Ways of Seeing: Sexism the Forgotten Prejudice?

Abstract

Recent developments in feminism, charted in Gender, Place and Culture over the past 21 years, have stressed the relational, differentiated and contested nature of gender. This has led to the rejection of the unified category women, and with this the right for feminism to make claims on behalf of all women. This paper argues that an unintended consequence of this development in ways of thinking about gender is that patriarchy as a form of power relations has become relatively neglected. It draws on research from a European Research Council project (including biographical interviews and case studies of a gym and workplace) to demonstrate that while the development of equality legislation has contained the public expression of the most blatant forms of gender prejudice, sexism persists and is manifest in subtle ways. As a consequence, it can be difficult to name and challenge with the effect that patriarchy as a power structure which systematically (re)produces gender inequalities,is obscured by its ordinariness. Rather, sexism appears only to be 'seen' when it affords the instantiation of other forms of prejudice, such as Islamophobia. As such, we argue that Gender, Place and Culture has a responsibility going forward to make sexism as a particular form of prejudice more visible, while also exposing the complexity and fluidity of its intersectional relationship to other forms of oppression and social categories.

Mind the gap: gender disparities still to be addressed in UK Higher Education geography

“…The latter includes confronting, as Valentine et al . () remind us, the ‘ordinary sexism’ that patriarchy and the gendered division of space – as well as the gendered division of labour – produce and reproduce. There are structural and interpersonal issues that demand both policy and praxis of equality.…”

Resident Perceptions of New Urban Tourism: A Neglected Geography of Prejudice

“…More positive directed prejudices are in this case a façade and a means for a continuous assumption of such differences between peer groups (Brown ). This incongruity of valuations constitutes “the intersectional nature of prejudices” (Valentine et al , p. 410).…”

The intricate geographies of gender ideologies in Germany

“…The strongest predictor of gender ideology in Model 1 is the xenophobic attitudes factor, which indicates that hostility toward ethnic minorities is highly correlated with conservative gender role attitudes. This intersectional character of prejudice and conservative gender ideologies is also scrutinized by Valentine et al (2014), who recognize in this entanglement ''the complex power relations which constitute society'' (Valentine et al, 2014, p. 410). The item ''school education'' is the strongest predictor in Model 3 and the second strongest in Model 1, which indicates that the longer an individual is part of the school system, the lower is his the level of conservative gender role attitudes.…”