he drives. Men do seem to be more proficient than women at certain driving tasks. However, this slight edge in ability doesn’t translate into better driving records. The kinds of accidents men get into are generally the result of their riskier behavior. According to one study, men are more than three times as likely to be ticketed for “aggressive driving” than women, and more than 25 percent as likely to be at fault in an accident.
Perception is a powerful thing. Despite the research, psychologists claim that it’s difficult to determine whether men are truly innately better drivers than women or if they’re simply more confident in their driving because they’re perceived to be better, and thus show more proficiency. Similarly, the stereotype that women are weaker drivers may negatively affect their performance behind the wheel.
http://www.rd.com/advice/relationships/are-men-better-drivers-than-women/
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)It doesn't matter to me who parks better. If one group causes more accidents than the other, then by my measure they are the worse of the two. Regardless of gender, I'd much rather ride shotgun with someone who is less likely to kill me than someone who can pull into a park faster.
Arkansas Granny
(31,515 posts)workplace. I'm able to get along with almost anyone and had very few problems with co-workers over the years, but I much prefer to work with men than women.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Arkansas Granny
(31,515 posts)Response to FarCenter (Original post)
seaglass This message was self-deleted by its author.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Response to FarCenter (Original post)
devilgrrl This message was self-deleted by its author.
raccoon
(31,110 posts)
ananda
(28,858 posts)She started out good, but then she had an operation and
suddenly became extremely toxic. I think maybe she
was invaded by a walk-in.
I like the people I work with now because I can choose my jobs,
and they're all good.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)women women act in assertive ways, we tend to dislike them, and i wonder if that is part of this rise. that women are behaving agentically in the workplace.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)are perceived as being acceptable, while comments like that singling out any other group would be perceived as problematic at best.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)it's manna from heaven.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)I can think of no one who benefits more from the protected space. 95% of women are despicable, was a recent one you got away with.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)where i shared my very real, but clearly anecdotal experience about behaviors i have witnessed. ill bring it here if it makes you feel better and open myself up to a wider group for feedback.
BUT if you read my unedited thread, i said the "behavior" was disgusting, not the perpetrators. you want to be my stalker, fine. i think its cute. what isn't cute is stalking me, mis-characterizing my words, and then assuming that im going to roll over for anyone who trying to elevate on group over another be it color, creed, race, or gender.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)That's not an anecdotal experience or a criticism of any particular woman's behavior.
That's a bigoted assertion. I wonder if anyone bothered alerting on it as such. Probably not.
Response to redqueen (Reply #95)
seaglass This message was self-deleted by its author.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)i think the tide is turning and its turning towards whats real and observable.
of course i could be wrong......i posted that while getting a huge MRA tattoo of a guilded penis surrounded by doves on my back. 
Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #106)
seaglass This message was self-deleted by its author.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)its beautiful. the phallus is resting on a glass ceiling being held up by nekkid females and the doves circling it are all carrying copies of Warren Farrel's book in their mouths. inscribed on the phallus is "Audere est facere".
its stunning.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)women are disgusting in their behavior; men are above reproach. 
That's called misogyny.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)People blind to racism / white privilege saying "I don't see skin color, everyone is the same to me"
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)since "95% of women under 35" are "disgusting." Sounds like a real egalitarian. I did a poll to test his hypothesis. Very few agreed with him. I'm sure we'll receive a lecture about how they don't have his great expertise in human behavior.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)We have to be very careful calling out his bigotry, cause he is under the impression it makes a difference.
He's apparently conflating the delicacies of avoiding personal attacks with the fact that bigoted views are bigoted 
BainsBane
(53,031 posts) Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Which makes the rest of your post a continuation of strawman nonsense.
Just sayin'
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)along with rape apology.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)I had a few DUers campaigning to get me PPR'd just for saying that MRA crap was being posted on this site.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)for anyone who read the entire post and the OP.
that's not bigoted, that, as stated, is my experience. mostly cause I seem to be the right guy, and have had WAY to many married women suddenly stuff their hands in their pockets only to come back up ring less. doesn't get more anecdotal than that.
you are very disruptive.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)BainsBane
(53,031 posts)The jury voted 3-3. Some said that the comment was repulsive but that it was made in a "safe haven" and therefore okay. I had a far less offensive comment hidden as being misogynistic. Safe haven's evidently don't apply to HOF.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Amazing that you consider yourself a psychologist but can't be bothered to acquaint yourself on research on topics you spout off about.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)is forced to deal with what is and not what things should be.
i don't care who sees my opinions, as they are based in untold hours of observation of the human condition.
and for the record, I've been here a long time too, and on certain things I'm always right and always well informed
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3876297&mesg_id=3876297
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)because any researcher knows that his or her own observations are only anecdotal. That is the purpose of behavioral research, which you clearly have never done. The very notion that you think women are more likely to cheat that men shows how skewed your world view is.
