This is why 20-something year old girl should not be PM (analysis, careers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So far you have done nothing but being dismissive, condescending and sexist instead of taking some excellent advice given on this forum. If you would spend half of the time sitting down with her to explain your services and charges instead of posting here on company time, you would be successful at work. Of course I don't know you personally, but your broad statements such as "everything is expensive in construction", "certified engineers" and "people who get enginginering vs people who don't" make me question your competency and how much you really know.
Frankly had the OP not used the word "girl" in the title and "legally blonde" so that everyone thought he was talking about a man, this whole thread would have been on the issue of authority vs knowledge, and a joke, one way or the other. But instead everyone reacted to the word "girl" and off we go down a PC rabbit trail.
Well hold up a second. While "girl" "legally blonde type" and "daddy" references were some of the most egregious examples of the OP's offensive attitude, they are NOT the only ones:
1. He belittles her experience:
a. How is someone 2 years younger than the OP (around 30, iirc) "straight out of college"?? If this is her father's company she could easily have 10 or more years experience working in this industry.
b. For all of his horn-tooting, how much "experience" in this industry can the OP have when he himself is a fairly recent graduate, on his 3rd career at age 30? (Note: not "job"; career)
2. Perpetuating the myth the gay men cannot also be misogynistic:
a. Several times he points out he is gay as though this was proof that he isn't sexist. You don't have to want to sleep with someone to think that you, because of your gender, are superior to them.
b. Several posters posed the question: would he have called out a male colleague's typo and sent a smiley face? Has the OP answered that question? Since he prides himself on his professionalism (as evidenced by his many many posts claiming such) it's a reasonable guess that he would not have done the same to a man. Simply because that's unprofessional behavior. Even more unprofessional considering it's a client with whom he does not have a close relationship. So it's doubtful this thread would even have been started if the PM was a man.
The reason the "PC rabbit trail" has to be traveled down (here in this thread, and elsewhere every. single. day.) is because so many people can't talk about legitimate issues without belittling, insulting, and stereotyping other people. How do people not see this? Why couldn't the OP discuss the issue without immediately resorting to sexist phrases and stereotypes? (Like this: "I made an unprofessional "joke" to an inexperienced PM, she took it too seriously. It's an extra bad situation because her father owns the company. I'm not going to get fired or sued, I'm just venting! Damn nepotism!")
Well hold up a second. While "girl" "legally blonde type" and "daddy" references were some of the most egregious examples of the OP's offensive attitude, they are NOT the only ones:
1. He belittles her experience:
a. How is someone 2 years younger than the OP (around 30, iirc) "straight out of college"?? If this is her father's company she could easily have 10 or more years experience working in this industry.
b. For all of his horn-tooting, how much "experience" in this industry can the OP have when he himself is a fairly recent graduate, on his 3rd career at age 30? (Note: not "job"; career)
2. Perpetuating the myth the gay men cannot also be misogynistic:
a. Several times he points out he is gay as though this was proof that he isn't sexist. You don't have to want to sleep with someone to think that you, because of your gender, are superior to them.
b. Several posters posed the question: would he have called out a male colleague's typo and sent a smiley face? Has the OP answered that question? Since he prides himself on his professionalism (as evidenced by his many many posts claiming such) it's a reasonable guess that he would not have done the same to a man. Simply because that's unprofessional behavior. Even more unprofessional considering it's a client with whom he does not have a close relationship. So it's doubtful this thread would even have been started if the PM was a man.
The reason the "PC rabbit trail" has to be traveled down (here in this thread, and elsewhere every. single. day.) is because so many people can't talk about legitimate issues without belittling, insulting, and stereotyping other people. How do people not see this? Why couldn't the OP discuss the issue without immediately resorting to sexist phrases and stereotypes? (Like this: "I made an unprofessional "joke" to an inexperienced PM, she took it too seriously. It's an extra bad situation because her father owns the company. I'm not going to get fired or sued, I'm just venting! Damn nepotism!")
You missed the fact that the OP also used the word "client". I'm wondering if you read what the OP has posted carefully enough.
