Explaining gender segregation

Abstract

Occupational gender segregation--the tendency for women and men to work in different occupations--is an important feature of all societies, and particularly the wealthy industrialized ones. To understand this segregation, and to explain its significance, we need to distinguish between vertical segregation entailing inequality and horizontal segregation representing difference without inequality, with overall segregation being the resultant of these components. Three major theoretical approaches to understanding occupational gender segregation are examined: human capital/rational choice, patriarchy, and preference theories. All are found to be inadequate; they tend to confuse overall segregation with its vertical component, and each entails a number of other faults. It is generally assumed or implied that greater empowerment of women would reduce gender segregation. This is the reverse of what actually happens; in countries where the degree of women's empowerment is greater, the level of gender segregation is also greater. An alternative theoretical approach based on processes of social reproduction is shown to be more useful.

Gendered political space: civil society, contingency theory, and the substantive representation of women

“…Notably, vertical gender segregation issues are also influential here. In other words, the way that the SRW is promoted is not only shaped by the number of women in the organization and presence of critical actors, as Prouteau and Tabariés's (2010) insightful account reveals, it is also influenced by the extent to which women hold positions of power and influence in CSOs (see also Blackburn, Browne, Brooks, & Jarman, 2002). Allied to this, a further contingent organizational factor is the internal governance practices and agenda-setting within CSOs.…”

Narratives of sex-segregated professional identities

“…Costa et al, 2009). "Feminised" occupations, in particular, suffer disproportionately to "masculinised" ones: the more "feminised" an occupation, the lower its pay, benefits, training and promotion opportunities; and the more likely it is to employ workers part time and part year (see Blackburn, et al, 2002;Reskin, 1993;Jenson et al, 2000).…”

“…Siltanen et al, 1995;Jenson et al, 2000;Blackburn et al, 2002) has focused on how occupations become divided along gender lines, for example how industrialisation has set up the conditions for women to be paid less by subdividing jobs into tasks that require more technical skill to use new technologies (tasks allocated to men) and more routine and repetitive tasks (tasks allocated to women). Sociologists have also critiqued the widespread devaluation of women's work (see for example, Hakim, 2000;Reskin & Roos, 1990; although also see footnote 3 below).…”

Gender essentialism and occupational segregation in insolvency practice

“…Numerous theoretical explanations for the emergence of occupational segregation have been developed, reprised and critiqued by various authors (eg Walby, 1988;Anker, 1997;Blackburn, Browne, Brooks & Jarman, 2002). Anker (1997) identifies three broad categories: neo-classical and human capital theories, institutional and labour market segmentation theories, and feminist or gender theories.…”