Thought this was interesting: http://dealbreaker.com/2009/07/nomura-fi...ployee.php

"Nomura kicked off a training session for new hires in April by separating the men and women. The women, including Harvard graduates hired by Lehman Brothers before it collapsed, were taught how to wear their hair, serve tea and choose their wardrobes according to the season, say executives who fielded a complaint about the session."

+

"Some Nomura managers interpreted strictly the company's dress code for women...[Lehman women were instructed] to wear sleeves no shorter than midbicep and to avoid brightly colored clothing, according to several people who joined from Lehman. Several women were sent home from the trading floor for dressing "inappropriately," these people say.

"I was sent home for wearing a short-sleeve dress, even though I was wearing a jacket," says one woman who says she plans to leave as soon as she receives her final guaranteed bonus payment."

Not that I'm a fan of treating Ivy League graduates like they're special, I'm an autodidact all the way! ^_^ But. Is this still common in Japan, or is it lessened for foreigners? I haven't paid attention to the current discrimination against "OLs" in Japanese companies the past cpl years or so.

Lehman tea parties are always awesome. Nomura-Lehman tea parties are off the hook, in a manner of speaking.

I wonder, did they serve because they were women or because they were new (or some weird combination)?

That's like complaining about getting circumcised when converting to Islam.

It seems like they are "taught" how to serve tea, and that could be considered business manner training in Japan. But doing it globally? Yea, they are pretty dumb. Still, I don't know what the writer wants to achieve by painting Nomura as a bunch of sexists like that.

http://wrt-intertext.syr.edu/vi/forrest.html (linked on wikipedia)

It's the WSJ (Murdock-controlled right?) so if there's the added issue of failed 'Western' business in their minds shaping the tone and focus of the article (which I didn't read past the excerpts--who pays for news??), I wouldn't be surprised. Then again, if gender discrimination happens in these specifically enumerated ways, there's not a lot more you can do to make it look worse.

Transparent_Aluminium Wrote:http://wrt-intertext.syr.edu/vi/forrest.html (linked on wikipedia)

Date says 1998.

Quote:Date says 1998.

It's just an essay on OLs.

Transparent_Aluminium Wrote:

Quote:Date says 1998.

It's just an essay on OLs.

So last century. Get with the times, grandpa!

Transparent_Aluminium Wrote:http://wrt-intertext.syr.edu/vi/forrest.html (linked on wikipedia)

Women were educated to perform for their men, to play musical instruments, to sing, to whisper in their ears, and to take care of even their smallest needs. The most famous and highly trained in this profession were the famous Geisha.

Oh yea, Japanese women have been, and still are, Geishas. Sure.

Quote:So last century. Get with the times, grandpa!

I'm still stuck in the last millenium.

masaman Wrote:

Transparent_Aluminium Wrote:http://wrt-intertext.syr.edu/vi/forrest.html (linked on wikipedia)

Women were educated to perform for their men, to play musical instruments, to sing, to whisper in their ears, and to take care of even their smallest needs. The most famous and highly trained in this profession were the famous Geisha.

Oh yea, Japanese women have been, and still are, Geishas. Sure.

Aren't the rural-born hostesses the new Guyshahs?

nest0r Wrote:

masaman Wrote:

Transparent_Aluminium Wrote:http://wrt-intertext.syr.edu/vi/forrest.html (linked on wikipedia)

Women were educated to perform for their men, to play musical instruments, to sing, to whisper in their ears, and to take care of even their smallest needs. The most famous and highly trained in this profession were the famous Geisha.

Oh yea, Japanese women have been, and still are, Geishas. Sure.

Aren't the rural-born hostesses the new Guyshahs?

You mean like キャバクラ嬢？ Yea, pretty much. But they aren't working for Nomura or Toyota. The "OL"s depicted in the link are obviously 一般職＝admins, and one of the main reason the writer was treated differently was most likely because she was a 総合職=professional. I don't know if she deliberately skipped explaining that or she just didn't know, but because of things like that, it seems quite partial despite some good insights it has.

Is that what you are talking about:

In fact, "in 1986 there was a law created to encourage equal opportunity. Large companies have to establish two career tracks for women: one (which most choose) for those who do not want to be a part of management, and one for those who do"(35).

Transparent_Aluminium Wrote:Is that what you are talking about:

In fact, "in 1986 there was a law created to encourage equal opportunity. Large companies have to establish two career tracks for women: one (which most choose) for those who do not want to be a part of management, and one for those who do"(35).

OK, she did mention it. I overlooked. It is pretty inaccurate though. She says "I would love to be a little fly on the wall as the senior management interviews new recruits out of university. I am sure they make the women feel so intimidated and inadequate that they would be terrified to accept such a challenge." However, qualification for 一般職 and 総合職 are different in the first place. Normally, you can get a 一般職 position with lower educational qualification, and you apply for ether 総合職 or 一般職 at the time you send in your resume, so I don't know how women who are trying to get 総合職 positions could be "terrified to accept such a challenge" and opt for 一般職 at an interview.

I'm not saying Japan is sexism free. It is definitely not. But some of the things she is sure of seem more like to be beliefs, if not prejudices.