Showing posts with label Sexism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sexism. Show all posts

January 31, 2016

New Book About Sexist Male Pigs On Wall Street



Maureen Sherry claims that the few women at Bear Stearns were sat together on what was disparagingly called ‘Estrogen Row’ by the men.

[From review]
When Maureen Sherry resigned from Bear Stearns after 10 years, she was given a going-away party, a sizable check — and a nondisclosure agreement.
“The legal department gave me this document to sign,” she says, and the money was a bribe: Don’t ever talk about the things you’ve seen here, or the way you were harassed, dehumanized, humiliated.
Sherry refused to sign and declined the check. “Me taking money,” she says, “wouldn’t help anyone coming up after me.”
Her forthcoming novel, “Opening Belle” (Simon & Schuster), a thinly fictionalized account of her 11 years on Wall Street, is the result.
[. . .]
For all of the horror stories she tells — the sexual degradation of female traders, the marginalization of women who were married or had kids — Sherry insists she didn’t have it so bad. A colleague may have guzzled her breast milk, and another may have left unwrapped condoms strewn in her pizza box, but, she says, “a lot of it was pranks. I never got groped.”
And herein lies the conflict so many women on Wall Street still struggle with: The very firms that have made them wealthy and successful have also abused them terribly — and like so many victims, many of these women feel it’s somehow their fault, their problem to fix.
Sherry points to Sallie Krawcheck, who was publicly fired from Bank of America during the mortgage crisis. Now “she runs Ellevate — it’s a membership thing for women. A lot of it’s about strategies, and how to work better with men.”
But why, she’s asked, should the onus be on women to work around men who treat them poorly?
[. . .]
A former colleague of Sherry’s, who asked not to be named, says it’s even worse than that. “Men getting b- - -jobs in front of staff — that happened all the time,” she says. “Lots of things that were extremely shocking, pretty disgusting.”
[. . .]




“Women filing complaints feel like it reflects poorly on them — that they are weak, non-team players,” Sherry says. “They don’t want to be labeled as a troublemaker. It’s a team environment, and they’ll ostracize themselves if they do so.”
Most everyone who goes to work on Wall Street is made to sign a U4 — a document stating that any grievances will be settled in-house. It’s meant to fend off sexual-harassment suits and fosters a secretive, hermetically sealed environment: Bad behavior stays behind closed doors.
[. . .]
In March 2010, three women filed a gender-bias suit against Bank of America, and in September, three women filed a sexual-discrimination suit against Goldman Sachs.
A refiling of that suit in 2015 claimed not just pay gaps and discrimination but that “Goldman condones the sexualization of women and an uncorrected culture of sexual assault and harassment.” One of the plaintiffs claims that she “was sexually assaulted by a married male colleague” after a business dinner, and that when she reported it to higher-ups, she was demoted.
In 2004 and 2007, Morgan Stanley settled two gender-discrimination suits for more than $100 million. The plaintiffs: thousands of women.
[. . .]
Then there are the male traders — less productive, less hardworking — who make double what the women do. Often, the excuse is that men can do what women cannot: comfortably entertain male clients on golf courses, at strip clubs and brothels.
[. . .]
For a moment — a super-brief, blink-and-you-miss-it-moment — there was a great discussion point after the 2008 financial collapse: Could the crisis have been averted, or at least mitigated, if there were more women in positions of power on Wall Street?
In 2014, in a column called “Eight Things I Wish for Wall Street,” author Michael Lewis wrote that women should be in charge.
“Men are more prone to financial risk-taking and overconfidence,” he wrote. “Trading is a bit like pornography: Women may like it, but they don’t like it nearly as much as men, and they certainly don’t like it in ways that create difficulties for society. Put them in charge of all financial decision-making and the decisions will be more boring, but more sociable.”
Sherry agrees. She also thinks there’s only one thing that could make Wall Street renounce its deplorable, chauvinistic attitude toward women: money. A 2014 report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers found that more women complete college and grad school than men, and make up a larger percentage of the work force.
That same year, Forbes magazine reported that women in their 20s without children out-earned their male peers. And a 2013 Pew Research Center report said women are now far more likely to be their family’s primary breadwinner.
That’s a lot of women with a lot of money to invest, and chances are high they’d rather not negotiate at a strip club.

