And, although men are more tolerant of open competition and disagreement up to a point, they can be as gossipy and cliquish as women when a man is FAR ahead of others. They're less likely to feel intimidated by a woman at the beginning, because they assume they'll be ahead of her game. When they find out otherwise, they taught women how to be b'y.
I hear you. But I am not talking about men, and I’m aware of this. But, I’ve found men far less so and more accepting of women than the narrative. I also notice that you need to say not all women, which is obvious to me, and I’m not sure why I need to caveat every post. Every post like this, there’s one woman who comes in with not all women. The rest of your comment makes sense, but every time a woman does this it makes me not want to engage.
Because cyberspace is the home of women who read studies of how women socialize and said to ourselves "Oh, so THAT's what those so-called school friends I never really liked were doing. Maybe. Or maybe they just had hair for brains."
We're accustomed to reminding people that we exist. Having our existence casually negated. I even had an e-friend post that she'd caved and declare herself to have a male-type (logical, analytical) brain, which felt to me like a slide back into the eighteenth century.
I suppose we keep reminding people that we exist because we learned at an early age that people who don't see us are likely to step on us.
What a painful life it must be to feel so victimized by men. Sorry to break it to you, but your experience of being a woman isn’t universal, and that woman you’re describing has her head on straight. She was probably excluded and fucked with by women like yourself too.
Not all women, but some. For whatever reasons, maybe the way I bonded with my mother as a child, I've tended to see competition among females clearly and avoid it by getting into the shadow of someone who's obviously much prettier and/or cleverer than I am. This might be someone easy to be friends with as she has no other close female friends. And it's clear to the sort of boring conformist females who stick together in clumps that if I weren't well above average Ms. Superachiever wouldn't be my friend, but I'm not the one who's revelling in superiority--she is.
And it's so easy to be superior to the conformists who stick together in clumps by simply not conforming.
What I used to hate was that nobody ever tells someone who was hired on the basis of test scores that "what it is that you do that causes other people not to liiike you" is score high on those tests. I think some industries make a lot of profit from talented young women thinking it's their teeth or their perfume or some such thing. I remember one job that was supposed to have lasted four weeks, that lasted two, where I tried not being efficient and ignoring the chatter for a change; apparently nobody liked that either because nobody willingly talked to me and somebody claimed to have seen me defacing employers' property.
What worked? Not even taking jobs where I would have been part of a "team" with "peers." Work directly with the boss or as an outside contractor who wasn't expected to fit into a group. It paid well for about twenty years, then it didn't for about twenty years.
I've worked for mostly women managers in my career (marketing design), and have been treated better by all but one of them than the few men I've worked for.
The one woman who was the exception was a beast and a gatekeeper of sorts. She had driven my predecessor to a mental breakdown and she ended up leaving the company. I only found out about this a year into the role. The following year I left after some very odd encounters with this woman. She acted like nothing was wrong as she tried to gaslight me at every turn. Most of the members of this small team were afraid of her but I was able to get some info from one of the 'long-termers' that she drives people out when she fears them, no matter who they are and lies to the owner about what happened after that person leaves. I'm sure a tall tale got told about me. I was able to move on and but took some time to detox her out of my mind.
My better half has had similar encounter with female co-workers, but now she's at an LT level, and has a bit more flexiblity, but still gets 'man-splained' to by her male peers. She's a lot like you in her mindset and handling these 'fun' situations that are seemingly endless.
What we're witnessing is socio-pathic tendencies (even psychotic) in humanity and every level, every gender, w/o exception. It's a lonely road, becasuse once you've identified them and their toxic nature, you avoid them, and many who are their 'friends', but they don't understand who they're dealing with and why thing will never change unless they find another path.
Keep fighting the good fight and know that, even in sharing this in your SS, will garner much approval by those who have experienced it first-hand, and are survivors. You are not alone and I'd welcome you into our little tribe anytime.
