Maria Charles

Indulging Our Gendered Selves? Sex Segregation by Field of Study in 44 Countries

Data from 44 societies are used to explore sex segregation by field of study. Contrary to accounts linking socioeconomic modernization to a “degendering” of public‐sphere institutions, sex typing of curricular fields is stronger in more economically developed contexts. The authors argue that two cultural forces combine in advanced industrial societies to create a new sort of sex segregation regime. The first is gender‐essentialist ideology, which has proven to be extremely resilient even in the most liberal‐egalitarian of contexts; the second is self‐expressive value systems, which create opportunities and incentives for the expression of “gendered selves.” Multivariate analyses suggest that structural features of postindustrial labor markets and modern educational systems support the cultivation, realization, and display of gender‐specific curricular affinities.

Equal but separate? A cross-national study of sex segregation in higher education

The contours and correlates of sex segregation in higher education are explored using data from twelve advanced industrialized countries. Tertiary sex segregation is examined across two dimensions: field of study (horizontal segregation) and tertiary level (vertical segregation). The authors argue that the different aspects of female status in higher education (e.g., overall enrollments, representation at the postgraduate level, and representation in traditionally male-dominated fields of study) do not covary because each variable is affected in distinct ways by structural and cultural features commonly associated with modernity. In particular, (1) ideals of universalism do more to undermine vertical segregation than horizontal segregation, and (2) some modern structural features may actually exacerbate specific forms of sex segregation. Consistent with these arguments, results suggest strongly integrative effects of gender-egalitarian cultural attitudes on distributions across tertiary levels, and weaker, less uniform cultural effects on distributions across fields of study (one notable exception being a strong positive effect on womens representation in engineering programs). Two modern structural features-diversified tertiary systems and high rates of female employment-show segregative effects in some fields and institutional sectors. Overall, few across-the-board integrative or segregative effects can be discerned that would lend support to evolutionary conceptualizations of gender stratification. Modern cultural and structural pressures are manifested unevenly and in contextually contingent ways

Deciphering Sex Segregation Vertical and Horizontal Inequalities in Ten National Labor Markets

Scholars and policy-makers increasingly treat occupational sex segregation as a generic indicator of female economic disadvantage. This view is difficult to reconcile with evidence that levels of sex segregation are lower in reputably ‘gender-traditional’ countries such as Italy, Japan, and Portugal than in ‘progressive’ Sweden and the United States. Understanding such seemingly anomalous patterns requires a two-dimensional conceptualization of occupational sex segregation - in particular, an analytical distinction between vertical and horizontal gender inequalities. Based on data from 10 industrialized countries, claims regarding (1) the hybrid nature of sex segregation and (2) the cultural and structural factors that influence its various components are empirically assessed. Results confirm that unequal distributions across the manual-non-manual divide (‘horizontal segregation’) and status differentials within these sectors (‘vertical segregation’) together account for a considerable share of occupational gender inequality. Gender-egalitarian cultural norms are associated with lower levels of vertical segregation in the non-manual sector, while postindustrial economic structures coincide with greater horizontal segregation (and more vertical segregation of non-manual occupations). The complex horizontal and vertical dynamics revealed here cast further doubt on unidimensional conceptualizations of sex segregation. They also provide the key for deciphering some long-standing empirical puzzles in the field.Scholars and policy-makers increasingly treat occupational sex segregation as a generic indicator of female economic disadvantage. This view is difficult to reconcile with evidence that levels of sex segregation are lower in reputably ‘gender-traditional’ countries such as Italy, Japan, and Portugal than in ‘progressive’ Sweden and the United States. Understanding such seemingly anomalous patterns requires a two-dimensional conceptualization of occupational sex segregation ‐ in particular, an analytical distinction between vertical and horizontal gender inequalities. Based on data from 10 industrialized countries, claims regarding (1) the hybrid nature of sex segregation and (2) the cultural and structural factors that influence its various components are empirically assessed. Results confirm that unequal distributions across the manual‐non-manual divide (‘horizontal segregation’) and status differentials within these sectors (‘vertical segregation’) together account for a considerable share of occupational gender inequality. Gender-egalitarian cultural norms are associated with lower levels of vertical segregation in the non-manual sector, while postindustrial economic structures coincide with greater horizontal segregation (and more vertical segregation of non-manual occupations). The complex horizontal and vertical dynamics revealed here cast further doubt on unidimensional conceptualizations of sex segregation. They also provide the key for deciphering some long-standing empirical puzzles in the field.

