3 ms·
This is part of the problem with this topic: neither side talks honestly about the effect, and both sides collapse the nuances down to easily defeated straw men
by etchalon 4y ago
This is part of the problem with this topic: neither side talks honestly about the effect, and both sides collapse the nuances down to easily defeated straw men.
The "wage gap" has never been attributed, by any study, soley to the impacts of discrimination for equal work – though some effect is seen. For instance, the 2009 Bertrand showed that there was a 10% gap between new business school graduates, based on gender [0]. That difference never really disappears, on average, across the population [3].
However, the effect definitively widens at child birth, with women shouldering an unequal amount of caregiving responsibilities [1]. Whether married or unmarried, women with children take a hit. However, when married, even with children, men don't take a hit. Married men generally earn more than unmarried men. In fact, they generally earn more than everyone else – though this effect is shrinking. [2] Unmarried women, without children, will generally earn 90% of an unmarried, child-less male assuming equal education levels. We see a growing disparity, with unmarried, childless women overtaking unmarried, childless men in earnings due to the education gap. Eliminate educational differences, and the gap reappears.
When either side collapses the "wage gap" down to simplistic tropes like individualized gender-specific discrimination or "choices", they're generally signaling they haven't studied the topic beyond reading a few headlines.
It's way more complicated, and interesting.
[0]: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/goldin/files/dynamics_of_the_gender_gap_for_young_professionals_in_the_financial_and_corporate_sectors.pdfhttps://scholar.harvard.edu/files/goldin/files/dynamics_of_the_gender_gap_for_young_professionals_in_the_financial_and_corporate_sectors.pdf https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/goldin/files/dynamics_of_t...
[1]: https://www.henrikkleven.com/uploads/3/7/3/1/37310663/kleven-landais-sogaard_nber-w24219_jan2018.pdf https://www.henrikkleven.com/uploads/3/7/3/1/37310663/kleven...
[2]: https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/economic-synopses/2018/09/14/married-men-sit-atop-the-wage-ladder https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/economic-synops...
[3]: https://docs.iza.org/dp9656.pdf https://docs.iza.org/dp9656.pdf
- scarmig 4y ago> However, the effect definitively widens at child birth, with women shouldering an unequal amount of caregiving responsibilities [1]. Whether married or unmarried, women with children take a hit. This is a a loaded phrasing, though. You could just as well say that men shoulder an unequal amount of wage earning responsibilities. Men with children take a hit in the amount of time and energy they are expected to spend making money. Gender roles and social expectations are what's driving this, but the common framing is all too often men using their agency to force women into theirs, without allowing for the possibility that women are using their agency to do the same.
- etchalon 4y ago> You could just as well say that men shoulder an unequal amount of wage earning responsibilities. You could say that, but I think most people would raise their eyebrow at you.
- scarmig 4y agoThe implicit assumption here seems to be that the husband/father unilaterally allocates working hours and childcare hours, and that working more hours outside the home is a privilege everyone will go for given the opportunity.
- etchalon 4y ago"Everyone" is doing a lot of work in that sentence, but I think the fact the gap lessens significantly for unmarried, childless women speaks to that. When given a choice, many women do chose to work more hours.