Class Notes (835,500)
Canada (509,212)
Sociology (3,252)
SOC366H1 (25)


19 Pages
Unlock Document

Michael Reid

Sex Segregation and Barriers to Integration: Numbers vs. Gendered Structures Agenda 1. How do we Know Sex Segregation Exits? measurement 2. Focus: Moving Up and Taking Charge • Women and promotions 3. Barriers to Integration: Numbers vs. Gendered Structures 4. mid-term details -looking at sex segregation at level of occupation -occupational sex segregation : jobs being seen as male or female across different occupations – this is what chart is . -gender concentration: the concentration of men and womenwithin a single occupation Distribution of Employees across Occupations (Canada, 2006 census) -looks at male and female differences in employment. Do they do different types of work? -women dominate service industry, men are in trade industry and in managerial positions. Men have more decision making power. -women are in people-oriented jobs, men in labour jobs. -largest distribution difference is in business sector – - Gender typing jobs – masc and fem – have more women and female -2 occupational groups that are mixed – filtering system going on - men dominate white collar and blue collar. 2 different types of masculinities but still definite notion of who fills the positions. -women dominate health and government occupations – because government has to be example of employment equity. They are good jobs, unionized, pensions, good job security. Measuring Sex Segregation Index of Dissimilarity (ID) What it Measures: • proportion of cases that would need to be reallocated in order to make the two distributions the same • Varies between zero (no sex segregation) and one (complete sex segregation) • To measure sex segregation in occupation. Shows how proportion of women who would have to change jobs to have equal occupation distribution • Measures race, ethnicity, gender, age – any type of dominance Problem: • sensitive to factors other than segregation itself • doesn’t control for things like influxes in labour market participation. Just like mean and average, it is really swayed by outliers. If a whole bunch of women enter the labour market, shifts the data. Effects levels of segregation. Vertical Sex Segregation -sex segregation – occupational segregation, at level of occupation. Why do we use this? -easy to collect data in census. Problem with that – primary level of analysis – there are many occupations under one title i.e. “health”. When we use this big giant measures it makes it look like things are integrated but they probable are not. i.e. doctors and nurses make it look like it’s more integrated than it actually is. Underestimates real level of sex segregation. -graph shows how dangerous it is – women – 35% of management – not that bad. These numbers are broken down more specifically. -men = yellow, women = red. -higher we get in decision making power, the fewer women we find in position. Fortune 500 Board Seats Held by Women Catalyst Statistics -women on boards – important for networking, have a lot of sway. Are decision makers, not just a title. -seems to be plateauing. Shows trend – important indication for future. Last 5 years – 1% increase. Vertical and Horizontal Sex Segregation Horizontal segregation : • Different but not differentially valued • Gender concentration/dominance • Measure of gender dominance in different occupations. Men and women do different types of work across different types of work. But equally valued. Vertical segregation : • Different and differentially valued • status, as well as the gender dominance, of the occupation- status differences • men and women do different types of work that is value i.e. managerial, high prestige, high pay. Overall segregation is a combination of vertical and horizontal -international examples: over sex segregation – high levels of both sex segregation – Scandinavian – have horizontal sex segregation – do fiferent types of work, not differently valued. Quate – has vertical sex segregation – have high status. Need to look overall – need t see what is driving it. -countries with high vertaical difference will also have horizontal segregation - also different types of work, go together. Conceptualizing Segregation Components -overal is the graph, go along for horizontal and high is vertical segregation. Need to know which on is which and label. 