I recently presented to a conference audience of amazing people in the philanthropy "business" in Cambridge, MA. A number of them were women who had been young during prime feminism-emerging times in the 60s/70s, so the comments from the audience were all the more telling.

One woman spoke of continuing trouble convincing the men in her organization that focusing on women was worth the effort; another spoke in frustration at hearing the same conversations and issues come up at this conference as did some thirty years ago; and another questioned if she had to start to think like a man in order to "sell" marketing to women.

As these audience members know, the fact that there is still a "sell" involved at all is ironic - since charity really begins with women. As Celinda Lake and Kellyanne Conway wrote in their book What Women Really Want, single women, in particular, are 37% more likely to be charitable donors than are single men. The authors also point to the varying profiles of female givers in general (not just single women):

"They are business owners with new wealth, widows and other women with inherited wealth, and even middle-class women who consider charitable giving a moral and civic responsibility."

But, even given powerful facts like the above (and from what I heard at this conference), it still seems necessary for women to switch back and forth between their own ways and "male-think" in order to motivate men in traditional industries (and beyond) to give marketing to women the time of day.

I have been talking with a lot of men lately who have admitted that this may well be the case. Marketing to women has been presented in a very womanly way and it has not appealed - even given the strength of the opportunity - to their business brains.

Now.. here's a question:

Is it easier/more comfortable for women to learn and speak in a man's "language" in order to persuade them of an idea/opportunity than it is, alternatively, for men to learn and speak in a woman's "language" about something they want to convince us of? My guess is that it is easier for women.

NOT because men in traditional industries are any less capable/persuasive, but because there remains a sort of societal taboo in a man's tapping his more feminine side - especially in the "man's world" of business. There is no such taboo on the other side. Women have had a lot more experience just forging ahead into unknown territory to get things done - and it all started with that feminist movement decades ago.

How can we now inspire men to forge ahead into this unknown women's territory, in philanthropy and beyond? We can study this particular men's market, learn about their "customer community, " and gather and utilize their feedback - all in order to deliver the message in a way that resonates: a.k.a. marketing 101 (or transparent marketing as outlined in my book, Don't Think Pinkem>). So, that's what I am going to do over this next year - apply my marketing truths to the conundrum and see what I can discover.