http://www.warrenfarrell.com/
)

(2) otherwise no hamlet

society cut up men

http://www.tapuz.co.il/blog/viewEntry.asp?EntryId=11...

I am not sure if Jack is that aware of how much he is correct regarding woman in the top of corporate America hierarchy.

I am Israeli but spending many years working for fortune 500 companies all over North America.

The statistics stating that most corporate America managers are men is highly misleading.

True, the vast majority of corporate America CEOs are men but the second level of senior management; the VP level is occupied by more then 50% VP women (my own observation is 60% and more).

I am basing the observation on intimate familiarization with about 50 out of the fortune 500 companies.

The nature of a multinational conglomerate company is so huge and divers that the actual power is in the hands of the corporate VPs (read: women majority) and not the CEOs.

Jack is more then correct

Oy, that's scary.

There was an article about women passing men in the white-collar professions, recently.

Thanks for the information.

Can I use it please?

Hi Jack, sure you can, with one limitation though…The facts brought by me are of my own observation and not scientific ones.
I am an independent consultant working with many companies all over North America for the past 18 years (added to many years in Israel on and off) and being amazed time and again by the phenomena of the feminism.

As in Israel so it is easy to observe here in North America the feminists enthusiasm to have men “pay for that” and the “That” is the tenth of generations of discrimination women experienced in the past (Which is undeniable).

Three major trouble for those assumptions:

A. With all do respect, our generation has nothing to do with the discrimination women experienced in the past and putting us as the scapegoat for past injustice is a faint excuse used (successfully) by the feminists. On the contrary, our generation is the one that responsible, more then ever, to the rights’ granting of women right in our time. One may jump to a conclusion (Right or wrong is debatable) that women nature is to be grateful for those that suppressed their rights and being ungrateful to those that sincerely looking for their benefits (But isn’t that probably the human nature at large – look at the Islamic/Arab world…So many of them loved/loving Sadam…!).
B. From unclear reason (to me) some of our generation’s male gender people are feeling the heavy load of blame for women past discrimination and taking it (clearly unjustifiably) on their shoulders (Just read many of the male respondents here as an example). For those I must follow the bible phrase…They have eyes but they can not see, they have ears but they can not hear and (sadly enough) they have testicles but they have no balls….It is unclear to me as of why those male (?) people are ignoring the sheer facts you and Gil Ronen bought up front. I have no problem with somebody that is choosing to argue about opinion, yours opinion (I myself am not agreeing with everything you have said), but ignoring facts? That is insane. The extreme feminists are successful due to the ignorant, politically correct, voters’ seekers and assurance seekers (The missing loving mother syndrome? – go figure) males. Without them the hot air balloon called “The feminist movement” is loosing most of its momentum, getting to its normal size, namely: keeping the women right in place as really needed and excluding unnecessary, unjustifiable men hatred.
C. Extreme approached Women are taking the very same approach they are advocating against without noticing (or may I say ignoring) the fact that they are discriminating against men all the way to the bank. It is a common practice by women to note those “Men Pigs”, Men chauvinists”, “Men violence” etc. Again the Bible: “Do not do to the other anything hated by yourself”….That is the basic of human decency. Should we come to a conclusion that part of the women gender are lacking of human decency? And if so, how they are to claim that they are better then men? A good question….

Having said all that we have to come finally to some proportions…..The vast majority of woman is descent and men lovers. This part should not be stained by the vocal, indecent (Inhuman) parts from the feminist movement. We have to recognize that even among the feminist activists there are nuances and some of them are positive beings. Men organization should fight those negative elements within the feminist movement that are calling for the elimination of the men gender and support those that are calling for cooperation.

I could make a nice comparison to the Israel / Palestinian relationship….In the right circumstances I do believe that the vast majority of the Palestinians are seeking a peaceful solution to the nations’ murderous dispute. A smaller part, the terrorists and the “Extreme Islamists” (In opposed to the Islam at large) are seeking the otherwise, namely: the destruction of Israel. Here’s the same: Israel should fight fiercely against the terror and the Islamists until suppressing most of it (I do not believe that we can destroy a terror completely – only bringing it to exist on a very low un-harmful state) and extend its hand for peace to the vast, silent Palestinian majority.

"facts brought by me are of my own observation and not scientific ones."

