Interview with a woman

Laurel S. Bernstein lbernstein at isisph.com
Wed Apr 5 10:47:06 EST 1995


Thanks to those of you (esp. below) who are helping me to clarify what I said- 
I agree with you both. I certainly didn't mean to imply that she was stupid 
for wanting children. But I think it was not a savvy thing to bring up, 
although I do not believe it affected my consideration of her for the job. I 
also agree with Stacy that what I want to hear in an interview is why you want 
to work for ME, not why you wanted to leave your last job. Perhaps I did not 
make myself as clear as I should have. 
Laurel

In article <D6Gvy1.1FM at midway.uchicago.edu> sferguso at kimbark.uchicago.edu 
(Stacy Ferguson) writes:>From: sferguso at kimbark.uchicago.edu (Stacy Ferguson)
>Subject: Re: Interview with a woman
>Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1995 16:18:01 GMT

>In article <3lf51p$7q4 at lace.Colorado.EDU>,
>Marilyn Walker  <Marilyn.Walker at colorado.edu> wrote:

>>
>>I suspect (hope) that what you meant by saying she acted stupidly was
>>that you realize there is lots of prejudice against women due to their
>>being the bearers of children, and that you wished she had realized that
>>and protected herself.  I see less and less evidence of prejudice against
>>women per se and more and evidence of prejudice against women who also
>>happen to be mothers, with the concept that they cannot possibly be equal
>>in the workplace.  
>>
>>Marilyn Walker

>No, it's not the children part of the answer that was stupid (although it
>probably DOES influence the interviewer negatively). What's stupid when 
>you interview for a job is to not behave like you REALLY WANT TO WORK THERE,
>not because it makes your personal life easier.



More information about the Womenbio mailing list