
Incivility in the Workplace: The Effects of Gender, Agency and Communion - dpflan
https://uanews.arizona.edu/story/incivility-work-queen-bee-syndrome-getting-worse
======
tyingq
Anecdotal, but I've heard the same from most women (those that know me well
enough to share) in tech. The worst female bosses they've had were far worse
than any single male boss. The story usually boils down to some version of _"
I succeeded in a harsher environment, suck it up"_.

There are a few exceptions, of course. Some people have risen through the
ranks mostly based on tactics like fear and intimidation. Some male, some
female.

Edit: Fwiw, I'm male, but with a decent track record of my female hires
surpassing my success.

~~~
jancsika
> The story usually boils down to some version of "I succeeded in a harsher
> environment, suck it up".

Mm, that quote characterizes the root of _a lot_ of evil in the world (or at
least propagates a lot of evil).

Anybody know a graceful way to disincentivize that kind of thinking?

~~~
stcredzero
_> > "I succeeded in a harsher environment, suck it up"_

 _> Mm, that quote characterizes the root of a lot of evil in the world (or at
least propagates a lot of evil)._

That quote isn't a root of evil. It's a statement that has originated in
something good, which can be co-opted for evil. My own parents have said that
to me. In many instances, their using that idea was for the good. However,
there are some instances where the trauma of their occupation/wartime
experiences showed, where they used this idea for something bad.

Also, one of my professors told me something like that, when it came to my
first exposure to C programming in the early 90's. Sometimes you _are_ in a
harsh environment, and you do have to suck it up and get on with it. Knowing
that others have done objectively better than you are now in an objectively
harsher environment is good and useful data to have.

 _Anybody know a graceful way to disincentivize that kind of thinking?_

Thoughtcrime? Sorry, but seeking to prosecute thoughtcrime is far, far worse
than just receiving information others have done better with less -- even if
it is being used as a means of aggression.

~~~
AgentME
>Thoughtcrime?

The other user is just asking how to encourage people to be nicer in a
specific circumstance, not seeking to literally criminalize things.

~~~
stcredzero
_not seeking to literally criminalize things._

You don't have to have legal support to create an environment of oppression
and toxicity. If one's goal is solely focused on suppression of a certain kind
of thinking, then it's doomed to fail. It's like not thinking about white
elephants, writ large. It's the Streisand effect. It's far better to focus on
positive goals. Build bridges between people. Encourage what you want to see
more of. If one is considering thought policing, then it's a sign that
something has failed.

~~~
wyattpeak
This is such a broad interpretation of thought policing as to be absurd. By
your definition obligatory anger-management or even general counselling would
seem to be thought policing.

You can demonstrably control particular types of thought, that's pretty much
the basis of clinical psychology.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironic_process_theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironic_process_theory)
\- which you're describing - is a specific, immediate, psychological effect.
It doesn't imply that thoughts can't be suppressed on a longer scale.

~~~
stcredzero
_This is such a broad interpretation of thought policing as to be absurd._

No, your interpretation of it is absurd. The key is, are you trying to coerce
people to hide their true thoughts, because you just want to control them?
Anger Management should be something that is entered into consensually,
because all parties know it's to their benefit.

 _You can demonstrably control particular types of thought, that 's pretty
much the basis of clinical psychology._

Sure. But suppressing others against their will for the sake of political
power is immoral. I don't see that as a proper aim of clinical psychology, and
the above context certainly wasn't what I was thinking about.

------
joncrane
So basically, women tend to be meaner to other women than the other
combinations (men to men, men to women, and women to men)?

~~~
titanix2
Personnal anecdote here. I majored and graduated from two bachelors with very
distinct demographic. The first one (CS) was 90%+ men, the other (language
studies) was about 75%+ women.

In the CS degree, relationship between people ranged from friendly to don’t
care. Most people weren’t concerned about people that weren’t their friends in
the class. All in all it was a neutral/good ambiance.

In the language promotion the ambiance was awful. The class was split in
various groups of 2-3 people half openly hating each other (tons of gossips
going one). When a group of 4 existed, it was actually 2 groups of 2 that also
disliked and bath-mouthed at any occasion. I’m sill reading the Facebook
degree group sometime, and besides one year, this distrust ambiance still
exists as of nowadays.

So the conclusion of the paper doesn’t seem farfetched for me; it actually
confirm what I experimented myself.

------
smsm42
> Paired with estimates that incivility can cost organizations an estimated
> $14,000 per employee

I would love to hear how they arrived to such a precise number. Unfortunately,
no references in the article.

------
busterarm
Having just come from a team where a female manager who a number of times
openly stated that she only likes to work with men, and sabotaged the careers
and performance of the people under her, especially the women, I can totally
see this.

~~~
majos
Did she ever explain this preference?

------
Justsignedup
Have to admit, the reporting is not as good as I had hoped. No links to
studies, very short, and for such a important topic...

