Women seem to be both under-utilized and under-incentivized in the labour force, even though those in high-income countries typically now have a higher educational level than do men.

Maybe turn that around then. Why are more men stupid/uneducated enough to enter the labour force only to be exploited by their employers for little gain in areas of life that matter? Or alternatively, why do men not have the opportunity to avoid the labour force even if they do recognize it is not to their advantage to enter it?

Obviously that is a bit nonsensical too but maybe the inherent assumption that it is good thing to spend a large percentage of your time labouring should be questioned if we want to answer questions like that.

Although such inequalities are widely recognized, they present a puzzle for economic models because they represent not just a potential injustice, but also what economists call a market inefficiency.

I am always fascinated, that each time the neoclassical school of economics proves to be false, they all act like thats a totally new and singular unexpected thing, as if this hasn't been proved time and time again for all sorts of issues..

market inefficiency

Don't get me wrong - people doing this kind of research and building up the data to prove the reality is a good thing, but the absurdity of turning to capitalism to resolve patriarchy is just much..

It's like the flip side of class reductionism - "only war is the gender war" - hey capitalists, look at this untapped resource, if you just exploit women 13% less, you can make all this extra profit!

And while I completely support this strike, I wish they too would look at the bigger picture.

The reality is that all these systems (capitalism and classism, sexism, racism, ableism, queerphobia, and so on) are interconnected and inseparable, they serve each other in many ways, and must all be abolished for us to have anything resembling a just society.