# data[].attributes.body
Contrary to popular belief Cinco De mayo is not Mexican independence day.

Cinco De mayo markes Mexicos military victory over France on may 5th 1862

Cinco De mayo is a bigger deal here in the US than in Mexico.

# data[].attributes.body
My question comes from David songs topic on the government legalizing drugs. Would the "criminals" who were in jail for drug charges go back to a life of crime if drugs were legalized or would they now be able to be like everyone else?

# data[].attributes.body
Why is workplace inequality still a big problem in the 21st century and especially in the more developed countries around the world

# data[].attributes.body
Eventhough women have a lot more equality today then a Couple of decades ago, some jobs still prefer men over women. But by vise versa, I think so jobs prefered women over men as well, such as nursing or babysitting. We often think women are the only one being dragged down by gender inequality but men are affected too.

# data[].attributes.body
The picture about the women trying to get a job surrounded by men is sad but true. Some jobs and occupation are mainly run by men when people don't even think twice about letting a women have a shot at the job. Women think different than males so who knows, if she were put in that job opportunity she could possibly think of newer and better ways of doing things

# data[].attributes.body
Many different people responded to my posts including Aj, ruby, Leke and others. I chose to address huan tran because he brought up a good point and agrees with my topic. Even as young as we are in high school gender discrimination is already working against us. Will this ever be something we can fix? Or will it be here forever?

# data[].attributes.body
A woman is not an object of convinience; but a creation of Gods purpose.

-Wayne chrisa

I chose this quote because it fits gender inequality so well. Women are not just a piece of property they are humans and a creation from God. They shouldn't be treated any different especially in the United States when we are so focused on freedom and equality.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the picture I chose for gender inequality. There is a lady trying to get a job surrounded by men. She is scared that she won't be able to get a good job because she is a woman.

# data[].attributes.body
1 women are looked at to be less hard working

2 women have more college degrees but have a tough time getting jobs

3 women are thought to take more time off them men

4 women are overlooked because of needed time off like having kids etc

5 women are still far outnumbered in high roles like Congress and ceo but usually have more time and hard work spent on jobs

# data[].attributes.body
1 women make 77 to every dollar

2 men hold higher jobs

3 women on avg get more education but less pay

4 men are more likely to get a job over a women

5 this is a worldwide problem and little hope is there that it will change soon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the new book Gendered Tradeoffs: Family, Social Policy and Economic Inequality in Twenty-One Countries, Becky Pettit and Jennifer Hook contend workplace equality for women boils down to not only whether women are included in the work force but on how they are included. Pettit is an associate professor of sociology and Hook is research scientist in the School of Social Work at the University of Washington.

The book, which looks at levels of women's employment, number of hours worked, occupational integration, and wage equality, draws on the ongoing Luxembourg Income Study. The study is a repository of data collected in a number of countries, and for the book, the UW authors look at Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway, United Kingdom, Czech Republic, Canada, Australia, Austria, Russian Federation, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Germany, Slovenia, Hungary, Belgium, Poland, Italy, Spain and the United States.

There are vast differences in women's economic fortunes in these countries, and in no one country do women do well on all measures of equality. Italy, for example, ranks first in wage equality but is 20th in the number of women employed. Sweden is No. 1 in women's employment but is only 14th in full-time work. While Belgium is first in occupational integration, it is 18th in women's employment.

Policies governing gender equality and inclusion in the workplace vary drastically in these countries, and Pettit contends that in order to understand gender inequality in the workplace it is necessary to consider to how a nation's family policies affect the division of household labor.

"Our argument is gender inequality in the workplace is in a large part due to bearing and rearing children. There are economically successful women everywhere but exactly how women manage the dual demands of work and home varies a lot. The biggest differences come when people have children and when those children are young," Pettit said.

