"Some skills earn money, prestige, and power. Others- caregiving, communication, and relational skills-are treated as optional extras. At best, they go unacknowledged; at worst, they're dismissed as unworthy of real compensation. Caring for children, the elderly, or the sick remains largely unpaid labour, still disproportionately carried out by women. Even in the paid workforce, social skills are relegated to the category of "soft"-secondary to technical expertise. The former often attract awe, praise, and bonuses, whereas the latter go unacknowledged."
"Traditionally, "male-associated" skills such as technical knowledge, physical strength, and financial acumen were rewarded as productive and worthy of high compensation. Meanwhile, "female-associated" skills like caregiving, communication, and organisation were framed as natural extensions of personality -more gifts than arduously crafted expertise. Importantly, current society's skew in skills valuation is not based in actual value of the skill. Instead, it reflects social hierarchies that map onto gender, race, and cultural divisions."
Skill value is socially constructed and mirrors hierarchies of gender, race, and culture rather than objective worth. Technical or "hard" skills receive pay, prestige, promotions, and power while caregiving, communication, and relational "soft" skills are often unpaid, unrecognized, or dismissed. Historically, male-associated skills were portrayed as productive and deserving, while female-associated skills were framed as natural gifts rather than crafted expertise. This unequal valuation concentrates rewards, fuels frustration, burnout, impostor feelings, and diminished self-esteem, and creates workplace dynamics where relational contributions remain undervalued despite being essential to project success.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]