Abstract
Following from the exploration in Chap. 4 of how women experience and construct their gender, sexuality and other identities in the context of male-dominated work, this chapter turns to the interactional level of identification by analysing workplace interactions, and how these are differentiated by sexual orientation and occupational group. Joan Acker (2006a, b) identified that one of the components of ‘inequality regimes’ that produce and sustain gender inequality within organisations are the organising processes that produce gender, class and racial inequalities. Organising processes include work patterns, organisational hierarchies and recruitment practices, as well as informal interactions while ‘doing the work’. This might cover exclusion from conversations, social events and decisions, as well as sexual harassment. The evidence from interviewees in this chapter will show that informal workplace interactions that foreground gender and sexuality remain one of the key mechanisms through which women are obstructed in their efforts to succeed in male-dominated work.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Economic: the control of economic resources such as property, income and earnings, with men having the greater share of earnings. Positional: gained by virtue of holding positions of authority, such as manager, union leader and head of household, roles which are typically dominated by men. Technical: the deployment of technical expertise and mechanical competence, normally monopolised by men at work and used to justify gender segregation and pay differentials. Physical: physical strength is held to be associated with male body shape and muscularity, which has historically helped them to dominate at work; male physical power includes the threat of violence. Symbolic: the ability to impose one’s own definitions, meanings, values and rules to give one’s own experience primacy, controlling how meanings are determined, including through the media of communication, such as control of ‘talk’ in meetings. Collective: the mobilisation of collective resources, for example within trade unions, pressure groups or networks, traditionally dominated by men but women can use networks to challenge male power. Personal: the utilisation of personal resources, such as character, knowledge, experience, ability to get on with people and articulacy; may be used by women in the family to establish influence over men, children and other women, but may in the workplace. Sexual: an aspect of personal power, can be an important way in which women assert themselves against men, but also used by men, for example in sexual harassment. Domestic: derives from the control of household goods and materials, and domestic skills and experience, which can give women considerable power in the home.
- 2.
The legal definition of harassment makes it clear that conduct is unlawful if it is unwanted and violates the employee’s dignity, or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them. UK case law has established that both physical and verbal actions amount to sexual harassment, and includes downloading or displaying sexual or pornographic images (LRD 2015).
References
Acker, J. 2006a. Class questions: Feminist answers. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
Acker, J. 2006b. Inequality regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender & Society 20(4): 441–464.
Bagilhole, B. 2002. Women in non-traditional occupations: Challenging men. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bagilhole, B., A.R.J. Dainty, and R. Neale. 2000. Women in the UK construction industry: A cultural discord? Minorities in Science and Technology 6(1): 73–86.
Bilimoria, D., and A.J. Stewart. 2009. ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’: The academic climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender faculty in science and engineering. NWSA Journal 21(2): 85–103.
Bradley, H. 1999. Gender & power in the workplace: Analysing the impact of economic change. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Burke, M.E. 1993. Coming out of the blue: British police officers talk about their lives in ‘the job’ as lesbians, gays and bisexuals. London: Cassell.
Byrne, J., L. Clarke, and M. Van Der Meer. 2005. Gender and ethnic minority exclusion from skilled occupations in construction: A Western European comparison. Construction Management and Economics 23: 1025–1034.
Clarke, L., and M. Gribling. 2008. Obstacles to diversity in construction: The example of Heathrow Terminal 5. Construction Management and Economics 26(10): 1055–1065.
Clarke, L., E.F. Pedersen, E. Michielsens, B. Susman, and C. Wall. 2004. Introduction. In Women in construction, ed. L. Clarke, E.F. Pedersen, E. Michielsens, B. Susman, and C. Wall, 8–22. Brussels: CLR/Reed Business Information.
Clarke, L., E. Michielsens, S. Snijders, C. Wall, A. Dainty, B. Bagilhole, and S. Barnard. 2015. ‘No more softly, softly’: Review of women in the construction workforce. London: University of Westminster.
Cockburn, C. 1983. Brothers: Male dominance and technological change. London: Pluto.
Cockburn, C. 1991. In the way of women: Men’s resistance to sex equality in organizations. London: Macmillan.
Colgan, F., C. Creegan, A. McKearney, and T. Wright. 2006. Lesbian gay and bisexual workers: Equality, diversity and inclusion in the workplace. London: Comparative Organisation and Equality Research Centre, London Metropolitan University.
Colgan, F., C. Creegan, A. McKearney, and T. Wright. 2007. Equality and diversity policies and practices at work: Lesbian, gay and bisexual workers. Equal Opportunities International 26(6): 590–609.
Collinson, M., and D. Collinson. 1996. ‘It’s only Dick’: The sexual harassment of women managers in insurance sales. Work Employment Society 10(1): 29–56.
Denissen, A.M. 2010a. Crossing the line: How women in the building trades interpret and respond to sexual conduct at work. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 39(3): 297–327.