Boards
- Women hold 11.1% of board seats in the Fortune 500

- 86% of Fortune 500 companies (429 companies) have at least one or more women director; 14% (71 companies)
have no women on their boards

- 188 companies in the Fortune 500 have 2 or more women directors; 34 companies have three or more
women directors.

- Of Fortune 100 companies, 97% have at least 1 woman on their boards

- Women represent 1.1% of inside directors (those drawn from top management of the company) on the boards of
Fortune 500 companies. Out of 1,173, 13 women are inside directors

Women Executives
- 11.2% of corporate officers are women

- 75% of Fortune 500 companies (376) have at least 1 women officer

- Over half (258) of Fortune 500 companies have more than 1 female corporate officer.

- 6% of corporate officers holding line jobs are women, while 94% are men

- Savings institutions are the industry with the most women at the top—32% of corporate officers are women.
Other top industries include: diversified financials (30%), publishing/printing (26%),
and transportation equipment (24%).

- 2 industry groups have no women corporate officers: trucking and textiles;
others with low representation include electronics, semiconductors (2%), and waste management (3%)

- Women make up 2.7% of top earners – the 5 most highly paid officers at Fortune 500 companies,
compared to men who make up 97.3% of top earners

That is very nice but what you are making out of it?

Your conclusions sir

At the same talken the moon is having 5 trillions
rock on it, so what?

(Seeing as you are a consultant to Fortune 500 firms in the US, may I dare to humbly suggest that you work on your spelling and grammar).

What do you mean, "what do I make of it"? You, if memory serves, claimed that "The statistics stating that most corporate America managers are men is highly misleading". How is this so if women hold 11.1% of board positions in Fortune 500 firms, 11.2% of corporate officer positions (which includes the more important VP positions), and 2.7% of top earners?

One comment - don't get too impressed by the title VP. In a typical large corporation, you'd find them dozen for a dime.

Few are aware of this fact more than I :-)

This is exactly why I mentioned "the more important VP positions". Most VP's are not officers of their companies, which is why the statistics related to officers is more enlightening than counting VP's.

As I stated earlier VPs in large corporates are more influencial then the CEO

I understand yours inclination to supress my numbers but you have to learn one or two more things about corporate America before commenting

Which VPs? *all* VPs? In *all* companies? In most companies? Individually? All taken together? How many female VPs are there? Are they precisely the ones that are more influential?

You have no idea who I am or what I do, and yet you make condescending remarks about my need to learn "a thing or two" about corporate America. Perhaps I already know a thing or two, and perhaps my experience with executive boards at some of the largest companies in ths US are different from yours. We are both entitled to our points of view, but your ability to ignore the facts, which are *so* biased, is rather impressive.

CHICAGO, Dec. 22 (UPI) – For the first time since tracking began 20 years ago, U.S. women outnumber men in higher paying, white collar managerial and professional occupations.

The gap will continue because of a self-perpetuating cycle of workplace gains for women, according to international outplacment firm Chicago-based Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20031222-091...

I must agree with you…

My spelling was so bad that you just did not understand the content, right?

I have explicitly said that the facts I was exposed to were the result of my own personal observation and not a scientific one.

This observation is based on the fact that in the past almost 20 years I have worked for more then 100 companies, many times concurrently, stretched from Brazil in South America, throughout Panama/Guatemala in the central America, going through more then 20 States (from east to west cost) in the United State and more then half of the Canadian provinces (from Yokon and BC in the West/north to PEI in the east- Ontario and Quebec included).
In each of those companies I have managed and managing yet between 500 to 2000 employees reporting to me or my lieutenants in the company I own by the chain of hierarchy command, per project, per company.

Ho yes, I have worked long time on and off in Israel as well responsible for many central initiative that you and alike today are getting it for granted, never realizing who was behind initially.
To remove any stinging questions as well,…. I would like to mention that I have fought as an IDF’s armored Battalion commander in the last three Israeli wars and started my abroad endeavors only after completing 20 years of first line reserve service (many of them in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon).

Why am I telling you all that? Just letting you understand that I know one or two things about corporate America. Nevertheless, if your experience is equal or topping mine, bless you. In any event I respect your experience…please do mine!

I would like to refer you to the conclusion of my postings in another thread here. I hope my “Spelling” will not prevent you of understanding it as it was written and intended:

“Having said all that we have to come finally to some measured proportions…..The vast majority of woman is descent and men lovers; This majority part should not be stained by the vocal, indecent (Inhuman – calling for the elimination of the Men gender) parts from the feminist movement. We have to recognize that even among the feminist activists there are nuances and some of them are positive beings that are carrying positive intentions. Men organization should fight those negative elements within the feminist movement that are calling for the elimination of the men gender and support those that are calling for cooperation.”….

