Search results

The changes in women’s and men’s work lives have been considerable in recent decades. Yet much of the recent research on gender differences in employment and earnings has been of a more snapshot nature rather than taking a longer comparative look at evolving patterns. In this paper, we use 50 years (1964–2013) of US Census Annual Demographic Files (March Current Population Survey) to track the changing returns to human capital (measured as both educational attainment and potential work experience), estimating comparable earnings equations by gender at each point in time. We consider the effects of sample selection over time for both women and men and show the rising effect of selection for women in recent years. Returns to education diverge for women and men over this period in the selection-adjusted results but converge in the OLS results, while returns to potential experience converge in both sets of results. We also create annual calculations of synthetic lifetime labor force participation, hours, and earnings that indicate convergence by gender in worklife patterns, but less convergence in recent years in lifetime earnings. Thus, while some convergence has indeed occurred, the underlying mechanisms causing convergence differ for women and men, reflecting continued fundamental differences in women’s and men’s life experiences.

Research in gender and development (GAD) remains largely preoccupied with women's issues and ignores the gendered nature of masculine experience. While exposing this inconsistency in gender research, the present paper highlights the gendered nature of men, and sets an agenda for their inclusion in gender research and planning.

To engage with the issue, the paper resists an unproblematic understanding of men as a singular formation, and instead builds on cultural and historical approaches which locate masculinity within modes of production.

Instead of casting men in the problem mode and theorizing masculinity as an ahistorical universal, an attempt is made to delink men from patriarchy. For development to be truly transformative, men's issues should be addressed not just as instruments for women empowerment, but also as subjects in themselves.

The paper, at a very broad level, pleads for a need to re‐vision and “men” stream development that does not ignore women, but accommodates men as gendered subjects.

In this context, power may be seen as embedded in specific modes of production, and not inherent in patriarchy. The paper argues that development agenda should go beyond categorical thinking, include men in gender planning, and create conditions for social justice.

Volume 15 Number 4 of Industrial & Social Relations includes an article by Catherine O'Regan and Clive Thompson entitled “Collective Bargaining and the promotion of equality for women in South Africa”.