This article explores a surprising and seemingly mundane organizational practice: passing notes during professional meetings. Based on 34 in‐depth interviews with women in a hyper‐masculine organization — the Israeli military — this study focuses on what I term gendered practices of public ambiguity. It demonstrates how these practices shed light on three interrelated paths to power at work: (i) practices of public intimacy between men; (ii) practices of women's degradation by men; and (iii) practices of recognition claims by women. The tension between the publicity inherent in the routine passing of notes and the ambiguity of their contents calls for a more nuanced theorization of gendered power practices, which transcends the accepted dichotomy of doing and undoing gender, reproducing or challenging the symbolic gender order. The findings show that gendered micro‐practices can become polysemic symbolic spaces in which women redirect the flow of power, if only temporarily and locally, and turn it into a multidirectional and multi‐agentic resource. The conceptual contribution of these findings is discussed in terms of the positioning of women in hyper‐masculine environments as pragmatic subjects who (re‐)construct mechanisms of power out of the restricted repertoire available to them.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

How do powerful women in a hyper-masculine organization talk about power? To answer this question, we should explore both cultural contents and gendered politics that inform women’s discourse about social power. This article investigates how women morally evaluate their own and others’ power. Based on in-depth interviews with 34 women serving in senior military positions, I argue that they achieve a sense of self-worth and professional subjectivity through moral work. This symbolic work involves three main discursive strategies regrading power: (1) Drawing symbolic moral boundaries between themselves and the morally ‘degenerate’ military environment; (2) Using ‘performances of authenticity’ to constitute their moral worth; and (3) (Non-)apology to counter the accusation implicit in the social expectation that they must apologize for their power as women. These strategies allow these women to talk about power in moral terms, bring power closer to themselves, and at the same time claim moral subjectivity. By morally justifying the use of military power, they make the internalized ‘brass ceiling’ transparent. Thus, I argue that although women are agentic in constituting their worth, this is not necessarily done by way of ‘resistance’, but rather through discursive maneuvering that relies on the same oppressive discursive patterns designed to restrict their power. Accordingly, their efforts to constitute their selves and ‘do power’ are carried out within, rather than outside, the gendered moral logic of the organizational culture.