Theories of Gender Stratification

Abstract

Gender stratification theories are reviewed in light of their causal assumptions, empirical evidence, and “agency” and “equity” implications. Agency involves the relative capacity of the individual to influence occupational outcomes; equity pertains to the perceived fairness of occupational rewards. It is concluded that the empirical support for the structural functionalist, structural barriers, cognitive, normative barriers, and normative alternative theories of gender stratification is either contradictory, equivocal, or limited. Further compounding the mixed empirical record is that the method used by many proponents of the structural barriers approach to measure sex discrimination is based on a logical fallacy that confuses outcome with process. Finally, the theories make quite divergent assumptions concerning agency and equity. These differences lead to contradictory conclusions about the degree that individuals, and particularly women, can control their occupational destiny, the possibility of increased gender egalitarianism, and the logic and efficacy of conservative, liberal, and radical political agendas.