Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 85
Following the entrance of women into the workforce in America, particulary after World War I, the United States has been notorious for its common, but unspoken, pratice of unequal pay for men and women who generally hold the same roles.
In the past, many women who worked in paper mills or in various other trades were often paid far less than their male counterparts. Today, many US organizations attempt to combat gender discrimination in terms of payscale.
Unfortunately, however, violations of gender discrimination laws are often hard to prove. When an employer and a potential new hire negotiate terms of salary, it’s difficult for a female candidate to determine whether she is being discriminated against as opposed to her male counterpart.
In any case, the bottom line is, yes, US companies should certainly be required to provide equal pay to both men and women who hold similar roles. However, this legislation sure also surely included clauses that ensure that compensation is generated based on merit and personal negotiation skills rather than gender or sex.
Clothes As A Sex Identity For Men And Women
It is a well known fact that has proved to be true for ages that people are being judged not only by natural qualities, personal character or educational level but also by the clothes we wear and the looks we have. Clothes are the reflection of our inner nature and condition. In an ancient time there was no distinction between male and female clothes or style, however now we see that there is specific clothes nd fashion for both men and women. Each new fashion reflects the attitudes and believes of the generation it is designed for.
It has been suggested by many critics that clothes can change society’s ideas of sex, gender and the roles of men and women. Rouse suggests that fashion and clothing do not reflect already established ideals of gender identity. However some critics propose that fashion and clothing follows strict basic ideas of masculinity and femininity. This essay plans to investigate the different ideas that critics have produced on fashion and identity, and see if Rouse’s idea of clothing being ‘part of the process’ can be applied to examples of conventional and inverted fashion. It also plans to look at the argument that by not conforming to gendered clothes of a person’s sex, that person has really escaped their gender identity.
It has been suggested that fashion is composed of 3 elements; the principle of conspicuous waste, the principle of conspicuous leisure and the principle of up to datedness where waste does not serve human life. This idea supports the Marxist idea that fashion only appears when society is so well organised that it produces more than the minimum needed to survive thus this surplus is suggested to show itself in the form of fashion where clothing is concerned.
Braudel can be seen to support Rouse’s theory by his own idea that fashion began by noblemen, squires and the bourgeoisie wearing tunics ’so tight that they revealed what modesty bids us to hide.’ The reason for doing this can be seen as a show of male masculinity thus creating an unconscious link between this way of dressing and their power in society as men and as the Elite ruling class. Wilson suggests that it began in the 14th Century with the changing of a series of styles that was determined by the Royal court right up until the 18th Century.
The idea that women’s fashion in the 19th Century demonstrates the wearer’s ‘abstinence from productive employment’ supports the idea that fashion helps and is part of the process of creating an identify. This can be seen by the fact women wore bonnets, long skirts long hair that prevented and restricted their movement to a minimum, thus the idea that they were dependant on men was strengthened and their position in society.
It suggests that fashion underlines sexuality so when clothes are worn to produced gender bending ideals it makes the majority feel threatened. He also thinks that exaggerated standards of beauty ‘can be disempowering and even offensive’. My first example is Christina Aguilera at the Music awards in Edinburgh 2003. The clothes she chose to wear to this event do not reflect conventional ideas of femininity, and for this she has been criticised by the magazine. Her first outfit is a torn tie-dyed dress and seems to be ‘Tasteful’ due to the fact it is a dress and reflects the gender identity allocated conventionally to it. In total contrast the next outfit is very domineering. It consists of leather trousers a bra and a little lace top. In contrast to the last outfit she wears her hair up as apposed to wearing it naturally. In wearing this she is creating an aggressive masculine image however, the magazine writer has mocked her by saying she has ‘forgotten her top’ suggesting that what she wears is not acceptable in society as it does not reflect her sexuality. The next outfit creates a strange image for her. We suppose it is a female one as she is in a skirt; however this outfit goes completely against convention and makes the viewer slightly uneasy as we try to guess what identity she is trying to convey. This could be seen as Wilson’s idea of exaggerated standards of beauty. In her next outfit her image again has undergone a complete change. She is in trousers which do add an n image of dominance it is toned down by the neutral colour of it. However the top with it reflects femininity by the fact it has a bow, which is quite a feminine idea or has been allocated female identity. In contrast the next outfit uses the same colour as the previous shirt, in a way that exaggerates femininity. However it is paired with a pair of trouser s that create a very masculine image. The fact that she does not reflect a set gender in her clothes again or the viewer is slightly uncomfortable. In her next outfit seems to create a gothic image that the magazine takes the piss out of perhaps because it does not reflect female gender identity. This is in contrast to the last outfits she wears which do create and conform to the identity of a conventional woman, however the last one in particular is again a very extreme version of this thus the magazine calls it ‘ridiculous’.
