1. Lorvig 1
Your Name: Victoria Lorvig_____________________________________________________________
Your name as you would like it to appear in Transtions:Victoria Lorvig_________________________
Title of your submission:_Nemko’s Women-Built Glass Ceiling_________________________________
Submission category (please bold one): personal critical analysis research-persuasive
Permanent mailing address:20 Holt Road, Lyndeborough, NH, 03082___________________________
Home/Cell phone:603-831-4499________________________________
Permanent Email:toritown@yahoo.com__________________________________________________
Best way to contact you during the summer: email toritown@yahoo.com_____________________
401 Instructor’s Name:Justin Burkart___________________________________________________
Date of Submission: December 23rd
,2014__________________________
If your submission is selected for publication, you will need to sign a Copyright Assignment Agreement
and Assignment Agreement form in late May; therefore,be sure to check your email regularly after the
spring semester ends.
Finally, please only submit your own original work, and please make sure that it is properly cited.
Contact Wendy VanDellon with questions at wja26@wildcats.unh.edu.

2. Lorvig 2
Victoria Lorvig
Justin Burkart
English 401
2 October 2014
Nemko’s Woman-Built Glass Ceiling
Human society has long endured the debate that surrounds the issue of gender division in
the workplace. The generally accepted roles were women as homemakers and nurturers, and men
as providers and leaders, but as women’s fight for equality persisted in the twentieth century, the
division lessened. Despite that, even today women still feel undervalued and suppressed in the
workplace. The term glass ceiling came about in the 1980s and has stuck as a metaphor to
describe women’s barrier against achievement. This theory is proven true by statistics: the ratio
of women CEOs in Fortune 500 companies is still below one in 5, even though women hold
nearly half of management positions across the country (Eagly). Marty Nemko is a life-coach,
columnist and author of a blog article called The Real Reason So Few Women Are In The
Boardroom. This piece explores and describes the reason he believes such a small amount of
women reach the top. Marty Nemko writes an original essay that gives his opinion on women’s
low rank in the working world, but his argument reaches only as far as those who agree with him
and does not do well to change the minds of his opponents.
The Real Reason So Few Women Are In The Boardroom does not denounce women as
inferior, but blames their personal choices as the block to the top. He opens by stating good
qualities of women that would not prevent them from attaining success. He explains the lack of
female leadership as being caused by women’s inhibitions to devote time to work. It is not their
inability to work hard, but their revulsion from it. To be a CEO, a person must dedicate a copious

3. Lorvig 3
amount of time and energy into his/her job and put work ahead of home and leisure life. He
gathered this idea from his work as a life coach, making him a professional well-acquainted with
2,000 (Nemko 730) professionals. He states that women express more desire for family time
while men focus more on work. Women do not spend time on their homes for men but for
themselves. They are naturally inclined to nurture and give care, not lead and manage. He gives a
lengthy example of the detrimental outcomes of female-ideology-based hiring and management.
If companies allowed family friendly environments and long vacations, the profits would
plummet and the company would ultimately fail. He closes his argument by saying that women
are just as able as men to aspire to the top, but only if they give up extra activities such as family
and home care.
The debate over whether or not women should have the same rankings as men is
commonly fought by women because they are the oppressed in this situation. Nemko knows this
so he opens with facts that list women as more qualified than men. He establishes himself as a
believer in the capabilities of women. This is a smart way to begin his article that later explains
why not all women belong at the top. He makes sure that he is not introduced as a misogynist so
that readers will not initially disagree with his argument. This draws the reader in if he or she is
in support of women’s advancement but the quickness of this paragraph keeps opposers reading.
Similarly, with his concluding paragraph, he restates his position in a way that does not segregate
women from men but groups all humans together so as not to appear prejudiced. The author
begins his piece with statements in praise of women and ends with a feel of gender equality to
draw in and keep the interest of those who would disagree with his overall argument.
Nemko goes beyond personal experience to support his stance by supplementing his
writing with facts from credible sources. He states that only 38% of female Harvard business

