The NYT is creating an entire mythology around DJT. He is just a person, with pluses and minuses, with the desire to lead and be liked, more or less like all of us.
2
More moralizing from the loyal opposition.
3
Did any of the women who worked with BHO have to put up with being called a “work wife”? I get it - you don’t like Trump. I am not sure how that gives you the right to trivialize the women who work in the White House in professional roles like Hope Hicks.
5
It seems that some elements of the left just love hating.
5
Diana - Have not seen any comment critical of the article. So much for feminist discipline!
1
Thank you for your insightful observations anout another insidious workplace practice that keeps women entangked in anything but the job at hand. All men should read this and offer support and help to the women in their lives who have to endure this. And “endure” is the correct term. It is not uncommon and very destructive for women to have to serve as nurses, therapists, emotional “comfort women” and bored psyche-soothers to grossly overpaid babies and self-proclaimed “geniuses” who feel entitled to suck the life force out of everyone around them.
4
Hope Hicks is probably in the same relationship as Nikki Haley, attention from attractive women and sex is all part of his neediness.
What we now know is his being married has no meaning, and her being married actually excites him.
And the evangelicals like it, as it is the Biblical view of women's purpose.
4
Jill, when everything is a problem, nothing is a problem.
2
Jill, you do a great job describing the dysfunctional dynamics of both extremely immature and toxic males and females that encourage them through enablement and conscious collusion. And, yes, it's a story as old as humanity. So, why are you so quick to exonerate the females in this sick equation by saying "it's not a woman's problem"? Why are you giving a free pass to the KellyAnne Conways and other female grovelers? Seems to me there's gender bias at play here.
3
Kellyanne wiping away the tears, Hope fixing the hair, the other Kelly offering the cookie, (no nail polish). Two out of three ain't bad.
Makes me wonder what kind of deal he made with Sarah Huckabee-Sanders, who can be pretty darn fierce in defense of her Sith Lord.
4
your over-the-top for effect rhetoric gets in the way of the points to be made. and you demean yourself with the insults. you have a valid point of view, one that i share, and are articulate, but the overblown adjectives and cartoon characterizations detract. no need to demean other women.
3
Considering Hope was an employee and personal friend of Ivanka's doesn't help. That is the only reason she is there.
1
Hope Hicks can leave any time she wants. Her family is wealthy and WANTS her to leave, even cajoled her to leave. Her family knows it is unhealthy, but as Hope Hicks, said, "I love the adrenaline..." She has become addicted to her own power, a fashion model advising @POTUS , having affairs with campaign personel, at the age of 28. Ridiculous. She will never be taken seriously in her lifetime.
3
It's time for women to step out of the "work wife" shadows and run the organizations. Let the guys find someone else to baby sit them.
I can't make head or tail of this column. As a professional woman, I've had several work husbands. I loved them, they loved me, and they made my life better in every way. These men were my champions and my best friends. We won awards together. We spoke truth to power together. We stood up for each other, and we covered for each other if one of us was sick or sad or hungover. Of course, I got paid half of what my work husbands got paid. That's why women should concentrate on economic parity instead of ... um ... whatever this column is about.
20
The Trump presidency hasn’t changed America, it has clarified reality. During the Obama years there was talk of a “post-racial” America, climate change was being addressed, health care was moving to becoming a right and women were moving closer to equality with men. The Trump slap in the face woke us up from that dream. Those behaving nicely for eight years were told the real patriarchal, racist, selfish America was back. The pre P. C. behaviors could re-emerge, people could stop acting. Women could return to their supporting role of helping men achieve greatness. Huckabee-Sanders replaced a man to protect the president by unapologetically lying for him on a daily basis. Mrs. Trump III is with him in all photo ops serving as prop for his celebrity. Trump’s own crass language regularly demonstrates how the most powerful man in American views a woman’s value and place in society. Trump relies on women to stroke his ego and experience his weakness because any woman could never be his equal or threaten his position. The dream of permanent progress for now is a liberal’s fantasy.
4
On a Late Night Show the other night, Wolff hinted that near the end of the book fire and Fury that he hints that Trump was having an affair in the WH right now with one of the staffers. He claimed he had everything he needed but the "Blue Dress" to actually come out and name names. He also said it should be obvious to anyone who pays attention to the going on in the WH and the appointments that have been made. My personal opinion after reading the book is that someone with the initials of HH is the one, but that's just my opinion. Someone does not simply go from being Ivanka's coffee girl at her fashion company to being Director of Communications for Trump at the WH without some kind of shall we say qualifications.
3
Come the artificials, you won't have much more to complain about. They will work just as well with their chips humming and clothes on at the workplace as they will with their clothes off at home. So perk up; the days of lamenting "hands on" requirements from boy bosses are numbered. The days of the superfluousness of women's skills or bodies will be innumerable.
Although this was an issue before Donald Trump was the leader of the United States, his presidency has definitely exacerbated it. The women in these "work wife" positions are no doubt very capable and smart, however it is also no doubt that Trump does not view them in this way. He has made his opinions of women very clear in the past, so that leads us to believe that the only reason that women are in these positions is because he does not want to deal with the "forcefulness" and "competence" of men, insinuating that he believes women are the opposite of this and will put up with anything from him without resistance. The "work wife" issue is going to continue to worsen and leave a lasting negative mark on our country as long as Trump is president because he is setting an example for the whole US. If people see the president acting in this way then they are going to think that it is acceptable to do the same and begin to voice and act on all of their sexist views. In addition, this is not the only problem that Trump is creating, this same idea goes for almost everything that he promotes or condones. Whether it be his opinions on racism, gun violence, or rape. Trump encourages people to be hateful and have these opinions since he is in such a powerful position, which will end up leaving our country in horrible condition and undoing all of the progress that we, as people, have made.
If everyone views women as "helpmates" and "maternal" and men as "needy" it's no wonder they don't succeed together in the business world. Never did this dynamic appear in over 30 years of a banking career.
Individuals have different personalities. That's true.
2
I agree with most of what the author says, but as a male I have had to put up with the same kind of thing from my female bosses. "Don't worry, we're not out to get you sweetie." "My office at 3". I kept my mouth shut. I had a family to support. But, I kept a lot of notes and wrote a great book about it. The only way to stay sane is expose the bad actors and the way "the system" supports them.
3
I doubt the women who engage in that role appreciate how much they are betraying the women who don't, or perhaps it is they just don't care.
1
Careful. Is this not what Condoleeza Rice did for Bush? Except that Rice was the Secretary of State and undeniably bright, capable and her own person whether you thought she was co-responsible for Bush's tragic Afghanistan/Middle East policies or not.
Until we know the Work Wives' day-to-day work agenda, actual responsibilities and substantive contributions it is difficult to know for sure. However, given that Trump doesn't listen to anyone or try to understand much of anything and given his outrageous policy proposals, flip flops, misogynistic, racist and xenophobic public personnae the real question is whether these women are having a positive impact and helping to restrain bad Donald or alternatively facilitating his bad behavior by offering feminine support. Do we really know the answer to this? And are we falling into the trap of trying to psychoanalyze from afar?
Michael Wolff has written an excellent book that everyone should read. Do not believe the Trump-cultists who are claiming it is "full of errors." There are a few common misprints ("waiver" instead of "waver"; "subtly" instead of "subtlety") & 1 whole mis-edited sentence. There's the "Berman" controversy: which "Berman" was actually at the 4 Seasons when Ivanka sashayed in (as dissected in a recent NYer piece intended to raise the wild thought that Trump's 'special' daughter might some day run as a Democrat).
That's it. That is the sum total of Michael Wolff's "errors/lies." Not a reason not to read the book & learn from it.
What I learned is that Trump is obviously obsessively cavorting 24/7. That's what Wolff reveals. As Stephanie Clifford herself confirms, his role model is Hef. What a concept for the White House!
Fewer than 1% of human beings, XX or XY, change their character over their lifetime. It's absurd, JF, to expect any workplace -- or for that matter, any marriage -- to be any kind of behavioral re-education camp.
A family is a place where we have all the people we will ever meet who are exactly like us. Understand that, outside your own family, you are dealing with entirely different people, different values, different habits.
Being overly familiar with those whom we hardly know leads to clashes & disappointments. Maintain formality, Miss Manners style: you are only responsible in your workplace for the actual work tasks being set, not 'reforming' others
3
I find myself increasingly taking the side of men in these stereotyping denunciations, which are becoming so popular. Not the side of the misogynist-in-chief - he's an outliar [sic] but men generally. The idea that women are always the victim in conflict with men is insulting to women. In my experience, bad behavior is equally split between the two main genders. There are just as many domineering, sociopathic women per capita in management as men. The key thing is the per capita part. We should be concentrating on fighting real inequalities, not traducing men. If a man came out with the kind of "women are this" and "women are that" generalizations that have become so popular now [and to be honest, have been among women for a long time] he'd be rightly described as a sexist.
4
for generations women have managed men this way. they're physically stronger; all we have are our wits.
1
survival of the fittest. An element of competition, that was a man ony experience in the 50 and 60s in the hey day of the corporation. Behind every great man was a great woman, but that was at home, and many men want it return to that way.
"It’s a male problem, one of absurd expectations and learned emotional helplessness. But if you’re used to women laser-focusing on you, handling you with care and treating you with wide-eyed deference, what incentive do you have to change?"
More white women voted for Trump than voted for Clinton.
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/138601/gender-gap-exit-polls-show-white-...
What incentive, indeed!
And you think this is a male problem?
No one frees slaves. Slaves free themselves.
1
The VSG is the neediest person on the planet. surrounds himself
with medioricites whose job is to incessantly praise him.
if you stay there, you cannot keep your integrity and good name.
you must lie in the service of the constant liar.
word
Male or female, we enjoy eye candy in people we have to see every day. When they are also dilligent in making the details of our busy lives run smoothly, they look even more beautiful.
6
I'm a male who has worked in social services all my life, and at least three quarters of my bosses have been women, as well as three quarters of the people I have led. And I've encountered needy female bosses who needed propping up, female bullies, and wonderful ones who put their staff first. But at work and in all settings there are families, and for better and worse these dynamics play out, echoing who knows what from people's pasts. The workplace is not an antiseptic world that exists outside of the rest of the world. Life consists of relationships.
23
I work alone so I don't have a work wife and never have had one. However, my wife manages a public institution with a primarily female cadre and she has to be a work sister. It's part of being a human (caring) and detracts not from her authority or responsibility. The relevant difference here is that she is the antithesis of Trump in every way, so it works.
8
It’s all about fathers and sons.
The rest of us have to deal with the aftermath of a son not feeling like he measured up.
And, sometimes the passivity of the mom suggests acceptance of the dad’s ruthlessness. The goal is making “him” a tough, successful man just like dad.
Murray Bowen, a founding father in the field of family therapy, would have a lot to say about the Trump’s multi-generational issues.
5
Day after day after day with this guy ..... it's just unreal. Where, when and how does it end? Or doesn't it? It's just awful. The next generation is watching this demeaning to us all descent into the morass and will think this mess is what America should be. The shining City on the Hill that is America gets more tarnished and further away each day with him in the "leadership" role. It's incredibly sad......we as a Nation have been, and should be, so much more.
10
I am employed by a bully. I also need a job to support myself. I refuse to stroke his ego, and I pay the price for that refusal. This article is about more than little Donnie, it is also about women being expected to kow-tow to needy men that employ them. Just two days ago I was on the verge of tears of outright frustration because my employer refused to see the extra work I have recently taken on due to the departure of another employee. Working with, or for, a needy man is emotionally exhausting and demoralizing. Only the strong survive. But at what price?
Don't be too quick to tell me that I could take control of my life and just get another job. Living in a remote area, and being a mature woman in a very small town are just a few of the reasons that "just" getting another job is not that simple of a solution.
I have read many of the comments here and believe that there are thousands of other women in circumstances similar to my own. Ms. Filpovic's article has pointed out a dynamic that is, unfortunately, all too common for women in the workplace.
200
Having also worked under bullies -- both a male and female boss -- I know how wrenching it is. What helped was the conviction I was choosing to stay in the job to meet my needs. I also learned some NVC and reflective listening tactics which helped me neutralize the bosses toxic impact on me. I fought back indirectly by building up endorsements in my LinkedIn profile and personnel file. I also joined other professional groups (Toastmasters) to build visibility and support as a valued professional and so that I would be less vulnerable to the boss's bad behavior. It is really hard; best wishes to you.
42
Susan, your plight is indicative of the fact that our schools are not teaching students what they can do to find a secure economic footing as the decades roll on. I am 60, a woman who got an excellent public school education in California at a time when schools were actually stocked with superb teachers & the curriculum delivered competent graduates. None of what I was led to believe I could do to be "economically successful" actually worked. I am witnessing, also, in all 3 of my adult offspring, that it is not what their teachers or schools recommended they do with their lives that actually helped them. It was pursuing completely different pathways that worked.
From what you write & how you communicate, it is clear you have abilities your job does not use. You need to find a way to become entrepreneurial, your own boss. Other women in your age & location have made this leap successfully. Take a day to visit your library, paying attention to fliers & bulletins as well as self-help books; do some searches online; network with people in the nearest big city; attend workshops. Enlist the help of friends; try your local congregation. There are highly effective mentors out there who will guide you. Be careful & thoughtful, but don't give up. This is an economy that works for those who refuse to accept outdated career paths. You will make more money & have less stress. And isn't that what you want?
2
Re Susan.
Her story and plight are not unique.
Giving advice is easy, especially from afar.
However, women are not the only ones who must put up with abusive employers, supervisors, colleagues in order to survive, support family members, go along to get along -- and yes, at what price?
7
Just wash their socks and all is fine, especially if you wash them by hand.
14
He treats everyone the same. Badly.
39
The cover of the January 13-19 issue of the British publication,The Economist, also shows an infantile Trump.
Cover is labeled in main heading: "One year old" with subhead "Is the Trump presidency really this bad?"
The graphic shows Trump in a baby buggy. Presidential seal on its side. He is tossing out a pacifier. His toy box is filled with missiles and rockets. His building blocks on floor spell "wall". His picture book below the buggy is titled "Fire and Fury".
92
This is somewhat reminiscent of Little Orphan Annie being used to get the old, rich white men to be benevolent to the poor. (see last sentence of paragraph 6)
Trump is so retro.
28
EVERYONE has to make distasteful choices sometimes, make accommodations sometimes - in life and work. Every adult, anyway. it’s not a Man/Woman thing.
24
There ARE men/women things, and they are profound and comprehensive, and they cannot and should not be ignored or minimized. There's also a pervasive drump contemptible phoaquine gnashshoal thing -- a thing far, far beyond any norm.
Not surprised to find an unsavory undercurrent of incest in the Trump/Ivanka relationship. After all, he DID tell Howard Stern he would date her if she wasn't his daughter
36
That incestuous undercurrent is not just a Trump thing, although his case is more overt. I have seen similar situations in the workplace with some older men as boss of young women. Bosses of certain age pick young women to play a daughter/wife emotional role. I have seen young women who manipulate such men to climb corporate ladders. It is so distasteful to me but so many either tolerate it easily or remain oblivious to such work relationships. I have lost professional respect for both side of such work relationships.
You have just discovered why CEOs divorce their wives and marry the secretary that brings them coffee. While Lord of the Realm at work, his wife at home tells him to take out the garbage.
91
So true. Best comment yet.
Personally, I'm tired of Trump personality columns.
58
It’s not about Trump’s personality, it’s about the role that millions of women are forced to play with men at work, especially male superiors.
2
If you are tired of Trump personality columns, don't read them.
2
Currently reading Rushdie's "The Enchantress of Florence". Strikingly, it seems to me, that the "work wives" of 2018 are not much different than the harem of a Mughal emperor- late 16th century.
K Stan
Granville, NY
33
We have a POTUS who treats women as commodities. Who is on his third wife and had an affair with a Porn Star 1 year after marrying his third wife. According to the author of "Fire and Fury" POTUS is currently sleeping around. He talks publicly on tape about groping women because he is rich and famous. Yet despite all this, Evangelicals embrace him. Why? Could it be because the Evangelicals are hypocrites.?
Shame on our country for submitting this embarrassment upon the country and world. With all of this the Family Values GOP also embrace him. Honesty and values have certainly sunk to the lowest level.
125
You have to give some credit to any woman who could stand to be touched or groped by this fat old junk food addict with an enormous back side. The effort needed does demonstrate a discipline most of us could not muster.
48
Probably the only good thing that might result from the Trump Presidency is the refutation of the idea that Republicans and Evangelicals are morally superior to anyone else, since it is becoming increasingly apparent that they are less so.
7
He's rich, so that discipline and extra effort is inspired by dollar signs.
2
Silly and moving like a treadmill.
1
I have no respect for the man-child who is currently polluting "Russia House on the Potomac." Wolff was clear in his recent interview that 5-time draft dodger "Cadet Bone Spurs" (THANKS! Senator Duckworth!) is having an affair with one of his female sycophants. My money is on Hope Hicks. If a disgusting man like Trump can talk about 'dating' his own daughter, nothing is going to hold him back from lewd interactions with his daughter's friend who now holds a pointless position at high pay in the Administration.
80
You forgot the part about him not remembering which foot it was that suffered this horrible malady
1
Wow. Right on point.
17
Seriously, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, liar in chief for the president.
How does she explain this to her children? Her dad?
58
Forget those members of the audience, how does she explain it to her self?
Seriously, this is the real question, one of the first we had to tackle when trying to unravel the circumstances of the abuse Kay endured as a child, and the continued attacks on her that characterizes much of our life together.
We can tell you unequivocally that pointing the finger at her doesn’t get at the truth, whether we do it or she does it herself.
The underlying mechanisms are diabolically opaque and complex. It’s taken us fifty years of work to construct a logically complete theoretical framework for human behavior of this sort. Like most such efforts, we rely heavily on those who have gone before us; if not for lots of brilliant research going back well before the fifties, we would still be scratching our heads.
The most solid common thread that emerges from our models is that women are not the problem; the behavioral templates evolution has provided us are the source, and it’s the male behaviors that are at fault.
Sorry, guys, but there’s a reason the recent debate has a tinge of male bashing. Unfortunately, it’s appropriate.
—Tom & Kay
22
Sarah Huckabee Sanders would have no problem explaining her willingness to lie for political purposes, since her father has been doing that for years. Don't forget that her brother tortured and killed a stray dog, apparently with no punishment whatsoever.
1
Why would Huckabee senior object? His entry to Trump is guaranteed. And this provides the rest of us with another great example of how corrupt the evangelicals are.
1
Artist Laura Breiling said it better (illustration), Nailed it, actually.
11
How does "Work Husbands" sound?
3
Like people who throw up roadblocks to women?
Speaking for myself, I go to work to get away from my dear hubby for awhile and do not need another clueless male asking me where we keep the tin foil (or reams of copy paper).
Trump bashing it getting so old.
8
Telling the truth about Mr. Trump will never get old. The facts will never go out of style.
70
Trump, himself, is wearing out his welcome.
51
Perhaps if he didn't say and do things that are so perfectly bashable, there might be less of it going on. Try focusing on the source of the outrage rather than upon the outrage itself.
1
Whatever works.
1
I'm not sure when the term changed, but "work wife" back in the day referred to a pretty much secretarial role in which the secretary was expected to do the little wife-y things for the generally male boss -- pick up laundry, sew a button, make reservations, etc. It was exploitation, but many women relished the closeness (this from my first female boss, who had been the company president's personal secretary before becoming a director in her own right).
When work wife became work wife or husband, and when it encompassed collegiality, I do not know. But when a work husband is expected to come to my house to shovel the front walk, then work spouse equality will have been achieved.
19
When I was on active duty as an Air Force colonel, I never asked my secretary to bring me coffee or to place phone calls for me. That may be due to my working class background. In addition, I was never comfortable with Officer-enlisted distinction. My father started as a West Virginia coal miner. As a teenager, I caddied at the local country club. That cured me of making class distinctions. You can’t buy dignity or integrity.
25
James, like you I came from a working background and rose to high academic and government positions. I never once asked any staff for personal favors but I would add that in my experience the secretary to the boss was usually as powerful as the boss and sometimes knows more about the work than the boss does. I think there are "work wives" who hold organizations together, or at least make things work. It is sad that they don't get the recognition or the pay that matches their value.
17
"Maybe your work wife can help ? " How about "Why don't they just leave? " To the extent that it takes a toll on these women because they offer emotional support to a racist misogynist demagogue, then let it take a toll. I have no sympathy for those who serve vile people. They in some sense are vile too.
33
WANTED: gal Friday. professional appearance, well spoken, must type, answer phones, cooking and social skills. 7 Sisters type background. some travel. wardrobe allowance. no one over 40 or married, no children. tall, volptuous blonde preferred.
13
We are reminded yet again with this concrete example that Trump's success as a white male is directly due to misogyny. The cruelty of this "benevolent sexism" is hard to avoid. Imagine you are one of his female employees. You are probably not a public figure like Kelllyanne, Hope or Ivanka. You are probably young. Now imagine the first time that this vile selfish man approaches you and demands that you provide "nurturing" and "maternal coddling." Just thinking about it makes my skin crawl.
