11-29-10 The Ceiling

The Ceiling

Many girls my age have had to listen to their parents tell them of a glass ceiling, and how it is their destiny to help make a crack. Today thousands of women are taking the best of the best white-collar jobs out there. By snatching positions as nurses and secretaries, and now CEOs, two thirds of American women enter into the work force. That number is expected to increase by fifteen percent by the end of the year. These are great strides for women since the sixties; however, until our country sees and accepts more women into blue-collar jobs the glass ceiling will remain in tact.

In the early 1900s, only twenty percent of women were involved in the labor market. That number has more than tripled. Today a job has become a necessity. Yet, women still make less than men do. They tend to be higher educated, and due to the maternal instinct spend every dime they earn on their families. So why is it that for every dollar, a man makes twenty-three cents more? Many economists say that this gap is because women tend to work fewer hours than men, and choose lower paying jobs. This gap is closing as more women enter the workplace and fight for equal pay. The actual jobs women are choosing, now, also close this gap. Either women are now choosing higher paying jobs, or they are choosing blue-collar jobs both pledge to pay the same amount to each gender, dollar for dollar. Yet, women in specialty jobs are seen to have lesser pay as seen in a study by the New York Times. For example, a woman working as a physician or surgeon makes forty percent less than men do. Whereas, women working as data entry keyers or as social workers, make equal pay to men.

Women in higher paying white-collar jobs have to work longer than men to be promoted. Some studies contribute this disparity to gender based biases, and others refer to the fact that men and women take different strategies to gain higher positions. This begs the question, whether women are tough enough in today’s society to take the higher positions. Male CEOs still maintain as heads of the best Fortune 500 companies, but women employ thirty five percent more workers than those companies combined. It is expected that women are to take these higher paying jobs, but when women have to struggle more than men to reach them is it worth it? Absolutely.

Women have made great strides in the workplace for my generation and the next. However, a bigger obstacle stands in our way. The lack of acceptance for women to be employed as plumbers, electricians, and postal carriers. Women are more educated and have been on a quest since the beginning of time, to beat men at their own game. We have achieved that goal but it was in this quest that we ignored the male dominated professions.

The east coast is obsessed with the idea of women in blue-collar jobs. Two years ago “NBC Nightly News” spent a whole week following women in those professions, obsessing on how they could possibly manage it. That is the secret to why most of America is obsessed with women like Sarah Palin, women who are frontier like, clubbing halibut and hunting. In the meantime, women in the western states of Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, etc. are not impressed by her antics. Here from the very beginning women had to learn to stand on their own and take up the jobs that were necessary for living. Jobs in the utilities sector and the postal industry are part of our every day lives, and it is a shame there are not many women in those professions. They are good paying jobs with plenty of benefits and yet, men still dominate those careers.

My mother is a driver for the United Parcel Service. She has worked for UPS for over twenty years. She has seen the look of surprise on peoples faces when they open the door expecting a sweaty man and see my sweaty mother instead. She was shocked when after she told a New York driver that she was in the same profession he told her that there were only two female drivers at his hub. We cannot bring ourselves to accept that women are equal to men. That is why they are paid less and are in stationary jobs. They sit in cubicles and tell themselves that they need to accept this job even if it pays less than the guy in the office. Women can never be seen as equals until they treat themselves like equals. Then only then can we break through the glass ceiling with men and women working side by side for equal pay and equal opportunity to provide for their families. Women must accept these jobs with open arms.

I do not wish to be taken out of context. I am not suggesting that women should not try to become CEOs, doctors, or even secretaries and waitresses. I am saying that no one should assign a specific gender to an occupation. Men should not think they could not become nurses, receptionists, or bookkeepers because they seem too effeminate. Every job has a use. Every society needs people to seek out these careers to work. The ceiling is then sure to crumble.  

Works Cited

"10 Surprising Statistics on Women in the Workplace - CollegeTimes™." CollegeTimes - College Blog, Reviews, Humor, Forum, and More! 15 Feb. 2010. Web. 30 Nov. 2010. <http://collegetimes.us/10-surprising-statistics-on-women-in-the-workplace/>.

Hopkins, Jim. "USATODAY.com - Female-owned Companies Flourish." News, Travel, Weather, Entertainment, Sports, Technology, U.S. & World - USATODAY.com. 05 May 2003. Web. 30 Nov. 2010. <http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/2003-05-05-women_x.htm>.

"USATODAY.com - Study Finds Women Largely Confined to 'pink-collar' Jobs." News, Travel, Weather, Entertainment, Sports, Technology, U.S. & World - USATODAY.com. 04 May 2003. Web. 30 Nov. 2010. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-05-04-pink-collar_x.htm>.

"Why Is Her Paycheck Smaller? - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 30 Nov. 2010. Web. 30 Nov. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/03/01/business/20090301_WageGap.html?8dpc>.

11-07-10 "My Opponent Is..." Works Cited

Works Cited 

Boyce, Greg. "Unofficial 2010 Election Results | NewsFirst5.com | Colorado Springs | Pueblo." Unofficial 2010 Election Results. 04 Nov. 2010. Web. 07 Nov. 2010. <http://www.newsfirst5.com/news/unofficial-2010-election-results/>. 

