Achieving gender equality is among the highest goals of modern day America, and it is widely believed that feminism is capable of making that goal possible.

The difficult reality is that common portrayal and understanding of the modern feminist movement have resulted in widespread misinformation about gender equality issues. Without critical re-examination and clarification, it could do more harm than good in reaching equality.

High-profile portrayals of feminism in America perpetuate some misconceptions, which have negative effects on the social and political outcomes of the movement.

For example, popular understanding of the wage gap argument is perhaps the most problematic talking point in recent gender equality debates.

Common wording of the wage gap in both politics and activist movements is that women make 77 cents to every dollar for doing “the same work” as a man.

President Obama quoted this statistic in the 2012, 2013 and 2014 state of the union addresses, as did Hillary Clinton in a recent campaign commercial. It’s one of the most widely believed statistics which social activism campaigns and politicians use to advocate for change.

However, this statistic is misunderstood and almost always used wrongly.

The figure originates from a U.S. Census Bureau report which concluded that in 2010, the average yearly earnings for all full time working women were 77 percent that of all working men.

It is not an “apples to apples” study. When looking at the exact same careers and controlling for a variety of other factors like education and experience, the wage gap shrinks. Depending on the study, the adjusted wage gap is usually closer to seven percent. Some specific fields have higher or lower gaps, and this is still a perceivable issue which needs addressing, but nowhere near an all-occupational 23 cent disparity.

The Consad Research Corporation prepared a study in 2009 for the U.S. Department of Labor which found that the adjusted gender wage gap for men and women in the same career is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent.

In a 2010 report by the Majority Staff of the Joint Economic Committee, the wage gap in specific federal occupations was shown to follow that same trend: ”In response to a request by Chair Maloney and Representative Dingell, the GAO examined the gender pay gap in the federal government and found that women federal employees earn 89 cents for every dollar earned by their male peers. After accounting for observable differences between men and women (including education, experience, and occupation), that gap narrows to 93 cents on the dollar. The remaining 7 cent pay gap may be attributable to discriminatory practices.”

When politicians and activists claim that women make 77 cents for doing “the same work,” they are completely misrepresenting the information. The blanket statement regarding 77 cents is not used accurately, and making that clear to politicians and the public will help to better approach the issue of wage inequality.

However, it’s also worth investigating the reasons behind the 77 cent figure for the sake of clarifying other issues.

A majority of women tend to pursue education and careers in non-science fields with lower pay. This can be seen as early as high school, but it is most drastic when looking at choice of college major.

A common analysis of this information is to claim that the reason women tend toward lower-paying fields is because of workplace discrimination and sexism in science education and institutions.

This claim has some validity, but where and when the discrimination lies and how best to solve it has also been brought into question.

According to 2010 research conducted by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, female underrepresentation in the sciences is more closely related to the choices of individual workers.

The report says, “gendered outcomes in the real world result from differences in resources attributable to choices… The ongoing focus on sex discrimination in reviewing, interviewing, and hiring represents costly, misplaced effort.”

According the the National Center for Education Statistics, only 17 percent of students who took the high school AP test in computer science in 2009 were female.

The institute for Women’s Policy Research also found that in 2009, on average only 29 percent of Associate’s Degrees in STEM fields were awarded to women.

Clearly, inequalities start sooner than the workplace.

An important question to ask when approaching female underrepresentation in math and science fields is: What in our society and education system discourages them from seeking out those fields, and what can we do to counteract it?

Women do often report feeling unwelcome or unsupported when seeking out science and math education. They may be told they are incapable or given little approval for the decision to do so from peers, family, or coworkers.

The discrimination which prevents participation, although it may exist in science workplaces, is not most troublesome there. It comes more heavily from everything leading up to that point before women even achieve reaching the job, as can be seen in the drastic inequalities as early as grade school.

Programs aimed at counteracting those early social pressures and arguing for female capability would be easier to implement and do the most good toward increasing involvement, rather than making sweeping gender sensitive alterations to the scientific institutions or workplaces women aspire to join.

If assertions about discrimination in science education and institutions are solely accepted as the causes for women’s underrepresentation in higher-paying fields, then valuable resources will be wasted on sensitivity courses, demonstrations, and policy changes which may have no impact on the issue.

These resources could be better committed toward encouraging women from the very beginning in math and science career choices, which is more accurate to the problem. Getting a foot in the door to begin with is a higher priority than corrective action later on.

As demonstrated by the misunderstanding surrounding the wage gap, feminism in America is hindered in its goals of equality due to some problematic misinformation which is perpetuated by media outlets, government officials and the public alike. Trying to solve inequality challenges with a misinformed country not only prevents real problems from being addressed, but also creates new issues as policies and attitudes change based on such misinformation.

It is important for a movement which aims to change the laws and culture of a country to clear up misconceptions and strive toward changing the most important observable problems.

The wage gap argument, women in math and science, and feminism, are inseparably linked. But rarely do common media portrayals of the movement make necessary clarifications.

If equality is truly the goal, coming from a place of honesty is the best way to do it. And unfortunately, feminism as it is most widely portrayed in American media and government is failing to popularize accurate information among the American people and policymakers.

CORRECTIONS:

Removed and replaced content:

Replaced “harsh” with “difficult.” Replaced “is misguided” with “has resulted in widespread misinformation about gender equality issues.” Replaced “will continue to” with “could.” Replaced “myths and dishonesty” with “ .” Replaced “inaccurate and” with “problematic.” Replaced “of feminism” with “in recent gender equality debates.” Replaced “claim has been proven false” with “statistic is misunderstood and almost always used wrongly.” Removed Consad Research quote. Removed Payscale findings. Removed “but those fields pay just as little for men doing the same job.” Replaced “the most common feminist reaction,” with “a common analysis of this information.” Removed “this claim has been proven false by a variety of studies.” Replaced “a result of,” with “more closely related to.” Removed report quote “society is engaged in the present in solving problems of the past.” Removed “feminist.” Replaced “these have no impact on the actual issues which lead to inequality” with “which may have no impact on the issue.” Removed “these wasted resources could instead be committed toward encouraging women to make higher-paying career choices.” Removed “striving toward unattainable goals.” Replace “accept reality and strive toward changing observable, factual problems” with “clear up misconceptions and strive toward changing the most important observable problems.” Replaced “only” with “best.” Replaced ”exists in America is failing to be honest in its assertions” with “as it is most widely portrayed in America is failing to popularize accurate information among the American people and policymakers.”

Added studies and analyses:

2010 U.S Census Bureau, “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States”

2012 National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education, “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Equality Narrows the Achievement Gap”

2010 Majority Staff of the Joint Economic Committee, “Invest in Women, Invest in America: A Comprehensive Review of Women In the U.S. Economy”

Parker Wells can be reached at [email protected]

Note: Opinion columns are signed opinion pieces meant to generate campus-wide discussions about topics. They are usually written by students, but they may also be written by faculty, administrators or readers. These signed opinion columns are the opinions of the authors and do not reflect the opinions of TLR, ASLC or Linfield College.