Introduction
Labor issues in America have historically been constantly confronted by conflicts between employers and workers. The specifics of the problems were quite diverse – from the gap in salaries between positions to the lack of respect for employees. The Great Depression, the boom in production, and many other critical events were a turning point in the development of the system and working conditions that we have today.
An equally important issue was gender – women’s rights were infringed for a long time and experienced a significant transformation only in the 19th and 20th centuries (Wortman and Sessions 37). This aspect is hugely complex, as it includes, from different historical perspectives, religious, economic, and political issues that, to one degree or another, impede gender equality in relation to labor. This paper offers a detailed analysis with evidence of sex differences in America regarding work. The central thesis is that the regulation of rights and main trends over time have been influenced by three directions: the purpose of each sex and the stereotypes associated with it, the historically established prism of patriarchy, and, finally, the division of labor into individual and collective.
Main Differences
Gender Purpose
Historically, it was believed that while the man worked and provided for the family, the woman looked after the children and the house. However, the case of America has become somewhat destructive in relation to this stereotype; since the economic situation, the wave of emigration created the need for work for every family member. For example, in his book “The Jungle,” Upton Sinclair tells the story that women had to work a week after giving birth and send their minor children to work (Sinclair 78). Accordingly, childbirth, as a woman’s destiny, has long been considered one of the only tasks of girls throughout life, which is why employers did not resort to hiring them because of the need for long holidays.
Even if women were given a position, their requirements were often slavish due to lack of experience and assessments of their ability to work – a person in a lower position did not differ by gender (Wortman and Sessions 48). This approach adversely affected their health, and it was only during union uprisings, falling birth rates, and rising infant deaths that the alarm began to sound (Greenhouse 473). Although it is difficult to single out the turning point when women approached equality, the reasons were laid down a very long time ago.
Another unpleasant factor was that in history, the only position that a woman could get was to work in a brothel. However, here, too, the conditions of detention of female employees were also inhuman – often, women were subjected to violence or involuntary drug addiction (Sinclair 220). Accordingly, the stereotype of a woman’s destiny as an object for the birth of children and the satisfaction of pleasure significantly hindered the development of their rights in the labor market.
Historical Patriarchate
The interweaving of these directions and factors is quite close. Given that men did business outside the home, sooner or later, as society developed, they came to power over relatively large groups and communities. This power was naturally seized by men-king and pharaohs; the only heirs to the throne were considered sons, but not daughters – such a long historical practice led to the reign of the stereotype of patriarchy, which could not be changed by the means and forces that women possessed. It even raised the religious issue that women are primarily disadvantaged because Jesus is a man (Wortman and Sessions 84).
Accordingly, the foundations only served to increase this gap from century to century, and only the turning points of economic and social life in America became a moment of change. The times described by Upton Sinclair already involved girls getting jobs. Even then, however, women leaders were scarce—they could qualify for small jobs but were abused by male bosses (Sinclair 108). Echoes of patriarchy were manifested through such attitudes, even though women were given the right to work.
It turns out that the ruthless time left women with the opportunity only for a successful marriage, which promised financial well-being, but not for hard work, which was presented as a mandatory component of the American dream (Greenhouse 83). Over and over again, women were returned to their destiny, at best, to be the guardians of the family hearth, cutting off the paths and opportunities for the manifestation of an individual personality, which undoubtedly was an echo of the established patriarchy.
Collective and Individual
Again, a consequence of the previous direction, which limits women’s rights compared to the achievements of men in labor, is the division of labor into collective and individual. Women were thought to be more capable in collective labor, which usually involved a lot of lower positions (Greenhouse 571). Their individuality could manifest itself without proper education and connections only in brothels or through sexual relations at work, which was often a part of blackmail rather than an opportunity to move up the career ladder (Sinclair 108). The times of recession and other crises in America have only emphasized this gap, leaving the only lot for women to die in poverty or childbirth (Sinclair 139).
At the same time, male actors could achieve the American Dream through hard work and entrepreneurship. The manifestations of their individualism were primarily explained by the previous directions described—stable patriarchy contributed to promotion and networking, and the purpose of the miners gave the green light to any activity. Collective efforts did not degenerate into trade unions along racial and gender lines, far from immediately – this was facilitated by extended times of crisis that hit both businesses and, to a greater extent, ordinary people who could not afford shelter and food.
Conclusion
As a result, differences in the market and working conditions between men and women have long been dictated by historical gender stereotypes, established patriarchy, and women’s exclusive access to collective positions without the opportunity to express their identity. The birth and care of children in the family required time and attention so that the child could safely get on his feet in a dysfunctional society, but the price of time was too high for a woman not to work. In fact, even when women were given access to jobs and could get jobs, they were marginalized by blackmail and violence by well-connected male bosses who got away with everything in a system full of stereotypes. All this, for a long time, led to monstrous consequences in each case – babies died as soon as they were born, families were often very sick, and it was possible to obtain financial well-being only by chance or by inheritance.
Moreover, in relation to men, the opportunity remained to catch the American dream in its original interpretation – through hard work. An example is Henry Ford, whose activities were also described by Upton Sinclair in the novel “The Automobile King,” but his power and opportunities described him as far from being the most good-natured person (Brinkley and Brinkley 202). Nevertheless, history will remember Ford as a skilled and talented engineer who created an automobile empire, but not as a socially irresponsible person.
Now, some trends continue to have their impact, but gender equality in work has changed significantly since the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Women have the opportunity to become leaders and even lead entire states. In addition, many large companies are now guided by social responsibility requirements, including issues of inclusion and diversity, by law or, at a minimum, at the level of codes governing workplace relations, rights, and obligations (Teng et al. 254).
Maternity leave now has a legal basis, and, in particular, progressive countries allow fathers to go on leave (Dudgeon and Bray 23). Although the problems of violence and blackmail still exist predominantly against women, there is now jurisprudence that has finally freed itself from stereotypical and corrupt thinking regarding gender equality. Despite the heterogeneity of this progress, society has become more balanced. As a result, the main areas that impede gender equality in labor markets—patriarchy, stereotypes, and collectivization of labor—have been almost eliminated, making it possible for more adequate and healthy global community development.
Works Cited
Brinkley, Douglas, and D. Brinkley. Wheels for the world: Henry Ford, his company, and a century of progress, 1903-2003. New York: Viking, 2003.
Dudgeon, Patricia, and Abigail Bray. “Indigenous relationality: Women, kinship and the law.” Genealogy, vol. 3, no. 2, 2019, 23.
Greenhouse, Steven. Beaten down, worked up: The past, present, and future of American labor. Anchor, 2020.
Sinclair, Upton. The Jungle:(1906). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2014.
Teng, Fei, et al. “Sexism and the effectiveness of femvertising in China: A corporate social responsibility perspective.” Sex Roles, vol. 84, 2021, 253-270.
Wortman, Jack, and Robert Sessions. Working in America: A humanities reader. University of Notre Dame Press, 1992.