"Communication is important. Mutual generosity is important. Men’s inner emotional lives are important. Women’s sexual boundaries are important. And vice versa on all counts, of course. But when talking about sex, female trauma is not subordinate to male frustration. Men not “getting” enough sex from their chilly wives (as though wives couldn’t possibly want sex, or be justified in not wanting it) has been our oversimplified narrative for generations. Prioritizing men’s sexual issues over women’s is not a revolutionary, maverick stance—it is the status quo dressed up as progressive pablum. And exploiting one couple’s very specific emotional trauma and dysfunction in order to support sweeping, regressive generalizations about the sexual function of entire genders is utterly fucked up."
#seriously WSJ WTF
"Secondly, let’s assume for a moment that it’s true that women aren’t as assertive as men. Let’s assume that there’s some sort of biological imperative that causes women to focus more on doing good work rather than jockeying for attention and respect from their peers. Why is the conclusion, then, that *women* should change to gain equality?"
#Harvard Business Review
"When a film does focus on someone in a subordinate group, it gets little attention unless, like The Color Purple (1985), it has a powerful white heterosexual male such as Steven Spielberg behind it. Anything less than that - no matter how good it is - has little chance of drawing much attention, much less winning an Academy Award. Even The Color Purple, which was nominated for eleven Academy Awards, didn’t win a single one, losing to Out of Africa.
The handful of films that do focus on people in subordinate groups are likely to be tagged (and devalued) as ‘women’s films’ (‘chick flicks’) or ‘Black films’ or ‘gay films’ or ‘lesbian films’, even though all the rest ar never called ‘men’s films’ or ‘white films’ or ‘heterosexual films’. In a society identified with dominant groups, such films are supposedly about everyone, or at least everyone who counts."
“Our company makes no difference between mothers or fathers taking parental leave; it’s all parental leave to us,” says Jeanette Skijle, H&Ms human resources chief. She adds that H&M sees parental leave-taking as an opportunity for its employees to try out different jobs and develop new skills. She noted the manager at H&M’s store in Kalmar, located in southern Sweden, is on six months paternity leave.
“The fathers taking leave are actually more worried than we are (and) wonder how we’ll cope in their absence,” she says, adding each H&M employee has a person appointed to take on his job if he goes on parental leave. “People think they’re irreplaceable, but frankly, nobody is irreplaceable.”