Kapish?

You wrote:

----
The statistics stating that most corporate America managers are men is highly misleading.

True, the vast majority of corporate America CEOs are men but the second level of senior management; the VP level is occupied by more then 50% VP women (my own observation is 60% and more).

I am basing the observation on intimate familiarization with about 50 out of the fortune 500 companies.
----

This is the object of my criticism, not whether or not you believe there are decent women or whatever. Surely you noticed that I *quoted* your reservation about this being your personal impression not a scientific fact, so there's no need for you to repeat it and claim that I misunderstood.

This is your impression, excellent, so perhaps you will find the cold, hard, undisputed facts enlightening. The facts are listed above. Do you disagree with them? If so, say why, and preferably give us some data. If not, we can part ways.

This has nothing to do with your background, your experience, or anything of the sort.

Apparently you are trying to eat the cake and yet keep it intact.

If the “Trusted” resource (no evidence to the source of the resource and its accuracy) brought by you to contradict my clam is so sacred, how come you are not answering tens of facts and links brought by Jack and Gil Ronen.

That shows that you are using demagogic tactics to makes yourself appear right, correct and good. You have done that with them and now you are doing that with me.

Sorry, not in my nationhood. Life thought me (and I am warmly recommending that for you as well – and no, I am not trying to portray myself as belong to higher level – just answering your unquestioned question) to trust my own observation and get far away from such so called “Trusted” researches/resources. You must be a young person. Only the youngsters are so fast to bring researches and crunched numbers. They have not been equipped with enough life experience to understand what is behind the numbers.

Two of the five major Canadian banks are so much infested with women workers that male are barely bothered of sending their resume for job application knowing for sure that their chances to be hired are slim. In those banks the typical branch is deploying 20-30 women and one decoration of male worker, just enough for the bank to be in compliance with the Canadian anti discriminatory law (well, the situation is not that bad in the USA). Again, my own observation, as I am highly familiar intimately with most of the Canadian provinces and its financial systems. BTW, we see some encouraging steps for corrections in those banks.

One of my academic titles is in Statistics and I would like to assure you that I am fully capable of turning any research upside down; presenting any result that will contradict the original one with a very simple methods and numbers manipulation (trusting statistical numbers – mind you).

I am not claming that you are the one to manipulate the numbers but I am assuming that you were willfully manipulated by others to believe in false results.

It is your civil right not to trust my own observation and opinion; I have no problem with that. Nevertheless, it is becoming more and more apparent that opinions like mine are getting deeper and deeper into the public opinion mainstream; the pendulum is swinging back faster and faster. People like Jacob and Gil Ronen are contributing much to this process; we need more like them though.

The judicial system is adjusting itself after long hibernated winter and finally, not in the too long future men and woman will find their place equally side by side in our society (Please link yourself to the Prophet Yeshaayaho prophecy….).

So the choice is yours, you can find yourself residing on the dusty shelves of history or becoming a part of a better, just and equal society, it is a matter of a simple choice.

You have yours statistics and I am having my own observation…

It is obvious whom am I trusting most!

..and about the spelling… you would be happy to get even 1/5 of what I am getting here for myself and my family with my “spelling” and I have being very conservative (not knowing what yours earning is).

See, people are willing to pay for the content, expertise and issues and not for the person and the outer shell…maybe that will be some lesson to you for the future, just maybe.

Your behavior is reminding me the behavior towards Jack (which I do not know and never met), many here are pointing at his limitation, trying by that to suppress and demote his opinions instead of relating themselves to the issues and facts he is bringing forward.

Those are not "my" statistics, those are facts. The Fortune 500 or 100 is an explicit list of specific companies, they have public lists of executives and board members, and from here it's a matter of counting.

It is indeed obvious what you choose to trust, the interesting questions is "why?".

You, indeed, don't know how much I'm earning, and it has, quite naturally, nothing to do with the fact that you could improve your spelling. If you don't want to, fine, this is your business.

As for lessons for the future you purport to teach me, thanks, I appreciate your concern.

I had no intention of "demoting" your opinions, the whole point being that gender statistics are not a matter of opinion. In any event, I apologize for referring to your spelling, it was ineed irrelevant.

no further questions