1932

Abstract

Various forms of inequality, such as the gender, race, and class systems of inequality, operate and intersect in societies and markets. In this review, I discuss specifically the gender system of inequality. I focus on market interactions, conceptualizing them as the building blocks for gender inequalities in markets. My objective is to give an account of the complex interplay between the unequal distributions of resources, stereotypes and cultural beliefs about gender, and the law. I start by describing the persistence of gender inequality in markets. Building on studies in social psychology, I then identify the ways in which stereotypes and cultural beliefs about gender constantly, and unconsciously, frame our market interactions. Lastly, I discuss the limits of the law in altering the ways in which we interact in markets and the potential of the law to bring about lasting change.

Keyword(s): genderinequalitymarketsstereotypes
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111620-012514
2021-10-13
2024-06-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/17/1/annurev-lawsocsci-111620-012514.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111620-012514&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Albiston C. 1999. The rule of law and the litigation process: the paradox of losing by winning. Law Soc. Rev. 33:4869–910
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Albiston CR. 2010. Institutional Inequality and the Mobilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act: Rights on Leave Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Albiston CR, Correll SJ, Stevens C, Tucker T. 2012. Laws, norms and the motherhood/caretaker penalty Doc., Am. Bar Found. Chicago: http://www.americanbarfoundation.org/uploads/cms/documents/albiston_120512.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Altonji JG. 1993. The demand for and return to education when education outcomes are uncertain. J. Labor Econ. 11:148–83
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ayres I, Siegelman P. 1995. Race and gender discrimination in bargaining for a new car. Am. Econ. Rev. 85:3304–21
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Babcock L, Laschever S. 2009. Women Don't Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Baron JN, Mittman BS, Newman AE. 1991. Targets of opportunity: organizational and environmental determinants of gender integration within the California civil service, 1979–1985. Am. J. Sociol. 96:61362–401
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Berger PL, Luckmann T. 1967. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge Garden City, NY: Anchor
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Berkowitz L, Walker N. 1967. Laws and moral judgments. Sociometry 30:4410–22
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Berrey E, Nelson RL, Nielsen LB. 2017. Rights on Trial: How Workplace Discrimination Law Perpetuates Inequality Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bertrand M. 2020. Gender in the twenty-first century. AEA Pap. Proc. 110:1–24
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bertrand M, Kamenica E, Pan J. 2015. Gender identity and relative income within households. Q. J. Econ. 130:2571–614
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Best RK, Edelman LB, Krieger LH, Eliason SR. 2011. Multiple disadvantages: an empirical test of intersectionality theory in EEO litigation. Law Soc. Rev. 45:4991–1025
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Bianchi SM, Milkie MA, Sayer LC, Robinson JP. 2000. Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor. Soc. Forces 79:191–228
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Bianchi SM, Sayer LC, Milkie MA, Robinson JP. 2012. Housework: Who did, does or will do it, and how much does it matter?. Soc. Forces 91:155–63
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Black DA, Haviland AM, Sanders SG, Taylor LJ. 2008. Gender wage disparities among the highly educated. J. Hum. Resour. 43:3630–59
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Blair IV, Banaji MR. 1996. Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 70:61142–63
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Blair SL, Lichter DT. 1991. Measuring the division of household labor: gender segregation of housework among American couples. J. Fam. Issues 12:191–113
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Blau FD, Brummund P, Liu AY-H. 2013. Trends in occupational segregation by gender 1970–2009: adjusting for the impact of changes in the occupational coding system. Demography 50:2471–92
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Blau FD, Kahn LM. 2017. The gender wage gap: extent, trends, and explanations. J. Econ. Lit. 55:3789–865
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Bohren JA, Imas A, Rosenberg M. 2019. The dynamics of discrimination: theory and evidence. Am. Econ. Rev. 109:103395–436
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Boring A, Ottoboni K, Stark P. 2016. Student evaluations of teaching (mostly) do not measure teaching effectiveness. ScienceOpen Res https://doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AETBZC.v1
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  23. Brines J. 1994. Economic dependency, gender, and the division of labor at home. Am. J. Sociol. 100:3652–88
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Brewer MB 1997. On the social origins of human nature. The Message of Social Psychology: Perspectives on the Mind in Society C McGarty, SA Haslam 54–62 Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Budig MJ England P 2001. The wage penalty for motherhood. Am. Sociol. Rev. 66:2204–25
