How Sexism Follows Women From the Cradle to the Workplace
nyti.ms/2Mz0ihKPosted Aug 20, 2018, 3:03 PM UTC
06
nyti.ms
New York Times article about an interesting new paper on how regional variation in sexism impacts women's labor market outcomes.
2
Nothing interesting about this trash
2
Honest question: what do you expect to achieve with this comment?
1
“It is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and women takes care of the home and family"
The researchers judged that "sexist" for arbitrary reasons, and continued a similar level of arbitrariness throughout the "study".
Let's consider some actual data. SAHMs are happier than working mothers: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahlandrum/2018/02/09/more-millennial-women-are-becoming-stay-at-home-moms-heres-why/
A SAHM also leads to superior outcomes over daycare for children in situations where it isnt a single mother who's financially impoverished: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/good-thinking/201505/the-truth-about-children-working-mothers
Women are also more likely than men to want to stay at home with the kids: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2014/11/06/many-more-men-say-they-want-to-be-stay-at-home-dads-than-actually-are/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.c39662781644
QED, women are more likely to /want/ to stay at home, they're likely to be /happier/ staying at home, and the outcomes are /better/ for the children when there's a stay at home parent.
It's fantastic that we all have the freedom to choose how to live our lives, whether that's being a stay at home parent or a CEO. It's disappointing that some "study" authors look at a phrase that describes the best voluntary choice for the majority (but not all), and label that as "sexism" because people choosing what maximizes their utility is somehow terrible.
There is nothing arbitrary about declaring that statement sexist. It's prejudice based on sex, which is one of the dictionary definitions of sexism.
Free people making free choices based on what maximizes their utility strikes me as obviously good.
I agree with you that the outcomes for SAHMs are better than the outcomes for SAHDs, but that result occurs in a context. For example, I hold that one of the reasons SAHMs are happier than SAHDs is that SAHDs pay a heavy social price. SAHM groups generally aren't welcoming to SAHDs and conventional men are often uncomfortable around caregiving men.
The paper uses answers to survey questions regarding women in the workplace to define "sexism". In other words, it is a clearly defined term, capturing the extent of views similar to those you express. If you agree with those views, there's no reason to take "sexism" as something negative here.
The researchers show that women's wages and employment are negatively related to the level of sexism where they grew up. This is interesting, because it tells us that there is a social/cultural factor to women's choices on the labor market (not that this should surprise anyone, but it's surprising what surprises some people...).
This result stands regardless of your opinion on whether the gender gaps are good or bad.