How Women CEOs & Women in Similar Roles are Ruining the Workplace

Status
Not open for further replies.

JBaldwin

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
More women are CEO's, more women are seminary professors. The United Methodist, PCUSA and the ELCA have predominantly women pastors. There are women in the FD I won't go into that but it is not pretty...I wonder where all this will lead?
I have been wanting to start a thread on this very topic for some time. I might just do that. As a woman who is probably very capable of being a CEO, I think it's the WRONG place for women, and I wouldn't do it. Women in leadership roles, especially over a lot of men, are ruining the work place. More on that later when it's not so late.

Well here is the promised thread.

In my lifetime, I have witnessed the rise of feminism, especially in the workplace. I have also witnessed the decline of male leadership in the work place. In the last few years, I believe we are seeing the workplace destroyed, because of the push to raise women to high levels of leadership even though they are not qualified.

Here is what I mean by "not qualified". I mean that most women (there are a rare few exceptions), are not wired for leadership roles. Because of that, they are demoralizing the men underneath them and ruining good workers (both men and women) in the process.

It seems the more leadership power a woman has in the workforce, the less efficient and effective she becomes. Why? Because God did not make women to lead. He made women to SUPPORT. Notice I didn't say "follow", and I chose that word on purpose. The word "follow" implies that a woman does nothing but take orders, and I disagree with that. I believe that women are there to support and help make a man more efficient in his leadership role, not just in the home and church, but in the workplace (when they are working). And yes, I do believe that there are times when women should work. I had to support myself as a single woman for 12 years before I married, and there are many others out there in similar situations.

An Aside: One of the reasons why feminism had such a power over women (even godly women) is because women were not treated as supporters, but more as followers in the work place. I believe they were reacting to this attitude from men, and to the fact that they were financially rewarded as "followers" rather than supporters.

I hope that clarifies at least one part of my thoughts. I would love to hear what you all have to say about this.
 
An Aside: One of the reasons why feminism had such a power over women (even godly women) is because women were not treated as supporters, but more as followers in the work place. I believe they were reacting to this attitude from men, and to the fact that they were financially rewarded as "followers" rather than supporters.

I hope that clarifies at least one part of my thoughts. I would love to hear what you all have to say about this.

:up::up:

don't forget men shirking there responsibilities.
 
Just wonder how much longer till the men start stepping up to the plate again, will it slowly solve the problem- or spark more feminist?
 
Just wonder how much longer till the men start stepping up to the plate again, will it slowly solve the problem- or spark more feminist?

I don't know, but at my husband's work place (he's working for a university), they have systematically replaced his boss (department chair), the dean of his college, and the vice provost with women. The morale is at an all time low and the professors (both male and female) are starting to rebel.
 
I sort of liked B. Bhutto.


But, then again, I am not a fun of short-haired, padded shouldered, bossy women who are often extra curt in reminding people of who is in charge.


I had a captain in the army that was a minority female when I was a new "butter bar" Lt. and (call me an ogre) after 6 months I swore once I was out of the army to NEVER to work for a woman again in my life in a subserviant role.

(p.s. she was passed over twice and exited the army in disgrace after announcing that her passing over was due to racism. I told her that is was simply that she was not a good boss... we did not leave on speaking terms).
 
Okay, I'm going to risk sounding sexist, here, but anytime you discuss biblical roles of men and women in our society, someone will think you're sexist anyway. I basically agree with the initial post, here, but would question the part about women being even in a supporting role in the workplace. I agree that a woman was made to "support" a man - to be his helper. However, what man or men is a woman made to support? Her husband. I think that, unless a woman has her husband for a boss, going into the workplace puts her in a position where she submits to the authority of a male leader who is not her head and, quite likely, is not even a believer. I don't see, biblically, why a woman is to support a man in these three spheres - home, church and workplace. It is, primarily, in the home, with the church (as in church leaders other than her husband) being quite secondary. I find no biblical justification for extending that principle of headship to some man who simply happens to be the boss at work.
Now, I realize that this may not apply to every conceivable circumstance, but, for the most part, I don't think there should be a need for a woman to compete in the workplace at all. A married woman can support her husband. A single girl can fulfill the same supporting role in relation to her own father. In the case of a widow or a single woman who's father is either deceased or not someone she is able to support for some other reason, she may have great opportunity to be used in the service of the church, supporting the male leadership an ministering under their authority (Rom. 16:1; Phil. 4:2-3). We ought to be concerned to look after the material needs of widows and any other ladies in our churches who have no man to be provider for them.
 