http://nypost.com/2016/01/31/trader-exposes-the-disgusting-sexism-plaguing-wall-street/

http://nyp.st/20f9gSw

Watch Video: The horniest CEOs on the street


* * *
[From article]
A female former trader has lifted the lid on Wall St sexism and revealed how male colleagues mooed at her when she was lactating - and once drank her breast milk.
Maureen Sherry claims that the few women at Bear Stearns were sat together on what was disparagingly called ‘Estrogen Row’ by the men.
They were mocked as ‘fertile lassies’ and one man even knocked back a shot of breast milk she had stored in the office fridge.
Miss Sherry, 51, claimed that the sexism was so bad that in interviews women were asked if they were married and if they planned to marry.
Some were supposedly made to promise never to have children.
Miss Sherry made the revelations in her forthcoming novel Opening Belle, a thinly fictionalized account of her 11 years as a managing director at now defunct investment bank Bear Stearns in the 90s and 00s.
The book is due to be made into a film starring Reese Witherspoon that will come out later this year.
Miss Sherry, a mother-of-four who attended Cornell University and the Wharton School of Business, writes that on her first day on Wall St she opened up a pizza box to find condoms instead of pepperoni slices put there as a prank.
Men openly debated hiring women based on their looks and one young woman noticed that her interviewer - a man - had drawn her breasts at the top her CV.
In the trading room there was an area called ‘The Dais of the D****’ where the high earning men sat.
They would order women to come over with a microphone before subjecting them to Game of Thrones style humiliations, the book says.
Miss Sherry writes that at one point when she was walking to the company nurse’s office with a breast pump, some men made mooing noises at her.
Mooing happened on other occasions too when she was lactating.
Miss Sherry writes: ‘I ignored the time someone taped torn panties on my screen when I came back from my honeymoon.
‘I don’t want to hear slut jokes all day long. I don’t want to work in a frat house.’
Miss Sherry writes that she lost count of the times a woman shared an idea at a meeting - only for a man to take credit for it.
One male colleague told her that they should hire only ‘women who have brothers’ because they are used to the banter.
[. . .]
Miss Sherry quit, took an MFA from Columbia University in nonfiction writing and is now a writer and mother in New York.
Her husband Steven Klinsky, 59, works at a private equity firm in Manhattan.
Wall St has long been accused of sexism but has done little to address it despite a string of multi-million pound lawsuits brought by former female executive.
Miss Sherry's book seems similar to the account published last year by former Citigroup trader John LeFevre, who was born in the UK and worked in London and Hong Kong.
In ‘Straight to Hell’ he told how he and his colleagues threw thousands of dollars over a shopping mall balcony in Manila in the Philippines during a party.
The group laughing as they watched poor people scoop the cash up until the police told them to stop.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3425498/Former-New-York-trader-says-male-workers-MOOED-lactating-drank-breast-milk-d-stored-office-fridge.html

Former New York trader says male co-workers MOOED at her when she was lactating and drank the breast milk she'd stored in the office fridge
A female former trader has lifted the lid on Wall St's shocking sexism
Maureen Sherry claims that women at Bear Steams were mocked
She revealed how male colleagues mooed at her when she was lactating
Ms Sherry also said that her male colleagues once drank her breast milk
By DANIEL BATES FOR MAILONLINE IN NEW YORK
PUBLISHED: 14:10 EST, 31 January 2016 | UPDATED: 14:49 EST, 31 January 2016

