As #MeToo Sweeps the World, Economics Profession Has Its Own Reckoning

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: The episode centers on sexism in economics and how anonymous job-market forums, biased textbooks, and the field’s narrow definition of “economics” have discouraged women for decades. Guests Heidi Hartmann and Gina Smialek argue the issue is structural, not isolated, and that data-driven scrutiny, a petition to reform hiring transparency, and role models like Janet Yellen could help change the profession.

Main Topics: Sexism and male dominance in economics: The discussion frames economics as a field still dominated by men at senior levels, with women underrepresented in top academic positions, policy roles, and conference panels. Economics Job Market Rumors and online harassment: Guests explain how the anonymous forum EJMR became a venue for vulgar, sexist, and racist commentary about candidates, especially women, affecting hiring and professional experiences. Structural bias in the discipline’s framing and pedagogy: Hartmann argues economics has historically excluded unpaid labor, caregiving, and household provisioning from mainstream models, and that textbooks reinforce gender stereotypes. Petition and institutional pressure for reform: Hartmann describes organizing a petition against EJMR language and pressuring the American Economic Association to respond, showing that collective action can push the field toward legitimacy and accountability. Women’s experiences and the pipeline problem: Smialek reports that women often face hostile commentary, subtle discouragement, and a culture that makes undergraduate women less likely to enter or remain in economics, especially macroeconomics. Role models and diversity leadership: Janet Yellen is presented as a powerful symbol and advocate for diversity, with guests arguing that visible female leaders can inspire future economists and broaden the profession. U.S. versus global context: The conversation briefly compares the U.S. with Europe, suggesting some countries have made more formal progress on gender diversity, while U.S. economics and corporate governance still lag.

Key Arguments: Women are not absent from economics because they lack quantitative ability; the field’s culture, hiring pipeline, and definitions of valid economics help keep them out. The economics profession has been slow to confront sexism because its biases are often embedded in institutions, pedagogy, and anonymous online spaces rather than explicit policies alone. Anonymous job-market forums allow harassment and demeaning language to circulate around candidates, making the hiring process less fair and more hostile to women and minorities. The mainstream neoclassical framework marginalizes topics like unpaid labor, caregiving, and household decision-making, which are central to many women’s research interests and lived experience. Empirical research and public pressure are effective tools for reform because economists respond strongly to data, rankings, and documented patterns of exclusion. Greater female representation, especially in top roles, would improve the discipline’s culture, broaden the questions asked, and likely improve the quality of economic science. Janet Yellen’s prominence matters because visible female leadership can change perceptions for children, students, and practitioners across economics and finance.

Data Points: Petition signatures: 1091 - Hartmann and Michael Reich’s petition against EJMR language and for reform in economics gained over a thousand signatures. Early petition support: 600 signatures in a couple of weeks - Hartmann says the petition caught on quickly before being formally transmitted to the AEA. Women in the PhD market: about 25% - Hartmann cites this share for women in the economics PhD market, noting textbook examples underrepresent them even more. Textbook examples of women economists: about half of their actual share - Hartmann says women appear in examples at roughly half the rate of their presence in the PhD market. Mentions of Janet Yellen: 55% of all mentions of female policymakers in economics - A statistic discussed to illustrate how few women are represented in policy/economics references. Duration of awareness of EJMR in the field: about 10 years - Hartmann says economists have known of the site for roughly a decade before wider public attention. Time from NYT exposure to AEA statement: late August to October 22, 2017 - The AEA did not issue its first formal statement opposing EJMR language until late October after the New York Times article. Estimated age of the International Association for Feminist Economics: 20-plus years - Hartmann cites the association as an institutional response to the field’s narrow definition of economics.

Pivotal Quotes: "“The nub of the problem is hiring.”" — Heidi Hartmann: Hartmann argues that improving hiring and bringing more women into economics is central to changing the field’s culture. "“What it is sort of looking at this problem empirically and saying, you know, here's data that shows that women are talked about in physical terms.”" — Gina Smialek: Smialek explains why the issue is more of a reckoning grounded in evidence than a classic #MeToo-style exposure of individual cases. "“Women often tend to go into labor economics where they can study topics that appear to interest them more... And those topics are, you know, not the mainstream of the field.”" — Heidi Hartmann: Hartmann describes how women’s interests and the field’s hierarchy steer women toward less prestigious subfields.

Implications: The episode suggests economics must confront not just individual misconduct but structural exclusion. If hiring, pedagogy, and professional norms do not change, the field risks losing talent and producing narrower, less representative analysis.