Paradox Of Gender Equality: What It Is And How It Is Reflected In Society
Our society has advanced in recent decades towards equal rights and obligations between both sexes.
However, phenomena have emerged that researchers are still trying to explain. One of them is the paradox of gender equality. In this article we are going to try to better understand what it means and what are some of the bases that would explain its existence.
The paradox of gender equality is a phenomenon detected when analyzing the relationship between the degree of equal rights and freedoms implemented in a given society together with statistics regarding the behavior of the population based on gender. The paradox occurs because it has been observed that, The more egalitarian a society is, the more a series of differences between men and women become entrenched faced with certain ways of choosing.
Why is it a surprising phenomenon? Because, apparently, the more similar the opportunities that both genders have in all areas of life become, we might think that the behavioral differences between them would tend to become increasingly diluted until they practically disappear. But the paradox of gender equality shows us that this does not always happen.
And it’s not just that it doesn’t happen, but in certain aspects, The differences between men and women become much more visible in those countries or societies that are apparently advanced in gender equality than in those where the indicators show that they are in a much more pronounced state of inequality.
So, what one might ask is, how is it possible that, the more efforts a society dedicates to eliminating the barriers that differentiate men and women, some of these divergences become increasingly accentuated? We will try to shed more light on this issue by exploring more facets of the gender equality paradox below.
The paradox of gender equality in the educational field
One of the areas where the paradox of gender equality has gained the most strength is precisely in the field of education and in the choices men and women make to build their respective careers In this sense, more than evident differences have been observed between the behaviors carried out by different genders in more traditional (and therefore less egalitarian) societies and those that take place in more modern countries.
It is not a question of opinion, but of data: countries like Saudi Arabia, which score much higher in inequality indices than others like Sweden, show an overwhelmingly higher proportion of women graduating in engineering and other technological careers. Specifically, in Saudi Arabia, almost half of the people who graduate in these disciplines (45%) are women, compared to just 15% observed in Sweden.
However, it is evident that much more has been legislated and fought for equal opportunities for women and men in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia. So, why does this obvious paradox of gender equality appear when we analyze the rates of students in technical careers? Shouldn’t the indicators approach 50% in each gender the more equality there is in the country?
Although this is the case in many other areas, it seems that career choice is an issue that escapes this logic, and this is demonstrated by the indicators. Of the countries that, according to different organizations, are in the top positions in gender equality, women only represent 20% of the total graduates in the so-called STEM disciplines (in English, acronym for science, technology, engineering and mathematics) .
On the other hand, in the countries that are most unequal between men and women, the percentage of women in STEM faculties skyrockets. We have already seen the data from Saudi Arabia, but in other countries, such as Iran, this rate increases to 70%. Because?
How is it reflected in the workplace?
Another scenario in which the paradox of gender equality has also been observed is that of entrepreneurship In 2021, Steinmetz and his team conducted a meta-analysis of another 119 studies in which this phenomenon was analyzed in more than 36 countries, accumulating a total sample of more than 260,000 people.
This work offered results similar to those we have already reviewed regarding the choice of university majors. In this case, women from less egalitarian countries were more likely to start and create their own businesses than those from those societies where the most legislative progress had been made towards gender equality. Another example of the paradox of gender equality.
Why is this happening?
Obviously, the question that arises in anyone’s mind when faced with this approach is, why does the paradox of gender equality occur? The first thing to keep in mind is that this question has two segments to take into account, because On the one hand, we must understand why in unequal countries there is greater equality in the area of ​​careers, but also why in more egalitarian countries there is greater inequality
That is, if this index remained firm in both egalitarian and non-egalitarian countries, whether indicating a majority of women in science careers, a majority of men in them, or equality between them, we would only have to worry to study why the forecasts are not met in one of the two cases.
But the paradox of gender equality makes the issue counterintuitive in both cases: the greater equality in society, the more inequality in that area, but also, the less equality, the less inequality when choosing scientific disciplines. Therefore, we will need hypotheses that explain both problems, or one for each situation, so that they explain the paradox in a complementary way.
One of the ideas that some of the researchers put forward to try to provide an explanatory basis for this issue is economic. In that sense, it is obvious that technical disciplines usually report higher salaries in the future than other types of careers. Therefore, the approach would be that, In the most unequal countries, women tend to enroll more in these careers to improve their economic position
This hypothesis could explain part of the paradox of gender equality, but there is a problem, and that is that it would apply to the situation of countries with inequality between men and women in which there is a low GDP, as is the case of many of them. , but it would not serve to shed light on the case of Saudi Arabia, for example, a country with gender inequalities but rich.
Likewise, the hypothesis would focus on the cases of unequal countries. But what about those where great equality between women and men has been achieved? One of the proposals for this case has been controversial because it conflicts with the very foundations of gender equality. It refers to the innate preferences of one another.
What if the question simply had to do with what men like to do most and what women are most attracted to, always in statistical terms? If this were so, it would seem that, once similar equality of rights and freedoms has been achieved for men and women, both men and women are freer to say questions such as the discipline to study, without other variables being involved.
If this hypothesis were correct, it would mean that men innately have a greater preference for technological careers while women more frequently lean towards disciplines in the humanities, medicine, psychology, and other careers. In that case, it would seem that wanting to achieve 50% of each gender in each and every field would be a question far removed from people’s own preferences.
This case raises an interesting dilemma: which society is more free and equal, the one that imposes restrictions so that half of those enrolled in each degree program are of one gender and the other half of the other, or the one that allows each individual to freely choose? their future, with everyone having exactly the same options to decide on?
This is a really complex issue to which experts still have no answer, so these hypotheses are simply that, hypotheses. Much research is still required in order to understand the paradox of gender equality and thus explain the differences observed in all the cases presented.