4. Lorvig 4
school MBA graduates are employed in their childbearing years (Nemko 730). These facts imply
these women could work if they wanted to, but choose otherwise because their priorities are not
in the working world. If Harvard and Stanford graduates are not employed, it must be out of
choice and not lack of interested employers, or so he believes. This is the best data he found to
give backing to his theory and it illustrates his point well. He does cite sources in text, but does
not give a works cited, making it difficult to track down his sources. While the sources sound
credible, brief internet research cannot find all of them. Assuming them to be true, these facts aid
his beliefs.
Marty Nemko is a career coach, meaning he has had extensive experience with women
and their reflections on life, especially in the work world. A coach like him is similar to a
psychiatrist in the way that he learns about people’s goals, desires and motives. Through
numerous clients he has concluded that women prioritize balance between work and home life,
and because of this, women are less likely to achieve. He also adds quotes and generalizations
from high-ranking clients of his to show what a good CEO is like. These first-hand sources
augment his argument and validity on an intimate scale.
The author relies on his exclusive memory to sculpt his case, but simply because his
clients think a certain way does not mean that all do. He generalizes all CEOs by the few that he
knows which cannot encompass all in the world. He also uses his clients to conclude that women
value personal life over career. All women do not have the same goals and wishes, so his
analysis cannot be true for all females. The percentage of people whom he works with is too
small to constitute a definition for all of that demographic. These observations are not supported
by studies or facts, merely it is his individual’s notice that drives the theories. As a career coach
he claims authority, but technically career coaches do not require any specific training or degrees

5. Lorvig 5
(Life Coaching Career). A study of professional couples found that having children do not affect
women’ role in the workplace any more than it does men(Byron 165). Personal experience can
be a valid source for ideas but cannot land a legitimate conclusion.
As Nemko continues in his writing he begins to use terms that too clearly show his
thoughts on the subject at hand. A tinge of frustration seems to manifest when near the end he
uses the term “we” to mean men, as if he is complaining about a personal incident. He refers to
those who support women’s right feminists, but in a connotation that makes them appear radical
and unruly. With these two terms he turns his blog into an “us versus them” with the men being
logical, and the feminists being destructive. Creating a schism between himself and some of his
readers does not aid his stance and makes the piece subjective.
The blog post asks for trouble when the reason for women being at home comes up. He
quickly asks the reader why women are not supposed to care for the home since it is evident that
they are. “… why do women take on most family caregiving in every society from Iceland to
New Guinea, in every era from ancient times to today, and in all political contexts from
communist to capitalist? Women’s desire to prioritize family caregiving is mainly biological
predisposition, not cultural brainwashing.”(732) this quote is full of unsupported “facts” and not
remotely a proven statement. To him this may seem like evidence enough, but to the entire
feminist movement this is not enough to make a claim. This topic is one debated long and hard
and only causes rebuttal when mentioned in this piece.
Nemko makes the mistake of depending on assumptions to prove a larger point. He says
that women are more likely to want children, but does not cite it. He says that women care more
about having time with children, gives no support and then attempts to explain the absence of
data. He continues on to say that it is fair for women to expect men to enjoy their activities such

6. Lorvig 6
as having children, but unfair for men to expect women to enjoy their activities such as doing
taxes, fix-it/build-it projects and playing basketball. He may claim to know about people’s inner
thoughts, but nowhere does it cite that exclusively women like children and only men enjoy
basketball. These statements are clichéd and are not legitimate enough to be a pillar on which to
build a case.
As the piece continues to slide into unsteady conjecture, the writer makes an ill-placed
theory. “I predict that if women…informed their career-minded future husbands that they insist
he fully share domestic and child-rearing responsibilities and that they don’t expect to earn much
money, many men would decide it isn't worth getting married.” (732)This is where the fact that
this is a blog post and not a scholarly work is very clear. He is stemming out into this own
thoughts and not continuing with his topic. This article is supposed to discuss women’s roles in
the workplace, not their deceptions in marriage life. Yes, this statement may be related to
women’s disinterest in work and attachment to children, but why go so far as to predict women’s
thoughts? By wrapping it up with “So, most women withhold those demands until
afterwards“(732) he transports women to the role of disingenuous schemers. This, once again,
makes his argument into us vs. them rather than objectively viewing the situation.
Nemko develops the claim that women choose not to progress in work, but others have
theorized that women avoid leadership because they fear the judgment of peers. A study
conducted by the Girl Scouts of America concluded that girls are twice as likely as boys to avoid
leadership positions for fear of appearing “bossy” (Italie). As a rebuttal to his point, it could be
argued that women appear to not aspire to reach the top when they actually fear the bad
reputation that accompanies the title of boss. It could be that women begin to prioritize home life
at a young age because it is where they feel they belong. As mentioned above, women have

