fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2287 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2287 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11. [tb]

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 084 secrets from Secret Submission Post #327.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Recently I had to go to a forum about corporate social responsibility (CSR).

During the Q&A, a woman read out statistics about more women in companies' boards being correlated with doing better at CSR (without mentioning nuances about bidirectional causation or any other possibilities), and commented about the panel being all-male and having the sole woman in the "gendered role of moderator" (which I thought she did badly, btw). She asked about whether companies would be willing to accept more females on their boards to do better at CSR.

The audience started mumbling. One panelist quipped, "Is this [name of local women's rights NGO]?", and then audience applauded.

Their answers weren't satisfactory because they didn't elaborate on the correlation and some fell back on "well, we're trying to get more women to take on these roles, but family roles" without addressing family roles much. The last panelist even added that since men in this country having to do compulsory military service for some years, women would be ahead of them when they start work. Cue audience applause.

I got worked up and tried to preface my question with something about gender equality being an issue that can and should be acknowledged even outside of "women's issues" forums, but at the same time the statistics mentioned earlier don't show the whole picture of relationships and other factors, and carry the implication that women will *automatically* act in a "nurturing" way in business, and are worth examining more closely another time, now back to the main topic.

I ended up stuttering a lot (to much audience mumbling) and didn't get to the part about the statistics before stuttering out my actual question.

Next question was from a woman who said that we should get back to what we're ALL here for, CSR! Cue applause.

Last question was from a man who asked how he could get his company to take CSR seriously when the upper management is made up of women (cue audience "ohhhhhhh") who think it's a joke.

Just needed to get that all out.

That sounds like a double dose of frustration, since there's an important issue that should have been discussed there, but the person who went before you and brought it up in the first place didn't really present solid statistics or a good argument. Raising questions like that in front of groups that don't seem to want to take them seriously is tough, too. :/

[ SECRET POST #2287 ]

Forum Q&A fail

Re: Forum Q&A fail