PM will take part in stoppage by women and non-binary people calling for pay equality and action on gender-based violence

Organisers hope the women’s strike – whose confirmed participants include fishing industry workers, teachers, nurses and the PM, Katrín Jakobsdóttir – will bring society to a standstill to draw attention to the country’s ongoing gender pay gap and widespread gender-based and sexual violence.

  • 0x815@feddit.deOPEnglish
    413·
    1 year ago

    For those interested, this year’s Nobel Prize for Economics has been awarded to economic historian Claudia Goldin at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, “for having advanced our understanding of women’s labour market outcomes”.

    Goldin mined 200 years of data to show that greater economic growth did not lead to wage parity, nor to more women in the workplace.

    Goldin’s work has helped to explain why women have been under-represented in the labour market for at least the past two centuries, and why even today they continue to earn less than men on average (by around 13%, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).

    Although such inequalities are widely recognized, they present a puzzle for economic models because they represent not just a potential injustice, but also what economists call a market inefficiency. Women seem to be both under-utilized and under-incentivized in the labour force, even though those in high-income countries typically now have a higher educational level than do men.

    • taladar@feddit.deEnglish
      232·
      1 year ago

      Women seem to be both under-utilized and under-incentivized in the labour force, even though those in high-income countries typically now have a higher educational level than do men.

      Maybe turn that around then. Why are more men stupid/uneducated enough to enter the labour force only to be exploited by their employers for little gain in areas of life that matter? Or alternatively, why do men not have the opportunity to avoid the labour force even if they do recognize it is not to their advantage to enter it?

      Obviously that is a bit nonsensical too but maybe the inherent assumption that it is good thing to spend a large percentage of your time labouring should be questioned if we want to answer questions like that.

      • RodeoEnglish
        8·
        1 year ago

        Yeah I mean it wasn’t 200 years ago that women stayed at home and provided huge amounts of value to the family. All that real-life value is being ignored so that we can ask why they weren’t working for someone else instead?

        What the fuck.

    • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.deEnglish
      93·
      1 year ago

      Although such inequalities are widely recognized, they present a puzzle for economic models because they represent not just a potential injustice, but also what economists call a market inefficiency.

      I am always fascinated, that each time the neoclassical school of economics proves to be false, they all act like thats a totally new and singular unexpected thing, as if this hasn’t been proved time and time again for all sorts of issues…

    • DessertStorms@kbin.social
      63·
      1 year ago

      market inefficiency

      Don’t get me wrong - people doing this kind of research and building up the data to prove the reality is a good thing, but the absurdity of turning to capitalism to resolve patriarchy is just much…

      It’s like the flip side of class reductionism - “only war is the gender war” - hey capitalists, look at this untapped resource, if you just exploit women 13% less, you can make all this extra profit!

      And while I completely support this strike, I wish they too would look at the bigger picture.

      The reality is that all these systems (capitalism and classism, sexism, racism, ableism, queerphobia, and so on) are interconnected and inseparable, they serve each other in many ways, and must all be abolished for us to have anything resembling a just society.