Finally, you have knowledge and gifts about certain things that are impossible to understand by others that don't have the same ones. Sometimes you feel like you're the crazy one, but know that the road less traveled isn't for everyone, thankfully!
Thank you, I appreciate this. I don’t disagree that people of either sex can be shitty managers, but my point in writing this was to illustrate the unique ways in which women can mess with other women’s careers. There’s plenty about men, but almost nothing about women because there’s such a taboo on talking about it.
Reading this article makes me think of what’s going on with the WNBA and Caitlin Clark. Whether racial, sexual orientation, ganging up on the girl getting all the attention or a combination of the three, it seems the dynamics are similar to what you are describing. Whereas men look forward to the competition and who’s better, these female players are vicious to her both physically and verbally.
As a man, I look at the situation as: Caitlin Clark is bringing viewers, sponsors and fans to watch and promote their game, yet she is trashed and abused for it. It feels to me that these other players would rather have a league losing millions than let a white, straight girl getting lots of attention lift up their game and help it to become more popular. The dynamic seems just as you described.
I haven’t followed much of what happened in the WNBA but yes I can definitely see that. It gave the impression of being about race but it’s actually about intrasexual competition.
Great analysis, Anuradha. I was also a recruiter in tech, but with no engineering background. Years ago, I was part of a university recruitment team for tech companies, and we were told to build relationships with the diversity engineering clubs to find candidates. It didn't matter that the SWE clubs only had women who studied bio and civil engineering but they came to the Info Sessions for the free pizza, etc. I also found that women who held higher positions were often not helpful, especially if they were in HR. My mentor was a man whom I followed to three companies. He always had my back and encouraged me to speak at conferences and trusted me enough to send me to Bangalore to teach the hiring managers how to interview candidates.
I didn’t have an engineering background either, just happened to fall into technical work. I find that when we talk about “women in tech” we don’t consider that the women in the companies who control the hiring for these positions also have their own agendas and could become gatekeepers, along your point.
Philosophy is the answer. For me, stoics, some Platonic dialogues, secondary sources on stoicism and the Bhagavad Gita. Also, money. Money solves depression, which solves insecurity.
money and philosophy is such a "radically pragmatic" answer lol
have you been following Sean Illing's series on his phd dissertation on the history of Camus' thoughts from nihilism -> absurdity -> revolt? it is very comforting when someone has had the thoughts you have thought but they say it better and take it further
I love your writing, Anuradha. Everything here is true. But the fact that it is so obviously true concerns me. The women that push the "sexist theory of work" are doing it intentionally because it benefits them. What do you think would incentivize them to see things as they actually are, as you do?
Honestly, there is no incentive other than the desire for sovereignty. I had to give up the need for social belonging among women to be who I am today, and that cost me a lot psychologically before I emerged from the fog. Women these days have no reason to rock the boat unless they’re willing to look in the mirror at their flaws and stop using structures to excuse it. I wish I had a more positive answer. Perhaps being increasingly lonely and bereft of real friends will do it.
This is a great piece about how gender driven personality traits have a major effect on a woman’s success in a traditionally “male” field like software development. Of course women always have been successful in this field. Ada Lovelace and Grace Hopper are outstanding pioneers in the field of computing. And I think that women definitely can have a knack for project management since people skills are very important. But I think that women should explicitly try to be more confrontational despite social training and even evolution. And organizations should try to have men that push back against promoting women to upper management need to be serious about equality in promotions and management.
I think women are very often even better than men in certain functions because we tend to be more detail-oriented, but the personality trait of being open to new ideas is key here, because, of couse, tech is always evolving. The need to be right is corrosive in technical roles. I agree that women should be more willing to be assertive but not in imitating what many women imagine men display; that is a kind of imagined toxicity attributed to men, which is then said to be the expectation of women. I have unsuprisingly found that my assertiveness is more punished by women and appreciated by men, which isn't what I expected.
