Gender and Inequality - Report Example

2) Gender and Inequality [Name] [Professor Name] [Course] [Date] [WORDS 2026] Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Introduction 2 Perpetuating gender inequality through division of labour 3 How cultural models of gender reinforce relations of production 6 Convergence between Marxist and Feminist ideas about the economy 8 Conclusion 11 References 12 Introduction Indeed, subordination of women is ubiquitous across both developing and developed countries with women being treated as subordinate to men through subjection to oppression, discriminations, control and exploitations. Within this perspective, this essay examines whether gender inequality is derived from a division of labour, how cultural models of gender reinforce relations of production and the convergence between Marxist and Feminist ideas about the economy. Perpetuating gender inequality through division of labour Gender inequality is high in the labour market. It is caused by discriminatory practices and gendered assumptions and practices. By generating institutionalised gender division of labour and in devaluing women’s work, gender inequality is regarded as a product of division of labour. Indeed, gender division of labour is in itself an essential feature of gender inequality. Of particular concern is in housework and occupations. Studies have shown that women do lion’s share of work at home. Despite the fact that gender inequality has reduced significantly in the past decades, division of labour in the households has remained highly gendered hence propagating it. The same could be said of labour market where gender segregation also remains high, even after there were declines in the 1970s. Studies have shown that the influx of women in the labour market remains high, while technology has attempted o reduce women’s housework obligations in addition to increasing demand for female labour in the labour market (Pacchiotti, 2012). Although considered a human want, gender equality has not been achieved in any country because of division labour. Indeed, a growing interest in this area has triggered researches in gender inequality globally to create a mechanism for comparing the extent of inequality in the developed and the developing nations (Pacchiotti, 2012). For instance, through the use of ‘gender empowerment measure’ (GEM) to show the inequality of women and men in each country. For instance, according to UN 2008 index, Tanzania (a developing nation) was placed at positioned 159, out of 177 countries, while the United States was ranked 12th. This clear disparity shows that women in the United States take part in economic and political sectors of the society because of minimised division of labour, compared to women in Tanzania (Feinstein, Feinstein and Sabrow, 2010). In any case, even the United States demonstrated perfect equality. Additionally, the indicator shows gender inequality in terms of accessing economics and political power. In any case, GEM does not show the extent of sexism involved in the gender norms of each society (Feinstein, Feinstein and Sabrow, 2010). Gender inequality in the labour market is also deep in some parts of Asia where division of labour is deeply embedded. For instance, in India where incomes and wages have been on the increase since the 1980s, gender inequality is mostly seen to originate in the labour market, whether it is far from being bridged. Participation in the workforce by women has influenced the rise in their remuneration, although the wage disparities across women and men are still dominant. A review of the trends in the economy shows the stubborn persistence of the inequality structure in the area of occupational concentration, where women have continued to flood low-end jobs as a result receiving lower wages compared to men (Rustagi, 2005). Figure 1: Employment ration in low-end jobs in Tanzania (Pacchiotti, 2012) Indeed, the biases and discrimination against women that signify gender inequality is reflected through the perceptions and attitudes among the agents in the labour market that are set up to perpetuate elements of division of labour. In India and Tanzania (and unlike in the United States), although there has been an increasing participation by women in the labour force, more men than women enter labour markets as workers as the entry age of women is later than that of men with most women entering at the age of thirty of thereabouts. This is because of the socially-defined household roles after they complete their reproductive roles of childbearing age and rearing. In India, the share of women employed in the managerial sector was 19 percent, as of 2010 according to World Bank statistics (See Figure 1 and 2). Figure 2: Ratio of female to male labour force participation in India (World Bank, 2010) How cultural models of gender reinforce relations of production Cultural model is a multifariously shared cognitive schema or instrument that members in a society committed to a certain culture draw upon to familiarize themselves to other members of the society thus enabling interactions and communication. Different types of cultural models exist. Among them include patriarchal precept model and the Hegemonic masculinity model. Patriarchal model refers to an authoritative male dominated social system that is discriminatory, exploitative and oppressive (Asante, 2004). Simply put, it is an ideological and a social constructs that regards men as being superior to women. Hegemonic masculinity attempts to explain why men have continued to maintain dominant societal roles. In any case, like patriarchal mode, it seeks to guarantee principal male position and subordinate social roles of women. Figure 3: cyclical pattern showing how hegemonic masculinity is reproduced These two cultural models have been instrumental in reinforcing relations of production through discriminatory practices and gendered assumptions and practices that devalue women’s work and exalting men’s work. Of particular concern is in housework and occupations. The two have reiterated the need for women to be home-based as well as assigned them low-end jobs in the labour market. The models have also created barriers for women to seek gainful employments that are competitive to those of men. Accordingly, women have become less productive. This explains why despite the fact that there have been an increasing participation by women in the labour force in India and Tanzania (and unlike in the United States), more men than women enter labour markets as workers as the entry age of women is later than that of men with most women entering at the age of thirty of thereabouts. In India and Singapore for instance, infinite variation on the position of women have existed based on the cultural surroundings, class, property rights, family structures and moral rights. In India for instance, while 80 percent of men are in gainful employments, only 32 percent of women are employed, due to social norms and cultural attitudes about women at workplace. ILO’s Global Employment Trends report shows that women’s productivity at workplace therefore remains minimal. Indeed, women’s participation in national economy through employment dropped from 37 percent in 2004 to 29 percent in 2010 (ILO 2013). According to a patriarchal model, production for sustenance that characterises women is regarded as 'non-production.’ National accounting systems that used for calculation of the GDP are based on the premise that if producers consumer their products, then they in actual fact do not produce at all since they do not fall within the production boundary. The political boundary can be viewed as a creation of politics in its functions and leaves out renewable production cycles from production. Therefore, in countries where patriarchy and hegemonic masculinity dominate, all women who produce for their community, societies or families are considered to be ‘non productive’ as well as economically inactive.’ Indeed, the devaluation of women’s work is an intrinsic outcome of capitalist patriarchy and hegemonic masculinity (Shiva, 2013). Convergence between Marxist and Feminist ideas about the economy Marxism economic system can be summed up as a theory where class struggle is a key element essential for analysis of social change in the society. It is a system of socialism where the predominant feature is public ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. On the other hand, feminism denotes a struggle against sexism or discriminatory social practices and ideologies resulting in male supremacy and female oppression (Schneider and Shackelford, 1998). For Marxist, all forms of discrimination originate from the division of the society into classes (Gimenez, 1975). To the feminists, discrimination of women is rooted in how men behave and their tendency to oppress women. Based on this clear disagreement in terms of ideology, it can indeed be argued that to a reasonable extent, there is no convergence between Marxist and Feminist ideas about the economy? The divergence is seen in the way Marxism seeks to promote economic or industrial revolution between the owners (capitalists) and the workers (labour). Indeed, Marxism is clear about the industrial concepts of pro-capitalist government that is anchored in the oppressed class, which leads to liberation of the working class form the bottom of the social hierarchy, creation of a single class through abolition of all classes and giving up of all private property where all property becomes public (Gimenez, 1975). On the other hand, feminism seeks to promote economic equality between men and women. Most of the feminists are specifically concerned with economic inequality between men and women. Indeed, some theorists have argued that gendered identities such are socially constructed. Unlike, Marxism, feminism differs over the sources of inequality as well as the degree in which sexual identities is examined. Marxism sees economic progress as emanating through the struggles for power between social classes. Conversely, feminism perceives economic progress as emanating through equality between the female and male gender (Schneider and Shackelford, 1998). Further, their divergence is perceivable in explaining the idea of a reserve pool of unemployed workers. Accordingly, unlike Feminism, Marxism can explain the likelihood of a reserve pool of unemployed people and of division of labours. However, it cannot explain a likely reserve pool of unemployed persons within the home would ne overwhelmingly female. It also cannot explain why division of labour at home is gender-based (Schneider and Shackelford, 1998). However, Marxist and Feminist’s idea of economy tend to converge at some point. For instance, they both signify struggles to upset social orders -- or to challenge the existing social structures, where one category dominates over the other. With regard to economic struggle, the struggle between labour and capital seeks to promote the physical opposite direction. An important aspect of Marxist perspective is that the social structure is not homogenous and that class is determined by economic might. Concerning feminism, it is a result of the struggle by women through women liberation movement to upset the social and economic order where men dominate. This is based on the feminist perspective that women are not treated as men’s equals in the economic sphere including in perceived roles in production (Schneider and Shackelford, 1998). Put differently, feminism is based on the premise that the social structure views men as completely dominant over women, including in capacity to be more productive economically. In which case, the feminist economic struggle advocates for equal rights and roles in production and is hence concerned with the challenges that exists in the social structures where men dominate (Gimenez, 1975). The two also converge in the sense that they seek to highlight that the problem with the privileging class over other systems or constructs of inequality, the argument is that its only through capitalism can end gender inequality. Convergence is also noted in the way that Marxist ideology emphasizes wage labour through analysis of a male-dominated social structure. This is the same perception that feminists take. Marxist also applies what is clearly termed as gender inequality between the reproductive and productive labour without realising that it lacks criticism of sexism (Gimenez, 1975). Therefore, it is clear that to a larger extent, there is no convergence between Marxist and Feminist ideas about the economy. Conclusion Gender inequality is high in the labour market as it is caused by discriminatory practices and gendered assumptions and practices. By generating institutionalised gender division of labour and in devaluing women’s work, gender inequality is regarded as a product of division of labour. This can also be explained by cultural models such as Patriarchal precept model and the Hegemonic masculinity model, both of which have been instrumental in reinforcing relations of production through discriminatory practices and gendered assumptions and practices that devalue women’s work and exalting men’s work. To a larger extent, there is no convergence between Marxist and Feminist ideas about the economy, as the former is concerned with the struggles between capitalist and workers, while the latter is concerned with women’s pursuit of gender equality. [WORDS 2026] References ILO (2013). India: Why is women’s labour force participation dropping? International Labour Organization, viewed http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/comment-analysis/WCMS_204762/lang--en/index.htm Asante, P (2004). Patriarchy. Retrieved: Feinstein, S., Feinstein, R & Sabrow, s. (2010). 'Gender Inequality in the Division of Household Labour in Tanzania,' African Sociological Review 14(2): 98-109 Gimenez, M.E. (1975).'Marxism and Feminism.' Journal of Women's Studies 1(1). Retrieved: Pacchiotti, M. (2012) Gender (in)equality in the Tanzanian labour market: showing the gap between the legal framework and the evidence provided by labour statistics. Retrieved: Ray, S. (2006). Understanding Patriarchy. Delhi: University of Delhi. Retrieved: Rustagi, P. (2005). 'Understanding Gender Inequalities in Wages And Incomes In India.' The Indian Journal of Labour Economics 48(2): 319-332 Schneider, G. & Shackelford, J. (1998). Ten Principles of Feminist Economics: A Modestly Proposed Antidote. Retrieved: Shiva, V. (2013). Our Violent Economy is Hurting Women. Medical Mission Sisters at the UN. Retrieved: Read More

