An ideal society would leave no room for discrimination or prejudice. But such a society exists, for the most part, only in our imagination. The reality is far less reassuring. Even societies that pride themselves on being developed and progressive continue to harbour discrimination in one form or another. Gender discrimination, in particular, cuts across social and economic boundaries. The difference lies in how it manifests itself: in some societies, it remains concealed beneath the surface; in others, it is out in the open, often in its most repugnant forms.

The world’s advanced economies are no exception. Despite their claims to progress and equality, women continue to encounter gender-based barriers in their professional lives. The economics profession, often regarded as a discipline grounded in rationality and evidence, is no different. In a 2019 survey conducted by the American Economic Association (AEA), nearly half of the female respondents reported having experienced gender discrimination. Among male respondents, the corresponding figure was a mere 3 per cent.

The gender gap is equally evident in academic economics. In the United States, men outnumber women by two to one in economics PhD programmes. These figures are particularly troubling for a discipline that has long examined the economic and social costs of discrimination. Thomas Carlyle famously described economics as the “dismal science”. The persistent inequalities within the profession suggest that the description may carry an uncomfortable irony: economics has much to say about discrimination, yet it has struggled to confront the discrimination within its own ranks.

This contradiction lies at the heart of Ann Mari May’s compelling and extensively researched book, ‘Gender and the Dismal Science: Women in the Early Years of the Economics Profession’. Across ten concise and engaging chapters, May traces the historical roots of gender inequality in economics, examines the institutional mechanisms that have sustained it, and documents the struggles of women who have challenged the profession’s entrenched hierarchies.

Drawing on data from the AEA, May investigates how institutional biases take root and how discriminatory practices reproduce themselves over time. She examines exclusion in recruitment and promotion, barriers to research publication, and unequal participation in professional organisations. Equally important, she brings to the fore the experiences, struggles and achievements of women economists. For the women who have persevered despite these obstacles, she uses the evocative expression “tenacious persisters” – a fitting tribute to those women who have refused to surrender their professional ambitions in the face of persistent discrimination.

To understand the origins of these inequalities, May turns to the history of American higher education, tracing developments from the latter half of the nineteenth century to the period following the Second World War. During the American Civil War, college and university enrolment among men declined, while the number of girls completing high school surpassed that of boys. These developments strengthened demands for women's access to higher education. Yet many universities remained reluctant to admit them. Some regarded women's presence as a “dangerous experiment; others viewed it as a direct threat to men's educational and professional opportunities.

For the pioneering women who entered the study of economics, admission to a university was only the beginning of the struggle. They faced isolation in classrooms, unequal access to libraries and laboratories, and persistent doubts about their intellectual capacity to master demanding academic subjects. The barriers were not merely individual prejudices. They were embedded in the institutions that determined who could study, participate and succeed.

Nor did earning a degree guarantee women a place in the profession. Those who successfully completed their education often encountered further obstacles in securing academic employment. May illustrates this exclusion through the membership records of the American Economic Association, founded in 1885. During its first six decades, women accounted for only 5 per cent of the association’s membership – a stark indication of how thoroughly the profession was dominated by men.

Prevailing social attitudes compounded these institutional barriers. Marriage was widely perceived as incompatible with an academic career, creating a trade-off that women were expected to navigate but men were far less likely to face. Women also struggled to secure recognition for their research in leading academic journals. May’s examination of articles published in the American Economic Review and the Quarterly Journal of Economics highlights the limited representation of women economists. Their exclusion was reinforced, among other factors, by their weaker access to professional networks and connections – resources that often shape academic visibility, collaboration and career advancement.

May also broadens the discussion beyond gender alone by examining intersectionality, the idea that different forms of discrimination can overlap and reinforce one another. Women from racial minority communities face disadvantages arising from both gender and race, placing them at the intersection of multiple forms of exclusion. Their persistent underrepresentation underscores the fact that women do not experience discrimination in identical ways. For some, the barriers are compounded, making entry into and advancement within the profession even more difficult.

The book’s central argument exposes a striking paradox. Economics has devoted considerable attention to understanding the damaging consequences of monopolies, unequal opportunities and discriminatory practices. Yet the profession itself has remained vulnerable to precisely these forces. A discipline that studies how institutions distribute power and resources must also be willing to scrutinise its own institutional arrangements.

The problem, therefore, is not simply that fewer women enter economics. It is that the structures governing entry, recognition, publication, promotion and professional participation can make it harder for women to remain in the field and advance within it. Increasing representation is essential, but representation alone cannot dismantle the institutional and cultural barriers that perpetuate inequality.

May’s book is ultimately more than a history of women’s exclusion from economics. It is a challenge to a profession that must practise what it preaches. If economics is to offer credible insights into fairness, competition and equal opportunity, it must confront the inequalities within its own institutions. That requires sustained efforts from academic organisations, universities, journal editors, employers and individual economists alike.

This book offers inspiration to pioneers and advocates of gender equality, “tenacious persisters”, and all stakeholders committed to making the economics profession more inclusive.

(The author is an Assistant Professor of Economics at B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, and a person of versatile tastes.)