July 8, 2015

Brooklyn, NY District Attorney Criticized For Attitude Toward Women




[From article]
Brooklyn DA Ken Thompson, who made a fortune as a lawyer for women in harassment and sex-abuse cases, is ironically so rude to his own female staffers that they’re leaving his office in droves, sources told The Post.
At least 11 women have quit, or have been forced out or fired, during the past year, including high-profile prosecutor Coleen Balbert, whom Thompson recruited to head his Sex Crimes and Special Victims Bureau.
[. . .]
“There is a problem there with how he treats women,” said one woman who is part of the exodus, charging that Thompson “has a problem with women who are self-assured.”
[. . .]
Thompson’s office didn’t respond to a request for details on turnover, but a spokesman called the allegations a “despicable smear that’s belied by the facts.”
“The truth is that DA Thompson has hired and promoted more women than men since taking office,” spokesman Oren Yaniv said. “He appointed many women to key leadership positions and treats all employees professionally and respectfully.”
http://nypost.com/2015/07/07/brooklyn-da-is-a-sexist-bully-female-staffers-say/

Brooklyn DA is a sexist bully, female staffers say
By Michael Gartland
New York Post
July 7, 2015 | 10:44pm

May 30, 2015

Bill O'Reilly Allegedly Dragged His Wife By Her Hair Down Stairs, Caveman Style





[From article]
Fox News anchor Bill O'Reilly is alleged to have physically assaulted his ex-wife by dragging her down a staircase by the neck, according to evidence heard during a bitter court battle over custody of their two children.
A hard fought three-year custody dispute between O'Reilly and ex-wife Maureen McPhilmy finally ended last month when a Nassau County Supreme Court justice granted custody of the couple's two kids to their mother.
During the closed hearing a court-appointed forensic examiner testified that daughter Madeline, who is now 16, claimed she had witnessed her father dragging her mother down a staircase by her neck, reports Gawker.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3087041/Bill-O-Reilly-forced-deny-accusations-physically-assaulted-ex-wife-prior-2010-split-dragging-staircase-neck.html

Bill O'Reilly forced to deny accusations he physically assaulted his ex-wife prior to 2010 split by dragging her 'down a staircase by the neck'
The Fox News anchor is alleged to have physically assaulted his ex-wife Maureen McPhilmy by dragging her down a staircase by the neck
A court-appointed forensic examiner said O'Reilly's daughter told him about the incident as part of her parent's hard fought custody battle
Daughter Madeline, who is now 16, claimed she had witnessed her father dragging her mother down a staircase by her neck
O'Reilly issued a statement via his personal attorney in which he has called the allegations '100 percent false'
By DAVID MCCORMACK FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 18:22 EST, 18 May 2015 | UPDATED: 21:21 EST, 18 May 2015

May 21, 2015

Wife Of Multi-Millionaire Athlete Sues For Discrimination



Philippa Okoye, Sues "Sexist and Racist" Boss

[From article]
The wife of an NFL player says she worked in a real-life “Wolf of Wall Street’’ office where co-workers sexually harassed her and openly mocked her marriage to a black man.
[. . .]
Higher-up Benjamin Alderson “made it known that he wanted to model [their] office on the ‘Boiler Room’ and ‘Wolf of Wall Street’ films,’’ Philippa’s suit says.
“In those films, employees of male-dominated investment firms used highly offensive language and engaged in extremely inappropriate conduct, including sexual harassment and drug and alcohol use in the workplace.”
Philippa says she was the only woman in the Midtown office when she was hired as a senior investment adviser in October 2013.
Surrounded by about 21 male co-workers, she was exposed to sexist antics the first day, she said.
“So can you handle the banter or are you going to be a woman about it and be sensitive?’’ Alderson snipped, she said.

http://nypost.com/2015/05/19/nflers-wife-subjected-to-office-racism-and-harassment-suit/

NFLer’s wife subjected to office racism and harassment: suit
By Josh Saul
New York Post
May 19, 2015 | 1:41am

April 9, 2015

Liberal Journalist Attacks On Women


Liberal Journalist Attacks On Women



Uploaded on Mar 9, 2010

Sex, Violence and Hate: The Top 10 Most Disgusting Attacks on Conservative Women






Published on Mar 5, 2012
In light of the Rush Limbaugh 'slut' controversy, its important to take a look at the widespread misogyny talk of major left figures. Ed Shultz, Keith Olbermann and Bill Maher.

