I don't know about anyone else but this is ludicrous in this day and age - I can barely believe this is actual training and policy for women in their organization. Also, that a woman Marsha Clark (not that one) and her consulting firm do the presentation and are part of this crusade to make women look like they need to be told how to act, dress etc, and any problems in the workplace are probably their fault. .

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-er ... e33e78606a

Not to nit-pick, but it's ludicrous in any day and age. I can't imagine being there and keeping my mouth shut. I'd probably have to be escorted out by security.

you and me both, rosanne. . .

I'm with both KB and roseanne ~ it was a standing joke in the office whether my boss [then managing partner firm-wide] or I was the scarier ~

GOPers generally have a mindset of "women belong in the kitchen and the bedroom" ~ I'm convinced they are scared of strong women ~

Sooz

Unfortunately, this is not just a GOP affiliated problem. The fact that this woman can make a living as a consultant spewing this crap attests to the pervasive beliefs in the work world that women should dress and behave differently from men, and should expect different treatment than men. And that somehow that is good for women and good for business with absolutely no empirical evidence to support.

A lot of people are unprepared to accept strong women- both women and men.

How does this program differ from the dozens of "Dress for Power" and "Get The Job You Really Want", "How To Get Ahead In Male Dominated Workplace, or Managing Male Employees etc. programs or even the old "Women are from Venus, Men are from Mars" books? They all say pretty much the same thing.

The differentiation between ok and not ok is when the underlying theme is women's natural behaviors are bad, must change, men's natural behaviors are good or all women are like this because they are women, all men are like this because they are men. The ok ones send a message that this behavior is better for this circumstance, whether it is a behavior traditionally associated with women or with men.

Remember that in the opening post you are getting what seems to be a fairly slanted view of the presentation. It really doesn't seem to have said much different that the books and programs I asked about and it was attended by a good many women (given the company, probably well educated, confident women) who have not complained about it. It's also very possible there were women among those who approved the presentation in the first place. A presentation in a place like Ernst & Young doesn't get approved easily.

The 55-page presentation, used during the day-and-a-half seminar on leadership and empowerment, was given to HuffPost by an attendee who was appalled by its contents

from paragraph 2

I would guess that attendance was mandatory and most women would fear for their job security should they speak out against the content. Just guessing....

Just because the programs you mentioned are similar doesn't make this one right, nor any of them. Women have "gone along to get along" in the workplace far too long with this kind of thing. Unfortunately it's ingrained into our culture. Remember, there was a time that working women were an anomaly. Then they were tolerated when so many men went off to war and they were needed. Then the economy almost dictated that families needed two working adults. Then, at last, women got tired of cooking and cleaning and wanted careers. Divorce became more common and women had to work to support their children. Our culture has changed. Too bad a majority of the patriarchy has been slow to do that.

The only problem with your assertion, Roseanne, is the program was voluntary, was requested by women and was presented to company executives (hardly the shy, retiring type) and received high marks from many of the attendees. This quote below - which was buried deep in the story - is what tells me Huff Post has offered up a bit of a slanted view of the program.

The training was just one of many that the firm offered to men and women, EY told HuffPost. PPP was created by someone outside the company, “an external vendor,” EY said, and offered because some women requested it.
The company said it disagrees with the way the content of the seminar is characterized in this story. “Any isolated aspects are taken wholly out of context,” EY said in a statement. The company said it reviewed the evaluations of women who participated in the program, and found they rated it highly. EY’s communications team also shared quotes from two current employees, who praised the training.
“Professionally, PPP was the most impactful leadership program that I have had the opportunity to participate in and I have always been incredibly proud and humbled to have been a part of it,” EY senior executive Stacey Moore, who participated in the training four years ago, said in a statement provided by company. “I am forever grateful to the firm for the opportunity and the investment in our women.”
Indeed, some EY partners include references to the PPP program on their LinkedIn pages. In May, female EY employees gathered for a PPP reunion and “graduation.” A LinkedIn post from one EY employee about that gathering says that more than 150 women have taken the course

The only problems I see in your assertion are these:

E&Y claimed it was voluntary.
Possibly requested by (how many?)women to demonstrate their willingness to be submissive (lady-like) and/or their jealousy of other women who get ahead by demonstrating such attributes.
E&Y is (I presume) a pretty elite employment opportunity
E&Y female employees would possibly not want to rock the boat (see above)

Unless you've ever been a female employee, you would not understand how women behave or what they may do or say in order to maintain or advance their jobs/positions when the hierarchy are men. It's sad to watch.

Just sayin' all that from a woman's perspective. I've seen it.

Not going to keep arguing with you jim. I could go on and on, but I have better things to do.