Analysis Of Sheryl Sandberg's Lean In

In her 2013 book “Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead,” Sheryl Sandberg argues the stance that people need to take initiative and “Lean In” throughout all aspects of life. Sandberg takes the stance that women deserve equality in the workplace, women in leadership roles, and high political roles. Sandberg acts as a launching pad for Rosa Brooks and Elizabeth Bruenig, who analyze and argue her stance, because Sandberg’s writing gets the conversation started. Brooks and Bruenig take different ideas and points from Sandberg to form their own persuasion of why “Leaning In” may not be the most ideal approach. They also use Sheryl Sandberg’s title in their articles because it acts as their hook and catches the audiences attention to consider their point of view. Brooks and Bruenig need Sandberg in order to analyze and formulate their opinions which is why “Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead” acts as the soundboard for the two conversations that will be discussed. Sandberg believes equality and initiative need happen to create a society where women are able to thrive, emphasizing her point of “leaning in.” She

Brooks took this stance against Sheryl Sandberg’s theory because she tried to take her advice and “lean in.” Brooks states how when she chose to “lean in” she became miserable, but successful. She uses Sandberg 's stance to comment on the state in our society, using Sandberg’s argument as a launching pad. Brooks using this launching pad is able to uncover the issue of working around the clock. Her argument changes the way I understand Sandberg’s argument because even though “leaning in” can lead to success, Brooks presents the many negative effects this involvement can have on us. Her project is that we need to kick back and challenge the idea that more is