Paradox of gender equality: what it is and how it is reflected in society

Our society has advanced in recent decades towards equal rights and obligations between both sexes.

However, phenomena have emerged that researchers are still trying to explain. One of them is the paradox of gender equality. In this article we will try to better understand what it means and what are some of the bases that would explain its existence.

• Related article: "The 16 types of discrimination (and their causes)"

What is the paradox of gender equality?

The paradox of gender equality is a phenomenon detected when analyzing the relationship between the degree of equal rights and freedoms implanted in a certain society together with the statistics regarding the behavior of the population based on the gender. The paradox occurs because it has been observed that, the more egalitarian a society is, the more a series of differences between men and women become entrenched before certain ways of choosing.

Why is it an amazing phenomenon? Because, apparently, the more similar the opportunities that both genders have in all areas of life, we might think that the behavioral differences between them would have to tend to become more and more diluted until practically disappear. But the paradox of gender equality shows us that this does not always happen.

And it is not only that it does not happen, but that in certain aspects, the differences between men and women become much more visible in those countries or societies apparently advanced in gender equality than in those where the indicators show that they are in a much more pronounced state of inequality.

So, what one might ask is, how is it possible that the more efforts a society devotes to eliminate the barriers that differentiate men and women, some of these differences are accentuated each time more? We will try to shed more light on this question by exploring more facets of the gender equality paradox below.

• You may be interested in: "Gender stereotypes: this is how they reproduce inequality"

The paradox of gender equality in education

One of the areas where the paradox of gender equality has gained the most force is precisely in the field of education and in the choices men and women make to build their respective careers. In this sense, more than evident differences have been observed between the behaviors carried out by the different genders in the most traditional (and therefore less egalitarian) societies and those that take place in the most modern.

It is not a matter of opinion, but of data: countries like Saudi Arabia, which score well above inequality indices of others like Sweden, show an overwhelmingly higher proportion of women graduated from engineering and other careers technological. Specifically, in Saudi Arabia, almost half of the people who graduate in these disciplines (45%) are women, compared to just 15% observed in Sweden.

However, it is clear that much more has been legislated and fought for equal opportunities for women and men in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia. So why does this obvious paradox of gender equality appear when we analyze the rates of students in technical careers? Shouldn't the indicators approach 50% in each gender the more equality there is in the country?

Although this is the case in many other areas, it seems that career choice is a matter that escapes this logic, and this is demonstrated by the indicators. Of the countries that, according to different organizations, rank at the top for gender equality, women only represent 20% of the total graduates in the so-called STEM disciplines (in English, acronyms of science, technology, engineering and math).

In contrast, in the most unequal countries between men and women, the percentage of women in STEM schools skyrockets. We have already seen the data for Saudi Arabia, but it is that in other countries, such as Iran, this index increases to 70%. Why?

How is it reflected in the workplace?

Another scenario in which the paradox of gender equality has also been observed is that of entrepreneurship. In 2021, Steinmetz and her team conducted a meta-analysis of another 119 studies that analyzed this phenomenon in more than 36 countries, accumulating a total sample of more than 260,000 people.

This work offered results similar to those that we have already reviewed regarding the choice of university careers. In this case, women from less egalitarian countries were more likely to undertake and create their own businesses than those of those societies where more legislative progress had been made towards equality between genders. Another example of the paradox of gender equality.

• You may be interested in: "Expert psychology in the face of violence against women: what it is, and functions"

Why is this happening?

Obviously, the question that assails anyone's mind when faced with this approach is, why does the paradox of gender equality occur? The first thing to keep in mind is that this question has two segments to take into account, because On the one hand, it is necessary to understand why in unequal countries there is greater equality in the area of ​​careers, but also why in more egalitarian countries there is greater inequality.

In other words, if said index held firm in both egalitarian and non-egalitarian countries, whether it was indicating a majority of women in careers sciences, a majority of men in the same or an equality between them, one would only have to worry about studying why the forecasts are not fulfilled in one of the two cases.

But the paradox of gender equality makes the question counterintuitive in both cases: the greater the equality in the society, more inequality in this area, but also, the less equality, less inequality when choosing disciplines scientific. Therefore, we will need hypotheses that explain both problems, or one for each situation, so that they explain the paradox in a complementary way.

One of the ideas that some of the researchers threw up to try to give an explanatory basis to this question is the economic one. In this sense, it is obvious that technical disciplines tend to report higher salaries in the future than other types of careers. Therefore, the approach would be that, in the most unequal countries, women tend to enroll more in these careers in order to improve their economic position.

This hypothesis could explain part of the paradox of gender equality, but there is a problem, and that is that it would apply to the situation of countries with inequality between men and women in those with low GDP, as is the case for many of them, but it would not serve to shed light on the casuistry of Saudi Arabia, for example, a country with gender inequalities but rich.

Likewise, the hypothesis would focus on the cases of unequal countries. But what about those where great equality has been achieved between women and men? One of the proposals for this case has been controversial because it conflicts with the very foundations of gender equality. It refers to the innate preferences of each other.

What if the question simply had to do with what men like to do the most and what women are most attracted to, always in statistical terms? If this were so, it would appear that, once similar equal rights and freedoms have been achieved for men and women, both are freer to say questions such as the discipline to study, without involving others variables.

If this hypothesis were correct, it would assume that men innately have a greater preference for careers. while women are more frequently inclined towards disciplines of the humanities, medicine, psychology, and other careers. In that case, it would seem that wanting to reach 50% of each gender in each and every field would be a matter far from people's own preferences.

This case raises an interesting dilemma: which society is freer and more egalitarian, the one that imposes restrictions so that half of those enrolled in each career are of one gender and the other half of the other, or the one that allows each individual to freely choose her future, all having exactly the same options about which to decide?

It is a really complex issue to which the experts still have no answer, so these hypotheses are still just that, hypotheses. Much research is still required in order to understand the paradox of gender equality and thus explain the differences observed in all the cases presented.

Bibliographic references:

• Ahl, H., Nelson, T., Bourne, K.A. (2010). The paradox of gender equality: an entrepreneurial case study from Sweden. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship.
• Haus, I., Steinmetz, H., Isidor, R., Kabst, R. (2013). Gender effects on entrepreneurial intention: A meta-analytical structural equation model. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship.
• Steinmetz, H., Isidor, R., Bauer, C. (2021). Gender Differences in the Intention to Start a Business. An Updated and Extended Meta-Analysis. Zeitschrift für Psychologie.
• Stoet, G., Geary, D.C. (2018). The gender-equality paradox in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Psychological science.