Denissen, A.M. 2010b. The right tools for the job: Constructing gender meanings and identities in the male-dominated building trades. Human Relations 63(7): 1051–1069.
Denissen, A.M., and A.C. Saguy. 2014. Gendered homophobia and the contradictions of workplace discrimination for women in the building trades. Gender & Society 28(3): 381–403.
DiTomaso, N. 1989. Sexuality in the workplace: Discrimination and Harassment. In The sexuality of organization, ed. J. Hearn, D. Sheppard, P. Tancred-Sheriff, and G. Burrell, 71–90. London: Sage.
Dunne, G.A. 1997. Lesbian lifestyles: Women’s work and the politics of sexuality. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.
Eagly, A.H., and L.L. Carli. 2007. Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review 85(9): 63–71.
Frank, M. 2001. Hard hatted women: Lesbians in the building trades. New Labor Forum 8 (Spring/Summer): 25–36.
Greed, C. 2006. Social exclusion: Women in construction. In Managing diversity and equality in construction: Initiatives and practice, ed. A.W. Gale and M.J. Davidson, 71–97. Abingdon, Oxon: Taylor & Francis.
Halford, S., M. Savage, and A. Witz. 1997. Gender, careers and organisations: Current developments in banking, nursing and local government. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Hearn, J., and W. Parkin. 2001. Gender, sexuality and violence in organizations. London: Sage.
Hochschild, A.R. 1983. The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hollway, W. 1998. Gender difference and the production of subjectivity. In Changing the subject: Psychology, social regulation and subjectivity, ed. J. Henriques, W. Hollway, C. Urwin, C. Venn, and V. Walkerdine, 223–261. London: Routledge.
Ibarra, H. 1993. Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review 18(1): 56–87.
Kanter, R. 1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
LRD. 2015. Law at work 2015. London: Labour Research Department.
McDermott, E. 2006. Surviving in dangerous places: Lesbian identity performances in the workplace, social class and psychological health. Feminism & Psychology 16(2): 193–211.
McDowell, L. 1997. Capital culture: Gender at work in the city. Oxford: Blackwell.
Moore, M.R. 2006. Lipstick or timberlands? Meanings of gender presentation in black lesbian communities. Signs 32(1): 113–139.
Paap, K. 2006. Working construction: Why white working-class men put themselves – And the labor movement – In harm’s way. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Perriton, L. 2006. Does woman + A network = Career progression? Leadership 2(1): 101–113.
Pringle, R. 1989. Bureaucracy, rationality and sexuality: The case of secretaries. In The sexuality of organization, ed. J. Hearn, D. Sheppard, P. Tancred-Sheriff, and G. Burrell, 158–177. London: Sage.
Rodriguez, J.K. 2011. Joining the dark side: Women in management in the Dominican Republic. Gender, Work & Organization 20(1): 1–19.
Rosener, J.B. 1990. Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review 68(6): 119–125.
Rumens, N. 2008. Working at intimacy: Gay men’s workplace friendships. Gender, Work & Organization 15(1): 10–30.
Rumens, N. 2010. Firm friends: Exploring the supportive components in gay men’s workplace friendships. The Sociological Review 58(1): 135–155.
Rumens, N. 2012. Queering cross-sex friendships: An analysis of gay and bisexual men’s workplace friendships with heterosexual women. Human Relations 65(8): 955–978.
Schneider, B.E. 1984. Peril and promise: Lesbians’ workplace participation. In Women-identified women, ed. T. Darty and S. Potter, 211–230. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield Publishers.
Stanko, E.A. 1988. Keeping women in and out of line: Sexual harassment and occupational segregation. In Gender segregation at work, ed. S. Walby, 91–99. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Stonewall. 2015. Stonewall top 100 employers: The definitive guide to the best places to work for lesbian, gay and bisexual staff. London: Stonewall.
Wajcman, J. 1998. Managing like a man: Women and men in corporate management. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Ward, J., and D. Winstanley. 2006. Watching the watch: The UK fire service and its impact on sexual minorities in the workplace. Gender, Work & Organization 13(2): 193–219.
Williams, C.L., P.A. Giuffre, and K. Dellinger. 1999. Sexuality in the workplace: Organizational control, sexual harassment, and the pursuit of pleasure. Annual Review of Sociology 25: 73–93.
Wright, T. 2008. Lesbian firefighters: Shifting the boundaries between ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’. Journal of Lesbian Studies 12(1): 103–114.
Wright, T. 2011. A ‘lesbian advantage’? Analysing the intersections of gender, sexuality and class in male-dominated work. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion 30(8): 686–701.
Wright, T. 2013. Uncovering sexuality and gender: An intersectional examination of women’s experience in UK construction. Construction Management and Economics 31(8): 832–844.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wright, T. (2016). Workplace Interactions in Male-Dominated Organisations. In: Gender and Sexuality in Male-Dominated Occupations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50136-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50136-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-50134-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-50136-3
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)