Study: Male chauvinist pigs make more money
October 2, 2008 by Jim GiulianoPosted in: Gender discrimination, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Money, Pay and benefits
Men who believe women should remain barefoot and pregnant tend to get paid more than men who think of women as equals in the workplace. At least that’s what one study shows.
The study for the Journal of Applied Psychology appears in a 19-page paper titled Is the Gap More Than Gender? A Longitudinal Analysis of Gender, Gender Role Orientation, and Earnings.
It contends that guys who think of themselves as traditional “breadwinners” and who believe that a woman’s place is in the home — or, at best, in a subservient position at work — make about $12,000 a year more in salary than men who think of women as equal partners at work and in the home.
Put another way, men who change diapers make about a $1,000 a month less than men who don’t change diapers.
The study uses a factor called “Gender Role Orientation” (GRO). If you’re a man who has a GRO of -1, that means you think of women as your equals. If you’re a man who thinks a woman’s place is in the home, your GRO is +1.
The study shows that -1 group makes an average annual salary of $39,000. The +1 groups pulls in an average of $51,000 a year.
October 6th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Well, that’s frustrating and kind of disgusting. Any idea why? Or is this just more evidence that good guys finish last…
October 6th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
My first guess as to why is because, they may not be as committed to their home life therefore giving them more time at work. But, in the end family life is more valuable so the good guys are ahead!
October 6th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
I don’t agree with the findings. I have worked in a nearly all male work environment for nearly 35 years and the evidence doesn’t support the GRO theory. With better than 10 years in Organizational Development the one behavior I have documented that influenced wages the most is the “Good Old Boys Club”. If one is socially connected to members of upper management the likely hood that one’s salary is higher and that merit increases followed the same – regardless of performance. Keep in mind that members of the “club” survive by protecting one another and as a norm women tend to be outsiders and men who see work as being a seperate life and not connected to the company/social ladder also see lower salaries, even if they are seen as being important team players. Favortism like office politics is not by design a part of business however, it is very much alive.
October 6th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
I think that this makes sense. If you are a man who expects his wife to stay home you are most likely assuming that the responsiblitily is on your own shoulders to support your family and make sure you make a decent living. I would not call them chauvinists, simply because of this view point. Maybe these votes were based on the salary the men were already making. If you are making 100,000 dollars a year it is much easier to say that your wife should just stay home….this improves growth of your children. On the other hand if you are making $25,000 a year and are struggling to make ends meet you may be more inclined to say your wife should be going to work. Bottom line is that no matter what your view point is their view point on the equality of women in the workforce isn’t what is determining their salary, its their own ambition.
October 7th, 2008 at 6:20 am
Actually, both of the responses by BK and by Roland explain what was found. People who tend to be part of the “good old boy” network, also do not value family time as much. They are willing to ignore the family in most situations to take care of the company’s problems. They are perceived as more valuable because they “are always there and never wimp out”. As I was typing this reply, I got a call from someone in management here who was complaining that an employee was going to be gone for 3 days because his father was having open-heart surgery and that there was no reason to be gone.
October 7th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
The study cited above did not use the words ‘pig’ nor ‘chauvinist’. I think your choice of those inflammatory words shows your bias and your desire to promote your agenda.
Those “traditional” men may actually respect and value women MORE b/c they work harder to support their families and that hard work results in higher compensation. That would not qualify them as “pigs” as your headline implies. (But, it clearly illustrates your politically correct bias.)
I am disappointed you did not post my response yesterday when I initially wrote it. More evidence of your desire to censor those with a different perspective???
October 7th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
I too was caught off guard by the title of the article. Even if an eye catching title is desired, the use of the word “pig” is unessessary.
November 19th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
I see and read it all the time. It boils down to.. Families are made to feel uncomfortable when a spouse chooses to stay at home with the kiddos, They usually pop on and off the employment bicycle there for tend to make lower wages. We read how disappointed the “womens lib movement” is with regards to the choosing to “stay home” with the kiddos and not go out and battle/jockey for position in the work world. I myself have risen and fallen several times int he work force, just for choosing to stay home a little longer with each child, not wanting to “shove” them into daycare. Had I of not broken the work cycle with having kids, it would have been easier to “rise” to top ranks. After returning to the work force after each child, the new employers mostlikely viewed me as someone who was NOT willing to put the Employer first,. therefore the top paying more appealing positions were no longer available..
June 22nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
In my experience, a lot of the men at the top have wives that stay home and handle all the tasks involving the household or the children. They don’t have to take off work when a child is sick, or has problems at school, etc. Their wife can handle any tasks that require an adult during working hours. As a result, they aren’t very understanding when one of their employees has to take off work for something relating to the children. They probably think the guy who takes off work because his child is sick is a slacker because they’ve never had to do that. I think my husband and I should take turns calling in sick when our child is ill. I can call my employer and say that my child is sick. My husband has to lie and say that he’s sick because if he tells them that the child is ill, the response is “can’t your wife stay home with her?” It doesn’t occur to them that I am the supervisor of the department, and it’s no easier for me to stay home than it is for my husband. In fact, my husband has a laptop and would be able to get some work done from home, so it would actually be easier for him to stay home than me. I’d be willing to bet that there are a lot of men in higher positions who don’t think that they’re chauvanistic, but just think that they should give the promotions to the guy who doesn’t have time off work for family issues. And that guy probably has a stay at home wife, which perpetuates the cycle.
July 7th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
The “good old boy” network is still alive and well in America.
August 27th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Nicely said, JCE…nicely said!! I couldn’t agree with you more.
October 10th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
I agree that there is a culture of bias against women and especially against what is seen as “women’s” work.
My husband works a high stress job and believes that since I quit my job to stay at home with our child I have been “on vacation”. If I need time off he scoffs at me as if I am crazy. To make matters worse we live overseas and move frequently so we never make long lasting friends nor see family more than once a year.
If I lose my cool because of this, I am seen as selfish and spoiled. The culture at his work place is such that if I get sick we are in trouble.