"However, it also asked women to thrive in systems never built for them in mind-to lean in, work harder, and compete more fiercely, as if grit alone could overcome structural inequality. Many pursuing it found not empowerment, but exhaustion. By the early 2020s, the girl-boss way began to encounter backlash. The pandemic exposed the unsustainable nature of always-on work and underscored how vital flexibility and remote options were for women's well-being."
"In early 2025 alone, over 212,000 U.S. women left the workforce, citing inflexibility as a primary reason as companies began return-to-office mandates. At the leadership level, for every woman promoted, two stepped out. Half of working women (51 percent) now report feeling stressed, compared to 39% of men, illustrating a gender gap in workplace strain. The problem is not women's ambition; it's the system's design. Modern workplaces still reward 24/7 productivity and treat exhaustion as ambition."
The ‘girl boss’ era celebrated relentless drive but pressured women to succeed in systems not built for them, prompting leaning in, harder work, and fierce competition that often produced exhaustion. The pandemic revealed the unsustainable nature of always-on work and highlighted the importance of flexibility and remote options. In early 2025, over 212,000 U.S. women left the workforce citing inflexibility amid return-to-office mandates, and at leadership levels two women stepped out for every one promoted. Fifty-one percent of working women report stress versus 39 percent of men. Modern, hierarchical, zero-sum workplace models equate exhaustion with ambition and jeopardize women’s health; companies must redesign systems to prioritize health, collaboration, and flexibility to retain women.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]