Believing sexism will go away without putting major changes in place, is not a reality. Sexism blatantly exists in the work place. Obvious (and most common) examples of this would be: women are often paid less than their male counterparts for the same position, men often receive rapid job promotions in comparison to women and women are usually the targets of gender based harassment. Women frequently struggle with the lack of pay they receive, in comparison to their male counterparts. A woman working in the same job as a man will usually earn less, despite the fact that she may have the same or better training, education, and skills required for the job ("Study Shows Female Managers in Britain Earn Less than Men, and Equality Could Be 57 Years Away."
Ironically, she is admitting Summers’ first point by herself implying that even she does not want to work 80 hours and she further argues that women are discouraged from making these time commitments because of discrimination in terms of earnings. This is ironic because Tong states that Summers is wrong and then through her offered proof confirms that women are hesitant to work 80 hours per week because it isn’t necessary or because they will suffer discrimination in terms of earnings. Unintentionally, Tong seems
Sexism does still exist in the workplace today, not only for women but for men too, although modern day sexism is less obvious, more subtle, and harder to put your finger on. The Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (amended in 1991) prohibits an employer from discriminating with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin (Wiener, 2010). Women have always struggled with sexism since women first began to join the workforce. When women were starting to work in similar jobs as men, they were being paid significantly less than their male counterparts were. “In the article Complainant behavioral tone, ambivalent sexism, and perceptions of sexual harassment” it seeks to point out recent changes to these laws to help place what is sexual harassment.
Unfortunately the recent report tells us that only by 2095 we can achieve the full gender equality on the workplace. However, of course, we could try and shorten that time. It is obviously important to have not only males in the business world, because this way we miss out on many opportunities that women could bring to the world, due to the different perception of values. When for example men are driven by mostly material success, women tend to build up relationships and friendly environment on the workplace. However, sometimes emotions and nurturing can affect the business in a negative manner.
Evening Things Out Affirmative action in the eyes of some can be considered to be the compromise for reparations. To others it can be looked at as an opportunity for women to be looked at as equals in comparison to their male colleagues. But those who don’t fall into either of those categories look at affirmative action as reverse discrimination or racism. There is an argument that there is truth in all of those statements, but it is more prevalent in the first two than the latter. Minorities were never given the appropriate chance they deserve, and women still can’t get the respect they deserve in the workplace.
Why is this? We are altered by looks, no matter what. And as many would like to say that what’s on the inside is where it counts (which it does, no doubt), we has humans can’t help to be more generous in a way to the attractive men and women. Certain companies only hire people based on their looks such as Hollister, Abercrombie and Fitch, Hooters, and international model companies. Whereas the less attractive people would be totally overlooked because they are not the description of attractive male/females they were looking for.
Occupational sex segregation is an explanation one could use to clarify the low numbers of women in coaching positions. Kane and Stangl argue that men who hire limited number of women do so to maintain their mal dominance in a field. Consequently, allowing women to freely enter a male-dominated field compromises the composition and distribution of jobs. Additionally, the authors cite marginalization as another way that occupational sex segregation takes place. Kanter’s definition of marginalization is transcended through examples that the authors provide.
Our society changes our attitudes and views on life more than our biological make-up. This dissertation investigates the hypothesis that in some cultures, men versus women cannot overcome stereotypes in the business world. Based upon both, feminist and masculine theory, the study argues that the characteristics that influence male and female behavior in the workplace are essentially, despite the fact that women are less likely than men to be promoted to high level positions. The paper concludes that stereotypes apply in general to both sexes and serve their purpose to help us make judgements when we do them intelligently and not absolutely. Considerably more work will need to be done to determine if individual differences in masculinity and femininity have both genetic and environmental components.
Employers who engaged in unfair hiring practices attempted to justify making discriminatory hiring decisions for several reasons. Some employers believed women lacked the skills and qualifications necessary to perform nontraditional and higher-paid positions simply because of gender. Other employers who hired or promoted women into supervisory or management positions prevented those women from attaining higher-level roles, which is referred to as the "glass ceiling." The glass ceiling is a metaphor used to describe a barrier where the targeted group--in this case, women--can see the higher rungs on a career ladder but are prevented from attaining more responsible and influential positions due to discrimination based on sex and business decisions that convey the message that men are more suited to leadership roles. This is evidenced by a study in 2003 conducted by University of California-Hayward professor Dr. Richard Drogin who discovered "women make up 72 percent of Wal-Mart's total workforce, but only 33 percent of its managers."
This situation constitutes in someway a handicap in the access of women to job opportunities. On the other hand, gender stereotypes stemming from patriarchy confine them to so-called low-skilled and low-paid feminine sectors. In Côte d'Ivoire, the average income of Ivorian women is 59% lower than that of men, a situation that accentuates the male predominance, mostly at the professional level (Moreau, 2014). Thus, the observation is that the subordination of the Ivorian women to men has become institutionalized due to their lower representation in the political and administrative sphere, the denial of their rights and education as well as the lack of government protection against abuse (Moreau,