"Some countries support working women publicly by providing child care. What we have in the United States are private solutions to child care," she continued. "People who have more resources can maximize their employment and pay for child care. Some nations are more generous and the U.S. is way behind them in providing early childhood education, child care and paid maternity leave."

Even so, state subsidized, family-friendly policies don't guarantee women can achieve equality in the workplace. Some of these policies foster the growth of part-time employment - which is a dead end for advancement - work segregation and wage inequality, the authors said.

So where is the best place for a woman to work and live?

"My answer depends on what a woman wants, how much education she has and what resources are available to support her and her family," said Pettit. "If you want to be a stay at home mother, Germany has a very extensive home leave policy. If you want to work full-time and have kids, the U.S. isn't bad if you can afford quality child care. If you want to work part-time, Sweden and Denmark have very good child care. And if you want to have your husband involved in child care, Finland is a good choice.

"In the U.S., very well-educated women are more likely to use substitute labor for child care. But this is not the case for low-income women, and this can lead to a two-tiered economic system that penalizes many women," she said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Workplace Gender Inequality Still Alive Worldwide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite big changes over recent decades, workplace gender inequalities endure in the United States and other industrialized nations around the world.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a topic that I can relate to. I work at a restaurant and the job you are assign to is definately based on gender. And this gender based issue has been around for ages so I don't know if we will ever see a change.

# data[].attributes.body
Does occupational inequality happen just in the United States or all around the world?

# data[].attributes.body
1: Are there intrinsic differences between women and men

that make each sex better suited for different jobs?

2: Studies have repeatedly shown that there are certain

things women and men are better or worse at.

3: Perhaps differences have evolved between the sexes we

should start celebrating those differences instead of ignoring them.

4: After all, if men are better at some things, it would seem obvious

that there are certain jobs, that women would also be better at.

5: "on average, women [House members] introduce more bills,

attract more co-sponsors and bring home more money for their districts than their male counterparts."

# data[].attributes.body
1: research showing that companies get a diversity dividend

2:  gender parity in employment could raise the GDP of countries

such as the United Arab Emirates by 12 percent,

3:  factoring in the reality that women are more likely to take parental leave

meaning that businesses believe men are more reliable.

4: These are not always the work of overt sexism. Very often these choices

can be perfectly rational responses to the short-term realities.

5: EX #1 Imagine a working, married mother-of-two in Switzerland. Statistically, she is likely to earn less than her husband. Considering the country’s joint taxation regime and expensive childcare, it makes economic sense for her to choose to leave work for the relatively short period of early motherhood even if she would have preferred to work.

6: EX#2  take a low-income family in Pakistan with two sons and three daughters. Sons are culturally expected to financially support parents, while daughters are married into other families where they become primary caregivers. In the short term then, parents with a small disposable income are making a rational economic decision by prioritizing their sons’ education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's an age old question - one that has been heavily debated in recent times: are there intrinsic differences between women and men that make each sex better suited for different jobs?

One of my aunts and I recently had a conversation about this idea of intrinsic differences between men and women. She noted that studies have repeatedly shown that there are certain things women and men are better or worse at, on the whole, that can be traced back to our "hunter and gatherer" days. For instance, the fact that men often cannot see food in the fridge that isn't right in front of their faces - as my dad says, "it wasn't waving its arms at me" - potentially a result of women having to be able to scan large areas for edible berries, nuts, etc. Similarly, women are often considered worse drivers, and maybe this is true as a result of not having equal ability to judge distances between objects - a result of men hunting and having to concentrate their attention on single object that was moving. Perhaps differences have evolved between the sexes and perhaps we should start celebrating those differences instead of ignoring them.

That was the gist of my aunt's argument and I could see some truth in it. It seemed to me, however, that the biggest problem was not in accepting the differences, it was in ensuring that this acceptance of intrinsic differences wasn't just used to benefit men - that it would not only be used when explaining why men have achieved so much in certain areas and why men are better at certain jobs. After all, if men are better at some things, it would seem obvious that there are certain jobs - outside of caring for children - that women would also be better at.

