成人小说亚洲一区二区三区,亚洲国产精品一区二区三区,国产精品成人精品久久久,久久综合一区二区三区,精品无码av一区二区,国产一级a毛一级a看免费视频,欧洲uv免费在线区一二区,亚洲国产欧美中日韩成人综合视频,国产熟女一区二区三区五月婷小说,亚洲一区波多野结衣在线

今年感恩節(jié)周末，我大概不是唯一一個和親朋好友熱烈談?wù)撝x麗爾·桑德伯格的人。

最近幾周，有關(guān)社交媒體巨頭Facebook的報道持續(xù)升溫，即使平常不留意這家公司及其首席運營官桑德伯格的動向，也很難視而不見。

當(dāng)頭炮顯然是《紐約時報》的一篇重磅爆料。文中披露，針對Facebook“泄密門”涉事公司劍橋分析以及俄羅斯利用其平臺干預(yù)美國大選，F(xiàn)acebook正在努力淡化丑聞的后續(xù)影響，還聘請了行跡可疑的政治公關(guān)公司Definers，詆毀抗議Facebook的人們。雖然桑德伯格與不當(dāng)行為密切相關(guān)，剛開始卻否認(rèn)知道Definers。在感恩節(jié)前一天，她承認(rèn)確實“收到過少量推薦Definer的電郵”。

在桑德伯格對Definers的問題改口后，《紐約時報》的報道左右開弓，掀起了媒體批評桑德伯格的熱潮。有人高呼，桑德伯格應(yīng)該辭職！有人認(rèn)為，她在替Facebook的首席執(zhí)行官馬克·扎克伯格背鍋。有的說，她應(yīng)該走人，但因為她是女性所以Facebook不會解雇她。有的聲稱，桑德伯格背上了永遠(yuǎn)無法抹去的污點。有的指責(zé)，她不能既當(dāng)“杰出的女權(quán)主義者”，又當(dāng)“令人敬畏的首席運營官”。

在我看來，要想理解所有爆料和熱門報道，會得到兩個自相矛盾的結(jié)論。一是，桑德伯格身為女性的事實很重要，而且與外界對她的評判密不可分。二是，桑德伯格是不是女性并不重要，與她身為首席運營官應(yīng)負(fù)的責(zé)任無關(guān)。

桑德伯格無疑是全球最知名的商界女性，一些評論者也開始追問，她的名譽受損對職場女性有何影響。我認(rèn)為這個問題不一定準(zhǔn)確?，F(xiàn)在談到女性擔(dān)任首席運營官之類最高管理層的代表性和影響力時，我們經(jīng)常會說：“別人能做到，你也有機會做到?！钡F(xiàn)實中，我們不可能成為謝麗爾·桑德伯格。她是一個孤例，因為她不但是高管，還是名人，也是文化偶像。

對職業(yè)女性來說，也許更適合的問題是，從桑德伯格跌落神壇的經(jīng)歷中可以汲取什么教訓(xùn)？我得出的結(jié)論是：真正的平等意味著面對權(quán)力同樣要精益管理，一旦輕率使用權(quán)力，就要承擔(dān)后果。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Pessy

審校：夏林

Am I the only one who had some, um, lively discussions about Sheryl Sandberg with friends and family over the Thanksgiving weekend?

Even for people who don’t typically follow Facebook or its COO, the (increasingly dire) reports about the social media giant in the past few weeks have proved hard to ignore.

It started, of course, with the New York Times’ blockbuster expose of the company’s attempts to downplay the Cambridge Analytica and Russian meddling scandals—and the disclosure that it hired shady comms firm Definers to discredit anti-Facebook demonstrators. Sandberg, who was strongly implicated in the bad behavior, initially denied knowing about the firm. Then, the day before Thanksgiving, she admitted that she had in fact “received a small number of emails where Definers was referenced.”

The one-two punch of the report, followed by Sandberg’s Definers flip-flop, unleashed a flood of coverage of the COO. She should resign! She’s taking the fall for Mark Zuckerberg! She’d be out of a job—but Facebook can’t fire her because she’s a woman! She’s “forever tainted!” She can’t be both a “towering feminist” and a “formidable chief operating officer!”

For me, making sense of all the reveals and hot takes has meant learning to hold two seemingly contradictory beliefs at the same time. One: Sandberg’s gender matters, and is inextricable from the way she’s being judged. Two: Sandberg’s gender doesn’t matter, and has nothing to do with the fact that she’s accountable for her actions as COO.

Some commenters have asked what the newly tarnished view of Sandberg, arguably the world’s best-known businesswoman, means for professional women. But I’m not convinced that’s the right question. When we talk about representation and the power of putting women in C-suite roles like chief operating officer, the saying often is: “If you can see it, you can be it.” In reality though, we can’t be Sheryl Sandberg. She’s a singular case—as much a celebrity and cultural icon as an executive.

Perhaps the better question for working women is what can we learn from Sandberg and her apparent fall from grace? Here’s one thing I’ll take away: True equality means leaning in to power—and bearing the full weight of the repercussions for using it unwisely.