About this topic, i always think about that example:

In a company or a group, if a woman is the most qualified person among all and if she is the best option to lead them and take them to their goal(like Bhutto- like many thinks that she was better than other men) then what happens? Is the result important? Or the process...
 
Excellent post Mike!
This was what I was alluding to in the thread where Joy "threatened" :) to start a post related to this. It ultimately comes down to headship. It has to.
Women were created to be under headship and promote the advancement of that head, just as the church was created to be under the headship of Christ and promote Him (Eph 5). Young ladies are to be under the headship of their father until given away. This has been lost in our culture of 18 yr. old adulthood, child rights, individualism, blah, blah, blah. It's a disgrace and abomination; leading young ladies into a false sense of independence for which they were never created. No wonder women, in general, cannot find satisfaction in their lives. They're trying too hard to fit into a man's role.
The young lady is to promote her father's prosperity until given away. This is why children are a blessing. It's not because they simply exist, sponging off mom and pop until they've received the training to make their mark in the world. It is because the more children one has the more prosperity he should enjoy as many hands contribute to the promotion of the head of the household.
Then, when the woman is given to another man, he becomes her head. The responsibility and submission is shifted completely. She is now to live to promote the head of her household, her husband. If she goes into the workplace she now has another head to promote. No wonder so much infidelity happens in the workplace. A woman's headship is confused and she now has two men (or more) with authority over her as she strives to promote the advancement of both of them. This too is an abomination and blurs the beauty and grandeur of the male/female distinctness that God provided from the beginning.
The cause and result of the fall as lived out in culture conspire against this beautiful design as men avoid and abdicate their responsibilities and women rise up and usurp the leadership role that God intended for men alone (Gen 3).
It's clearly in the garden. Deborah is a good example too, where Jael kills Sisera and gets the glory a man should have had because Barak desires a woman to join him in battle (Judges 4-5). History repeats this theme time and time again. Women rise to leadership where there are no men with vision. If men embrace their God given roles then there is no vacuum that women think they need to fill. And, if men embrace their roles then it is much easier for women to embrace the glorious role God has given them as men's helpers.
So, Mike, I guess I can join you in tomato dodging.
 
More women are CEO's, more women are seminary professors. The United Methodist, PCUSA and the ELCA have predominantly women pastors. There are women in the FD I won't go into that but it is not pretty...I wonder where all this will lead?
I have been wanting to start a thread on this very topic for some time. I might just do that. As a woman who is probably very capable of being a CEO, I think it's the WRONG place for women, and I wouldn't do it. Women in leadership roles, especially over a lot of men, are ruining the work place. More on that later when it's not so late.

Well here is the promised thread.

In my lifetime, I have witnessed the rise of feminism, especially in the workplace. I have also witnessed the decline of male leadership in the work place. In the last few years, I believe we are seeing the workplace destroyed, because of the push to raise women to high levels of leadership even though they are not qualified.

Here is what I mean by "not qualified". I mean that most women (there are a rare few exceptions), are not wired for leadership roles. Because of that, they are demoralizing the men underneath them and ruining good workers (both men and women) in the process.

It seems the more leadership power a woman has in the workforce, the less efficient and effective she becomes. Why? Because God did not make women to lead. He made women to SUPPORT. Notice I didn't say "follow", and I chose that word on purpose. The word "follow" implies that a woman does nothing but take orders, and I disagree with that. I believe that women are there to support and help make a man more efficient in his leadership role, not just in the home and church, but in the workplace (when they are working). And yes, I do believe that there are times when women should work. I had to support myself as a single woman for 12 years before I married, and there are many others out there in similar situations.

An Aside: One of the reasons why feminism had such a power over women (even godly women) is because women were not treated as supporters, but more as followers in the work place. I believe they were reacting to this attitude from men, and to the fact that they were financially rewarded as "followers" rather than supporters.

I hope that clarifies at least one part of my thoughts. I would love to hear what you all have to say about this.

:amen: and :amen: !!!!

What you have written here is something that has long been on my mind and heart - and I've spent a career in the legal field. In a "support" capacity, mostly because of my individual temperament.

You have said exactly what I've been wanting to TRUMPET all over the place for years and years! :applause:

A simple "thank you" for this wouldn't have been enough from me, Mrs. Baldwin!!!!!! There's nothing I can add except for anecdotes, which I won't bore people with here.

