When you say...
> Chauvinistic or not, I truly believe if the reward were there, our society would have more women in leadership positions.
Specifically, what is the reward you are describing and how does it differ from the reward available for men? Are you saying you believe the reward to incent women to management would need to be greater (putting aside the uncertainty about how to define "greater") than the rewards that sufficiently incent men?
I will think about it. If I can find a way to present my position more clearly without social Hacker News repercussions, I will.
edit: funny, how I do the same in real life, with my career, etc. I withhold strong positions, and give watered down expressions, to survive. Kinda sad. Lack of real anonymity means I also have to moderate expressions. Any future employer finding me here will hold everything I say here against me.
What "but still"? What is it about that that still supports your point, even if it is entirely out of ones hands if your hair falls out? If it is indeed mostly/totally genetic, why continue to look at it as a symptom of "letting oneself go"? That's just a stigmatizing attitude to hold on too (if it is indeed mostly genetical).
Bald men and short men have hurdles, too.
Getting fat is for many a lifestyle issue (a bad lifestyle is what you alluded to in the first place). It may be partly genetic in that some people only have to start worrying about their waistline in their thirties while some have to do so in their teens. It is not clear at all that baldness is a lifestyle issue.
Noone mentioned short men.
After 13 years, I still prefer to sit down and disappear into the screen and build things. I have natural leadership ability, I have a big personality when required, but I just don't feel motivated by money or rewards to take on the responsibility of leading a team.
I watch my colleagues get promoted, all male. And then I watch them try to balance wife, kids, and life. Without their wives, they tend to do poorly at life maintenance. They get fat, or pot-bellies at least, their hair falls out (probably just genetic but still) and after a few years the stress has broken them. The factors of leading means your reward depends on others whom you are unable to really control. So they spend time playing head games with people and taking work home that others can't or won't complete.
The handful of women I know in leadership positions also have a stigma attached. Their ego leads just like the males, but the women are considered "too aggressive" and get labeled as such.
So with minimal reward (I require double my income to ruin my life), management/leadership is just not an option for me, regardless of my abilities. I suppose living up to my capabilities should be reward enough, but it isn't.
Until I get a wife and/or make enough money to pay for the easy leisure and lack of worry I have now, I don't care about the prestige of leadership.
Chauvinistic or not, I truly believe if the reward were there, our society would have more women in leadership positions.
My personal life has a higher "fee" than men for living and breathing my job. Pay me that fee, I will make a go of it.