The image of engineering as a masculine profession has reproduced the perception that engineering is unsuitable for women. While various strategies have been used to try to increase the number of women entering engineering education and employment, their success has been limited. At the same time it has been argued that the way gender is ‘done’ in work can help diminish or increase inequality between the sexes. Using empirical research exploring women engineering students’ workplace experiences, this article considers how gender performance explains their behaviour and attitudes. Butler implied that doing gender can result in our being ‘undone’. This was specifically found to be the case for the women students in this study, who performed their gender in a particular way in order to gain male acceptance. In doing this they utilized certain coping strategies: acting like one of the boys, accepting gender discrimination, achieving a reputation, seeing the advantages over the disadvantages and adopting an ‘anti‐woman’ approach. These strategies are part of women's enculturation and professionalization in engineering, yet they also fail to value femaleness. In ‘doing’ engineering, women often ‘undo’ their gender. Such gender performance does nothing to challenge the gendered culture of engineering, and in many ways contributes to maintaining an environment that is hostile to women.
Occupational segregation by sex remains the most pervasive aspect of the labour market. In the past, most research on this topic has concentrated on explanations of women's segregation into low paid and low status occupations, or investigations of women who have crossed gender boundaries into men's jobs, and the potential impact on them and the occupations. In contrast, this article reports on a small scale, qualitative study of ten men who have crossed into what are generally defined as 'women's jobs'. In doing so, one of the impacts on them has been that they have experienced challenges to their masculine identity from various sources and in a variety of ways. The men's reactions to these challenges, and their strategies for developing and accommodating their masculinity in light of these challenges are illuminating. They either attempted to maintain a traditional masculinity by distancing themselves from female colleagues, and/or partially (re)constructed a different masculinity by identifying with their non-traditional occupations. This they did as often as they deemed necessary as a response to different forms of challenge to their gender identities from both men and women. Finally, the article argues that these responses work to maintain the men as the dominant gender, even in these traditionally defined 'women's jobs'.
This article draws on data from a qualitative research study undertaken in an old (pre-1992) UK university with the main aim of investigating the issue of the gender dimension of academic careers. It examines the idea of an individualistic academic career that demands self-promotion, which is still used as a measure of achievement by those in senior positions. However, there is a basic contradiction. While this idea is upheld, men simultaneously gain by an in-built patriarchal support system. They do not have to make a conscious effort to be helped by it, thereby perpetuating the cultural hegemony of individualism. Women are not admitted to this support system, and if they are seen as needing or wanting to set up their own system, this is viewed as a weakness. The answer appears to be for women to strategically harness feminist ways of working in a collaborative and supportive way.
In response to impending skills shortages and changing employment patterns, the UK construction industry recently has made considerable efforts to attract more women to its professions. However, despite their increasing representation, there are indications that women experience difficulties in developing their careers within the industry. This research investigated the careers of men and women working for large construction companies, in order to establish the gender determined influences on women's career progression. A primarily qualitative methodology was employed for the research, in which career profiles were developed through ethnographic interviews with 41 matched pairs of male and female employees. This allowed the gender specific determinants of careers to be established across a range of different organizations, and from informants at different vocational and life-cycle stages. The analysis resulted in the formulation of a set of eight interrelated theoretical models, from which a theory of women's career development was constructed. The theory reflects the belief that the construction workplace is a competitive and conflictual environment, where women are overtly and covertly discriminated against by men, who use structural systems to undermine their participation. The women interviewed were found to have dealt with these barriers in a way which perpetuated existing work cultures. If reflected throughout the industry, this would suggest the existence of a self-fulfilling cycle of women's continued under-achievement. The paper puts forward the radical proposition that women should not be attracted to the industry unless steps are taken to moderate its exclusionary and discriminatory culture.Women, Career Development, Discrimination, Hrm, Grounded Theory,
This article reports an investigation into the influence of gender at a pre-1992 UK university. Interviews with Heads of Departments and others defined as occupying 'middle management' positions reveal three distinct stances to the new higher education, of 'collaboration', 'resistance' and 'transformation' and the article explores how gender influences these stances. It attempts to move beyond a simple focus on gender differences, towards answering Bacchi's (1990) call for 'a more useful political analysis (which) would draw attention to the way in which the current economic system encourages certain behaviours and discourages others'. It shows that women academics are taking a transformational stance, but that the stances are not gender-specific. Gender is institutionally embedded with other organizational characteristics, such as academic discipline, departmental size, compatibility with external commercial activity, and the ability or otherwise to generate funds. Questions are raised about the contribution of such stances to the future of the new educational order.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.