Unit C - Blog 14

Britton begins to frame three questions regarding the theory of gendered organization based on one major issue. This issue is the persistent wage gap between men and women workers. Birtton explores this issue by researching why occupational segregation is persistent, why women concentrated jobs pay less, and what keeps women at the bottom of the ladder. After framing these questions she gives some of the reasons why these are issues. Those reasons include structures of work organizations, ideological functions that shape them, and the agencies of the workers themselves. Essentially she is saying that these three elements are the primary reasons that organizations are gendered. She goes on to explain that we first must acknowledge that organizations are unequal between genders. After that we can analyze it from micro levels, being the individuals, then from macro levels, such as social institutions, policies, and practices.

The three main components of this theory are all interlinked and take place together. The first aspect is the organizational structure. This includes the policies, procedures, and general configuration of an organization, which also includes laws. This is very systematic and is on a macro level. The structure is almost unnoticeable because it is engraved into the operations and some individuals don’t even realize that they are part of the segregation. An example used in the book was when a woman interviewed for a counselor, or correctional officer, in Alabama, but was denied due to her height and weight. With the structure of the laws and legal policies in Alabama at that time, this was valid. This structure automatically would have prevented women from even attempting to get the job. The next component is the cultural and ideological assumptions that shape us. Several examples of this include the media, interaction with others, and anything else that individuals are exposed to that display behaviors. I think movies are a great example for this. Britton uses military movies and the term, “a place where boys are turned into me.” Several movies make a reference to this saying, therefore influencing the culture of and thought processes of the individuals that watch this. I think this can be said for many things. In my last blog I referred to television shows always having female nurses that are good looking. The consistency of this on several different shows displays a cultural norm of nurses being good looking women. The last area is agency. This involves individuals’ interactions that imply gender inequalities. Britton notes that these often aren’t even intentional. The examples that come to me are terms like, “take it like a man,” and “quit whining like a girl.” I think these are the most relatable to me. Since studying in the justice field, I have noticed more and more of these types of remarks everywhere. I hear them from professors, co-workers, television, and especially sports talk radio. Will all three of these components working together our society continues to feed into gender segregation both intentionally and unintentionally.

When Britton says “organizations are gendered at the level of structure,” she means that how organizations are structure can influence gender segregation, and the amount of it. Obviously, as discussed above, the way an organization and society is structured can minimize the amount of segregation. Many of our current structures were designed before any laws were even created for women’s rights. We have certainly made some progress and changed some policies just enough to be in line with the law, but they have not been completely changed to eliminate gender inequalities. Because we are still following structures that were created when discrimination was socially accepted, we continue to reproduce and produce discriminatory behaviors. If organizations were designed or redesigned without gender being a factor, then the structure would be at a level where gender wouldn’t be as much of a factor in the organization. There would still be other things that would influence it like culture and agency, but the structure wouldn’t really allow for that to dictate jobs or salaries.

Public and private spheres become gendered based on history. Women have traditionally been the primary care takers of children. Clearly women also are biologically the primary care taker when birth first takes place, and there really isn’t any debating that. Because of that biological fact and historically women are the care takers of their children, society has structured around it. As society has progressed that has included the socialization of jobs, of men, and of society all together. These reflect on the history of labor by having socializing jobs for men without having to worry about them missing work because of physical effects of pregnancy or child birth. It has allowed for the primary focus of men to be work and of women to be childcare. This is another reason why women are directly affiliated to nurturing and caretaking jobs. These socializations then became norms and have continued to reproduce as time has progressed. They have now become a part of law and policies because it creates an inequality. Women are sometimes considered to be a bit of a liability because there is the chance of pregnancy, or even an emergency with a child to where they would have to leave work. Some policies have allowed for women to take maternity leave so they don’t have to worry about missing work. Laws have been formed for women to not be segregated against because of this biological function.