It seems that the preliminary outcomes of a new study conducted from 1984 to 2004 have found a place where women's intrinsic abilities may be a huge boon: in Congress. The preliminary results of this study show that, "on average, women [House members] introduce more bills, attract more co-sponsors and bring home more money for their districts than their male counterparts." The study itself does not base the differences on intrinsic abilites, but while reading I began to wonder if there are some benefits to being a woman in that type of a position - are women better collaborators, better at buttering people up for money, better at multi-tasking and therefore producing more work? Perhaps.

The article I read (linked below) accounted for some of the differences by noting that there are so few women in Congress that perhaps the ones who make it are the cream of the crop or have more of an incentive to prove themselves. Of course this may be true, so there is a lot to be said for the test of time. But if anything, this study gives reason to believe that women lawmakers are very effective and a woman's ability to successfully represent her district should not be doubted as much as it oftentimes is by voters. The best part of the article, in fact, were the comments by the women lawmakers on the difficulty in getting into office - the worry that they wouldn't be able to be the heavy-hitters that men were. So the question may in fact be whether these women, once in office, emulated characteristics that are typically considered masculine or whether they used those skills that are typically considered feminine to achieve these stellar results.

For the time being I'm withholding judgment, but it does make me wonder more about how we judge a person's potential "effectiveness." Perhaps we believe that masculine characteristics are the best way to effectively make laws and represent constituents, but maybe the women in Congress are slowly, but surely proving that effectiveness is not gendered in quite the way so many people believe.

Check out the article and let me know your thoughts!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Question Rephrased: Are There Some Jobs Women are Just Intrinsically Better at than Men?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's an age old question - one that has been heavily debated in recent times: are there intrinsic differences between women and men that make each sex better suited for different jobs? One of my aunts and I recently had a conversation about this idea of intrinsic differences between men and women.

# data[].attributes.body
Who: men and women getting paid and

getting different jobs based on gender.

What: different employers/jobs accepting

or paying one gender over the other.

When: Workplace inequality has always been

an issue. its a huge topic now in the 21st century.

Where: jobs around the world, certain employers

hiring women/men over the other.

why: many different people may be sexist, see

an economic gain or think one gender is better

at certain work than another.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Saadia Zahidi, Special to CNN
Editor's note: Saadia Zahidi heads the Women Leaders and Gender Parity Program at the World Economic Forum and is founder and co-author of the annual Global Gender Gap Report, released October 25. The views expressed are the writer's own.
Gender inequality is good economics. Yes, you read that correctly. While we know that individuals, economies and societies would benefit from gender parity in the long term, gender inequality is often a perfectly rational choice for individuals in the short term.

Gender imbalances, and their resulting economic consequences, are still startlingly visible everywhere, from the developed world to emerging markets. In Brazil, more women attend university than men, but women earn only a third of what men make for the same job. In the United Arab Emirates, three times as many women go to university as men, but half as many women participate in the labor force. Across Europe, women outperform men academically and enter the workforce in similar numbers, but occupy less than 15 percent of board positions. In Pakistan, where I grew up, a girl has only a 29 percent chance of making it into secondary school, compared to 38 percent for a boy.
More from CNN: Why women must seize this moment
There is irrefutable evidence on the economic contribution that women can make, from the familial and community level, to research showing that companies get a diversity dividend, to the World Economic Forum's own global data on the correlations between gender and competitiveness, released this month. By some estimates, gender parity in employment could raise the GDP of countries such as the United Arab Emirates by 12 percent, Japan by 9 percent and the United States by 5 percent. While many institutions are constantly pointing to these potential collective gains, progress remains dismally slow. So what's holding us back?

We are. Millions of daily, individual actions of men and women, from a manager's hiring decision, to a woman's career choice, to a family's resource allocation, add up to perpetuate the gender gap. These are not always the work of overt sexism. Very often these choices can be perfectly rational responses to the short-term realities.

