A common narrative spread by the feminist movement is the idea of a glass ceiling. Some form of barrier that blocks women from entering executive positions, in an attempt to maintain the workplace as some form of "boys club." This idea doesn’t do the situation justice. First, the primary function of the wage gap isn’t always subconscious bias, but rather the choice made by a lot of women to have children. Let's say we have two employees for a company, Mark and Mary. Mark and Mary both put in a lot of time to work, on the order of 50-60 hour work weeks, and both Mark and Mary make $50,000. However, Mary decides to have a kid, and has to dial her work week down to 40 hours a week. Mark on the other hand, is still working 50-60 hours a week. Mark ends up getting paid more by promotions and raises, simply because he has dedicated more time to his job.

This brings me to the second flaw in the glass ceiling argument, a lot of women are less willing to put in large amount of hours to their work. When asked to list what was valued in a workplace, women were much more inclined than men to value work-life flexibility. While this does have the benefit of improving women's mental health as they are not as likely to overwork themselves, it comes at the expense of financial gain, as it is hard for an employee working 40 hours a week to compete with an employee working 60-70 hours a week. This is also why we don't see many female CEO's, as a lot of women don't want to take on the burden of working 70-80, maybe even 100 hours a week to get there.

The third flaw in the idea of a glass ceiling is the idea that men and women are doing the same exact work. Putting workplace habits under a microscope shows this to be false. Women were significantly more likely to volunteer for more altruistic tasks when working than men. While these altruistic tasks, like organizing company events and serving in low-ranking committees do help the company, it comes at the expense of the individual. This is because these altruistic tasks are less likely to get someone promoted than say, an employee who put 60 hours of work into a company project.

The depiction of the workplace disparity as a glass ceiling is also a label that misdiagnoses the root of the issue. A sticky floor is a much better description of the issue, with the adhesive being the lack of confidence held by a lot of women in their work. Women were much less likely to self-promote their work, even when revealed that it would help with career advancement. This is further manifested when asking for promotions and raises, where lack of confidence in their work would certainly short-change women.

Finally, the biggest obstacle for women in the workplace would in fact, be other women. An analysis of workplace incidents in 2012 revealed that 68% of workplace bullying was between the same sex. 80% of that 68% was women picking on other women. A bit of math equates 54% of all workplace bullying being women picking on other women. This in turn harms women, as lets say in a group of women, one woman advances in the corporate ladder. Statistically, she is less likely to give a hand to the women below her, but rather kick them off the corporate ladder. If women didn't stall the advancement of other women, then we might not even have this issue (glass ceiling, or more properly, sticky floor) in the first place. This is also why I say the idea of a glass ceiling is harmful to women. By shifting the blame on men, it diverts any attention away from toxic practices by women that may hold them back.