The gender pay gap exists in most countries, some more extreme than others. But this statistic takes into more variables than we may think, such as: career preference, personality, psychological and economic factors, just to name a few. And whether or not the presentation of this data is done correctly, is a debate that lasts longer than a short blog post can cover. I wanted to talk about 2 points that are interesting (and the 2nd being related to economics) that make up a fraction of the gender wage gap.
Jordan Peterson is a professor and clinical psychologist that works with a variety of clients in his professional career. He notes that there is a personality trait of “agreeableness,” which is often associated with being kind and compassionate and also associated with women, that has a part in the complex equation of what determines our salaries. Being less agreeable means that you are more willing to argue and fight for a higher salary, and we see this trait among men more. To add to that, the numbers show that women who work in unions to fight for higher salaries are paid 89 cents for every dollar men make compared to women who aren’t in a union, who make 82 cents for every dollar.
Besides personality traits and interests, women also pay what is known as a “motherhood penalty,” and it’s not unreasonable. While not all women have children, if we look at average numbers and statistics of wage, we would have to look at the average number of children women have: 1-2 children. Once they do have children, women’s wages do see a penalty, based off of unquantifiable evidence that measures women’s working utility. Even though it is unquantifiable, that doesn’t mean it is non-existent, women spend around 50% more time than men engaging in care activities within a home. Businesses and employers recognize that this time gone to care-taking is time lost from working, so the question remains: “Is it unethical to account for economic losses due to an individual's private/home life?” This is only one aspect of the reasoning behind women receiving less pay than men on average, but it does show a more complex equation behind statistics we see and accept.
Is there discrimination in the workforce and economy due to gender? Yes. But it’s not as dramatic as we assume it is, as the statistic of men having higher pay on average compared to women takes into account a multitude of variables, gender just being one of them. If you are still curious, I did link my sources in which there are long analyses of this issue.
Sources:
This is a really interesting article for me. I think that you're right to some extent, but like you said, there are way more variables to it. For example, why don't more women fight for equal pay? I think women naturally being agreeable may be one factor, but other things like gender roles may play into it. When women fight for something the same way that men do, we're perceived as too bossy or unfeminine, which causes some companies to turn these women away. Though in a perfect world, women would get what we deserve by fighting like men do, it doesn't actually work that way because it backfires a lot of the time. Then, the choice becomes between no pay or 82 cents for every dollar a man makes, so it might be more beneficial in the short-run to keep our heads down. Like you said, it's complicated but I enjoyed reading your perspective!
ReplyDelete