On Innovation and Yahoo's Telework Ban

As the old saying goes "Give the people what they want" (aw, shucks)... here's my defense of the Yahoo CEO's decision to enact a blanket ban on all telework.

Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer (I've previously blogged about her here) was a fantastic recent hire. But it seems folks just can't resist tripping the proverbial prom queen. Unlike pretty much the majority out there who get off on second guessing every move she makes**, I, for one, am convinced she knows what the hell she is doing.

If anyone can right the sad, sinking ship that is Yahoo today, it's her. Informal poll time: show of hands, who uses Yahoo on a daily basis? Yeah, I thought not. I still use a Yahoo mail account and people actually make fun of me for it.

So when Mayer (the well-compensated tech genius expert) tells us (the technically-inept masses) she has mined Yahoo's employee VPN data and it has told her in no uncertain terms ALERT - the folks you have been paying to do the work aren't doing the work!, then she had the responsibility to do something about it. And she did - her move was a decisive, drastic one that has made her very unpopular in the press: she decided nobody at Yahoo is allowed to telework anymore.


For starters, nobody in her peer group is more data-driven and evidence-based in their processes than she is. Mayer made the decision by checking the data showing how much teleworkers were actually logging in to Yahoo’s network – and well, case closed. From the SF Chronicle:

“Likewise, we’re hearing from people close to Yahoo executives and employees that she made the right decision banning work from home.
“The employees at Yahoo are thrilled,” says one source close to the company.
“There isn’t massive uprising. The truth is, they’ve all been pissed off that people haven’t been working.”

There you have it: folks were not doing the work. Why her middle managers couldn't have effectively managed their own employees in the first place is of course, another story, and one that probably speaks to Yahoo's lackadaisical cultural problems that Mayer is trying desperately to correct. I prefer to call it strong, unflinching leadership on her part, but her critics are calling it some other unflattering things.

Her critics, such as Lisa Belkin in Huffington Post.com, are saying, "I had hope that as a new mother, she would use her platform and her power to make Yahoo an example of a modern family-friendly workplace"... it's a warning for everyone "that their lives don't matter." Seriously, Ms. Belkin? That sounds awfully hyperbolic. @Cloud, Wandering Scientist has a great analysis of why we aren't holding male CEOs to these same feminist standards.

Mayer's role is to lead a lagging company within the context of unforgiving American tech company capitalism - where it's survival of the fittest out there. Which, like most of corporate American life, is onerous hell to folks who need to take some time out of it for various reasons, but hey that's our system, and while I can't think of a better one either, I know we can do a few things better (uncoupling insurance from employment, universal child care, guaranteed paid maternity leave etc etc). But, as Mayer is not an elected official I would submit these concerns are not her primary problem. Instead, her focus is right where it should be: on building a collaborative workplace that will create and deliver inspired, innovative products. Buy into her vision, Yahoos, or get out. I can respect that, but I may not like it. And if I'm a recent Yahoo hire whose employment decision was predicated on my ability to telework, then yes, I have a legitimate grievance - but I'd wager that's a small subset of Yahoos. Certainly, there are also Yahoos out there who are grateful to have a leader with a snowball's chance in hell of saving their jobs.

As I've commented elsewhere, "productivity" alone is no longer the name of the game. There seems to be a dichotomy between productivity and innovation. Everyone's gut intuition about it and the current research seem to agree that telework improves productivity. But surprise, surprise telework is actually bad for innovation:

"Studies show that people who work at home are significantly more productive but less innovative, said John Sullivan, a professor of management at San Francisco State University who runs a human resource advisory firm. "If you want innovation, then you need interaction," he said.  "If you want productivity, then you want people to work from home."

Mayer was hired last year with a direct mandate to alter Yahoo's stagnating culture. A decade ago, Yahoo was a place where the best and brightest Internet hires came together to innovate. For too long, Yahoo has been coasting along on auto-pilot, losing market share while maintaining existing business lines rather than growing new ones (i.e. being "productive" rather than "innovative"? hmm....). Yahoo has obviously been outpaced by Google and Facebook - two companies which, by the way also frown upon telework, albeit in a less extreme way than Yahoo's anti-telework policy. Which ought to tell us something.

