“ We are all so different that it is just … normal .” Normalization practices in an academic hospital in the Netherlands

Abstract

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Exploring and Critiquing Women’s Academic Identity in Higher Education: A Narrative Review

“…We ask the reader to question who is setting the standards by which these solutions are constructed and that suggesting the individual is solely responsible for change is counterintuitive. We argue that placing individual blame de-emphasizes reflecting on the neoliberal episteme of academia, and potentially poses resolutions of gender inequity as being “a woman’s issue” (evident in Leyerzapf et al, 2018). Focusing the onus of responsibility on one individual, or group of individuals, deflects responsibility from the institution and the system, to the individuals experiencing the issues as being responsible to potentiate change.…”

“…Strategies to navigate academia tended to place the individual academic as responsible for resolving institutional issues. For example, in their discussion of effective change strategies in academia, Leyerzapf et al (2018) suggest needing to “challenge the normalization practices evident in higher education” but then later suggest “diverse ‘othered’ identities need to adapt to current ‘normal’ practices within academia” (p. 147). Additionally, Hart (2016), Johnson et al (2011), and Wright et al (2017) have proposed current solutions to gender inequity in academia assist women in being authoritative, gaining respect, establishing credibility, and maintaining interpersonal academic relationships, however, these solutions emphasize an individualistic focus.…”

“…Academic norms, values, and behaviors were perceived as guided by the majority demographic (i.e., white, cis-gender, heterosexual, male academics; Wright et al, 2017) with the expectation that academics adhere to the guidelines set out by the neoliberal episteme (Harris et al, 2017; Yaacoub, 2011). As such, some participants suggested the academic context systematically disadvantages women based on these expectations (Leyerzapf et al, 2018; Settles et al, 2019; Zhao & Jones, 2017).…”

Care work, gender inequality and technological advancement in the age of COVID‐19

“…The development and implementation of new technologies in care is also associated with specific ideas regarding who is suited to provide such care and what they look or sound like (Hester, 2017). This may have the effect of obscuring or explaining away social divisions and inequalities based on identity factors such as gender, race or social class (Leyerzapf, Verdonk, Ghorashi, & Abma, 2018). More generally, pre-existing hierarchies of labour within the care industry that see white men dominating the higher management positions and women of colour being concentrated in jobs that centre around the care of bodies imprint patterns of development, with the increased number of high-tech roles generated through investments in telecare and telehealth tending to benefit men as they prevail in information technology and communication sectors (Hester, 2018).…”

Introduction: Scholarly engagement and decolonisation: Views from South Africa, The Netherlands and the United States

“…Using the intersectional lens, they show that othering practices at the intersection of gender/religion/race highlight the gendered racialisation of medical education as an exclusive white space (Essed, 2005). The authors argue that (white) researchers studying diversity issues in (Dutch) academic medicine need to engage in critically reflexive dialogue on their own role in the research and on how research concepts such as 'cultural diversity' and 'migrant background' may be depoliticised and racialised terms with a link to white innocence and the silencing of antiracism perspectives in society and academia (Ahmed, 2012;Leyerzapf et al, 2018;Wekker, 2016).…”