This article first appeared on AVFM Romania.
At the end of the last week, the gutless faceless sociologists that the media quotes with authority have released what they call a “sociological survey” regarding how do women feel discriminated against at the workplace in north-western Romania, says Actual de Cluj.
The great frustration of all “progressive” ideologues is that Romanians in general tend to be quite aware of the basic facts of life and they are less likely than other peoples of Europe to rush into sacrificing their families, their relationships and their social structures on the altar of forced equality of outcome.
The absolute majority of Romanians know, either from direct experience, or from their parents, that the progressive equality tends to end in rationed bread and forced admissions in a mental hospital in case of wrongthink.
And this lately survey serves to show, yet again, that in spite of the feminist agitprop, Romanian women continue to insist in crediting common sense and their native tendencies and reject the ideological pressures of this day and age. And this aspect drives ideologues nuts.
For instance, the team of sociologists who conducted this survey declares that they are profoundly “surprised” by the fact that women consistently prefer to have a male boss and not a female boss.
The fact that they are surprised shows that either the team of sociologists that conducted this survey is filled with sinister incompetents, or is filled with ideologues who aren’t terribly interested in the facts, but rather in building a narrative that would allow them to manipulate the public. In all fairness, both of these are perfectly possible.
The answers provided by the Romanian women in the survey are almost word-for-word consistent with the answers provided by American women, British women, Swedish women or Spanish women in similar surveys. In any country in which similar studies have been made, the inescapable fact that most women prefer a male boss and not a female boss has been revealed without exceptions.
Moreover, the reasons given by Romanian women for this preference are almost identical to the ones given by British women. For instance, from a survey conducted in 2010 in Great Britain, which revealed similar tendencies in that country, we learn that:
Two thirds of employees agree they would rather work for a man than a woman.
Female bosses were accused of being moody and incapable of leaving their personal lives at home.
A third of those polled claimed women in charge are ‘loose cannons’ – ready to stab colleagues in the back at any time, and who constantly feel threatened by other people in positions of authority.By contrast, both male and female workers believe male bosses were less likely to get involved in office politics, were easier to reason with and rarely suffered from mood swings.
Men are also said to be more straight-talking than women and rarely talk about others behind their backs, it emerged.
The esteemed sociologists, led by Alina Bîrsan, sociologist at Encore Research SRL (LLC), who conducted this survey in northern Transylvania explained for the paper the reasons given by the female interviewees for their preference:
All female respondents, regardless of their level of education, would rather prefer working for a man than a woman. They say that such an arrangement is more appropriate since men represent the institution better on the outside, they manage conflicts in the workplace better, they don’t try to micromanage everything and they don’t waste time by involving themselves in all the components of a process. [Women in the survey] also said that male bosses tend to have a much more relaxed attitude than a woman and that women bosses tend to be a lot more demanding for the subordinates.
So, they’re more straight talking (and thus solve conflicts better), don’t get themselves into petty gossip (more relaxed attitude) and are not obsessed with control (no micromanagement). One would say that the Romanian women had a consultation session with the British women before filling out the questionnaire.
More to the point, the revelations of this survey are perfectly congruent with a more comprehensive study made several years ago by Gallup România1. In 2003, the study called Women’s access on the labour market made by Gallup Romania revealed that:
In almost all [studied] groups the difficulty of working with female collectives was mentioned. Gossip, envy and lack of support are problems that frequently emerge in female-dominated collectives. […] At the same time, most female respondents stated that they prefer working in male-dominated collectives, arguing that one can always count on help and respect among men. One of the participants from Satu Mare summed up the argument by saying: “Only among men can a woman feel like a lady”.
Didn’t Alina Bîrsan and her taxpayer-subsidized sociologist team know these aspects? If not, then maybe they should consider starting a career in hamburger flipping – because in their current field they have already proven their limits. If they knew these aspects, why were they surprised? Were they sort of hoping that in the meantime the women in this country have mentally regressed to such an extent that they’d now swallow the feminist fairy tales?
The question from above is not exactly a rhetorical one since Bîrsan provides a hint in her answers that she might have hoped that Romanian women swallowed at least a bit from the feminist kool-aid that is being subsidized with tens of millions of euros for propaganda annually. Alina Bîrsan explains for Actual de Cluj:
Moreover, many women do not want to be bosses, ”because they say that family comes first and one can’t perform best in both”.
How did we get to the point where women prefer their bosses to be always men and, more importantly, not to even aspire to be bosses? The causes are profound, says Bîrsan and she explains: “it’s a reproduction of the familial environment; that’s how we grew up – with the man leading the family and that’s what we expect in the workplace. And women say they feel safer that way” – says the sociologist. “[The women] are very comfortable with this arrangement. They seem to draw positive feelings by being in this position. For now, unfortunately, it seems that women prefer to be secondary; they don’t mind working more but they do mind being at the forefront” (emphasis ours)
That unfortunately seems to suggest that the team of sociologists is at the very least trying to explain the facts away through an ideological perspective. This tendency is also revealed by the fact that women’s preferences for male bosses and rejection of female bosses is described as “misogyny” instead of a more neutral (and much more correct) description such as the fact that this preference is the result of past experiences.
The argument that “that’s how we grew up” is also dubious at the very least once we put these responses into an international context. The social context in Great Britain is now totally different than the one in Romania. In the UK, divorce is sky high, the family court system works on a Kafka-esque model and huge areas of that country are essentially man-deserts, as Erin Pizzey calls them. And yet, British women have the same preferences with Romanian women when it comes to bosses.
When one finds such congruences on completely different groups that come from completely different social contexts, any researcher worth his salt has to wonder whether this may be the result not of a social construction, but rather biology. But these questions are now outside of the Overton window of the social sciences in the Academe – where the ideology of social constructivism is now the official dogma.
Let’s be crystal clear on this one: no-one says that nice female bosses don’t exist. A significant proportion of individuals can bring up one, or maybe even two pleasant experiences with female bosses. However, by and large, the experience with female bosses – both for women and for men – tend to be negative and generally worse than one’s experiences with male bosses. And the reasons for this state of affairs are diverse and go beyond the usual “social construct” claptrap.
Romanian women tend to be adult
In total contradiction with the multilaterally-progressive sociologists, Romanian women tend to put their families first and they tend to be perfectly aware of the feminine nature and tendencies and take them as they are (as opposed to ignoring them or, even worse, shout out loud that they don’t exist).
For what sociologists call “gender roles” – Romanian women tend to apply the correct term: nature. And Romanian women seem to tend to know better than the ideologues that messing around at a fundamental level with your own natural inclinations tends to end badly.
Whilst in other countries women have allowed themselves to be manipulated by the ideology that promises that you can “have it all,” Romanian women aren’t even trying to bother listening to the ideological fairy tales. One of the reasons for this is that almost all Romanian women can ask their parents what happened the last time when the ideological fairy tale of absolute equality of outcome was put into practice.
In other words, Romanian women tend to be adult. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Unless you’re a sociologist, in which case you would treat any trace of normality and common sense as inherently bad and oppressive; and as something that must be deconstructed ASAP in the good tradition of the dialectics.
Reference:
1 V. Marinescu; V. Pricopie – Accesul Femeilor pe Piața Muncii, The Gallup Organization Romania, 2003, p. 43
