Show notes
Back when I was a college girl majoring in Marketing my brain would move what felt like miles a minute and the chumps around me had to keep up. Or they didn’t even want to compete. when it came to entrupership, I was in a leage of my own. why? maybe becase I am a women-who is feminine presenting. I was one of two girls in my entreperships club in highschool, sadly the other girl was there ironically. what I brought to the table mattered becase it was my job, the role I can’t get paid for. but if one women is to serve through the bogg of men who, in one conversation, lost respect for me. something along the lines of this:“I want to have a perfume and pJ line outside of University,”hence no repsonse nor eye contact. They lost respect in me, becase I wasn’t just a women but one that orinally wanted to enter a industry dominated by $677 Billion dollars of revenue yearly. some women experced vast help. from the business boys around her. In my podcast she is qouted to reconized that the reason they were so happly helping her. factually according to her perspective, it was becase they didnt see her as a threat. she is a women-and in the serverty of her gender they found her not to be competion-even if they were in the same field. however doing my time in the worst summer class ever no men made eye contact with me-nor struck up conversations. so maybe, in the end little cutsey me, with her 4 internships at the time was indeed the threat. in todays episode of the Desktop Vanity we will conquer the topic of why women make better ceos?is this misandry? no. instead we are acknowledging the immense data and literature that shows that startups that are either run primarily by women or are coed by women end up being financially more prosperous quicker with more faster exits despite the concerning lack of resources.I want for us to acknowledge that I do make a reference to being a 1970s housewife. The reason why I mentioned that and also the exposé that I had quoted it simply because I wanted to relate the same financial abuse comment amongst stay at home moms I believe to be coherent with the intense lack of funding rigorously unmowed on women founders.That someone would reap the benefits of a woman's service in this case cooking or cleaning or in the case of business products and stock yet not giving them them tools to create.It is reaping the benefits and not giving anything in return and expecting more than what you can give. I wanna make it clear that I coincide those exposes with financial abuse in relation to how women only get one percent of private equity or venture capital funding in the US and then 2.11% worldwide.If you're interested in exploring women founders and funding bias then please check out one of my recent essays on the matter right here: In the end we find many ways that women have become better CEOs. And this podcast episode is to fight against the the notion that being caring collective and community oriented makes you less money. When it comes to measuring performance we see that startups run exclusively by women only get 0.8% of venture capital funding as of 2025 compared to a mix gendered founding team with 49.9% of capital invested.To get down with the data I recommend highly listening to the podcast episode as I enthusiastically discuss what makes women better ceos overall.I found it heartwarming and overall beneficial for my soul to write this as someone who is a recovering marketing major.So I'd sit here in my bed with my blue light glasses or my LED light therapy mask and I wonder deeply.. Why this video essay did not originally take off?It could be that I didn't put it in a space like this designed intentionally for women to spark joy with ambition self-love and intellectualism.The abuse that I think women face in the entrepreneurial field is abundant and overly plane is day right before eyes, but why do we not like women entrepreneurs despite Data showing that we are more Efficient overall, and we break even faster compared to startups run exclusively by men. It's a unique cognitive dissonance that I could only relate to a form of misogyny. Just the same as someone would experience being a housewife or a stay at home mom in the 70s where and a pat article society men did not feel obligated to give resources abundantly nor equally despite the unpaid labor the women varnish onto fireplaces and tapestries.Could the desire for a woman to be an entrepreneur be a form of matriarchy revenge? It doesn't change the fact though that this