I have been studying Chinese history for a long time, but the interesting phenomenon is in 5000-year history of China, there is only one formal empress called Wu Zetian, and the amounts of emperors are four hundred and eight. The percentage of women to be a leader of China is 0.25%. Nowadays, Hilary Clinton has been reported by all the newspaper and TV shows, because she is the only woman who has possibility to be the first female president. Comparing Chinese history and American history, it is rare to see that the women become the decision maker of the country. Also there is an article points that
“Studies show that women in the United States often face doubts about their leadership and are judged more harshly than men. Alice Eagly, who teaches management and psychology at Northwestern University, points to studies showing that female college presidents and police chiefs face additional criticism when they fail. (1)”
After looking at these information, there are some questions suddenly popped in my head about women in leadership. Why women have lower percentage of being a leader than man? Can women achieve true equality?
Depending on the research, of all the people in parliament in the world, 13 percent are women. In the corporate sector, women at the top, C-level jobs, board seats -- tops out at 15, 16 percent. The numbers have not moved since 2002 and are going in the wrong direction. (2) This information shows that women are having hard time to achieve parity with
Across cultures, many times similarities lay within them that go unnoticed. It is true that obvious differences set them apart; but if a closer look is taken, it is surprising what can be found. The Chinese culture is obviously different from the American culture, but underneath the surface there are similarities. One of them is how the treatment of women has evolved and changed. Anti-feminism in China has been present since ancient times, and has just recently decreased. Anti-feminism in America has never been as severe as it was in China; however, instead of the value of women gradually increasing over the years - it has reversed. The value of women in America has decreased. There are many similarities between the ancient Chinese women
One identified contributor to women's slower than expected assent into leadership is the persistence of assumptions and stereotypes that women are intrinsically "communal" or "dependent" and "passive", and therefore, lack the capacity to succeed as leaders. (National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, 2006 as cited by Isaac, Kaatz & Carnes, 2012).
The Chinese left their home in China to make their way to America. Most of them came from poor provinces in China such as Canton or now known as Guangzhou. Along with the Chinese came their different culture and different religions; like Buddhism, believed that life is filled with suffering only to be caused by desire and the only way to end this is through enlightenment. On the other hand, Taoism was another religion the Chinese believed in and this was based upon the writings of philosopher, Lao-Tzu. Beside from Buddhism and Taoism, According to the article,” Chinese Immigration in the United States,” the author states,” The majority of Chinese Americans could be characterized as practicing some forms of Buddhism or Taoism”(Chinese 1).
In an effort to combat these structural impediments, parliaments across the globe have adopted proportional representation (PR) systems. Implementing gender mainstreaming practices have increased the amount of women holding parliamentary seats worldwide. “Non-PR countries only average 13.3 percentage rates. PR countries boast a much higher office holding rate at 20.7 percent respectively.” (Renzetti, Curran, Maier 2012: 312-313).
Whilst quotas fast track women into parliament, there is need for long term strategies to keep women in political positions and eliminate the sexism that prevents women from entering into politics primarily. Whether this is through education, initiatives to combat stereotypes, and providing opportunities and support for women, it is vital that we eliminate the gender gap that has grown increasingly in recent times.
With wage discrimination between men and women, occupational segregation, higher poverty rates among females, and the lack of women in the decision-making body, Canadian women continue to fall behind men economically, socially, and politically. According to Linda Trimble and Pamela Marie Paxton, the lack of female political representation has been the principal reason for ongoing gender inequality. The underrepresentation of women in decision-making positions results in the neglect of women’s issues in public policies and programs; thus, the lack of critical numbers of women representatives not only impedes women from important negotiations in areas of finance or labour, but it also allows for the unequal status quo to continue/exist between genders.
The Chinese Six Companies were six companies across the United States which played a major role in the Chinese prostitution and was a key organization for Chinese Americans in 1800s. They original main goal was to help the Chinese come from and return to China, help many corpses shipped them to China for burial and take care of the starving and elder. The Chinese Six Companies also attempted to discourage prostitution in the Chinese community and attempted to limit prostitution in America. Even though their main goal was to help out the Chinese, during the 1880s their outlook complete changed. These Chinese Six Companies saw the benefits of prostitution which they force encouraging and overseeing all the vices associated with the Chinese-American
For centuries women have always strived to be as equal and superior as men. From shifting themselves as the careful house wife attending to the children, to helping out in factories and serving in war during the early 1900’s. Then eventually women received the right to vote. Women then began to receive and further their education, becoming professionals like men were. The past century has been a century where women have been catching up to men proving to be just as superior as men.
A question that a lot of people, especially women, seem to wonder is why are women being held back from leadership positions in the workplace. According to PEW Research Center ‘the problem is that women still have to do more
A larger percentage of men still run states and governments in the political field compared to women as well as in the parliamentary representation. That even though the number of the females joining colleges and the job market has increased more than that of the males over the years, they still earn less in compensation as compared to their male colleagues. This is despite the fact that female’s rate slightly above males in working rate productivity.
I agree with Manning’s statement that women are hypercritical of themselves and men are often more confident of their abilities than they ought to be. Traditionally, women are more cautious and aware of their actions as they heavily impact their ability to advance within an organization. According to Sebastian Bailey (2014), women are several underrepresented in senior leadership, holding less than 5% of Chief Executive Officer positions in Fortune 500 companies in 2012. Bailey (2014) also suggests that society typically associates successful and efficient leadership with the characteristics of masculine traits and a female leader would violate those gender norms.
In the feudal era of China, when Confucianism played a dominant role in human thoughts and was the measure for all ethical standards, so that a woman became the Emperor, holding power absolutely could not be possible. The men chauvinism affected deeply in the root of each generations, each classes in the society which is heavily feudal as China. But Wu Zetian, from a very normal woman, with her intellect, cunning and also cruelty, she rose to be the Emperor and till now, she was the only female Emperor in Chinese history.
As the author points out, the figures on women in leadership is staggering in disparity. The article takes time to focus on identifying and highlighting reasons what makes a successful leader. Having an opportunity to attend a leadership meeting, in which we discussed improving inclusion at my company, this article presented many of the same reasons that as a company we tried to understand, “Why do we not have more women in leadership?” This article really underscores that in order for a business to survive and grow or for that matter, any organization to flourish you need to find individuals that embody the above-mentioned leadership traits not just seniority.
Even though numbers are slowly rising in the United States, there are still more men in executive positions than women. According to one survey, female workers only made up 43% of legislators, senior managers, and senior officials whereas male workers made up 57%. In congress, congresswomen make up only 17% of representation compared to congressmen making up 83% (Ferrante, 2011, p. 312). Gender stratification is one explanation for the tremendous gap. Ferrante (2011) describes gender stratification as the unequal distribution of opportunities and resources amongst male and female employees. (p. 311) For example, male workers have an increased opportunity to receive a promotion than a female worker. According to Tinsley (2013), women are more likely to receive executive positions when a company is doing well, rather than when a company is suffering. Some companies stereotype that women workers will leave the workforce soon to bear children, limiting their chances of achieving executive status (Ferrante, 2011, p. 316).
Gender and leadership? Leadership and gender? A journey through the landscape of theories start off by giving a statistical summary of percentages of women in higher echelon position in the workforce. With this information in the intro, the article quickly highlights the limited representation of women in exclusive positions in Fortune 500 companies. Next, the paper examines multiple theories why this problem exists in the workforce. The four theories examined are biology and sex; gender role; causal factors; and attitudinal drivers (Appelbaum et al, 2003, p. 44).