Aarzoo Choudhary
Although 2024 holds the key to global political and social change, one thing seems to have remained painstakingly constant; the overwhelming overshadowing of women in the economic and financial industry. Throughout economic history, the depreciation of female contributions to economic theory and philosophy has regressed towards chronic levels, bearing the question, is change imminent or impossible?
To understand female subordination in economic history, we must speak of Anna Schwartz, who co-founded monetarism, a method of government manipulation of the money supply, that has become indispensable in our understanding of growth figures, and a weapon of restoration in global and national crisis, such as the quantitative easing method taken during the Great Financial crisis, which allowed liquidity and recovery, avoiding major bankruptcy for leading banks. Her authorship in the title, alongside Milton Friedman, of “A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960”, changed the course of economic history, highlighting the causes of the market failure surrounding the Great Depression, forcing and urging the redrafting of future global and political decision making. Yet, on the sacred night in 1976, she sat and clapped for Friedman’s Nobel Prize victory, as the spotlight dimmed her into darkness.
“Anna did all of the work, and I got most of the recognition,” Mr. Friedman recognised, a humble yet eyeopening acknowledgement of the constant gender battle and its relentless ability to reduce the work of a leader to a “colleague”, or shadow of her male equivalent.
Or perhaps we should discuss the work of Mary Paley Marshall. Who, you may ask? Well, then let’s discuss her husband Alfred Marshall instead. Founder of neoclassical economics, unarguably one of the greatest voices of our modern economy, yet above all, a husband, collaborator, and cowriter. Publishing their book “The Economics of Industry”, Mary and Alfred pioneered transformative development into 19th century industry, yet credit was bestowed upon her husband, propelling him towards his future greatness. Meanwhile, Mary herself remained a modest, suppressed voice, despite fighting voices, such as that of Keynes herself, who regarded her “an intellectual and thinker every bit as significant to the historical development of economics as her husband or any of the other economist about whom he wrote.”
We may even look closer to home, at the advice given to me as I decided my academic pathway: “Don’t pick economics, the class is full of guys”.
However, instead, we may instead choose to look towards Mary Callahan Eordes, the head of the asset and wealth management division of America’s leading bank, JP Morgan Chase & Co, retaining this esteemed role following 25 years of dedication, or towards Gita Gopinath, an Indian-American economist, who served as the First deputy Managing director of the IMF, pioneering research into macroeconomics, writing on defining events and innovative economic policy.
The historical economic sector has for too long cast darkness on the light of their women. Only when we look through the lens of progress will we stop dwelling on inequality, and rather imagine the future we hope to create; one where women gain recognition for their contributions, and instead of ‘aiding’ impact, become impact.
Yet, if all fails, then, in the words of Shirley Chisholm, “If they don’t give you a seat at the table, bring a folding chair”.