Jesus. I've never even studied psychology, and I know more about basic research methods than you do.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)go bark up another tree! sheesh.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)yet you have no basis for making that claim. It's the veneer of authority to try to give to your stories that make them so problematic. Anyone can say, the people I've known have done x, w, or z, but you dress it up in professional veneer, when you don't have the background or knowledge to make that claim:
and for the record, I've been here a long time too, and on certain things I'm always right and always well informed
All your hours of observation have taught you that the behavior 95% of women under 35 is "disgusting." All that demonstrates is the crater sized chip on your shoulder. Jesus, even a casual knowledge of psychology would suggest you are choosing to involve yourself with women who reaffirm your negative view of the gender.
Believe me, I've had my share of problems with the opposite sex, but I know that stems from my own psychological issues, not because the entire sex is somehow "disgusting." We attract and choose people who reaffirm how we feel about ourselves.
And yeah, I've encountered a few married men too. Know what I did with that last one who lied to me? I told his wife. Problem solved. Tell anyone you plan on dating that, and the problem doesn't reoccur, I assure you.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)who said that? not me. i said 95% of women under 35 will cheat with the right guy and the behavior is disgusting.
why do you hate monogamy?
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Last edited Fri Jun 14, 2013, 12:39 AM - Edit history (1)
Because I'm a woman I must hate monogamy? Don't worry, I'm over 35, so even in your stilted view of the world, I don't quite qualify as "disgusting." Ever consider the radical notion of dating women your own age?
I am so tempted to do a DU poll on this. I don't think I can resist.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)but, as in the case of rape reporting, self reporting on sex and gender issues is sadly pretty unreliable.
Edit to add: unreliable meaning social pressures often lead to under-reporting.
love to see what comes of it.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Not about whether people themselves have cheated but what their views on the subject are. Underreporting won't be an issue.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023012745
I have no idea why you couldn't do a poll yourself. Anyone can do them.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)anyway, thx. I look forward to seeing the results.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)I have to leave for a bit. You may be right about the star. Don't know.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)"for the right guy". very important distinction, thats why I said it.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)I'll add the right guy to the poll question. Other than that you can add it as a reply.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)If you do a search on the site for "all men cheat" you get 15,800 results.
Yet if someone dares to say something far less extreme to the effect of 'almost all women under 35 would cheat under the right circumstance' you get a poutrage of biblical proportions which instantly labels you a bigot, a MRA(used in the pejorative) and dog knows what else.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)and anyone who can't recognize that is really bad off. Both statements are ludicrous. So evidently the 35 point is an MRA meme. Here I thought it was just one person's psychological issue. There really is no underestimating the hatred that the petty minded have for women. It's sad, but then they are sad little people, probably the same kind of people that advance pro-rape notions of elastic consent. It must be awful to spend one's life hating half the population, but then I think probably the real target of their hatred is themselves, probably with good reason.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)BainsBane
(53,031 posts) 
Not even close. I've never advanced a position that all of either gender cheat, or that 95% of those under 35. The idea is preposterous. The only thing I can safely say that characterizes 95% of men is an XY chromosome. Other than that, people vary tremendously.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)If you want to call someone a bigot for expressing an opinion that you can't even begin to debunk with anything other than your own opinion, then it's not hard to see where the hate comes in. The hazard to pulling the misogyny card on every DUer who dares to disagree with you is eventually people figure out that your posts are the functional equivalent of a nuisance alarm.
Anyone who cares to do some research on the subject knows the number has to be quite high for both genders. 68% of women admit they would have an affair if they knew they would never get caught. Now add to this the number who are not actively looking for an affair, but are capable of being seduced given the right circumstance. Narrow the subset to the under 35 age group who are the most likely to cheat and it's not hard to figure out that the number has to be quite high.