41
Never dawned on me till reading this piece:
Hillary was Bill’s work wife.
8
With a law degree and first lady of Arkansas. Somewhat different than being a teen model and no-experience President Whisperer.
24
The notion of having someone to look after the boss's emotional needs didn't suddenly emerge with the entry of women into the workplace. Care and feeding of needy bosses has been somebody's job since forever.
Guys who work for bosses like this just recognize that the boss is a needy pain in the butt. Women take it as a slam against their gender.
15
"loathsome", "contemptable", "sycophants": Such temperate language betrays the author's biases, and warns the reader not to believe anything she says.
4
Where is Melania? What may we infer from her absence?
16
Gratitude for the freedom to be with her friends and a young son.
9
...and here's yet another one, spot on for this article. Patrick Meehan, Republican of Pennsylvania and member of the House ETHICS COMMITTEE is guilty of workplace sexual abuse, and has bought his way out with TAXPAYER MONEY. Is prison an adequate enough punishment for this sleezebag? I am pretty sure that what he has done constitutes a serious felony, and should be punished accordingly. Hopefully, when the Judge tries the case, he will note prominently that this piece of garbage sat upon an ethics committee that judges other miscreants.
I think we should demand all of the proceedings of that committee to see who else may have dipped his wand into OUR money illegally - and while we're at it, have all the NDRs that Trump forced down the throats of his victims declared null and void, and published on the front pages of the NYT or WaPo. Lock them both up, for a long, LONG time. Here's to that gang of thieves, the Republicans!
26
Add Sarah Huckabee Sanders to the collection.
19
What is described here is the embodiment of Christian values. Woman was created from Adam's rib. The guidelines for this lifestyle can be found in the Bible.
2
And one of the reasons I am an atheist.
1
The Old Testament is more of a guide to what Christians should avoid, such as polygamy, slavery and genocide. Evangelicals should try reading the New Testament, but they seem to be addicted to fire and brimstone, and severe punishment, especially for females.
1
Gosh, and I didn't think Americans did irony.
1
This is sad and rather pathetic.
4
" subtly sexist men ... often hire a small number of us [women], with the unspoken, but swiftly understood expectation that we will be the uncompensated “chief feelings officer.” Then they often lose respect for us because we play this very role."
A, you weren't supposed to find this out. B, You must have hacked the efiles at Men Rule the World, Inc. C, let's just forget all about this, eh? No sense stirring up trouble. Er, would you make me a cup of coffee and then talk to me about my problems? I think my daughters hate me.
15
"Benevolent sexism is more insidious...."
I find Filipovic who ostensibly fights for the oppressed to be unusually vicious when she attacks those she disagrees with. Ms Hicks seems to be one of them. What i sense in columns like these is cognitive dissonance.
2
Thank you.
6
So who was almost outed by Mr. Wolff on Bill Maher yesterday - Hope Hicks?
19
I bet Hope Hicks is the woman with whom Trump is allegedly having an affair, per Michael Woolf on Maher last night. Why doesn't the NY TImes investigate that? You all seemed determined to investigate Bill Clinton's affairs a couple decades ago, why does Trump get a pass?
26
Might it be said that Hillary have a work wife in Huma Abedin?
These characterizations are getting out of hand.
This is our current juicy journalism.
7
Don't you mean "work moms"?
6
Donald John Trump is a manipulative simple minded, self-serving gladiator who surround himself with strong woman who have sold their souls ....period
13
What a brilliant article!
Thank you, Jill!
17
There are no "work wives" or "work husbands"...marriage involves a sacred vow as well as a legal contract. This "work spouse" concept undermines real marriages. Work is about doing a job...not a profound commitment to one's life partner and most beloved. Trump seems to have come from a dysfunctional family and is insecure and needy..,hence the puffed up weak ego and bullying. His uneducated dirt poor Crofter mother was a cold & negligent gold digger and his father controlling, harsh & cruel. Three marriages show he has no idea of what marriage is about and his kids are all dysfunctional. It may be Ivanka who brings down her father in the end...she is only there because she can't make it on her own in the real world...so much for her ridiculous fabricated image as being a self made working Mom finding the right balance in her life. She is an insult to every working woman and Mother in this country. Who can take her seriously? Trump clearly can't handle real women in any capacity.
36
What is this, the fictional 1950s where the dutiful wife was only positive--except the shrill ones on I Love Lucy?
How many wives don't tell husbands when they need to stop certain behavior, be more aware of some situations, etc.?
Even your graphic artist for the article reinterpreted the writer's words and made a graphic about babying Trump.
And what is this nonsense that it is only women of the administration who cater to volatile Trump? Did you miss the story weeks ago about all those cabinet members who went around the table telling Trump how exceptional he is, and how loyal they are?
This column should have been rewritten. It is disgustingly sexist about claiming "work wives" are normative in America, then identifying what that must mean in this White House.
13
Great piece. Reject the notion of a work wife as necessarily female. More fascinating, perhaps, is the enabler's delusion that they actually exert control over the superior they cuddle. This may be a rationale for taking on a Geppetto-esque role. As. regards the current administration, observers have fostered the illusion that such people protect the superior from themselves and even worse outcomes. John Kelly comes to mind. He was originally cast as a governor to trump's worst tendencies but has since apparently swallowed trump's twisted world view. Otherwise, why lie about Frederika Wilson and refuse to apologize? Pence is another example, literally gushing on command, on camera, in ways that Melania never will. The Faustian nightmare of those in and around trump is a new low for our democracy, which makes me wonder what the electorate - and the media - are learning as we go into the midterms.
26
Great article. It almost, I repeat almost, made me feel sorry for Ivanka, Kellyanne, and Hope. But being a "work wife" is a bit like facing harassment: a point has to come when women either take it or not, and women should know that the best thing to do, albeit not the easiest, is not to take it.
9
Essentially what I read is that certain roles in the Trump administration are not open to men.
As president, one has the right, indeed often the need, for people who will play this kind of role, be it emotional support, shoulder to cry on or whatever. It is healthy for Mr Trump, and it is a good thing for the country that he has these women
The real problem is not here, but rather in the paucity of women and, more importantly, of feminists, in roles of real power.
2
You wrote an entire column that accepted as starting point the premise by Wolf that men are "less loyal" and more likely to have ambitious personal agendas?
You actually don't know women are equally ambitious nowadays?
You honestly see a difference in behavior of Jared versus Ivanka in this White House? And so on, with plenty of other White House men who can be compared to each woman you named.
Very shockingly sexist approach to your column.
8
She was reporting what Michael Wolff wrote in his book. Re-read the column.
1
Without the power of women behind the throne of Trump, one can only imagine how worse off this nation might be. Of greater importance however are the Women who marched yesterday and will continue their march to the polls in every special election that leads to this November and numerous Novembers to come. It is they who, if they do indeed back up their words with deeds, who will right this sinking ship of state. The incompetent in the Oval Office cannot even manage to steer his own party's ship let alone the nation's. Their mad and sad attempts to alter its course by simply rearranging the deck chairs will do them no good, no good at all. It is with great anticipation and pleasure this old codger looks to the Women of this nation to set her straight. I do wish them well. Count me on board.
DD
Manhattan
15
Personally I don't like the term "work wife/husband". Is colleague not good enough any more?
Apart from that, I completely agree with the author of this insightfull and interesting article. Many women will pamper and extend loyalty to emotionally needy man in high places hoping to profit careerwise from their seemingly priviledged position. Ideally they would not need to do that in the world where equal opportunities practice would acqnowledge their professional as well as emotional competence and allow more women to the top positions regardless of whether or not they have support of powerful men.
Having said that, I do not agree that emotional instability (of people in power) is gender specific. A female professor and a head of an institute where I used to teach, lacking leadership skills, managed by intrigue and gossip and a young male colleague was a 24-hour loyal assistent and caretaker. Well qualified and self-confident women were barely tolerated which resulted in a considerable staff turnover and eventually weakened the institut's position.
9
While the rest of our world has evolved, we are seeing the last gasp of the dinosaur men.
4
While this is interesting (I have personally experienced it) I am worried that we continue to live in a bubble, comforting each other with stories about this bad, incompetent man forgetting that those who are on his side live in a totally different bubble where he can do nothing wrong. These two bubbles don’t intersect and therefore no matter what is written about the person Donald Trump, it doesn’t impact or influence those in the other bubble. I strongly believe all journalists and Democrats should focus strictly on facts (lies), political and economic achievements (or lack thereof) and try to mobilize all those who are most impacted by his all white agenda. And don’t look too far into the future, because most people live in the now. Attacking his faulty personality makes him just more sympathetic to his followers who see him as a victim of the bad media and the Dems who don’t know how to lose.
5
Other than Trump and the White House, where do these people work? I've had these types of relationships in every job I've even had, but they work both ways; I unburden my troubles with a friendly female colleague, and she unburdens her problems to me. Of course, we're "individual contributors", not management, with no authority over each other. Maybe it gets worse when you start rising through the ranks; I wouldn't know because I've never been there. I've been in the corporate world for a long time, and I've never seen any of these things that #meToo is talking about. The women I've known there are at least as capable of taking care of themselves as the men.
3
Once again a partisan zealot (Ms. Filipovic) projects her own fantasies onto Trump. If this were Obama, he would credited with his "close working relationships with women." This is why Democrats lost to Trump and are at risk of losing to him again. They are taking their own propaganda about him as truth, and then running against that propaganda. The American public (Trump voters and half of the rest) doesn't buy it.
1
You should be careful not to ascribe your perspectives to the rest of us.
9
Mère, père et enfant terrible. It can't be fixed.
2
An old feminist essay went "viral" before the internet: "Of course I want a wife; Doesn't everyone."
Its gist was the "4M" conception of wifehood: Mistress, Mother, Muse and Maid.
"Husband" incidentally was originally one practicing "husbandry" as in "animal husbandry" or a "ship's husband"--a managerial caregiver.
So just as women can want domestic "wives", men might want domestic husbands, adding another "M" to wifehood--family Manager--not just Maid/houseworker.
Many good families had wives who were 'familial husbands"--their (nominal) husbands relegated to "bread winners." Women "wanting it all" want to be both husband and wife in these senses.
Ideal "work-wives" and "work-husbands" are supportive colleagues who "have your back"--adding a little luster to the daily "servant/maid/muse" grind.
But "luster" can turn into a pun--the glow grows. Good Management can be sexy just as Musing can be sexy--tempting women to morph into Mistresses; or turning men into suitors.
Trump operates on a strict division of labor. His work-wives (Maids/Muses) are not his Mistresses/Mothers (these get confused); but they are his Managers--managing his public image ("alternate facts") and his businesses--now including POTUS.
At least his Maids/Managers are not his Mistresses. That was Slick Willy's problem.
2
Reminds me of Mary Wollstencraft and her admonition against men putting women on a pedestal-just a trap so that they are not at their side.
3
Yes, it’s a mommy - toddler relationship. But it looks to me like everyone around Trump is gently handling a live grenade.
53
The old expression 'behind every successful man is a woman' used to mean his wife, now that’s expanded to include the ‘work wife’ who props up a man who can’t hack the stress of a work environment. Trump seems to have so many ‘work wives’ that he’s got his own harem. I wonder if that would make him eligible for deportation as a Muslim.
50
In successful environments, the success of many individuals is helped by the good work teams. And good office managers, secretaries, administrative assistants, help the executives. Social workers, nurses, therapists and front office staff are critical to medical practices. And so on in every professsion.
It is stupid, swollen ego for anyone to call self a " work wife". Really out of line term.
3
The list of complaints never ceases to end does it. Can’t do this, don’t do that, shouldn’t that. #moveon with #metoo and get back to work
4
Yes, women have just started talking about it, and already the cries of "When will it EVER end?" are echoing in the air.
Sit down. This is going to take awhile.
14
Ms. Filipovic, What brilliant take!
Thanx
25
A Stormy in every port,
With whom Donald can consort,
And what makes it even hotter,
Is she reminds him of his daughter,
Which makes for very fine sport.
44
I guess we will have arrived when we have work husbands too
3
No. We have arrived when we recognize compassion to our fellow workers is FAR from equal to the relationships of spouses.
These terms--work wife, etc.--need to be dropped.
5
Why is Sarah Huckabee Sanders missing from this commentary?
As the toady most willing to equivocate, prevaricate and downright lie in defense of himself, she must be of infinite value as a work wife and "nurturer."
56
And she offers no Spicerlike comic relief. Poor SHS we wish she would sush
up.
6
Sanders has the bad luck of having to be accountable in public to the public. I doubt she's anything more than a yessir-rightawaysir-whateveryousay-girl to him in private, unlike his 'work-wives' who are privy to his more private thoughts.
To Trump, Sanders is a 'punishment' to the press...and by extension, us. For Trump, if we had been nicer to him...she would've been 'prettier'.
1
Speaking of female roles: When is the First Lady's social crusade against cyberbullying going to take off? Other than disembarking from AirForce One in leather pants and heels I haven't seen/heard much about her doings.
36
Em ~ Melania is the silent wife/first lady, to be seen but not heard. I wonder if she is allowed to have a mind of her own in public. The anti-cyberbullying crusade is not going to happen.
15
This is why #MeToo is expanding around the world, and not just because of sexual assault or innuendo!
Women are tired of this type of exasperating treatment, just more reason why many ex-husbands are out there trying to find a shoulder to cry one...
Sad.
17
You left out Sarah Huckabee, who lies for a living for Trump. She is like the Key and Peele "anger translator" character for Obama, except rather than ramping it up she softens Trump's venom and channels it into slightly more palatable fabrications and excuses for her work-husband and Trumplandia.
These women are professional enablers and should never be thought of as victims of the monomaniacal monster who lives in the bowels of our Republic.
34
Softens his venom? I believe that she crystallizes and intensifies it through that daffy monotone that she uses for any pronouncements, whether true or, more frequently, false.
7
I am no fan of Donald J. Trump, but I don’t understand the author’s characterization of Hope Hicks as “loathsome”.
2
It's because of the way she acts, not because of the way she looks. But you probably do find Sarah Huckabee Sanders loathsome.
4
How dare you give credence to the odious term "work wife." It is disgusting and needs to be banished from the lexicon. And no, despite pretending that there is some kind of balance because someone once used the term "work husband," no one actually uses that term. "Work wife" is all about demeaning and de-professionalizing women. Continuing to put this term in articles and headlines just prolongs its ugly existence.
6
Its about describing a reality. How do you want to call it?
2
I think Trump has "mommy issues." I have never heard him speak of his mother. Why is that?
"A boy's best friend is his mother." - Norman Bates from the film "Psycho."
23
@susan
...or his sister, who, believe it or not, is a sitting federal circuit court judge!
https://goo.gl/wPE8uK
3
With Trump, the USA is formally in the age of "Caligula". Where debauchery is the norm, and alternative facts enter the lexicon.
The biggest suprise with this shame, is the exposure of the fake Right Wing Evangelical Christians. The rise of Trump and Roy Moore types supported by that group, highlights what hypocracy looks like in these TIMES!
The Trump base is really the exposure of the BIRTHERS and Tea Party. And how disconnected they are, from reality! And how inept they are at the task of GOVERNANCE!
22
How dare you give credence to the odious term "work wife." It is disgusting and needs to be banished from the lexicon. And no, despite pretending that there is some kind of balance because someone once used the term "work husband," no one actually uses that term. "Work wife" is all about demeaning and de-professionalizing women. Continuing to put this term in articles and headlines just prolongs its ugly existence.
4
How dare you give credence to the odious term "work wife." It is disgusting and needs to be banished from the lexicon. And no, despite pretending that there is some kind of balance because someone once used the term "work husband," no one actually uses that term. "Work wife" is all about demeaning and de-professionalizing women. Continuing to put this term in articles and headlines just prolongs its ugly existence.
5
I absolutely agree that "work wife" is a disgusting and inappropriate term.
Employees with job descriptions fulfilling their roles are not the same as those spouses who ride the ups and downs of private life, make commitment to live and care, handles extended family relationships, etc.
5
The article actually addresses the demeaning position Trump has put these women in- soothing him, interpreting his misogyny in toned down messages. It is Trump who has brought this 1950s idiocy into our WH.
59
Trump reminds us every day why we do not want to return to the '50's. I grew up in that world. The V.P. who hired me for a wonderful job, and who mentored me as I grew into it, also grew up in that world. He was the exception to the rule for 22 years. He set the tone, and eventually the old guard retired. The world has moved beyond what is now the norm in the WH; it is not the "new normal"; and, it won't last beyond Trump.
1
Donald Trump still seeks the parents who abandoned him.
16
Very interesting, very provocative and very good and very well written( 4x very, but at least I didn't say basically or literally) Why any decent female would subjugate themselves to such a rancid creature is beyond me. Guess daddy just didn't pay enough attention to them when they were young. One thing is for sure, sisterhood will never be a word they have used about them from another female.
9
Let me distill this article down to its core point. To work for Trump as a male or female one must leave their brain, heart, and spine at the door.
30
Now that we have dissected Trump's dependencies consider what Philippe I. Reines was to Hillary Clinton.
1
Bringing Hillary into this is sheer ignorance.
10
Hillary is not the President; you seem obsessed with a woman who is not in a position of power. We do not need to care about, or be interested in what her professional relationships were. Move on to the current occupant of the WH, and to those who surround him. If you are pleased with them, then all is good with your world. Hillary Clinton has no impact on that world.
1
great insightful article.....is anyone surprized he denigrates strong women who won't play by his rules and put him on a pedestal? i.e. Hilary, Pelosi, Warren, Feinstein, et al. also good timing coinciding with the second women's march.
19
I recognized this during the campaign —Hope Hicks is pretty and 100% loyal to trump. No wonder he hired her and has since promoted her. I never once read a word where she has contradicted him. She is the perfect “work wife.”
14
To work for somebody like Donald Trump you either have to sell your soul, or not have one to sell.
If you have real integrity, you cannot allow yourself to be anywhere near people like this.
30
Every CEO needs a Hope Hicks, regardless of the gender of the CEO. It's just harder for women CEO's to attract a woman or a man to provide constant personal support.
Don't insult Hope Hicks by callng her a stupid Office-Wife. She has a college degree and is very skilled at dressing to please Mr. Trump and to be appropriate in whatever place he appears (e.g. Europe, Japan, China).
There is a world of difference between the publicly silent Ms. Hicks and the very pubic speaking of Sarah Huckaby Sanders. Sanders is a deliberate provocator who delights in being harsh and alt. right - and Christian fundamentalist. In contrast, Hope Hicks is seen but never heard. Donald J. says Ms. Hicks is very bright and talented. She has to be very smart to keep up with him, and very diplomatic never to cross him.
Maybe someday Hope Hicks will talk - or even think of running for office. She would make a very attractive candidate and she seems never to lose her cool.
3
No to Hope Hicks running for anything except Miss America. It's about her politics, not her looks.
3
Hope Hicks lacks any personal standards if she works for Trump. There is nothing classy about her. (She was dating Corey Lewandowski. Nuff said.)
10
Work Concubines. That is how he regards and treats ALL Women. Those he doesn't consider worthy of his attention or as possible sexual conquests, simply don't Exist. The ultimate overaged playboy, eternally on the prowl, oblivious to his own lack of attractive qualities. Really, really gross.
Thanks, GOP.
23
When women go on the front lines in combat, and the men can stay home to look after the kiddies, you will know we have got past this gender-bashing. Don't hold your breath.
1
It happens. Plenty of national guard members activated to war zones are women, and husbands at home with children, their schooling, his career.
8
Why are all the columnist and news reporters (opinions) are afraid to call
Trump what he is "The First American Dictator"?
9
Hope Hicks, as portrayed in the Michael Wolff, "Fire and Fury", is much more than a sycophant and supplicant: she is trump's paramour. He told Bill Maher that one needed to read between the lines for this information. He could not directly publish it since his source was off the record.
11
You forgot to mention Sarah Huckabee Sanders - his staunchest defender and another enabler.
5
A man who ends up paying $130,000 for a date with a woman has more than a work-wife problem.
21
We can always count on the zombie-feminist to demonstrate power-envy. Sisterhood no more?
1
Trump's sees women as only good for one thing - to serve him and pleasure him whether in the office or in the bedroom.
7
This is 100% on target and I worked for one of these guys for many years. His ego could not tolerate anyone, but particularly not any woman, who did not defer to him, and he was brutally cruel to those who would not knuckle under. Like Trump, he saw himself as a benevolent boss – demanding but fair.
He was anything but that; he was a creep in every way imaginable, a racist, classist, sexist jerk - and a moral coward. Like many of such men, he earned enough income for his firm so that those in control tolerated his bad behavior, albeit while holding him at arms length. In fact, he’s still at it, aged, but still pulling in enough bucks to remain atop what is now a shrunken empire.
As I gain more insight into my own behavior, I realize that I evaded the many covert misogynists in the workplace by manipulating overt misogynists, a/k/a, pseudo-patriarchs who, like all unashamed bullies, were weak, insecure and emotionally stupid. In so doing, I replicated childhood relationships in a traditional, ethnic, male-dominated culture. I thought I’d broken the pattern after a bad experience in graduate school, but now see that I had merely perfected my technique. Manipulating needy creeps to avoid being annihilated by creeps who aren’t needy, is not feminism.