March 12, 2014

Useful Billionaire Idiot Woman Promotes Sexist Propaganda, Assisting Dividing Americans



[From article]
Men make up only half the labor force, down from 70 percent a generation ago. Sixty percent of the bachelor’s degrees in the United States are earned by women. Women hold most entry-level managerial jobs. Single women in urban areas out-earn men by as much as 8 percent, on average. Among all younger women, the infamous “pay gap” with men has shrunk to statistical insignificance. By some measures women dominate most of the fastest-growing professions. Over the last 30 years, their wages have risen 25 percent while those of men have fallen 4 percent.
[. . .]
sentences [from her book] like this one: “The night before Leymah Gbowee won the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize for helping to lead the women’s protests that toppled Liberia’s dictator, she was at a book party in my home.” I guess you had to be there.

Useful billionaire idiot woman promotes sexist propaganda, assisting to divide Americans more.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/brave-new-stereotypes_784265.html

Brave New Stereotypes
Behold the Lean In Collection
MAR 17, 2014, VOL. 19, NO. 26

April 23, 2013

University Students Play Ostrich, Deny Their Beliefs Are Misguided



 
Freedom Center Ads Depicting Victims of Islamic Apartheid Attacked, Censored in College Newspapers

Every year college campuses across the country hold a festival of hatred aimed at Jews and the Jewish State. Israeli Apartheid Week has become notorious for the targeted harassment of Jewish students, support for Hamas and even physical violence.

This year the David Horowitz Freedom Center responded to Israeli Apartheid Week with Islamic Apartheid Week. Unlike Israeli Apartheid Week, which is based on a lie, Islamic Apartheid Week addresses the sexism, homophobia and religious bigotry threatening minorities in the Muslim world. To promote Islamic Apartheid Week, the Freedom Center attempted to place an ad in forty college papers.

The ad called "Faces of Islamic Apartheid" drew attention to the victims of Islamic sexism, homophobia and theocracy by briefly telling the stories of gay men hanged in Iran, women and girls murdered by their governments and their families for the crime of falling in love and the Christian Minister for Minorities Affairs in Pakistan's cabinet who was murdered for trying to reform his country's theocratic blasphemy laws.

These four women, three men and one little girl were the victims of Islamic Apartheid. Five of them have been murdered. Their memory lives on only when they are remembered. One has been on death row for six years. Telling her story may help save her life. The remaining two live under threat of death.

Instead of listening to their stories, the campus culture of political correctness drowned out their voices and apologized for even allowing their stories to be told.

Nine college papers turned the ad down, five of them in the University of California system which has been criticized for tolerating anti-Semitism. When the California State Assembly passed a resolution condemning anti-Semitism on campus and warned that no public resources should be used for anti-Semitic hate, the University of California objected on free speech grounds. However free speech for Israeli Apartheid Week did not translate into free speech for Islamic Apartheid Week.

Seven college papers took the advertisement. Of those papers, Tufts University's Tufts Daily, Austin's Daily Texan, and UPENN’s Daily Pennsylvanian ran apologies from their editors for even printing the ad.

Tufts Daily editor Martha Shanahan called the decision to run the ad an "editorial oversight." Daily Texan editor Susannah Jacob denounced the attempt to tell the stories of victimized women and children as "hateful" and "an unspoken incitement to violence."

Martha Shanahan spent two pages apologizing for the existence of the "Islamophobic and violently offensive" advertisement, the existence of Tufts Daily, its staff and her own existence. At no point during her long series of apologies, did Martha acknowledge that her paper had run four editorials in a single week from Students for Justice in Palestine attacking Israel and promoting hatred for the Jewish State. And in an unequal response to this, it also ran a brief letter from Tufts Friends of Israel distancing itself from the ad and politely suggesting that apartheid shouldn't be used to refer to Israel.

Anthony Monaco, the President of Tufts University, took to Twitter to denounce the advertisement for vilifying Islam, but made no such denunciation of the Tufts Daily's op-ed, "The Case for Israeli Apartheid" which (not coincidentally) appeared on the same day as the ad. At Tufts, no one apologizes for accusing democratic Israel of apartheid. There are only apologies when theocratic Iran and Pakistan are accused of practicing Islamic Apartheid.