Anyone knows of any citation?

~~~
Glyptodon
[http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-56107-001?doi=1](http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-56107-001?doi=1)

------
DoreenMichele
I'm a woman. I appear to be the only woman to ever make the leaderboard of HN
(under a different handle). This is off the cuff. But, some thoughts.

I have stated that I tend to get along better with men. The response to that
by other women involves ugly, bitchy personal attacks that blame me and make
me feel like saying "And you wonder why I would rather deal with a man. Geez."

I have blogged about my thoughts on how _women eat their own._ I try to be
very even handed and consider the context. I think one driving factor is that
female success is a scarce product. If there can be only one token woman, then
whoever got there first has tremendous incentive to actively discourage and
alienate other women.

Being a prominent woman on HN has led to zero female allies from the site.
Women do not email me or hit me up on twitter to bond with me over our
participation on HN.

I do have one female twitter contact who is a YC alum. It is not a strong
association and did not start on HN. It started on twitter.

I have had women be openly ugly to me on HN. I have had women piss all over me
about how I don't speak for all women or something, never mind that I never
claimed to

I have had women try to "side" with me and say incredibly misandrist things
and other problematic things that make me cringe and make me want to openly
reject their remarks and disavow any association with them.

I do feel women that came after me take it for granted that the atmosphere is
more welcoming of women than when I got here, give me zero credit for my role
in that and piss all over me. It makes me sympathetic to the thing described
in the article of established women having a hostile _just suck it up_
attitude.

I often feel other women are trying to use me to their advantage, often at
tremendous threat to my hard won position.

I worked really hard to fit in here and gain the respect of the guys. I did a
hard thing and many men here respect that because they have done hard things.
The women who think it should be handed to them on a silver platter are often
pissing all over me, my handiwork and the culture of male achievement as I
have come to understand it, though I am sure my glimpses are just bare
glimpses at best.

Women wind up fighting over the crumbs and it gets vicious. I find this
baffling. I refuse to fight over the crumbs and cannot fathom why women don't
reach out to me as a potential ally.

I don't fully understand what drives these patterns. I sometimes blog about it
and a single off the cuff comment cannot possibly do the topic justice. I try
to think through what might constitute real solutions. The tendency for women
and society to pile on with the blame game is not constructive.

It's all well, fine and good to note that this is a pattern. The danger is in
acting like women are just pathological creatures all around and not wondering
what drives such behaviors.

I try like hell to be sympathetic to why other women are frequently so awful
to me. But I have no plans to cut my own throat for their benefit. I would
prefer to find another path forward. In the absence of that, I have every
intention of looking out for myself. Nearly 6 years of homelessness taught me
no one else really will.

~~~
stcredzero
_I have had women piss all over me about how I don 't speak for all women or
something, never mind that I never claimed to_

When people start associating politics with immutable surface characteristics,
then watch out. By their actions, they are implicitly advertising that such
surface-stuff is more important to them than the content of your character. In
the old days, we called that bigotry.

Thanks you very much for writing this. I am also in tech and I was also
homeless for 4 months, though mine was a _bourgeois_ version spent in AirBNBs.
(It started out with a physical assault on me, however.) It's good to know I'm
not the only one and good perspective to know that others have been strong
enough to survive much worse.

------
savagedata
I wonder if this study takes into account that, because some professions are
skewed toward women and others are skewed toward men, on average women will
interact more with women than with men on a daily basis. Instances of
incivility from women and from men should be normalized by number of female
coworkers and male coworkers.

I wish I could access the PDF to see if the researchers accounted for this.

------
AlexCoventry
Is the preprint available?

~~~
_rpd
[http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fapl0000289](http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fapl0000289)

~~~
AlexCoventry
Thanks.

------
rocky1138
This article is completely useless without knowing the sample size.

~~~
stagbeetle
Her articles are on the first page of Google, two of them are very obviously
titled, and one of them even lets you download the PDF. Here it is, I've even
clicked on "Sort by Year." Buzz buzz, Queen Bee.

[0][https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=f7T153gAAAAJ...](https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=f7T153gAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate)

~~~
rosser
It's entirely possible to lmgtfy without snark.

~~~
weberc2
Unless it was edited, I don't interpret the comment as snarky. At least no
snarkier than any other lmgtfy.

------
kelukelugames
Click bait title. See hn guidelines. We should rewrite yes no questions.

~~~
sctb
Thanks. We've removed “Is 'Queen Bee Syndrome' Getting Worse?”, which seems
not to be the question addressed by the article or studies. We're happy to
update the title again if someone can suggest a better one derived from the
article.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
I feel the title should be fair warning this is a gender study, as that
indicates a lot about what people will expect to see in the discussion about
it.

"Incivility at Work as Reported by Gender"?

~~~
sctb
Thanks, that's a good point. We've gone with (most of) the study title.

