The gender wage gap is a societal issue that has persisted for many years, which entails an income gap between men and women. The wage gap is a demonstration of gender discrimination and ethnicity and hurts women financially. Allowing this puts the facade that men are more important than women because the pay isn’t equal even at the same job, which is not true at all. In the following four sources, I will discuss the problem with this unfair system and ways that the gap can be closed for good, and I will be analyzing four different types of sources related to the gender wage from a rhetorical point of view.

In the first article titled, “Gender pay gap fight: Efforts to correct differences may be lowering pay for all,” the central argument made by authors Jesse Davis and Paige Ouimet is that governments should begin increasing the awareness of the gender wage gap’s s existence to employers and revealing a wage range when hiring people. The authors of this article wrote to debate the ways that have been attempted to try and close the gender wage gap using an analytical tone. Indicators of this tone being used are words such as “however,” which is used several times in the paper. The word, however, is analytical in which it is used to compare and contrast ideas. The use of this word can be used to consider one’s idea that is presented but then elaborate how this idea may be wrong using evidence showing its analytical nature. This is the case in this article as they compare how the government is handling the gender wage gap and how the solutions they present are better than those of the government. The two authors are both professors of Finance. They have extensive experience in analyzing the capital structure and corporate Finance, giving them a great perspective into how the wage gap can be closed and the best methods to approach it since it’s their area of expertise. Using a website as their medium, the authors’ target audience is the local and state governments who need to implement better strategies to close the gender wage gap, which can be easily accessible. This is made evident in the article when they say, “…States and local governments across the county have enacted bans prohibiting employers from asking for a job applicant’s salary history…Overall, the researchers found that salary bans led to a 3% decrease in the wages of new hires…they found no significant difference in the gender pay gap for new hires following a salary history ban.” (Ouimet and Davis) This is done to let the government know that this method of trying to close the gap is not working, and they should be looking for other solutions that will. This is an argumentative article because it gives a solution as to what the government tries to do to close the gap, and then it critiques that solution through research that proves that it is not the best solution. They then provide a solution that they believe would be more viable, which includes “Requiring employers to disclose wage ranges when hiring, an approach that is being implemented in Colorado, may provide a viable alternative.” (Ouimet and Davis) This demonstrates their stance on the gender wage gap issue because they believe this solution would be the best way to close the gender wage gap, and they argue this through their analysis of data that has been collected. Also, they applaud some of the efforts that the government has tried to use but believe they must do better by the authors giving their own suggestions, further showing the government as their target audience. 

In the next article titled, “Gender Discrimination Is at the Heart of the Wage Gap” by Anthony P. Carnevale and Nicole Smith, the central idea is that the gender wage gap is really just a financial view of how society looks at men and women with gender discrimination and stereotypes being the driving factor. The authors of this article wrote to spread awareness of the active gender discrimination being portrayed in the workplace being reflected through the difference in pay. They are trying to inspire people to protest, gauging the government to implement laws to restrict gender discrimination. Evidence of this is present when they open their article with the editor in chief of The New York Times, who is a woman avidly protesting her salary being lower than her male predecessor. There was a noticeable gap present between their salaries, and she posted on her social media platform to gain the attention of everyone, specifically people who can make laws to change it. The authors are both research professors at Georgetown University, and both work for its Center on Education and the Workplace. This center specializes in studying the link between education, career qualifications, and workforce demands which shows they have great knowledge in the gender wage gap and can provide insightful reasoning for this problem and how to stop it. The medium for this article is a magazine. Their audience is the government, as they have the power to make these problems stop by creating new laws targeting gender discrimination. Evidence to support this is shown in the text as they directly target critics of closing the gender wage gap when they say the gender wage gap is not the government’s problem. They review their stance and then show how this point is incorrect as both genders get identical degrees yet differences in pay, showing that they want the government to look further into this problem. Their stance on the gender wage gap is that it is a product of gender discrimination, and this is the only thing that explains using an authoritative tone. For instance, in the text, it says, “Critics of initiatives to close the gender wage gap…say gender-based wage inequalities are due to individual choice and therefore are of no concern to the government…But Harvard economist Claudia Goldin…Using wage data for men and women with identical degrees and experience, she was able to show that gender discrimination is ultimately at the core of the gap” (Carnevale and Smith). This demonstrates the two authors’ tone on the gender wage gap. They are firm in their opinion that the gender wage gap is caused by gender discrimination, using phrases such as “did not hold water,” giving no leeway for an opposition. This no leeway kind of attitude further demonstrates the authoritative tone present in the article. They include various solutions for the gap closing, one being “increase wage transparency and provide legal protections for workers who raise concerns about gender-based wage discrimination” (Carnevale and Smith), showing their optimism that the gender wage gap close one day.