You may not like the number he came up with and it very well may be quite wrong, but calling someone a bigot because you don't like what they have to say, calling them out so you get more opportunities to call them a bigot, and then trolling them ad nausem is really pretty nutty whether you realize it or not.
Cheers!
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)and you defended the point. That really says it all. It obviously reflects a profound hatred of women. You call it bigotry. I did not. I see it as far worse than that. All positions are not equally valid. Some are hateful, and no one gets a pass for advancing such positions. if you don't like an association with misogyny, don't defend views that 95% of women under 35 are "disgusting." The poll in GD shows just how repulsive most people here find such assertions.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)I'm not going to continue to be lectured on the subject of tolerance by an egocentric.
Cheers!
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)that anyone should have to tell you than indicting 95% of any group as "disgusting" is a hateful statement, but since he's only talking about women, it's okay.
Response to BainsBane (Reply #237)
Major Nikon This message was self-deleted by its author.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)Is that really what you think? Well, how can such disgusting people be allowed to inhabit this planet. Something has to be done about that. Oh wait, it already is. It's called femicide. https://www.google.com/search?safe=active&hl=en&authuser=0&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=643&q=femicide&oq=femicide&gs_l=img.3..0l4j0i5l2j0i24l4.891.1957.0.2221.8.8.0.0.0.0.185.924.3j5.8.0.cpsugrccggmnoe..0.0.0..1.1.17.img.Qdmwa1iF2SA
tridim
(45,358 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)were going along with. Sad.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)People have to talk about their feelings and experiences, man. If their experience is that women are conniving backbiters who are fundamentally, morally incapable of holding positions of power, that is totally not the same as misogyny. So stop saying that!
And if they want to back up their anecdotes with a totally biased presentation of statistics that ignores that male bullies are about twice as prevalent as female bullies, you are denying the experiences of every man who has ever been victimized. You just really don't need to be so shrill about it.
And obviously, pointing out that there may be socially induced factors for male bullying is portraying all men as intrinsically evil, while pointing out socially induced factors for female bullying is treating women like children who can't be held responsible for their own actions. So therefore you are sexist against women and men and are a complete hypocrite!!!
in case it isn't obvious.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)antigone382
(3,682 posts)You seriously can't parody this stuff.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)You're right, you can't parody it.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)and because women perpetuate these biases themselves.
(i know you know the answer to this, i was just stating it again)
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)and were upset and complained angrily that I was checking their status on current projects as well as monitoring their output. (my boss would laugh and say- but that's her job!!) They tried to charm me with anecdotes instead of give me the info I needed to do my job. I don't know what the hell they were doing all day, but to a man, it came out as 30% less than the slowest woman on my team.
And my boss, who liked palling around with dudes, made excuses for all of them, and sometimes I suggested I should stay and finish their work, LOL.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)work can be when that shit is not tolerated. I don't think I could tolerate that sort of crap again, but at the time- it seemed pretty typical.
But their expectations were for me literally not to manage them, fucking hilarious. I quit and my job got dumped on one of them, and he was fired within a month.
JI7
(89,247 posts)but the woman a bully .
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)when women behave in agentic ways.
depressing.
Mopar151
(9,982 posts)Speaking only for myself - It's not the assertive part that bothers me. It's the manipulative behavior to set up someone to be inappropiately assertive that grinds on me.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Mopar151
(9,982 posts)The receivers job was to break down and deliver incoming freight, until it was something she did not want to deal with. Then tales are told to the boss lady of the stockroom about how rude and nasty I am.....
Or the reaming out my boss (at that time, one of the nicest guys in the world) got for my telling an accountant the truth , instead of simply blowing her off, as 4-6 other people in my predicament had done. Apparently I was supposed to be more impressed with her hissy fit.....
GreenEyedLefty
(2,073 posts)My current boss is a textbook paranoid, incompetent micromanager.
I am able to tolerate her because I put up huge boundaries with her. Mostly I let her give me work to do, and I do it well, but I refuse to engage her in her bizarre power games. Thankfully she will be gone in 1 year (contract expiring, will not be renewed). I've put up with her for almost 3 years, I can do one more.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)run with that one, why don't you. yeh, thought so.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)
Enrique
(27,461 posts)The title of the article is so problematic I didn't even bother to read beyond the excerpt. And the excerpt does not support the title.
I'm currently in a company where all the directors are women. The female CEO is gay by the way.