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Byrnes JP, Miller DC, Schafer WD. 1999. Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 125:3367–83
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Castilla EJ. 2008. Gender, race, and meritocracy in organizational careers. Am. J. Sociol. 113:61479–526
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Cha Y, Weeden KA. 2014. Overwork and the slow convergence in the gender gap in wages. Am. Sociol. Rev. 79:3457–84
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Charles M. 2011. A world of difference: international trends in women's economic status. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 37:355–71
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Charles M, Bradley K. 2002. Equal but separate? A cross-national study of sex segregation in higher education. Am. Sociol. Rev. 67:4573–99
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Charles M, Bradley K. 2009. Indulging our gendered selves? Sex segregation by field of study in 44 countries. Am. J. Sociol. 114:4924–76
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Charles M, Grusky DB. 2005. Occupational Ghettos: The Worldwide Segregation of Women and Men Stud. Soc. Inequal. 200 Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Chwe MS-Y. 2001. Rational Ritual: Culture, Coordination, and Common Knowledge Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Cooter R. 1998. Expressive law and economics. J. Leg. Stud. 27:S2585–607
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Correll SJ. 2001. Gender and the career choice process: the role of biased self-assessments. Am. J. Sociol. 106:61691–730
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Correll SJ, Benard S, Paik I. 2007. Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?. Am. J. Sociol. 112:51297–338
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Cotropia CA, Masur JS, Schwartz DL. 2018. Gender discrimination in online markets Res. Pap. 864 Coase-Sandor Inst. Law Econ. Res., Univ Chicago, Chicago:
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Cotter D, England P, Hermsen JM. 2008. Moms and jobs: trends in mothers’ employment and which mothers stay home Brief. Pap., Counc. Contemp. Fam., Univ. Tex. Austin: https://contemporaryfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/2007_Briefing_Cotter_Moms-and-jobs.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Cotter DA, Hermsen JM, Vanneman R. 2004. Gender Inequality at Work New York: Russell Sage Found.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Cuddy AJC, Fiske ST, Glick P. 2007. The BIAS map: behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 92:4631–48
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Danaher K, Crandall CS. 2008. Stereotype threat in applied settings re-examined. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 38:61639–55
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Diekman AB, Eagly AH. 2000. Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: women and men of the past, present, and future. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26:101171–88
    [Google Scholar]
  43. DiPrete TA, Buchmann C. 2013. The Rise of Women: The Growing Gender Gap in Education and What It Means for American Schools New York: Russell Sage Found.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Dobbin F. 2009. Inventing Equal Opportunity Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Dobbin F, Kim S, Kalev A. 2011. You can't always get what you need: organizational determinants of diversity programs. Am. Sociol. Rev. 76:3386–411
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Edelman LB. 1992. Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: organizational mediation of civil rights law. Am. J. Sociol. 97:61531–76
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Edelman LB. 2016. Working Law: Courts, Corporations, and Symbolic Civil Rights Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Edelman LB, Petterson SM. 1999. Symbols and substance in organizational response to civil rights law. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 17:107–38
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Edelman LB, Petterson S, Chambliss E, Erlanger HS. 1991. Legal ambiguity and the politics of compliance: affirmative action officers’ dilemma. Law Policy 13:173–97
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Edelman LB, Uggen C, Erlanger HS. 1999. The endogeneity of legal regulation: grievance procedures as rational myth. Am. J. Sociol. 105:2406–54
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Egan ML, Matvos G, Seru A. 2017. When Harry fired Sally: the double standard in punishing misconduct. NBER Work. Pap. w23242
  52. England P. 1992. Comparable Worth: Theories and Evidence Piscataway, NJ: Trans. Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. England P. 2010. The gender revolution: uneven and stalled italicGender Soc 242149–66
    [Google Scholar]
  54. England P, Allison P, Li S, Mark N, Thompson J et al. 2007. Why are some academic fields tipping toward female? The sex composition of US fields of doctoral degree receipt, 1971–2002. Sociol. Educ. 80:123–42
    [Google Scholar]
  55. England P, Budig M, Folbre N. 2002. Wages of virtue: the relative pay of care work. Soc. Probl. 49:4455–73
    [Google Scholar]
  56. England P, Folbre N. 2005. Gender and economic sociology. Handb. Econ. Sociol. 2:627–49
    [Google Scholar]
  57. England P, Levine A, Mishel E. 2020. Progress toward gender equality in the United States has slowed or stalled. PNAS 117:136990–97
    [Google Scholar]
