Revealing and Concealing Gender 2010
DOI: 10.1057/9780230285576_5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

‘Mothered’ and Othered: (In)visibility of Care Responsibility and Gender in Processes of Excluding Women from Norwegian Law Firms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
29
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These have contributed to the persistence, even intensification, of high levels of sex segregation both within and between occupations (Charles 2011). For example, Lyng (2010) demonstrates how normative, high‐commitment careers in professions such as Law, characterized as having a masculine gender, exclude women and how discourses of meritocracy and individual choice help to conceal the gendered nature of its dynamics (Lyng 2010); Harwood (2010) exposes the ‘hidden’ attitudes and practices in the police that support a masculine culture; while Watts (2010) explores, within the highly masculinized occupation of engineering, the ways in which ‘token’ women can be undermined – both conspicuous as ‘physical spectacle’ and invisible in relation to the authority required for the job. Read through the frame of the (In)visibility Vortex, these accounts can expose the mechanics of segregation in terms of the durability, insecurity and invisibility of the norm, how it preserves and conceals gendered processes through normalizing discursive practices such as those around the notion of ‘natural’ difference, as well as the ways in which visibility and invisibility are implicated in day‐to‐day interactions, experiences and strategies of the margins.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These have contributed to the persistence, even intensification, of high levels of sex segregation both within and between occupations (Charles 2011). For example, Lyng (2010) demonstrates how normative, high‐commitment careers in professions such as Law, characterized as having a masculine gender, exclude women and how discourses of meritocracy and individual choice help to conceal the gendered nature of its dynamics (Lyng 2010); Harwood (2010) exposes the ‘hidden’ attitudes and practices in the police that support a masculine culture; while Watts (2010) explores, within the highly masculinized occupation of engineering, the ways in which ‘token’ women can be undermined – both conspicuous as ‘physical spectacle’ and invisible in relation to the authority required for the job. Read through the frame of the (In)visibility Vortex, these accounts can expose the mechanics of segregation in terms of the durability, insecurity and invisibility of the norm, how it preserves and conceals gendered processes through normalizing discursive practices such as those around the notion of ‘natural’ difference, as well as the ways in which visibility and invisibility are implicated in day‐to‐day interactions, experiences and strategies of the margins.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The majority of respondents argued that performing one's official roles better than others, doing more than the minimum required (Lyng, ) and making one's excellent performance visible to important others were essential to progress upwards. Rupika explains how she climbed up the hierarchy of a large public bank:
The first time I took part in DOC's launching of new branches — I discovered that I was quite a good trainer.
…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Early and mid‐career respondents argued that being seen in the organization outside official working hours (Gambles et al ., ) and participating in wider activities, entertaining organizational clients and attending social events were essential to progress (Lyng, ). Sashi, a lecturer, explains the presenteeism expectations in a leading public university:
Being seen is very important to the people in the department — the more you are seen the happier they are.
…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But new mothers who work are often subjected to unjust hostility when breastfeeding in the workplace and it has even been shown to be deliberately discouraged by certain employers (Galtry, ; Gatrell, ; Kitzinger, ; McKinlay and Hyde, ). What Gatrell () describes as the hard labour of employed parenthood is thus treated almost exclusively as residing within the domain of the mother; while, as discussed above, fathers are still widely assumed to be principally concerned with the iconic activity of breadwinning and, as such, as being unaffected by the visible bodily and domestic responsibilities of having children (Lyng, ; Tracy and Rivera, ).…”
Section: Working Fathers In Absentiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, a number of employers unfairly assume there is a correlation between maternity and reduced work‐orientation and competencies (Blair‐Loy, ; Cockburn, ; Collinson, ; Cooper and Davidson, ). Lyng (, p. 95) suggests that this is due to organizational beliefs that mothers cannot maintain ‘up‐and‐go‐career’ trajectories, especially in professional and managerial settings (Haynes, , ; Gatrell, ). Visibly pregnant and newly maternal bodies at work can evoke discomfort among colleagues, employers and even other employed mothers (Acker, ; Longhurst, ; Mäkelä, ; Warren and Brewis, ).…”
Section: Working Fathers In Absentiamentioning
confidence: 99%