If this anti-telework trend catches on outside of the tech-specific domain, that will be a crying shame. Because we know for a fact telework is great for productivity at fixed jobs. At Yahoo, and at this specific historical moment for the company, I can totally see how Mayer made the correct call. So, please, let's all stop questioning Mayer's intelligence in these matters.

** By the way, they call this "Tripping the Prom Queen" (great book, BTW) wherein the strongest females are attacked by the weakest females - the exact opposite of the treatment of strong males in our society. I happen to think this explains most of the anti-Mayer and Sandberg rhetoric out there.

Zero Dark Thirty's Real Message is Anti-Torture

Zero Dark Thirty is quite possibly one of the most misunderstood movies ever. I'm a huge fan. It's one of those movies people will watch in the future to get a sense of what the militarized American empire was like from 2001-2011. It is also one of the strongest feminist and anti-torture messages I have ever seen in a major Hollywood film. Yet people are accusing it of being the exact opposite.

There's been a lot of criticism from people on the left that makes me wonder, "Are we even talking about the same movie here?" The praise from certain people on the right also leaves me scratching my head.

So when I came across this HuffPost Live interview of filmmaker Michael Moore by Marc Lamont Hill, I said to myself - finally, someone gets it! Thank you, Michael Moore:

"Does the artist have a responsibility for the ignorance of the person watching the art? I don't want to have to dumb down my work for the people who won't get it.  I want to put it out there and the people who get it, get it."

I encourage you to watch Marc Lamont Hill's interviews of Michael Moore in their entirety. They're posted in 4-6 minute increments with a short commercial in-between. Don't miss the part where Michael Moore calls out the workplace sexism in the CIA. Fantastic.

Wake me up when September ends

Crazy, full, active, wonderful month here at Casa Hush, hence the lack of blogging.

I'm training for a 5k that will take place at Thanksgiving time, trying to beat my PR of 25 minutes. (Anyone want to virtually join me? I double dog dare you to sign up for a local "Turkey Trot" where you live.) I run to help keep my blood pressure within the normal range. My family history of heart disease sucks. I recently invested in an at-home blood pressure monitor that I like - the Omron 7 Series Plus. It was about $50 at Costco.

Both of my kids are at the same Montessori this year. It rocks. They love it. They are speaking a ton of Mexican Spanish, and have even started using some funny slang that I don't always understand. Like "chongo" (translation: a hair thingy). Awesome.

Over the weekend, we went swimming outdoors for what was probably the last time this year. This was the summer that DS finally learned to swim independently and in the deep end. He loves to show off by doing back flips off the diving board. DD is not far behind. If only she were a bit taller, she'd be able to touch the bottom in the shallow end and would have a lot more confidence. I think it helped that we never put them in "floaties" or life jackets (unless we're on a boat, of course.)

Fall is closing in. I went for a run in the crisp, cool air this morning. Work has finally gotten a lot less busy this week, so I suddenly have more time to play, instead of needing to be at my computer and phone at the butt crack of dawn.

Some friends came to visit last week. They're expecting their first baby in January. They kept asking us for advice. "Trust your instincts" was the basic summation of all I could come up with. Apparently, I am only able to give real advice anonymously and online.

We'll be back to our regularly scheduled programming next week. ;)

Don't hate the Mayer, hate the Game, plus the odd Butterly Effect

I've left a lot of comments in a lot of places (most notably here, here, and here) this week about what I'm now utterly convinced is great news for women everywhere: Marissa Mayer, a 37-year-old pregnant woman, has been named CEO of Yahoo.

As @mom2boy put it so well in my comments section: "Take that glass ceiling." Yes, it really and truly is fantastic news. Full stop.

Of course, the response hasn't been all unicorns and rainbows though. I've learned a lot about certain corners of Corporate America this week, and about what's possible, and about what the costs might be.

At first, I'll admit, I was (and am) disappointed by Mayer's seemingly anti-feminist statements that could have been cribbed from Rush Limbaugh (feminists are "militant" and "have chips on their shoulder"... holy hell, I can't even defend that shizz), but upon further reflection I finally have begun to understand the social meaning of her words within the very specific, boundaried space of American tech culture. Now that I have a better handle on the relevant background assumptions of this culture, I think I can read her statements in their proper context, and see her remarks for the kind of coded language they probably are.

