Naomi Cahn

This is one of those books where I had to keep taking breaks, because I would get so angry at the examples of misogyny, scapegoating, and other unfair treatment of women. And there are sadly many such examples, even when you account for the fact that this book is limited to labor instead of all aspects of the economy as the subtitle seems to imply.

The authors, through their analysis of several cases ranging from finance and tech to education and retail, make a convincing argument that such show more biased practices are linked to what they call the Winner Take All approach. The resulting toxicity, legal and ethical violations, and devaluing of community good in favor of private profit have wide-ranging and harmful effects. Fortunately (even in the current political climate) there are ways to push back. By laying bare these power dynamics, this book does its part to shine a light on these injustices, while raising the voices of women fighting the WTA system. show less

This book examines the rise and impact of the "Winner Takes All" economy that has been the driving force behind short sighted business practices that have led to multiple company collapses, recessions, and economic bubbles bursting. Coincidentally, this manner of conducting business is also notorious for gender pay disparities, sexual harassment and racial discrimination.

The authors are all Law Professors and examine these economic impacts and how they effect women through a number of show more lawsuits, drawing conclusions from the outcomes. Though obviously meticulously researched, this book is very accessible and digestible.

They clearly break down the Triple Bind that prevents women from succeeding in many fields. Firstly, if women don't compete on the same terms as men, they lose. Secondly, if they try to compete on the same terms as men, they are punished for violating gender norms. Thirdly, when women see that they aren't treated fairly even when they compete on the same terms, they take themselves out of the game, provided they haven't already been pushed out.

Although the cases the authors use to illustrate their points can be discouraging, they end with some hope of change and suggestions for continuing the fight for equity in the workplace.

As I said above, I found this book to be easy to read and enjoyable if the stories of injustice did frustrate me. The insights into the toxic business practices also helped me better understand parts of my own career and experience. show less

Wonderful assessment of the impacts of income inequality in creating different types of families across the income spectrum. Though this is a heavily researched academic text, the majority is highly accessible to the lay reader. It matches up nicely with sociology work by Edin (which the book references), providing an economic perspective to explain the sociological findings on low-income families. This book proves that low-income women who do not marry the fathers of their children are show more making an economically rational choice given that low-income men are typically unemployed, poor parents, and do not contribute domestically. I wish the frequent "just get married" commentators could understand that.

There are places where the book gets a bit repetitive, which can be a little distracting if you read the book straight through. In addition, I thought the authors paid a lot of attention to Charles Murray as though he is the only conservative commentator to demonize low-income women. However, this is an extremely valuable look into the segmentation of the economy and its impact on American families. Highly recommended. show less

Is there any ripping out the roots of a patriarchal economy? A well-constructed argument for the return of the pro-social corporate ethos.
Reproduction is the currency of evolution. But the cost of successful rearing of young is not unilaterally shared between sexes or their employers. Rearing future society members within American society is not viewed as a shared cost that extends to the purview of employers at all in most cases.
In a sense, there is an even worse case to argue - the least show more compensated mothers bear the task of bearing children who are most unlikely to achieve social mobility within the current U.S. system. They will probably work, often as their mothers, in the poorly compensated service sector. The propagation of the WTA economy relies on this.
The book follows detailed case studies that represent female disenfranchisement at various stations in the conceptual hierarchy of workforce social classes. Whether high-earning and high-powered or minimally compensated with supposed minimal influence, the book attests to the economic disadvantages of being female.
My takeaway was that the book is well-argued and functions as expected. However, it is not a pleasure read if you’re female unless you like being justifiably angry. That said, I think the crown jewel that I wish was more expanded upon was the conclusion chapter, “A future without WTA excess.”
The conclusion included the historical context for how we arrived at more pro-social periods in the American economy. Of course, if the conclusion had been expanded upon, I would have been functionally reading a different book.
America needs Western European models of a social care state and aspirational notions of what a government can do to ensure that its society functions in an egalitarian manner. But we’re not in that part of the wheel of time. We have neither corporate responsibility nor legislation to curb runaway “neglect of gender parity.”
The book is full of sound arguments for the construction of systems that do not leave women behind while participating in the economy outside of the home. show less