This calls for a natural absence of glass ceiling because when women appear as victims, it is camouflaged for them to ignore the injustice. There may never raise a question of the existence of glass ceiling. Despite there are commissions and activists who are keen enough to notice the existence of glass ceiling in new ways.
One innovative way in which women remain away from their deserving positions is the motherhood and child bearing, which is propelled by lacklustre laws of women’s resurgence at workplace after maternity leave and affordable healthcare (Russell, 2016). Child bearing requires women to be naturally out of work for six months or more. When they return, they are seen with the eyes of suspicion as women are seen as demotivated and not fit for work physically. This is an innovative way of allowing women to let go of their rightful place and she does not even realise the discreet discrimination that she is a part of (O’Brien, 2009). The second generation gender bias is prominent in its usage at multinationals resulting into glass ceiling and its perpetual increment.
Glass ceiling has never vanished as assumed and alleged when discrimination and equality laws came into force. It had been practiced openly and influenced by first generation gender bias where patriarchal society made women look uncomfortable at work. While women competes with men equally, glass ceiling provides men an easier progress but restricts women artificially to their position. Attachment to traditional gender roles is seen as the primary reason for the persistence of glass ceiling that is openly upheld in society instead of being abolished. Second generation gender bias is making innovative ways of deterring women from succeeding as they use women’s natural and socially imposed weaknesses as reasons for their inability to perform the task. Glass ceiling is to stay unless radical law enforcement is not introduced in all work settings.