It is never too late to stop doing dumb “stuff.” Donald Trump is giving all of us a vivid example of yet another way that women fall prey to male power. We should take the lesson.
15
Nuns sometimes play/played this role to Priests.
6
Excellent description of a male/female relationship I had never considered. A healthy outcome of the me-too movement are articles like this that are exploring different layers of male/female relationship that I feel were too unidimensional in the past. It will take years for those in the workplace or for that matter any place where men and women come together to pursue common purposes to make collective sense of the dynamics of their relationships and the more difficult problem of how to regulate those relationships in public spaces.
3
Just as in marriage, some women attach their economic future on thier male work husband. And then defends and pampers him as well as promotes him. We don't see the opposite happening very often. But Bill and Hillary did reverse roles . She first gave him loyalty support and drive. He then returned the effort, but not as well.
6
What is feminism ever going to do when it no longer has a 'workplace' to obsess over -- when it is no longer defined by its little careerist dream jobs? What ever will feminism do when it has to just deal with people as people, not 'colleagues.' I'm truly tired to having op-eds like this define our lives by professional categories and protocols. If feminists want a lot of fraternization policies and rules for relating to one another, they should join the military, or work on a cruise ship, where strict social and political hierarchies define everybody's role and relationship to one another. And besides, as recent event have shown, feminists will only ever apply all these rules and policies to people they don't personally like. When they like a person, we will suddenly hear a lot about how 'context matters,' which is another one of saying double-standards.
Maybe we can just chill. Maybe they can lay-off the president.
2
On Bill Maher’s show last night, Michael Wofff implied that, reading between the lines toward the end of his book, you could see with whom the constant (but elderly) orange playboy was currently having a WH affair. The quotation that starts this editorial piece is likely the “read between the lines” excerpt. That, paired with Hicks’ dramatic exit when Trump called her the best piece of tail Lewandowski had ever had (also from “Fire and Fury”), suggests Hope is more than “office” wife. She’s younger than Ivanka but came to him through his daughter. As this piece notes, she babies and cares for him. She has intimate access. He has managed to combine the wife/daughter roles perfectly with her. How could it not turn sexual?
18
Well my therapist led me to believe that taking care of men’s feelings to a fault was a deficiency unique to me so it sure is nice to see I have sisters out there!
7
I'm always amazed by the lack of professionalism in the workplace. And the lack of appropriate boundaries - by both men and women. The idea of a 'work spouse' is creepy. You may want to discuss that with your real spouse.
7
Agree. Really going backwards as a society to use this term.
5
You know, one way to assess someone- man or woman- is to contemplate what it would be like to be trapped with them on a deserted island, where mutual effort is required to survive.
Think about that and think about Donald Trump.
Need I say more?
8
Maybe in this case "work-mother" takes precedence. While wives are often substitutes for mother, nothing can take the place of the real thing.
1
Interesting. For a look at how one woman handled this very situation, take a look at “Phantom Thread” in theaters now. I am not associated with the movie but saw the connection.
2
You could call it a "work wife" or "work husband" or use the older term, Friend. All relationships are unequal, including friendships. Some are more unequal than others. Some are exploitive. Some people are incapable of true friendship.
6
Condi Rice once had to correct a slip of the tongue, and she did correct it quickly: she referred to President G.W. Bush as "my husband."
13
The women in Trump's circle are fascinating and there's no doubt they play the role you describe but what I find equally interesting, are the subordinate men--including prominent members of Congress.
Frankly, I've never seen anything like it. Here are these supposedly alpha males who go utterly weak at the knees at an angry word or a pointed tweet from their master and bend themselves into pretzels to praise him and grovel before him, competing with each other to shower him with the most effusive compliments.
There is an old saying that when it comes to politics "It's better to be strong and wrong than weak and right." Trump with his exaggerated masculinity and his string of trophy wives, mansions and hotels, his aggressiveness, exudes a form of strength. His opponents, and he has been very fortunate in his opponents, not so much.
As an author who's working on a series of historical novels set in an ancient kingdom where an absolute monarch rules, it is a fascinating real life display of power in action and the psychology of subordinates. As a sane person living in what is supposed to be a modern democratic republic, it is absolutely mystifying and on many levels absolutely revolting.
11
Is it the case that with Trump this argument about the role of women applies to the men who work for him as well? Does Trump demand emotional labor to support him from everyone?
3
Reminds me reminds me of the “campaign wives” of the Russian front in World War 2. A female soldier/adjutant was “assigned” to a General for sex and whatever other duties (light housekeeping?) were needed. Remember Eisenhower and his British “driver”, Kaye Sommersby? This model of the White Alpha Male is showing its last fraying edges in Trump because he still attempts to inhabit this role, while huge swatches of the modern world have moved on.
4
My work partner for 20 years was a nervous, obsessive, emotionally trigger-happy woman and a well-respected scholar. Alas, she was my opposite, infinitely conservative and prone to abuse progressive, sophisticated, or worldly thinkers. I was everything her family, cloistered childhood, and religious schools thought distasteful. But her knowledge of her area was world-class and her love of poetry inarguable - unless the poet or translator touched on love, liberal ideas, or physicality - then she exploded and I had to salvage the work. I learned a lot and rethought much.
But first we fought like mad and produced work that took us all over the world until she could no longer teach. I recall incredible blowups over my tie, a scholar's sweater or any literary reference to physical passion. She lost patience with wimps of either sex - and always excited debate. Her ire'd wane, her balance return. She won3 prestigious teaching awards. We published and lectured across disciplinary borders. I miss the tirades and the and the stories about our battles over books.
No, she was never my passion partner. She was my research partner - equal to the men who ruled her field. She was what tRump can not tolerate, an equal, no sycophant, or push-over, or servile woman, or portable mother, or sensual suffix to a male verb. Maybe I should send him her number... she'd melt him to an orange puddle of pee.
46
Feminists are the chief perpetrators of what this author decries ("benign sexism") as harming women in the workplace. Feminists insist women be credited with bringing "compassion" and "nurturing" to the work world, and otherwise "diversifying" it. But if you claim you are "diversifying" something as a group or gender, then you are also saying you are "different" as a member of a group or gender. In that case, your real aspiration is to be "special" not equal. You can't have it both ways.
14
I am unaware of any feminist who has said women bring "compassion" and "nurturing" to the work world, which is why we must "diversify" it. This is not the feminist argument for diversifying the work world. I think you're applying your own gender stereotypes to this issue. The feminist argument for diversifying the workplace is that women deserve equality in all areas of life, including the workplace. And this is not because we're nurturing or maternal or whatever nonsense, but because we're HUMAN BEINGS.
16
No, Joseph. You are blaming the victim again. Feminists do nothing of the sort.
Donald Trump has a long and well documented history of treating women shabbily and with utter disrespect. Any women who sign on to work for him are delusional or enjoy chaos and male misbehavior.
31
women tend to assume they will change their men
men tend to assume their women will stay the same
both tend to be disappointed.
31
We're in a moment where sexual assault and harassment are finally getting the attention they deserve and the author is continuing with her shtick of how all ambitious, upper income white women are victims of "soft sexism." She doesn't have anything to contribute to #metoo. Why has she always focused on perceived slights in professional settings rather than advocating for those who have experienced clear harassment? Is it because she hasn't experienced harassment and, therefore, doesn't find it to be worth discussing? Only issues she believes affect her personally are important?
7
Her biases and narrow focus are present in everything she writes. For example, she has no interest whatsoever in what men think or feel or are affected by anything, other than assigning the worst possible motives and characteristics to them. But she has no obligation to participate in MeToo. I can't believe I'm defending her.
1
JC - Maybe you need to read my comment again to accurately comprehend it. I did not state anything regarding her obligations. I compared her concerns with those that most people finding more pressing - sexual assault and harassment vs. her concern trolling with the intent to generate clicks. It appears from your comment that you would not find anything negatively affecting women concerning.
2
I don't get your point. You are asking the author to imagine herself in a different job? She can write what she knows from her experience, not what someone in a different job knows.
Yes, professional women's 'cuddling' seems of the essence for ever-needy Trump, someone to support his insecure 'macho' image of being seductive, desirable, perhaps uniquely indispensable to women's needs and wishes. Nonsense of course, except for a childish, immature and self-centered 'psyche' that failed to grow up. Not that crooked lying Trump's symptoms are unheard of, given that there are legitimate mental disorders such as autism, where repetitive patterns of behavior makes it difficult to get along and recognize other human beings...without objectivizing them; it's that this 'ugly frog' seems incapable to recognize fact from fiction, and compulsive in attacking any slight on his 'majesty', and where cruelty is displayed 'so naturally'. This charlatan, being an alfa-male, cannot withstand a like-figure for too long, and give his stable genius too much shadow; hence, his requirement of pliable women willing to become submissive to his capricious and ever needy behavior. Narcissism alone does begin to explain all that Trump is; why would he be so darn unscrupulous in all his dealings, while sustaining a stupid entitlement of white supremacy, if not racism, with no compunction to declare such bigotry in the open? I concur with you in that, with all the praising of his vanity ongoing, and the full complicity of a cowed republican party, he has no incentive to change whatsoever. He is a spoiled brat. Now, where is mom's bottle?
12
I am reminded of Wayne Hayes's famous "secretary" Elizabeth Ray who once ultimately admitted, "I can't type. I can't file. I can't even answer the phone."
12
How would you describe Ivanka?
9
Indeed, one has to wonder about Ivanka, given the contexts in which Trump mentions her.
5
Just recall the near-incestuous remarks he has made about her physical appearance and has allowed others to make, such as Howard Stern. Recall various photos of the two and his creepy hand placement.
3
Americans so weirdly if not cheaply often use marriage terminology outside of marriage discussions. “Married to this idea”, “divorced from that reality” etc.
Interesting points are made here by this journalist, but how about returning words to describe private or family life to their appropriate places in vocabulary?
5
We are all lucky she didn't use sports analogies. Americans seem to put those in their vocabulary constantly.
1
Brilliant column, Ms. Filipovic. Thank you!
9
I will never understand why a woman would work or vote for Donald.
40
I disagree with the concept "work wife" especially for this president. As the graphic with your column so aptly depicts, it is a "work mother" that this man both craves and demands. This indulgent mother of his creation forgives all his temper tantrums and caters to his every whim. That he needs women to mother him while simultaneously needing women whom he can degrade and sexually defile can only to only one conclusion: he hated his own mother.
26
First, I can't say I'm surprised at the argument that Trump maintains essentially-infantile relationships with women, and therefore likes to keep a lot of wet-nurses around.
Makes sense to me, and is of course the flip side of his contemptuous attitude towards all the women who AREN'T his mommy. Still, I'd point out that this isn't just women: this guy generally shoves men into the saame mammy role, or flies into hissy-fits when he can't. Think Jeff Sessions vs. Obama.
Doesn't really much matter. We're just plain stuck with this fool for a while, and need more attention to his acts than to armchair psychoanalysis.
Oh, by the way? The guys who feel picked on by this "antimen," argument need to take a good look in the mirror; I generally find that a) I only feel picked on when somebody's got my number, and b) it's best to avoid flipping from screeching about being stereotyped to stereotyping everybody I disagree with.
And the characters arguing that Obama had Valerie Jarrett? Feel free to compare a) that man's wife, b) Valerie Jarrett, to Trump's assorted wives and the shabby likes of Betsy deVos or whoever.
6
Then just last night Mr. Wolff said to Bill Maher , there are back doors to other doors to door and trump still is carrying on , where is Melania in this equation ?
13
Missing in action?
3
Trump has both work wives and work husbands. Ivanka is the stellar work wife who hasn't participated in the real world so doesn't know much about anything. I don't know why Sarah Sanders is there since she usually looks unkept and cannot even create intelligent lies. Hope Hicks and Kellyanne Conway are definitely work wives. As for work husbands, Kevin McCarthy, Lindsey Graham and John Kelly play that role well. Lindsey holds Trump's hand on the golf course telling him how great he is, McCarthy picks out Trump's favorite candy flavors and Kelly tries to keep him calm.
15
Don't be so quick to categorize Kelly. He is the first and last person to have Trump's ear and that is usually the stance Trump will then take. Look no further than the immigration issue. Kelly is the quintessential believer in the United States as the home of the superior white male; all others need to leave or never come here. He's the puppet master to Trump's puppet.
4
Agreed. Kelly tries to keep Trump calm and also ruined the DACCA deal along with Steven Miller. White men wanting a White country. Kelly should never have been put in the position of Chief of Staff. He lied about Fredericka Wilson and he will continue to lie and lie and cover for Trump.
4
This editorial collapses a huge number of individual relationships into a caricature of codependency, misuse, abuse, and dysfunction. That is an enormous sacrifice of human potential for the sake of outing the small number of malfunctions in an otherwise eminently human panorama.
4
I am always wondering about the UN Secretary - Nikki Haley. She seems to coddle some but can also be a straight shooter as in the Roy Moore case.
5
Great accompanying illustration. Love the cookie.
5
Anyone, male or female, working for Trump is suspect, by definition.
21
It's an interesting and probably accurate analysis. Thanks for your spelling it out so clearly.
I have employed women in my businesses, and I don't think I ever hired or engaged anyone for that "emotional support" role, as described, but I have to say I never really even thought about it. I just had work that needed to be done.
Still, with Trump, it's probably correct. The guy just seems like a complete doofus. Who is it that elected this guy? Are they embarrassed yet? Sadly, probably not.
14
To “ . . . Nor is it a problem of the many women whose bosses aren’t as crass or odious . . . “ add, “or pernicious as Mr. Trump . . . “
Well done, Jill Filipovic, well done indeed.
7
Yet another opinion piece that bashes men and makes women out as victims. Please! Do women never use their sexual and emotional traits to get ahead in the work place? Are males the only gender with raw ambition?
9
Generally ambitious women are seen as "pushy ", as evidenced by the absolute backlash against Hillary Clinton who, despite all her other political faults, was a woman audacious enough to run for president.
3
Audacious? She was an experienced First Lady, NY State Senator, and former Secty. of State. Those were pretty good qualifications. What qualifications did a failed, 5-time bankrupt businessman who inherited and squandered a real estate fortune have? What governing experience did this inept, racist President have? What diplomatic experience does he have? He has insulted our oldest allies; he has isolated us from the world community of leaders; and, he has shown no interest in learning anything about governance. He has surrounded himself with plutocrats who will use him, and us, for their own financial gain. He has begun to dismantle every policy and regulation put in place for the public good. The damage will be extensive, long lasting, and the repair will be expensive and difficult.
The sad part about this is the Reality that it actually happens. Time is the only cure for it. Women are equal in the Universe. Yes, EQUAL!!!! Once that passes the Enculturation Process, life on this planet will be so much better. Just know that you have so much more support than you realize right now. Spread out your wings and fly. You go girl.
4
Seems to me that "work wife" is the wrong term. In Trump's case, "work mother" fits better.
14
Are some of these women the ones who are doing his makeup each morning and coloring his orange hair? I have always wondered how he got that done each day.
11
Where's the dividing line between empathetic colleague and "working wives?"
2
You must be kidding. Empathetic coworker is VERY DIFFERENT than a spousal relationship!
2
The indignation in the is warranted, but not because the piece is man-bashing, which it isn't. Short of trading sexual favors, all of us (men and women) have put up with odious bosses in order to fill out our resumes - personal or professional. In Washington, especially, there are gorgeous women who had once been highly paid lobbyists and now proudly parade around as some truly-homely senators' 2nd & 3rd wives. It's a not-so-insider's joke: "...oh, yeah, her. Used to hustle for XYZ brand, quid pro quo strategy, ha ha, but she's now married to very influential Senator Geezer."
The strategy works exceedingly well elsewhere -- ask Georgina Chapman Weinstein, Wendy Deng Murdoch who was a waitress when she spotted Rupert and stalked him, and for aging B-list female tv stars who are ultimately relegated to D-list roles and "suddenly find love" with multimillionaire hedge fund managers 20 years their senior.
Takes two to tango folks: Hope Hicks is a zephyr but where else but serving Trump would a "look-at-me, look-at-me" knockout like her get to come off as gravitas but next to Trump, or another person like him. Kellyanne Conway is a blatant liar but has a quartet of college students to pay for so she too "serves." Melania gets to wear dozens of phenomenal clothes and is photographed around the world: the model wife, the wife model - literally and figuratively. It's truly sexist to think that only the men have all the agency.
14
How about including Sarah Huckabee Sanders as a work wife; she put a best foot forward for The Donald.
3
A thought provoking article
"It’s a male problem, one of absurd expectations and learned emotional helplessness. But if you’re used to women laser-focusing on you, handling you with care and treating you with wide-eyed deference, what incentive do you have to change?"
Exactly, but then again by that logic it is really also a female problem, because until the assuagments cease and the eyes narrow the problem remains. And that, shockingly enough, makes it a human problem.
17
Except that when the eyes narrow, the person owning them may be out of a job. But otherwise, yes, I agree it's a human problem that involves changing the way women are viewed from every angle.
1
Regardless of what "always has been", humans deserve individual respect - BOTH men and women. It usually takes two to tango - one enabler and one enabled. This, to the extreme, is what Trump has always done amidst his obscene misogyny. The women that freely cater to such a deviant get what they deserve, assuming they have made the choice to "roll over". Those that have not done so by free will deserve retribution and righting of the faulty assumption that what always was, always will be.
I seem to remember that slavery was once the norm, as were segregation (see Trump's Federal prosecution for such) and glass ceilings. Admirable, strong women have done much to correct this, but are losing significant ground under the Misogynist-in-Chief. At least they still have the right to vote (for the time being). This also applies to people of color.
As long as there exist women with little self-respect and a male-dominated system extolling misogyny, work wives will be work slaves.
4
Omarosa Manigault? We hardly knew thee.
Her mistake was to think she could lever her own ambitions with Trumps needs.
A lot like Trump supporters. Who put their aspirations in Trump and will learn it isn't about them. It's all about Trump.
7
Thank you Excellent perception. I was an executive assistant what a horrible title and this very much hit home.
8
I remain mystified by the women who have steadfastly stood by his side, often defending another tweet or statement. I ask myself, how are they wired? And to those who have children, daughters for example, what do they tell them? Could it be that they are as power hungry as their male counterparts?
This is the first President that has got me wondering why do people work for him? Are they all wired like Amarosa?
10
Is the word sycophant echoing in anyone else's mind now? These women are all using their femininity to get in on the game because Trump is less threatened by them as he would be by men. And he tries to put a "woman's touch" on things to blunt the obvious and brutal regime change he is undertaking in the US. He is recklessly dismantling a culture and politic he barely understands and fueling divisions among us that will be hard to mend. He will reap what he sows: chaos and failure. But he'll get a great book deal out of it.
6
Workplace dynamics are infinitely more complicated than this one dimensional analysis.
Many women cultivate a father/daughter relationship with a male boss to perfection to advance their careers. Many older or shorter men are incredibly abusive to younger or taller male underlings. Many divorced women need male companionship which they get through male subordinates. IThe needy male and his accommodating work wife is just one branch on the tree.
13
This is at least one example of gender equity in the administration: The men and women appointed to Trumpian positions are for the most part equally incompetent, deceitful, gratuitously cruel to the less fortunate, and fawning.
8
Whatever valuable insights and valid points this author makes are undermined and perhaps lost when she ends her piece with the nastiness and name-calling that's become a hallmark of advocates who dwell on the extremes of just about any issue nowadays. Ms. Filipovic has worthwhile things today, but when she descends into name-calling (referring to the women surrounding Trump as "contemptible power-hungry sycophants") her behavior becomes as loathsome, albeit in a different way, as that of the "work wives" she criticizes. Nastiness does not make an argument, even a good argument, more compelling.
12
These women aren't Trump's other wives. They're his other mothers.
20
Work wives in the Trump world are there for one reason only; to satisfy his primitive brainstem level reflexes and impulses.More generally, they can be quite useful, for example in delivering well meaning and helpful advice that in today's work environment could not come from the opposite sex or in providing a different perspective on issues at work or elsewhere.
2
An excellent reminder that we don’t have to be “nursturing” and “maternal” to our bosses OR our husbands. My first husband, who left me after 23 years of marriage and five children for a much younger woman, said “At last I have found a nurturing relationship.” She lasted less than two years and turned him in to bankruptcy court for concealing assets. I should have been that smart.
11
Is it too much emotional labor to say, “No ,thanks, I prefer red wine.”?
8
Apparently it's too much emotional labor to ask "would you like to have sex with me tonight?"
2
It's puzzling that Ms. Filipovic begins this well-thought piece by discussing the 3 main women in mr. trump's life, and concludes it by slinging accusations at mankind. She doesn't register that perhaps there are personalities who gravitate to their roles--men and women--and inevitably somehow find each other. And why no mention of another White House woman, deputy chief Katie Walsh, who finds herself with no effective function and ultimately disengages? It's unfortunately that 40 years after ERA and NOW that we are still mired in tradition male/female roles both at home and the workplace. However, the author's premise is altogether simplistic and seems constructed primarily to sling a scatter-shot of spears at men.
