Conclusion
Based on the facts in this case, Ann Hopkins was indeed a victim of sexual discrimination. I feel her style and business demeanor was not accepted among the male partners and they felt threatened by her assertiveness and desire to always win. When her interpersonal skills were addressed, Ann did everything within her power to try and change and accommodate the company and truly make the effort needed to show her sincere and willing attitude to do what it took to get the job done.
Price Waterhouse did discriminate against Ann Hopkins by permitting gender stereotypes to play a significant role in its decision to deny her promotion. Her aggressive style irritated some partners who did not work closely with her. She didn't seem to fit the mold they had for women and they tried to change her looks and behaviors. They acknowledged using the forms and written comments in the evaluation phase when determining her appointment to partner. Included in these comments were remarks made about her masculine characteristics, which are against the stereotypical ideal they held for a woman. They discriminated against Ann because she was female, and didn't fit the mold.
Ann worked very hard to overcome and correct the negative comments regarding her interpersonal skills. Yet shortly after telling the senior manager in her office that she could not, nor would she make adjustments to the way she dressed or looked, she was informed that she would no longer be considered for partner in the future. Coincidence? I believe that when she refused to come across as more feminine, she committed professional suicide with her company. The company related her appearance and demeanor with her interpersonal skills, which she was successfully working to improve and denied her the opportunity she deserved.
…
