I think when the video talked about how women were finally “given” the right to vote that it truly was a downplay of all of the hard work and dedication they put into fighting the Constitution and men that kept not passing the amendments. I guess I never realized that it took a whole 72 years to finally ratify the Constitution and it is definitely not portrayed that way in school either, at least from my history classes. I think that it is also sad that we are still fighting for true equality in some aspects of today’s society because we have already come so far.
The articles about leadership I agree with on some level. The second one talks more about how it is not necessarily that women are better leaders but more so that their experiences provide a new and exciting perspective to some of the challenges in the workplace that men may not think to try. It is a combination of what the specific aspect of the career entails and then of course qualifications for the job. Of course I am all for more equal pay if the same job is being done and girl power and all that but I don’t think that it should entirely be about women needing to take over in all leadership positions.
I did like the second article talking about how maybe the “stereotypical qualities” of women could be some reasons why women have these different views about how to solve issues within the workplace. I also think that from the first article, it was interesting that Schein talks about how Great Man theory does not pertain to this gap between men and women in leading positions.
You bring up an interesting point of the video and its gloss over the hard work it took to achieve women the right to vote. It does in my opinion however clearly depict the amount of time it took for it to happen due to wars. What I found interesting, however, was how the stops that happened for the right to for women like the wars, allowed them to do jobs otherwise not allowed to do which help them prove their capabilities.
I also found Steinem’s point about women fighting for rather than being given the right to vote very interesting. I agree that this history is not taught properly in our history classes. It was not until recently that I learned about the connections between the abolitionist movement and the women’s suffrage movement. It also seems that Anthony has kind of taken on a role as a figurehead where people see her as perfect, when in reality she definitely has flaws.
I had also never put much thought into the phrasing that women were “given” the right to vote, especially considering how much fighting was done to achieve women’s suffrage. I think this relates a lot to the second article because it talks about how women have “broken the glass ceiling” by proving that they are just as capable of being successful leaders as men.
I found the articles to be a little contradictory at some points. While it is the stereotypical qualities that help make women effective leaders and bring a new brand of leadership to the table, because of the stereotype, women are often put in positions like Human Resources, or dealing with staff issues and group organization. While this may cater well to the talents of many women, it also does hold them back from obtaining positions of executive leadership that are more dominated by men.
I agree that the historical stereotypes of women are part of the reason that women have different perspectives because women leaders tend to be transformational and help their employees by encouraging them and sharing information. This perspective allows them to lead differently because they aren’t just about the transaction but about the people around them.