2
When I read what Katie Way had said about Ashleigh Banfield, I was truly shocked. How can we, as feminists, build a better world than the male dominated predator world we now inhabit? For Way to go after Ms. Banfield because of her age, her "highlights" and her lipstick, it's as sexist and ageist as any male creep. I'm a little older than Ms. Banfield and have been active in feminist causes for 30 years. Am I to be thrown to the side and my contribution forgotten because I'm now over 45 and "no one knows who you are." I spent a lot of time fighting for rights that I didn't have but which I enthusiastically endorsed as a way to make a better world for the next generation of women. The bashing of Ms. Banfield really opened my eyes. Ageism and sexism is alive and well, even with women.
7
It is amusing that I have seen basically two points of view in the letters, especially from the men: 1)Trump is a pig and 2) This is male bashing. Yes, Trump is a pig, but just because we are all pigs to some extent does not make it male bashing, and this article was not about Trump.
Ego stroking feels good, almost as good as sex. It is problematic in the work environment because time devoted to ego stroking has no immediate benefit, (long term there are probably benefits even for the stroker but also as the author points out it also causes further problems). I can think of no case where I think that ego stroking should be part of the job however and we need to work on reduction and elimination. I do not believe it is possible to eliminate in a generation but pointing out that it happens even in liberal areas is a start. Give the male bashing complaint a break and find yourself a partner who enjoys stroking your ego at home, at work do such a good job that the boss wants to stroke your ego.
2
I'd love to know where your bar is set for male bashing. Apparently it extends somewhere above calling all men pigs. Speak for yourself, brother.
1
The author left out Trump’s press secretary, who doles out the daily doses of lies and insults that obviously he approves of. When Sean Spicer tried that, he was laughed out of the room. But Ms. Sanders isn’t subjected to the same scorn from the press for that same behavior. It is the job of the press secretary to provide information, not judgments about, say, “losers” who don’t agree with Trump’s schizophrenic views and behavior about a government funding bill.
7
Ms. Filipovic’s astute observations come to the same debilitatingly-irrelevant conclusion: “It’s a male problem.”
Is it? Then how do most women consider themselves experts on the subject, lecturing men with plugged ears? Why are women voicing most complaints? No, it’s a societal problem, and last time I checked that included both men and women.
If Ms. Filipovic expects anything to change, it will require the assistance of women who not only tolerate abusive behavior but exploit it for personal gain, who are only handing their share of the problem off to its next victim.
2
As long as white men retain most of the power, women do their job plus and enormous amount of energy trying to figure out the dynamic. It is exhausting.
I do not see men reading self help books about how to share the power or support women.
6
Generally speaking, power is not relinquished. More exhaustion ahead!
Trump's cabinet has a number of sycophantic men who smooth his ego and act as his 'workwives' (I recall only Mattis and Tillerson who made neutral comments when asked endorse Trump). Men sometimes are workwives too, they just don't carry the emotional burden as well.
4
I saw a tv clip of Trump that for some reason gets played over and over. Trump is moving down a line of people shaking hands. Ms Hicks keeps moving with him to stay in the film frame. It's obvious she knows where the camera is. It's quite weird.
9
It's amusing to read comments from men here calling this man bashing. I've had several jobs in which I was treated in this manner -- the last of which was the most egregious involving trips to take his dog to the vet, his kids to the doctor or myriad other appointments, cook for his friends, make out school and camp applications for his kids, pick up his Rx's and laundry -- I could go on.
It's not only humiliating, it also draws the ire of other women in the office who have various spread gossip about what you're "really doing".
7
The point of the article isn't the man-bashing. It's where she takes it. It's her tone and demeaning attitude toward men and her extremely flawed perception that only men in power treat underlings this way and only women subordinates are adversely affected by it, none of which is true. I can attest from personal experience, and my experiences are no less valid than yours.
1
When it comes to rising in the ranks of corporate America or in politics the willingness to make oneself a doormat makes no distinction between the sexes.
5
Well, some of the doormats have doormats of their own, and sadly, more of the secondary doormats are female, through no fault of their own.
1
Men and women are different ...physically, mentally and emotionally. We are ying and yang... equal but different. One is not superior and the other inferior. Harmony exists when both are equally balanced.
3
However, as long as traditional "feminine" traits are devalued or mocked ("run like a girl", "cry like a woman", etc.), then there will be no harmony. One side will take advantage of and dismiss the other.
3
But as men who work know, egalitarianism is not always the norm, and many of us have found ourselves serving as the caretaking “work husband” to the emotionally needier female co-worker
2
that is not a common situation...very unusual.
3
Women like to espouse that these things rarely happen to men. It's easier to dismiss that way. You make a statement of fact that it's unusual, but that's only your belief. You don't know the truth.
1
Yes, but there will always be the anecdotal, "But, but, but...#WhatAboutTheMen" when these articles come up. Because heaven forfend that the men don't somehow shoehorn themselves into the conversation and make it about themselves...again. So we have to gentle down the message, soften it up, keep the water warm, whatever so their egos are assuaged when we are trying to point out a basic inequity that they are either (a) unconcerned about or (b) do not want to change because it benefits them.
2
Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a Trump work-wife who was not mentioned in this article. For that matter, Sean Spicer was not mentioned either but he seems to have fit the description too. And what about those nutty work-wives in the Cabinet who took turns praising Trump for the media?
4
They are bound to Trump like a "Phantom Thread". They are helpmate, nurturing mother, and fashionable traveling companions. As long as they are in the room his hard edges are not as discernible. But it is truly startling how little these cosmopolitan and liberal leaning women have on his policy side. Trump's true love is his base. When Trump climbs those stairs to the podium at his rallies, it is their rock star adulation that puffs him up and makes him strut like a rooster. Trump is a man of a multitude of illusions. These women furnish him with another. He can't be that much of a monster if they remain by his side.
3
Chatting with my wife on the tennis court today, she quipped that on certain air carriers, if you have a second wife, she flies free. I replied, that's enough for me to convert. You can't have too many wives, working, flying, or just enjoying some light banter on the court.
5
As is typical nowadays, most all problems are due to mistreatment of women. I suggest most all of what the author complains about is a characteristic of people, men or women, who have the power to force other people, men or women, to devote themselves to supporting the person in power.
3
This article helped me understand a lot - particularly why many of us women gag when we see Kellyanne, Hope, or Ivanka. I hadn’t quite been able to put my finger on it - wow, yes, this writer really gets it.
6
Ivana Trump, Hope Hicks and Kellyanne Conway are three strong women and they are not pushovers. They want to serve President Trump in the best manner possible but I do not think they are yes people. They each had successful careers before joining the Trump administration and are very bright females. Mr. Trump knows he has three capable and qualified women and trust their judgment and advice. He is the president and still makes the final policy decisions but I am sure he takes into account their input and expertise. He needs them and knows he has three component workers he can trust.
14
The fact that they are 'strong women and they are not pushovers' does not mean they are not also 'yes' women. I have not seen or heard any of these strong women voice one word of disagreement or challenge to the president, have you?
9
The women WPLMMT praises are all professional liars. They are paid by us taxpayers to orchestrate lies against us taxpayers. Does this make them not "yes people"? No, just liars. To Trump they are all yes people or they would not be still working in the White House. But MPLMMT is perhaps inadvertently correct in calling all three of them "component workers". They are just components in Trump's machine, and if they show strength of character against his lies he will easily replace those components.
7
O.K. name some of their accomplishments since the inauguration.
I'm waiting.
9
Donald Trump has a woman problem? Or does he have a work wife problem?
Well, he also has a man problem, a child problem, a human being problem, and more generally an “X” problem for pretty much any value of “X”.
His main problem, as most people can see very clearly by now, is that he is simply an awful human being. Which is why we all have a serious Donald Trump problem.
440
Although this article makes some interesting points, I beg to differ about a few things. The author states that the "term 'emotional labor' gets vastly overused, but this is a textbook example." The author also states the same for the terms “work wife” and “work husband." Frankly, maybe in her experience this is the case, but for some of us, this is not so. Additionally, the dynamics of work relations in the White House are not fully understood, much of it based on hearsay. That said, none of the information presented in this article is surprising since Trump's level of maturity is essentially infantile. Still, you have to wonder what toxic mix of his childhood and upbringing, personality, and cultural mileau created this hollow, self-absorbed man that we are stuck with for the next three years, regardless of who pampers him and attends to his every need to avoid another tantrum or meltdown.
5
It really is a reflection of Trump's overall conception of the role of women. "What can they do for me?" Melanie was arm candy when he married her. Others are hand-picked obsequious sycophants to prop up his ever-starving ego, or else they are secretly only appearing to cozy up to him (which he falls for) in order to access power for their own agendas. Either way, he serves as poor example of the better character that good men should strive to be.
7
In my observations in the workplace, that description is spot on. Another rice women pay for filling those "work wife" roles: Let that man leave the company, or retire, or otherwise not be around, and all she did for him will likely count with no one else at all. She'll be out in the cold.
5
One of my husband's many female employees sent me a note just before one of our vacations two years ago. She informed me that she was his "work wife"--and that because she did so much to make the work environment run smoothly, she expected us to be give her a special gift from our approaching vacation trip.
I was livid that any woman expected a gift just for doing her job, and that she dared to inform me she was the " work wife".
4
I'd like to point out the last paragraph of the piece leads to a chicken-and-egg argument, almost literally. The assertion that the described workplace dynamic is both a "male problem" and one of "absurd expectations and learned emotional helplessness" is a little contradictory. Who would us males have learned our emotional helplessness from, or developed our absurd expectations of the females in our adult lives based on? The way our mothers raised us, of course. I offer the counter assertion that it's the women who enable their sons to grow up believing a female will always swoop in to clean up our messes and right our wrongs who are to blame, if anyone is. If it's truly a learned behavior, you have to look at the teacher and not the student. In a work-wife situation, you have a dynamic between two adults, in the mother-son situation where the emotionally helpless behavior is learned you have a dynamic between an adult and a child. Chicken and egg. So who's really to blame?
4
Who cares who is to blame when the house is burning down?
A better question to ask is, "How can we fix it?"
1
Sexism wrapped up in an analysis of Trump.
The author should spend more time considering both sides of such relationships. I’ve worked as a bartender with an entirely female service staff and the situation described is definitely a two way street.
6
Have been a close and sometimes disgusted observer of intense boss-work wife relationships -- both ways, female boss with male work wife, and male boss with female work wife. For me the pity was that the boss became overly dependent on the work wife, which tended to exclude others, some of whom had important expertise and input and should have had a seat at the table. If the work wives (regardless of gender) would provide just the emotional element, that's one thing. But their favored status tends to cross over into subject areas truly beyond their scope.
3
Behind every great man is a surprised woman....married or otherwise. The woman behind Trump appear to encourage and support his misbehavior.
Trumps flaws are both wide and deep. It now appears to be a national pastime to make sense of this President's psychological failings.
Trump is a national embarrassment, the damage done to date and in our collective future appear almost to be boundless. At this point Trump's actions are the true measure of his limitations.
I believe like most people, that as a country we will be able to rebound--after Trump leaves office.
Psychological Theories are easily malleable and elusive--as they are vast--ultimately they offer few conclusive conclusions and little insight. And so our new pastime will continue to evolve, as Trump devolves.
Ultimately Trump will simply become a footnote to history.
2
This essay is the best I have read on women who placate powerful men in the workplace, as employees. I have been aghast at the behavior of the women who surround Trump, and, so very sadly, no longer surprised. They have no idea that their "undying love" and support for him is a bloody one way street. I watch Ms. Huckabee-Sanders at the briefings, who sits by his knees, and barks all day long, seeing no one. Trump has an innate ability to gather work wives that other women do not like, which keeps his manipulation of Conway, Sanders, Ivanka, and the Homeland Security Chief, assured. It's interesting that Melania stays far away. As the trophy wife, her aloofness keeps her alive.
6
Unfortunately, what he has to say about women as a whole is true, in that they are more than likely the ones to cater to a man, rather than have their own agenda. He has had three wives, and where did that get any of them? Being cheated on, and divorced, except for the last one, who still remains married to him. That is also why, even most high profile women in Hollywood, never talked about the horrific behavior of men. The one to look at is Bill Cosby, in that, except for several, most kept quiet for years after being drugged, and assaulted. That in itself, should say everything there is about the nature of the female to nurture, but nurture, and support the wrong men, and therein lies the problem. The nature of the human male animal is a crapshoot at best, as there are lots of good ones, but too many bad ones. Women become pregnant, nurse, and raise men. Women in droves voted for Trump, and still support him. Why?
2
Having been in the working world for several decades it became clear that for some men the relationships they have with their female assistants or associates often leach into 'office wife' territory.
Sometimes it is a fulfilling existence of mutual support and affection.
Sometimes it is a distorted relationship as it is in Trump world. He likes having women around to feed his ego. It probably makes him feel safer but it boils down to a harem mentality to me.
His relationship with Ivanka seems stronger than with Melania and more dependent.
Hope Hicks is pliable and very attractive but her role is ill defined and if she has much impact it is not clear.
Kellyanne is along for the ride. She adds little value since she burned herself by overbooking her appearances and over estimating her abilities.
I don't think office wives are necessarily a bad thing if they work for both parties. I've known women who were extremely supportive of the man they worked with and they had a meaningful relationship.
It's ultimately a woman's choice to be in that role. The horror to me would be caught in Trump's narcissistic net.
3
Forget this work wife nonsense. The common enterprise requires the skill of its employees to profit and survive. The greater role dispensability of an employee, the more useful he or share can be to the company. Increasing skills and roles becomes an important asset for climbing the career ladder.
Accordingly, if an employee, male or female, can help a superior feel better or become more motivated and productive, this promotes the common interest and also become an interpersonal skill of the specific employee.
3
This is just an excellent article. Thank you.
2
Anyone who has grown up in a dysfunctional alcoholic family knows the characters.
The Dutiful Wife, stone-faced, stiff and uncomfortable, pretending everything is fine, breathing a heartfelt sigh of relief whenever "Dad" is absent.
The Loyal Daughter(s) responsible, protecting "Dad" from himself, hovering nearby so he won't do anything egregiously stupid, trying to control situations, as she can't control him, deflecting his more outrageous impulses, diligently striving to create her own shiny flawless family.
If she's perfect, then "Dad" must be fine: otherwise, how could she have turned out so well?
The Adoring Son(s): emotionally maimed, protective of "Dad" for, without his genius, who would they be? "Dad" is clever, insightful, bold. Other people just don't get "Dad": he's the best dad, entrepreneur, grandfather, boss, the best mentor.
The Business Associates: their status, their lifestyles, are dependent on "Dad", so they deflect, laugh his absurd behaviours off, backpeddle and twist themselves into hitherto never before seen shapes to normalize "Dad's" bizarre tweets, offensive statements, irrational accusations, vindictive attacks.
The goal of all this is, of course, to preserve the family unit at any cost, but the cost is horrendous for everyone except "Dad".
I have watched this human tragedy play out in my own family with dangerous, brutal, and destructive outcomes.
It is more terrifying than I can express to watch it playing out on the global stage.
7
Ms. Filipovic has well described the dynamic of the work wife/work husband and how this egalitarian ideal has been distorted by the current occupant of the White House. While we certainly hope that most men will not behave badly, the undercurrent of acceptance and normalizing of the dynamic that Ms. Filipovic describes is the larger problem. Our daughters and granddaughters must not be subjected to the expectation that they have to cater to a needy dependent male ego. And all of us, men and women, need to be part of the solution.
2
Thank you for articulating this. It's often difficult to explain how being treated differently - if not outright insultingly - can be exhausting. It seems like women are in the long process of explaining there are a lot of ways we're made uncomfortable, put to unspoken different standards, made to work more and for less that might not all be the same level of bad, but all need to be dealt with and stopped. I can't even fathom how racism must wear on people of color in a similar or worse way.
6
Great column! In spite of all the damage trump has done and will doubtless continue to do, it is inspiring to live in a time of such powerful awakening, which trump has greatly aided and hastened. His behavior is so egregious that there is no way to ignore or deny, and it highlights in stark relief such behavior throughout our culture. If the country survives him, I believe we will have a more egalitarian society that will not tolerate such sexism, racism, ignorance and incompetence. 2018 elections can't come soon enough.
4
I always wanted a "wife" when I worked and traveled much of the time. I think the article was a very good one and described some of the things that happened to all working women no matter what level in the organization. If we didn't smile, we were considered angry. If we didn't ask people about their families, we were thought to be inconsiderate. We had to be loyal but not asked into the inner men sanctum. When it came to promotions, the men were promoted and we had to fight for everything and every promotion we finally received. Worst of all, there was no recourse because HR worked for the bosses not us so nothing was done when stupid, unnecessary, sexist comments were made and everyone laughed. If you didn't, you were not part of the "team." I sincerely hope things get better but it didn't in the 40+ years I worked. Maybe this isn't just a flurry of thoughts but really the start of what a woman's revolution should be. Now if we could only get women on our side. If that would happen, life for all would be much, much better.
9
WT, you should read this article again. It is not black and white. She is not just saying women are victims and men are predators. And I also disagree that it didn't add much to the discussion simply because there isn't that much discussion of this topic in public.
1
I don't understand.
Is it really, as the author suggests in the concluding paragraphs, "a male problem, one of absurd expectations and learned emotional helplessness?" The women mentioned in the piece have great agency. Any one of them could leave Trump tomorrow, and not starve. They are exercising their agency by staying put. It's a choice. That it's not one that the author (or I) would consider does not make it less of a choice.
But perhaps I am blinded by the absurd expectations and emotional helplessness which, alas, plague my gender.
2
One of the best pieces of career advice I've ever gotten, and from a man, concerned whether I should go with a male boss who was taking a new job and asked me to be part of his team at the new place. If you do that, my colleague said, you'd be his creature, dependent on him; you won't be seen as an independent professional. I didn't take the job.
It is unfair: moving along with bosses is the way men move up in their careers. But it's not a route available for women.
3
Let's not forget that the men who work for Trump provide different, but equally appalling emotional support. Constant fawning praise of the boss, shielding him from negative opinions or news, providing edited, dumbed-down versions of documents ( 1-page max), etc. Is there anything more demeaning in the public record than the worshipful odes required of cabinet officers at meetings, in front of cameras?
7
Perhaps the most difficult aspect of implementing a truly gender balanced society will be the question of gender roles- it starts the moment a child is conceived and forces accelerate the moment it exits the womb.
Am I a cultural sexist because I permitted my wife to dominate the nurturing of our only child- I was the major money earner and she became full time Mom during our son't first years, but even when both parents work, the mothers engagement with young children is usually more emotionally and time consuming than the father's. Actually, throughout the lives of the children.
Turns out it doesn't stop there.
I've never worked in an office, but I expect pigs like Trump aren't the only men who take more than they give emotionally in the office pecking order of givers and receivers.
I guess equal pay for equal work should mean women are paid more for the same posts- they always have to work harder.
2
Very thought provoking article. The unspoken underlying theme here is the white privileged male, who cannot see the pyramid of support below him. It’s no irony to point out that the majority of our elected officials in congress are older white males, making decisions for a much more diverse population. The self-centeredness of their perspective is reflected in their legislative agendas.
But put that aside for a moment and consider our husbands, fathers and friends, who fall into the category of white, male and therefore privileged. Even the most compassionate of them, have a remarkably hard time seeing the privilege bestowed them. They feel that they have worked hard, supported their families, participated in household responsibilities, and been humble in times of need. I’m not going to parse fault in these areas because other comments already have pointed out some inconsistencies here. Many of these men are truly good people. But it often confounds me how many are truly oblivious to the opportunities they have been afforded by their race and gender in the workplace; to privilege at home in household responsibility sharing.
Many of these men are beloved. But give them a next life in a women’s shoes, or a person of color, or a minority religious faith. It’s not an easy journey when your not at the top of the pyramid.
5
Personally I am totally unable to offer emotional support to anybody, male or female. I have very little empathy and am generally uninterested in people’s feelings but only in their intellects and working abilities. And yet throughout my career I have been mentored and supported by men rather than women. All my closest friendships, platonic or otherwise, have been with men. I am reasonably good looking and it has helped, of course, but I suspect that many men find it easier to communicate with a woman who does not ask for soul-baring or ‘proper’ emotional response. But there are patriarchs who are taken aback and even disgusted by a woman who shows no feminine weakness. They don’t want a friend or a lover but a little Daddy’s girl. Such men are as repulsive to me as they are often to other men. Trump is of this kind; a silverback gorilla who cannot stand to be among equals, always requiring subordination and support. Fortunately, I have not encountered many men of his kind in my working life. Unfortunately, they are far from rare.
2
The three women you mention remind me of the characters in the movie, "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly." They have their roles to play and they do it so well. They also remind one of the three characters, "Hear No Evil, See No Evil and Speak No Evil." It would be funny if it was not so true and sad.
2
As a man in a traditionally "female" role (I'm an RN) I've seen many a change over the years. Still, I harken back to my thoughts when I first started hearing about "women's liberation." I thought then, and still do, that it is not women who so much need liberation as it is men. Bred to "be a man" ignores a large part of what it is to be human. Sure men and women are different - my wife is quite different, and we're both blessed by that. But "equal" does not equate with "same." Mr. Trump is many things - most of the words I consider would have prompted a mouth cleansing from my grandmother - but needy is perhaps the most blatant of his ills. This is rapidly reflected by his need to be "the hugest" everything. He even let this affect his speaking of recent hurricanes - they were "the biggest." News flash - Jesus might have controlled the weather, Mr. Trump does not. And come to think of it, Jesus repeatedly said his mission was "to serve." Ah, contrast!
