Introduction
In recent scholarly literature, the workplace is viewed as a site where the gender of employees plays a key role in forming attitudes, developing biases, and providing rewards. Researchers agree that it is possible to observe gender inequality in the workplace in the treatment of male and female employees, and their experiences are associated with “doing gender” (Fletcher 2003; West & Zimmerman 1987). The concept of “doing gender” was formulated by West and Zimmerman (1987), and according to them, “doing gender” is an accomplishment and an activity that is recurrently performed by an individual. His or her gender is observed in interactions and concerning other people’s expectations. It is important to explain the concept of “doing gender” in detail and discuss how it is applied to women’s and men’s specific experiences in the workplace; despite critiques of the concept, modern work environments reflect this principle in observed biases and hidden discrimination.
Explanation of the “doing gender” concept
The concept of “doing gender” is based on the idea that gender is not a complex of traits, but is rather a complex of activities performed by individuals according to sets of norms prescribed to one or the other gender (West & Zimmerman 1987). Moreover, “doing gender” means that a person cannot avoid this performance because they have been educated in certain frameworks. Behavioral differences can be associated with resistance to representing one’s gender, but these activities cannot be avoided entirely. Thus, individuals choose to “do gender” because they do not know other patterns, and they are expected to demonstrate certain behaviors and reactions. If these persons choose to oppose their situation, they are assessed by the public according to the expectations assigned to each gender.
Application of the concept to men’s experiences in the workplace
Despite debates on the issue of gender in society, West and Zimmerman’s (1987) concept can be directly applied to female and male experiences at work. According to McDowell (1997), men in the workplace tend to accentuate their masculinity, including decision-making, problem-solving, and leadership skills, and these qualities and behaviors are expected of them. If men demonstrate these skills, they are rewarded. Furthermore, Schilt (2006) developed this idea and found that female-to-male transsexuals begin to receive more benefits in their workplaces when they act as males even though their abilities and skills do not change. This evidence seems to support the principle associated with “doing gender,” according to which women and men are expected to demonstrate quite different behaviors in interactions because of widespread gender biases. Individuals succeed in the workplace when their behaviors are within expectations, and they succeed in the workplace if they are men.
Application of the concept to women’s experiences in the workplace
When it comes to women’s experiences associated with their gender in the workplace, there are two opposing views. On the one side, women are viewed as leaders and managers only from the perspective of masculine behavioral patterns. In her study, Schein (2007) stated that leadership positions are viewed as prepared for men, and this aspect creates career barriers for women. Kirton and Healy (2012) demonstrated that women succeed in the workplace when they begin to develop masculine leadership qualities and specific competencies because of the expectations of their followers or co-workers. On the other side, women are expected to act according to their gender in the workplace also because other types of behaviors provoke questions and opposition among workers (Eagly & Carli 2007; Trades Union Congress 2016). According to Wright’s (2016) conclusions, the positional power of women does not guarantee differences in men’s perceptions of these women. In these examples, women are expected to demonstrate “doing gender” in both cases, but concerning masculine or feminine behaviors.
Opposing views
However, others hold the view that the concept of “doing gender” is not applicable in the modern world because of changes in women’s social roles and the overall transition in sex and gender identities. Thus, Fletcher (2003, p. 11) promoted the idea that women represent new approaches to leadership, including “post-heroic leadership.” As a result, the traditional concept of “doing gender” seems to be unable to explain women’s and men’s experiences in the workplace because women can be supported by their followers as leaders despite their femininity. Still, this counterargument can be refuted from two perspectives. First, if women in the workplace successfully perform as leaders, they are still involved in “doing gender,” but as female leaders. Second, despite women’s efforts in this area, their experiences still differ significantly from men’s experiences, and biases, discrimination, and harassment still exist, even if sometimes in hidden forms (Wright 2016). Therefore, the concept of “doing gender” can be effectively applied to the modern workplace.
Conclusion
Although the concept of “doing gender” was formulated in the 1980s, and it is now considered a traditional view of gender inequalities in society, it can explain specific elements of women’s and men’s experiences at work. Despite women’s and men’s behaviors and visions regarding this, they tend to perform according to their gender or resist the public’s expectations depending on their activities. Nevertheless, even if individuals behave unusually or have experiences that are not associated with their gender, they are still assessed according to certain views on gender adopted in society.
Reference List
Eagly, AH & Carli, LL 2007, ‘Women and the labyrinth of leadership’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 85, no. 9, pp. 62-71.
Fletcher, JK 2003, The paradox of post heroic leadership: gender matters, Web.
Kirton, G & Healy, G 2012, ‘Lift as you rise’: union women’s leadership talk’, Human Relations, vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 979-999.
McDowell, L 1997, Capital culture: gender at work in the city, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Schein, VE 2007, ‘Women in management: reflections and projections’, Women in Management Review, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 6-18.
Schilt, K 2006, ‘Just one of the guys? How transmen make gender visible at work’, Gender & Society, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 465-490.
Trades Union Congress 2016,Still just a bit of banter? Sexual harassment in the workplace in 2016, Web.
West, C & Zimmerman, DH 1987, ‘Doing gender’, Gender & Society, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 125-151.
Wright, T 2016, Gender and sexuality in male-dominated occupations: women working in construction and transport, Palgrave Macmillan, London.