Victim of a woman or victim of a man; or shoulder the weight yourself and learn to play the ever-changing game. Much better with good people in your corner, as you said :)
I saw this in spades throughout my career. Once, in particular, a young woman who was on my team, expressed frustration that she'd always thought it was men who'd hold her back but the men were always helping. It was the older women who constantly talked shit, refused to share information, blocked her from meetings, and all sorts of bullshit. The only way it looks like men have it better is because I don't accept their bullshit whereas this young woman didn't have the temperament to be an 'asshole' like me.
That's definitely in line with what I've heard from other technical women as well. Women like you describe are stuck in a bind, where the older women would likely punish her for being more assertive. I'm guessing she didn't need to be as assertive with the men because they probably appreciated her intelligence. I've found this to be true on Substack as well. It's crucial that managers like you see these things, because I've known so many men who don't or who otherwise maintain a studied silence around it. I've also seen deals go awry in terms of scope because women were working them; the only time I've had women on the sales end of my projects, they are too reticent to push back against unreasonable demands. I tried to point out where a deal was wrongly scoped, and I had my hand slapped; that's literally never happened with a man in sales. They tend to trust my judgment more completely.
Diversity of thought is sadly not valued among women, and that’s one major reason the culture among the left considers impurity of thought as grounds for reputational damage. This is made even worse when the woman is straight and feminine presenting.
I work in advertising, and am one of the few men at my company of 95% women. As someone who enjoys the “tea” it’s very interesting - I hear a lot of opinions about coworkers from other coworkers. It really is interesting watching everyone be very nice in a public facing front, but there are absolutely covert mechanisms at play behind closed doors.
As someone at the director level at my company, I want to help everyone below me grow and make as much money as possible, regardless of gender. I can’t change all of the intricacies of female to female dynamics, but I can try to drive the conversation to merit and progress: here’s what you can control, here’s how you can improve, etc.
That's really all you can do as a man in management. I do think men gossip too, but it seems to be less of a weapon than in the hands of women, wielded against other women. But I could be wrong. My issue is really just that the idea of the sisterhood gets used to cover up the negative psychological effects of covert female competition, and that's not to mention how women who didn't come from money like me are materially affected by this behavior.
As a female executive in a highly paid, male-dominant profession - I think yes there is some truth in these assertions, and they are indeed difficult to discuss openly.
That said, twice in my career I have personally witnessed men in positions of power explicitly nix considering a woman for an opportunity for advancement on the basis of their opinion that a man would be better suited - and this is a taboo thing to say, so I feel confident in saying if I’ve actually heard it said twice, it has been said many, many other times that I haven’t heard.
And I think you ignore the unintended but very real barrier for women in male dominated professions of finding mentors and deep peer relationships- men do not necessarily intentionally exclude women, but they worry about accusations or perceptions of misconduct, and I think simply relate better to and feel more comfortable with other men in these informal alliances, often resulting in women missing out of guidance, insights, and assistance that their male peers take for granted. When you’re earlier in your career the effect is small, but as you attempt to climb to the highest levels, it can be that little edge that means getting the top job or not.
As you alluded to, women have made it dangerous for well meaning men to give career advice and mentoring. I have seen two good men get their careers put into jeopardy by young mentees who misunderstood the extent that the mentor could help the mentee's career along. Both mentees came after the mentors with allegations of sexism. They thought that the mentors weren't opening enough doors because the mentees were women. Those kinds of accusations are poison. There are many such stories to be had out in the work world
Your writing gets spicier and spicier with each piece of the female aggression puzzle. Your link between the erosion of meritocracy (whatever there was of it) and the lack of women with hard skills and intrasexual competition is intriguing. Excited for more!
And I appreciate that you and I have been pushing this conversation forward in our own ways. Convenient self-deception cannot stand because it prevents the development of discernment.
And, although men are more tolerant of open competition and disagreement up to a point, they can be as gossipy and cliquish as women when a man is FAR ahead of others. They're less likely to feel intimidated by a woman at the beginning, because they assume they'll be ahead of her game. When they find out otherwise, they taught women how to be b'y.