I've never been in a more healthy work environment. The CEO seems to have an eye for dysfunction, I've seen her nip problems in the bud within a fraction of a second.
markiv
(1,489 posts)Holy shit, this is my work week summarized in one video
markiv
(1,489 posts)I've had co-workers like that. My favorite was a former couple who, for whatever god forsaken reason, decided to torment us all and work in the same office after their break up. Every conference room encounter invariably devolved into that. We eventually started little betting pools over who would toss the first bomb, him or her.
It was both miserable and perversely entertaining.
William769
(55,145 posts)I was in the workforce fo many years. This is just consense.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)You've been lucky, then, not to experience what others of us here have.
Congrats. Seriously.
markiv
(1,489 posts)so they can be much nicer, or, much nastier, than men, depending on what they want to do
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)equally capable with equal propensity.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)we dont like them and consider them "bitch" or "ballbusters" or other unpleasant things
so i do agree that i am sure some women managers are as awful as men but in addition i think our perceptions of what women should be and what managers should be dont mesh.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)raccoon
(31,110 posts)
Nikia
(11,411 posts)The thing that they complained about would be considered completely acceptable for men. It's like they didn't think that I should tell them about their poor work performance at all. Telling my boss about their insubordinate attitude was being a complete "backstabbing bitch". The most effective female supervisor at my workplace gets this crap all the time too.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)
Kinda proves the feminist belief that women are people, too.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Squinch
(50,949 posts)Last edited Thu Jun 13, 2013, 06:41 PM - Edit history (1)
All those poor guys with their awful female bosses.
Response to Squinch (Reply #75)
carolinayellowdog This message was self-deleted by its author.
midnight
(26,624 posts)antigone382
(3,682 posts)...and it has given those of us who actually read such articles, and the research which they inaccurately purport to represent, the opportunity to discuss the actual facts and statistics at hand rather than their seemingly deliberate misinterpretation.
Initech
(100,068 posts)it got to the point where I couldn't sit at my desk for more than five minutes without her accusing me of wasting time. It was that bad. Never again.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)Response to FarCenter (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Squinch
(50,949 posts)Response to Squinch (Reply #114)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)It was awesome--communication was clear and timely, we were organized like a fine machine and we even laughed and had a good time. Staff of about 10. I miss that place and often measure other work experiences against it, even though the pay wasn't great. And we are all still friends nearly 10 years later.
The place I work now, we went out with a mixed group to lunch with two women and 4 men in our department and when the other woman and I went to join the men at the table, they'd only grabbed a four top with no seats for us! Nice, huh? We had to sit at another table by ourselves.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Executive Director who hired them all our non-profit corp.
It was a positive, efficient, personal, and problem free workplace, but in fairness, I knew all of the women prior to hire, and knew that they were all honest, responsible, reliable, kind, intelligent, mostly college educated conscientious human beings who valued personal integrity. All of us were flaming liberals, a few with interesting 60's backgrounds, ("Carla" would never 'fess up to why she left the country and spent all those years in Bolivia ~ I upped everyone's wages and supplied an excellent healthcare benefits package after they were hired, and it all paid off wonderfully.
We were a great team, and we were very successful up to the time I left the position a few years later to go traveling.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)
It's always nice to hear positive stories about women in the workplace.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)average for that type of non-profit, but they were still pretty low.
I believe that a large part of the positivity and success of that particular scenario was that none of us felt any direct pressure to try to behave like we perceived that men behave in the workplace, and none of us were being evaluated by men or male designed/operated workplace systems, along with the fact that none of us are/were authoritarian or conservative in nature.
After all, men have been primarily running the workplace since forever; we haven't had much opportunity to see what we can do when we are at liberty to do things in a different way, with forethought about replacing workplace norms of aggression, dominance, and competition with cooperation, communication, and respect.
One thing about social service/human needs fields is that they often attract nurturing individuals who find that type of work rewarding personally rewarding. We were not operating in a profit, dominance, or competition based system at all. Our mission was to improve the quality of life for our clients to the best of our ability within the framework of our statement of purpose. All I had to do was keep a well balanced budget and facilitate the program like Ms. Santa, and everyone else got to be Ms. Santa every day as well.
Easy to see how a group of bleeding heart radical liberals might create something efficient, positive, and constructive under these circumstances.
