Gay CEOs Struggle With The Silence

Beth Brooke, a gay executive at Ernst & Young, tells the Wall Street Journal about opening up at work.

Wall Street Journal:

For nearly two decades, Ernst & Young executive Beth Brooke navigated the office like it was a minefield, dodging water-cooler chatter for fear that someone might corner her with a personal question.

Her colleagues whispered that she was a "loner," she said, scarred from her divorce or perhaps just reclusive by nature.

Read the whole story at Wall Street Journal

Comments

[paul87920]

08:39 AM on 07/26/2012

Why would a CEO have to worry more than the janitor at a Fortune 1000 or 500 company?

I understand that the expectations and the stakes are higher, but speaking from a business perspective that CEO is 1000 times more invaluable to a company than one of the so called grunts.

[duckpuddle]

06:47 AM on 07/26/2012

Nice article. In the conservative Wall Street Journal, no less.

Times, the are a changin'.

There is a lot of power and freedom in coming out. The more we come out to our world, the more gay people become welcome members of society rather than some anonymous and obnoxious stereotype.

Come out, Come out, where ever you are!

Oh, yea: Obama 2012

[norepublicanleftbehind]

02:44 AM on 07/26/2012

Really? Wealthy, powerful, and ?

Glad you found your strength sister.

[Scurvydog74]

07:41 PM on 07/25/2012

Don't you have to be human to be gay?

[duckpuddle]

06:47 AM on 07/26/2012

Actually, no. Put you probably don't care either way.

[CEKChuck]

07:15 PM on 07/25/2012

Timothy Cook is out. Is Apple not part of the Fortune 1000 list?

[duckpuddle]

06:48 AM on 07/26/2012

Good call. That deserves a letter to the WSJ editor.

[EvilMango]

04:30 PM on 07/25/2012

Most conservatives are self hating closet homosexuals.

[norepublicanleftbehind]

02:45 AM on 07/26/2012

God, try to get through dinner parties with them. It's like an evening of pulp fiction, you can't wash hard enough.

[mc53]

04:29 PM on 07/25/2012

Oh boo hoo. You're rich, white and powerful. Just say, "I'm the boss, I'm gay, get over it.".

[PrideCraddock]

03:50 PM on 07/25/2012

Come on out...the water is great.....

[gomezrules]

03:02 PM on 07/25/2012

I'm not buying it, not in this day and age. I don't argue that in the past that being gay might have been an impediment to advancement. But Wall Street is about making money, period. If the talent, perceived or other wise, is there that provides confidence that someone is capable of leading their company in the manner that their shareholders/owners (i.e., it all comes back to making money for them and their customers/clients), then they will be on the short list for such a position.

AND, given how important political correctness is these days, and the value placed on things like 'ceiling shattering' and good publicity for putting people in positions in as much for the demographic they represent as opposed to any other factors, I don't think one's sexual proclivity or lifestyle is going to cost them like it sis in the past.

[munki]

02:06 PM on 07/25/2012

Personal preference is what it is... so... why some having issues with what they are...

I think "who you are" is much more important... in corporate America...

[Marc Driftmeyer]

03:02 PM on 07/25/2012

Personal preference is in reference possibly to one who is bisexual, but not homosexual. As a heterosexual male I don't have a preference for women. I am only attracted to women. It's in the genes. The same for all combinations of human sexuality. It's in the genes.

[Figure]

04:04 PM on 07/25/2012

Except bisexuals.

[tom sproule]

05:51 PM on 07/25/2012

and it's in the jeans... :)

[MikeDu]

01:53 PM on 07/25/2012

It seems to me the fact that she was a corporate CEO was superfluous to the story. It could just as easily have been a story about an actor, a secretary, a cashier, a police officer. I suppose the WSJ would naturally assume a CEO's personal issues were more important simply by virtue of it being a CEO who was experiencing them.

[chaya]

02:25 PM on 07/25/2012

Interesting perspective.

An actor, secretary, cashier, or police officer doesn't need to worry about destroying their company by coming out. But many people besides CEO's have to worry about losing their jobs or losing promotions, being treated badly, being killed (especially in the Middle East), or causing problems for their employers.

Their experiences sounded so familiar to me, from my first 4 years in the Army (in the 70's). I identified with their stories. I was certainly no CEO.

[ScottyboyLA]

01:18 PM on 07/25/2012

"Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein, who describes his bank's gay-friendly policies as crucial for talent retention, said during the Out on the Street conference in May that he has lost at least one client since he publicly voiced support for gay marriage. "It doesn't come without a price, but I could care less," he said." I love Lloyd's response to losing a client who is undoubtedly homophobic: "but I could care less". Who wants their business anyway. Say hallelujah!

[chaya]

02:26 PM on 07/25/2012

Clap your hands! :)

(channeling Tracy Chapman...)

[mc53]

04:31 PM on 07/25/2012

You actually believe that stuff from GS? Really? Wow, I've got some waterfront property in Saudi Arabia for you.

[JJR60616]

12:51 PM on 07/25/2012

Like the headline..."Executives Struggle With Being Gay"

like the other gay people are somehow exempt from this "struggle"?

[norepublicanleftbehind]

02:48 AM on 07/26/2012

Little people must have little problems. (Argh!)

[hypnotoad72]

12:38 PM on 07/25/2012

I don't care if they're gay or not. What they do and authorize makes more sense. After all, Coca-Cola was preaching gay-friendly stuff while committing human rights abuses in Colombia... P.S. I'm not hetero.

[SymoneSayz22]

12:34 PM on 07/25/2012

My partner is CIO at a company, she has been there for 20+ years. The head of the legal department once told Her that she can't believe my partner came out in that conservative environment and she really can't believe she survived it.

It was mostly a non issue, but only mostly. There were some issues but not many. By the same token, not a single person came out visibly with support for her.

[mc53]

04:32 PM on 07/25/2012

"Visibly with support". OK, over someone's sexual orientation? It's not like they need sympathy or something. Maybe if she had lost a loved one, but not over this. Please.

[SymoneSayz22]

04:45 PM on 07/25/2012

She wasn't asking for sympathy. But when the few instances of negative reaction occurred, she stood alone to defend herself. No one stepped up and said we aren't going to be that company who is anti gay, except her. The silence was defending. Plaahhleese.

[duckpuddle]

06:54 AM on 07/26/2012

Yes, support for someone being open about their sexual orientation in the workplace.

As a man, through the 80s, 90s, and 00s, I spent a lot of energy getting my coworkers to "unlearn sexism". Even today, when I (infrequently) hear a sexist remark, I challenge the person. This is the same type of support that gay people need from others.