This is partly why I shy away from job descriptions seeking “rockstars,” “ninjas,” or “gurus.” It immediately tells me two things:

1. The job description was probably written by a cocky man.
2. The company culture is probably very dude/bro centric with meetings that tend towards pissing contests.

Neither of those appeal to me in a job culture. I suspect that’s true for many women, but also quite a few men.

“Words like “competitive” and “dominant” (male) versus “compassionate” and “nurturing” (female) can signal whether a job is typically held by men or women. ”

The study is wrong in its basic assumption that those are inherently gendered words, there is simply no scientific basis to assume that.

Reality (and many other studies) shows women can be as much dominant and competitive as man, and man as compassionate and nurturing as women. This kind of –ism that wants to protect the stereotypes in the name of empowerment does nothing but harm.

What about treating them as equals instead of perpetuating stereotypes of man as “dominant” and “competitive”, and women as “compassionate” and “nurturing”?

re: a.almarakarn

This is exactly what they did – by putting “masculine/feminine” wording in a job description and having lots of people read it and rate it they are proving that the wording is not not just sounding “masculine/feminine” but really is masculine/feminine. And that “treating them as equals”, wording wise, is just wishful thinking and simply wrong, not reality as it is.

@a.almarakarn – While there are women who are “dominant” and “competitive” and men who are “compassionate” and “nurturing” there are also cultural stereotypes and expectations. For most of the United States, and maybe most of the Western world, these stereotypes and expectations currently equate “dominant” and “competitive” with men and “compassionate” and “nurturing” with women (e.g., do a google face image of “compassionate OR nurturing” [1] then one for “dominant OR competitive” [make sure SafeSearch is ON!] [2] ) . Time and culture will change (for example, pink used to be associated with boys [3] ) but one possible way to speed up the rate of change is understanding. In this case, understanding, that there are words that may trigger an unconscious bias or expectation, allows individuals to consciously review job descriptions to either pre-publication edit out such words or post-publication compensate for such words.

[1] http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&gbv=2&tbs=itp%3Aface&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=compassionate+OR+nurturing&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=
[2] http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&tbs=itp:face&tbm=isch&q=dominant+OR+competitive&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&start=0&uss=1
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink#In_gender / http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=238733

Anyone can apply to any job they want. As long as HR managers aren’t throwing out resumes on the basis of gender, I don’t see what the fuss is about.

Seems like the *real* problem is that many women in our society don’t perceive themselves as competitive, and many men don’t perceive themselves as compassionate. There are plenty of competitive women out there, and plenty of compassionate men. In fact, most well-adjusted people are both competitive AND compassionate. For those who are not, you can blame society all day long, but in the end that’s a personal problem.

No need to re-write the job ads. Sheesh.

@Zack – I’m in the process of job hunting, as is everybody else in my department. We’re a well-educated mix (all have at least a bachelors degree and most a masters degree) who have worked for a branch of our company that’s been bureaucratically forced into non-existance. As we’ve been job hunting, it’s been interesting watching the different ways women and men look at job postings and their applications.

A former male employee, who nows works for the government, wired two jobs very specifically for two of our male employees (and yes, it’s under investigation). Another male employee (who has since been hired elsewhere) told me to “make up job experiences”; his justification was that I am capable and shouldn’t not be considered simply because I haven’t already had certain experiences. Meanwhile, the women have suggested only slightly stretching the truth (e.g., I worked a total of 1/2 an hour on a project that lasted several years; the project manager told me that working on it even for 60 seconds means I can list it on my resume – in a way that implies but never states that I worked on all aspects of the project), but none of the women have suggested or condoned outright lying about experience that I don’t have.

Meanwhile, I’ve been called to interview for a job in another state; a job which I won’t take unless I can tele-work. Both my parents (divorced, hate each other, and agree infrequently enough that when they agree it’s rather monumental) told me not to bring this up until I was given an actual offer. The men in my office all agree; the women in my office all disagree. My parents’ and the men’s justification is that I should be considered solely on my competency. The women’s justification is that it may be a qualifying factor (i.e., the job may require that I physically be in the office) and therefore it is deceitful and irresponsible not to mention it early in the interview process. You may ask yourself about my mother’s reasoning. Until their divorce, she was a stay-at-home-mom and my dad was in the corporate world. My dad was laid off about 6 times while I was growing up; so they have the joint experience of him being in the position that I now find myself.

In otherwords, how men and women, as aggregates, ‘compete’ differs enough without adding in the complexity of gender-biased language. Many of the women that I’ve talked to feel the men “cheat”, while most of the men I know argue that they’re just “playing the system” and the women should/can do the same.

Why are “competitive” and “dominant” perceived as masculine traits while “nurturing” and “compassionate” are perceived as feminine traits. The problem isn’t with the use of the terms but with our assumptions about who possesses these traits.

In language, meaning isn’t inherent. It’s constructed.

I think that some men and women have been brainwashed by society to an extent. If a woman applys for and is hired for a job where she has to have a dominant take charge attitude, that could backfire on her in the workplace. A strong female administrator can be the object of resentment by their subordinates (and superiors), regardless of the gender. A strong man is considered someone to be admired, but a strong woman in some cases is an object of scorn. Women are seen as the nurturers because as their position as mothers. If a man has these characteristics, he is seen as “soft” or effeminate in some circles.

I have a problem with the photo that illustrates this article. Talk about gender problems and perceptions! Though neat and clean, the man looks like he threw on his favorite shirt and jeans. To me, he is not sexually attractive (he hides it). The woman, on the other hand, exudes sexuality by the way she’s dressed and her body language. Looking for a job online does not require sexy hair and makeup as well as fashionable clothing and stiletto boots! When seeking a job online, people are usually at home (or library) dressed comfortably, often in their pajamas or T-shirts and shorts. This photo perpetuates gender sterotypes and is wrong for such an article. We see this sort of gender bias on TV all of the time. I think this is perpetuated by employers as well. As a person over age 40 with lots of education and experience, I find it scary and disgusting when I read some of the ads for jobs. I’m involved with job search support groups and the majority of people are over age 40. Clearly, we have been discriminated by our ex-employers as well as those from which we are now seeking jobs. I’d love to look like the young woman in the photo because I would have been hired last July (I was laid off end of June). Although it’s clearly difficult for older men to find a job, try being an older woman who would look ridiculous in tight jeans and stilettos! Although I am energetic and like to have fun, I don’t answer employment ads seeking “energetic, parties hard, fun office, etc.” Nor do I answer for “nurturing” and “compassionate” because they want to pay very low wages to a woman.

I’ve always specifically looked for jobs with the “male” terminology. Better pay right from the start usually.

Karen – don’t know how you’re reading all that into the picture. They’re both sitting erect, they’re both wearing blue jeans and a shirt appropriate to business-casual workplace. Neither one is just surfing the web from home. They’re about the same age, same BMI, same socio-economic status from all indications.

Yes, men and women dress differently, and women do pay more attention to appearance (heels, sleeveless shirt, makeup). This picture is not forced or contorted, it reflects our public society.