7. Lorvig 7
always been branded as the homemakers, so they seek work home-life balance because they feel
obligated to. It is not that they want to have a nice home for themselves, but that they want to do
what they are expected to. What to some, such as the author, appears to be focus on home life
could also be interpreted as shirking of external judgment.
Nemko presents the concept that women choose not to succeed, but some stories suggest
otherwise. James Chartrand is a successful writer and the author of the renowned blog Men With
Pens. James is not her real name, but one she adopted to become more appealing as a writer. She
recalls her first entrance into the work world as a man: “Taking a man’s name opened up a new
world. It helped me earn double and triple the income of my true name, with the same work and
service.” (Chartrand) Her recollection shows that despite being the same person, she was treated
differently seen as a man. Employers and coworkers ceased to ask her about children or doubt
her advice (Hawkins). Her reflection on this prejudice is that “Truth be told, if just a name and
perception of gender creates such different levels of respect and income for a person, it says a lot
more about the world than it does about me.” This concludes the experience of a real-life sufferer
of the glass ceiling. If Nemko is saying that men and women are treated equally and women
prevent themselves from success, then why did Chartrand have so much trouble as a woman?
Reasons presented by the author of The Real Reason So Few Women Are In The
Boardroom offers a claim that to him is completely clear, but to some readers it may not be
enough to convince them. A reader who already supports his view will easily be convinced, but
not all readers begin on his side. Because his argument rests on the belief that women stop
themselves from achieving, women themselves can easily disagree with him. He may claim to
know women but he is not one. A female who reads his article can be easily offended because

8. Lorvig 8
she is being told what she thinks. A woman who believes that women are equal to men will not
buy his theory that women choose not to try, especially if she is one who does apply herself.
After careful review of the article by Marty Nemko, it can be concluded that he has
aimed this piece at men. With terms such as “we” and assumptions about women that only one of
the other gender could make, his debate can only be accepted by men. While credible in parts,
the base of his theory is laid on the hope that women’s minds are not known to the reader. Some
women may see his point as valid but others could easily argue against it and the viability of his
sources. He offers a unique opinion on the foundation of the glass ceiling which targets male
readers and has little footing in the minds of female critics.

9. Lorvig 9
Works Cited
Byron, K. “A Meta-Analytic Review of Work-Family Conflic and Its Antecedents.” Journal of
Vocational Behavior 67 (2005): 169-198.
Chartrand, James. “Why James Chartrand Wears Women’s Underpants.” CoppyBlogger.
Wordpress. Web. 24 Sep 2014.
Eagly, Alice H., and Linda L. Carli. “Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership.” Harvard
Business Review 85, no. 9 (2007): 63-71.
Hawkins, Kathryn. “James Chartrand of Men With Pens On Being a Woman in the Copywriting
World.” Quickbooks. Intuit. 25 Aug. 2011 .17 Sep 2014.
Italie, Leanne. “Sherly Sandberg’s ‘Ban Bossy’ campaign meets critics.” The Christian Science
Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor, 20 Mar. 2014. Web. 18 Sep. 2014.
Kochanowski, Susan. “Women In Leadership: Persistent Problems Or Progress?” Practical
Arguemnt. 2nd Ed. Laurie G. Kirszner, Stephen R. Mandell. Boston: Bedford St. Martin’s,
2014. 716-723. Print.
“Life Coaching Careers” Careers In Psychology. n.d. Web. 22 Sep. 2014.
Nemko, Marty. “The Real Reason So Few Women Are in the Boardroom.” Practical Argument.
2nd Ed. Laurie G. Kirszner, Stephen R. Mandell. Boston: Bedford St. Martin’s, 2014.
730-733. Print.

10. Lorvig 10
Afterthought
When plunking down to write the first draft of my essay I thought to myself okay time for
some college level writing. This had better be good. While in the past I may have seen the word
“draft” as meaning “rugged sloppy rough draft, with this essay I decided to put careful thought
into what I was writing. Because of this, there was not very much deviation between my first and
third drafts. There were a few reorganization issues but there was no major rearrangement. I did
do quite a bit of word changing, especially with the author’s name. I worked through the essay to
find repetition and give some variety in words.
As far as peer advice goes, I didn’t get much feedback from my classmates. Of what I did
get, it was primarily issues that I had already found. There were a few helpful comments on areas
where my sentence framing was confusing or where certain phrases did not fit the flow of the
paper. There were a few suggestions that I ignored and some that were not relevant (page
numbers for online sources, for example). One comment asked about a counterargument to my
counterargument, which I may have addressed had it been asked earlier in the game, but adding
more to the topic at this point would not help my paper. It was, however, nice to have something
to spark curiosity.