Sexism in the silences at Australian Universities: Parental leave in name, but not in practice

Abstract

Unequal distribution of child rearing and domestic responsibilities between parents contributes to gender inequity, a wicked problem in Australia. Inequitable parental leave policies at Australian public Universities place the burden of care squarely on the mother, diminishing or absenting the father. We examine how the gendered nature of the existing policies are constructed in ways that create inequities and discourage their uptake. A post‐structural feminist lens provides us with a theoretical vantage point from which this wicked problem can be problematized. We present three recommendations for enabling more equitable outcomes for parents. The first is to eradicate the punitive approach and support flexibility; second, the policies must be parental leave in name, provision and practice; and finally we recommend a minimum parental leave standard for Australian universities nationally. These findings have policy‐level significance for redressing parental leave inequity within the Australian university context. The paper concludes with theoretical contributions, practical implications, and suggestions for future research.

Sexually harassed, assaulted, silenced, and now heard: Institutional betrayal and its affects

“…At the heart of structured silencing are the complex power relations that are enacted and cloaked in multifaceted ways. While sometimes hierarchical, positional authority is but one dimension, men's dominance in Australian workplaces is another (Duffy et al., 2022). We extend the work of others who have posited how it is the interweaving effects and complicity of multiple third‐party actors (e.g., HR, colleagues, direct supervisors) who silence victim/survivors (Fernando & Prasad, 2019) through both top‐down formal policies and bottom‐up practices.…”

“…We depict how a structured silence and silencing of sexual harassment and assault is strengthened through relations and practices, which we position as an inequity regime (Acker, 2006; Duffy et al., 2022) that betrays Sofia. We use the term “inequity regime” to be consistent with recent work by Duffy et al (2022) that highlights how our thinking has evolved from wanting the same for everyone (equality), to recognizing and supporting differences by striving for equity.…”

“…We depict how a structured silence and silencing of sexual harassment and assault is strengthened through relations and practices, which we position as an inequity regime (Acker, 2006; Duffy et al., 2022) that betrays Sofia. We use the term “inequity regime” to be consistent with recent work by Duffy et al (2022) that highlights how our thinking has evolved from wanting the same for everyone (equality), to recognizing and supporting differences by striving for equity. Acker (2006, p. 443) positions regimes as “loosely interrelated practices, processes, actions, and meanings that construct and reproduce class, gender, and racial inequalities within particular organizations.” In neoliberal organizations (like Sofia's employer), the inequity regimes bestow an advantage on some employees—most often straight, white, middle‐class, able‐bodied men—and disadvantages others (Morley, 2013).…”

You Can Knock on the Doors and Windows of the University, but Nobody Will Care: How Universities Benefit from Network Silence around Gender-Based Violence

“…Research on belief systems in organisations has added that support for male dominance and heteronormative masculine norms reproduces inequalities in institutions and contributes to the invisibility of sexual harassment or harassment (O'Connor et al 2021;Acker 1990;Naezer et al 2019). As Duffy et al (2022) and Shannon (2022) pointed out, in a context where institutions tolerate inappropriate behaviour by more powerful supervisors (usually men) towards young researchers, doctoral students, and postdoctoral fellows (most often women), incidences of sexism, sexist comments, or other expressions of toxic masculinities would not be heard by the organisations because it does not seem to be in their interest to challenge practices which safeguard the institutions' performance. Our findings show a very similar pattern and uncover how male dominance, male leadership styles, and toxic masculinity norms, which perpetuate unequal gender structures and behaviours, reproduce dominance and gender inequalities in universities.…”

“I've got more of a role to play”: Australian fathers’ perspectives on parenting through the lens of COVID-19 lockdown.

“…Although it is labeled “parental leave,” if the father is the primary carer, the birth mother has to apply and transfer her leave entitlements to the father (Baird & O’Brien, 2015), thereby contributing to the disparity on how men and women are valued in the workplace (Pennington, 2020). Parental leave inequity does not only affect men but also disadvantages women as they often have interrupted employment, more domestic duties, reduced potential for career growth and promotion, and less pay (Duffy et al, 2022; Kalb, 2018). Although the research on the benefits of positive father involvement has increased significantly in the past decades, parental leave inequities create organization contexts where men are penalized and discouraged from child caring practices (Gatrell et al, 2022).…”