Imagine a working, married mother-of-two in Switzerland. Statistically, she is likely to earn less than her husband. Considering the country's joint taxation regime and expensive childcare, it makes economic sense for her to choose to leave work for the relatively short period of early motherhood even if she would have preferred to work.

Or take a low-income family in Pakistan with two sons and three daughters. Sons are culturally expected to financially support parents, while daughters are married into other families where they become primary caregivers. In the short term then, parents with a small disposable income are making a rational economic decision by prioritizing their sons' education.
More from CNN: Workplace battle for Saudi women
Visualize an HR manager in Mexico. Even managers who inherently value female colleagues are factoring in the reality that women are more likely to take parental leave, especially in a context where men have traditionally been breadwinners and women homemakers. For the less conscious managers, hiring an equally skilled man is the rational and convenient short-term option.

Paradoxically, it's these convenient and appealing choices that are leading to unintended and harmful long-term consequences for the individuals who make them. Over time, the Swiss mother may struggle to find a rewarding job that matches her expectations of salary and seniority, after the hiatus in early motherhood. In old age, the Pakistani parents may have found more comfort with five well-educated children earning good salaries - and two similarly successful daughters-in-law. The Mexican manager may find that having predominantly male staff prevents the firm from appealing to the majority of its consumers, who happen to be women.

Add up these short-term logical choices across households, firms and countries and we end up with severe individual and aggregate long-term losses. So what's the solution? There are many - and responsibility lies with both governments and companies at once.

First, governments need to become more strategic in regulating, creating incentives and raising awareness to encourage people and organizations to make advantageous long-term decisions. In Turkey, for example, where only 26 percent of women work, the government rewards companies for employing women by subsidizing their social security contributions. In Norway, a "daddy quota" allocates fathers 12 weeks of non-transferable paternity leave, creating knock-on effects for the division of labor at home and at work. In Bangladesh and Indonesia, cash incentive programs aim to encourage parents to send girls to secondary school. The governments of Malaysia and India are introducing minimum thresholds for women on boards.

While these are useful examples of innovation, countries cannot implement only one or two of these policies and expect real, broad results. Each country needs to implement an array of policies - a multi‑pronged approach that caters to its unique circumstances and is customized to various strata of society.

Companies also hold enormous responsibility. The current approach of many companies is to create externally focused girls' or women's empowerment flagship programs that are not core to their business.

While such programs are useful, if companies really want to get the benefits of gender diversity, their leaders needs to take a holistic, introspective approach that leads to fundamental reforms on how to recruit and retain employees, how to mentor and sponsor high-potential women, how to sensitize managers to different leadership styles, how to manage work-life balance policies so that they don't disadvantage women, how to empower women across supply chains - and how to manage efficient corporate responsibility initiatives so that they support women and girls.

To accomplish this, companies need to learn from each other's experiments so that change is accelerated, as opposed to competing in promoting their flagship programs. At the World Economic Forum, we are running innovative and experimental pilots with dozens of companies through such collaborative platforms in Mexico, Turkey and Japan - and early results show change.

"Culture" is man-made, quite literally. What we think of as irrational and harmful biases are rooted in a past logic, one that may not be valid today, but which cannot be ignored when designing solutions. With the right incentives, we can make gender equality the new rational choice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When gender inequality is good economics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Saadia Zahidi, Special to CNN Editor's note: Saadia Zahidi heads the Women Leaders and Gender Parity Program at the World Economic Forum and is founder and co-author of the annual Global Gender Gap Report, released October 25. The views expressed are the writer's own.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Occupational inequality is often linked with occupational segregation in a work place. The greater the segregation in a workplace, the greater the occupational inequality. This is true specifically for jobs dominated by a certain minority or women. They often have bad work environments and less income than white males who usually make up the managerial positions with better work environments and more pay.