Offended Feminists Seek to "Ban Bossy"
“Ban Bossy” say Beyonce, the Girl Scouts, Condoleeza Rice, actress Jennifer Garner, and others who have joined Facebook Chief Operating Officer, Sheryl Sandberg, in a campaign to cease discouraging assertiveness in young girls. Sandberg, who says she was emotionally damaged in ninth grade by a teacher who labeled her “bossy,” claims that men and boys are praised as leaders when they assert themselves, while women receive disapproval for the same behavior.
Blogger, Matt Walsh, takes issue with the reasoning of the campaign, stating:
The propagators of Ban Bossy have universally declared, without a shred of proof or coherent reasoning, that the word “bossy” is sexist, and that it’s only used against girls, and that it causes self-esteem issues, and that it has some connection to the lack of female CEOs at Fortune 500 companies, and that the behavior typically described as bossy is heretofore considered acceptable and admirable, and that nobody is allowed to feel otherwise.
...What if there are fewer women CEOs and politicians because fewer women want to be CEOs and politicians? What if we are all called to be leaders in some fashion, but there are different types of leaders? What if it’s actually a really horrible idea to try and force everyone to be Alpha dog, Type A personality, take-charge head honchos?
...What if it’s insulting to women to label the scarcity of female CEOs as some kind of objective evil because it implies that becoming a CEO is a superior goal to which all people should strive?
With the “Ban Bossy” campaign having just begun, the issue appears likely be a topic of discussion and debate for some time. What do you think? Is “bossy” an insult used exclusively against females? Are men always admired for assertiveness? Could a "Ban Bossy" campaign actually be demeaning to women who see "traditional" gender roles as wholesome and desirable? Share your comments below.