  58. England P, Li S. 2006. Desegregation stalled: the changing gender composition of college majors, 1971–2002. Gender Soc 20:5657–77
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Ewick P, Silbey SS. 1998. The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Exley CL, Niederle M, Vesterlund L. 2020. Knowing when to ask: the cost of leaning in. J. Political Econ. 128:3816–54
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Fishbein AJ, Woodall P. 2006. Women are prime targets for subprime lending. Rep., Consum. Fed. Am. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Fisk SR, Ridgeway CL 2018. Framing gender. Handbook of the Sociology of Gender B Risman, C Froyum, WJ Scarborough 157–71 Cham, Switz: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Fiske ST, Cuddy AJC, Glick P, Xu J. 2002. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 82:6878–902
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Galanter M. 1974. Why the “haves” come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change. Law Soc. Rev. 9:195–160
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Galinsky AD, Hall EV, Cuddy AJC. 2013. Gendered races: implications for interracial marriage, leadership selection, and athletic participation. Psychol. Sci. 24:4498–506
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Glick P, Lameiras M, Fiske ST, Eckes T, Masser B et al. 2004. Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 86:5713–28
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Gneezy U, Niederle M, Rustichini A. 2003. Performance in competitive environments: gender differences. Q. J. Econ. 118:31049–74
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Goffman E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life Garden City, NY: Doubleday
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Goffman E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1st ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Goldberg P. 1968. Are women prejudiced against women?. Trans-action 5:28–30
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Goldin C. 1995. Career and family: College women look to the past. NBER Work. Pap. w5188
  72. Goldsmith-Pinkham P, Shue K. 2020.. The gender gap in housing returns. NBER Work Pap:. w26914
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Gupta S. 2007. Autonomy, dependence, or display? The relationship between married women's earnings and housework. J. Marriage Fam. 69:2399–417
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Hirsh CE. 2009. The strength of weak enforcement: the impact of discrimination charges, legal environments, and organizational conditions on workplace segregation. Am. Sociol. Rev. 74:2245–71
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Ito TA, Urland GR. 2003. Race and gender on the brain: electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 85:4616–26
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Kagan RA, Gunningham N, Thornton D 2011. Fear, duty, and regulatory compliance: lessons from three research projects. Explaining Compliance: Business Responses to Regulation C Parker, VL Nielsen 37–58 Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Kelly EL. 2010. Failure to update: an institutional perspective on noncompliance with the Family and Medical Leave Act. Law Soc. Rev. 44:133–66
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Kilbourne BS, England P, Farkas G, Beron K, Weir D. 1994. Returns to skill, compensating differentials, and gender bias: effects of occupational characteristics on the wages of white women and men. Am. J. Sociol. 100:3689–719
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Kleven H, Landais C, Posch J, Steinhauer A, Zweimüller J. 2019. Child penalties across countries: evidence and explanations. AEA Pap. Proc. 109:122–26
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Kricheli-Katz T. 2012. Choice, discrimination, and the motherhood penalty. Law Soc. Rev. 46:3557–58
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Kricheli-Katz T, Regev T. 2016. How many cents on the dollar? Women and men in product markets. Sci. Adv. 2:2e1500599
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Kricheli-Katz T, Regev T, Correll S. 2019. Why are women penalized in product markets?. Socius 5: https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023119861024
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  83. Kunda Z, Spencer SJ. 2003. When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application. Psychol. Bull. 129:4522–44
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Levanon A, England P, Allison P 2009. Occupational feminization and pay: assessing causal dynamics using 1950–2000 U.S. Census data. Soc. Forces 88:2865–91
    [Google Scholar]
  85. MacCoun RJ. 1993. Drugs and the law: a psychological analysis of drug prohibition. Psychol. Bull. 113:3497–512
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Mandel H. 2013. Up the down staircase: women's upward mobility and the wage penalty for occupational feminization, 1970–2007. Soc. Forces 91:41183–207
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Mandel H. 2018. A second look at the process of occupational feminization and pay reduction in occupations. Demography 55:2669–90
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Mandel H, Semyonov M. 2014. Gender pay gap and employment sector: sources of earnings disparities in the United States, 1970–2010. Demography 51:51597–618
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Marshall A-M. 2003. Injustice frames, legality, and the everyday construction of sexual harassment. Law Soc. Inq. 28:3659–89
