Aspects of Female Inequality - Essay Example

ASPECTS OF WOMEN INEQUALITY Aspects of Female inequality Introduction There are aspects of women inequality that must be addressed. Most challenges facing women go unaddressed, including the fact that they are invisible in economic analysis. Social, education, or economic institutions may affect these aspects. Their economic empowerment is a must for pro-poor growth, sustainable development, as well as a requirement for rights and equitable communities. Accomplishing a women’s economic empowerment cannot happen so quick; it will take logical public policies, long-term commitment, and a holistic approach from all development actors. A feminist model of preferences must be incorporated into policy recommendations and welfare economic analysis. Most significant, institutional structures are a big concern and should be analyzed carefully. Basing on an economical point of view, some aspects of women equality need to be addressed, and various steps be taken to overcome them. They include: Wage discrimination against women Investigations of the labor market in most countries indicate that average wages seem to be lower for women as compared to those of men. However, one may be right to say that this observation is not sufficient enough to conclude that gender-based wage discrimination really exists This is for the reason that the differences may be due to dissimilarities in productivity, or unequal skills. In this sense, I can ague that gender discrimination against women exists in a market economy, only if men are paid higher salaries than women for a specific productivity level (Samuelson, & Nordhaus, 2005). According to the Inter Press Service, on a world scale, women farm over half of the total food produced. In the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa, women produce 80% of basic foodstuffs, while in Latin America, they majorly involve in poultry, horticulture, and subsistence farming. However, little or no recognition is given to this, and worse of all, most of them go unpaid. Such women find it hard to find financial resources to sustain themselves, since many societies have not yet realized or accepted that traditional roles have changed. Reasons behind such disparities include the idea that women are underpaid generally because they usually carry out low-status jobs in comparison to men (England, 2003).Like in the graph below; the yellow bar shows the rate of employment for men as opposed to that of women in pink. Figure1. Shows the rate of employment between men and women Wage discrimination against women is a critical issue that must be addressed by concerned agencies and the government at large. The big reason for this step is that women are losing huge amounts of dollars over the course of their carriers, yet the issue continues to broaden. Worse, some women get fired for attempting to fight it and get reasonable pay (Smith, El-Anis & Farrands, 2011). This means that women still have an uphill to climb to get their rights concerning this issue. How Wage discrimination against women can be overcome In America, the Paycheck Fairness Act would help terminate wage discrimination through closing some loopholes in existing labor laws that make it nearly impractical for employees to expose and stop pay discrimination. What can be applied globally is decentralization, where a true economic democracy dominates, where all sections of society are empowered to accomplish financial prosperity through full employment. Women are encouraged to take part in each level of decision-making. For women in the society to succeed, there must be community-managed organizations. In economic democracy, economic justice should be granted the highest priority to do away with sources of inequality (Woolley, 1998). This should include compensatory programs to conquer the legacy of gender-based discrimination and continuing discrimination. Consciousness should also be raised to change the attitudes, ideas, and behavior that encourage wage discrimination against women (Samuelson & Nordhaus, 2005) Another remedy for this issue is to adjust the pay rates in discriminatory firms to remove whatever component is based on, to discriminate women. However, such a process requires the development of a way of categorizing whether or not, and to what extent of pay variations in jobs within a firm is discriminatory. One technique of unraveling the components of differences in wages is to weigh the worth of those jobs directly, by use of any of some job valuation processes. The idea of comparable worth should be that jobs with equal worth must be paid equally regardless of one’s gender (Bachan, 2012). Barriers limiting Women’s promotion, e.g. ‘glass ceilings’ According to Woolley, the hidden barriers that limit the progress of women towards promotions extend all the way back to the “glass ceilings” at the top most country’s most complex corporations to the “sticky floor” of minimal wedges, low-mobility jobs, down in the labor market (Woolley, 1998). Over time, this issue has proven to be an extraordinarily powerful and lasting image, which has concentrated on the limitations of women to employment equity. The glass ceiling reflects the constraints at lower points of the labor market. The barriers associated with women promotion exist in a structure of economic systems, work organizations, educational systems, and in huge social orders. With this in mind, it is clear that these barriers affect large volume of the societies’ basic structures that brings about development. The issue must be addressed so that a more equitable distribution of opportunities can be achieved, one that is not twisted by unfair treatment. If this problem is addressed, people will understand, and then get rid of all the artificial barriers created by gender, inclusive, but