Aimee Groth reports:

Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg has ignited tons of press over her controversial new book, Lean In. During a 60 Minutes segment she defended her message that women need to step up and own their success.

"The very blunt truth is that men still run the world," she told 60 Minutes' Correspondent Norah O'Donnell. "I'm not blaming women ... but there is a lot more we can do."

As for critics who say that a billionaire like her can't give advice to most working Americans, Sandberg says candidly: "I feel guilty a lot. I compare myself to at-home mothers with their kids ... Every woman I know feels guilty. I felt so guilty I wrote a whole book about it."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/sheryl-sandberg-60-minutes-interview-2013-3?op=1

This is true, so is the TED. I was reading "Nice Girls Don't Get the Corner Office: 101 Unconscious Mistakes Women Make that Sabotage Their Careers" (Lois Frankel) Funny, these topics keep coming up in conversation. It's interesting that I left school thinking gender issues didn't exist, and in two careers found...hmmm... they do, I have experienced them in two careers. And both Sandberg's works (the book so far--and the TED) are spot on. It's sad how the smallest things are seen differently from gender to gender. 

Also, this is fascinating: Rice University's study shows that recommendation letters for women show words like "team-player" while letters of recommendation for men show things like "innovator." Word choices make all the difference. 

http://www.rice.edu/nationalmedia/news2010-11-09-letters.shtml

After reading that I went back and watched the TED talk again...

...and you're right, Dawn. Details matter, and there's still a lot of progress to be made.

"This is deeply personal for me," she explains. "I want every little girl who's told they're bossy to be told that they have leadership skills."

i am NOT a fan of this lean in movement.  i am a fan of sandberg and her accomplishments and i am in violent agreement with most of what sandberg says (grossly summarized as: men still run the biz market, women need to do more to get themselves in the game, men need to be more proactive about mentoring/supporting women of merit, society needs to flip it's socialization script to/with young girls).  however, this is old news and i feel like this movement is nothing more than a knitting circle/book club, which is leaves me wondering, where's the action?  i would like to know more about what sandberg is doing to increase the number of women in high growth businesses or high ranking positions with decision authority in industry - or  within FB.  is she actively investing in women startups? is she actively doing anything other than speaking at events and promoting her book?  it's the same question i have for oprah &  sarah blakely and other loaded women of accomplishment.

because talk is cheap.  action changes the ratio. 

in fact, in this regard, i would have to give far greater props to dave mcclure and other men in #StartupLand because they actively invest in women who are trying to enter the high growth business arena.  i applaud sandberg, oprah, and blakely for their charitable giving to women in need and third world women and girls but it begs the question: what have they got against other women (in this country) who are trying to launch what could effectively become multi-billion dollar businesses?

putting their money (how about from those book sale profits, yo!!??) where their mouth is would speak <more meaningful> volumes to me.  at this stage, it's just another coffee klatch that addresses the superficial and it smells stale.

Right now I believe she just speaks and promotes the book.

But she says we're just at the start of this movement and she'll likely increase her commitment to it in the future.

Having finished the book, my criticism of that is in three points: 1. it doesn't go deep, but maybe that is how the avg. biz book does it now, but missed opportunity to maybe write about many (not just a couple) of examples of men shifting their own behaviors to support women at work, to look at ourselves more deeply to see what and why we have created this (i mean women, men, institutions, companies, and the culture at large) -- instead of deep, it's pleasing and nice.. and status quo.. the book is everything she tells women is wrong with us.. we are too nice.. too pleasing.. we are missing opportunities; 2. very little of the text looks at emotional literacy and how we might get more literate and real with each other (men and women) to solve this; 3. the writing is so blah and terrible.. i was bored out of my mind after the first 2 ch.s .. though the last 2 ch.s were better.. when i talked about the concept only and voiced concern about it.. many women piled on and told me READ THE BOOK.. well.. i'm not really impressed.. though i did initially feel some compassion for her about her wedding and all the times people have made fun of her for being an organizer.. that does suck ... and it happens to women in those situations a lot.. but also men.. i know plenty of men teased for that..So.. emotional literacy could take a hard look at the teasing and say: we are pushing people into a shadow of pleasing when we tease that way.. and we are hurting them from being their true selves by shaming them..I think my main annoyance with the overall "movement" and concept is that this is a marketing movement, not a real movement (and i get an ad for leanin.org on the right side of these pages on every page.. and have for weeks -- *with* her picture -- so.. but this is *not* a vanity project even though her face is everywhere and it's all about her being beautiful and pleasing.. )...  she seems to be "marketing Lean In into a movement" and that offends me.. and yet it's directed at me.. the marketing for the movement.. it feels offensive that a woman with her power wouldn't go deep on this.. given the platform on which she stands.. but i get its her choice to be shallow.. but it's my choice to find the marketing and the lack of depth disturbing.. and unfortunate..and a missed opportunity.

i want *fierce* Sheryl to fight for women, not *nice* sheryl to just kind of nicely point out that we women have a tiny little problem and we need to shift ourselves...

Lastly, if the "movement' fails.. who will people think were responsible? The way it's constructed now: if it fails, it's because women didn't lean forward. Nothing else went wrong or was systemically or culturally wrong or stayed wrong all along.