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Moss-Racusin CA, Dovidio JF, Brescoll VL, Graham MJ, Handelsman J. 2012. Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. PNAS 109:4116474–79
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Murray-Close M, Heggeness ML. 2018. Manning up and womaning down: how husbands and wives report their earnings when she earns more Work. Pap. 20 Soc. Econ. Hous. Stat. Div., US Census Bur. Suitland, MD:
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Nelson RL, Bridges WP. 1999. Legalizing Gender Inequality: Courts, Markets and Unequal Pay for Women in America. Struct. Anal. Soc. Sci 16 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Niederle M, Vesterlund L. 2007. Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much?. Q. J. Econ. 122:31067–101
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Nielsen LB. 2000. Situating legal consciousness: experiences and attitudes of ordinary citizens about law and street harassment. Law Soc. Rev. 34:1055–90
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Nielsen LB, Nelson RL, Lancaster R. 2010. Individual justice or collective legal mobilization? Employment discrimination litigation in the post civil rights United States. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 7:2175–201
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Prentice DA, Carranza E. 2002. What women and men should be, shouldn't be, are allowed to be, and don't have to be: the contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychol. Women Q. 26:4269–81
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Quinn BA. 2000. The paradox of complaining: law, humor, and harassment in the everyday work world. Law Soc. Inq. 25:41151–85
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Reuben E, Sapienza P, Zingales L. 2014. How stereotypes impair women's careers in science. PNAS 111:124403–8
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Reuben E, Sapienza P, Zingales L. 2015. Taste for competition and the gender gap among young business professionals. NBER Work Pap. w21695
  100. Ridgeway CL. 2011. Framed by Gender: How Gender Inequality Persists in the Modern World Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Ridgeway CL, Correll SJ. 2004. Unpacking the gender system: a theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender Soc 18:4510–31
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Ridgeway CL, Kricheli-Katz T. 2013. Intersecting cultural beliefs in social relations: gender, race, and class binds and freedoms. Gender Soc 27:3294–318
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Ridgeway CL, Nakagawa S 2014. Status. Handbook of the Social Psychology of Inequality J McLeod, J Lawler, M Schwalbe 3–25 Dordrecht, Neth: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Rudman LA, Moss-Racusin CA, Phelan JE, Nauts S. 2012. Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 48:1165–79
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Sapienza P, Zingales L, Maestripieri D. 2009. Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices are affected by testosterone. PNAS 106:3615268–73
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Shelton BA, John D 1996. The division of household labor. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 22:299–322
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Smith RA. 2002. Race, gender, and authority in the workplace: theory and research. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 28:509–42
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Spence JT, Buckner CE. 2000. Instrumental and expressive traits, trait stereotypes, and sexist attitudes: What do they signify?. Psychol. Women Q. 24:144–62
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Spencer SJ, Steele CM, Quinn DM. 1999. Stereotype threat and women's math performance. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 35:14–28
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Steinberg RJ 2001. Comparable worth in gender studies. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences NJ Smelser, PB Baltes 2393–97 Oxford, UK: Pergamon
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Stryker S, Vryan KD. 2003. The symbolic interactionist frame. The Handbook of Social Psychology J Delamater 3–28 New York: Kluwer Acad./Plenum Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Suchman MC. 1997. On beyond interest: rational, normative and cognitive perspectives in the social scientific study of law. Wis. Law Rev. 1997:475–501
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Sunstein CR. 1996. On the expressive function of law. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 144:2021–53
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Swim J, Borgida E, Maruyama G, Myers DG. 1989. Joan McKay versus John McKay: Do gender stereotypes bias evaluations?. Psychol. Bull. 105:3409–29
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Tak E, Correll SJ, Soule SA. 2019. Gender inequality in product markets: when and how status beliefs transfer to products. Soc. Forces 98:2548–77
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Weeden AK, Newhart M, Gelbgiser D. 2018. Occupational segregation. Pathways, Spec. Issue30–33 https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Pathways_SOTU_2018_occupational-segregation.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Wynn AT, Correll SJ 2018. Combating gender bias in modern workplaces. Handbook of the Sociology of Gender B Risman, C Froyum, WJ Scarborough 509–21 Cham, Switz: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111620-012514
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error