Playing the Game Differently: How Women Leaders in Academia Are Challenging Neopatriarchy

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Sex Roles Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI:10.1007/s11199-024-01544-4
Emilee Gilbert, Michelle O’Shea, Sarah Duffy, Chloe Taylor
{"title":"Playing the Game Differently: How Women Leaders in Academia Are Challenging Neopatriarchy","authors":"Emilee Gilbert, Michelle O’Shea, Sarah Duffy, Chloe Taylor","doi":"10.1007/s11199-024-01544-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite Australian and New Zealand Universities pledging to address gender inequities, the patriarchal history of universities continues to impact the careers of women in academia. Under-representation of women in senior leadership and a culture of masculinity can lead to a lack of resources for feminist leadership and a devaluing of women’s work. We investigate how women in academic leadership are playing the game differently, making strategic moves to navigate leadership in the neoliberal neopatriarchal academy. We explored the experiences of 22 women in academic leadership through online qualitative surveys and reflexive thematic analysis of the data, taking inspiration from Bourdieu’s work on habitus and doxa. Although women leaders were able to successfully make strategic moves to advance their careers, these were shaped by parenting status, race, culture, and age. The women’s leadership approaches were counter to the masculine doxa of the academic field, leading instead relationally. We do not suggest that there is a specific ‘female’ style of academic leadership, but that successful authentic leadership can be founded on a feminist ethics of care in contrast to neopatriarchy. Adoption of such approaches across the academy might unshackle academics across genders from their positioning in academic leadership hierarchies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48425,"journal":{"name":"Sex Roles","volume":"241 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sex Roles","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-024-01544-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite Australian and New Zealand Universities pledging to address gender inequities, the patriarchal history of universities continues to impact the careers of women in academia. Under-representation of women in senior leadership and a culture of masculinity can lead to a lack of resources for feminist leadership and a devaluing of women’s work. We investigate how women in academic leadership are playing the game differently, making strategic moves to navigate leadership in the neoliberal neopatriarchal academy. We explored the experiences of 22 women in academic leadership through online qualitative surveys and reflexive thematic analysis of the data, taking inspiration from Bourdieu’s work on habitus and doxa. Although women leaders were able to successfully make strategic moves to advance their careers, these were shaped by parenting status, race, culture, and age. The women’s leadership approaches were counter to the masculine doxa of the academic field, leading instead relationally. We do not suggest that there is a specific ‘female’ style of academic leadership, but that successful authentic leadership can be founded on a feminist ethics of care in contrast to neopatriarchy. Adoption of such approaches across the academy might unshackle academics across genders from their positioning in academic leadership hierarchies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
玩不同的游戏:学术界的女性领导者如何挑战新父权制
尽管澳大利亚和新西兰的大学承诺解决性别不平等问题,但大学的父权制历史仍然影响着学术界女性的职业生涯。女性在高层领导中的代表性不足以及大男子主义文化,都会导致女权主义领导层缺乏资源,并贬低女性的工作价值。我们研究了学术界领导层中的女性如何以不同的方式参与游戏,并采取战略行动,在新自由主义新父权制的学术界领导层中游刃有余。我们通过在线定性调查和对数据的反思性专题分析,从布迪厄(Bourdieu)的 "习性"(habitus)和 "行为"(doxa)研究中汲取灵感,探索了 22 位女性学术领导者的经验。尽管女性领导者能够成功地采取战略行动来推动自己的职业发展,但这些行动受到父母地位、种族、文化和年龄的影响。女性领导者的领导方法与学术领域的男性 "态"(doxa)相悖,而是以关系为基础进行领导。我们并不是说学术界存在一种特定的 "女性 "领导风格,而是说成功的真正的领导可以建立在女权主义的关怀伦理之上,与新父权制形成鲜明对比。在整个学术界采用这种方法可能会使不同性别的学者摆脱其在学术领导层中的定位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Sex Roles
Sex Roles Multiple-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Sex Roles: A Journal of Research is a global, multidisciplinary, scholarly, social and behavioral science journal with a feminist perspective. It publishes original research reports as well as original theoretical papers and conceptual review articles that explore how gender organizes people’s lives and their surrounding worlds, including gender identities, belief systems, representations, interactions, relations, organizations, institutions, and statuses. The range of topics covered is broad and dynamic, including but not limited to the study of gendered attitudes, stereotyping, and sexism; gendered contexts, culture, and power; the intersections of gender with race, class, sexual orientation, age, and other statuses and identities; body image; violence; gender (including masculinities) and feminist identities; human sexuality; communication studies; work and organizations; gendered development across the life span or life course; mental, physical, and reproductive health and health care; sports; interpersonal relationships and attraction; activism and social change; economic, political, and legal inequities; and methodological challenges and innovations in doing gender research.
期刊最新文献
Not All of Me Is Welcome Here: The Experiences of Trans and Gender Expansive Employees of Color in the U.S. Being Not Binary: Experiences and Functions of Gender and Gender Communities In Their Own Words: Re-Examining Gender Differences in Career Interests and Motivations in a New Generation Think Manager-Think Male Re-Examined: Race as a Moderator Playing the Game Differently: How Women Leaders in Academia Are Challenging Neopatriarchy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1