Margaret
 
One of the main areas of emphasis in our small, family-integrated church here is that we are trying to challenge and equip men to step up to their role of leadership in their homes. That involves spiritual headship as well as providing for their families.
This is a big issue in our home, as we raise 2 daughters. My wife has shared how insecure and pressured she felt as a young single woman because of the way this was handled in her home. When she graduated from school, she was expected to get out into the workplace and "pull her weight", so to speak, in her parents' home. I imagine that is not an unusual approach for a father, but I believe it derives more from our feminist culture than from the Scriptures.
 
I do not subscribe to the view that a woman is tied to her father, in all things, until she is married; nor do I believe she necessarily must leave the home and find a job until she is married. Culture has placed a burden on young women to support themselves financially. This does not mean a young woman has to separate from the family. Take health insurance for example. Most adult children are forced off their parents policy once they complete college. Unless they are employed they are uninsured. If my daughter attends a college nearby I would like her to live at home. That is the ideal. But even if she is out of state it doesn't mean she is removed from my complete authority. Much of this has to do with the relationship a parent has with their child. At this stage of her life my daughter wants to submit to my authority. There are many children who live at home and refuse to submit to the authority of their father.
 
Two points:
(1) There is a female pastor and seminary teacher at a UMC seminary near my house that I go talk to on occasion because she is very knowledgeable. She has stated that women sort of "rebelled" because of the way they were treated over the centuries, they were treated more like a servant that a help meet. She was honest enough to tell me that a lot, not all, of women in the ministry were there due to feminism and trying to show they could do anything a man can do, and sometimes better, than it had to do with trying to be more biblical. I think women in leadership roles in ministry has more to do with the churches trying to be like society rather than trying to follow God's rules for church.

(2) Where I work it is mandatory that we attend are day long classes every year on how to get along with women in the work place. What you can and cannot say, how you can and cannot act, what can be watched on T.V., what magazines can be laying around etc. They have everyone on edge especially when women are at a station. Sadly there are some women who capitalize on this and claim they have been "sexually harassed and sue the city and retire or they sue and get promoted. It has greatly affected the moral of the workplace. Then of course there are the affirmative action hires and promotions. There needs to be a certain amount of women in management roles. When there is a woman who is promoted to captain it makes the news and the paper. I have heard that it is really bad in the military.

I hope this is not too offensive, I feel bad even putting this in print, like I am going to be reprimanded.
 
Erick,

I've had to attend those mandatory meetings too. Fortunately I am very adept in allowing my mind to wander. I think of other things and basically ignore the tripe. When the meeting is over all is well and back to what passes for normal.
 
One of the main areas of emphasis in our small, family-integrated church here is that we are trying to challenge and equip men to step up to their role of leadership in their homes.

What would be your recommendation as to the best book to read to learn what that means and how to put it into practice?

I've only been attending a reformed church for the last two years and still have a lot of baggage in my understanding I'm sorting through. So a good resource on this subject would be very helpful. I have 14 month old son, so I've been working on learning how as the head of my household I am to raise my Son in the faith, discipline him etc and overall clearly understanding my role.
 
And just think, if Hillary becomes President you'll be able to expand your analogy from ruining the workplace to ruining the country. :p
 
Only in two out of seven jobs have I had a good experience of working for a woman. I prefer working for men. I love working with ladies, but not for them.
 
Mr. Murphy, a good start might be "Rediscovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood," which is available in PDF file here for free: http://www.cbmw.org/images/onlinebooks/rbmw.pdf

Excellent catch Josh. Also the website itself is well worth checking out. I especially appreciate their willingness to put so many solid books on the Net for free.

BTW, my wife and older daughter are both seminary educated. My wife serves a Christian ed role in our church (mostly in children's ministries). Few things get her as furious as the nonsense of feminism. She has observed that most of the ordained women she knows (she never sought ordination for reasons of conscience) are very angry and bitter people. Jeanette thoroughly enjoyed the DVD, Monstrous Regiment of Women (DVD), nodding approvingly throughout the documentary.
 
One of the main areas of emphasis in our small, family-integrated church here is that we are trying to challenge and equip men to step up to their role of leadership in their homes.

What would be your recommendation as to the best book to read to learn what that means and how to put it into practice?

