Female led relationships discussion

I’m not really counting on many replies (though I’d love to be pleasantly surprised), but my wife and I watched this movie earlier today. I’ve always had a soft spot for Barbara Stanwyck—she has above-average beauty, but also intelligence, strength, confidence, and a dominance that makes her incredibly sexy.

The story follows a woman (played by Stanwyck) who leverages those qualities to succeed in both life and business—and quite explicitly so for its time period (or any era, really). It’s not the whole picture, of course; you’ll need to see it yourself. Anyway, I found it intriguing to view this film through the lens of the #Me Too movement, which seems keen on de-sexualizing the workplace among other things. Yet for some women, that shift might actually be a disadvantage. Consider: men can reach the top by being cutthroat, backstabbing kiss-up schmucks; so why shouldn’t we allow a woman to use her sexuality to climb the same ladder? Which set of traits is truly worse in leadership? Yes, I admit there are some equally repugnant women out there, but as a group, men are far more prone to being those backstabbing kiss-ups than women are. At least that’s my take after two decades at the professional level in corporate America.

I also thought it was fascinating how censors edited this scene from the movie… “A woman, young and beautiful like you, can have whatever she desires in life because she holds power over men. But you must use them rather than letting them use you. You need to be a master, not a slave. Look here — Nietzsche stated, ‘All existence, regardless of how we idealize it, is nothing more nor less than exploitation.’ That’s exactly what I’m saying. Exploit yourself. Head to a major city where opportunities abound! Use men! Be strong! Defiant! Leverage them to get what you want![[3]](”

I wonder if that reality didn’t sting the patriarchy just a little too much?