I haven’t written about anything dealing with female empowerment lately, but I have read a couple interesting articles that I thought I’d share.

The first is a post Just Judy (Judy Grundstrom) wrote for MinnPost about the lack of female leaders in business. It outlines what Sheryl Sandberg (former Google exec, current Chief Operating Officer of Facebook and all around badass) discussed in her TED talk called “Why we have too few women leaders”. Included are three tips Sandberg gives to help women bridge the gap.

Thought: I work for a company that has a women CEO, and being able to witness first-hand what that looks like is truly priceless. Seeing the toughness, compassion and dedication that the leader of Tunheim Partners exudes for both her business and her family makes me dream bigger than I maybe would if I never had the opportunity to work under a female CEO.

Read more here MinnPost – Just Judy: We need more strong female leaders in business

The second article is a post on Yahoo! Shine that reports about an Irish woman who was forced to leave the country to have an abortion since they are illegal in Ireland. The twist, her own doctor advised her to terminate the pregnancy so that she could proceed with her cancer treatments.

“By the time all was said and done, the delay in cancer treatment allowed the disease to spread in her body. She’s now been declared “terminally ill.” If she dies, she’ll leave behind her daughter, motherless.”

Thought: So many pro and anti abortion fighters look at the issue as so black and white. Okay, not okay. Life or death. But, it isn’t, and as is true with any human rights law, the implications and bizarre cases that emerge are both shocking and tragic.

Read more here Yahoo! Shine – If Abortion Were Illegal: A Glimpse of the Reality

Although I generally like her music, and have always been curious about her as a person, I was a bit reluctant to go to Monday’s Lady Gaga show. As a rule of thumb, I don’t do arena concerts put on by pop stars. They are typically overpriced and it’s just not my thing. But, I’ve heard that Gaga puts on a hell of a show, and my friends peer pressured me by saying it would be a “good bonding experience” (a tactic that can get me to do just about anything). So, I coughed up the $125 bucks (eek), but on my sparkly top and eccentric belt and headed to the X.

I was blown away. By Gaga’s performance, but more than that, by her fans. They are loyal, passionate and damn near obsessive with their love for her. They put in an admirable amount of effort to dress like her and spent the entire 2+ hours of her performance hanging on her every word and erupting in cheers, loudly and often. It got me wondering, what exactly is her appeal? I mean sure she has catchy songs, an eccentric personality and an affinity for the gays, but so do many who have come before.

Then Gaga discussed why she created the Monster Ball: to provide her fans a place where they could relax, be themselves and let their freak flags fly. The concept isn’t new by any means, it seems every pop star, actress and model happened to be a nerd in high school who got picked on regularly. What’s different with Gaga is the believability factor. I mean, I can very easily picture her as an awkward high school student sitting in class next to Paris Hilton (they went to the same high school, afterall) and retreating inward to work on her creativity. Let’s face it, Lady Gaga is a freak, and she makes it cool for other freaks to be themselves.

I’m not discounting her amazing creativity or talent, but I do not think either of those alone would create the cult fan base she has built. She does put on a damn good show though, and spending two hours immersed in her twisted world only increased my fascination in finding out of who exactly Lady Gaga is.

My one complaint: although she gave a lot of love to both St. Paul and Minnesota, she failed to give even one shout out to Minneapolis. I’m sorry if it’s confusing, but if you do a show in this region, you have to give love to fans from both cities.

We’ve found, in our work with executives at dozens of organizations, that it’s possible to build any given skill or capacity in the same systematic way we do a muscle: push past your comfort zone, and then rest. Will Durant, commenting on Aristotle, pointed out that the philosopher had it exactly right 2000 years ago: “We are what we repeatedly do.”

When I happened upon this survey conducted by Glamour that asked 1,013 men questions about a variety of topics, I had no intention of it becoming a blog post. I wasn’t even thinking about my blog. But, some of the results surprised me. Mainly when comparisons were made to how men responded to the same questions in 1995.

Since I often call to light the unfairness bestowed upon women, I wanted to pass along some good news. We have come a long way for women’s equality.

The questions that I found the most interesting:

Will a woman be elected president in the next 20 years?

• Possibly. I’d certainly consider voting for a woman – 78%
• Possibly, but she won’t get my vote – 15%
• No way. Americans will never elect a female president – 7%

In 1995, only 29% said they would elect a female president. Nearly 50% more men would consider voting for a woman! That is progress.

Complete the following statement: Breast-feeding in public is…

• Natural and a mother’s right – 78%
• Really gross – 22%

I don’t even know how I feel about this topic. Part of me thinks there is always someplace you can go to be discrete.

If it were painless, safe and free, would you encourage your wife or girlfriend to get breast implants?

• Yes – 25%
• No – 75%

In 1995, 55% of men said they’d go for bigger boobs. Hooray for the flat chested!

Nice work, men. Way to be empowering.

Photo Credit: Walter Parenteau on Flickr

9AZCU7E6T6EH

I have been debating whether or not I should write this post for a couple of weeks because (a) I largely want my blog to be positive, and (b) working in the public relations industry, it can be risky to publicly call out any company in a negative light.

However, the more I saw the commercial below, the more I found myself getting upset; and a good rant never hurt anybody, right?

Okay, enough justification, onto the commercial.

It is a Reebok advertisement for its new “easy tone” sneaker. The first thing that stuck out to me was the tag line “better legs and a better butt with every step.” Isn’t that what happens when you, oh, I don’t know, walk, run and take steps in general? Apparently the shoe is made with balance ball technology. I’ve been to the gym, I’ve used a balance ball, so okay, I’ll assume this claim to be true.

After watching the ad a few times I realized what it really was that made me so upset. It’s the fact that this commercial pits a female’s body parts against each other. It is no longer enough for me to be jealous of the Photoshopped women in magazines, or the beautiful woman walking down the street. I now have to be self conscious that my ass looks better than my tits?

Whereas the shoe itself actually piques my curiosity, the advertisements completely miss the mark.

I was talking to my friend, Stephanie Lentz, about the ad and she said “it reminds me of the movie What Women Want where the Mel Gibson character’s male brain cannot comprehend what a woman would look for in a work-out shoe.”

Sport companies have a unique opportunity to portray women as strong, determined and athletic. I’m sorry Reebok, I just do not appreciate your decision to portray us as self-conscious and body obsessed.