The past, present, and future of sex segregation methodoloqy

We review the logic underlying margin-free analyses of sex segregation arrays. In the course of our review, we show that the Karmel-MacLachlan decomposition does not live up to its margin-free billing, as the index upon which it rests, Ip, is itself margin-sensitive. Moreover, because the implicit individualism of D is necessarily inconsistent with margin-free analysis, the field would do well to abandon not merely the Karmel-MacLachlan decomposition but all related efforts to purge marginal dependencies from D-inspired measures. The criticisms that Watts (1998) levels against our log-multiplicative approach are likewise unconvincing. We demonstrate that our preferred models pass the test of organizational equivalence, that the “problem⤎ of zero cells can be solved by applying well-developed methods for ransacking incomplete or sparse tables, and that simple log-multiplicative models can be readily devised to analyze disaggregate arrays. We illustrate these conclusions by analyzing a new cross-national archive of detailed segregation data.

Organizational and Institutional Factors in the Process of Gender Stratification: Comparing Social Arrangements in Six European Countries

Industrial nations vary widely with regard to the extensiveness and the nature of womens occupational activities.1 In Western Europe alone, rates of female labor force participation for 1988 ranged from about 38 percent of the working-age population in Ireland to over 84 percent in Sweden (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 1990a, Country Tables II). Recent research also provides evidence of some great international differences in womens labor market distribu tions (Charles 1992). Levels and patterns of occupational sex segrega tion range widely, even among Western European countries with quite similar economic and social structures.

UNEVEN INROADS: UNDERSTANDING WOMEN’S STATUS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Growth in female tertiary enrollment has been accompanied by persistent gender differentiation within systems of higher education worldwide. We identify three dimensions of female “status” in higher education – overall female enrollments, sex segregation across tertiary levels, and sex segregation across fields of study – and we offer a conceptual framework for understanding cross-national similarity and variability on these dimensions. Commonalities across countries reflect the interaction of global pressures for expansion and democratization of education with persistent cultural representations of “gender difference.” Variability can be attributed, in part, to the different ways in which global cultural and structural pressures have been manifested within particular socio-historical settings.

What Gender Is Science

Looking at science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields across countries challenges the assumption that women in more economically and culturally modern societies enjoy greater equality. Rather, freedom to choose a career may paradoxically cause women in affluent Western democracies to construct and replicate stereotypically gendered self-identities.

Culture and Inequality: Identity, Ideology, and Difference in “Postascriptive Society”

How have conceptualizations of “culture” been incorporated into sociological studies of class, racial/ethnic, and gender inequality? This article first reviews the development of American scholarship on social inequalities during the past half century and the role of cultural analysis in this development. It goes on to consider culture-related responses to three central questions in the subdiscipline and closes with an examination of currently contentious issues. Likely future developments include movement toward more fluid, contextually contingent conceptualizations of class, race, and gender and an increasing prominence of analyses that explore the dynamic interplay between individual, interactional, and institutional processes of inequality.

Who Likes Math Where? Gender Differences in Eighth-Graders' Attitudes around the World.

Some of the most male-dominated science, technology, engineering and mathematics occupations and degree programmes are found in the world’s most affluent societies. This article assesses whether gender gaps in attitudes follow similarly surprising patterns. Multivariate analysis of eighth-graders’ affinity for mathematics and aspirations for mathematically related jobs in 53 countries shows that the attitudinal gender gap is indeed larger in affluent ‘postmaterialist’ societies. Moreover, both girls and boys view mathematics more negatively in these societies. The authors suggest that cultural ideals of individual self-expression, highly prevalent under conditions of broad-based existential security, operate to reduce girls’ and boys’ interest in pursuits thought to be economically practical but personally non-expressive. Girls may be particularly susceptible to this negative effect, because taken-for-granted cultural beliefs about core female personality traits (and girls’ gendered understandings of their own authentic inner selves) are often at odds with dominant representations of mathematical and technical work.

Venus, Mars, and Math

The author explores how the gender gap in aspirations for scientific, technical, engineering, and mathematical (STEM) work changes with societal affluence. Over-time data on cohorts of eighth graders in 32 countries reveal that aspirations for mathematically related work become more gender differentiated as societal affluence grows. This relationship holds controlling for students’ social class backgrounds, mathematical achievement, and affinity for school, and it is not explained by cross-national differences in the economic integration of women, gender stereotyping of science, or Internet access. Observed patterns of gender segregation reflect more than just women’s greater freedom to indulge tastes for non-STEM work in affluent societies; tastes are themselves more gendered in these contexts.