1981 1986 1991 1996 % Change Vertical .45 .36 .31 .27 -41% Horizontal .60 .62 .62 .64 +6% -in Canada – over time there has been a decrease in vertical – have gained more status jobs but still highly distributed horizontally. -index of similarity – 45% of women would have to change jobs to have no sex segregation in vertical jobs. -what explains these trends – changes in labour force participation in total – women have more than doubled – 80s start to enter male-dominated jobs breaking glass ceiling. Occupations that are feminized haven’t changed. We are entering still gendered occupations, some women entering womanly occupations but not men entering women’s. focus of vertical component – getting women into management positions. Promotions & Women 4 Key Ares where Women face barriers to integration: 1. Getting into male dominated jobs -sex segregation problem – getting into male dom. Jobs and industries 2. Getting into managerial jobs -at the top rungs – glass ceiling problem – inequity in promotions 3. Getting ‗real‘ authority -in management jobs, but now need to get real authority. Beyond a title. You control finances, hiring and firing. 4. Exercising authority -compliance problem – getting subordinates to comply. Useful Concepts: • The Glass Ceiling (and other ceilings) • Metaphor – women get promoted at equally as men up until a point. You are climbing and then you stop at invisible barrier. • i.e. seen easily within an occupation – law – a lot of women associates, very few partners. See professors at associate level, few chairs. Discrimination, have own culture, you’re an outsider. What happened to men? Do they face ceiling? No they have glass escalator. • Glass Escalator • Christine Williams – men entering female dominated occupations. Structurally advantaged that advantages men – idea of mobility is still a masculine idea. Men need to be managing the women. • Sticky Ladder • Different name for effect of glass ceiling – women are in the status ladder and they get stuck • Sticky Floors • Characterize women’s predominance n service-sector jobs –flat in mobility structure. This is in feminized occupations, they are bad jobs. This points to the problem of horizontal segregation. There is nowhere to move up. Theories Role of Organization Structures/Processes 1. Rosabeth Moss Kanter‘s (1977) Men and Women of the Corporation Tokenism • Overall Idea: workplace social structure shapes thought and behavior • hypothesis: as proportions begin to shift, so also do social experiences • proportion of people in a work room. Looking at female tokens ( there are fewer). As proportions shift, so do social experiences. The more you add subordinate group people, we start to think of them differently. ****** TEST : her work on tokenism – women are the subordinate group and men are dominant – not talking about gende per say – ANY SOCIAL CATEGORY WHERE YOU HAVE DOM AND SUBORDINATE GROUP – YOU WILL HAVE TOKEN PROBLEM. WHEN YOU SHIFT PROPORTIONS, YOU CREATE AN EQUITABLE SITUATIO, CHANGES WHAT WE THINK AND WHAT WE EXPECT. IT IS A NUMBERED ARGUMENT. ELIMINATES BIAS ETC. if you shift the proportion, you are change the behavior. !!!Kanters, as you add more women, that’s gonna change the behavior, more equitable and no more tokenism. , number& gender.(her case is gender, but she focus on number. It’s a number argument) • there is a masculine ethic: organizations reward those who act like traditional masculine qualities– no emotion, authoritative. • What is a Token? • a salient social category that represents no more than 15% of people in a work setting (dominant versus subordinate group— not specific to gender per se!) • 3 things you experience by being token • Visibility • Look like the other, large awareness. • You experience heightened performance problem. • Everything is noticed so the token becomes the symbol of a subordinate group – i.e. their action speaks for all minority, this is how they behave • Contrast • Insiders vs. outsiders – not only visible, you are different – other status. The dominant group heightens their boundaries to keep minority out. Not to keep them out but because they like what they have going on. • Stereotyping • You are the representation of the job. • Distorting characteristics to fit stereotypes – i.e. women manger is assumed that she is secretary • “office mom” – women in administrative position represents mom. -integrating women in male-dominated contrast – male closure – most mangers are men, they hire men. Will a women fit? This sways behaviour of manager. What about clients? Will they be comfortable, what are competitors doing. Wmen are seen as risky labour – not like me, can’t predict what you’re going to do – homosocial reproduction: reproducing like me. -outsider withi – intersectionality Role of Organization Structures/Processes Janice D. Yoder and Patricia Aniakudo. (1997). “Outsider within the Firehouse: Subordination and Difference in the Social Interactions of African American Women Firefighters”. Hostile Organization Environment • Relational demography and defining ‗outsiders‘ complicated when we intersec
More Less

Related notes for SOC366H1

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.