It can be said then that the clothes Christina Aguilera wears on this night does create a certain gender identity, however whether we as viewers accept her decisions to wear the clothes depends on whether the reflect already existing gender identity in a way which is not excessively extreme. It can also be said that she is trying to escape the false and constricting ideology of feminism. She is in a way reversing gender roles by wearing trousers
As we feel almost uncomfortable with women in trousers and taking on masculinity, when men do it we see it an acceptable way of dressing. Women can be seen as attempting to refuse or escape the ideology of femininity by the wearing.
By the fact that clothes create an idea or identity means that there must be the basic idea of gendered clothing to start with. In this view Rouses argument could be seen as contradicting itself. Larrain suggested that reproduction was the continued existence of institutions, practices and products and relative social positions of people. If we see reproduction in this way the idea that fashion must reflect existing gender and sexuality can be seen as equally true. Tilkner 1977 suggests that there is some kind of distinction in dress, however the particular attributes emphasised as masculine or feminine vary widely according to time and place. For example Crawley drew attention to the fact masculinity in Europe is signified by the wearing of trousers, while in parts of Africa masculinity is signalled by the wearing of an apron. There has also been the same idea of different emphasis at a diff period of time for colour too. Steele brought to light the fact that in the 18th Century Pink was worn by boy babies and Blue for girl babies as pink was seen to be a more dominating and strong colour. It was not associated with femininity until the 1920’s.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 80
I feel that women and men shouldn’t be put into two separate genders in the business world. If you are qualified for a job and do it well, whether a female or male, you should receive the pay deserved. If you suck at your job, don’t receive great pay or promotions, and just happen to be a female… you don’t deserve it. If you suck, don’t receive great pay or promotions, and just so happen to be a male…you don’t deserve it either.
I don’t feel gender is really looked at anymore unless it is a labor job or where maximum physical strength is needed. This isn’t the early nineteen hundreds anymore. Men and women are equal now and any business who belittles that idea presently, apparently isn’t a good business man or women.(and I hope they see that).
So yes men and women should be paid the same for a job they are inquiring about or are already employed at. We are capable of the same strengths, work ethics, and leadership skills. Regardless if I am a female, male, or anything in between.
Possibility of modern women losing their feminine grace – Part 9
Are modern women losing their “feminine grace?” Are you kidding me? That term is insulting to me. It concerns me that this would be anyones concern. The problems that exist in my life rarely revolve around the loss of my “feminine grace.”
As a woman, I worry about being respected in the work place, about splitting up the chores at home fairly, about being respected even though I don’t look like a model, about being respected when I go out of the house when I’m looking my best, about being listened to… Am I concerned about the loss of “feminine grace?” I would be happy to do away with such notions.
The role of women is expanding. It is a wonderful thing to lose the stigma that all women should have some admirable unifying quality. Women should be admired and respected for their unique qualities.
If we are to be concerned about a loss of grace it should be a concern for the totality of the society. We are losing grace amongst men and women equally. We are becoming a blunt and callous people. Going are the days of chivalrous gentlemen and dainty ladies. Hopefully, with these things go our pretenses. Hopefully what is left behind is something real, that we can all live up to without the pressures put upon us to live up to romantic artifice.
Living Together Without Marriage Improves Men’s Mental Health
A study in England of thousands of women and men found that people who went through the good and bad times with the original mate and stayed together were much happier mentally.
It was also found that men who played the field got over the relationships when they ended much quicker then women did.
Women who stay single who once had a great love that did not work out tended to be mentally stable.
The fact that women who live with a man without benefit of marriage are not as happy as the men is because there is no financial protection for them when the relationship ends. Security is everything to women and marriage represents stability and although the relationship can end they will have some rights. This explains why women who are married are more mentally stable then if they simply lived together.
Women have children and need a stable lifestyle and a strong desire to protect themselves and their kids. So marriage is very important financially and also there is the question of respect that everyone needs. If a women has her own career and here own money these thing may be less important.
From a man’s point of view and if he’s over 25 security is not very important. But most men don’t want to be squeezed into a relationship by the women he loves. He want’s it to be his idea. The trick for a woman is to make him believe it is His Idea.
Being married has always been associated with greater mental and physical health. Bachelors don’t live, as long, at least that’s what the myth indicates. In the past studies have shown married men live a longer life with greater psychological happiness.
There was an English study for 10 years ending in the millennium of 10,000 adults. Both men and women were interviewed and asked a series of questions about being depressed or anxious.
Long-lasting relationships that have weathered the storm provided excellent mental health.
People that had failed relationships and were now alone had combinations of grief and anger and were often depressed. Both men and women had poor mental health after this experience. But for those who could move on to new relationships, much of the damage was somewhat reversed. Although women seemed to have a harder time of letting go than men did.
Women’s mental health progressively deteriorated with the more break-ups they experienced.
For men that had several different experiences it seemed the opposite was true. Men who had more then one relationship and moved on seemed to be in excellent mental health. Those men that had only one relationship and not moved on were not as mentally stable.
Women who never married but lived with their mate were in great mental health unlike men in the same situation
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 67
I am stunned that this is even a topic to be discussed.
I have one question for all of those who do not feel this should be yes. What does a man do better in the office than a woman to justify more of a salary?
It is so frustrating when people state that men are more competent in the office because women are more “emotional”. I despise that comment, while statistically women are more emotional we also do posses the ability to balance that out with a practical and logical approach. This emotional side allows us to have better problem solving skills, thus creating more collaboration in any conference room. I have been in Corporate America for 10 years. I have dealt with many competent professionals, both men and women, on the other side of that I have dealt with many unprofessional, incompetent colleagues, again both men and women. It is not gender that determines your success in the office, nor should it determine your salary.
At the end of the day two people paired up side by side, with the same level of experience, and education level should be equally compensated whether regardless, of age, race, religion, etc., it is a little thing called the Equal Employment Opportunity Act.
A thought to ponder, I recently heard at a seminar I attended that in 15-20 years they expect that 60% of women will be the “bread winners” in their homes. I wonder how it will feel when the tables are turned.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 90
Equal pay for women and men presupposes that the employer is actually comparing two equal candidates for the same position. Generalized statistics that can be manipulated to prove either side of this argument should be ignored. As anyone who has taken Statistics 101 knows, any set of figures can be presented in whatever manner the statistician chooses. Before we give our Pavlovian response let us examine the question carefully. “Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to men and women”? The answer has already been legislated. By law, US companies ARE REQUIRED to pay men and women equally.
What constantly fuels debate on the matter of pay, is not gender, but rather equal credentials and seniority. It is not the purpose, and should not be the purpose, of US companies to be the playing field that every special interest group wants to use to achieve its agenda, which rarely has anything to do with true equal considerations for a specific position. Rather, these groups want to take disparate qualifications and call them equal, but only if it is a man and a woman being scrutinized. No one ever presents these arguments if either two men or two women are being considered for the same post.
Before we blindly hop on a bandwagon it would behoove us to realize exactly what it is that we are so loudly trumpeting to the work place. Equal pay for equal work is, and should be, the standard of US companies.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 66
You can’t come up with a sweeping statement saying women and men should be paid the same by a firm. If they do the same job and are equally successful, then fair enough, they deserve to earn the same. But a lot of things need to be taken into account. Just because men and women work the same hours shouldn’t mean they get the same monetary rewards at the end of the month.
