Surname 1
A Critical Analysis of Wage Inequalities in Contemporary Society:
On Liberty
Student’s Name
LWSO 413-01
Professor
May 2, 2020
, Surname 2
John Stuart Mill makes impassioned arguments against the position of man in society or
society’s existing order. One of the issues he address is the issue of wage labour, which he
concedes is somewhat biased against women while empowering men. The article’s purpose is
confronting his analysis in tandem with the conception of justice, which underlies Mill’s
utilitarianism. It is noteworthy; however, that Mill’s inclination to justice results from intellectual
influences. While showing concern for issues affecting women in the labour market, he also
accentuates the role of laws and customs in creating the wedge in wages between man and
women. That notwithstanding, Mill’s analysis aligns with his vision of freedom for women and
equal justice.
Wage inequalities between men and women is a long-standing issue in Western
economies. As a result, extensive studies on this issue is imperative to help elucidate these
inequalities. However, studies in the last two studies tend to consider the effects of social norms
(Tharenou 2013). Some of the studies consider external norms, including the male breadwinner
framework, as well as internalized norms such as “identity”, which constrains individual choices
(Schieder and Gould 2016). Such studies are evidence of concrete steps undertaken to introduce
gendered economics to inequalities. However, it is notable that this direction is synonymous to
that initially taken by John Stuart Mill in Victorian England as addressed in, Principles of
Political Economy (1848). Few studies have attempted to address Mill’s conception and
treatment of gendered economics and wage inequalities.
Pujol (1992) acknowledges Mill’s work as having the merit of reflecting economic
outcomes of particular social relation affecting the economic status of women in society. That
notwithstanding, Pujol faults Mill for abrogating his duty of addressing the inequalities by
providing practical solutions; in any case, his obsession with the conventional division of labor
, Surname 3
based on gender, where the man is responsible for earning and income while women are
household managers.
Ball (2001) also explains Mill handling of the wage inequalities issue, based on Mill
hypothesis and belief of equal pay for equal amount of work or services rendered concerning
employment cadres occupied by both males and females. As she argues, such differences can
primarily emanate from occupational segregation because of sex, and thus, solving this profound
problem requires a purposive approach of eliminating such prejudiced discrepancies by allowing
equal access to all employment opportunities for women, especially those considered
predominantly male. Ball (2001) is also swift in concluding that while Mill proposition is
feasible, it is not autonomous, meaning purposive action is necessary to achieve wage
equalization. Gendered stereotypes about women constrain them by preventing them from
partaking in the labour market like their male counterparts. Despite this Mill’s conclusion
presents a conflicting issue: agreeing partially with Ball’s conclusion implies a rejection of the
grounding for her hypothesis, hence leading to the interpretation of Mill’s suggestion as cursory,
non-rigorous, and akin to a desperate call for absolution from analyzing the issue.
Sigot and Beaurain (2009) also examine Mill’s position on employment opportunities for
married women. According to them, Mill advances laws and customs as the main drivers of
gendered differences in wages. They argue that laws of a country can trigger segregation while
customs, evident in power relationship can evoke salaries wedges between both sexes according
to beckerian maxims. They also perceive that Moll feels the onus is on individual to modify their
customs to suit the agenda of equal pay for equal work, which aligns with the principle of justice,
which necessities equal treatment regardless of gender or sex.
A Critical Analysis of Wage Inequalities in Contemporary Society:
On Liberty
Student’s Name
LWSO 413-01
Professor
May 2, 2020
, Surname 2
John Stuart Mill makes impassioned arguments against the position of man in society or
society’s existing order. One of the issues he address is the issue of wage labour, which he
concedes is somewhat biased against women while empowering men. The article’s purpose is
confronting his analysis in tandem with the conception of justice, which underlies Mill’s
utilitarianism. It is noteworthy; however, that Mill’s inclination to justice results from intellectual
influences. While showing concern for issues affecting women in the labour market, he also
accentuates the role of laws and customs in creating the wedge in wages between man and
women. That notwithstanding, Mill’s analysis aligns with his vision of freedom for women and
equal justice.
Wage inequalities between men and women is a long-standing issue in Western
economies. As a result, extensive studies on this issue is imperative to help elucidate these
inequalities. However, studies in the last two studies tend to consider the effects of social norms
(Tharenou 2013). Some of the studies consider external norms, including the male breadwinner
framework, as well as internalized norms such as “identity”, which constrains individual choices
(Schieder and Gould 2016). Such studies are evidence of concrete steps undertaken to introduce
gendered economics to inequalities. However, it is notable that this direction is synonymous to
that initially taken by John Stuart Mill in Victorian England as addressed in, Principles of
Political Economy (1848). Few studies have attempted to address Mill’s conception and
treatment of gendered economics and wage inequalities.
Pujol (1992) acknowledges Mill’s work as having the merit of reflecting economic
outcomes of particular social relation affecting the economic status of women in society. That
notwithstanding, Pujol faults Mill for abrogating his duty of addressing the inequalities by
providing practical solutions; in any case, his obsession with the conventional division of labor
, Surname 3
based on gender, where the man is responsible for earning and income while women are
household managers.
Ball (2001) also explains Mill handling of the wage inequalities issue, based on Mill
hypothesis and belief of equal pay for equal amount of work or services rendered concerning
employment cadres occupied by both males and females. As she argues, such differences can
primarily emanate from occupational segregation because of sex, and thus, solving this profound
problem requires a purposive approach of eliminating such prejudiced discrepancies by allowing
equal access to all employment opportunities for women, especially those considered
predominantly male. Ball (2001) is also swift in concluding that while Mill proposition is
feasible, it is not autonomous, meaning purposive action is necessary to achieve wage
equalization. Gendered stereotypes about women constrain them by preventing them from
partaking in the labour market like their male counterparts. Despite this Mill’s conclusion
presents a conflicting issue: agreeing partially with Ball’s conclusion implies a rejection of the
grounding for her hypothesis, hence leading to the interpretation of Mill’s suggestion as cursory,
non-rigorous, and akin to a desperate call for absolution from analyzing the issue.
Sigot and Beaurain (2009) also examine Mill’s position on employment opportunities for
married women. According to them, Mill advances laws and customs as the main drivers of
gendered differences in wages. They argue that laws of a country can trigger segregation while
customs, evident in power relationship can evoke salaries wedges between both sexes according
to beckerian maxims. They also perceive that Moll feels the onus is on individual to modify their
customs to suit the agenda of equal pay for equal work, which aligns with the principle of justice,
which necessities equal treatment regardless of gender or sex.