pushback has led to a decrease in women founders over the years. We're after Covid we saw a drop in women founders heavily decline. From 15.9% in 2020 to 13.2% in 2023. This is a response not just to the economy but also women being risk advertent and socially we desire to be in places that we belong. Does that mean that the fight is over and work done fighting absolutely not of course not. When we see the lack of support and respect we see the gentrified Women presenting Business ownership occupation to retreat. Because it is a blessing to have us in our life, and we’re not appreciated, we’re not appreciated.SHOW NOTES:podcast Episode: Why Women Make Better CEOs (and the Market Inefficiency of Misogyny)Series: Desktop VanityThesis: The venture capital world isn’t just biased—it’s fundamentally irrational. While the data shows female-led startups are capital-efficient “money-making machines” that generate 2.5x more revenue per dollar than male-led teams, systemic misogyny creates a “market failure” where these high-performers are denied the tools to scale. We are looking at a system that chooses to forfeit a $4 trillion annual revenue opportunity just to maintain the status quo of the “boys’ club”.Detailed Summary of Key Topics1. The ROI Paradox: 78¢ vs. 31¢We’re breaking down the cold, hard numbers that prove women are statistically better bets. For every dollar of funding, startups founded or co-founded by women generate 78 cents in revenue, while male-founded startups generate only 31 cents [12:53]. That’s a 2.5x higher return. Furthermore, while the “business boys” are busy burning through cash to find a market, women-led startups are breaking even in 3 to 6 months [07:58]. Men take an average of two years to hit that same milestone. If the market were rational, investors would be tripping over themselves to find female founders; instead, they continue to starve the high-performers of capital.2. “Recession-Proof” Leadership & Sustainable GrowthIn this episode, we tackle why women handle economic downturns better. Women-led teams are calculated risk-takers who prioritize profitability over “blitzscaling” [13:35]. This isn’t because we’re “scared” of risk; it’s because we’re disciplined. We build sustainable operations that lead to less burnout for ourselves and our employees, moving away from the “burn and churn” culture that defines the male-dominated tech sphere [14:36].3. The “Niche” Excuse & The 80% AdvantageWomen drive 80% of all consumer purchasing decisions in the U.S. home [15:02]. Yet, when female founders like Melanie Perkins (Canva) or Whitney Wolfe Herd (Bumble) pitched their ideas, they were told they were “too niche” [20:35]. This is the “ignorance tax”: if a male investor doesn’t have the lived experience to understand a “female pain point,” he declares the market doesn’t exist. They ignore the reality that “niche” products for women actually serve the world’s most powerful economic engine.4. The 1970s Housewife & The Financial Abuse ParallelWe are drawing a direct, painful line from the domestic “Click!” moment of 1972 to the 1% funding gap of 2024. Just as Jane O’Reilly’s iconic essay exposed the “basic disorder” where a husband claimed his income was “his” while his wife wallpapered the house to save the mortgage, modern VCs reap the benefits of female innovation while denying them the equity to own it. It is a system of corporate communication violence that expects women to be the “face” of the brand—blending personal identity with professional scrutiny—without giving them the immunity of separation that male CEOs enjoy.5. The “Likability Bias” & The Series C BottleneckWe discuss the “performance policing” where women are labeled “pushy” for being direct, while men are “confident” [06:21]. This bias intensifies as women scale. At the Seed stage, we might get 3.2% of the capital, but by Series C+, when the checks get larger and the “boys’ club” reasserts itself, that number drops to a dismal 1.8%. We are exiting businesses 6 to 8 months faster than men [18:15], yet we are still being asked “prevention-oriented” questions about how we won’t fail rather than “promotion-oriented” questions about how we will win. 6.The CEO Identity Blend: Unlike male CEOs who hide behind the legal shield of "corporate personhood," female founders are systematically pressured to be the "face" of their brand. This blends personal identity with professional scrutiny, creating a relentless, non-existent work-life balance that men simply don't have to navigate.Journalism Prompts for the Audience* The “Niche” Reality Check: Can you name a product you use every day that a male-dominated board likely dismissed as “too niche” during its first pitch?