In any case, even the United States demonstrated perfect equality. Additionally, the indicator shows gender inequality in terms of accessing economics and political power. In any case, GEM does not show the extent of sexism involved in the gender norms of each society (Feinstein, Feinstein and Sabrow, 2010). Gender inequality in the labour market is also deep in some parts of Asia where division of labour is deeply embedded. For instance, in India where incomes and wages have been on the increase since the 1980s, gender inequality is mostly seen to originate in the labour market, whether it is far from being bridged.

Participation in the workforce by women has influenced the rise in their remuneration, although the wage disparities across women and men are still dominant. A review of the trends in the economy shows the stubborn persistence of the inequality structure in the area of occupational concentration, where women have continued to flood low-end jobs as a result receiving lower wages compared to men (Rustagi, 2005). Figure 1: Employment ration in low-end jobs in Tanzania (Pacchiotti, 2012) Indeed, the biases and discrimination against women that signify gender inequality is reflected through the perceptions and attitudes among the agents in the labour market that are set up to perpetuate elements of division of labour.

In India and Tanzania (and unlike in the United States), although there has been an increasing participation by women in the labour force, more men than women enter labour markets as workers as the entry age of women is later than that of men with most women entering at the age of thirty of thereabouts. This is because of the socially-defined household roles after they complete their reproductive roles of childbearing age and rearing. In India, the share of women employed in the managerial sector was 19 percent, as of 2010 according to World Bank statistics (See Figure 1 and 2).

Figure 2: Ratio of female to male labour force participation in India (World Bank, 2010) How cultural models of gender reinforce relations of production Cultural model is a multifariously shared cognitive schema or instrument that members in a society committed to a certain culture draw upon to familiarize themselves to other members of the society thus enabling interactions and communication. Different types of cultural models exist. Among them include patriarchal precept model and the Hegemonic masculinity model.

Patriarchal model refers to an authoritative male dominated social system that is discriminatory, exploitative and oppressive (Asante, 2004). Simply put, it is an ideological and a social constructs that regards men as being superior to women. Hegemonic masculinity attempts to explain why men have continued to maintain dominant societal roles. In any case, like patriarchal mode, it seeks to guarantee principal male position and subordinate social roles of women. Figure 3: cyclical pattern showing how hegemonic masculinity is reproduced These two cultural models have been instrumental in reinforcing relations of production through discriminatory practices and gendered assumptions and practices that devalue women’s work and exalting men’s work.

Of particular concern is in housework and occupations. The two have reiterated the need for women to be home-based as well as assigned them low-end jobs in the labour market. The models have also created barriers for women to seek gainful employments that are competitive to those of men. Accordingly, women have become less productive. This explains why despite the fact that there have been an increasing participation by women in the labour force in India and Tanzania (and unlike in the United States), more men than women enter labour markets as workers as the entry age of women is later than that of men with most women entering at the age of thirty of thereabouts.

In India and Singapore for instance, infinite variation on the position of women have existed based on the cultural surroundings, class, property rights, family structures and moral rights.

Read More