Talk:Gender inequality

In television and film section issues

The statement "Hollywood actresses get paid less than actors." is logically flawed if taken literally. I could find many examples of an actress lead in a film being payed more than their male supports or counterparts in other films. Another way to read this is that actors are paid more than actresses for performing a similar role, however the following text taken from Forbes magazine doesn't justify that similar work is being performed. A simple solution is to change the statement to "On average, Hollywood actresses are paid less than actors." or "Top Hollywood actors are paid more than their respective female counterparts", however for that last statement to hold up I'd actually have to do some research and cite it. I don't like the way this statement implies that the actors and actresses are actually performing similar work by comparing their overall income. I feel like if it is trying to show inequality, as per the articles topic, it should prove more relation by examining the income of actors and actresses from situations of a single movie with two lead roles of roughly equal importance (one male and one female) with other factors accounted for. I know this may seem pedantic but I believe it to be important to the quality of the article. I don't have much experience using the talk page so excuse me if I haven't followed conventions. Cynicle (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Men's inequality

This article needs to mention men as victims of inequality as well as women. Wrad (talk) 01:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The fact that men and women experience inequality is inherent in the idea of gender inequality.

The article itself is an example of what it describes. Ironic, isn't it? --Joshua Issac (talk) 12:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I will look and see if there is any studies on the issue. One would suspect that there has to be, but I don't know. 88.114.154.216 (talk) 07:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality

The section I have tagged, and the Gendered media section, are biased towards women. --Joshua Issac (talk) 13:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the Gendered media section is highly flawed, although it is a necessary component to a gender inequality page. I think the discussion of racial differences in media portrayals is not necessarily appropriate for this section. Furthermore, there should be citations to support the claims made in this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaurigem (talk • contribs) 20:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Follow the rules. That is mark the non-sourced stuff with the cn-tag and delete them if no supporting evidence appeards in time. Or better yet, search for material to support the claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.154.216 (talk) 07:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Gender inequality and religion

The article should likely discuss the role of religion in gender inequality, since this is one of the most common complaints from gender activists, namely that religion contributes to this kind of inequality. ADM (talk) 10:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Sexism and Discrimination

This section needs more citations and structural examples of how gender inequality is institutionalized.

Also, with regards to "benevolent sexism"--is that really a term? Is there any type of sexism/discrimination that may be considered "benevolent"? Furthermore, the idea of "positive" stereotypes is disputable. I would argue that stereotypes are inherently negative. This section needs serious work and I would go so far as to suggest a complete overhaul. (Kaurigem (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC))

Feminist Bias

This article has a large feminist bias and only mentions men in a negative capacity. Isn't that against wikipedias rules? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.251.159 (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Moved for chronological clarity.

I've reverted some recent IP edits, as they removed cited material, and replaced it with assertions and a YouTube link.

Article is not exclusively negative to men. Articles about discrimination must cite the existence of discrimination and its nature as determined by reputable sources. -Yamara ✉ 20:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Removed image and accompanying description that, "from a young age, a way to differentiate between boys and girls is to dress girls in pink." This article is about "gender inequality" not "gender construction." Note: is naming a child based on ethnicity (e.g. Stankowski vs. Wong) a sign of "racial inequality?" Eyeofpie —Preceding undated comment added 13:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

most common reason ignored

Many women put their careers on hold to have have children. this both means less women get as far as their male counterparts who continue to work and also disinclines employers to hire them in jobs where training as expensive, because they may just lose them. this should be incorporated to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil Ian Manning (talk • contribs) 11:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any specific suggestions for changing the content of the article? Kaldari (talk) 22:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I think Phil's specific suggestion was to mention in the article what he just said above. --Uncle Ed (talk) 14:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Here's (what I believe to be) a citable source on the subject of income disparity between the genders: http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender Wage Gap Final Report.pdf 71.17.99.70 (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Income disparity

• white men continue to earn 25 percent more than equally-well performing women and minorities.

Does the reference show this, or merely claim this? And is this taking into account factors such as the willingness of men to work more hours per work, or that they have more unbroken years of experience (because they didn't take a career break to raise kids)?