When anti-Israel voices are outweighed 4-to-1 and the editor apologizes for publishing another perspective that would have made it 4-to-2 then the freedom of debate at Tufts University is in a very sad state. When that same editor prints editorials describing Israel as an apartheid state, but promises to put in place an entire system of oversight to make certain that no advertisement challenging Islamic Apartheid is ever printed again, then a system of censorship has been put into place silencing the voices of victims and encouraging their persecutors.

The Daily Texan's Susannah Jacob claimed that the crosshairs over the faces of the victims were an incitement to violence when they were actually a way of bringing urgency to the violence that had been committed against them. And making it clear that she never even saw the advertisement that she was denouncing, Susannah described the ad as depicting six women, when it included two gay men, one Christian man and one little girl.

Susannah further distorted the truth about Islamic Apartheid when she described the pervasive sexism, homophobia and theocracy that these people fell victim to as "discrete incidents of violence by Muslims" being used "to implicate all Muslims" while ignoring the fact that five of the victims in the ad had been targeted by their governments or with government backing.

Can the Daily Texan's editor honestly claim that Iran's persecution of women and gay men or Pakistan's persecution of Christians are "discrete incidents of violence", rather than state policy? Could she find a single human rights organization that would agree with such a dishonest whitewashing of the terror under which millions live?

Jennifer Sun, editor of the Daily Pennsylvanian, printed a letter revealing that her paper’s executive board has decided that they “will no longer publish advertisements from the David Horowitz Freedom Center.” This stunning admission of censorship was apparently motivated due to negative campus response to our ad and pressure from the Muslim Students Association and the university’s interfaith student group, PRISM.

The responses to the advertisement have established once again that some forms of apartheid are privileged on campus and that some forms of persecution cannot be talked about. Demonizing the Israeli victims of Islamic terror is within the realm of campus free speech, but speaking about the vulnerable minorities in the Muslim world is not.

If the advertisement was wrong, then there would have been no need to censor it. False claims can easily be disproven. Five minutes with Google would have told every reader and editor whether there was any truth to the Faces of Islamic Apartheid.

It is never necessary to censor lies. It is only necessary to censor truth.

That is why the majority of campus papers – ten so far, including Harvard whose editors said they would not print it under any circumstances -- refused to run this paid advertisement. It is why those few who did have begun making ritual apologies while lying about its contents. It is why the attacks on the advertisement have taken refuge in vague platitudes about offensiveness, without a single attempt at a factual rebuttal. It is why every response to the advertisement has consisted of claiming that speaking about Islamic bigotry is the real bigotry.

There were eight faces and eight names in the censored advertisement that the President of Tufts, the editors of Tufts Daily, the Daily Texan and the editors of ten college papers that turned down the ad, did not want their students to see or know about because it might disturb the manufactured campus consensus that they have constructed with great effort around Israel and Islamic terrorism.

These are the names. Amina Said. Sarah Said. Afshan Azad. Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. Shahbas Bhatti. Rimsha Masih. Mahmoud Asgari. Ayaz Marhoni.

They were repressed as individuals. Now their story is being repressed on the American campus.

★   ★   ★

November 3, 2011

Cambridge Discrimination Complaints Details

The question is: Who did not give her the amount of desired support? Was it her supervisor in Cambridge, or the US DOE? I do not know the details of this event which gave rise to the complaint and settlement. But after 32 years of seeing close up outrageous claims racism for any and all events which a Black person did not like, it creates suspicion about the validity of any claims without evidence. Feelings of unhappiness brought thousands if not millions of complaints of racism. How much more can we bear if every time someone, anyone has hurt feelings it becomes a federal case? Certain specific acts are prohibited by law. But every instance of discrimination is not unlawful, or actionable.

