I have the improvised plot twist figured out and will finish Chapter 2 tomorrow. In the interim, I’ve been thinking about the firing of Jill Abramson, who was the Executive Editor of the New York Times until last week. The media has been full of stories accusing the management of the Times of sexism in her dismissal. There’s also been a fair number of male apologists explaining why Arthur Sulzberger had to do what he did because of her ‘style’.

A woman in a position of authority is in a no-win dilemma. If she doesn’t get results, she is too soft, and will be let go. If she gets great results, but hurts some feelings along the way, her style is called into question and she has to go in order to restore the morale of those whose feelings she hurt. The guy taking her place, Dean Baquet, is an African-American man. Apparently he’s very popular with the staff at the NY Times. Will that popularity be enough for him to keep his job when the paper continues relentlessly to bleed red ink over its failure to keep up with digital competition? Not likely. Then it will be the opposite argument: Dean had to go because he just couldn’t get the results needed for The Times to stay financially healthy. More likely than not, he’ll be replaced by a younger, white male.

Back in the early days – the 70’s and 80’s – women were recruited just for the numbers. That’s the honest truth. And if she could survive the misery of the workplace where she was perceived as less qualified on the basis of her gender, subjected to harassment, both physical and emotional, then her reward in promotion was just to endure a more subtle form of sexism. Racism works in a very similar way. Did you ever hear any other president being chided for being aloof and detached, other than Barack Obama? Do results really matter, given the gauntlet blacks and women have to run? That is the question.

But here’s the real deal in a nutshell: the entire world is still controlled by white men. White men make up the rules and women and minorities have to try to figure out where the lines are in terms of behavior. It’s an impossible task, because there’s no instruction manual. It’s like the Greek myth of Sisyphus, doomed to roll a rock up a hill until just before the summit, where it perpetually rolls back down to the bottom. Read the background story of this myth, and it personifies what it means to be a woman in the world of business controlled by white men with their fear and loathing (yes, I said fear and loathing) of women. Check out this cartoon: I believe it says it all.

So what’s the answer? Two radical ideas. First: take a page from Ghandi’s methods to rid India of the Raj. Boycott the process. If all the women in business quit, can you imagine the impact? Even if for a day a month, an organized, focused, sit-down strike would at least get their attention. Second and no less radical idea: emulate the women in Aristophanes’ comedic play Lysistrata. Greek women on both sides of the Peloponnesian War agree to withhold sex from their men until the Sparten and Athenian men agree to a peaceful settlement. Young and old women work together to deprive the men of both sex and money from the treasury to buy material needed to carry on with their aggression. Of course, since it’s a comedy the strategy works and peace is restored.

In order to implement either radical solution, women have to band together. Sisterhood will only prevail when women see it in their best interest to cooperate toward a solution, rather than competing with each other for the scraps handed to them by white men. Will this ever happen? One can only hope. But since this has been the situation since 411 B.C., it won’t be easy to accomplish. Give it some thought, ladies – then, stand up and be counted!