New Yahoo! CEO is 37 ... and pregnant!

The 'attractiveness card'?? Seriously? She's attractive. What would you suggest, putting a bag over her head and dressing her in a lawn bag? Maybe have her legs amputated so you don't have to be tortured by them?

No clue how some of you exist with real women in the real world. No clue at all.

 

I don't know how some women exist in the real world not admitting women use looks to their advantage, like Mayer does.

BTW, I was not rating her looks. It's interesting that rating attractiveness is OK in the Bobby Petrino thread but doing so here makes this it's a joke, because we all know this thread is the one that pushes SPJ.com into joke territory.

 

I know, there are TONS of attractive women who get to be CEOs of companies like Yahoo because they're attractive.

Guess what, attractive works both ways. You can be gorgeous and brilliant, and instead of being recognized for your work, there's always going to be some schmuck who just sees tits and a great pair of legs.

 

Jesus, Stitch. So it's a knock against her for wanting to look attractive? Because, what? Playing up her frumpy side is a better, smarter idea? What, exactly, do you recommend she does?

Ugh.

 

I don't know about the rest of you Uggos, but I owe much of my professional success to my good looks. Just the way the world works, people. Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.

 

To be fair, he was not suggesting that it was "a knock", instead his implication was essentially the opposite, that it was an asset she'd used to her advantage when beneficial. And nowhere did he suggest that she wasn't otherwise qualified and deserving of the position.

I don't know whether Stitch's suggestion is true or not, but if so, it would hardly be a shocking thing. From the couple pics here, there certainly is a striking appearance difference from nearly every other Fortune 500 CEO I've seen. Might that have helped along the way, I don't know, but it would hardly be an unprecedented thing if it had. That factor is an unspoken difference-maker in countless business and personnel decisions every day.

 

I'm pretty familiar with the tech industry, even if I don't know any players besides a couple of well-known tech journalists. Mayer has been in the spotlight for several years and tends to get more publicity than pretty much any other VP of a tech company (or any company for that matter). Part of that spotlight had to do with dating Larry Page, which seems to explain why she's was cast out of the Google inner circle when he took over as CEO.

Mayer also happens to be the Googirl.



http://www.modernluxury.com/san-francisco/story/the-adventures-of-marissa
http://gawker.com/362143/googirl-article-vanishes-from-web

More good and bad on Mayer.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-about-marissa-mayer-she-has-two-contrasting-reputations-2012-7

 

Just think, if she was 21 years younger, she could get a reality show.

 

Stitch, you have the subtlety of a gorilla in a feces-and-bananas store.

Anyway, I side with Amy on this one: It was the company's responsibility, even if she had shown up to the interview with a clear-as-day baby bump, not to ask. And it was Meyer's ethical (but not legal) responsibility to tell. You don't want to start a job off on that kind of foot. That goes for any job, including and especially a high-paying, high-powered job where your task is to save a multibillion dollar corporation.

 

I can't think of a single time where I saw a debate about whether a man got a CEO/CFO/other high level position because of his looks. (When Jack Welch was leaving GE there was an article that discussed who was the best golfer of the three candidates for his replacement, though. Well, there was the article that discussed our former CFO and described him as "powerfully built" when the truth is he's really short and squat and trolly looking. I think the guys at work found this funnier than I did.)

I happen to like that attractive women are getting high level positions. Eventually there will be enough (As more women get these positions I think just naturally there will be more that are also considered attractive even by SportsJournalists.com standards) that you won't be able to explain all of the attractive ones as being there only due to their looks.

Generally, it seems like no matter what a woman in a leadership position looks like she gets criticized. (Unless she is a U.S. Supreme Court justice. I've never heard anybody slam O'Connor, Sotomayor, Kagan, or Ginsburg because they aren't pretty.) If she's too attractive, the "using her looks" or worse gets thrown around. If she's not good looking - and is controversial - jokes are made about how ugly she is. Poster child - Clinton.

I hate this topic. Whether I like it or not, how a woman looks does have implications - good and bad - in the business world.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, the new CEO of Yahoo!



Just because.