Women's Incivility to Women

You think men are bad, take a look at the way women treat other women in the workplace. Instances of male sexual harassment are legion. And they fit neatly within the dominant ideological narrative. You know which one: the one that sees men as oppressive patriarchs who want above all else to abuse and exploit women.

When women mistreat other women, we do not call it harassment. We call it incivility. Mostly, it does not involve exchanging sexual favors for job promotion. It involves women undermining other women by acting uncivilly. It is more subtle, but certainly damaging.

Joann Lublin explains that women prefer not to report such instances. They believe that other issues, like pay equity, are more important. And they surmise that complaining too much will make them look like complainers. Given the current national conversation about sexual harassment, a women who complains about some disparaging remarks will not taken as seriously.

Women mistreating other women… it means being impolite and being treated disrespectfully. It means conducting psychological warfare, using bad manners.

Lublin writes:

Women are 14% to 21% more likely than men to report experiencing uncivil treatment from female co-workers, according to a study led by Allison S. Gabriel, an associate professor at University of Arizona’s Eller College of Management.

The study, which reflects three surveys covering 1,340 male and female employees in the U.S. in a variety of occupations and industries, defined incivility as being ignored, interrupted, mocked or treated disrespectfully. It found that women mistreated by female counterparts reported lower job satisfaction.

“We are the first to help clarify that it [incivility] seems to be more of an experience women are experiencing from other women than from men,” Ms. Gabriel said.

Perhaps women feel that they are competing against other women for a small number of management positions. Yet, another explanation offers itself. For all I know, women are more individualistic and less likely to function as team members. After all, girls to not spend as much time on playing fields. They do not have dress codes and uniforms. They do not learn sportsmanship and team play. Case in point: Hillary Clinton.

More likely, young women learn about the business world by taking courses in feminist ideology. Such courses teach that the corporate world is an organized conspiracy to oppress the disadvantaged for the benefit of the patriarchy. They learn that it’s all drama and that it’s all abuse and oppression. So, they try to climb up the corporate hierarchy by undermining  other women. They must see that most men do not tolerate such mistreatment.

Lublin’s article does not mention it, but women compete against other women for male attention. Surely, it matters whether a woman is married or unmarried, a mother or not a mother. Women who have small children at home are at a decided disadvantage when competing in the workplace against women without children.

Childless women are not very sympathetic to mothers whose loyalties are divided between work and home. For all you and I know childless women disrespect working mothers because the latter are less committed to their jobs. How many times do childless women need to cover for mothers who are obliged to stay home with a sick child or to rush off to a school meeting.

But... said childless women expect to be treated equally and to receive the same compensation.