Occupational gender segregation--the tendency for women and men to work in different occupations--is an important feature of all societies, and particularly the wealthy industrialized ones. To understand this segregation, and to explain its significance, we need to distinguish between vertical segregation entailing inequality and horizontal segregation representing difference without inequality, with overall segregation being the resultant of these components. Three major theoretical approaches to understanding occupational gender segregation are examined: human capital/rational choice, patriarchy, and preference theories. All are found to be inadequate; they tend to confuse overall segregation with its vertical component, and each entails a number of other faults. It is generally assumed or implied that greater empowerment of women would reduce gender segregation. This is the reverse of what actually happens; in countries where the degree of women's empowerment is greater, the level of gender segregation is also greater. An alternative theoretical approach based on processes of social reproduction is shown to be more useful.
It is well known that women and men tend to work in different occupations, and generally held that this disadvantages women. In order to understand how far this occupational segregation entails gender inequality it is necessary to examine the vertical and horizontal dimensions of the segregation. The horizontal dimension measures difference without inequality while the vertical dimension measures the extent of the occupational inequality. Two measures of vertical inequality are used: pay and social stratification (CAMSIS). Measurements over a number of industrially developed countries show the expected male advantage with regard to pay. However, contrary to popular beliefs, women are consistently advantaged in terms of stratification. Also, it is found that the position of women is more favourable where the overall segregation is higher – the lower the male advantage on pay and the greater the female advantage on stratification.
This article presents a new approach to measuring the most important dimension of gender segregation - the vertical dimension-in quantitative survey data. This, in turn, allows for a reassessment of the view that high levels of gender segregation are synonymous with high levels of social inequality. In order to do this, the article also draws upon significant conceptual developments. `Segregation' as it is commonly understood is named as `overall' segregation, and is the resultant of two components, `horizontal' and `vertical' segregation, representing difference and inequality separately. This provides a clear approach to measurement. The argument is developed with a case study of the British labour force. The pattern of segregation, in terms of its overall level and its components, varies considerably across sections of the labour force. In terms of inequality, the vertical components measured indicate that British women working full-time are more advantaged than we would expect, and that women working in part-time manual occupations, though facing the greatest relative disadvantage in terms of pay, are actually slightly advantaged over men working in manual occupations in terms of social stratification. Although overall segregation has remained relatively unchanged over the five year period from 1991 to 1996, there have been some significant changes to its components within the various sections of the employed British labour force in that time. By looking at the various sections of the labour force, relative to the labour force as a whole, we can achieve a better understanding of how segregation operates with respect to gender inequalities.
Women experience significant morbidity in the early weeks postpartum, the extent of which may have been underestimated in previous research relying on retrospective recall. Findings contribute to the growing body of evidence that supports early identification, treatment, and support for women's physical health problems in the postpartum.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.