In other words, are we saying that women or blacks are not getting equal pay for equal work, or are we implying that the only possible reason men (or whites) make more is that? --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Inequality seen as a bad thing

The slant of the article, particularly the "Explanations for gender inequality" section, is that inequality is bad. This should be made explicit, rather than remaining an (obvious?) subtext. We should say which people consider gender inequality to be bad. Also, if there are any significant viewpoint holders who consider gender inequality to be good - in any aspect at all - we should describe those views as well. Of course, if that is now a minority view, we must not make it seem that this is a 50-50 dispute. What percent of the general public, or of experts, are opponents or supporters of gender inequality?

At one point, the "Explanations" section starts off to praise gender inequality, i.e., that it can help to structure parenting and marriage. But how it helps specifically is not mentioned. We go right into a complaint that women "still" do most of the domestic chores.

One way to improve the article would be to talk about the division of labor in the family, or in society as a whole, based on sex differences, whether considered completely inherent, or socially constructed. For example, men seem to like to take more dangerous or uncomfortable jobs (like roofer, oil rig worker, lumberjack) or jobs that require a lot of solitary intellectual work (computer programmer). Women tend to choose jobs which provide more social interaction (?) or flexible hours. [This is off the top of my head, so don't copy and paste this text till we check with sources!]

The question, of course, is whether the 'inequality' is 100% the result of discrimination (against adults) and social pressure to conform to sex roles (as children develop into adults). Is this considered a given? Or is it just a very commonly held idea? Are there any people out their, whose views merit inclusion in the article, who disagree?

Are any verifiable, quotable sources writing about how men and women might be happy making different choices? Or explaining these choices as other than coerced? That is, do women actually like taking care of young children, and might this explain why so many (given a choice) will become schoolteachers or stay-at-home moms?

Please don't do a Larry Summers on me [1]. I just want to help write a complete and unbiased article. --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Bahrain female workers earn 40% more? could be a paradox

I am a statistical analyst and was going through the income by gender for Oman and was surprised I found that woman earn more than men too!

It can be explained as follows:

Men have the highest share in the labour market, which means Omani men will also work as security men or as taxi drivers with a very low salary. However, most Omani women will prefer jobs as school teachers or working for the government or a hospital, and some woman stay at home to be housewives,which gives the illusion that woman will earn more.

The fact here is that men work on a very broad scale of salaries and woman are concentrated on a higher scale.

I remember making a small presentation about this effect in the last year of university, it is called "Simpsons Paradox".

So can you just try to get the number of females and males included in the study if possible, because that would show the Paradox. The most famous example of this paradox is when an American university was accused of being sexist on admissions, when in fact thy were not sexist at all. (Hala014 (talk) 10:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC))

Proposed Revisions and New Entry: Gender Inequality in China

Hello Everybody! I wish to expand this article because I feel that it under developed and fails to provide a worldview on the subject. The subsection “Gender Inequality Across the Globe” provides only a brief summary of international gender inequality issues. There is no reference to the gender disparities that plague any other countries besides the United States. In hopes of expanding the worldview of this entry, I propose to add an overview of gender inequality in China under the “Gender Inequality Across the Globe” subsection. I also propose to link the summary to a new Wikipedia entry I will be creating focusing solely on Gender Inequality in China. I have found a significant number of scholarly resources related to the topic, such as works by the World Bank and Amartya Sen. It is evident that this is a topic of great discussion that deserves proper attention on this page and Wikipedia as a whole. In order to allocate this proper attention, my new entry will include subsections on legislation, cultural and societal norms, and implications in regards to family structure, education, healthcare, and employment. I hope that other contributors will continue my contributions by adding subsections including but not limited to, the history of gender inequality and the impacts of gender inequality on sexuality.

I will be completing this entry under the guidance of a Poverty, Justice, and Development course at Rice University. I have added the banner to top of this page, if you would like further information. If you have any suggestions for the execution of my proposed entry, please let me know. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! Thank you. Nqogu (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Physical differences applied in discriminatory hiring.

