‘Are we to become a gender university?’ Facets of resistance to a gender equality project

Abstract

Gender equality (GE) is something 'we cannot not want'. Indeed, the pursuit of equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities for all women and men throughout a society freed from gendered oppression is widely visible in recent organizational GE initiatives. In practice, however, GE initiatives often fail in challenging gendered norms and at effecting deep-seated change. In fact, GE measures tend to encounter resistance, with a gap between saying and doing. Using a GE project at a Swedish university, we examined the changing nature of reactions to GE objectives seeking to understand why gender inequality persists in academia. We used 'resistance' to identify multiple, complex reactions to the project, focusing on the discursive practices of GE. Focusing our contextual analysis on change and changes in reactions enabled a process-oriented analysis that revealed gaps where change is possible. Thus, we argue that studying change makes it possible to identify points in time where gendered discriminatory norms are more likely to occur. However, analysing discursive practices does not itself lead to change nor to action. Rather, demands for change must start with answering, in a collaborative way, what problem we are trying to solve when we start a new GE project, in order to be relevant to the specific context. Otherwise, GE risks being the captive of consensus politics and gender inequality will persist.

The curious under‐representation of women impact case leaders: Can we disengender inequality regimes?

“…At times, women scholars appear to lack the self‐promotion and bravado of men in the same position. Such examples point to ‘women‐centred explanations for gender disparities' (Bird, , p. 202) rather than systemic influences and suggest stereotypes of ‘women's lack of self‐confidence' (Powell et al, , p. 139). Ostensibly, women scholars' lack of self‐promotion and women professional support staff drafting impact cases for men ‘with big titles and big roles' perpetuate Matthew (Merton, ) and Matilda effects (Rossiter, ) in the impact policy agenda.…”

“…It also contributes to critical conversations in Gender, Work and Organization about the ‘gendered substructure [that] underlies organizing and helps to explain the persistence of male dominance and female disadvantage, in spite of years of attempts to implement gender equity policies' (Acker, , p. 197). We strongly resist assumptions about ‘women themselves being the cause of gender inequalities' (Powell, Ah‐King, & Hussénius, , p. 139).…”

Precarity, gender and care in the neoliberal academy

“…Analysing the gendered aspect of precarity within a polarized labour force (Kalleberg, ) is important as it allows us to better understand why women are over‐represented in part‐time and fixed‐term appointments in elite fields like higher education: it enhances understanding of the complex interface between gender and ‘… women's lived experiences, organizational practices and societal norms’ (Ozkazanc‐Pan & Clark Muntean, , p. 380). Refocusing the theoretical discussion on women's relational and caring lives also advances understanding of gender equality more generally (Powell, Ah‐King, & Hussénius, , p. 127).…”

Kynferðisleg áreitni á vinnustað: Aðgerðir, aðgerðaleysi og leiðin fram á við

“…den Brink 2018; Powell, Ah-King & Hussénius 2018). Greining á viðnámi við slík verkefni getur gagnast til að varpa ljósi á vandamál sem jafnan koma upp í innleiðingarferli jafnréttisverkefna og nýst til að gera áaetlanir um aðgerðir markvissari og árangursríkari (Lombardo & Mergaert 2013).…”

“…Það er þó ekki gefið að þau sem bera meginábyrgð á forgangsröðun verkefna og bjarga hafi jafn jákvaeða sýn því það er þekkt úr öðrum jafnréttisrannsóknum að vaenta má viðnáms frá þeim sem slíka ábyrgð bera þegar kröfur um aðgengi að björgum aukast (sjá t.d. Powell, Ah-King & Hussénius 2018), líkt og fram kom í þessari rannsókn.…”