"Elections Over, Ads Just Beginning? - Local News - Jacksonville, FL - Msnbc.com." Breaking News, Weather, Business, Health, Entertainment, Sports, Politics, Travel, Science, Technology, Local, US & World News- Msnbc.com. 04 Nov. 2010. Web. 07 Nov. 2010. <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40014158>. 

Sorensen, Adam. "Can the Republicans Make a Twin Killing in California?" Time Magazine. Time Magazine, 20 Sept. 2010. Web. 07 Nov. 2010. <http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2019138_2019132_2020303,00.html>. 

11-07-10 "My Opponent Is..." Negative Advertisements Form a Negative View on Government

           For the past year, negative advertisements have swarmed the airwaves. “My opponent dresses like a Nazi on weekends…” “My opponent isn’t a true Christian…” “My opponent is a socialist… “ These comments are only a few left over from the past midterm election. All parties involved were guilty, painting their opponent as outlandish, cruel, and dishonest. Yet, for once both parties could finally agree on something. Those commercials are exhausting. Elections have always had negative advertisements, but this year’s election was filled with only negative views. Making it impossible for any person elected to receive respect from the American people. Negative advertisements have been seen to have a deeper affect on voters, yet once in office there is distrust from the beginning.

            Studies have shown that in today’s society, negative advertisements tend to have a deeper influence on voter turn out. Almost as if the American people enjoy watching a candidate go up in flames. Yet, most polls show that the American people feel like these ads have no impact on their voting decisions. Then why do politicians feel like they need to continue using violent advertisements? This tactic is not only reserved for politicians. In Colorado there was an ad supporting Amendment 62, a law stating that protozoa in the womb are humans, making it impossible for any woman to have an abortion under any circumstance. This ad portrayed President Barack Obama the “angel of death.” The commercial was so offensive it was taken off the air immediately. On Election Day, seventy one percent voted no, and the amendment was not passed. Could this have been due to such a negative campaign?  Yet for politicians, negative advertisements make one look slightly better than the other. An edge that is necessary in harsh elections such as these.

            Could this edge help them when in office? The answer is no. Already they have a bad reputation, and the American people have trouble trusting them. In 2008 twenty three million Americans between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five voted, the highest turnout of young voters in history. In this weeks midterm election only nine million turned in their ballots. True, midterm elections always have a smaller turnout than presidential elections. But, what happened to that enthusiasm? Could it have been smothered by negative political ads by either party? Meghan Mohon, although she is only sixteen and not old enough to vote, made an excellent point: “It’s like choosing between the lesser of two evils…” This is what happened to the young voters. Negative ad after negative ad has formed a pessimistic view on government as a whole.

            This disapproving view on government was at times the basis of many political ads. “The Pelosi /Obama agenda” and “taking back our country” was at times plastered on TV screens for the entire commercial break. This promise to change, yet again, was the reason sixty house seats were turned over to the Republicans, furthering the party divide. This divide will make it harder for either party to continue with their plans.  This forces them to compromise, a plan which some senators and representatives have already shot down. Words used throughout the campaign like socialist, communist, muslim, and infidel stick even after Election Day. Now many congressmen have to compromise with these people they insulted for the past year. These are people who they openly disagree with, and now, together, have to find a middle ground. Their negative advertisements are now becoming their downfall.

            One would think that once the election is over, the ads would cease. Yet, that is not necessarily true. Now those elected in office have to keep their supporters enthusiastic for the next two years, something the Obama administration did not focus on. It is projected that now, more than ever, the American people will continue to see negative political ads. The plan is to keep the populace angry, and end the current administration. It is not to form more jobs, fix the economy, or help solve the current education crisis, it is to gain power through harmful bantering between the two parties. If these elected officials spent as much money on the country as they do political ads, the economic recession would be softened. In a “Time” article on Meg Whitman’s campaign: “She has already given $119 million to her own campaign, making her the single largest self-donor among statewide candidates in U.S. history, and is on pace to spend tens of millions more by Election Day.” (Sorensen Sept. 20, 2010) This in a state where unemployment has reached twelve percent and the deficit is around twenty million dollars. (Sorensen).

              The political world has become nothing more than blasting ones opponent. They throw around insults, lies, and secrets to portray their rivals as scum to give them an edge. Yet, when in office, they struggle to cooperate with those whom they disagree with, and the American people sit waiting for the change promised. The younger generation of voters loose interest quickly when political candidates attack each other ceaselessly. What is the cause of this pandemonium? Negative political ads. The effect is a nation divided by hate and gridlock, a populace with deep seeded distrust in the government and a lack of interest in change. The solution for this struggle cannot be for the American people to be nice to each other, that does not win elections. Yet, citizens should not be forced to listen to one angry ad after another. Instead, it is the candidate’s job to think of how they will present themselves to the voters. In Governor Hickenlooper’s campaign, he produced a commercial showing how after every negative ad he feels like he needs a shower. He told the voters his views while not portraying his opponents negatively. He won with fifty one percent of the Colorado population’s vote. If more candidates had ran a campaign like this one, there would have been less anger in the voting places. And maybe the American people would be confident in their choices.