While a law enforcement officer would obviously never have to use physical strength or endurance when responding to a call, the United States is rife with needless physical fitness tests that exclude women from law enforcement jobs.

For example: http://www.kktv.com/home/headlines/Too_Hard_For_Women_Aurora_Police_Department_Suspends_Fitness_Test_147323005.html?storySection=comments

Why doesn't this article mention this? Hcobb (talk) 17:28, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe that your premise that "a law enforcement officer would obviously never have to use physical strength or endurance" is flawed. However, the section In the Workplace might mention job qualifications that on the surface don't discriminate but in reality discriminate against women, such as height limits or physical fitness requirements that are unnecessary or stricter than necessary hen seen in relation to the work. Your sources would have to be better than a comment section, though.Sjö (talk) 08:39, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=165842 Results showed that females failed the physical ability test significantly more often than males. The study did not support the need to climb through a window or to drag and pull a 158- pound mannequin 30 feet in 9 seconds. Findings, however, supported other areas in which applicants might be tested for physical competence, such as pushing, balancing, and climbing and showed that the physical ability selection test did not depict actual physical tasks performed by police officers.

http://www.wric.com/story/17394451/fbi-sued-for-gender-discrimination-by-male-employee A male employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is suing the agency for gender discrimination, claiming that a physical fitness test to become an FBI agent is biased against men.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/1997/February97/070cr.htm The Justice Department today sued the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) for discriminating against female transit police applicants by requiring them to meet fitness standards that are unrelated to successful job performance.

Etc. Hcobb (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Little discussion on Innate differences

Numerous studies have been done on the innate differences between the sexes and their behavior. This article does not cite these at all. I think it would be important, as part of the discussion in that field has also related how for example more assertive and aggressive behavior (expressed by all male mammals) most likely has to have at leas some kind of effect on human career progression and pay. If this discussion is not included the article will give off the incorrect impression that gender inequality (as in pay gaps et cetera) is only caused by bias.88.114.154.216 (talk) 07:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed Revisions and New Entry: Gender Inequality in Thailand

Hello everyone,

I am currently working on a term paper for my Gender Economics class. My topic is about Gender Inequality in Thailand which will mainly focus on the context of gender division of labor in labor market. I am planning on starting my article by pointing out the problem of gender inequality from various perspective based on the gender inequality indicators in order to build up the understanding of the situation in Thailand. I will then present, in detail, the gender in equality in labor market in several aspects such as gender wage gap, employment rate, etc. I would be appreciate if you guys can help me with the sources of data of further idea of what else should be included, or not included, in the article or what other indicator(s) I shall present in my article.

So far I have gathered some information from world bank website. Some of my literatures include:

Kampon Adireksombat, Fang Zheng, and Chir Sakellariou. The evolution of gender wage differentials and discriminations in thailand: 1991-2007. In Economic Growth Centre Working Paper Series, number 2010/05. Economic Growth Centre, 2010.

George Gray Molina and Mark Purser. Human development trends since 1970: A social convergence story, 2010.

Social Institutions & Gender Index. Gender equality in thailand. http: //genderindex.org/country/thailand, 2012. [Online; accessed 28- September-2012].

I am sure I need a lot more citations to make a good article and I would be appreciate if any of you could provide me some suggestion(s). Thank you very much.

Econkc (talk) 18:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

No clarification needed for image caption (first image on page)

Dressing female babies in pink to make them look "girly" and "feminine" is considered common knowledge because most people understand that. We do not need to cite anything because it is already common knowledge. Also, no clarification is needed in my opinion. --Carrot Lord (talk) 23:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

most people understand that. See the tag at the top of the article - that assumption seems rather culture-centric. The caption also makes assertions about "heteronormative idea of femininity", which need to be clarified and sourced. Also, did you know that pink was sometimes the preferred color for boys in 20th-century America before the 50s? Diego (talk) 06:49, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Most women prefer to couple with guys who have high status occupations

Most women prefer to couple with guys who have high status occupations. Can this be added to the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.40.208.132 (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2015 (UTC)