She's a master player of the game, no question. One of the unbreakable rules of this game might be don't you dare undermine the meritocracy myth cherished by the male tech geeks who actually control the system, or else they will fuck you up, apparently even if you're their boss. In 2012, it seems there is still no magical pinnacle you can ever reach in a large American tech career where it is safe to let your feminist flag fly if you wanted to. Can this really be so?

If true, what a sobering reality. And one I am, alas, in no position to refute. I simply note that if you take Mayer's words at face value, it's easy to conclude one can really get ahead by vocally distancing oneself from feminism. What Mayer actually believes in her heart is an open and probably irrelevant question. This all reminds me a bit too much of the progressive community's response to the appointment of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court. He also played the game extremely well. [Insert disclaimer here: not all members of underprivileged groups must vocally and at all times support the liberation movements for those same groups. Duh.]

Against this backdrop I say: Don't hate the player, hate the game. The game sucks. And by game I, of course, mean patriarchy. Don't hate on Mayer for making it despite the odds being stacked against her. Be happy for her. Be happy for the hope her promotion to the CEO title gives to women, that yes, it is possible. It may not be terribly likely if you're an outspoken feminist who won't hide your true feelings at work, but nevertheless it is possible, and she proved it.

There's one other aspect raised by all of this that's been on my mind this week. There's this false and troubling Butterfly Effect-esque idea out there that whenever a woman becomes a mother, her work choices can start messing things up for all of these other people - many of whom she is not even related to, nor has ever met before.

Walk this through with me and tell me if I'm wrong.

Odd Butterfly Effect argument, Example #1 - If a mother stays home, and lets her husband be the family breadwinner, according to believers of the Butterfly Effect-esque idea, she's messing things up for his natural competitors at work by giving him unfair time and resource advantages against them. If he's somebody's boss, it's constructed as her choice to stay home that's responsible for making him choose to penalize those of his employees who would rather not work long hours and to favor those employees who do work the longer hours. The fact that he's an asshole is not assigned any responsibility. (My, what power this mother has.)

Odd Butterfly Effect argument, Example #2 - If a mother works outside the home in a corporate setting, she's got to return from maternity leave at the socially correct time, instead of the time that might feel right for her personally, or else - Butterfly Effect! Other parents she doesn't even work with are going to be harmed! Her choice to resume work before using all of her paid time is constructed as undermining the work/life balance opportunities for other people, even those of people who work at some other random company. Which brings us to Mayer's situation.

Mayer says she plans to take a 2-week-long maternity leave, which has some folks concerned because they feel it's too short. (Ironically, two weeks is still far longer than the vast majority of working mothers in America can hope to enjoy.) The most common iterations of this reaction are "she's a clueless first time mom who is just fooling herself" or "she's acting too 'macho' if she honestly thinks she can pull it off" (see the original Anne-Marie Slaughter fallacy: "Because I wouldn't do it therefore no one can"). I actually believe this is still yet more coded language from Mayer - the CEO of a public company would rather not see her company's stock go right into the shitter because she was foolish enough to make an in-stone proclamation 3 months in advance when she can, of course, change her mind if her postpartum reality differs from her initial estimate. Also, I haven't heard anyone mention this possibility yet, but often the full leave benefits only accrue after working at company for at least a year - I'm even talking about professional jobs where 12 weeks might be the norm, you still might not be guaranteed to get it if you've only been working there for a few months.

Does a choice that, by the way, Mayer hasn't even technically made yet, really and truly harm any other employees? Inside or outside of Yahoo? I don't necessarily think so, given that the real harm is being done by the people who are in the actual positions to say yes or no to a leave request, as well as those who have been running the places with the policies that have sucked for so long. Possibly I'm wrong though. Many who are critical of Mayer's two week maternity leave announcement are citing the supposed Zoe Cruz precedent (who didn't take the full time off herself then was apparently hostile to folks at Morgan Stanley who wanted flex time).

