Only 1 of the 20 richest women made her own fortune.. (shes #17)

tumblr_mppb0lHYyy1sunadjo1_500.gif
 
Name change?

Anyway, there's probably some deep social commentary that can and has been made, but I'm not going to dive into it. Interesting article and observation, though.
 
Yea couple days ago.

and I think it'll be interesting to see if that shifts at all in the next 20 - 40 years
 
Don't even get me started on Gina Rinehart.

Telling us all we should work for $2 a day and spend less time at the pub.

Fuck right off, Gina. I enjoy my $21.50 AUD an hour and my penalty rates on weekends and public holidays.
 
Why would expect rich women to have the capability of creating vast fortunes without the aid of inheritance if it's only been socially acceptable for women to have high powered careers since the 70's, and even then met with resistance?
 
seeing that the average age of a billionaire is 60, the average person enters the work force in there 20's and that the 70's were 40 years ago i see no problem with this
 
Although this is true, it wouldn't be the case if people like J.K. Rowling and Oprah didn't give away so much of there money that they aren't in the top 20 anymore. That should be the trend that you make a thread about. How much more money self made females give to charity than their male counterparts. I'm not sure if it is even true that they do, but I'd be pretty surprised if they didn't. Men are fucking greedy.

But obviously the inherited wealth females are the worst. Nothing worse than a gold digger we all know that.
 
Its not like on June 15th, 1978 women were suddenly viewed and treated as equals as executives, it just started there.

To the above poster, I wasn't trying to start a shit storm and I don't know why there would be one. I was just pointing out that there are some obvious reasons behind the stats. I didn't know this would be controversial...what is the opposing view that you're trying to state? That women just aren't as capable in business?

I think there are various reasons, and probably a lot of factors play into it. Women are probably less likely to take risk, too-- and since a lot of business ventures are risky this could play into it as well. Women may also have on average, a different definition of success?

But I was also thinking about the fact that there is a lot of old money out there. Traditionally in very wealthy families, the sons (if there were any) worked for the family business and would inherit or take over the company when there time would come. There are probably quite a few men on the list who inherited money, and then built upon the wealth.

 
The OP did not post a list of sell-made billionaires. He just posted a list of billionaires in general-- he was pointing out the stats for the women on the list. All of the men on the list are not self-made-- case in point-- the Koch brothers.
 
sorry, I didn't see the stat for the men in comparison, I get what you're saying.

But yeah-- I mean a head start in terms of opportunities--education and otherwise, wealth, family businesses etc. Sorry I missed your original point.
 
yeah I fucking hate those women who take over their family business, fuck those skanks who are just in it for the money.

Arabians post = spot on.

Women are also expected to stay home with the family/take care of the household, which holds them back from climbing to high status positions. Being a successful mother AND a successful worker is very, very difficult, if not impossible. Idk what you say in english, but in swedish people within the equality debate are talking about "the woman trap" (lol inb4 its a trap jokes lol): eventhough the official policy/standpoint of something is aiming to be gender neutral, in practice it helps to consolidate gender roles and structures within society which are not beneficial towards women.

Economic policies that for example encourage women to be home with their kids, steer them away from a career and professional life (since its mostly women who tend to stay at home with their kids, not the husbands). People may say that "hey, nothing is stopping the men from staying at home with their kids and let the woman work", but this is where the "woman trap" comes into play: our current, unequal tradition of household
 
fuck my post was cut off

our current unequal tradition of what a household looks like means women are more likely to stay home (because thats what mothers are expected to do, men in average earn more money etc), which in turn cuts them off from the job market and makes them less powerful/society remains unequal.
 
The list is also a little bit skewed...I see that Amancio Ortega is on there as self-made. He is the co-founder of Zara-- he co-founded it with his wife-- she is dead now, so is not on the list.
 
The average age of the top 20 richest men is 72

The average age of the top 20 richest women is 62

Just an FYI
 
haha, wtf? I was being serious? I googled and only came back with a proposed bill in Mumbai.
 
Right, but changing it to what?

Isn't the current law that anything acquired previous to marriage maintains the property of the individual, and anything acquired during marriage is 50/50?

I don't see a problem with that.
 
yes it is.

Question: How Does The Court Determine If Property is Marital Or Non-Marital Property?

Answer:The courts have no authority over non-marital property. So, the first thing the court has to do is determine whether they have authority over property. Generally speaking, all property acquired by either spouse before the marriage is considered non-marital property. All property acquired after the marriage is considered property of the marriage or marital property. If the property is marital property then the court must “equitably” divide the property.

 
If you really don't know what I'm talking about, then I'm not going to explain to you how divorce favors woman.
 
I'm afraid I can't read your mind and know if you're talking about parenting, assets, or what...if you really wanted my opinion on a given issue, you'd have made it clear. It seems instead you'd rather be vague and then condescending.
 
Quoting snobunny$:

Its not like on June 15th, 1978 women were suddenly viewed and treated as equals as executives, it just started there.

your right but they could enter they could enter the workforce and as they grew older it would become more and more normal to have a women executive, also seeing how we are discussing 'self made' billionaires i don't see how it is to relevant either because you don't start as a secretary for the business you founded

Quoting Tinga$:

you do notice that most of the people on that list are like really old right?

yes, but the average age of a billionaire is still around 60, so yes i did notice most people on the list are old.

more importantly though a self made billionaire would of founded their own company so i don't see how social stigma against women in the workplace would come in to much play

 
If you're starting your own company you usually need some venture capitalists and other investors. This has been and likely still continues to be more difficult for women. It isn't just about opportunities for promotion within a company. Women have been held back in all aspects of business and politics as well. It is getting much better though.
 
There is a reason it says generally speaking and I was more leaning towards all the things with alimony (sp?) and child support etc. That isn't money that was made in the marriage...

 
Not to mention in order to maintain a position of dominance in a business a woman must assume dominant behavior, which is generally considered unattractive and unbecoming of women, who should remain dainty and submissive, leading to hostile attitudes for behavior that, when mirrored by males, is not paralleled.

Women may not experience the blatant "you must remain barefoot and pregnant at all times" sexism anymore, but there are far more insidious and serious issues with social attitudes regarding normal behavior for women that pose a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top