2
Amen, brother.
A tale as old as time. These techniques will sound especially familiar to wives and daughters of alcoholics and domestic abusers; survival tactics, in many cases. But yes, this is part and parcel of what needs to be unwound and understood for women ever to be treated fairly in the workplace. These expectations were at work during Hillary's candidacy. She was penalized by male and female voters equally, even when most of them had no idea they were doing it.
3
It does make one wonder if it goes beyond having a "working wife." For all the women who had the courage to report Trump's sexual misconduct, how many more have actually traded sexual favors to get what they wanted from him? It's incredibly sad to think that I can't help but think our President is capable of any immoral and despicable act to stoke his fragile ego.
2
In other words, he doesn't consider women equals, but lesser beings whose purpose is to serve him. Nothing new there that we didn't already know.
2
I totally believe this 'work wife' dynamic is going on. If Trump is like other male narcissists I know, it can resemble a kind of femininity that a certain kind of female can identify with, manifesting in the Big Daddy dynamic. It's one of the few places Trump can get away with his 'aggrieved hero' shtick and get away with it. It's also likely some of the few human relationships where he can actually engender a kind of loyalty from the work-wife caregivers around him. "Can't you see we're invested in him (ultimately for YOUR benefit)? Why can't you stop picking on him and let us do our jobs?"
It's a version of Stockholm syndrome, where one identifies with one's object of focus.
3
"It’s a male problem, one of absurd expectations and learned emotional helplessness."
With respect, no.
This is a common aberrant outcome in malignant power structures, particularly among media and entertainment figures. The sex of the person on top, be it a Patti LuPone or a Donald Trump, doesn’t matter. And when it's not "work wives" (I agree - a wretched term) it may be "yes men,” all serving masters or mistresses capable of only two modes of communication: talking or not listening.
We can all relate to these hierarchies of emotion. The higher your position in the hierarchy the more emotions you're entitled to. Lowly souls may NEVER express ANY emotion whereas people at the top can act out freely, almost without restraint. Thus, we can talk about constitutionally granted freedoms and human rights all we want. Meanwhile, all too many people must emigrate from the mythical United States almost daily to a workplace that’s little more than a totalitarian state where we must attend to the emotional needs of anyone above us on the org chart, men and women.
Sexualizing it isn't useful in my view. It assumes it would be different in a matriarchy than a patriarchy. The dysfunctional power structure you describe is itself the problem. It’s demeaning and thoroughly immune to efficiency and innovation. It’s both outdated and indescribably cruel.
2
At my law firm job, where I was the IT manager, I was constantly undermined by the relationship of my boss to his two "work wives." Everyone always called H. his wife and M. his mistress and I think that was not far from the truth. Sorry to say this, but they both exploited their positions so that they could do an end run around me, who was their direct report. It was extremely demoralizing. H. laughed at everything that the boss, K. said. She soothed his ego, listened to his jokes, never complained, never spoke up for either herself or anyone else. M. wore low-cut blouses and bent over K's desk, "explaining" certain charts and data. She was haughty about her position as K's favorite and she was much, much younger than I was. Of course, I got laid off, and neither H. nor M. did. It was a horrible dynamic, for which not only I, but other people in the department, suffered. K was openly hostile to me and threw me out of my chair once when I didn't perform a task in the time he had allotted for it. Yet, if either H. or M. did anything wrong, it was always overlooked. I hated that job and I must say I did not feel much solidarity with these women who would have gladly put a knife between my ribs. I would call them "enablers" out for themselves and themselves alone, rather than "work wives." Women can, and have been, very cruel.
3
A woman in the workplace should not be expected to play the role of wife or mother, let alone sex object. At present, it's a practical necessity for her to be in some degree a feminist (or what a wrongfully demanding and disappointed man will call a feminist).
But I hope and believe that the future holds an opportunity for her to be simply an unman: a woman who neither panders to infantile men (not a Homeric epithet, you understand) nor learns to play their boyish, brutish games. Emotional caregiving is not the alpha and omega of women's "unman" strengths. I speak from close observation.
Workplaces and whole societies stand to benefit from the (comparatively) mature ways of women who are free from paternalism and also free from the distorting effects of anti-paternalist striving. I'd like to see America catch up and, if possible, take the lead in this area of human growth.
http://thefamilyproperty.blogspot.jp/2018/01/the-voyage-to-restoration.html
Thanks Filopovic. It seemed to me that there was something wrong with Trump in this regard but I had not grasped what it was until this article.
Also, perhaps another way to distract Trump from doing evil as President is to focus more on these "contemptible power-hungry sycophants". After all the origin of the phrase, getting one's goat, was that valuable horses were kept with a pet goat, and if that goat was removed the horse could not perform well. So focus on these female goats more.
2
People men and women need to find their own way of being in the world and remain true to themselves. Finding that place or places is a life time proposition. If you dwell in a world or job where you are given that role without input or understanding it is demeaning and impossible to maintain without severe damage to ourselves. We need environments that champion our individuality.
In a Trump White House you would immediately be classified according to the whims and prejudice of your boss whether you are a man or woman, black or white or someone who kowtows to Trump. Thus you have a toxic workplace for everyone and you can count on being damaged if you stay in that environment for longer than a day.
2
It is really all about narcissistic mirroring. Trump has chosen women who are willing to be mirroring objects for his terribly fragile, sensitive ego. In contrast, he chooses authoritarian male figures to prop him up and guide his ideology. The reality is that there is "no there there" with Trump, no emotional development, just an emotional child, looking for parental figures for guidance. And he is our so-called president. Sad!!
3
This is an admirably written piece identifying a complex psychology. Definitely persuasive.
1
I agree with all of the essay's well thought out truths, but I could not help thinking about the elephant in the room.
I have known these egotistical men and their compliant women and I have never known the "servicing" of these men to not include their sexual needs at some point.
Let's not be silly here. There is no doubt that men, and in particular Trump, get their "emotional" needs met in many ways, and that includes sex (with a "special" chosen one, usually).
Read the newest headline from "Fire and Fury." I rest my case.
1
The most poisonous environment is that of the single biological sex. I experienced this throughout my most tender, formative years. There were few women and no girls. Men and boys ruled. I experienced first hand a world akin to Lord of the Flies. Few women, I have since learned, have been exposed to this intensely masculine domain of misrule and savagery,
At her all female schools, my sister experienced a less extreme, less cruel version. Nonetheless, the bullying and malice were still stomach turning. In the all female environment of the Wrens, there was a similar pecking order. Women can be vIcious to each other,
In the largely female work force of primary schools, the bullying by women of other women lower down the hierarchy is appalling.
2
The illustration that accompanies this article is amazing. It humanizes Trump in the most unexpected way. Congratulations to Laura Breiling.
Sorry Jill, while "Work Husband' might be new, "Work Wife" has been around since the days of "The man in the Grey Flannel Suit" in the 50's and was even a major theme of several Hollywood screwball comedies several decades earlier.
2
This is not a male problem -- it's a narcissist problem. Narcissists and sociopaths are over-represented in the ranks of upper management in general, and such behavior is more often rewarded when it comes from males, which is why Filipovic presents this as a problem with men. But narcissistic women who climb through the ranks also often require such demanding emotional labor.
Narcissists have very damaged egos and require a constant supply of emotional labor from those around them to prop up their fragile self-regard. As the subordinate to a high-ranking female narcissist in a large advertising agency, I experienced a daily need to perform the role of the dutiful son (only allowed to reflect the needs of the mother and never to have my own needs), while also offering her the reassurance and encouragement she failed to receive from her own father. I faced a double bind that must be familiar to the Hopes and Kellyannes of the world, although unlike me, these women knew in advance what they were getting into.
What we have in capitalism (and now, courtesy of Trump, democracy) is a perverse system that valorizes anti-social, narcissistic behavior among our leaders of a type that few of us would accept in our intimate lives. What Filipovic sees as a problem of masculinity is a problem with narcissism, reflecting the widespread rot of a system that enables and empowers anti-social personalities and by extension, in these neoliberal times, antisocial policies.
2
While I am quite sure that it's on neither male or female job descriptions, this piece posits that it is only women who have to tend to the psychological needs of the boss. Men who have the same sort of bosses have to laugh at his lame jokes, listen repeatedly to his 'war stories' and put up with his taking credit for their ideas at the "risk (of) losing the job altogether". If they don't do so they are "not team players." Whether salaried or hourly, people get paid for their time at work and sometimes part of the job is to put up with jerks.
114
That's a good point. It's a different dynamic, but can be similarly painful.
Yep, that is exactly what Kelly and others at the WH are doing now. But there is always another option, you now. And it works for both men and women.
Everyone who has had a career in the corporate or government world has faced the decision to either compromise their principles or quit. It is an extremely tough choice, particularly if you have a family. The problem if you elect to stay is that you find yourself becoming someone you don't recognize or like, one little step at a time. Sometimes the only thing you can do, even knowing the heavy cost, is to leave.
I have been in both situations and eventually came to the realization that there are somethings that are not worth compromising on. And yes, it did put an end to one phase of my career. Life goes on however.
34
In my career attempt to find an ethical environment I worked in 3 different work spheres. All compromised and corrupt, full of disfunction and inane politics. Corporate world was horrible but the worst was academia.
2
I believe it was Henery Kissinger who said "Academic politics is so bad because there is so little at stake."
Thanks for capturing the cost so well. One of my work colleagues paid with his life (at age 33). It truly is harrowing to see what is tolerated. Trump is the image of this shadow.
Work spouses can be a powerful team. They protect each other, so beware getting between.
Sure it can be abused. Anything can be, and lately it seems most everything has been. But abuse is not inherent in women in the workplace, nor in having each others' backs.
7
Read the article.
Accurate, and thanks for that.
Except: “In particular, women who self-selected themselves as tolerant of or oblivious to or amused by or steeled against his casual misogyny and constant sexual subtext — which was somehow, incongruously and often jarringly, matched with paternal regard — got this.”
In our experience, ‘paternal regard’ is often the first level of misogyny, sexual subtext, and worse. As our family physician expressed it while helping us deal with the effects of a vicious rape, “It travels in families, from generation to generation.”
In his well trained experience, there is nothing incongruous about the paternal connection. Jarring, yes, but it’s folly to think it’s not everywhere, and often the root of the female acceptance described.
Not their fault, not at all. The selection is likely made for them, long before their sexual self-image has begun to form.
Trump’s only trick was learning how to recognize it, and take advantage of it.
Tom and Kay
9
It is a male problem, but I think the conclusion that the coddling of it by female co-workers enables it is bit off. Typically men who behave this way, demanding all this emotional support and creating standards for those co-workers that they would never meet themselves (and that is the worst part of the behavior), have almost unfettered power in the workplace. As Trump shows,the co-workers -- women or men -- have three choices: tolerate it, quit or be fired. Make the latter two choices, and no problem. There are plenty of replacements ready and waiting.
12
Thank you for seeing the reality of the situation, and not handing out the pat "Well, if you don't LIKE it, just don't DO it" answer that so many have.
Probably all true, and irrelevant to what Trump is doing to our country. Forget for a moment the Trump misogyny racism, self-promotion, etc. His base of supporters doesn't care about these things and they will support him regardless of them.
Focus on the tax cuts for the wealthy, the elimination of healthcare for our children, the mass reduction in job training and education, the attempts to eliminate women's rights, and the assault upon our environment. These are the ONLY issues that will eventually defeat this man from passing his agenda or getting re-elected.
Guaranteed.
17
No one is proposing to "eliminate health care for our children". He's probably referring to CHIP; the Republican budget proposal includes renewing it. It's on hold, because the Democrats refuse to vote for the proposal, probably because they want Republicans to be blamed for the shutdown.
5
It's actually been on "hold" for six months, this is the first time it hasn't been promptly renewed in a bipartisan manner, and it's being used cynically as a bargaining chip by the right, and Trump, to ram their agenda down our collective throats.
Mr. Katz. Republicans would not bring up CHIPS to be acted on as they wanted a bargaining chip when DACA was discussed. The refusal to deal with DACA appears to be racist against people of color. Trump has said he loves DACA but irrationally refuses to support it. Makes one wonder.
1
First of all, relating Donald Trump to normal humans is a waste of space.
Meanwhile, the middle 90% of us bosses knows that part of the job is mentoring, encouraging and dealing with the egos of your staff; both male and female. More than half of the women who have worked for me over the past 15 that I have been a boss has broken into tears. As supervisor, I had to deal with that.
Every conversation I have with my staff I find myself considering how their egos. How can I manipulate their emotions and desires to mutual benefit. That is the job of the boss. In addition, I need to stroke the egos of customers and listen to them vent about their problems. In turn, I often commiserate with members of my inner circle at work. Men and women. To think that it is a woman's job to listen and encourage is imperceptive. The person who thinks that has tunnel vision and fails to see the things that are happening on the periphery of their vision. I encourage you to watch more. Listen more. You will realize that the world is full of men helping men, men helping women, women helping women, and, yes, when helping men. That is not a bad thing.
7
Half the women reporting to you breaking into tears suggests a management, problem, Bruce. I also worked for a boss who reduced employees to tears. She was abusive and manipulative and the general manager of one of the country's top credit card companies, and the company watched 18 of my direct reports quit their jobs before sending her into company mandated counseling. She was eventually fired, receiving a large settlement. The women and men who quit under her (including myself)? No settlement for them.
Quitting a job doesn't right management problems. It's generally the manager who needs to go.
2
My experience as a boss is similar to yours, Bruce.
It's about that word "manipulate..."
2
The incentive is to treat others as you would have them treat you or communicate knowledge as non gender based.
10
Spot on. The term for this destructiveness toward egalitarianism might be symbiotic toxicity or toxic symbiosis. Choose your weapon.
2
Thank you Jill. This has been hidden in plain site and even those of us who have been work wives fail to see if for what it is.
5
I am bothered by the phrase “women that work” when it refers only to women who hold jobs for pay. I spent a large portion of my life working for pay in NYC. Now I am home taking care of the kids, the house, the meals, the mortgage, the bills, the yard, and acting as the liaison with the schools, and taking care of a child with special needs. I’ll let you guess which has been more “work”. I used to misunderstand the wives of my colleagues who didn’t hold jobs outside of the home. Now I see that they are the glue that holds some public school together. My point is this: it is time to change our ever evolving language. I think by saying “women who work” we really mean “women who work for pay” or something similar.
23
It can be wonderful to have a sensitive person or three around to balance and add perspective. Powerful Woman should have work help-meets as well.
I'll bet you Oprah does. I'll assume Ruth Bader Ginsburg does too. Nurses and secretaries used to be strictly male jobs. There are many men in those and other fields now. Change happens. Perceptions change.
The author of this article made a big mistake, She called them "Work Wives". The term "wife" is always feminine.
"If you don't like what's being said, change the conversation." I prefer the term Help-Meet. Basically, its someone who has your back. It shouldn't be considered demeaning.
2
Assistant. Everyone knows what it means.
1
If it's this common for men in the workplace to carry so much emotional and other baggage I would expect to see some corporations that would be by design, dominated by women from top to bottom.
If men are despicable and needy in the workplace the fallout from the resentment and chaos created would fall to the bottom line. If that were the case it shouldn't take much imagination to gather a team of women to compete head to head with corporations dominated by men.
Where are the women owned/managed and staffed companies?
Any restaurants? Auto dealerships? Ad agencies? Law firms?
It seems to me women ought to be able to run circles around firms that are dominated by men. Where are they? Any examples?
6
Trump doesn't need a Work Wife as much as he needs a Work Mommy. He needs someone to talk calmly, in small words and short sentences, about the document that just a year and a day ago he swore to uphold and protect.
Work Mommy needs to talk to him about the need for lucid, consistent thought and conversation rather than constantly playing with his favorite electronic device. She needs to talk about getting new playmates because the ones he usually hangs out with just want use him as long as they can and then to hang him out.
She should wash out his foul mouth with brown laundry soap and sit him in a hard chair in the corner to think about how he's hurt other kids and their families by denying them health care. Work Mommy should tell him he needs to think seriously about the Dreamers, and how badly he'd feel were he one of them. He needs to think about how many people in Puerto Rico still do not have electricity months after the hurricane. She should tell him to think about how important it is to have clean air and water, and large unpolluted playgrounds in our national parks.
There's so much he could think about while sitting in that chair in the corner that it could take him all of 3 years, less a single day.
28
Michael Wolff said on "Real Time" last night that Trump's been having an affair while president but he couldn't come up with enough evidence to put that in "Fire and Fury." He said there's a blatant hint about this toward the end of the book, that people could see it if they looked carefully.
Remember Trump described one of his 'work wives' as a "piece of tail."
4
I have had a few jobs where I had experience a male boss and all women. Inevitably I had to ask, "Where are the men, why don't men work here?" ( I didn't last long.) I witnessed educated, capable and talented women, fawning over, making excuses for, and catering to the alpha male boss, when clearly their actions and behavior is being one of subservient. Not even a work wife- I dislike the term "work wife" it trivializes a role that should be of a partner of equal value and reciprocal of respect.
Time for the Trumps in the world to grow up, be a adult that treats women in the work place with dignity and value, more then just to exist to monitor the male's emotions or propping up their ego, and in so many words saying "There there it is going to be ok." I understand the need to be supportive, we all need that, but when it becomes chronic enabling, where self respects exits the room -full stop!
12
I've rarely been sexually harassed at work but I've definitely experienced this dynamic. I particularly recall my young male boss (maybe 29 years old when I was 24) saying things like, "Can you read this email from my girlfriend and tell me if she's mad at me?" We worked in the same (very small) office and he wasn't a bad guy and didn't harass me, but he was certainly needy.
I know people will say: why didn't you say no? The truth is, I did try to set limits, when he overstepped things I'd say, "I think you should do that on your own," but he wheedled me for this kind of help, he was my sole supervisor, and we worked in the same very small office. It wasn't possible to avoid him. Instead, I had to manage his feelings -- even his feelings about me setting appropriate limits in terms of managing his feelings.
26
Ah, yes. The conundrum of dealing with "I am uncomfortable with this, but you will make me even more uncomfortable telling you about it because not only do I have to let you know that you're making me uncomfortable, but I further have to make YOU comfortable with the fact that I'm uncomfortable."
It becomes this exhausting ring-around-the-rosey game of how to gentle down the message and it make sweet, nice, and non-threatening...whereas a man in the same situation would be like, "Dude, don't ask me to do that, OK?" and it would be perfectly fine.
Women have to deal with the instant escalation of hurt feelings, shame, or guilt that inevitably turn into annoyance, aggravation, or outright anger because the woman dared voice an opinion that ran contrary to how the man perceives it "should" be.
Not quite "How dare you contradict me?" but close enough.
This article is the usual blindly moralistic - men/bad, woman/good posing as objective analysis. In the end, everything is of course a male problem.
Perhaps the reason women don't succeed is precisely because they are not emotionally needy in the way men have been bred to be. Women are taught healthy emotional skills from an early age, and are just too fulfilled to have the "fire in the belly" that it takes to reach the top in modern capitalism, especially against emotionally hungry competitors.
That is one take-away from this article.
10
@tom0063
You're over-thinking it. This piece isn't talking about 'women' generally any more than Trump represents all men. It's just about the women AROUND TRUMP, and how that dynamic is not unique to Trump or the White House as an office environment.
1
Where does it say "men bad" or "women good"? The article I read stated that "not every man in the workplace demands this kind of emotional labor from his female colleagues; most don't" while on the other hand classifying Hope Hicks, Ivanka Trump, and Kellyanne Conway as "contemptible, power-hungry sycophants." So....I guess it's not that men are bad and women are good.
1
Extraordinary response.
1
As much as always enjoy bashing Trump, and he deserves every bit of it, this important subject is an unfortunate choice because it gets buried under Trump. This is such a common scenario. I saw it over and over and over again in business. At a point around the late 70's - early 80's, this was probably the best way to get your foot in the door and a time when the door was just barely opening for women. But I still see it today. We revert to something we feel comfortable with in our work relationships. The woman as male helpmate is very comfortable, very recognizable.
7
An honest assessment of the asymmetrical relations of the genders in the workplace and the distance yet to travel to make them emotionally symmetrical and mutually rewarding. Perhaps inadvertently, though, Ms. Filipovic essay sheds light in the subterranean tensions in the lives of many, if not most married couples today. The author presumes emotional labor properly "belongs" there. But I'm afraid women today seem increasingly fed up with the "emotional labor" they feel they are expected to contribute in their relations with their husbands, who, like them, actually do need emotional support. It's not just that husbands are lousy at giving it, and need patient training. It's that women seem to be increasingly "done with that" in their marriages, too, not just at their workplaces. It's becoming an emotional minefield and and emotional desert at home and at work.
10
Your comment reminded me of a classmate of mine (most of us were adults on our second careers) whose husband wanted her to quit school after two months because of how much work his share of the child care was. She used to say "I have 3 kids --- ages 5, 3, and 35."
