Why do feminists care how many Fortune 500 CEOs are female?

It doesn’t make any sense to care how many Fortune 500 CEOs are female. Instead, what does matter is how many of the Fortune 500 companies were started by a woman in the first place.

A fake feminist demands that companies created by men hire more female CEOs. A real feminist starts her own company and makes herself the CEO.


March 18, 2015. Tags: , , , , , , . Politics, Sexism.


  1. EDell replied:

    You hate blacks, you hate women, you hate immigrants, you hate gays, you seem to hate all the right-wing talking points du jour things to hate for a right winger. You march very well in goose step with your ilk, it seems. Do you have an independent mind of your own? Didn’t think so. The number of CEOs in Corporate America probably amounts to being the lowest representation of females for any group or occupation out there, at a measly 4%. That’s an abysmal figure and one that highly suggests of a virtually impenetrable old boys network fiercely wanting to remain in charge of things. And becoming the CEO of one’s own company isn’t exactly done with the snap of one’s fingers, especially when one doesn’t have an old boys network to nurture their way to success.

    • danfromsquirrelhill replied:

      When feminists demand that companies started by men hire more female CEOS, they are saying that women need men to rescue them.

      A real feminist starts her own business and makes herself the CEO. She does not need a man to rescue her.

  2. EDell replied:

    No, that’s not what they’re saying at all. They’re pointing to what is an obvious omission of women from CEO ranks for whatever arbitrary reasons that men in executive positions have. The same would apply to blacks and other minorities as well.

    “The number of white women who were CEOs in each year since 2000 increased at a fairly dramatic rate. In 2000, there were four white women CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, and as of January 15, 2014, there were 23, an almost sixfold increase.

    However, a new and unexpected pattern has emerged for the other underrepresented groups. By the end of 2013, diversity in the CEO position had declined for them. The number of African American CEOs dropped from its peak of seven in 2007 to six, the number of Latinos from 13 in 2008 to 10, and the number of Asian Americans from 15 in 2011 to 10.”


    So it seems that what ever modest, but still laughable, gains women had made since 2000 was largely at the expense of other minorities, with a net plus of even more white males in CEO positions. Clearly, there’s a systemic problem of an old white boys network in the upper ranks of Corporate America that is dug in real deep and which refuses to bend much in accommodating itself to recognizing others who aren’t privileged white males but who could nevertheless be just as competent and effective, if not more so, than the old white boys. Seems you can’t see that, or much of anything else, beyond your hand at arm’s length.

    • danfromsquirrelhill replied:

      Women are not “minorities.” They make up 51% of the adult population.

      It would be great if more blacks and Latinos, as well as more women, started their own Fortune 500 companies.

      Starting a Fortune 500 company is a huge accomplishment. Becoming a CEO of a Fortune 500 company that was started by someone else is not an accomplishment, if it happened because the person whined and complained and demanded that someone else put them in that position.

      • EDell replied:

        Women are a minority in the CEO ranks of Corporate America and they’re viewed by CEOs as a minority to be reflected in their ranks as such. And it’s not about starting your own Fortune 500 company, it’s about establishing a career within such a company that white men do easily enough and climb up the ranks without much problem compared to their female colleagues and other minorities who also would like to make a career move up the ranks in the same company. And for a Fortune 500 company to become one, it takes decades to get to that point so it’s not as mindlessly simple as snapping your fingers and bingo, I’ve got a Fortune 500 company, in the way you deliriously fantasize it to be. It’s extremely rare that a company will achieve that status in less than a decade out of the 22+ million companies there are in the US and something that can be counted on maybe half the fingers on one hand. Snap out of your hallucinatory right wing coma.

      • danfromsquirrelhill replied:

        A real feminist starts her own Fortune 500 company and makes herself the CEO.

        A fake feminist expects a Fortune 500 company that was started by a man to come to her rescue and make her the CEO. It’s very similar to those women in fairy tales who expect Prince Charming to come to their rescue.

  3. EDell replied:

    You’re utterly clueless as to what constitutes a real feminist. But it’s interesting how you avoid discussing why women are denied climbing the ranks of the corporate ladder within a company they chose to make a career with, the way men can easily do so seemingly without a problem. That’s where feminism really kicks in, making CEOs aware that they actually have female employees who can do just as good of a job, if not better, than male ones. But given a choice between a male and female candidate of equal caliber for a top position and the CEO will go with the male one 99.99% of the time – because they’re easier to fit into the old boys network and the culture that comes with it. And there is no such thing as starting your own Fortune 500 company, either for men or women. It doesn’t happen that way in the real world for the 22 million companies that got started up, including those by women. Time to flush out the right wingnuttiness in your brain and cleanse with some fresh, lucid thinking. A little actual life experience added to that will help as well.

  4. dude replied:


    “But given a choice between a male and female candidate of equal caliber for a top position and the CEO will go with the male one 99.99% of the time…”

    EDell, please provide a source for the “99.99%” figure.

  5. countingthe toll replied:

    As a woman this sort of rhetoric angers me. I do not need special treatment. I do not need pandered too because I am female. These third wave feminists whine and cry about the most absurd things. The wage gap is a myth. They do not take into account the types of jobs that women choose as opposed to men. Nobody is keeping women out of anything other than women themselves by spreading fear and propaganda about the society we live in in the western world. If these so called feminists really and truly cared about issues affecting women why do we not hear them decrying ISIS and militant Islam? Why do we not hear them decrying the sweatshops used by most prominent clothing stores? All I hear from this wave of feminists is whining about nothing.

    Another behavior of third wavers is the shaming of other females who do not ascribe to their dogma. If these women truly wanted equality for all they would not damn and threaten other women who do not agree with them. I have been told I deserve to be raped, I am stupid and on and on simply for pointing out the issues I see as silly that they are valiantly and misguidedly supporting. The whole Gamer Gate debacle comes to mind. The press has labeled it a hate movement against women and it is nothing of the sort. It is a group of gamers who do not enjoy being profiled by militant feminists for a hobby they love. I guess what I am trying to say is that the ease with which these feminists agree to censoring other people’s thoughts and beliefs is quite scary. What happened to debate and discussing ideas? Nowadays if you don’t agree with the status quo you are branded a traitor to your sex or a terrorist and the people lobbing these labels do not even think twice about their words. Those who are anti-Gamer Gate have made comments such as “we should brand all Gamer Gaters for life so we know who they are” and “all Gamer Gaters should be gassed in camps” and the mainstream media does not give this any coverage. They have even started employing virtual block lists which seem innocent enough but is also a great concern to me. I don’t see how this behavior does anything to help anybody male or female. It sounds like totalitarianism under the guise of feminism.

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trackback URI

%d bloggers like this: