GENDER STEREOTYPING IN THE THIRD WORLD



Gender Stereotyping in the Third World

Ishita Mukhopadhyay[1]

Abstracts

Concentration of female employment in specific job types is the phenomenon associated with construction of gender stereotypes. They have been identified by many researchers in the literature. Many occupations have also been identified with extreme gender stereotyping. The present paper tries to construct a measure of gender stereotyping, while presenting its departure from existing segregation measures. The paper then tries to assess and analyze the extent of stereotyping in some countries. The basic objective is to look into the nature of stereotyping.

Occupations can be differentiated between those with disproportionately female labor forces and those with disproportionately male labor forces. This phenomenon is well known as the phenomenon of occupational segregation into gender types. During the last decade, much research on employment trends of women focused on occupational segregation into gender types. The paper attempts to look into the phenomenon of stereotyping of jobs into gender types in the third world countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Section I surveys the relevant literature on occupational segregation and Section II reviews the existing measures on occupational segregation. Then the paper develops the dynamic concept of stereotyping and suggests measures so that the effects brought in by the forces of globalization in the third world can be accommodated in the measure for gender stereotyping. Section III then analyses the aspect of stereotyping of occupations in the third world countries.

Concentration of female employment in specific job types is the phenomenon associated with construction of gender stereotypes. They have been identified by many researchers in the literature. Many occupations have also been identified with extreme gender stereotyping. The present paper tries to construct a measure of gender stereotyping, while presenting its departure from existing segregation measures. The paper then tries to assess and analyze the extent of stereotyping in some countries. The basic objective is to look into the nature of stereotyping.

Occupations can be differentiated between those with disproportionately female labor forces and those with disproportionately male labor forces. This phenomenon is well known as the phenomenon of occupational segregation into gender types. During the last decade, much research on employment trends of women focused on occupational segregation into gender types. The paper attempts to look into the phenomenon of stereotyping of jobs into gender types in the third world countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Section I surveys the relevant literature on occupational segregation and Section II reviews the existing measures on occupational segregation. Then the paper develops the dynamic concept of stereotyping and suggests measures so that the effects brought in by the forces of globalization in the third world can be accommodated in the measure for gender stereotyping. Section III then analyses the aspect of stereotyping of occupations in the third world countries.

Evidence of occupational segregation into gender types have been obtained by Blau,F and Jusenius, C (1976), Elia, P (1988), Hakim,C (1979), Reskin,B and Hartmann,H (1986) , Watts, M and Rich, J (1993), Anker,R (1998) and many others. All of them have stated several reasons why the phenomenon of occupational segregation is important for the discussion of labor market as a whole.

Occupational segregation occurs when different people participate in different kinds of occupations and there exists rigidity in the mobility of groups or people from one occupation to another. In this paper we are particularly interested in such occupational segregation which occurs along gender lines. We often find occupations which are termed ‘male’ or ‘female’. The observation is that women are excluded from the ‘male’ occupations and males are not preferred in the ‘female’ occupations. The employers extend the logic of differential of efficiency in the case of male and female workers. It is stated that relatively less efficient and low skilled jobs are assigned to women and skilled and efficient jobs are for men. This particular type of occupational segregation if it persists sets in a process of gender stereotyping. The process is itself self-reinforcing. This has an important negative effect on how men see women as well as women see themselves by reinforcing and perpetuating the process. The process of gender stereotypes is generated and maintained by persisting occupational segregation. Women who are repeatedly engaged in less or unskilled jobs develops a preferential ‘skill’ in those unskilled jobs and this reality is felt by both the employers and the workers. Although this has a general negative effect on labor market conditions, this is hardly felt by the participants in the labor market. The stereotyping along gender lines in the workplace can be due to various reasons. One basic reason behind the phenomenon has been the perception of women’s work as an extension of housework. What an woman should do is what she is used to do. So there is a process of ‘housewification’ of the work done by woman outside her home. Since women perform the marginal duties, it is perceived that they would also perform similar types of duties outside their home also. The other perception is the fact that the underlying gender dimension in the socioeconomic set up calls a job ‘marginal’ if it is done by women and there is marginalisation of women’s occupations. It is also obvious why women are lesser paid than men. The less or unskilled jobs fetch low wages and we have a male-female wage differential. Although there exists male-female wage differential within occupations, but the differential is more pronounced due to occupational stereotyping. Even if it is possible to eliminate to eliminate occupation-wise male female wage differential, the differential persists due to gender stereotyping. As men and women do different kinds of jobs, they fetch different wages. It is also clear why women are given cheaper wages than men. The process of stereotyping strengthens the rigidity in the labor market. Persisting occupational segregation can generate and accentuate several important impacts upon the labor market in general. To understand these impacts, it is necessary to identify areas or occupations where stereotyping is being generated. The difference between the concept of occupational segregation and the concept of persisting and reinforcing occupational segregation is also to be spelt out.

Thus, we observe a subtle difference between segregation and stereotyping. Occupational segregation exists when men and women are differently distributed across occupations to a degree greater than is consistent with their overall shares of employment, irrespective of the nature of job allocation. Stereotyping is the phenomenon when the occupational segregation persists, maintains itself, and strengthens over time. Stereotyping is a dynamic concept, whereas segregation is a static one. There may be occupational segregation at two different points in time, but the patterns may be different. Stereotyping is said to exist when men and women continue to do the same type of work in the job market so that labor mobility across gender types is prohibited. Occupational segregation is thus necessary, but not sufficient for creation of gender stereotypes. So clearly, we have two dimensions of any measure of stereotyping—the segregation and the intensity of segregation along the same direction over time.

The measure of segregation can also be used for finding the extent of displacement or shifting of workers from existing jobs. If the pattern of segregation changes direction, then we may conclude that workers have shifted from one type of occupations to the others. However, this shift can also take place without substantial occupational segregation. Since we are discussing the aspects of gender stereotyping, the paper does not consider the pattern of shift that can occur without occupational segregation.

Occupational segregation hence can be measured and the overtime changes in the pattern of this measure can be observed. The overtime pattern can be continuation of the pattern in the same direction or in different directions. If the pattern reinforces itself in the same direction, we claim that stereotyping has occurred. If the pattern moves over to different directions, then we claim that shift has occurred. When occupational segregation occurs at a particular direction, or in other words, either males or females are continuously repeatedly employed in the same occupation over a fixed time period, we say that stereotyping has emerged.

The discussions on globalization policies in the third world have yielded the consensus that this has devalued the traditional areas of female work, such as subsistence agriculture, agro-based small scale production. This has shifted female laborers from the mentioned occupations into certain newly created job types. Empirical observation relates to the fact that female specific income generating and employment projects have not received the same level of resources and attention. Hence this led to the concentration of women in marginal economic sectors. Concentration of female workers has become higher in ill-paid and low-skilled jobs, and we find occupational segregation of female laborers in such areas.

Experiences from East European transition economies also reveal the fact that there is preponderance of over-employment of female labor force in certain employments. These are the jobs with longer working hours, shorter retirement rates, and lower wages. ILO studies on women in the labor market (1990) reveal the occupational segregation and the employment problem of the women in transition economies. Concentration of female workers is high in the informal sector activities in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Data from Brazil, Jamaica and many others show that female laborers are concentrated in low-skilled jobs (Vickers,1991).

Displacement from original spheres of activity of both male and female laborers have combined with an increasing concentration of female labor force in marginal activities. It is the female with little or no skill who is then employed at the tail end of the production process. Thus globalization has brought in the indirect effect of occupational segregation into gender types.

There exists a subtle difference between segregation and gender stereotyping. Occupational segregation exists when men and women are differently distributed across occupations than is consistent with their overall shares of employment, irrespective of the nature of job allocation. Stereotyping is the phenomenon when the occupational segregation persists, maintains itself, and strengthens over time. Stereotyping is a dynamic concept, whereas segregation is a static one. There may be occupational segregation at two different points in time , but the patterns may be different. Stereotyping is said to exist when men and women continue to do the same type of work in the job market so that labor mobility across gender types are prohibited. Occupational segregation is thus necessary, but not sufficient for creation of gender stereotypes. So clearly we have two dimensions of any measure of stereotyping—the segregation and intensity of segregation along the same direction over time.

The measure of segregation can also be used for finding the extent of displacement of workers from existing jobs. If the pattern of segregation changes direction, then we may conclude that displacement of workers has occurred from one type of occupation to the other. However displacement can also take place without substantial occupational segregation. Since we are discussing the aspects of gender stereotyping, the paper does not consider the pattern of displacement that can occur without occupational segregation.

Occupational segregation hence can be measured and the overtime pattern of this measure can be observed. The overtime pattern can be either continuation of the pattern in the same direction or in different directions. If the pattern reinforces itself in the same direction, we claim that stereotyping has formed. If the pattern moves over to different directions, then we claim that displacement has occurred. However the displacement that occurs due to the shift in the pattern of occupational segregation is also indicating an emerging phenomenon of stereotyping.

The observed effects of the policies of structural adjustment and in-built globalization in the third world countries involves both the effects of stereotyping and displacement or in other words emerging stereotyping. Since stereotyping and displacement of gender types are both two dynamic aspects of the phenomenon of occupational segregation, the paper tries to look at both these aspects from the measure of occupational segregation. The following section deals with the measures of these effects.

II

The present section presents the existing measures on occupational segregation into gender types and then decomposes the existing measures into both the effects of existing stereotyping and emerging stereotyping. After a brief discussion of the drawbacks of the existing measures, an alternative measure has been suggested to analyze the two effects.

The simplest measure of occupational segregation has been the sex –ratio of the workers employed in the various occupations. If there exists n occupations indicated by ‘i’. Mi and Fi indicate respectively the number of male and female workers in the ith occupation, then S1 = Fi/ Mi indicate occupational segregation ratios. Higher S1means that the particular occupation ‘i’ has more concentration of females relative to males. Scott(1994) defined degrees of gender segregation in order of ascendance of the measure =S1. Higher values and lower values of the indicator helps to categorize the occupations as exclusively men (EXM), mainly men (M), mixed (MF), mainly women (F) and exclusively women (EXF). This measure has been used by a number of researchers successfully (Hakim, 1979; Reskin & Hartmann, 1986) to estimate the extent of segregation in different countries across occupations and also across jobs. Occupations are defined as aggregates over the cluster of jobs belonging to the occupation. Empirical data has shown that occupational segregation can smoothen out the extent of segregation across job types. So sometimes segregation across job types reveal the intra-occupational segregation. Whatever may be the extent of desegregation, this measure of segregation suffers from the absence of relativity as this does not measure relative concentration of females compared to males in the occupations.

Karmel and Maclachlan (1988) defined an index of occupational segregation where the aspect of relativity was included. Segregation in each occupation should be measured relative to the overall segregation. An occupation employing more females relative to males is not alone sufficient to claim segregation. The occupation becomes an F or M occupation if the occupation employs proportionately more females relative to the overall sex-ratio of the employees. Karmel and Maclachlan index ( K-M index) is presented below.

S2 = (1/T) ( |Fi – a(Mi + Fi )| =(1/T) ( | (1-a) Fi-aMi| (1)

where T and a stand for total employment and female share of total employment.

This index can be split up into constituent Composition and Mix effects, where the latter can be split up into Occupation, Gender and Interaction effects. The Composition effect looks at the change after excluding the change in the occupational structure and the associated change in the male and female employment. The Occupation effect looks into the change after excluding the change in the total employment and the proportional change involved in the respective occupations. The Gender effect is based on comparison after including the changed gender shares of the occupations. Since the change in the occupational structure and the change in the growth rates of both the female and male employment across occupations are related, there is an Interaction effect composed from both the effects. The K-M index have been developed further by Watts and Rich(1993). As an alternative to the above index, Blackburn, Siltanen and Jarman(1993, 1995) presented the marginal matching index(M-M) and index of dissimilarity (I-D). I-D may be interpreted as the sum of the minimum proportion of women plus the minimum proportion of men who would have to change their occupation in order for the proportion of female to be identical in all respects.

I-D=1/2((Fi/F – Mi// M(

Here the symbols indicate the number of females and males in female and male occupations and the total female and male occupations.

Siltanen, Blackburn and Jarman (1995) expressed I-D in terms of a basic segregation table where the measure clearly equals the proportion of women in female occupations minus the proportion of males in female occupations. However, this value is sensitive to the changes in occupational structure of labor force and the extent to which the occupations are feminized. The marginal matching index(M-M) intends to correct this disadvantage by measuring changes in occupational segregation by sex resulting exclusively from changes in the sex compositions of occupations.

MM=(Ff*Mm-Fm*Mf)/ F*M

The subscripts ‘f’ and ‘m’ indicate the occupations categorized into female and male categories. I-D and M-M are the same when half of the labor force is female.

The discomfort in the I-D as well as the M-M measures is the fact of determination of male and female occupations prior to the occupational segregation measures. Occupational segregation in the static sense and in the dynamic sense determines what occupations can be termed ‘ male’ and what occupations can be termed ‘ female’. Hence any measure based on the assumption of pre-existence of occupational categories runs into tautology.

The present paper tries to develop a dynamic aspect of the occupational segregation measure and tries to identify stereotypes and emerging stereotypes. The point of departure to construct such a measure would be an appropriate index of occupational segregation. For this purpose, any presupposition of occupation categories cannot be accepted. Hence the dynamic measure proposed in the next section is based upon K-M measure instead of M-M measure.

In the present paper we are trying to analyze the current and emerging stereotyping trend from the segregation measure. We take the K-M measure as our point of departure and construct the two effects to analyze the two trends. Current stereotyping of gender types into certain occupations means we need to concentrate on particular occupations rather than aggregates. We define S3i as the measure of segregation of the particular occupation.

S3i= {|Fi-a(Mi+Fi)|}/ ( |Fi-a(Mi+Fi)| (2)

As the above measures are weights, we have (S3i=1

To get information regarding stereotyping, we need to estimate the index over the time periods. Again as stereotyping is a measure which involves comparison of segregation across occupations, ith and jth occupation need to be compared.

We now define the measure for current stereotyping S4i,j as follows.

S 4i,j= S3i-S3j (3)

But this measure suffers from the fact that this is only a binary comparison and what we need to do is to identify a cluster or group of clusters. The measure indicates a matrix S4 and the dominant row in the matrix identifies the occupation with the highest segregation or concentration of female laborers. The descending order of this dominance also identifies a cluster.

0 S12S13……S1n

S4= S210S23……..S2n

………………………..

Sn1Sn2Sn3……….0

Since Sij ‘s with varying i’s indicate concentration of female laborers along the ith occupation, the dominant row identifies the female occupations and these are the occupations, where stereotyping develops.

To consider overtime effects, the segregation measure needs to be estimated at two time periods t and (t+1). So we have both S3it and S 3i(t+1) .But these measures are again responsive to at and a t+1. The suggested measure observes S 3i(t+1) at old sex-ratios i.e. at. This means that this would exclude the overall change in the segregation pattern. This defines S 3i(t+1) 1 as follows.

S 3i(t+1)1=S 3i(t+1)1 { F i(t+1) , M i(t+1) , a t} (4)

The above measure would identify if there exists an area where there is continued segregation. To know about existing and emerging areas of stereotyping, we need to distinguish between the following measures.

S 3i(t+1) 2 = S 3i(t+1) 1/ S3it1 (5)

S 3i(t+1) j(t+1) 1 =S 3i (t+1)1/ S 3j(t+1) (6)

(5) identifies if the pattern of segregation is in the same direction and (6) identifies the emerging areas of segregation.

The constructed measures can thus be used to locate areas where stereotyping exists as well as emerges as a trend. Cross- country data from the third world countries show that there exists not only segregation of occupations into gender types, but there has been an increasing concentration of female laborers in informal and marginal sectors of the economy. The results are uniform in all the countries. An analysis of Indian census data during the last three decades show the strong result that there have been marginalisation of female labor force in all the states throughout the country (Mukhopadhyay & Mitra, 1995).

There exists several theories in the literature explaining gender stereotyping. According to the neoclassical theory of human capital, we have the twin theories supported by demand and supply forces. The labor supply theory stresses on lower levels of human capital of women. Since women are lesser educated and trained, they are pushed to ill-paid jobs. The labor demand theories push forward the argument that there are direct and indirect costs of labor in the case of female laborers. The labor market segmentation theories base their arguments on the concept of dual labor market. They stress the existence of segregated labor markets and occupations. Gender theory makes a contribution to explaining occupational segregation by sex by pointing out how closely the characteristics of female occupations correspond to typical stereotypes of women and their supposed abilities. Traditionally women are endowed with caring nature, skill at household related work, greater manual dexterity, greater honesty etc. and these characteristics push women to ill-paid jobs.

However, none of these fully explain the phenomenon of emerging stereotypes. The reason for persistence of the phenomenon of stereotyping is due to existence of a vicious cycle in the process. Women are generally specialized in some marginal jobs, which are the ones which needs unregulated hours of work, piece-rate of payment and seasonal pattern of employment. Working in any of these jobs can thus by themselves cannot sustain any individual. The individuals are forced to participate in multiple jobs consequent in longer working hours and low wage rates. These are mostly unskilled labor but due to persistence of stereotyping, individuals who are stereotyped in this unskilled labor market attain a level of specialization in these jobs. Stereotypes are ‘specialized’ in these jobs and the cycle goes on and on. The cycle gets support from the demand as well as the supply side. The employers gain maximum profit by maintaining a backyard of marginal unskilled and semi-skilled laborers , who are to be paid the minimum. The suppliers of this type of labor are willing as the absence of regularity and labor laws fits in well with the unpaid labor market in the household. But as they participate in any one of them, they cannot sustain themselves without participating in the other. This develops the participation in the multiple labor markets. So the process gets reinforced by itself. Multiple labor markets reinforce a process of working in unregulated markets, which means occupational segregation. Figure 1 illustrates the above vicious cycle.

Multiple jobs

(

Ill-paid jobs

(

Occupational segregation

(

Stereotyping

(

Multiple jobs

Figure-1

Occupational segregation is thus the primary precondition for existence and generation of gender stereotyping. Since it is difficult to gather comparable data of worldwide distribution of occupational gender distribution, the work of identifying the emerging stereotype work zones worldwide still remains. However, one can get a feel of the problem from the statistics laid done in the following tables below. The table regarding earnings differential of female and male workers can be taken to be an indication of occupational segregation.

The problem is a persistent one and also a developing one mostly in the Third world countries and the transition economies. The process of globalization has also brought in new occupations and job types in the third world countries. This acts itself as a reinforcing process to create gender stereotypes. There is need to identify areas of existing and emerging stereotypes so that necessary actions can be taken in this regard to prevent such labor market rigidities.

REFERENCES

1. Anker, R(1998): Gender and jobs: Sex segregation of occupations in the world, ILO, Geneva.

2. Blau,F and Jusenius, C(1976) :’ Economist’s approaches to sex-segregation in the labour market’ , in M. Blaxall and B.Reagan (ed) Women in the workplace: Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

3. Elias,P(1988) : “Family formation, occupational mobility and part-time work” in Hunt(ed) Women and paid work,London,Macmillan.

4. Hakim,C(1979) : Occupational segregation, Research Paper 9 , Department of employment, London, HMSO.

5. Karmel and Maclachlan(1988) : Optional sex-segregation: increasing or decreasing, Economic Record, Vol 64.

6. Mukhopadhyay,I and Mitra, N (1995) : Gender bias of marketisation: a study of informal sector in West Bengal (mimeo): presentation in a national seminar on Market vs. planning in the honour of Prof. A. K. Dasgupta held in Viswabharati University, West Bengal.

7. Reskin,B and Hartmann,H (1986) : Women’s work; men’s work: sex-segregation on the job. Washington D.C. National Academy Press.

8. Scott, A, M,(1994) : Gender segregation and social change: men and women in changing labour markets. Oxford University Press.

9. Vickers,J (1991) : Women and the world economic crisis. Zed Books, London.

10. Watts,M and Rich, J (1993) : Occupational sex-segregation in Britain, 1979-1989.; the persistence of sexual stereotyping, CJE , Vol 17.

-----------------------

[1]Department of Economics, University of Calcutta, India, email: imukhopadhyay@

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download