I hear you. But I am not talking about men, and I’m aware of this. But, I’ve found men far less so and more accepting of women than the narrative. I also notice that you need to say not all women, which is obvious to me, and I’m not sure why I need to caveat every post. Every post like this, there’s one woman who comes in with not all women. The rest of your comment makes sense, but every time a woman does this it makes me not want to engage.
Because it gets repetitious?
Because cyberspace is the home of women who read studies of how women socialize and said to ourselves "Oh, so THAT's what those so-called school friends I never really liked were doing. Maybe. Or maybe they just had hair for brains."
We're accustomed to reminding people that we exist. Having our existence casually negated. I even had an e-friend post that she'd caved and declare herself to have a male-type (logical, analytical) brain, which felt to me like a slide back into the eighteenth century.
I suppose we keep reminding people that we exist because we learned at an early age that people who don't see us are likely to step on us.
What a painful life it must be to feel so victimized by men. Sorry to break it to you, but your experience of being a woman isn’t universal, and that woman you’re describing has her head on straight. She was probably excluded and fucked with by women like yourself too.
Not all women, but some. For whatever reasons, maybe the way I bonded with my mother as a child, I've tended to see competition among females clearly and avoid it by getting into the shadow of someone who's obviously much prettier and/or cleverer than I am. This might be someone easy to be friends with as she has no other close female friends. And it's clear to the sort of boring conformist females who stick together in clumps that if I weren't well above average Ms. Superachiever wouldn't be my friend, but I'm not the one who's revelling in superiority--she is.
And it's so easy to be superior to the conformists who stick together in clumps by simply not conforming.
What I used to hate was that nobody ever tells someone who was hired on the basis of test scores that "what it is that you do that causes other people not to liiike you" is score high on those tests. I think some industries make a lot of profit from talented young women thinking it's their teeth or their perfume or some such thing. I remember one job that was supposed to have lasted four weeks, that lasted two, where I tried not being efficient and ignoring the chatter for a change; apparently nobody liked that either because nobody willingly talked to me and somebody claimed to have seen me defacing employers' property.
What worked? Not even taking jobs where I would have been part of a "team" with "peers." Work directly with the boss or as an outside contractor who wasn't expected to fit into a group. It paid well for about twenty years, then it didn't for about twenty years.
I've worked for mostly women managers in my career (marketing design), and have been treated better by all but one of them than the few men I've worked for.
The one woman who was the exception was a beast and a gatekeeper of sorts. She had driven my predecessor to a mental breakdown and she ended up leaving the company. I only found out about this a year into the role. The following year I left after some very odd encounters with this woman. She acted like nothing was wrong as she tried to gaslight me at every turn. Most of the members of this small team were afraid of her but I was able to get some info from one of the 'long-termers' that she drives people out when she fears them, no matter who they are and lies to the owner about what happened after that person leaves. I'm sure a tall tale got told about me. I was able to move on and but took some time to detox her out of my mind.
My better half has had similar encounter with female co-workers, but now she's at an LT level, and has a bit more flexiblity, but still gets 'man-splained' to by her male peers. She's a lot like you in her mindset and handling these 'fun' situations that are seemingly endless.
What we're witnessing is socio-pathic tendencies (even psychotic) in humanity and every level, every gender, w/o exception. It's a lonely road, becasuse once you've identified them and their toxic nature, you avoid them, and many who are their 'friends', but they don't understand who they're dealing with and why thing will never change unless they find another path.
Keep fighting the good fight and know that, even in sharing this in your SS, will garner much approval by those who have experienced it first-hand, and are survivors. You are not alone and I'd welcome you into our little tribe anytime.
Finally, you have knowledge and gifts about certain things that are impossible to understand by others that don't have the same ones. Sometimes you feel like you're the crazy one, but know that the road less traveled isn't for everyone, thankfully!
Thank you, I appreciate this. I don’t disagree that people of either sex can be shitty managers, but my point in writing this was to illustrate the unique ways in which women can mess with other women’s careers. There’s plenty about men, but almost nothing about women because there’s such a taboo on talking about it.
