The gender order in action: consistent evidence from two distinct workplace settings

Abstract

In this article, we elaborate an integrative framework of the gender order that considers gender as something simultaneously structurally outside of individual action and as constantly done through interaction. Combining a structural perspective with micro-interactionist accounts makes it possible to show how these mechanisms manifest themselves and how individuals engage with and concretely 'do gender' in situ. We focus on three mechanisms through which the gender order emphasizes difference and creates inequality: androcentrism, agentic masculinity, and female devaluation. We illustrate our elaboration of the gender order with empirical evidence from two dramatically different male-dominated employment settings, meat-processing and higher education, in Switzerland and Germany, respectively.

The Healthy Workplaces Ecosystems and Professionals’ Stress Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Moreover, teleworking has increased the amount of childcare and domestic care more often provided by women [16]. We can hypothesize that women are less assertive and demanding in relation to their expectations of the responsibility of work organizations to look after their health and promote healthy environments [65].…”

Public diplomacy of authoritarianism: Strategic use of Suzanne Mubarak

“…352, 355). This study essentialized the positions of a woman through a false binary imposing limitations on her body and limitations of value by setting her boundaries out of "male" territory (Zinn & Hofmeister, 2022).…”

Measurement invariance and psychometric properties of a German-language Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory among cisgender sexual minority and heterosexually identified women and men.

“…Women might also adhere to norms and standards described by masculinity ideologies (García-Sánchez et al, 2018; Zamarripa et al, 2003). For instance, women might display behaviors that are defined in part by masculinity ideologies (e.g., being results-oriented, speaking assertively, expressing confidence in oneself, showing determination), especially in male-dominated workplaces (Galea & Chappell, 2022) and when taking leadership positions (Mohan et al, 2022; Zinn & Hofmeister, 2022). Women who display certain behaviors associated with masculinity ideologies, even in workplaces where such behaviors are often expected and favored, face devaluation (Mohan et al, 2022; Zinn & Hofmeister, 2022), and are in conflict with femininity ideologies, that is, culturally defined standards and norms of how women are expected to be or behave (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Hamilton et al, 2019; Heilman & Okimoto, 2007; Vink et al, 2022).…”

“…For instance, women might display behaviors that are defined in part by masculinity ideologies (e.g., being results-oriented, speaking assertively, expressing confidence in oneself, showing determination), especially in male-dominated workplaces (Galea & Chappell, 2022) and when taking leadership positions (Mohan et al, 2022; Zinn & Hofmeister, 2022). Women who display certain behaviors associated with masculinity ideologies, even in workplaces where such behaviors are often expected and favored, face devaluation (Mohan et al, 2022; Zinn & Hofmeister, 2022), and are in conflict with femininity ideologies, that is, culturally defined standards and norms of how women are expected to be or behave (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Hamilton et al, 2019; Heilman & Okimoto, 2007; Vink et al, 2022). In order to understand the degree to which women conform to masculinity ideologies and may consequently face devaluation or disadvantage (Hamilton et al, 2019), instruments for the assessment of conformity to masculinity ideologies need to be validated in women in addition to men and people with another gender.…”