“In one meeting, Abramson was upset with a photograph that was on the homepage. Rather than asking for a change to be made after the meeting, she turned to the relevant editor and, according to sources with knowledge of the meeting, said bluntly, “I don’t know why you’re still here. If I were you, I would leave now and change the photo.””—
This seems like a pretty good and clear example of a double standard, putting aside any broader and more speculative commentary about the implications of Abramson’s termination. It is nearly identical to a story often repeated in praising tones about Apple’s Tim Cook:
Cook’s no-nonsense approach to management and solving problems was made immediately evident upon coming to Apple. When in a meeting discussing a problem in China, Tim Cook noted that the problem was “really bad” and that someone should be in China fixing it. Thirty minutes later, Cook then famously looked over at Apple’s operations manager, Sabih Khan, and asked “Why are you still here?” Khan was on the next flight to China.
This anecdote appears in every hagiography of Cook’s time at Apple, never with negative implications, always as evidence of decisiveness, attention to detail, high standards. People love it! Of course, a flight to China is a lot more onerous —did Khan have a family?— than a trip to a computer to change a photo. While I personally can make no real evidence-based argument that Abramson’s departure, pay, or treatment is the result of sexism in its entirety (I certainly have my suspicions, which only grow as more details leak), I can say this: much of the coverage of her time at the NYT reeks of it.
We were at our neighborhood park one Saturday afternoon and we had given up on getting Lincoln to like the swing (although to be fair, we are generally terrible at presenting him with developmentally appropriate activites — for example, I bought a shape sorter toy for him when he was six months old and was a bit disappointed that he only wanted to eat the shapes… and furthermore, he was probably still small enough to slip through the leg holes of the baby swing so was preoccupied with staying IN the swing, but I digress). Defeated, we were sitting on the side, eating oranges and watching other kids play on the playground.
There were several other parents sitting on the side as well but there was one mom, running around the playground with her kids, going down the slide, climbing the ladders, and talking through the telephone poles.
Now I’ve probably read far too many anti-helicopter parenting articles for my own good and I was busy trying to imagine how I would be when Lincoln’s old enough to run around on his own when the mom suddenly ran in front of us and turned to her girls to ask,
"Did you activate your lava boots?"
What an awesome mom. Period. End of story.
God, I hope I always have the energy and creativity to remind my kid to activate his lava boots.
“We now know that 24 hours without sleep, or a week of sleeping four or five hours a night induces an impairment equivalent to a blood alcohol level of .1 percent. We would never say, ‘This person is a great worker! He’s drunk all the time!’ yet we continue to celebrate people who sacrifice sleep for work.”—
There’s a green OXO mixing bowl filled with lemons and oranges that appeared on my dining table a few days ago. I didn’t put it there — so it must have been the husband. It looks staged. As if we were preparing for an scheduled open house this weekend. We’re not. There’s also an easter basket filled with plastic eggs that hold Cheerios, Goldfish and nasty yogurt puffs — yeah, I tried them.
Feels odd to sit down in front of my laptop to write a blogpost while the sun is still streaming into my kitchen. Who am I and how did I get here? Who do I want to be and how do I get there? Those are the questions I’ve been contemplating for the past few days.
I have all these anecdotes stored up in my mind that I’ve been collecting since January. I’ve made a million mental notes to blog about this or that. The Malaysian flight that disappeared, Edward Snowden, and the shooting at the Jewish Center. But whenever I sit down and open up Tumblr, it all seems not worth documenting or not worth reporting.
Out of character, I know.
I’ve been savoring my reading of The Goldfinch and lines like this haunt me:
When I looked at the painting I felt the same convergence on a single point: a flickering sun-struck instant that existed now and forever. Only occasionally did I notice the chain on the finch’s ankle, or think what a cruel life for a little living creature — fluttering briefly, forced always to land in the same hopeless place.
Kindle tells me that these lines have haunted at least 1880 other readers.
Conservatives often say the poor and jobless got that way because of their own personal failings, but Americans tend to blame the plain old free market.
A new HuffPost/YouGov poll released Thursday finds Americans generally think both the rich and the poor ended up where they are more because of the opportunities they had in life than because of personal successes or failures.
But not everyone feels that way. Republicans are far more likely to pat rich Americans on the back for their hard work while blaming poor Americans for not working hard enough.
Among all Americans, 44 percent said they think poor people are poor mostly because of a lack of opportunities, while only 30 percent said it’s mostly because of their individual failings. More specifically, 47 percent said poverty has to do more with the fact good jobs aren’t available, while only 28 percent said it’s because poor people have a poor work ethic.
Maybe there’s some good that comes with this recession: more progressive thinking.