* The Invisible Labor Inventory: If you itemized the “unpaid domestic labor” you do to support the career of those around you, what would that “invoice” look like at a CEO’s hourly rate?* The Identity Tax: Have you ever felt compelled to be the “face” of your work because your technical skill wasn’t considered “enough” to represent it?Recommended Articles & ReadsPrimary Reads & Essays* “Click! The Housewife’s Moment of Truth” (1972) by Jane O’Reilly: The classic Ms. Magazine piece that explains the sudden realization of systemic inequality.* (https://msmagazine.com/2021/03/04/from-the-vault-click-the-housewifes-moment-of-truth-ms-magazine-spring-1972/)* “Why I Want a Wife” (1971) by Judy Brady: The satirical look at the domestic expectations placed on women.* (https://www.scribd.com/doc/45464220/i-want-a-wife)* “The Cassandra Curse: How HealthTech is Biased Against Women” (2024): The Guardian’s coverage of how using advocacy language like “women’s rights” can actually decrease funding outcomes.* (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/oct/08/womens-health-tech-less-likely-to-get-funding-if-woman-is-on-founding-team)* “Own It: Five Life Lessons from Sallie Krawcheck”: A summary of the core principles from her book on navigating the male-dominated financial world.* (https://www.wealthmanagement.com/ria-news/sallie-krawcheck-s-five-life-lessons)Core Financial Research & Data Reports* Boston Consulting Group (BCG): “Why Women-Owned Startups are a Better Bet”: The definitive 2018 report documenting the $0.78 vs. $0.31 revenue disparity.* View the full report* Female Founders Fund: 2025 Review of Funding for Female Founders: A deep dive into current funding stagnations, the AI boom, and exit statistics.* (https://blog.femalefoundersfund.com/2025-review-of-funding-for-female-founders-d7bda299ddba)* PitchBook: US Female Founders Dashboard: The live data source for the “1% of total capital” and “Series C bottleneck” statistics.* Access the dashboard* Kauffman Fellows: Gender-Inclusive Founding Teams and Success: Research analyzing over 90,000 companies to show that women-led firms raise more money at similar investment stages than all-male peers when given the chance.* (https://www.kauffmanfellows.org/journal/data-show-that-gender-inclusive-founding-teams-have-greater-success-in-fundraising-and-innovation)* Digital Defynd: Top 100 Female Leadership Facts & Statistics (2025): A comprehensive fact sheet on ROI, board diversity, and the $5 trillion missed economic opportunity.* View the statistics hereEnding Statement“In the end, we don’t need more pink blazers or empty slogans to fix the funding gap. We need a market that finally operates on logic. When you ignore female founders, you aren’t just being a misogynist—you’re being a bad investor. It’s time to stop the corporate communication violence, stop the ‘too niche’ excuses, and start funding the founders who are actually delivering the returns. Thanks for sitting at the Desktop Vanity with me today.”APA Reference ListBoston Consulting Group. (2018). Why women-owned startups are a better bet. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2018/why-women-owned-startups-are-better-betBrady, J. (1972, Spring). Why I want a wife. Ms., 56.Digital Defynd. (2025). Top 100 female leadership facts & statistics. https://digitaldefynd.com/IQ/female-leadership-facts-statistics/Female Founders Fund. (2025). 2025 review of funding for female founders. https://blog.femalefoundersfund.com/2025-review-of-funding-for-female-founders-d7bda299ddbaKauffman Fellows Research Center. (2020). Data show that gender-inclusive founding teams have greater success in fundraising and innovation. https://www.kauffmanfellows.org/journal/data-show-that-gender-inclusive-founding-teams-have-greater-success-in-fundraising-and-innovationMorgan Stanley. (2020). The $4 trillion blind spot. https://about.crunchbase.com/blog/business-investment-to-womenO’Reilly, J. (1972, Spring). The housewife’s moment of truth. Ms., 54–59.PitchBook. (2024). All In: US female founders dashboard. https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/the-vc-female-founders-dashboardTrump, D., & Burnett, M. (Executive Producers). (2004–2017). The Apprentice. Trump Productions; NBC. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit milasthoughtslately.substack.com/subscribe
