Sexism And Gender

The fact that women only make seventy-seven cents for every dollar earned by a man is alarming. In fact, I have done a great deal of research on the topic. Uncovering the truth about of a common misconception is always invigorating. I have found that much of the gender gap can be explained by factors other than discrimination. But, many people when they first hear the seventy-seven cent statistic automatically assume that the root of the disparity is some form of sexism. One major shortcoming of the figure is it's failure to consider college major. The highest paying majors, which are mostly engineering in nature, are predominantly male, while the lowest paying majors are predominantly female. Women are also more likely to work part time than
men, more likely to work fewer hours in a day than men, and less likely to take hazardous jobs, which are typically higher paying. Also, if women can be paid three fourths as much for equal work, women would hypothetically dominate the workforce. To reduce costs, almost all jobs would be given to women, and eventually the firms that continued to hire males, who would be much more expensive than their female counterparts, would be forced out of business. It is also extremely unlikely for there to be a nationwide conspiracy to hold women back. I think that the first wall that needs to be hurdled is the information barrier. As long as women believe that regardless of intellect or skills they will be paid less than their male equivalent, their mindset will be an impediment to their success. An information campaign about the true causes of the gender gap would go a long way.

Cornell economists Francine D.
Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn are both a wealth of knowledge for all things gender gap. They reached a slightly different conclusion than I did, and I would love to pick their brain about their methodology and their prescription for the best course of action. Cornell also offers superb research opportunities. The chance to further delve into the gender gap with even more resources than I could imagine at the Center for the Study of Inequality, tantalizes me. Cornell is also an excellent place to further the discussion about the gender gap, and I could even go as far as to minor in
inequality.
Another issue that I am passionate about learning more about is game theory.
Unfortunately, I only have a rudimentary knowledge of game theory, but what I do know is that I want to know more. The psychological aspect of economics is captivating. The concept of the prisoners' dilemma being boiled down to the Nash equilibrium really struck a cord with me. What interests me the most are the applications of a strong understanding of game theory. Game theory can be used to predict the general behavior of consumers, and to help understand how and why oligopolies act the way that they do. However the understanding of oligopolies also can also be used to devise better incentive systems that help to rein in excesses that hurt the consumer. Studying the relationship between conflict and cooperation as it relates to game theory at Cornell genuinely excites me. Given that Cornell currently offers nine classes with game theory in their title, there are many opportunities to look at game theory from different angles. Cornell is a place where I can take my fascination with game theory as far as I want to take it with students who are just as passionate about game theory as I
am.