.I've only been attending a reformed church for the last two years and still have a lot of baggage in my understanding I'm sorting through. So a good resource on this subject would be very helpful. I have 14 month old son, so I've been working on learning how as the head of my household I am to raise my Son in the faith, discipline him etc and overall clearly understanding my role

One place to start, in addition to the resources already mentioned here, might be "Family Driven Faith" by Dr. Voddie Baucham.
VBM Online
 
Have women in the workplace driven inflation up? In the fifties a family could live comfortably on one income now it is almost necessary to have two incomes.

Women are starting to get all the diseases only men used to have, ones pertaining to stress, heart disease, ulcers, workplace dissatisfaction, etc. I even hear women who are in demanding jobs and positions of leadership are deciding to return home and say that there is more fulfillment there taking care of children.
 
No tomatoes here, but...

Okay, I'm going to risk sounding sexist, here, but anytime you discuss biblical roles of men and women in our society, someone will think you're sexist anyway. I basically agree with the initial post, here, but would question the part about women being even in a supporting role in the workplace. I agree that a woman was made to "support" a man - to be his helper. However, what man or men is a woman made to support? Her husband. I think that, unless a woman has her husband for a boss, going into the workplace puts her in a position where she submits to the authority of a male leader who is not her head and, quite likely, is not even a believer.

Agreed 100% that a woman is made to be a helper to her husband and to help him fulfill his goals in life. However, I see no bible warrant for the idea that a woman may not come under another authority other than her husband or father. Being under authority is not necessarily the same as being under ‘headship’. Even a married woman or a daughter at home is under the ‘authority’ of the ruling government, and her pastor, by the ordinance of God. Her husband may well come first, but that does not make the existence of other authority relationships sinful.

I don't see, biblically, why a woman is to support a man in these three spheres - home, church and workplace. It is, primarily, in the home, with the church (as in church leaders other than her husband) being quite secondary. I find no biblical justification for extending that principle of headship to some man who simply happens to be the boss at work.

Throughout the Old Testament, we see that many women were under the authority of other men as their maidservants. God’s law specifically allows for a situation where a woman has both a husband and a master, and he sees nothing evil about it (Exodus 21:2-11).

Now, I realize that this may not apply to every conceivable circumstance, but, for the most part, I don't think there should be a need for a woman to compete in the workplace at all. A married woman can support her husband. A single girl can fulfill the same supporting role in relation to her own father.

A single girl or woman is certainly under the headship of her father. But I see no bible reason to say that headship is denied or compromised in anyway if she comes into an authority relationship with another man, for the reasons stated above.

In the case of a widow or a single woman who's father is either deceased or not someone she is able to support for some other reason, she may have great opportunity to be used in the service of the church, supporting the male leadership an ministering under their authority (Rom. 16:1; Phil. 4:2-3). We ought to be concerned to look after the material needs of widows and any other ladies in our churches who have no man to be provider for them.

I have often seen the fact that widows were to be cared for as justification for the idea that women have no place in the workforce. When I look at 1 Tim 5, I see some fairly strict criteria for a widow to be placed into the full time care and support of the church. Not every woman simply by virtue of her gender is to be supported fulltime. Bible ‘support’ in an ordinary case it to provide people with a means to earn a living, even if efforts are taken to make that work easier that it normally would have been – as we see with Ruth and Boaz and Deut 24:19
 
The young lady is to promote her father's prosperity until given away.
.
.
If she goes into the workplace she now has another head to promote. No wonder so much infidelity happens in the workplace. A woman's headship is confused and she now has two men (or more) with authority over her as she strives to promote the advancement of both of them.

This logic does not follow. Does a man who works for another man end up taking on the role of a woman and promoting this other man instead of being his own man?

No, while he may serve his boss’s interests at work, he is essentially still working for himself. He brings home his paycheck to support his family and his own goals. Likewise a woman may bring home a paycheck in support of her family whether she is married or unmarried.

I don’t want to get into a discussion about a woman's duties at home, all I am saying here is that your argument that a working woman is under another head in a sinful way does not seem to me to work.
 
I basically agree with the initial post, here, but would question the part about women being even in a supporting role in the workplace. I agree that a woman was made to "support" a man - to be his helper. However, what man or men is a woman made to support? Her husband. I think that, unless a woman has her husband for a boss, going into the workplace puts her in a position where she submits to the authority of a male leader who is not her head and, quite likely, is not even a believer.

In support of this, here is an internet article from ladiesagainstfeminism.com you may be interested in:

Against the Proletarization of Women

Antonia Cunningham writes:
A married woman who works for another man is literally forced to obey two economic masters, and is consequently unable to be subject to her husband in everything as the Lord commands (Eph. 5:24).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top