I'd love to see our governments run on these principles!
duuser5822
(54 posts)And sexist, to boot.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)They are more violent, and they typically have much more power in our society, including the workforce. So maybe "women bullies at work" is not a hair-on-fire social issue like sexual harassment and unequal pay.
Anecdotally, I have seen both. Most recently, women, due I'd guess to random chance and a male executive with extremely poor hiring judgment. One woman, an executive, was, I believe quite literally, a pathological liar, who undermined and misled everyone in sight before skulking off and leaving a lot of damage, and a triumvirate of incredibly angry older women, whose antics included one screaming at a female administrative worker that if there were any complaints she would "help her pack her f*cking box." Another escapade included hiding the purse and *cane* of an older female part-time employee prior to a meeting in which she was let go, then "escorting" her out with not a moment to say goodbye. The older woman had recently recovered from a serious illness.
I would note I was not subject to this kind of treatment, in part because of my position and perhaps in part because of my gender. Interestingly, I later found that the "f*cking box" lady was the reason a young female employee seemed afraid to even speak to me. She told her I was mean. Turned out not to be the case. That kind of nonsense was typical for these particular women.
I have seen nasty abusive males in the workplace. I have heard sexist talk in the presence of female employees. I am more concerned about these things because they are more common and more institutionalized.
But it is a matter of power, not gender. Women and men can both be wonderful. Both can be horrible and abusive.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)instead, we get victimization contests.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)I think there may be patterns of anti-social conduct that are more specific to men vs. women, but that's of only general sociological interest. I do think it's important to keep in mind that oppressed groups are not immunized against abuse of power by dint of minority.
And it doesn't change the fact that as to gender, we need to focus on the broad inequalities, which run widely in favor of men.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)only within a single class stratum.
Upper-class women being much more privileged than lower-class men, for example.
Money trumps gender every time. Women who had control of money have always been able to flout social conventions, e.g. Standard Oil heiress Joe Carstairs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barbara_%22Joe%22_Carstairs
Female & gay, but not oppressed.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)The anecdotal abuses I witnessed were, besides the one executive, which again was covert and indirect, mostly by relatively low-level female managers abusing female administrative staff.
I had the sense that this was tolerated in part because the women involved were not at the highest levels of authority. But as far as social class, I'd guess all involved were in fact in very similar strata, if we are talking about education and income.
There may even have been a paternalistic attitude in play, where a low-level female supervisor screaming at female administrative staff was regarded as beneath the concern of upper management, which in that particular situation, was male.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)(somewhat more superior?) female administrative staff?
and management didn't want to get involved because it was too piddly?
i've seen the second (& i've seen the bullied get shit when they complained about it, as a matter of fact), but i've never seen low-level workers get away with bullying administrative staff (which in my mind would be bullying above one's pay grade).
so dunno if i understand 'administrative staff' the same way you do.
as for the workers all being of the same social class -- yes. bullying is usually superior to inferior or equal-equal (or close enough that the 'superior' has no power over you).
attacking superiors is something else, but it's hard to describe it as bullying. bullying is about attacking those who are weaker.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)f....or possibly dating black men and definately having more fun then they thought was proper.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)if you're a man, a woman, gay, straight, or whatever.
You can buy freedom.
Money trumps.
Rosemary kennedy never had control of any money because the family thought there was something wrong with her from early childhood:
By Massachusetts state law, the Binet intelligence test was given to her before first grade, as she twice failed to advance from kindergarten on schedule. According to Henry H. Goddard, she had personally suffered intellectual disabilities. Rosemary was deemed to have an IQ between 60 and 70 (equivalent to a mental age between eight and twelve). Her sister Eunice thought that Rosemary's problems arose because a nurse had delayed her birth awaiting the doctor who arrived late, depriving her of oxygen. Her mother's cousin thought the marriage of second cousins by her parents Josie and John F. Fitzgerald caused it. At the time, a low IQ was interpreted as a moral deficiency. A biographer wrote that Rose did not confide in her friends and that she pretended Rosie was normal, with relatives beyond the immediate family knowing nothing of Rosemary's condition.[3] Younger sister Eunice surmised from various doctors' visits to their home that Rosemary was both "mentally ill" and epileptic.[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_Kennedy
She was educated in a convent & never lived independent of her parents' control.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)rule.