Reading this article makes me think of what’s going on with the WNBA and Caitlin Clark. Whether racial, sexual orientation, ganging up on the girl getting all the attention or a combination of the three, it seems the dynamics are similar to what you are describing. Whereas men look forward to the competition and who’s better, these female players are vicious to her both physically and verbally.
As a man, I look at the situation as: Caitlin Clark is bringing viewers, sponsors and fans to watch and promote their game, yet she is trashed and abused for it. It feels to me that these other players would rather have a league losing millions than let a white, straight girl getting lots of attention lift up their game and help it to become more popular. The dynamic seems just as you described.
I haven’t followed much of what happened in the WNBA but yes I can definitely see that. It gave the impression of being about race but it’s actually about intrasexual competition.
Great analysis, Anuradha. I was also a recruiter in tech, but with no engineering background. Years ago, I was part of a university recruitment team for tech companies, and we were told to build relationships with the diversity engineering clubs to find candidates. It didn't matter that the SWE clubs only had women who studied bio and civil engineering but they came to the Info Sessions for the free pizza, etc. I also found that women who held higher positions were often not helpful, especially if they were in HR. My mentor was a man whom I followed to three companies. He always had my back and encouraged me to speak at conferences and trusted me enough to send me to Bangalore to teach the hiring managers how to interview candidates.
I didn’t have an engineering background either, just happened to fall into technical work. I find that when we talk about “women in tech” we don’t consider that the women in the companies who control the hiring for these positions also have their own agendas and could become gatekeepers, along your point.
> "Until just five years ago, I was persistently insecure"
The use of the past-tense verb right there sure does catch my curiousity.
O sooth-sayer, may thy share this wisdom?
Philosophy is the answer. For me, stoics, some Platonic dialogues, secondary sources on stoicism and the Bhagavad Gita. Also, money. Money solves depression, which solves insecurity.
money and philosophy is such a "radically pragmatic" answer lol
have you been following Sean Illing's series on his phd dissertation on the history of Camus' thoughts from nihilism -> absurdity -> revolt? it is very comforting when someone has had the thoughts you have thought but they say it better and take it further
Not very familiar with Camus’s personal philosophy. But yes I know the phenomenon.
I love your writing, Anuradha. Everything here is true. But the fact that it is so obviously true concerns me. The women that push the "sexist theory of work" are doing it intentionally because it benefits them. What do you think would incentivize them to see things as they actually are, as you do?
Honestly, there is no incentive other than the desire for sovereignty. I had to give up the need for social belonging among women to be who I am today, and that cost me a lot psychologically before I emerged from the fog. Women these days have no reason to rock the boat unless they’re willing to look in the mirror at their flaws and stop using structures to excuse it. I wish I had a more positive answer. Perhaps being increasingly lonely and bereft of real friends will do it.
This is a great piece about how gender driven personality traits have a major effect on a woman’s success in a traditionally “male” field like software development. Of course women always have been successful in this field. Ada Lovelace and Grace Hopper are outstanding pioneers in the field of computing. And I think that women definitely can have a knack for project management since people skills are very important. But I think that women should explicitly try to be more confrontational despite social training and even evolution. And organizations should try to have men that push back against promoting women to upper management need to be serious about equality in promotions and management.
I think women are very often even better than men in certain functions because we tend to be more detail-oriented, but the personality trait of being open to new ideas is key here, because, of couse, tech is always evolving. The need to be right is corrosive in technical roles. I agree that women should be more willing to be assertive but not in imitating what many women imagine men display; that is a kind of imagined toxicity attributed to men, which is then said to be the expectation of women. I have unsuprisingly found that my assertiveness is more punished by women and appreciated by men, which isn't what I expected.
Victim of a woman or victim of a man; or shoulder the weight yourself and learn to play the ever-changing game. Much better with good people in your corner, as you said :)
Enjoyed reading this, Anu.
thank you <3 I always appreciate your wisdom in life.