Can't we at least wait until Mayer's leave is over before we assess what the verdict is for folks at Yahoo? In the meantime, let's blame the actual people in charge for the issues that continue to plague us elsewhere. You know what kids say - "You're not the boss of me!" Blame the actual boss of you. That said, I get it though - Mayer is an easy scapegoat; she's been all over the news lately, so she's a convenient person to blame for the fact that the corporate game too often just plain sucks. Hate the game, not the player. Hate the game, learn to play it better. Or stop playing (full disclosure: that's what I did). Or start your own game (also what I did).

That's all I've got. Sock it to me now.

A Happy, State Dept Parent's Response to Slaughter

Came across this great Slaughter response from Dana Shell Smith, a globetrotting bigwig in Foreign Service at the US State Department, titled "How to Have an Insanely Demanding Job and 2 Happy Children."

And what I want to say is A-fucking-men, sister. Tell it!

To me, Shell Smith's Both/And message of "With a lot of ingenuity and hard work, it can be done and your family can be happy" rings a whole hell of a lot truer than Slaughter's Either/Or message of "Despite my wealth, my family wouldn't make the arrangements that are necessary to have this particular job and make us all happy, so therefore no one else in the whole wide world can either."

Not to worry, Shell Smith's piece is much shorter than Slaughter's - in fact, you can read it in under 5 minutes. Dare I say, it is even almost as good as what most of my regular commenters could have written while half-asleep. ;) Yes, Atlantic editors, that's me taking a shot at you again.

Here's a flavor of the raison d'être for Shell Smith's response:

In conversation after conversation, my colleagues and I puzzled over why Dr. Slaughter's experience had so contrasted with ours. Was it because she had tasted another life, that of an academic who had a level of control over her schedule that we could not even imagine? Was it because she tried out government work while living in a different city from her family?

Regardless of why our experiences differed so greatly, I was left thinking not only about my own experience, but about the responsibility we women have to create change by introducing a different environment for the younger, more junior officers -- both male and female -- whether in government or elsewhere. After a stream of officers in the bureau I lead stopped in to tell me that they wished I would weigh in, I decided to add some of my thoughts and experiences to the conversation.

Bingo.

One thing about the reaction to this piece has struck me. That Shell Smith and her husband haven't seen a non-animated movie in the theatre in the last 10 years has apparently managed to make some people on the internets sad. But I say to each their own (obviously.)

Look folks, whether we choose to admit it or not, most (but certainly not all, insert privilege disclaimer here) of us are actually making time for the things that are truly the most important things to us. How do you spend most of your time? Then that's your actual priority right there. Ok, now consider my already dead horse yet again beaten. Honestly, what's so "sad" about a couple's filmgoing hobby taking a backseat to their family and careers for awhile? I'm sure they'll once again throw away their hard-earned cash at the cineplex when the kids are older! Can anyone ever win on the internets? Sheesh.

What I'm trying to say here is that Shell Smith's perspective is shared across many industries. My friend the successful surgeon and mother could have written this. And in my old corporate line of work, this is how the higher ups all make it work. Work and family are the top priorities. Friendships, hobbies, perhaps they're not as much of a priority, but they are also not entirely absent either. Take exercise for example - it often gets a lot of short shrift amongst this set. There's a reason you hear about people hitting the gym at 4:30am if fitness is a true priority.

They're happy to live like this. Really and truly. They're also telling the truth.

We all need to accept that not everyone shares our personality type. Not everyone likes the same things you do. We all define the term "priority" so very differently. The popularity of Ugg boots and the Kardashians are living proofs of that one for me. But I don't go around getting sad that not everyone is prioritizing downhill skiing and reading like my family does.

Hit me with your best shot...

BLOG CARNIVAL - How I Get It All Done (and Am Fabulous)

Happy International Women's Day! This post answers the call of the wonderful Blog Carnival Hostess With the Mostess - @feMOMhist.

Listen up youngish (or oldish) women, here's where I inspire you to decide for yourselves what you want out of life and encourage you to believe you can have it.

Here's my recipe for work/marriage/parenting/living life fabulously. I've got 6 touchstones about that, then I'll share my day to day logistics (I think ours are probably pretty rare for Americans today).