Imagine a man and a woman work on a conveyor belt in a car production company producing fan belts. If the man makes 1,000 fan belts in a day and the woman makes 500, are you going to pay them the same? I would hope not. If so, there is nothing to stop the man going slow and producing the same number of fan belts as the woman. Equally, if a man and a woman work for a company selling insurance policies and the man sells ten policies in a week, while the woman sells twenty, don’t you think the woman should take home more cash come pay day?
One area which maybe a little darker is that of physical strength. For example, in the construction industry, a male can generally carry more bricks than a woman. But both are given 100 per cent effort – so do you pay on effort or results? That’s not an easy one. Sport is another area of confusion. For example, Wimbledon is going to pay the same prize money to men and women this year for the first time. Is that fair? Men are stronger, play five sets as opposed to three for the women – and attract more viewers live and on television.
Companies can decide what pay systems they bring in, but they shouldn’t be forced by law to pay the sexes equally for the sake of it. Let them create their own pay structures – if you don’t like it, you can always look elsewhere for a job. That’s not being sexist because there may well be areas where women get paid more than men.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 49
I do believe that US companies should be required to provide equal pay to women and men, but only if the type of work performed is equal. For example, in a company where you have men doing strenuous, physical labor and the women in that same company perform the same duties as men the pay should most definitely be equal.
I think the problem we have with women claiming that men make more money is coming from women who may work in the same company but perform different jobs. If a man is performing a job that makes the company grow and earn more of a profit, then of course he should make more money than say a woman who works for that company in a secretarial capacity.
I think that in the US men and women are paid equally for equal jobs, it’s the law. As a woman I would love to make more money that is for sure but I do not expect to make as much money as a man (or woman for that matter)whose job is harder or more important to the company. That would be ludicrous. It is the same the other way around. If a woman is the head of a company and she works long hours and devotes a lot of her free time to making the company grow, she will make more than a man in that same company that has a less demanding job.
As a nurse, I can honestly say that whether it is a male or a female the pay is the same. There really is no pay discrimination in the US that I can tell. Now if you want to talk about men being chosen for a particular job over a women, that might be a different story.
Thoughts on womens liberation movement – Part 8
If I could change anything in history, it would be the introduction of the Feminist Movement. Coming from a female this could seem shocking, however, because of the great implications and changes that the Feminist movement caused I frown on the movement. The Western and industrialized countries have been greatly affected because of this movement. Problems like greater divorce rates and the re-defining of the institution of family and gender roles have had a major impact on our society.
Through out my life I have witnessed the advancements of feminism. In school, I was able to see many examples of what the feminist movement has accomplished. The accomplishments of feminism have been many. For example, women obtained the vote and have an opportunity to advance educationally, which are major accomplishments. I would not be in college right now were it not for the advancements of the feminist movement. With new freedoms, however, came new problems. The family witnessed the most changes. Women are now competing with men at all levels of professionalism. They have left the home and have put in jeopardy the future of younger generations. Gender roles that were before clearly outlined and defined have now been confused. Questions, such as, who is to stay home and take care of the children, and who to become the main bread winner have now caused a great debate between men and women. Women are no longer compelled to stay in monogamous relationships like those found in marriage. Divorce rates have increased drastically because of the new freedoms of women. They no longer have to exercise energy to save a marriage and keep a family together because society does not have that expectation on women.
Our society has had a great impact on feminism. The more power women have in our society the more problems arise. Women are different from men in many aspects. The feminist movement advances on an unfair principle, the principle that men and women are equals. An unfair principle, because women and men are not “programmed” the same. Physically women are weaker than men are. Women are driven by their emotions and less rational, a problem the feminist encounter.
Men have run this world for centuries and, in my opinion, have done a good job. Men have sought the protection of women and families. Women need to be in the home and taking care of future generations, instead of competing with men and making our society worse. The beginning and advancements of the feminist movement continue to give sprout to new problems. There is no wonder why the Eastern countries refuse to allow a feminist upbringing. Even women themselves in other countries view feminism with great apprehension.