I saw this in spades throughout my career. Once, in particular, a young woman who was on my team, expressed frustration that she'd always thought it was men who'd hold her back but the men were always helping. It was the older women who constantly talked shit, refused to share information, blocked her from meetings, and all sorts of bullshit. The only way it looks like men have it better is because I don't accept their bullshit whereas this young woman didn't have the temperament to be an 'asshole' like me.
That's definitely in line with what I've heard from other technical women as well. Women like you describe are stuck in a bind, where the older women would likely punish her for being more assertive. I'm guessing she didn't need to be as assertive with the men because they probably appreciated her intelligence. I've found this to be true on Substack as well. It's crucial that managers like you see these things, because I've known so many men who don't or who otherwise maintain a studied silence around it. I've also seen deals go awry in terms of scope because women were working them; the only time I've had women on the sales end of my projects, they are too reticent to push back against unreasonable demands. I tried to point out where a deal was wrongly scoped, and I had my hand slapped; that's literally never happened with a man in sales. They tend to trust my judgment more completely.
Yeah, every guy I met was super impressed with her because she was assertive, direct, and sharp. I only got complaints from women.
Sigh, that is sad but I suppose to be expected. Also makes me think about your toxic empathy piece. Where’s the empathy for nonconforming women?
Hell, not even empathy but kindness, respect, valuation of diversity?
Diversity of thought is sadly not valued among women, and that’s one major reason the culture among the left considers impurity of thought as grounds for reputational damage. This is made even worse when the woman is straight and feminine presenting.
I work in advertising, and am one of the few men at my company of 95% women. As someone who enjoys the “tea” it’s very interesting - I hear a lot of opinions about coworkers from other coworkers. It really is interesting watching everyone be very nice in a public facing front, but there are absolutely covert mechanisms at play behind closed doors.
As someone at the director level at my company, I want to help everyone below me grow and make as much money as possible, regardless of gender. I can’t change all of the intricacies of female to female dynamics, but I can try to drive the conversation to merit and progress: here’s what you can control, here’s how you can improve, etc.
That's really all you can do as a man in management. I do think men gossip too, but it seems to be less of a weapon than in the hands of women, wielded against other women. But I could be wrong. My issue is really just that the idea of the sisterhood gets used to cover up the negative psychological effects of covert female competition, and that's not to mention how women who didn't come from money like me are materially affected by this behavior.
As a female executive in a highly paid, male-dominant profession - I think yes there is some truth in these assertions, and they are indeed difficult to discuss openly.
That said, twice in my career I have personally witnessed men in positions of power explicitly nix considering a woman for an opportunity for advancement on the basis of their opinion that a man would be better suited - and this is a taboo thing to say, so I feel confident in saying if I’ve actually heard it said twice, it has been said many, many other times that I haven’t heard.
And I think you ignore the unintended but very real barrier for women in male dominated professions of finding mentors and deep peer relationships- men do not necessarily intentionally exclude women, but they worry about accusations or perceptions of misconduct, and I think simply relate better to and feel more comfortable with other men in these informal alliances, often resulting in women missing out of guidance, insights, and assistance that their male peers take for granted. When you’re earlier in your career the effect is small, but as you attempt to climb to the highest levels, it can be that little edge that means getting the top job or not.
As you alluded to, women have made it dangerous for well meaning men to give career advice and mentoring. I have seen two good men get their careers put into jeopardy by young mentees who misunderstood the extent that the mentor could help the mentee's career along. Both mentees came after the mentors with allegations of sexism. They thought that the mentors weren't opening enough doors because the mentees were women. Those kinds of accusations are poison. There are many such stories to be had out in the work world
Your writing gets spicier and spicier with each piece of the female aggression puzzle. Your link between the erosion of meritocracy (whatever there was of it) and the lack of women with hard skills and intrasexual competition is intriguing. Excited for more!
And I appreciate that you and I have been pushing this conversation forward in our own ways. Convenient self-deception cannot stand because it prevents the development of discernment.