Who Am I? Four years ago, I was a former academic turned VP at a BigName company making bank. Then I got pregnant, and had a nice long mat leave, came back, and was at the lowest point of my life ever, my marriage sucked, I had no social life, I was out of shape, and I had an epiphany. When my first child was 8 months old, one day I just knew I had to leave BigName because I had to travel all the time and I never saw my baby or my husband. (No really, I never saw my baby or my husband.) And though it paid quite well, I didn't love the work and how it drained all my time and energy. I felt trapped by the hours the job required.

We solved the problem in an odd way - by moving far away to a much smaller town where we could pursue our passion for skiing, spend more time as a family, and get the hell out of the stressful BigCity corporate rat race. It was the right decision. People thought we were nuts for leaving. There were haters, but the haters were wrong. (In fact, one hater still living our old life came to visit us recently and confessed that he envies our current life.) Best decision ever, second only to marrying DH.

Now I'm the owner of 2 profitable businesses (providing almost as much income as I made at BigName - quel surprise), the mother of two kids, ages 4 and 2, and the wife to Mr. Perfect who works one 9-5ish M-F job where he's the owner and the boss, but unlike most Americans he has 12 weeks of vacation. We ski a lot because now the mountain is only 30 minutes from our door. We are happy.

My Six Touchstones for how I manage to get it all done:

1. Marry Well or Not At All - Doubt means don't. I've seen too many careers derailed because someone married an asshole, and then had to deal with more weird passive aggressive shizz than could fill an entire episode of shitty Dr. Phil. My husband rocks, and does more around the house than I do. We have had rough patches in our marriage due to kid stress, but we've worked though them. (Thank you Harville Hendrix and John Gottman, et. al.) We schedule the time for dates and having fun and sex together - I guess that's our secret. My old male mentor once advised me, "If you and your equally ambitious spouse want to run with the big dogs, carry the leash in your mouth, and have children - live near the office, get the help you need on childcare, and you will have more flexible time and more total time to spend with your children." Amen!

2. Be Ferociously Organized - this is a personality thing, I think. I came out of my mama's womb knowing how to organize, write everything down, and remember the details. I'm a planner by nature, and I'm excellent at time management. If you're not, may I suggest "Getting Things Done" is a cult book for a reason.

3. Know When To Let Shit Go - Our home life is at times a controlled chaos. It will never be camera-ready 100% of the time when our kids are little. There is often a dog turd lurking somewhere. We just roll with it. We still have people over once a week. This provides the incentive we need to tidy up. I let go of the need to have a perfectly manicured home. It is at a Good Enough level of clean most days.

4. Show Them The A.F.C. = Actual Fucking Cash. That's how you get promoted in a company or survive as a business owner. You have to produce revenue. You have to convince the people with P&L responsibility that you're the reason for all of the A.F.C. coming in to your area, so therefore you're valuable and deserve more. People seem to forget that. As Tina Fey said "Everyone is your competition." Learn how to compete. Once you consistently show them the A.F.C. then you'll free to do more of what you want to do, such as showing up to work at 10am, or being a royal beeyatch when the mood strikes. Read "Nice Girls Don't Get the Corner Office" if you want a shitty-titled but accurate how-to.

5. Pay A Professional - Delegate. Outsource. We have a gardener. We have a handy person who comes quarterly to tackle our running list of things I can't fix in 5 minutes time. We would have a housekeeper if we could find one locally who could actually complete the job right. (Still searching). We have 2 regular babysitters. We would use daycare, which is more reliable, but there are no good daycares where we live. It saves us time to have the sitters come to our home and let themselves in. Our regular daytime sitter also does light housework. We pay her well and worship the ground she walks on.

6. You Make Time For Things That Are Important to You - I need me time. I need to ski a lot. I need time to go see a movie in the middle of the day if I feel like it. I need local friends. I need our dinner group, our wine group, and my two book clubs. Even though they're often not perfect, they're working for me now. Life is too short to let your time get away from you. So I re-arranged my life so that we have the kind of time for these pursuits. I don't have to go to an office everyday. We have no real commute. We have plenty of vacation time. In a few years we'll take the kids out of school for weeks on end and go on a big international trip. These tradeoffs make living in Podunkville worth it.

Now, our day to day logistics.

Most Weekdays:

I wake up at 5am, work out, and shower. Start working at my computer at 6am.