[From article]
"According to the complaint: in her first year, Wong was successful in creating an important grant proposal for a Center for Families pilot program funded by the Federal Department of Education. While the DOE considered the application to be outstanding and ranked it number one among the proposals it received, Wong found that she was not offered the same assistance offered to white employees.
When she asked her supervisor for more support she was denied help and told to “work harder.”

http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x167854483/Details-exposed-on-Cambridge-discrimination-case#axzz1cfUP4QNu

Details exposed on Cambridge discrimination case
By Scott Wachtler/swachtler (at) wickedlocal.com
Cambridge Chronicle
Posted Nov 03, 2011 @ 07:00 AM

November 17, 2008

Beautiful Bridge


*Sincere Apologies To Everyone*

Over the past months I posted funny pictures and jokes for friends I
thought shared the same sense of humor. Unfortunately this wasn't the case and I seem to have upset quite a few people who have accused me of being sexist and shallow.
If you were one of these people, please accept my humblest apologies.
From now on I will only post items with a cultural or educational content
such as old monuments, nature and other interesting structures.

Attached you'll find a picture of the Pont Neuf Bridge in Paris.
For those of you who are interested, Pont Neuf is the oldest bridge in
Paris and took 26 years to build. Construction began in 1578 and ended in 1604.
'Le Pont Neuf' is actually made of 2 independent bridges, one with seven
arches and the other with five arches.
Fascinating.
*WHAT A NICE BRIDGE*

March 14, 2007

This Story Has No Legs

This Story Has No Legs

Two Boston academics weigh in on news legs. "It doesn't belong on a news
show [...] Showing off someone's legs is probably not a good message to be
showing the viewers," said Belle Adler.
"A person who is an anchor is trying to describe the news and her legs have
nothing to do with it," Balser said. "It demeans her ability to communicate the
news well to people [...]" It's "so out of order" she added. (JESSICA HESLAM, "GAM SHOW MAY BE KATIE'S LEG-ACY, Critics won't skirt the issue," Boston Herald, September 7, 2006)
It is extremely curious that these two Boston academics state the obvious
with respect to Katie Couric. But they remain silent when child of Andy Rooney,
Emily shows her leggy legs nine out of ten daily shows she does on the PBS
station. She does what many call news also. So why is there a pass for Rooney
but not for Couric? Can someone explain that to me? Is it OK to show legs on non
profit TV, but not on for profit?

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA


Boston Herald (MA)
GAM SHOW MAY BE KATIE'S LEG-ACY
Critics won't skirt the issue
By JESSICA HESLAM
September 7, 2006

She's got great legs and CBS knows how to use them - but women scholars are
divided on whether Katie Couric should keep her sexy stems behind the anchor
desk.
Wearing stilettos and a skirt, Couric's toned and taut legs made their first
appearance before the first commercial break Tuesday evening during Couric's
"CBS Evening News" debut.

"It doesn't belong on a news show - making somebody a little bit sexual. Showing
off someone's legs is probably not a good message to be showing the viewers,"
said Belle Adler, an associate professor of broadcast journalism at Northeastern
University.

Diane Balser, a professor of women studies at Boston University, said
objectifying a woman anchoring the evening news is "so out of order."

"A person who is an anchor is trying to describe the news and her legs have
nothing to do with it," Balser said. "It demeans her ability to communicate the
news well to people because it points their attention to the objectification of
women."

Couric's shapely legs were front and center as she interviewed New York Times
columnist Thomas Friedman face to face shortly into her first network newscast.
The usual third-place CBS news show clinched the No. 1 spot that night, with
13.6 million people tuning in.

The legs were much less prevalent last night. When the 49-year-old Couric
co-hosted "Today," her tanned legs and short skirts were practically a show
staple.

CBS spokeswoman Sandy Genelius said "they shot her (Couric) as you would shoot
any anchor on a news set." As for those who say CBS is playing up Couric's legs,
Genelius called it "bunk."

Carol Jenkins, a former TV anchor and Women's Media Center board member, said
"the more women the better, whether they show their legs or not."

Jenkins said Couric's debut was a milestone and women across the country were
thrilled. Actress Marlo Thomas held a viewing party and feminist leader Gloria
Steinem - founder of the Women's Media Center - cried.

"We have to get used to seeing women's legs without falling down and pointing
and giggling like we haven't seen women's legs before," Jenkins said. "We just
have to get over it."
- jheslam@bostonherald.com