not limited to the ones that form the glass ceiling (Simister, 2012). Majority of women employed in the biggest and most steady companies in the U.S. work in the low-level jobs of the firms’ hierarchies. Attaining employment equity for women in such low-paying jobs needs open advancement opportunities and a clear definition of the issue to the women themselves and to the public (Nicholson, 1995). The larger the gap in wedges, power, and prestige given to people at the top most positions compared to the ones at the bottom of a firm, the higher will be the barriers to improve upward mobility for women. This means that the problem needs to be addressed early enough to prevent the big gap from widening even further. Elevation of the power, wedges, and prestige is a good strategy to reduce the gap. Discrimination in economic systems and educational opportunities that are external to work firms are formidable barriers to women promotion. Educational barriers hit hard in depriving majority of women of the opportunity to begin a carrier on equal balance with men. Promotional barriers lead to overrepresentation of women in low-paying jobs, and current economic trends result in proliferation jobs that reward low wedges, hence the issue must be addressed to improve women opportunities in high-ranked jobs (Simister, 2012). How to overcome barriers limiting women’s promotion To overcome this problem, there must be significant changes in social structures. The elimination of sexism in workplaces can only be achieved if the rigid hierarchies in such organizations are radically reduced through raising wages of low-paying jobs using equitable compensation strategies. Improving advancement chances by use of changes in administrative promotion policies and redesigned job hierarchies; and redirecting organizational variety plans away from changing attitudes and focusing on reducing structural inequalities in workplaces (Ferber & Nelson, n.d). More control of household spending by men than women Sociological research on how couples control and manage household spending, conducted hugely in Europe has focused majorly on describing and analyzing couples’ use of various management systems and explaining associations between given management-control systems and every partner’s access to individual household spending. According to one study carried out in Britain, most British couples use the “allowance” system, where the husband maintains control over his often-higher earnings, though he hands over a fixed amount of money to the wife for housekeeping expenditures (Pahl, 1990). Apart from this research, it is evidenced in most parts of the world that women are the ones who mostly control household expenditures. I think this aspect of women inequality is not such a big issue because only a small percent of men tend to control most of the household spending. Evidence for strong cultural or social influences on couples in the West and the way they control money is based on studies that show that couples’ practices differ by region depending on the historical patterns of the labor force participation of women, regardless of their current employment. However, men who dominate in household spending are those who have more money to spend on personal purposes. This suggests that independent management seems to be associated with less spending by women, given that these women earn lesser than their partners do (Canterbury, 2001). More control of household spending by men than women may be an issue, but does not need much to address about, since most women take the lead in this section. In the book, “Women Want More” by Michael Silverstein, who is a co-author talks about the ways in which firms can capitalize on female consumers (Bachan, 2012). In the book, it is estimated that women could earn close to $18 trillion yearly and control about $28 trillion of spending. Elizabeth Duke, a federal Governor, quoted surveys in a speech in May, 2010 that illustrate that women account for 80% of the total household decisions in the U.S., thus a 65% of auto buys and 93% of food purchase (Pahl, 1990). Men should not control household spending since women involve in more of the family shopping, and therefore they are constantly aware of inflation and price changes; they know precisely what it takes to stretch a budget than men can do. Women may as well bring other skills to decisions on spending, but men are more overconfident and risk loving. These are sufficient reasons as to why women should control household expenditure. The solution lies in attempts to promote equitable division of roles of partners in a home so that men can respect the role of women in dominating in this context. References Bachan, K, 2012, Plan International: Reach for the Stars, Plan International, Retrieved from www.womendeliver.org/updates/entry/plan-international-reach-for-the-stars. Canterbury, E, R, 2001), A brief history of economics: artful approaches to the dismal science, Singapore: World Scientific Publishing. England, P, 2003, ‘Separative and soluble selves: dichotomous thinking in economics’, in M.A. Ferber & J.A. Nelson (eds), Feminist economics today: beyond economic man, Chicago: University of Chicago Press Nicholson, W 1995, Microeconomic theory: basic principles and extensions, Orlando: Dryden Press. Pahl, J, 1990, ‘Household spending, personal spending, and the control of money in marriage’, Sociology 24: 119-38. Samuelson, P, A& Nordhaus, W, D 2005, Economics, Singapore: McGraw-Hill. Smith, R, El-Anis, I & Farrands, C 2011, International political economy in the 21st century, Harlow: Pearson. Simister, J, 2012, Gender-Based Violence: causes and remedies, New York: Nova. Woolley, F, R, 1998, ‘The feminist challenge to neoclassical economics’, in D. L. Prychitko (ed.), Why economists disagree, Albany: SUNY Press. Read More