commissioner.org
| Source | Patrick Bond |
| Date | 21/03/25/13:18 |
| (This read is unsatisfying, because the content and methods of the economics discipline are simply not considered below, sadly. That means there's no mention of women's vastly under-counted role in Gross Domestic Product - where unpaid household and community work hours are neglected as a matter of definition, along with pollution and nonrenewable resource depletion - notwithstanding that GDP remains macro-economists' single most used/abused variable. Also in micro-economics, the social-reproduction roles that women play, so vital to the labour market, go unremarked upon. The interactions of capitalism and patriarchy are ignored, including all sorts of feedback loops which generate such systemic discrimination.
Still, because the article reminds of the sobering lack of gender diversity and representation within a discipline that is profoundly anti-humanistic, anti-environment, and so structurally incompetent that it cannot recognise capitalist crisis tendencies before a full-fledged economic meltdown hits, one can only hope that if more women are given higher-profile roles in academic departments, they can do some good. But that broader agenda would require mentioning the utterly destructive ontologies, methodologies, behavioral assumptions and policy prescriptions of bourgeois economics... and more forcefully arguing not within, but against this bogus field of study. And frankly, in spite of the last dozen years of efforts by well-meaning young scholars concerned about the 2008 fiasco, and several prior decades of attempts at feminist, anti-racist, environmental and other heterodox add-ons, I don't think bourgeois economics can be reformed.) The Conversation The gender gap in economics is huge – it’s even worse than tech |
Copyright (c) 1998, Joongpil Cho