The 'girlboss' movement initially inspired rising female tech executives to start companies and build communities, creating visible role models and hope for greater opportunity. A 2019 cover showing a visibly pregnant CEO became a powerful symbol of that moment. Within a year many prominent female founders faced cancellation, mostly over harsh people management rather than criminal wrongdoing. Assertive, founder-mode behaviors were judged as egregious while women were expected to be nurturing and flawless. The 'girlboss' label constrained leaders from charging hard and making mistakes. Investor portfolios now include many founders at risk of takedowns, producing timidity and reputational concern.
It's hard to remember now, but there was a time when the term "girlboss" was aspirational. I was a rising young tech executive at the time, so inspired by the movement that I became a part of it, setting off to start my own company and a powerful community of female founders on the side. All of a sudden I saw role models everywhere. Equal opportunity seemed, if not totally within reach, at least possible. In retrospect, the golden
Girlbosses were expected to be not just smart, attractive, and savvy, but nurturing, soft-spoken, generally inscrutable, bastions of DEI, and generally all around perfect. Anything short of that was a step too far from the confines of the girlboss brand. The very label that enshrined their power limited their ability to charge hard, and make mistakes in the process. My portfolio is full of girlbosses at risk of cancellation
Collection
[
|
...
]