Gender inequality in the United States
However, despite this progress, gender inequality in the United States continues to persist in many forms, including the disparity in women's political representation and participation, occupational segregation, and the unequal distribution of household labor.
The United States government implemented these policies in response to the creation of and support from the National Organization for Women in 1966, establishing the mission to push for more vigorous enforcement of anti-discrimination laws.
To achieve true political equality, Lawless and Fox state that the key element is to "along with passing laws and policies that help integrate the workforce, undoing the traditional power dynamics of the family.
[17][18] In such cases, the stereotyped view of women is "favorable in content and yet prejudicial in [its] consequences," and attempts to provide justification for discriminatory behaviors presented as helpful or paternal.
These attitudes stem from patriarchal norms and traditional social standards, which tend to hold biased views about women's ability to express their ideas and political affiliations.
[23] Men's tendency to self-report the likelihood that they would commit sexually violent acts has also been found to increase after exposure to sexist humor, as reported by researchers from the University of Kent.
Their research emphasizes the effects that the political representation imbalance will result in a reduction of addressing complex and diverse issues and concerns, ultimately negatively impacting U.S.
[29] Unfortunately, with these stereotypes considering their types of candidacy based on their gender, they create more definite unfair expectations for women and highlight a significant difference in the power of their influence.
Schmitt's 2019 research discusses another active scenario of political imbalance: how the role of gender and elections is shaping the size of legislators' policy agendas in Congress.
[33] These authors examine the evolution of women's roles in political spheres, particularly in the context of the challenges faced during the 2016 elections, linking these to broader trends in contemporary feminism.
Her work suggests that traditional methods may not fully capture the complexities of women's contributions to politics, particularly in leadership roles where qualitative impacts are significant but often overlooked.
Similarly, Scott and Collins (2020) explore how emotional factors impact political ambition, suggesting that feelings of frustration and injustice spurred by current events can motivate women to seek office.
Research by Kanthak and Woon (2015) points to 'election aversion' as a significant barrier, where women, despite being equally qualified as men, often hesitate to enter competitive political races due to perceived high personal costs and low chances of success.
[35] Additional barriers include fundraising challenges, where Sorensen and Chen (2022) find that gender and race significantly influence the ability to raise campaign funds, often to the detriment of women, particularly those of color.
The insights from these studies underscore the complex, multi-faceted challenges and advancements in women's political participation in the United States, highlighting the ongoing efforts to achieve gender parity in all areas of government.
They ranked the United States last out of 20 industrialized countries in an index that measured such programs as family leave, alternative work arrangements, part-time employment, and other means to make workplaces more flexible and family-friendly.
These attitudes and biases can be exemplified in various ways, such as limiting women's access to education and job opportunities, perpetuating harmful stereotypes, and promoting unequal treatment in multiple careers.
However, in their survey and experiment results, Lawless and Fox discover that younger and recent generations do not view women in leadership roles negatively (both by male and female respondents).
[51][52] According to a study and analysis conducted by Lawless and Fox in 2018, women who work are still responsible for handling most household tasks at a rate six times higher than men (43% compared to 7%).
In 2013, the United Nations reported about democracy and gender equality by arguing "Democratic ideals of inclusiveness, accountability, and transparency cannot be achieved without laws, policies, measures, and practices that address inequalities."
[53] This has been confirmed by a number of other studies; for example Makiko Fuwa from University of California, Irvine noted that while there has been movement towards greater equality, "in 1995 American women still spent nearly twice as much time on housework than men" and there is also a segregation of household tasks.
[57] Researchers from the University of Michigan have found that from 1970 to 1985, the percentage of men and women who supported traditional social roles for wives and believed that maternal employment damages mother-child relationships or children's development decreased.
This initial entrance into a particular field of study is shaped by an individual's desires to take a certain set of classes, leading to somewhat specific career opportunities and subsequently, salaries.
[100] According to researchers at the University of Mississippi, undergraduate women have higher rates of expected educational attainment than men at the bachelors, masters, professional, and PhD degree levels.
[104] Women are extremely underrepresented in high-paying academic disciplines, like science, business, and law, yet overrepresented in low-paying fields, such as English, romance languages, and education.
[109] Structural racism and gender inequality affect access and awareness to healthcare and fertility care, like contraceptives, family planning resources, and sex education.
[131] The higher male suicide rate is also associated with traditionally masculine norms such as hyper-independence, reluctance to seek help, emotional unexpressiveness and social exclusion, according to all the available research on the matter.
[132][133] A research paper done by the Portland University provided evidence that the risk of male suicide could be social environmental factors (unemployment, discrimination, poverty), homophobic alienation, and stressful jobs.
[142] After controlling for legal and extralegal characteristics, a study done by the journal Justice Quarterly found that young, black and Hispanic males are at increased risk for citations, searches, arrests, and uses of force by the police.
[144] A meta-analysis done on experimental research about mock jurors found that it was advantageous for defendants (in sentencing) to be physically attractive, female, white, and of high socioeconomic status.
