Entrenched Gender Inequality Persists in Americas Workplaces and Politics

Abstract

Gender inequality has been in existence since time immemorial. Gender is considered to be the primary marker of social and economic stratification. Due to this, it has led to significant exclusion in almost all fields. There are still systematic gender differences in material well-being regardless of one's socioeconomic class. Gender inequality is the bias treatment of members affiliated with a particular gender due to perceptions that they are inferior to others. Inequality in America is mainly associated with women. The women, in most instances, are given lesser responsibilities in the majority of the areas. Some of these areas may include but are not limited to education, employment, and politics. Some people may argue that gender inequality has reduced in the United States courtesy of activism and political advances. But the bottom line is that inequality is still rampant in the United States in the education sector, political participation, and the workplace. This essay is intended for the political elites and other activists that have tried to sensitize the general public that gender differences have been reduced in these particular areas in the United States of America. But the big question is, why is it there in the first place? Should gender differences be an issue in the world’s superpower? The fact that it is still in existence means that women are still not recognized. The political elites and the activists who think otherwise are only trying to sugarcoat the whole issue for known and unknown reasons. Research done revealed that approximately one in five employed women in the United States say that they have been sexually harassed at work. The research revealed that more than 22% of employed women had been a subject of sexual harassment compared to a mere 7% compared to men. On the same issue of employment, companies should create a gender-balanced board of directors. But in the real sense, the companies that have accomplished this particular setup have had to pay for it. According to the journal organizational science, it was revealed that the firms that had implemented the gender-balanced boards tend to suffer market penalties (Fuhrmans, 379-380). In other words, the market, in general, does not appreciate the fact that a board with women can deliver. The companies that were initially doing well before the gender diversity suffered a decrease in market value after the initiative (Fuhrmans, 379-380). Similarly, the research revealed that the firms that openly stated their stand on the commitments to diversity suffered a decline in the firm value (Bertay et al.; 12-16). The reason for this is associated with the general view of women's representation. The research clearly explained this scenario citing that "The level of female representation on a firm's board may send a negative signal to the market regarding a firm's commitment to shareholder value maximization if it is perceived as being motivated by a desire for diversity" (Parks, 377-381). The general interpretation to this is that there is the general stereotype that females are less competent than their male counterparts as far as business is concerned. Additionally, there are cultural biases in the workplaces, which lead to disparities. These disparities are in most cases directed to women, which come at a great disadvantage. The disadvantage on women is regardless of their ages, education, and social background. Women tend to be judged more harshly than men in the same positions even if they stand a chance of being equally or more competent. Such disparities are well displayed in the pay, whereby women are at a disadvantage of receiving lower pay than men across all occupations. The earnings harder affect the ethnicities and races, whereby the African Americans and the Latino women are most affected by earning the lowest pay. A study done on gender inequality revealed that even though there was an increase in the gender representation of both genders, women were not equally represented in the top managerial positions (Bertay et al.; 12-16). Surprisingly, given a chance to be in the topmost position, their pay tends to be less than that of men in similar positions. Therefore, this means that women are not wholly integrated into society, and their roles are stereotyped and directed elsewhere. There have been excuses aligned to the reasons as to why such is the case. The research established that women did not get the top positions due to the conditions that they give. For instance, those who argue that there is no problem with gender inequality cite that women give conditions that make it hard for them to...