(P.S. She stayed in school and they stayed married.)
1
Most men benefit from a mom (or at least a woman’s perspective) when the going gets tough.
Executive secretaries, operating room nurses, athletic trainers etc. all play that role from time to time and it can be an important one, involve mutual respect, and carry no sexual overtones. It’s one human being using their unique gifts to help another through a rough patch and continue to function effectively.
During a career in Orthopaedic Surgery I was deeply indebted to my secretary of 29 years and many fine operating room and hospital and ER nurses for smoothing the path. They kept me out of a lot of trouble with their opinions and observations.
One thing’s for sure, given a specific situation there can be a BIG difference in the male and female perspective. Listening to each other without being dismissive can lead to much smoother sailing.
Do female executives and surgeons benefit from a father figure to do the same? I don’t know. It would be interesting to hear some stories.
43
Dear TK,
I find your post to be wise and respectful!
Thank you!
Terrence Kennedy,
I think you missed the point of the article. There is a difference.
4
I think you read a different article.
2
This is one of the few upsides of the Trump Presidency: we are getting broader and deeper conversations about sexism and misogyny in all its forms. This 'work wife' role is familiar to any woman who has worked in a male-dominant environment. Even in more female environments, women who do not have a high degree of emotional intelligence can be ostracized for this. Women are expected to be caregivers, empathic and emotionally attuned to others. When we fall short of this standard, there are consequences.
But some women do use the stereotype to their advantage to mollycoddle powerful men and access privilege. This has always been an option for women during times when they were denied opportunities to exercise power in their own right - the dowager empress, the mother of the heir to the throne, the dutiful daughter. It's not surprising that some women fall back into this behavioral pattern when given the chance.
And with our current Patriarch-in-Chief, there are chances aplenty for women to regress back to prior workplace norms.
15
"But as women who work know, egalitarianism is not always the norm, and many of us have found ourselves serving as the caretaking “work wife” to the emotionally needier male co-worker or superior."
Although I am fine with the analysis Filipovic provides about Trump, I find the above language is blatantly sexist. I work in a professional environment and people support each other and collaborate and get things done, regardless of gender. I don't buy the argument that women play this role than men in the workplace.
Take a look at the men in the office/lab/field and see that they take care of each other and of women, probably as much as women take care of men and each other.
8
Glad your experience is better, but the scenarios in the column are too true for many women.
4
This is because people did their homework and grew up.
That is not the case in many areas of the country or apparently in our own White House.
1
This is a very common dynamic. One does not have to particularize it to the current president. I was married to a very financially successful small business owner in a small town. This allows someone to have undue influence, albeit in a much smaller pond. There were several work wives. Once I observed one of them actually kneeling at his feet with a sheaf of papers for his consideration. We were at an outdoor venue to celebrate a business success. So, he on the picnic bench, she in the grass at his feet. This sort of thing undermines a marriage . And it was so undignified.
It was very instructive over the years to hear him vent about some of the employees. Women who were outspoken, brought their own points of view to serious policy discussions engendered hostility and irritation. ( I'm such a woman as well.) Those who fluttered, soothed, agreed, kept others from ever getting a hearing, never manifesting any disagreement were beloved and overpaid.
Now, he also had male employees. They could get away with a lot-shaving their hours when he was not looking, demanding that their wives be hired though not necessarily needed at the moment, walking out with office equipment and not bringing it back, getting mileage benefits, expensive enrollments in professional societies etc.
The more prominent and well compensated an individual becomes the more self serving people are attracted to the operation. Not all of them are, but it becomes disproportionate and just gets worse and worse.
8
Is this column wishful thinking? John Kelly and Stephen Miller have far more influence on Trump than any of the supposed "work wives." The women mentioned could leave their official roles tomorrow and nothing would be changed. Remember when the media said Ivanka would be a tempering influence on Trump? How has that worked?
11
Steven Miller, the devil Bannon left behind, is clearly dangerous for our
beloved country.
1
Two things I've seen and experienced over the last 15 years of working in environments that are roughly 50/50 male/female.
1) Women are not more or less competitive, kinder, gentler, selfish, competitive or ruthless than men in pursuing their goals and the progression of their careers. That comes down to the individual, not their gender.
2) The tendency of powerful people to bestow favour and privilege on those who will flatter them, pay them daily attention, make them feel liked, and offer emotional and social support is not limited to men or women. The primary function of one of my male colleagues - over the past 10 years - has been to fulfil that function for our female head of department - who is 20 years older. By any quantitative/financial measure he shouldn't be employed by the company.
12
There are good evolutionary reasons for this. As the anthropologist Jules Henry succinctly put it: men compete for power; women compete for men.
Women are attracted to men with good financial prospects around the world according to a study by Arnold Buss, "Strategies of Human Mating." Genes are selfish. A female in pre-historical times needed a powerful male for protection during periods of pregnancy and nurturance.
I hasten to add that this genetic tendency may have been formed 60 million years ago and may no longer apply, but we carry it still.
10
Nice shot, misses the target by a ton...
The evolution of the human mating strategies (yes, plural, there are two, and only two) is far more recent than you imply, only as old as the species (although the primitive version derives from similar behavioral templates in previous species).
The roles, goals, drives and impulses that define a behavioral strategy aren't nearly as simple, low level, or limiting as the picture you present.
We all enjoy freedom of choice and self-determination, and the behavioral strategies we are born with have evolved to encompass this reality.
Which makes the result, when instantiated, almost infinitely variable, and just as difficult to interpret as that implies.
It can be done, but it requires starting with the proper pieces in place.
T&K
Hmmm... I'm not so sure how to respond to this comment, given 80% of the diet of hunter/gatherers was supplied by the gatherer (woman) and birth/infancy was traditionally something men were excluded from. It's a particularly patriarchal perspective that women need(ed) men to supply food, shelter or protection.
As frog species in certain parts of the the US are clearly demonstrating, men are not nearly as necessary as men would have themselves believe.
True enough about the frogs. All the New Mexico whiptail lizards in my yard are females and reproduce by means of parthenogenesis. I've spoken to them and they feel two ways about it.
Trump and others are extreme examples and we shouldn't be judging gender dynamics based on those scenarios. There is something incredibly powerful being good at emotions and helping others with that skill, and it should be valued and respected, just as being a strong manly leader should be. Many of these gender characteristics are parts of the same coin, yin-yang, driven maybe more than we care to acknowledge by our perspective hormonal makeup. Step back from the contrived world we live in and think about how these things play out in our hunter-gatherer past, how harmony and cooperation in the face of very disparate tasks might be facilitated by these things. This is not to say that neurotic examples should be ignored, they happen too often usually because the principles are undeveloped themselves, stuck somewhere in their development or whatever.
2
Female secretaries also do this for women. So it's not just "learned male helplessness." There are internalized expectations about roles and hierarchies.
That said, I've known at least one man who was quite aware of how he played helpless and made women cater to him and solve his problems at work. So I do think there's a well of male entitlement out there.
Love the last line ("Maybe your work wife can help")!
3
I suspect, strongly, that men who grew into professional life during the time when women became common in the workplace have some mixed, and mixed up, thoughts and feelings about how to treat and deal with women in the professional context. Specifically, it is assumed by many men, myself included, that women have a wider emotional range of comprehension and understanding than other men. If a guy starts telling his troubles to a man, the reaction might be to mock him or tell him to shut-up, grow-up. Men assume women to be at least somewhat more sympathetic or at least potentially so.
The phenomenon of the "work wife" has indeed been real. Wasn't that the function of the executive secretary in the old days? One can see it movies made in the '70's and '80's where the secretary handles almost anything the male executive needs or throws at her.
No one has a right to expect or demand this sort of "tender care" from any co-worker regardless status, subordinate or not. It is wrong and demeans the role of women in making substantial contributions at work. At the same time, I know this: the world needs women who are, indeed, different than men. A world peopled only by male egos, needs and ways of acting is depressing almost beyond imagining.
3
This article gives the very useful concept of work spouse a bad name! A previous job I had was made much better because I had a work wife, not at all in the sense of this article. We were both completely at ease speaking with each other about job, family and political issues, notwithstanding disagreements about politics but with fundamental agreements about values, and no gender issues whatsoever. We were each other's work spouses. In other words, about as a high a grade of friendship one can have.
3
I take Ms. Filipovic's points, and add that the toll taken in a workplace dominated by the need to salve the boss's needy ego applies, maybe not equally, to men too. I think that any number of men related by their jobs to Donald Trump would bear witness to this. Popping immediately to mind are: Rex Tillerson, Reince Priebus, Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, Ron Rosenstein, Dan Coates. The list goes on.
James Comey refused to play Trump's game, so the president mercifully fired him. Comey's "crime" may have been to do his job with the collusion investigation, but I strongly suspect that Trump was reacting just as much to an ego-challenging underling independently saying, "No, Daddy; I won't do your bidding."
15
Agree with everything you wrote, Jill. However, a good chunk of it could also apply to many of the men in Trump's orbit. To that point, your article unintentionally highlighted the delicious irony in the fact that Sean Spicer and Jeff Sessions are portrayed by women on Saturday Night Live. And Mike Pence, with his apparently assigned role to be obsequious public flatterer of Herr Donald, could have been portrayed by another SNL woman (Cecily Strong?) in a white wig, rather than Beck Bennett.
I think the big difference is that Trump has no problem publicly insulting, bullying, belittling and humiliating men, but seems to not do so (at least publicly) to the women who work for him, especially if they are young enough to be his daughter. I don't recall any public excoriation of Hicks, Conway, Huckabee-Sanders or Haley to the same extent as Sessions, Tillerson, Spicer, Bannon, etc.
5
But that doesn't fit the current, dramatic narrative of men doing bad things to women in the workplace and women having to suffer all of the burdens and abuse.
The NYT only prints piece on these subjects from a woman's perspective, and the writers are free to be as hostile and belittling toward men as they want. It's fun!
1
When I started in business in 1976, we couldn’t choose between male bosses and coworkers who were misogynistic and ones who weren’t. We would have had to stay home, but we needed the money. To the privileged, gender, class, or color, equality feels like discrimination. We needed to maintain relationships, including intimate ones. There was no equal. We played our hand and did our best. I remember how hard it was for my mother to support me. I wept in the train this morning, watching mothers with young daughters going to the March. We want them to have an easier time.
5
Wow. Great piece. Very powerful. I had to read through it twice, however, to make sure a description of me wasn't in there somewhere lol. (It isn't.)
I was a "boss" most of my adult working life. From one-girl, one-guy offices, to national organizations and then into my own business. I did see everything described here, at one time or another, I considered most interactions as "destructive."
There's always an aberation... I had a secretary work with me, very pretty, did most of the work for two of my salesmen. When one came to me and told me he had been dating this woman for two years, I never suspected it. They worked great together, I never had any complaints. At the time, the company I worked for, strongly discouraged workers dating other workers.
My salesman wanted to "come clean" about it, they wanted to marry and he was nervous about our company rules and the possibility of both of them continuing working. Magnanimous me, I told him not to worry about it, we just won't mention it to the home office. I didn't want to lose either one of them. Nobody said anything the 5 years I was there.
I feel, now, like sort of a hero, looking back on it. But back then I was really worried if would get in trouble, my bosses would have never hesitated, they were very authoritarian. This was back in the 60's.
It's not a "male problem," but a "self-absorbed male" problem, and one that is heightened as the successful male gains more power and, ironically, does fewer "activities of daily living" things for himself. But it's not unique to males among the self-absorbed and self-important. Kings and Queens alike have always had the same problem; they live at a certain stratum of the political and community life, and have to be coiffed, fed, toiletted, and otherwise 'mothered' (the gendered verb does apply) more intensively and also more skillfully. Mr. Trump is just an extreme example of this neediness.
5
It’s interesting how making the career switch to teaching middle school has taught me so much about Trump and his ways.
On the first day of my master’s I learned that the most effective teaching method is to have a “strong voice.” A “strong voice” is loud, declarative, confident and utilizes very simple words. To hammer the point home, our professor showed us a video of Margaret Thatcher before and after politics. Before politics, Thatcher was quiet, meek, verbose, expressing herself diffidently in long, complex sentences. Thatcher after politics was strong, confident, using very simple vocabulary and short words, as well as well-placed bursts of silence to punctuate her points. Thatcher had found her “strong voice.”
This and other lessons made me think—Trump has mastered crowd control through “strong voice,” very much like a competent teacher of middle schoolers. And that adults are just overgrown children who need a leader to guide them, just like children yearn for a leader to guide them in their classrooms.
However, as my experience with teaching has continued these past few months, I’ve realized that Trump also has the psychology of a high-needs middle-school child. Reading this article hammered that reality to me. So the term “emotional labor” really struck a chord with me—it’s so much like my middle-school teaching job.
And this is the man who is now running the U.S. Frightening doesn’t even come close to how scary this realization is.
9
There is another even deeper aspect. The expectation of others to fill the deficiencies we perceive in ourselves. That extends to all relationships and is beyond the limitations of gender. I've experienced relationships where the emotional imbalance leads to significant imbalances which leads down negative paths, causes unnecessary hurt and harm and wastes life. It takes considerable work to develop the self-awareness to avoid those emotional traps.
Solution? Self-awareness coupled with other awareness. Does that mean psychotherapy for everyone? If we treated mental health with the concern that we treat physical health then yes. Caveat of course is that the current majorities inn government have clearly communicated that they don't believe that all people should receive medical care. So if the majority of people pretend mental health is irrelevant or even fake then what?
The one place where the concerns of the mind, behavior, conduct, beliefs and attitudes are regularly addressed - religion - could turn to actually helping people to grow into good mental health. But today religious beliefs are devolving into weapons in culture war. So we will continue to stumble and fail. Sometimes seeing with a bit of clarity such as now with regard to sexual harassment and with articles such as this one. But otherwise we will continue to stumble in the darkness.
2
Sounds to me like the author is simply making clear that Trump recognizes 'the natural superiority of women" and that he is giving women an important roles as some of his most trusted advisers.
3
Thank you for articulating something I have experienced repeatedly and often during my seventy four years as a woman. It is pervasive and often unknowledged and drains a tremendous amount of energy from the women who are involved knowingly or unknowingly.
5
Women are not innocent victims. Yes patriarchal behavior is entrenched in our society but we've been fighting for equality since the days of Susan B Anthony and if we truly want to be seen as equal we must set boundaries and push back against this type of behavior. You can't have it both ways.
Equal means not expecting men to hold the door open and pay our bills. Equal means demanding the same rights as a man and being willing to leave if that doesn't happen. If you don't like how you're being treated by men in the workplace you have options, you certainly don't have to stay. You might even find happiness by starting your own business where you can set the rules.
7
Interesting point and likely a valuable insight into many workplaces, but kind of undercut by making it personal and targeting three Republican women when in all likelihood this is a trait that strikes evenly across party lines.
4
This is an interesting article (Jil is oneof the more thoughtful feminist writers) but I will focus on one small, and likely unnoticed contingent rhetorical phrase. It is a comment that occurs in most, if not all, articles by women writing about sexism, metoo, ansari (the list gets too long to enumerate). The generic phrase that is ubiquitous ( in varying forms): "Of course not every man...(most don't) or...(and some men). If the subjects about which the author is writing (and I think this is a great provocative article) really does not reflect "most men" what is the real point of highlighting the behavior. Trump notwithstanding, this article seeks to add another thread to the fabric of sexism that is continually being woven. And yet--if the majority of men are not at the loom, how is this, or any other "not most men" type of assertion of societal significance? So, I say continue writing these articles but forego the knee-jerk caveat and be clear that the focus is on one type of behavior practiced by one specific type of individual and is not necessarily informative of a whole gender. Otherwise, this article and many like it are simply articulating a form of sexism and most (but not all!) men will simply put their fingers in their ears and utter a rapid "la-la-la-la"...most (but not all) men I know are increasingly tuning out and they would have been happily in the "conversation".
3
Trump gives Ivanka the responsibility of family leave policies in the workplace, but gave Jared Kushner responsibility for solving Middle East peace, the opioid epidemic and retooling government with technology. So much for Trump's empowerment of women.
13
Such a well thought out article, with instructive examples from Trump's work wives and from common everyday office relationship that I often do not recognize as such. I pride myself on being as open and respectful of women at home and at work. But I recognize that there are subtle expectations on my part, for example when a female employee lingers to discuss with me a lost client when my male colleagues see it as "That's life. We'll get new one." It just feels better to have someone stay a while and talk, listen and offer some encouragement. I think that is a form of female nurturing. It is a gift and talent women enjoy quite naturally. They are better at it than men. Yet I need to name my needs for what they are and not assume my female colleagues owe that nurturing to me all the time. I have learned from this piece: to be more aware of my own feelings and emotional needs; to name and work with them with the help of my friend, male and female. If our emotions flow from out thinking, how I think about what my friends "owe" me is quite important.
5
"Benevolent sexism is more insidious. In the view of the benevolent sexist, women and men should occupy fundamentally different roles, with the men as patriarchs and women, with our naturally maternal and gentle dispositions, as helpmates and caretakers."
The whole dynamic, unsurprisingly, resembles the purported work environment set up by Rupert Murdock on FOX, until the lid blew off the predatory behavior of O'Reilly and Ailes.
It's easy to see why Megyn Kelly couldn't stay for long, particularly after she challenged Trump himself.
In a sense the work-wives that satisfy the multiple needs of narcissist bosses like Trump (and ex-FOX hosts) have to be two people, but are usually only rewarded for one. Competence in the actual job, as well as the added one, but pay on par with the second.
I think it takes a special kind to put up with all this; my suspicion, either too young or too lacking in self-esteem to realize the subservient role demanded.
Reading that the young and Hope Hicks had to endure nonstop yelling from Trump on his plane while she steam-pressed his ties and suit pants for the boss in underwear, made me gag. Not to mention personal insults about Corey Lewandowski from the vulgar Trump--beyond creepy.
I guess anyone entering Donald's world has to value money as much as he does.
44
"Megyn Kelly couldn't stay for long..."
Megyn Kelly worked at Fox for 13 years.
2
My wife once said to me, "Women hold the emotions of men".
I think a mom has as much, or more influence on boys learning to
be emotional and stable men. Sometimes they have to be there for
there sons by teaching them sports, because dad is "working".
And salving their emotional and physical wounds.
And so it continues in the work place.
39
Huh? Women have a duty to salve men's emotional and physical wounds in the workplace? Women should get a pay bonus over men. Who will salve women's emotional and physical wounds in the workplace? Women's wounds are usually from men, shouldn't men be required to contribute to a compensation fund for women?
Great article, very perceptive. This is real and not spoken about. We need more work on developing emotional intelligence in the workplace.
136
It's not just emotional intelligence that's needed. This kind of behaviour is a way for men to avoid being responsible for themselves; for their feelings, their acts, everything. And the atmosphere encourages women to overlook and overrule their own feelings and opinions, and to skew their behaviour to support a lie. The lie being that daddy-supervisor-boss has to be able to avoid his own inner truth. Very complex, but maybe we can get it cured some day. That will release a lot of creative energy into the workplace. (And the rest of life too.)
1
In the 1980's, I worked as a secretary for a well-known PR man. In the job interview, he told me that the woman who had held that job previously (for thirty years) had "given her life to him." When he saw my badly disguised look of alarm, he quickly added, "But, I don't EXPECT that." He did, though, and I didn't last too long in the job. It wasn't an unpleasant parting of the ways - more mutual than one-sided. But, I don't think I would experience now what I did then as I left his office that last day, which was a deep knowing that I had been a great disappointment to him.
125
Differences in the roles men and women play is deeply entrenched in our culture. Men and women are socialized to follow role archetypes from a young age and these archetypes are relentlessly reinforced as children mature into adults. It would be naive to expect these gender role archetypes not to show up in the workplace. However, I'm not quite sure it is particularly constructive to frame this phenomenon as another example of women being victimized by men.
For one thing, women often intentionally embrace these roles, as it gives them considerable advantages. I have seen women rise in the ranks of management, precisely because of their abilities to empathize and parse the emotional content of communication better than men. This could be viewed not so much as a burden but as an asset. We would be better off if men developed similar skills.
As a man, I also don't particularly like being culturally pressured into a patriarchal role where I am expected to not to reveal emotional weakness, especially in front of other men. So, I have no choice but to seek out emotional support from women, who are less judgmental and more open to that. So, in a sense, I feel like men can also be victims to of this dysfunctional dynamic. We should be free to seek emotional support from both men and women.
The op-ed is too simplistic in its black-and-white portrayal of women as victims and men as the benefactors of this dynamic. I don't think it adds much depth to the discussion.
156
I don’t agree that women are portrayed as victims here. I saw this as stating what feels to be a clear eyed assessment. We all suffer, on one level or another, from this distortion of both women and men, for many of the reasons you list.
So this column does add to the conversation - who else has pointed out this dysfunctional dynamic recently? We have to open our eyes to all the different ways our cultural expectations manifest to be able to make lasting changes.
2
All right, so again, the problem is the workplace, not the soft environs of home and personal relationships. It's all simplistic and black-and-white when you're not yoked to the dynamics Filipovic describes in your own work life. How else to chip away at the "deeply entrenched" than to call it out plainly?