Just like all these anecdotes about women bullying in the work place are meaningless.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)money, i beg to differ. a lot of rich women had, and have, control of the money. some used it well, some didn't, but they had control.
and thus could do whatever the hell they wanted.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)rich family is if they're the only heir. i've studied the subject, and it's not the case.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)This thread became an opportunity for a whole lot of people to jump on board with perspectives that women were way nastier as coworkers and way more sadistic as bosses than men, in spite of both the contents of the actual article (which more or less describes female bullying in a context of male domination) and in spite of the research report on which the article was based, which found that a) bullies are more likely to be men; b) victims are more likely to be women; c) when you actually do the math to break down the statistics, women are equally likely to be bullied by men as they are by women, and d) men are far more likely to be bullied by other men than they are to be bullied by other women.
If there is a story to be told, as far as I can tell, it is in line with much feminist theory about the nature of patriarchy. Power is abused by whomever has it against those who are perceived to have less of it. In this case, men bully both men and women who are beneath them, at nearly equal rates (though slightly higher with other men), whereas women bully exclusively other women, because it is much less likely that they will have power over a man, both in terms of work hierarchies and in terms of social expectations. The article itself quotes the main researcher's suspicion that female bullies target other women because they view other women as more vulnerable, whereas they fear reprisals from men. The article also suggests that women bully other women because they feel vulnerable as women in a male-dominated workforce and are anxious to secure their status through the positive perceptions of men.
Yet this thread very quickly mushroomed into a referendum on the misbehaviors of women in the workplace, completely ignoring the male-dominated context in which that misbehavior occurs.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)They're common in certain professions.
And so is bullying.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)they can pay them less, and never let them advance. every shitty company I worked for had loads of bullying going on- starting at the top, with the guys who ran it. but we were not supposed to notice them seeting the tone.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)but i agree, management sets the tone. and often that management is female.
bullying is about *power*. not gender.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)when men do it so much more frequently- as you admitted, then it's NOT about gender. When it happens to you, it is. LOL
What BULLSHIT.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)women are 61% as likely to bully overall as men & women bully women 80% of the time. If you're a woman you're more likely to be bullied by another woman than a man.
Fact.
I'm not saying bullying is about gender; I'm saying that women are more likely than men to bully women. There are reasons, but it's a fact. A fact you keep trying to obscure.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)on women proportionally more than men- you don't seem to realize- women bullying men is the rarity. Women getting bullied by roughly equal proportions of men and women IS the most common scenario. Unlike tatooed out lesbian hieresses. LOL.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)
Recursion
(56,582 posts)... in my professional life I have never seen cruelty like what I've seen between women in the same workplace.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)advancement. Multiple times.
Strangely, it doesn't make me want to make blanket statements about men being bullies in the workplace.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)BainsBane
(53,031 posts)There are a few people I haven't gotten along with, or rather they have not gotten along with me. My view is that one simply doesn't have the right to harbor animosities at work. It's a professional environment, and you have to work together to get stuff done. My approach has been to respond professionally and try to win them over with my competence.
eridani
(51,907 posts)--for the extra brains and hands.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)I would much rather deal with a man as my direct manager and supervisor than a woman, any day. And I say that as a woman.
I was thrown under the bus earlier this year by such a person, and it is going to take me a LONG time to get over it. I don't like being made to feel as though I have to be constantly on the defensive -- it just adds unnecessary stress and makes the job harder than it has to be. But that is just part of her MO. I don't understand it, and I never will, why some people think they have to treat others like shit.
raccoon
(31,110 posts)is being a good "tough" boss.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)When a woman is a bully, it's because she's a woman.
Lovely article, like flypaper.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)when a thread talks shit about women-in-general, it's misogyny.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Why do you take it so personally? If it doesn't describe you, why should you be offended?
When a thread talks shit about women in general, it's misogyny.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)With a lot of young women who have brought the high school\sorority\facebook "mean girl" mentality with them into the workplace. Xer's and up much, much less so.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)that they target other women as enemies. In my experience, however, that is a small minority of women. I couldn't say whether it's generational. I find most women to be very supportive of other women. I suspect the culture one works in matters. If the work culture is cut throat and mean spirited, that will be reflected in relations between women as between between employees more generally. I am fortunately to not work in such an environment and don't encounter problems like those described in the OP. I have, however, in social settings and online met women who appear to dislike other women. They constantly seek male approval. I have not, however, encountered much of that in the work place and none of it in my current position.