Nope, I actually read the whole thing and didn't fixate on the word "girl." I looked at the whole description as someone too young and inexperienced for the PM job and too stuck on themselves to understand a pretty typical joke style in that work situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AfternoonCoffee
...
b. Several posters posed the question: would he have called out a male colleague's typo and sent a smiley face? Has the OP answered that question? Since he prides himself on his professionalism (as evidenced by his many many posts claiming such) it's a reasonable guess that he would not have done the same to a man. Simply because that's unprofessional behavior. Even more unprofessional considering it's a client with whom he does not have a close relationship. So it's doubtful this thread would even have been started if the PM was a man.
I can't answer for the OP, but in my work world, YES, we will call out silly typos, with smiley faces and a whole bunch of other assorted stuff. Jokes about typos and smiley faces are unisex. It's not a reasonable guess to say he wouldn't have done the same to a man. Had he not mentioned "girl" at the beginning, you wouldn't have even considered the gender involved. And there are plenty of threads like this throughout the work forum. And if you go back before the days of internet, there was still plenty of bull sessions about young guys right out of college (OMG I used the word guy) with more authority than knowledge. Young whippersnappers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AfternoonCoffee
...
The reason the "PC rabbit trail" has to be traveled down (here in this thread, and elsewhere every. single. day.) is because so many people can't talk about legitimate issues without belittling, insulting, and stereotyping other people. How do people not see this?
You're right, we can't talk about legitimate issues because the PC police turn everything into something to be offended over. Be honest, had he started this with "Young guy right out of college ..."people would have discussed the topic rather than the wording.
You're right, we can't talk about legitimate issues because the PC police turn everything into something to be offended over. Be honest, had he started this with "Young guy right out of college ..."people would have discussed the topic rather than the wording.
That's my point! Why can't legitimate issues be discussed without resorting to cliche stereotypes? The "legitimate issue" in this thread has NOTHING to do with the PM's hair color, gender or age. Yet the OP himself choose to make those traits the issue. If he had stated "Young woman right out of college..." It would have been an improvement, but there would still be the issue that she is only 2 years younger than him, and NOT straight out of college...
However, the OPs disdain is so obvious that the "topic" and the "wording" cannot be separated. He HAS the issues BECAUSE of the wording (well, because of his negative mindset towards what he perceives this person to represent, which manifests itself in his chosen wording. )
You missed the fact that the OP also used the word "client". I'm wondering if you read what the OP has posted carefully enough.
Nope, I actually read the whole thing and didn't fixate on the word "girl."
It is a shame you didn't afford my posting the same consideration. It is also a shame that, as a result, you missed the entire point of the message you were attempting to reply to.
Why can't legitimate issues be discussed without resorting to cliche stereotypes?
Many difficult workplace issues stem specifically from the general disregard some people have for "others" -- behaviors that pop up in the workplace up as racism, sexism, ageism, etc. Those people tend to either work well with people "like them" or at least manifest grudging respect toward such folks, while finding excuses to demean, belittle, marginalize or stereotype "others". This kind of behavior is noted most often within dominant groups in the workplace, those supported by the greatest numbers and/or greatest support by management, and so the behaviors can be seen as an attempt to alienate those who are perceived as competing for status, opportunities or benefits that those engaging in the behaviors would prefer to be reserved for themselves and those people they like.
So, does she work for a general and you are a sub? Or is she a property manager and you're the general? I'm trying to understand the relationship here.
Either way, as someone who has worked in construction, starting hands on in a ditch 20 plus years ago and is now a project manager and estimator, I totally agree some field experience is a good thing, even to the point I Would require it for architects as well.
On the other hand, you would have to be an exceptional 22 year old to not have people think the same thing about you and I see you must feel it hence your comment about always having the data to back you up.
Also, any time someone brings in a child, regardless of gender onto a role like this, there will always be nay-sayers regardless of their competency and I'm sure that she senses it from people and it is why she is being so sensitive in addition to whatever her true level of grasp on the big picture is.
It's just the nature of the business. You would probably do better with her by commiserating and then help her with the issues you feel get on the way of your working with her, long term because she's not suddenly going to no longer be her father's child anytime soon. Why not just set up a separate meeting to go over the disputed numbers so it's not causing issues in the regular job meetings?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
