Harmon’s Histories: Women’s pay inequity just the tip of a historical iceberg

By Jim Harmon

In 1894, a Pittsburgh Gazette newspaper columnist writing under the nom de plume “The Quiet Observer,” asked the question: “Are women really abused as much as they claim to be?”

The Observer, in a piece carried by The Missoulian, claimed: “It seems to be a fact that a majority of them, married and single, believe that they are abused by the men just because the latter have control of business affairs, run politics, and do the courting.”

“Just because?” Seems to be enough reason. But that’s a 2024 reaction to an 1894 issue.

Anyway, the writer continued, “Among the indignant are the women of marriageable age who are still living at home; the old maids; and the ‘shop girls,’” paid little for their toil.

Shop Girl? What the heck is a shop girl?

More research is needed. So down the rabbit hole we go!

Post-Civil War, the industrialized garment industry was able to turn out much cheaper clothing, allowing women to, well … buy more clothes. That led to the department store, many of which included restaurants, leading to the daylong shopping experience!

According to the New York Historical Society, department stores were very different in that they had fixed prices for merchandise. Thus ended the need for a man’s “negotiating skill.” Stores could now hire unskilled labor (aka, women) at a much cheaper rate of pay.

In the 20 years between 1880 and 1900, the number of shop girls exploded. By the dawn of the 20th century, female sales clerks outnumbered male clerks. The Historical Society noted that “working as a shop girl was considered one of the best jobs. It was a respectable position in a clean, safe working environment.”

There was a dark side, though. Shop girls tended to make less than female factory workers, they worked incredibly long hours and faced harassment from male managers and customers alike.

Anyway, back to our 1894 article: The shop girls, according to the columnist, believed that they were truly abused by men. They felt their remuneration was far below what was needed to actually “live by the sweat of their brow.” They pointed the finger of blame at “young men who were earning money enough for two, and spending it for their own comfort.”

The shop girl also “wondered why the boys did not gather around and ask her to choose one of them to be her defender and supporter.”

But the loudest complainers were the married women: “It is all right during the honeymoon, but when that is over and they turn to face the realities of life they feel that they are abused.”

“Her household duties are heavier than when she was at home; her husband is not the sighing lover who filled her heart with joy, and her days are not as thickly interspersed with picnics as they were when she was a girl.”

Immediately below the “Quiet Observer” column was another titled: “Those Bachelor Girls: How they radiate happiness and have fun.”

Apparently, in the view of this second columnist (the New York correspondent of the Pittsburg Press) everything changed by 1894, and “the woman who does not marry has a recognized position socially, and we have all grown wise enough to know that any woman who wishes can marry.”

In fact, according to the New York columnist, “beautiful friendships” can develop among women and “the possibility of a home being made, without a man in it, is a certainty.”

“In flats or in dainty little houses, two or three bachelor women (they don’t call themselves girls) ... arrange for one to be the home-keeper while the other is out in the world.” (They are) happy and comfortable from day to day.”

Cited as examples of these successful “bachelor women” were “the editor of a well-known literary paper … a well-known actress … (and) the only woman dealer in plays in this country.” In addition, there were “innumerable little homes where women are bound by ties of blood.”

Still left hanging was the issue of equal pay for equal work. According to the American Association of University Women, in 2024, the gender pay gap still exists. I leave you to ponder their data:

Asian American women are paid 89 cents for every dollar paid to non-Hispanic white men.

White women are paid 74 cents for every dollar paid to non-Hispanic white men.

Moms working full-time are paid 63 cents for every dollar paid to dads.

Black women are paid 66 cents for every dollar paid to non-Hispanic white men.

Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) women are paid 60 cents for every dollar paid to non-Hispanic white men.

Native women are paid 55 cents for every dollar paid to non-Hispanic white men.

Latinas are paid 52 cents for every dollar paid to non-Hispanic white men.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau. (2023). 2022 Current Population Survey (CPS) Annual Social and Economic Supplement Tables for Personal Income and the American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2009-2022).

Jim Harmon is a longtime Missoula news broadcaster, now retired, who writes a weekly history column for Missoula Current. You can contact Jim at fuzzyfossil187@gmail.com. His best-selling book, “The Sneakin’est Man That Ever Was,” a collection of 46 vignettes of Western Montana history, is available at harmonshistories.com.