Kids wake up at 7:15am or later. I eat breakfast with the kids. Spanish-speaking Babysitter arrives at 7:30am. DH takes DS to Bilingual Montessori.

I work at home from 8am-3:30pm. I can come and go as I please, and run errands or have me time if it's a slow work day. Either DH or I will pick DS up from Montessori and noon and meet up for lunch. Babysitter leaves at 3:30pm.

I play with my kids from 3:30-6pm. But if I didn't finish my work (happens very rarely), and it's winter, I'll take them to the local McDonald's with a play area and I'll work on my laptop. If the weather is good though, I'll send them out in the backyard to play. Or put on a movie for the kids if that fails.

One day a week DS has karate from 4-4:45pm - DH often takes him. DH comes home anywhere from 4-6. DH cooks dinner every night. We sit down together as a family and have a routine of each taking a turn talking about our day. Even the 2-year-old, which is hilarious. I do the dishes while he plays with kids.

At 7:30ish we start the bedtime story routine. If DD has not napped at all, they'll both be asleep by 8:30pm. DH and I have sex and/or read and watch TV in bed. I do one last work email check to make sure I have no fires to put out. We're all asleep by 9:30-10pm.

Weekday Exceptions:

I'm home all day with the kids one day a week (DS is at half day Montessori, and I attend morning co-op preschool with DD).

If it is Thanksgiving-Easter I'm skiing one day a week with DH, while our sitter cares for our kids at home.

We have Date Night one weeknight a week, and we have a regular sitter come from 5-9:30pm.

DH and I are also in book clubs and on local boards that might meet the occasional M, T, or Th night every 6 weeks, so we roll with that.

Most Weekends:

We have Date Night every Saturday from 5-10pm, when we sometimes meet with our Dinner Group of 3 other couples, or our Wine Group of 4 other couples. Regular sitter watches the kids.

Sunday am is ski school for DS, so DH and I get a half day of skiing in, while a sitter watches DD. We could take her skiing with us if the sitter calls in sick, but it is a lot more fun to ski sans kids. She'll start ski school when she's 4. Eventually we'll all have blissful, full days of skiing.

Other than that, we don't have much scheduled on the weekends. And we like it that way!

What works well about our daily logistics:

We don't have our kids in activities that take up much time. There's skiing (which we also get to do while DS is doing it), spanish (in our home), karate. They don't have a choice at this age. Swimming happens during the summer when karate is over. Very rarely we'll do a one-off soccer or art camp that is short and ends soon. Our daytime babysitter teaches them Spanish, and she tidies up the house - lots of drive time saved there. It might start to suck when they're older and ask to do more activities. To which we'll start off saying no...

We are not bound to an office schedule. I work from home. DH works out of an office but is an owner and sets his own hours. We can take vacation pretty much whenever, but we will lose some income. Living in a small town, there's no traffic, and no commute stress. Win-win-win-lose as to the lack of ethnic food.

There you have it. Thanks for reading! Feel free to share yours.

Firing the Client

I never blog about work. Sure, I'll blog about what's ailing my vagina, my marital problems and solutions, all manner of inane things, but never my work. I guess I'm just not that into talking about it. This may also stem from the fact that, in general, I don't like to spend more emotional/mental time on work than is ever absolutely necessary. My blog is my fun, personal time - separate from work. That's how I like it. I also value my privacy and don't wish to ever be outed IRL (not that that would ever happen), hence few specifics about my jobbity job jobs.

But I will say this about my work. The good (and sometimes really bad) news is I'm my own boss. I have the luxury of picking and choosing the people with whom I do business. Today I fired a client who has been a pain in my ass for the last 6 months.

It felt goooooood.

Firing a client is not something I've ever done before. I had this epiphany at 3am this morning: I honestly never want to see or hear from this client again. There is no amount of money this person could pay me that would make me want to interact with them ever. I know that saying, "everyone has a price." Not in this case. Not for me. Honestly. No. Fucking. Way.

What did this client do to piss me off and make me realize I'm done with them, you ask?

Long story short: after a shitstorm, the client told me I was supposed to have known they wanted me to tell them A Certain Thing orally as opposed to me telling them A Certain Thing via letter and email. Therefore my failure to tell them orally is their reason (excuse) they failed to complete Big Task they had committed to completing.

