If you are a Facebook user, you may have noticed a tide of likes and comments that surged forth with the recent launch of the "Lean In" campaign, a global community "dedicated to supporting women." How did you react? Did you click and read? Ignore? Feel compelled to act or frustrated?
"Lean In" is the product of Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's chief operating officer. Emerging out of a blitz of publicity, Sandberg's campaign includes a book, a website and an organization that promote courses, corporate affiliations and "Lean In" circles.
There are a host of reasons why many across the nation have critiqued Sandberg. Her rarefied educational and professional background, as well as her wealth and success, separate her from the majority of women (and men, for that matter), and critics easily impose an elitist bent on her writing and ideas. Setting these matters aside, I want to engage with Sandberg's ideas as a college-aged woman, and as someone who believes strongly that there are and continue to be barriers to female success in the workplace.
Despite these beliefs, I found myself immediately irritated and put off by Sandberg's campaign, which I was first exposed to through Facebook and later other campaign media. Though Sandberg's campaign is well-intentioned, I think she will struggle to garner support among current and recent college students the constituency she needs to rally to affect any real change. Its corporate bent, archaic strategies for female empowerment and failure to incorporate men into the larger conversation on gender in the workplace create a piecemeal solution that will not compel my generation to act.
"Lean In" is built on the premise that women have not succeeded because there are few women in powerful leadership roles nationwide. Setting aside the question of whether this is the best indicator of female success, Sandberg's unerring reliance on corporate graphs, jargon and partnerships removes whatever authenticity might have lingered in her campaign. From partnerships in which corporations sponsor "Lean In" education modules for their employees to promotional materials calling for "Lean In" stories that have a "tension point," "share [a] resolution" and have a "happy ending," "Lean In" appears scripted and lacks the genuine character that attracts our generation to a cause.
One of "Lean In's" key proposals is women's circles, communities of like-minded career women who come together monthly for a guided conversation on career and work-life balance. While I believe in the value of mentorship, the idea of women's circles harkens back to another era, of book clubs and bridge tables, when female career aspirations were far more limited. Furthermore, these circles are highly contrived section leaders ensure that each group address an appropriate amount of topics in each session and each woman receives three minutes to update others on her life and career. Following this aged vision of female empowerment, Sandberg affirms another stereotype of yore when she calls on women to replace their "feminine" ways with more traditional "masculine" behavior, asking women to replace "I" with "we" and speak with a lower, more authoritative voice. By recommending that women change their behavior, Sandberg affirms traditional gender stereotypes and neglects the diversity of skills that women bring to leadership roles.
Finally, as someone who has grown up in an era of relative gender parity in the classroom and home, I find Sandberg's emphasis on exclusively female empowerment frustrating. While she justifies her focus on women's internal barriers by saying that our society is already engaged in dialogue on systemic barriers to female success, her focus on women is in the danger of reinforcing the idea that women alone are to blame for not succeeding in the workplace.
Ultimately, I believe that changes in the glass ceiling that Sandberg describes will come only through conversations with both men and women. While asking women (and men) to consider their own internal barriers to success is part of a solution, Sandberg's female-focused argument veers dangerously close to letting an entire gender off the hook. For lasting, institutionalized change, both men and women must be empowered change makers willing to have challenging conversations and make important reforms about gender and the workplace.
