Research Question: Why are there less women in professional business occupations compared to men? Is it because they are treated differently, or viewed differently? If so, in what ways?

Personal Context: This research question interests me because I am a stakeholder: I am both a woman, and a future business professional. These two facts also make me credible to write about the topic, because I experience these issues in some form each and every day. It is often mentioned in the business world that there are significantly fewer females than males, and I personally would like to know why. It certainly affects my values because I believe that men and women are absolutely equal. It is extremely bothersome to me that not everyone shares these values, but I am at least willing to look through their eyes for the purpose of learning. In my own life, I constantly hear people put women down when they are in positions of power, management, or leadership. What's more, many of my fellow peers think women are incapable of being business professionals, or holding public offices such as the presidency. I recently found out that of all 500 businesspeople on the Fortune 500 List, only 25 of the CEOs are women. Quick math: that is 5%. FIVE PERCENT! Women who were once held back from professions such as business are quickly learning, growing, and exceeding in their careers. In 1919, women were lawfully given the right to vote, making them equal to men. So why is it that the business world, roughly a century later, still does not mirror that equality? 

Source 1: This argumentative source talks of the double bind that women face in the workplace, and claims plainly that "women just can't win." There is a constant presence of balancing being a woman, and being a professional. The article's evidence relies mainly on examples that show women in the middle of a paradox. For example, if they take charge, they are called bossy, but if they let others take direction, then they are called weak leaders. The interests at stake in this article are the interest of women working in a professional, business-like environment. In terms of the major value at stake, this is an issue of equality in the workplace. Therefore, it extends out to almost all women because it applies to any woman who has a job and whether or not she is treated equally in that position. The author is Catherine Rampell, a Princeton grad who writes for the Washington Post. She has won many prestigious awards, and has been asked to speak on TV and public radio on numerous occasions. Considering she's a successful businesswoman, it is implied that she has first-hand experience with the double bind that women face. She is inevitably bias, though, because she is a woman and may not see the topic through the eyes of others (men). 

Source 2: The informative source discusses the differences in attitude directed at female managers, and if it changes over the course of one's academic maturity (meaning as they become upperclassmen). It also details some possible factors (culture, age, region) which could lead to varying outlooks on professional women. The hypothesis of the article is that the upperclassmen will have more positive attitudes toward female managers, but the study did not uphold that statement. The interest at stake is still women's interests, but this article specifically focuses on females in management positions. The major value being discussed is gender equality, just like the previous source. Tope Bello, a writer of the informational work, is a professor at East Carolina University in the Management Department, and has a doctorate degree. Joseph Tomkiewicz is also a professor at ECU in the Business School. Both writers are credible because they work directly in the profession in which they write about, and show clear references to scholarly sources outside of their knowledge.

Source 3: 

The article's main claim is about the double-bind paradox, which basically means that as men achieve more they get increasingly likeable, while women are just the opposite. The more that women rise up the ranks and gain power professionally, they less likeable they become. Firstly, the article bolsters its argument with the Heidi/Howard Case Study done by business graduates at Stanford University. The author then gives specific "woman" body language examples, and then provides alternatives that might be more professional instead of feminine. Women's interests are, once again, at stake, because if they realize that they become less likable as they climb the professional ladder, they might refrain from doing so. I think this brings in the simple values of right versus wrong. Is it right for society to judge women for succeeding at work? Is it right to judge women based on their body language, when we do not do the same for men? Carol Kinsey Goman has her doctorate and often delivers keynote speeches on body language for female leaders. She's a leadership communication coach and successful author. She has clear credibility on the topic of professional women and how they portray themselves through body language, and she also has first-hand experience in the field. I was unfamiliar with the Heidi/Howard Case study, but after some research it shows that Goman did, it seems, summarize the studies truthfully and with little to no personal bias.

Feasibility of Research Question: The research question is arguable because everyone can have different opinions about why there are less women in professional business occupations compared to men. There are many reasons that could answer this question, and no one single answer is the right or correct one. Most of my sources agree that women are less likeable, more judged, and more scrutinized in leadership or management positions. Generally, the agreement would be that we are harsher on female professional leadership. The disagreement rises when it comes to why women are treated differently, and it what ways this is enacted. So far, these perspectives are all sort of "in favor" of women, which is my viewpoint. Therefore, in order for a source to differ from my perspective, I would need to find one that is through the eyes of a writer who thinks there are legitimate reasons women are incapable of being professional leaders. My research question has become a little broader, I think, to encompass more professional women than just those who pursue business. If I just stick to women in business, I lose some of the insight and sources that are helpful to my writing. 