It's exhausting to see men (and some women) idealistically respond "not me" and yet coolly assign victims. It may well not be you but it's all around you and always has been. Fair to call it a messy, hard start of evolving our archetypes forward.
1
Agree and add that it is also unfortunate Filipovic uses a sneering broad brush on men overall, waiting until the 10th paragraph to briefly concede this behavior is "not (of) every man," then closing with "its a male problem," rather than a problem of some. To assign behavior to an entire class of people is poor work and undermines an argument
4
Women are not supposed to be as ambitious, cutthroat, self involved, or interested in getting ahead as men. We're the caretakers even if we're not temperamentally suited to do it, even if we're as interested in learning the logistics of programming or mechanical engineering, or being a surgeon, as our male colleagues. We're the gift that keeps on giving, so to speak. And as soon as we don't we're trashed.
Donald Trump is an extreme example. However, I and every other woman I know can cite at least one male on the job with us who has behaved this way towards us or another woman. It's demeaning because it demotes us to nursemaid status. It's a subtle putdown of our work, our integrity, our intelligence, and it makes it easier for companies to pay us less and to fire us. After all, when all you're seen as is Adam's rib, if he's fired why are you needed? And that's what's wrong with how women's contributions to work and our needs to support ourselves and our families are viewed by a male dominated society.
142
If women are "work wives" I assume it's because they want to be. Many, many professional women do not put themselves in that position, and they let it be known that they will not be that person. I have worked with many women who were just as "ambitious, cutthroat, self involved and interested in getting ahead" as men are, and not afraid to show it. If you're a excellent mechanical engineer or surgeon you need not be more than that. People respect you, just as they do your male colleagues. But, if women offer themselves as "nursemaid," then they will be treated as such.
1
Assume all you want Ms. Pea but my experience tells me otherwise. I've seen men place women in that position. I've seen good women leave because of it. Do you know how much a company loses when a good employee leaves or is fired because she complains? Do you have any idea of how many women don't bother to speak up during meetings because the men in the room have silenced them so often that they simply keep their ideas to themselves? Men are used to having the spotlight all to themselves. Any time they have to share they feel that they are getting less than what they need. And quite a few will use any method available to denigrate a woman's contribution no matter how she presents herself.
2
Nothing you've said applies just to women. It's called being a subordinate in a competitive workplace with demanding bosses - male and female. If you don't speak up, you don't get heard. I personally have rejected that kind of workplace and don't work in one anymore. It's a choice.
What you see as a problem with men is simply the The American Workplace. Most people, men and women, don't speak up to the bosses because they're afraid to. There are possible repercussions to doing so and everyone knows it. At the very least, you're not going to get promoted unless you kiss the right butt in the right way. It's not exclusive to men by any means. Women who work for female leadership know this.
Women bosses are just as threatened by it as men, but believing that doesn't allow for the kind of biased, self-righteous indignation that is thrown around like sport.
In over 40 years of work life, I've been expected by male superiors and co-workers to be the 'work wife'. It isn't necessarily in my nature, but sometimes it was easier to go along and get along than be the friction that reminded men that maybe they weren't God's gift to the planet. Less competent females sometimes got the promotion or better assignments because they were the 'work wife'. More likely, they got the standard cost of living adjustment when rewards were passed out.
86
Re: "Less competent females sometimes got the promotion or better assignments because they were the 'work wife'." And that also goes for being promoted or protected from layoffs over men.
7
I'm reminded of the classic feminist essay "I Want a Wife."
119
Women in Trump's circle are either handmaidens, brood mares, ornaments or surrogate mothers. Sometimes several of those roles at once. He seems to have regarded "Mad Men' as a workplace training video. Were he actually a conservative and actually appreciative of the work women can do in government, he'd have picked a woman running mate. Instead he picked a radio talk show host who can't even trust himself to be in the same room as a woman without a chaperone. The pendulum has swung far in one year.
1091
Is Stephen Miller a work wife, or simply acting as President Stephen Miller?
1
Trump's all pendulum and no clockworks.
3
It's always struck me as rather demeaning, that all women in his circle are always in dresses, heels, full make-up and hair. They are trophies for Trump to parade around and express his machismo. Yuck.
3
Painful to continue watching the egomaniac seating at the Oval Office. Sadly, this man has normalized rudeness, gross exaggeration of facts, lies, and foul language.
276
Do not EVER say, think or intimate that any of this is NORMAL. It's not.
It is all widely - and I mean WIDELY - recognized across the spectrum as pathology.
It is RECOGNIZED, but that doesn't make it the norm, the new norm or nothing to comment upon and RESIST.
It is recognized, commented upon, rejected.
Don't forget that. Don't normalize. Resist.
And this is the place and opportunity to teach your kids and every child within sight and shouting distance that this is NOT what we are about, not what they should be about as they grow up, and it's not accepted or OK.
7
This is yet another NYT man-bashing screed thinly veiled as a Trump piece. Why is this kind of thing okay?
You know, it's possible to get a point across without the vitriol and absolute contempt for men in general, not just the one in the oval office. Please stop already. It's irresponsible to keep painting men with the same broad, demeaning brush every day.
It's only a matter of time before there is a backlash, just as there was when women were treated this way. Two wrongs don't make a right.
79
J.C., did you know that women are a majority of the population, not men? Once in a while you may have to read a story from our point of view. There is always a backlash backlash from men. We keep pushing ahead because we must. You have the choice not to read the very few articles addressing the female side of the equation. At most publications and certainly on television, the male/female ratio is 3 male reporters to one female. Think about that next time before you complain.
5
J.C. --- if this doesn't apply to you (although your comment suggests that it does), then you don't need to worry about it (although your comment suggests that you should).
3
Unfortunately you have seemed to miss the point of the essay. It’s by no means a man-hating piece, as intoned in a paranoid voice. Filipovic clearly states that she is not talking about men in general, but a subset of men who operate on casually sexist assumptions to get by at work. The point is that men have to bear the responsibility of paying enough attention to exploit their female colleagues in order to prop themselves up. Maturity demands that men, not women, have to listen up and do something about it. Women are speaking their truth; men have to live more truthfully.
3
I’m totally in favor of a world with only women plumbers.
49
The most loudest and most populous groups involved in the movement expect neither their sons nor daughters to do anything as horrifying as plumbing.
5
Women don't want to be plumbers? Is this a veiled insult to the plumbing profession? It's funny until you need one. Plumbers are a necessary and vital part of modern life. Imagine life without it. As a retired electrician after 33 years in construction, I know electricians AND plumbers that are women. We CAN do the job. And if you are in the union, even better. Sisters get equal pay as our brothers in the trade.
1
Um, no, Carmen. It is a not-so-veiled dig at many of the loudest SJWs who use selective statistics and don't really wish for anything approaching equal representation in what *they* consider vocations beneath their station.
And of course I've met women in the trades.
Thank you for recognizing that women do indeed receive equal pay for equal work in your experience.
I've read that Omarosa has tapes of meetings with trump and others in the administration. Wouldn't it be ironic if she - a Black Woman - is the one who ultimately takes him down?
145
Nah; he'll just pay her off and she'll deny his having done so. People like Ponderosa have no integrity or they wouldn't be working for Trump in the first place.
207
Katherine:
Let us hope that Robert Mueller has subpoenaed those recordings. Wouldn't it be ironic if, as with Rchard Nixon, the recordings prove the case?
In Washingon DC, the law is that one can record any onversation with the agreement of only one participant. As long as she was a participant, there would not be a legal basis for challenging the legality of the recordings as evidence.
45
Although D.C. law generally permits undisclosed recording of conversations when one party consents, that does not prevent corporate policies, military orders or federal employment regulations (depending on one's particular workplace) from prohibiting such recording, especially in the workplace. I would be surprised if having a security clearance to work in the White House comes with the freedom to covertly record conversations at one's own discretion, especially if the person being recorded is president of the United States.
1
At first I thought this was going to be just another tiresome anti-Trump piece.
Then I realized that it was actually a broader, yet equally tiresome, anti-man piece.
It must be slow news day.
69
John, if men could even imagine being treated as women have been treated for centuries/millions of years, they would be doing more than merely demonstrating!!
Not anti-man, anti discrimination of women.
1
Didn't you see the president's tweet? Great day to get out and march!
Nothing new, Donald is your typical misogynist. But this not new nor is Donald the exception. As a Roman Catholic, I have experienced this from the pastors and priests the rule over us, helpful women! Despicable.
86
Hope hicks? Bingo.
55
Yeah, Obama had his work wife in Valerie Jarrett. Thank you.
31
You certain about that? I wouldn't bet on it.
1
Jarrett is a family friend to both Barack and Michelle, aware of their policies, and goals. False analogy.
1
You are so right . But he only had one and Trump has at least four. I guess you can call that white privilege.
1
What DOES Hope Hicks do?
84
She holds reams of talking points not used, stands in the wings, travels on Airforce One, attends official events and generally looks absolutely fabulous.
83
"and generally looks absolutely fabulous."
No surprise! She was a Ralph Lauren model.
3
I have the same question about many of these shady characters. I simply can't conceive of what they do when they show up at work in the morning. My impression is, not much, because even those who have clearly defined responsibilities (rather than just vague titles like "Senior Advisor") likely can't usually get anything done while chaos and crises swirl continuously at the White House every day.
4
Corporate America has been moving away from finding this sort of behavior acceptable. That’s why this administration seems like a total throw back to the 1970s. They focus on outdated threats, outdated technologies, and outdated social norms. Coal will never be king again, the biggest threat to us is cyber assaults which more military hardware can not defend against, and women will not go back to being half-citizens. In the “good old days” we corporate women knew we were making progress when we were branded “a bitch”. It meant our ability and clear competence was threatening to a certain type of male. Look at all the name calling from POTUS et al - same dynamic. Too bad these young women don’t realize that the demeaning roles they’ve accepted will forever damage their futures. When you are a laughing stock to the whole country you can be pretty sure future employers won’t be throwing opportunities your way. Except for Ivanka, the rest of them had better save up a nice nest egg to tide them over once this administration is done with them.
84
Kelleyann (and her husband)is supposedly worth about $40 mil. the Kushers have it cushy to the tune about $375 mil (minus the debt on the Tishman bldg). does Hicks have money?
these are not women desparate to get another job any time soon.
1
Great points; two more: What worries Trump staff is how they will amass the money needed for legal representation. Unfortunately, out here in Silicon Valley, many of the guys haven't gotten the memo that the "good old days" are over.
vanityfair.com/news/2018/01/brotopia-silicon-valley-secretive-orgiastic-...
Couldn't disagree with anything here. But there is another part of this whole dynamic. I was once a manager/owner of a small restaurant and we employed many young women as waitresses and cooks. There was a small but noticeable percentage of these who would act like "Daddy's girl" towards me when they first arrived. I wasn't interested in that and didn't respond to it. This was often met with some confusion and some dismay. It was as if they didn't know how to act around me and felt unable to influence my opinion or feelings about them and their work.
I didn't blame the women. Even then I knew they had been conditioned to act like that from childhood. Usually things would settle down and we just learned to work well together.
But it's not just men who need to take a look at the habits of thought and feeling that we have absorbed in our lives. It's not so easy as just saying "it's a male problem". Its not such a simple thing to see oneself.
456
As a lesbian I find that men are often confused when they don't elicit the expected responses from me to their usual comments/come on routines to women. It's sad to realize how many men (most of them in fact) depend upon female recognition of their masculinity in every sphere of life, even at work where life should be about cooperating to get the job done.
123
There's another dynamic also - the woman who uses her subservient position to influence the man to destroy himself. I know that sounds harsh, but I've seen it in families. If a man or boy has that dependent streak, it opens the way for manipulation by the supposedly subservient female. (This probably won't make it past the editors because it sounds pretty extreme!) (It's not - it happens all the time.)
1
Hen3ry, I’m a straight woman who has often been “accused’ of being a lesbian when I reject a man’s comments or challenge his behavior.
4
So, you are saying Donald Trump is high maintenance. I expect that with his hundreds of wives Genghis Khan was high maintenance too.
Whenever a woman starts offering such 'emotional care" to me in the workplace I get suspicious. I know exactly what the author is going on about and can spot it immediately. When I see it I also make the personal assessment that I have wandered into an informal ad hoc psychiatric care facility. It's the kind of ritual behavior that is not out of place in the family home. A man's home is his castle and the wives and children of the master of the house frequently make accommodations for their loved ones. I most often see it in a 'family business' where the proprietor employs family members and the marketing appeal to the consumer public is that of a 'Family Business', warm and comfortable and trustworthy. It's also a warning sign of concealed corruption, because family loyalty is of paramount importance. The customer comes first, after family.
231
Very apt description that should be read by every working woman.
1
"Whenever a woman starts offering such 'emotional care" to me in the workplace I get suspicious. I know exactly what the author is going on about and can spot it immediately. "
So... when you spot it, how do you interpret it as it applies to you?
1
...Genghis Kahn was the greatest perpetrator of the species’ primitive mating strategy ever documented. None of the women you refer to as his ‘wives’ were that; the only female role defined in the primitive behavioral strategy is victim, desperate to survive, exactly the role history records.
Females conventionally (and correctly) described as wives are in relationships defined by the modern mating strategy, loosely called ‘long term pair bonding’, but far more complex than the term reflects.
There is no evidence that Genghis Kahn engaged in any modern strategy relationships. His entire political purpose as a leader was impressing the primitive strategy on the future of the species. Recent DNA studies hint that he might have been at least partially successful.
—T&K
One of the greatest mysteries is that millions of women including Evangelists continue to support Trump despite his self-proclaimed admission of being a sexual predator that grabs the private parts of women without permission. He claims they "like it". No woman with any self-respect can justify voting for Trump.
422
Many Republicans believe that the worst Republican is preferable to the best Democrat. So they support the worst (so far) Republican.
30
Frankly, no self-respecting Christian should support him either, given his appalling behavior towards the poor and every other group that Jesus spoke in favor of. But on they go. The Christian right's support of Trump has led me to the realization that being a right-wing Christian in this country is a status symbol to those who view themselves that way, rather than a set of beliefs that track in even the most distant way with the teachings of Jesus. And being a Republican, to people, is probably a similar moral status symbol, empty of any particular set of beliefs (about the deficit, for example, or the sanctity of marriage) except a self-satisfied sense of being one of the good guys.
3
In this case, party loyalty is no excuse. It is a matter of human decency and Trump has none.
1
I hope he is paying her well for it, because she is going to need it to pay all her legal fees. Not where I would have wanted to be at 28.
65
Not to mention her therapist's bills!!
1
Trump is the personification of the egocentric nature. Through total fault of his own he is surrounded by either sycophants, manipulators or both. Arguably the only truly "loyal" people in his circle are his close family.
27
It's absolutely appalling that this is the kind of discussion is made necessary by our national leadership. I don't know what's worse, Trump's disgusting, immature and irresponsible behavior or the media which delights in wallowing in this stuff. Trump's behavior is reprehensible, but it generates paychecks for many journalists, media moguls and authors.
35
What the President says, does, and insinuates is news, 24 hours. The Media reports the news, 24 hours. End of story.
Okay. Now explain Sarah Huckabee Sanders. The only thing she seems to nurture is hate.
705
Interesting question. Not sure I know, but she does a great job of protecting and/or defending Trump. She also berates the press, barely stops short of calling them liars, and is often just offensive to them. That might be enough for Trump given his view of the press and since he values public demonstrations of loyalty so much. I think the word for her is sycophant.
2
Indeed, conspicuous by her absence...
1
Sarah HS is a product of her dad's fundamentalist religion and its labyrinthine moral chicanery.
Remember when Kim Davis was denying marriage certificates to gay folks and old Huckabee horned in on the microphone? He could hardly contain himself in a moment that could deliver attention to himself.
He defended the Duggar guy who was found to be molesting his sisters just as vigorously. The old fundamentalist "chain of command" heresy is alive and well in what Sarah HS is telling herself about lying daily for a guy like Trump.
6
The White House operates like a luxury clinic. Its one privileged patient gets all that concierge service while tens of millions of Americans lack even the most basic amenities, like housing and food.
Memo to Trump's private nurses: What's your pay compared to the chief male orderly, John Kelly?
The sycophantic White House doc is another case, what with his inordinate praise of his patient's good genes and, like, stable genius - based upon a test that Trump likely passed in the traditional Trumpian way: by cheating.
Sarah Sanders is in a class all by herself. Her Nurse Ratched persona is reserved for the inmates of the White House press room, in those daily badgering group-therapy sessions called "briefings" only because the words emanating from her mouth are so short on the truth.
And while we're on the topic of caring/covering for for men in high places, let's not forget all the unpaid and underpaid female caregivers out here in the real world. Sadly, Ivanka's "crusade" for paid family leave has turned out to be just as fraudulent as Daddy's presidency.
It's time for all women to demand and receive decent economic support as well as recognition and respect. According to one recent survey, more than half of women report being tired all the time, while only a fifth of men do.
So here's a wake-up call. Caregivers (and that's most of us) are entitled to the same guarantee of treatment that Trump enjoys. This isn't a privilege. It's a basic human right.
470
I was at acupuncture yesterday and couldn’t help but hear the conversation on the other side of the curtain. The poor woman getting treatment has recurrent cancer and her main stressor is the male in her household (husband or father?) who can’t understand why she is not available to take care of him the way she has in the past. Not kidding—the need by men to be taken care of is rampant out there. Why do you think they remarry so soon after losing their wife.
1
Very good piece of writing.
@Karen Garcia
Miss your comments.
"Nurse Ratched" is inspired.
Guarantee Kelly is making double any woman in the administration.
5
I don't know about other men, but I totally reject the phony imputation that all or most men channel the behavior of the emotional parasite who sits in our White House. This guy certainly couldn't have anticipated all the fissures he is exposing in our political life and culture, but Hope Hicks and her fellow Trumpies do this sort of thing freely and willingly. They aren't his slaves. They're in this game for some reason I certainly don't comprehend and obviously neither do millions of America's women.
57
There are many people who lust for *proximity* to power. That goes for men and women both. In this case, the powerful figure prefers so-called "work wives" over "yes men". Different techniques to the art of sycophancy, but essentially the same mindset and route to the goal. Given today's intellazical fashion and the audience's contempt for Trump, it is necessary to bring misogyny and that man into the story to get the clicks.
4
Before you get too defensive, David, you might want to reread the article, especially this line: "Of course not every man in the workplace demands this kind of emotional labor from his female colleagues; most don’t."
1
Noted. Give or take a few percentage points, only 32% do. But man, do they ever moan about it.
Somebody forgot to tell Nurse Jackie about this.
13
Shoot. The title & illustration led me to believe we'd find out all about who does Trump's ghastly hair & hideous makeup, who lays his jammies out, runs his bath, floats his rubber duckie, etc. Instead we get another lecture on mens' (endless) flaws.
Oh boo.
37
Donald Trump has wisely surrounded himself with natural born American citizen women who are not former beauty queens, professional models, friends wives or porn stars who might tempt him into adultery or sexual harassment and assault. Moreover since Trump has spent a third of his time in office vacationing while at his resorts and/or golf courses compared to his predecessors he is hardly working at all. While no one except Trump thinks that tweeting and watching Fox News is work.
26
Wolff was interviewed on Real Time last night. He indicated that, unlike in Trump's private life, it was more difficult to carry on affair in the White House, but not impossible. Bringing in an outsider wouldn't work, but a regular employee would most likely go unnoticed. Wolff then concluded by saying that, yes, there was something going on and a clue as to the object of Trump's affection was included, between the lines, in the last part of the book. Re-read the last 40 pages. Knowing what you're now looking for, it's really obvious.
29
And that is...who?
Thank you again Jill. It clears up so much for me.
8
Spot on. Wonderful column.
Doubtful if men at work will do much navel gazing, since your last paragraph says it all - - why change when the women at work are so wonderful? And if they weren't so wonderful (caring, nurturing, careful, likeable) then how would you treat them?
17
Not all women cast in the role of 'work wives' are naive or helpless, as this piece would have us believe. I'm a woman and so tired of other women casting the entire female species as submissive and without choice. The three work wives of the Trump White House could easily choose not to be there, capable of getting plenty of other jobs (Hope HIcks) or leading a very comfortable existence even without one (Ivanka, Kellyanne). Think of their motivation in keeping their White House position--it's not merely to attend to the Big Baby's needs. Obviously, they think there's something to be gained from having such a prominent position, whether status, prestige or better-paying opportunities in the future. There might be some women with no options, forced to remain in the demeaning position of a work wife. There are plenty of others who put up with it because they have another goal, and tending to a male ego is part of the price. Men have to tend to Donald's ego too--Reince, Bannon and Spicer could tell you all about it.
322
In that case you'd think they would have the responsibility to help their charge grow emotionally, perhaps by exercising the compassion that comes from thinking of someone, anyone, else as a person in full instead another instrument of power.
No, what they are doing is not protecting. It is enabling, in ways that can make millions of real mothers and their children suffer.
18
Lural, most women are NOT paid well to be handmaidens. That is Jill's point.
