Ellen Pao is Awesome: Part One

Ellen Pao is Awesome: Part One

On March 27, Ellen Pao lost her gender discrimination lawsuit against the venture capital firm where she formerly worked. Pao and her attorneys argued that over the course of her 7 year career at the firm, she was treated unfairly, was not promoted, and was ultimately fired due to gender discrimination. But the court, sadly, did not agree. Apparently the sexism she experienced just couldn’t quite be proved, as is brilliantly referenced in this New York Magazine Article.

We’ve talked about this over and over again in class. What’s better: Outright, overt isms? Or consistent, subtle micro-aggressions? They’re both painful; they both cause harm to the perpetrator as well as the recipient. But the more I think about the issue, the more I’m recognizing that micro-aggressions are more damaging. Not because they are any more painful to hear or process, but because the person on the receiving end must go through so much stress simply determining intent. “Did that person say that to me because I’m a woman? Was I reviewed poorly because I rejected his sexual advances? Would they have listened to my idea more intently if I were a man?”

It takes so much emotional time and energy to process these instances of sexism. We can drive ourselves crazy wondering! And beyond that, after we have determined that, yes! That was sexism! Then, we have to bear the burden of proof. If you’re called “a c*nt” in the office, everyone agrees that the perpetrator is sexist. If you’re called “sweetie,” how can you prove that it’s doing you any harm?

That’s the problem with this next-generation sexism. Women often have no allies, no one to turn to for validation, no one who believes their experiences. We’re left with this feeling that something is wrong, but we can’t quite prove it.

Ellen Pao tried to prove it. Unfortunately, she didn’t win in the courts. But perhaps she’ll win in other ways. After all, we’re talking about it, aren’t we?



One thought on “Ellen Pao is Awesome: Part One

  1. What comes up for me when reading your post is our society’s obsession with “proof.” To me, providing “proof” means feeding into our society’s demand for whiteness. Data and proof uphold whiteness because data and proof are born from things that are deemed worthy and acceptable by those in power (read: white men). Our society is so well practiced at not receiving or believing the experiences of targeted groups, whether it is women, people of color, trans*individuals…DATA is the only acceptable and legitimate language and DATA only comes from white-centric trials, funded by the powerful…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s