The third article, “How to Attack the Gender Wage Gap? Speak Up” by Jessica Bennett, discusses a long coveted solution for the gender wage gap problem, which includes women advocating more for themselves in the workplace and not submitting to a job offer salary that they believe they should be receiving more for. The purpose of this article is to inform the women of strategies in which they could better market themselves to their bosses for their salary to increase. At times because of internalized stereotypes of women and men, self advocacy becomes harder for women. She discusses ways to get their point across and make it successful, almost like how a business pitch is presented in a board meeting. In this informative article, the target audience is all women since this issue affects all women no matter their ethnicity. Evidence of this in the text is the author giving suggestions mainly meant for women to use such as her giving strategies men use to typically increase their salary and directs them as strategies women should also use, further indicating women as their target audience. The author has a long history of work mainly focused on women’s rights, such as in her coverage of the #MeToo movement. This movement was critical in the progression of women’s rights as it steadily became encouraged for women to come out about being victims of sexual abuse. Her covering it demonstrates her desire for women to be treated the same as men in all aspects. Also, being the New York Times’ first gender editor, which is meant to explore gender issues across platforms, shows her commitment to cover all aspects in which women are discriminated against. With this, through the background of accomplishments, her point proves to be valid and impactful. Her stance in this article through the use of a newspaper medium is that there is a way to close this gender wage gap, and it’s just through advocacy for oneself. If all women implement these techniques, the gender wage gap will gradually close and cease to exist. For example, in the article, it says, “At Mount St. Vincent, the Draft 1 workshop…They are coached not to offer up a figure from their last job, unless explicitly asked. The use of terms like “initial offer” — it’s not final! — is pounded into them. And, perhaps most important, they learn never, ever, to say yes to an offer immediately.” (Bennett) This demonstrates the author’s stance by using an assertive tone indicated by words like “pounded” and the use of exclamation points, demonstrating the urgency and need for this information to be understood by her audience. She uses this tone to show common mistakes women may make when interviewing for a job and solutions for each one to present themselves better as the best candidate for the job and why they should be making that money.

In the fourth and final article, “Gender differences in wage expectations,” Ana Fernandes, Martin Huber, and Giannina Vaccaro discuss the data found in their research on the gender wage gap. The central idea is that a combination of personal and professional factors between women and men could cause the gender wage gap. The authors’ purpose in this scholarly article is to analyze the factors that cause the gender wage gap. This was done through them researching for them to come up with their own answer. The genre of this article is an analytical report. The author’s target audience is fellow economists who are well versed in the gender wage gap issue to discuss their findings on reasons for the gender wage gap to hold up for discussion with fellow experts. They use terms such as “CHF300,” which a regular person reading this will not immediately know if they are not familiar with the subject. This term refers to the rate of exchange between US dollars and Switzerland Francs. The authors are all economists as well, and they have a shared interest in gender economics, showing their expertise in the issue of the gender wage gap. The author’s stance in this article is that a combination of personal (such as childbirth) and professional (level of education) factors between women and men could be the cause of the gender wage gap. For example, in the text, it says, “Further, when professional and personal mediators are jointly considered, the direct, unexplained effect of gender is greatly attenuated, both in size as well as in statistical significance” (Fernandes et al.). Through the use of a formal tone, which is demonstrated through their elaborate discussion of the data that they collected, such as the determining the type of relationship, either direct or indirect, that occurs when they are manipulating variables in their study; the authors can provide a reason for why this gap exists, a question many have been trying to definitively figure out. The authors also use words specific to their fields and organize with no slang involved, only relating to their data, further showing the use of a formal tone.

These sources use a different method in conveying their message through the use of various mediums and each having a different tone. They each write with a different purpose, with Source 1 being to argue, whereas Source Three is to inform. They each have different reasons for writing their articles and the effect they want it to have on their audience. An example of this is in Source 3, in which the author wants the audience, which is women, to get the general idea that they can get equal pay as men; they just have to be persistent as men do as well. They are all similar in that they all present reasons why the gender wage gap exists. Each divulges deeply into what the gender wage gap is and the possible ways it was created. Most of them also provide their audiences with ways in which the gap can be closed. The first and second sources both addressed similar audiences, which were the government, while the third and fourth sources differed in their audience. However, the audience all are people who can help solve this gender wage gap problem as they all play critical roles in it and, therefore, can create change in it. All of the authors having extensive expertise in these areas were able to give probable solutions using several devices, giving us the optimistic future that this problem will be ridden out once and for all.

Citations 

• Anthony P. Carnevale and Nicole Smith. “Gender Discrimination Is at Heart of Wage Gap.” Time, Time, 19 May 2014, https://time.com/105292/gender-wage-gap/. 
• Bennett, Jessica. “How to Attack the Gender Wage Gap? Speak Up.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 15 Dec. 2012, https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/business/to-solve-the-gender-wage-gap-learn-to-speak-up.html?searchResultPosition=5.
• Davis , Jesse, and Paige Ouimet. “Gender Pay Gap Fight: Efforts to Correct Differences May Be Lowering Pay for All.” WRAL TechWire, 30 Sept. 2021, https://www.wraltechwire.com/2021/09/30/gender-pay-gap-fight-efforts-to-correct-differences-may-be-lowering-pay-for-all/. 
• Fernandes, Ana, et al. “Gender Differences in Wage Expectations.” Plos One, Public Library of Science, https://go-gale-com.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Journals&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&hitCount=18&searchType=BasicSearchForm¤tPosition=5&docId=GALE%7CA663852430&docType=Report&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZXAY-MOD1&prodId=OVIC&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA663852430&searchId=R1&userGroupName=cuny_ccny&inPS=true.