Or in other words, the client would like to blame me for their own failure to complete Big Task.

Um, no client, I deal in the written word. It's called CYA.

So I told them orally, and by letter, and by email that I'm letting them go. I feel better already.

Ever break up with a client? How did it go down?

Everyone's Talking About Sheryl Sandberg

Unless you've been living in a hole (which I sometimes do), you've probably noticed that everyone, everywhere (I exaggerate only slightly) has been talking about Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook COO lately.

I've noticed a couple of trends in the recent internet discussions about her.

There's this odd debate about the role of "luck" in her story. "She just got lucky." As if "luck" and "hard work" are mutually exclusive. As if building a relationship with a key mentor or leaving one job for a better one is just about "luck" and has nothing at all to do with "hard work." What's up with the either/or thinking? Why can't it be BOTH "luck" AND "hard work"?

There's also the sad/endless media-created "Mommy Wars" (gah!) debate Sandberg's story brings up: WOHM, SAHM, blah blah snore, you already know my take on this = who gives a shit about the label? (All I care about are the non-existent "Daddy Wars.") People are INDIVIDUALS with UNIQUE PREFERENCES. As in, there are people like to wear capri pants sometimes, or shell out $75 for the unflattering canvas footwear du jour that's all the rage. I happen to think they're fugly, but at least I know my way isn't necessarily "right." To each their own. Every family has unique needs and challenges. I'm not going to compare my own needs and my sorely limited set of work/life balance resources to those of a billionaire married to a multi-millionaire endowed with multiple live-in nannies and kids who probably slept through the night at birth. But good for them. I'm awesome in my own way. So are they.

Where was I?

Oh yes. There's also the debate about the Horatio Alger fantasy the Sandberg story conjures. It's great that someone from a relatively disadvantaged group (women) "Made It," and has succeeded (in terms of pecuniary gain and revered social status) beyond most capitalist dreams. "One of them did it, so why can't they all?"... "They just need to work harder... stop lacking ambition" ... "Be born to better parents."

I think this blogger gets it.

Three-Year-Old Making Babysitter Cry

Even though I have a shitload of work-related things going on right now, I need to take a break from it to blog about the following situation I'm finding myself in. I just got back from a lunch meeting where I was asked to start taking on a new business opportunity that I'm really excited/scared-in-a-good-way about. Of course it will require me to make sure I have adequately backed-up childcare, because unlike some of my other work, I can't rely upon being able to do most of it from home. I'm also pretty sure our regular babysitter is at the end of her rope when it comes to our charming 3.5-year-old DS.

Isn't that how life works? You get a great professional opportunity, and the very same day your babysitter tells you how unhappy some little one is all of the sudden making her. "I was crying in bed last night and my husband asked me what was wrong...." Noooooo!!!

Sitter approached me just a few minutes ago with tears in her eyes telling me she believes that DS really does not like her at all. The last 3 times she's watched him he has been a holy terror towards her because he misses his mama. I've had to leave my house with DS kicking and screaming. (Side note: I'm guessing at least a part of this is a developmentally-normal 3.5 year-old thing, because a lot of friends with same-aged kids have reported the same fits of Erratic, Sudden-Onset Clinginess). We've been down this road before with Sitter whenever DS has been in one of his phases. Talking through it with him has sometimes helped. Today she insinuated that she thinks DS would be happier without her - I had to ask if she was quitting. She said "No way." Whew.

DH feels that Sitter needs to develop a thicker skin and stop taking a 3-year-old's pissed-off protestations that he "hates you" because his mama just left for work as Gospel truth. I tend to agree. Sitter takes what DS says to her very, very personally. On the one hand she says she understands it, "He's only 3, I know that's how 3-year-olds are, but the way he talks it is like talking to a grown-up. He's just different than all of my 3 daughters and DD." Yeah, he's one special snowflake alright.

I asked her "so what do you want me and DH to do about it" - three times.

"I don't know."

"Do you want us to keep talking to him and letting him know what our expectations are?"

"Yes."

"What else do you think would help?"

"I really don't know."

"Does he need more discipline?'

"No, I just think he hates me, and I'm sad..."

Ugh....