Does the concept become more clear if you consider the “work wife” who serves a woman? Huma Abedin was the quintessential work wife for Hillary Clinton. Abedin has a respectable educational background and enviable connections. She is by all accounts a very smart, capable woman (except in her choice of men) who could have accomplished much more in her career on her own. Yet she chose to serve a more ambitious woman, and trail along in that woman’s slipstream.
3
Awesome reporting, or guessing with ample facts as to the man behind the curtain. Do I note missing here the three "real" wives, who one can assume were faced with the same request for this pattern of behaviour, and for two of them, then the assumption that failure helped to drive to divorce. Melania cannot be far from that. There's a whole book alone for her (since that face at the inauguration, what a year for her!).
10
Trump would be the last man I could nurture; I can hardly look at him much less interact with him....
28
They betray womanhood daily and they are all acting like little girls hoping to keep daddy's affection and attention. Some are doing this as it was their lifelong survival kit living with a Trump, and others are pandering to him to further their ambitions. This perplexes me as who would hire any one of them after their employment with Trump and their daily exposure to the world as liars, or people living in a 'deep state' of denial. It is not only their womanhood that is impugned but their future employability.
I was once a 'work wife' to a really outstanding guy and fellow employee, and we made a great team who always got the job done and had fun doing it. His wife, his one and only love of a lifetime, coined the phrase for me back then and it was the first time I heard it. I had no clue that we were acting out these roles, platonically, in the workplace, until she pointed this out.
We respected who we were, what made us tick, our strengths and weaknesses, our positions in the company, celebrated our gender differences, always communicated, and we supported each other professionally and emotionally which kept us both on an even keel during even the worst of work days. It was healthy sustenance and mutual support that was non-toxic to either ego.
I never had to debase myself in order to curry or sustain his favor, or vice versa. I never had to demean myself or lose my self-respect. These women are not nurturing, they are enabling, and at a cost to themselves.
47
I find your characterization that Hope Hicks is a woman "betray[ing] womanhood" interesting; actually, weird. As if all women owe all other women natural loyalty or innate solidarity because they have the same anatomy. Women don't take an oath to uphold other women. Nor do men to uphold other men. Each of us, man and woman, chooses who we will or won't uphold, on an individual basis. We are also each entitled to make our own choices about who we will serve--and as Bob Dylan said, "everybody has to serve somebody."
1
Reading this reminds me that Hope Hicks: 1) is quite young and regardless of background is inexperienced; 2) has been with Trump for a long time; 3) cannot stand being in the limelight; 4) has never been the subject of Trump criticism (quite the contrary); 5) is in the thick of Mueller's probe; and 6) just had to defer immediately before showing up to speak with authorities re: the Trump investigation (presumably to prepare).
The fact that Hope is what this article suggests she is will shortly serve our country very well. Just like Donald, Jr. when he finally hits a wall and has to answer; and in the words of Steve Bannon, Hope is "going to crack like an egg."
33
Thanks to Ms. Filipovic. This is a serious problem that exists in almost every workplace, including academia. Emotional labor is also invisible and unpaid. The "chief feelings officer" not only has to soothe the pathetic ego of their male bosses, but also everyone in his path of destruction. Keeping co-workers from feeling like garbage requires a lot of time and energy. And if that seems too touchy-feely, here's a more practical angle: employees who are made to feel like garbage are at best inefficient, and at worst completely shut down. Try finishing a project when a key team member needs a week's worth of mental health days to decide whether or not she wants to quit.
154
Why is it that so many women only see flaws in men? I've been treated like garbage by more women bosses than men bosses. I've been in the exact position you describe in your last sentence with two different women bosses. A lot of women will tell you the same thing. They have confided that to me many times over the years and through multiple organizations.
Insecure people tend to overplay their control and underplay their humanity when put in charge, and there are just as many women who do it as men. But some women will never see it or admit to it. It takes courage to break the "woman code" by outing other women and too easy to just blame men for everything.
J.C. although women bosses can be brutal and demanding, needing emotional support similar to male bosses, the huge difference is in the vastly different scheme of things. As a rule in our society men have the power and women don't. This is the pount of the article. This is not to criticize men. It is pointing out the structural white male heirarchy in which men benefit and to which women are subjugated.
2
Maybe I reinforce my liberalness when I read the NYT, Washington Post. But I read USA Today and look at Fox News, too. Everything I read leads me to loathe DJT more and more. He has absolutely no human redeeming qualities. What disturbs me even more is the statements I've read and heard from those who voted for Trump and still support him. Like most other people, my small 401(k) has grown in the last year. Is few thousand dollars worth selling our national soul? The president of the United States is totally without honor.
77
Ninety percent (90%) of the evil acts done in the world is carried out just to pay a mortgage, or buy a Range Rover, or send a kid to college. Evil is typically banal, unexciting stuff. Trump is no better and no worse than 90% of the people in the U.S. He was produced by American society, not some other country. As a lawyer, I know from whence I speak. Or, ask a priest or clinical psychologist.
There is nothing victim like about Hope Hicks - she eagerly pursued and fulfills the job she is in. A young woman with no skills or experience is now a constant advisor to the President - is so disgustingly absurd that it can only make one wonder what the boundaries of that relationship are. In a corporate setting someone who'd risen to the highest role without education, experience and achievement commensurate with the position would be assumed to have an intimate relationship with the boss - and the actual victims are the rest of the office who have to watch it all unfold! Women aren't always the victims of the sex dynamic alluded to here - there are plenty of women who seek it out and are willing to play ball for advancement. Trump surrounds himself with plenty of those. The real victims are the women who don't go along to get along in that scenario.
1029
I am in total agreement with you but just to clarify how the appointment process went down, (from wikipedia)-"In January 2015, Donald Trump earmarked Hicks, who was 26 years old at the time, for the role of press secretary for his potential presidential campaign. Donald Trump summoned her to his office and, as she tells it, "Mr. Trump looked at me and said, 'I'm thinking about running for president, and you're going to be my press secretary.'" I don't care if she was "only" 26. Most reasonable women would have run from this "opportunity." She WILL regret her employment choice one day.
6
She wears the tux in their relationship too.
Seriously, it's so SAD that a woman's path to success still includes packaging and selling themselves...
1
There a whole heap of equally unqualified young males working for Trump. Being unqualified but obsequious seems to be the major requirement for this administration.
2
George W Bush had his "work wives" also: Condi Rice, Karen Hughes, Harriet Miers.
I finding more and more as I research it, there is not too much difference tactically between the Bush43 and Trump administrations.
In fact, one might argue Bush 43 was even more theatrical than the king of all media, Trump. After all, Trump has yet to land on a carrier deck in a fighter plane dressed in a full flight suit.
6
No. You don't get it..
7
I don't think they make flight suits that large. But I did get a laugh over the picture in my mind.
4
Ms. Filipovic's column is so utterly true (in general, not just about President Trump) that it ought to amount to stating the obvious. What a miserable thought that for so many people apparently it isn't obvious at all, or else somehow it's alright (I say as an imperfect human being who doesn't mean to celebrate my own enlightenment).
11
And then there is the category for Sara Huckabee-Sanders.
20
Sarah Huckabee-Sanders is the pitbull guarding the junkyard gate. She's amazingly talented at what she does. I wonder why she and Conway don't realize that their legal fees will outpace their pay by orders of magnitude, though. Maybe they've been reassured by the liar in chief that 'he'll take care of it'?
2
That well-bruised "apple" fell right next to its bloated paternal "trunk", in the overgrown Garden of Evangelical Hypocrisy. Don the Snake slithers bye.
3
So thinking men and women have complementary roles is worse than assault. Got it.
8
You forgot to mention that the complementary role that women have is always subordinate. NOW, you've got it.
3
You may have missed the point.
2
What we need to do is replace the work wives, personal secretaries, women CEOs who are "just one of the boys"... the whole patriarchal model with:
a council of Eldresses that all men must answer to.
Sounds ridiculous but that's the answer.
5
I can totally relate to this. I was married to a man who demanded I be a "work wife" as well as working full time myself. Of course it didn't work. And Jill is correct. They do not "respect" what we do for them or for ourselves. Once you develop a spine you are out. Sounds a bit like t-Rump.
25
I've been in academia most of my life (30 years). I've only worked under male presidents, provosts, and male deans. Without exception, each had a string of assistants, assoc. deans, and or vice-presidents who all fell into the category of "handmaiden". I hope my institution is an anomaly.
I might be useful research to find out who provides wifely support for ceo's and others in power.
43
I don't doubt there is much truth in Ms. Filipovic's assessment of the "work wife" phenomenon. I would only suggest that many men, including myself, simply appreciate having women around. Based on my own experiences with male environments in the military many years ago and later in the construction industry into which women later arrived, the mere presence of women has a civilizing effect on men. Women tend to bring a different point of view and different priorities into a workplace that can soften the rough edges of male behavior. It's almost inevitable that men will see in female co-workers something of their mother, sister, wife or daughter. Even if that respect becomes a bit paternalistic, that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Among honorable adults, it can produce a healthy respect rather than condescension or lust. I don't know that men and women will ever be able to treat each other with complete equality as if there were no differences. The fact is we are different, and thank goodness for that.
54
"... appreciate having women around." I suggest you listen carefully to that phrase, and then consider how different it is from ... appreciating having women as part of the team."
12
"It's almost inevitable that men will see in female co-workers something of their mother, sister, wife or daughter. Even if that respect becomes a bit paternalistic that isn't necessarily a bad thing."
Yes it is a bad thing. That's the problem in a nutshell. I never once saw the men I worked with as daddy or brother or husband. They were colleagues with anatomical differences. If I needed a father, I had one. Ditto a husband. Paternalistic is an insult, and by definition a relationship among unequals.
68
Umm, you just made her point.
20
You get the sense since Michael Wolff’s “Fire and Fury” came out that on a daily basis this sterling cast of social observers and literary spelunkers assemble to go through … a “National Enquirer” take-down piece? Preferably one with aliens landing in the Rose Garden? I do. You’d think they’d consider the source of all this bombastic entertainment and decide to just ignore the results. You’d think that the normal process of analyzing arguments would commence by assessing the validity of premises and the credibility of sources.
But, no – the clicks the analyses draw are just too valuable if the purpose is to lambaste Trump. It’s been enough over the past two years to reanimate what was fast beginning to appear as a print-journalism corpse.
It’s not JUST our politics that are broken, but so many other things that have fractured in their wake.
Yet Jill takes this insistence on diving deep into the navel of Michael Wolff to find NEW immutable truths relevant to human intellectual and emotional evolution to imply that we should now create a new #MeToo for the “benevolent sexist”: for the man who doesn’t abuse but who merely needs people around him to validate his persona, in whom to confide and whom to trust. And they happen to be women, heaven help them.
How about the men who serve Katie Couric in precisely the same way?
But, no, let’s not analyze this TOO intelligently, because that gets in the way of slamming Trump and of all those clicks.
15
"You’d think that the normal process of analyzing arguments would commence by assessing the validity of premises and the credibility of sources."
You mean like all those people who assiduously look into Fox "news" stories that completely distort the truth or, in many cases, flat out lie? Or all of the Trump lovers who call anything fake news if it criticizes Trump? And if so much in the book isn't true, how come almost no one in the White House denies Wolff's stories?
40
Check the new Bill Maher interview with Wolff. Wolff hinted at currently impossible to verify stories, which were only vaguely hinted at in his book, which involved a slight bit more expansive definition of Work Wife.
12
@Richard Luettgen: You obviously haven't read this book you condemn. You should.
24
I hope you're not assuming "home" wives are like your image of work ones. I'll have to lighten up on emotional support. Next, we'll have divorce-bound working woman bosses getting some emotional sustenance from their smart male underlings. Or men who lavish their sympathy on women who are tormented by their female superiors. Why not simply flag harm when and where it happens and wrote fiction on the side?
5
I guess Senate Majority Leader Schumer was not willing to be Trumps sycophant. Those are the things that keep Americans hopeful!
172
There will always be people who will turn a blind eye to the most boorish or odious behavior because they want to be in, or near, the seat of power. Men and women are no different in this way, only the style of soft abuse to be tolerated....
120
All I can say at the moment is, "bravo Jill".
71
Hope Hicks needs to get out of there. History is going to treat her as some sort of deluded nurse to Elephant Man Trump.
178
They are all, both Trump's men and women, tainted, and it's indelible.
17
HIcks will be lucky if history treats her that way. Rumor has it the truth is even more degrading.
42
The past 24 hours have brought us hints that Trump is having an affair inside the white house. I'm fairly certain it isn't with Sarah Sanders. My first guess would be Hope Hicks.
3
Human Nature is complicated, interesting, irritating, maddening, but then so is Nature in general.
The term "Mother Nature" was not invented without reason.
"Behind every great man" is often a woman or more than one woman, beginning with Mom.
And if some women in (or not in) power need a Man or Men to make their lives in some way more bearable (even more pleasant), maybe That's Just The Way It Is.
How many positive, important, meaningful events have come about because of one's "helping" relationship with someone else?
Maybe most of us need "nurturing" now and then.
"No Man is an Island . . ."
Doug Giebel, Big Sandy, Montana
10
The author clearly makes a distinction between "helping" and vile misogyny as embodied in Trump.
12
Women need to find their own honesty. It takes courage and sometimes, loss in order to be self respecting, honest humans. As long as women are willing to assuage men, they pay the cost of knowing that men deserve their place above them. Honesty and courage...gives women their voice.
67
An all male work environment often involves constant challenges and response, and the resolution of all these little disputes often results in a way forward to solve the problem at hand. This can be effective, if exhausting. Researchers have found that men most often dream about conflicts with other men, while women's dreams more often involve cooperative activities with other women. Unless the work is something dirty, dangerous or physically exhausting, I'd much prefer to work with women.
123
Dirty, dangerous, or physically exhausting? Like childbirth?
29
Boys socialize differently than girls. At least they did when I was young, when kids were still allowed to play outside among themselves. We played sports and games and there were inevitable disputes, which we worked out, if sometimes loudly, among ourselves, without adult interference. We resolved the issue, the game went on, and everyone continued to have fun together.
It's possible you either didn't have many male friends growing up or you preferred the company of girls. I don't condemn that in any way, but neither should you condemn men for being debaters and practical problem solvers. If you're exhausted by that, that says as much about you as it does about them.
I currently work in an almost all male unit of a larger organization that is about 50/50. I've never been in a more comfortable and cohesive work environment and the one woman on our team has also never been happier. But that's my experience. Yours is obviously different.
11
Confused by your last sentence.
So you do not want women in jobs that are dirty, dangerous or physically exhausting?
Sounds sexist.
I spent 35 years doing dirty, dangerous, and physically exhausteing work -- pipeli e construction. I was good and I loved it!
4
Nurses were often expected to play this role for doctors
507
@K
Make that PRESENT tense--“Nurses ARE expected...”
The doctors always know that there will be food in the nurses’ lounge in ICUs. The doctors never bought any of the pizzas or brought cakes, cookies, etc but they sure ate most of the food.
The nurses flirt, make sure that the doctors get shoulder massages, run to get chairs or even pens for them to write.
My pre-med classmate who was frankly pretty homely, skinny with thick glasses and bad skin couldn’t WAIT to get his MD as he said “Finally I’m going back to my home town and I’m going to “bed” every “girl” who wouldn’t date me in high school. He is now 70 years old and is STILL surrounding himself with buxom blondes as his nurses and front office workers...and on his fourth wife--they get younger each year.
Are all doctors this way? Of course not, but the majority still feel that they are superior as human beings from anyone who isn’t an MD whether nurses, occupational, respiratory, or physical therapists. Surgeons still throw instruments and yell at nurses. It’s a hierarchy that will never change.
5
So behind every successful man there are MANY women.
They used to be referred to as secretaries. And very often husbands ran off with them.
235
Or more often had affairs with them - [or at least, attempted to].
3
If I’m not mistaken Trump’s brother dumped his wife Blaine for his secretary, Anne Marie Pallan (?).
1
Women listen but often don't speak up. Men speak up but don't hear. Both sexes could benefit from extra efforts to be persuasive and/or informative - without raising each other's hackles.
393
"listen, but often don't speak up" If I had a dime for every time I have witnessed a woman speak up in a meeting and been totally ignored, only to see a male colleague say essentially the same thing a few minutes later to great acclaim, I could probably pay my mortgage for this entire year. It has nothing to do with how persuasive or well informed the woman is. You are right that men don't hear, although I would says "some" men, not all. And many women do not now sit back silently when ignored. But it is extremely difficult to challenge this conduct without upsetting the male egos in the room -- even among those most open to changing their often automatic reaction. Personally, I ran out of the energy for "extra efforts" when I reached my late 20's. I am not responsible for the egos of other adults. I am responsible for courteous listening and a thoughtful response to them.
15
I don’t think this is what was meant by “Keep Hope Alive” ,but that Donald surrounds himself with beautiful women like Ms Hicks is no surprise.
Her most prominent feature is that she pleases his eye and says things he wants to hear. She may be very smart but that’s not important in the Trump administration.
335
Apparently not smart enough to know she is chief Play Pen attendant on The Titanic.
59
The work wife/mother dynamic was identified by Rosabeth Moss Kanter in her classic study, Men and Women of the Corporation. That book was first published in 1977. Here we are over 40 years later, but in Trump's world, nothing has changed!
113
When I stared my job in a government office, the secretary of the regional boss was a GS-5. It was in the later 70s that someone evaluated her actual role and her position was changed to Administrative Assistant GS-9/11.
1
40 years ago Donald Trump was 31 years old with his character having been set some 10 years earlier...and Dinosaurs don't evolve.
2
You study in the same college when you are young. You may have better grades than male students. When you actually come to work you start to touch invisible sealing very soon. A senior specialist is willing to train the male beginner but not you. You grab a pile of books and you train yourself. There is not everything there of course. "Know how" means something but you will get it the hard way.
Later you will have opinions on how to build an architecture of the project and you are not welcomed. You grab the book how to handle your male coworkers so they don't oppose your participation. Gestures, figures of speech. You make it automatic, it works.
You suffer from little things. You interrupt and it is out of place. You are interrupted and they don't let you finish, simply ignore you and if you insist you will ruin your relation with your colleagues. And many more.
They will spend time together, including boss, informal time, but you will not fit in.
When you will be hired implicitly they will expect mechanical work, not the ideas and career. This is sometimes why they will prefer a woman.
I have heard "you are excellent. But he needs this raise more than you since he is a breadwinner of the family". Was I a breadwinner?
I don't know why #metoo did not touch this aspect of sexism but it exists and it is a moral strain that the majority of professional women live every day.
No. Not all men are like this. But there are plenty.
632
RE: "I have heard "you are excellent. But he needs this raise more than you since he is a breadwinner of the family".
A long time corporate crony of djt, Carl Icahn is a classic example. Here is an excerpt from The New Yorker:
"He also waged a bitter fight against the flight attendants’ union. Because most attendants were women, Icahn insisted, they were not “breadwinners,” and should not expect compensation commensurate with that of male employees. At one point in the negotiations, he reportedly suggested that if the flight attendants were having such trouble making ends meet they “should have married a rich husband.” (Icahn denied having made sexist comments.) C. E. Meyer, the company’s chief executive, described Icahn as “one of the greediest men on earth.” T.W.A. eventually went out of business."
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/carl-icahns-failed-raid-on...
16
Thank you Helen. this rings true I every way. your words although correct were painful to read.
4
Invisible sealing--well put!
2
Couple of points -
1. These emotional needs are also met by male employees, who bolster the boss's ego by sycophancy which ranges from outright flattery to collecting objects or emails which the boss will like. Rep. Kevin McCarthy having his staff separate the pink and red Starburst candies so he can give them to Trump being an example.
2. The learned emotional helplessness is a feature you find in men and women. Men seem to get a lot more out of it probably because about the same percentage of men (I guess) respond supportively to this neediness in men or women, but a much larger percentage of women support this neediness in men than they do in women. From my observation women seem to be almost hostile to other women in such circumstances while coddling men who behave a lot worse. Mother-in-law vs Daughter-in-law relationships are orders of magnitude more toxic than Father-in-law vs Son-in-law cases. Same for Sisters-in-law relationships vs brothers-in-law relationships. And within the same gene pool, how most Moms treat their sons vs how they treat their daughters.
Of course Mr. Trump is a selfish narcissist for whom it has worked very well in life. He does respect those who have the guts to stand up to him though. What life shows is very few people have the integrity of a Mattis or a McCain. Everybody else is a spineless aider and abetter, only the degree varies.
64
I'm waiting for the book Hope Hicks writes about the needy and emotionally fragile President Trump. It should be great fun to read and make her a multimillionaire.
195
Sorry, the feminist can't have it both ways...being in power and being a victim...
I would have thought that Ms. Filipovic would have been pleased that there are so many women in positions to influence the events of the day in meaningful ways.
I certainly am.
42
Thanks for letting us know that we can't have it both ways. I'm going to make a note of that. Meanwhile, how many ways have men had it for the last few millennia?
11
Having it both ways is not only possible, it is at the heart of the problem.
It is exactly that combination that wreaks interminable havoc. The man or woman who identifies (consciously or not) as Victim while wielding power is a horrible danger to all within his/her sphere.
Victims naturally congregate. Hence, the current White House.
8