Posted on 04/10/2005 6:15:01 PM PDT by CHARLITE
I am absolutely captivated by the reality TV series 'The Apprentice'. Not just because of its drama (of which there is much) but because it shows how good old fashioned capitalism – hard work, common sense and entrepreneurship – win out over politically correct ideology. Almost uniquely, the show presents capitalist leaders as the hero, rather than the typical stereotypes such as the evil Mr Burns from the Simpsons. The reality of such men is that while many of them may be cold, or unpleasant, they are the necessary servants of the marketplace. Their bold and forceful careers give the public not only innovative and affordable products and services, but untold jobs.
The American and British series feature two of capitalism's most uncompromising patriarchs: Donald Trump and Alan Sugar. Mr Trump, with his extraordinary hair and bombastic manner has frequently been portrayed by the media in less than flattering ways. But from what I have seen of the American show Mr Trump comes across as intelligent and fair. The same can be said of the boss in the British show: Sir Alan Sugar – the Jewish industrialist who founded and still runs the electronics company Amstrad.
If you haven't seen the show before, the basic premise is that the boss is looking for an apprentice, and 14 young hopefuls are competing for this role. In each week's episode they are split into two groups and given a new business task, such as designing a new product, running a department in a luxury store, or convincing celebrities to part with valuable possessions for a charity auction. By the end of each episode the reckoning arrives: one team will have won, one will have lost. The winners are rewarded with treats such as a luxury dinner with Mr Trump or a weekend in Monaco. The losers are subject to a boardroom meeting where they are required to analyse the reason for failing and plead their individual cases. Finally, at the end of each episode Trump and Sugar fix one of the contenders with their vulturine gaze, jab a finger in their direction and declare "You're fired!"
Sometimes these firings cause you to jump for joy, sometimes they are sad, but they are never cruel. Its nothing personal, it is strictly business. In fact, it is this masculine, detached and logical approach to the firings that stops it from being cruel. In a world full of industrial tribunals, lawsuits and compensation it is almost shocking to hear those two words. It is also refreshingly value-affirming: actions do matter, they do count, and there are winners and losers. Men generally thrive under this kind of competitive regime.
In the British series the conventional 'wisdom' of the management gurus – that women are more effective workers – has been shattered. In all the areas that are now supposed to favour women, the men have shown themselves, as a group, to be far better. This includes communication skills, multi-tasking and acting as a team-player. The women, in contrast, have often become over-emotional (even breaking down in tears), mired in management jargon rather than getting on with the job at hand, and unable to cohere together as a team. Indeed, it was only when the female and male teams were mixed in together in the later episodes that any of the women seemed able to perform. Nor can this be due to biased editing on behalf of the broadcasters: the British version of The Apprentice is shown on the usually misandric BBC.
I haven't seen much of the American series but I managed to watch some extracts from it online. It was interesting to compare the styles of Trump and Sugar. Trump seems to like aggressive energy in the boardroom and (at least in the segments I've seen) has a greater respect for the academic imprimatur of a degree, Sugar seems to prefer a slightly less emotional style, he also pays little respect to those with MBAs, preferring to look for a natural, down-to-earth common sense in his would-be apprentice.
Yet even with these different styles of personality, both Trump and Sugar respect the bottom-line more than the modern creed of diversity, minority quotas, and feminist affirmative action.
In an age of political correctness, quotas, and business-by-committee it is refreshing to observe these iconoclastic titans of commerce in action. The Apprentice is reality TV in the truest sense: it shows how business flourishes by respecting results – the real world – rather than ideology and PC theory.
Darren Blacksmith is the webmaster of www.cooltools4men.com
You're just jealous that you don't have a spaceship. :D
Just kidding!!
You seem to want to believe it's all sexism. Accusations of sexism are used as an office political tactic far more often than actual occurrences. Civil rights activists? Hardly. Using PC sensitivity training violation accusations to back stab people? Absolutely.
I never spoke about myself but I've heard professional career woman say this and they're not bitches either.
Did you actually work with these women, or are you reporting hearsay? Has it happened to you, or are you going by anecdote? I've heard professional career women say this and who also claimed they weren't bitches. But everyone who actually worked with them disagreed.
"Well, I guess we know that Chris really is that edgy, and he didn't win.
I don't think any of us who follow that show were surprised to hear that he was arrested in FL for losing his cool. :-)"
Do tell! I hadn't heard about the FL incident. What happened?
Comments on the replied-to post?
"Omarosa is the current stereotype of a "strong woman", which is an overbearing drama queen, seeing any subordinate with a better idea as a threat. A true strong woman would be Lady Margaret Thatcher."
Omarosa has 3 problems. 1) She is a liar. 2) She likes to play the race card to get her way. 3) She worked for the Clinton administration. Other than those obvious faults, she would probably be considered by many to be a successful woman.
If she has to fall back on lying, playing the "race card", and otherwise being a "drama mama", she is likely a weak person. All that stuff is outward bluster. But then this is East Coast corporate culture, where more importance is placed on the appearance of ambition, including playing these little head games (Yuppies). Then again, a lot of people on top see right through that game (Trump's VP of a golf property, forget her name, is one I think who does not suffer such fools kindly).
I agree.
It's happened to me but more in the context of discussing political issues where I'm told to go do some dishes and be in the kitchen where women belong. It's odd that someone would say that to me considering I want to be a stay at home mother. I've hardly met a man that disagreed with my choice of 'career'. As for my friends, I have no reason to believe they lie to me. I don't doubt there are women like Omarosa in the workplace but that's not every woman. There are things a man can get away with that a woman can't and not be called a bitch.
Neither sex, nor any racial background, has a monopoly on head-cases.
And there are things a woman can get away with that a man can't and not be called an @$$hole.
But you already knew that. Also, older folks can often get away with things that younger folks cannot ... one must earn the right to be a pinhead.
-AB (Pinhead 1st Class, bucking for Chief Pinhead)
I have seen the same thing in medicine. Ob-Gyn became an extremely popular specialty for women. Thus the residency programs went from being predominantly male, to nearly exclusively female. The group cohesion amongst the residents vanished, and vituperative mayhem prevailed. They would spend untold hours in meetings together trying to talk their problems through, which only made things worse.
#67 has a link to one of the stories. All of them are similar. I just can't wait to see which episode gets him fired. Maybe this week?
Maybe it's themselves they are lying to. One rarely sees one's self as a villain.
I don't doubt there are women like Omarosa in the workplace but that's not every woman.
Absolutely agree. But it is the majority of the women who trot out the concept of "fear of strong women" being the cause of their workplace woes. If they were such strong women, in the admirable sense of strength, they would overcome by merit or move on to where quality is appreciated instead of whining.
There are things a man can get away with that a woman can't and not be called a bitch.
Yes, men and women are different. We employ different tactics. Some women employ masculine tactics extremely poorly, then wonder why they aren't getting the same results as men seem to. Yet, they wouldn't have any trouble spotting how silly a man looks when poorly attempting female tactics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.