gender sensitivity essay brainly

Gender equality through school: providing a safe and inclusive learning environment

Credit: Khumais

Boys and girls must feel welcome in a safe and secure learning environment. Governments, schools, teachers and students all have a part to play in ensuring that schools are free of violence and discrimination and provide a gender-sensitive, good-quality education (Figure 16). To achieve this, governments can develop nondiscriminatory curricula, facilitate teacher education and make sure sanitation facilities are adequate. Schools are responsible for addressing school-related violence and providing comprehensive health education. Teachers should follow professional norms regarding appropriate disciplinary practices and provide unbiased instruction. And students must behave in a non-violent, inclusive way.

FIGURE 16: Who is responsible for what in ensuring gender equality through school

NATIONAL AND SCHOOL POLICIES SHOULD TARGET SCHOOL-RELATED VIOLENCE

School-related violence is a pervasive issue in some countries. Violence can be physical, psychological or sexual; it can occur on school grounds, in transit or in cyberspace; and it may include bullying, corporal punishment, verbal and emotional abuse, intimidation, sexual harassment and assault, gang activity and the presence of weapons among students. It is often perpetrated as a result of gender norms and stereotypes and enforced by unequal power dynamics. It was estimated that, globally, approximately 246 million girls and boys experienced some form of school-related violence in 2014 (UNGEI, 2017).

While the vast majority of teachers are caring professionals who put the best interest of their students first, some abuse their position of power. In West and Central African countries, sexual abuse and exploitation by teachers, school staff and others in position of authority is common practice (Antonowicz, 2010). Sexual violence happens frequently in many schools in South Africa but crimes are rarely investigated and prosecution rates are low (HRW, 2016). In the United Republic of Tanzania, over half of girls and boys who had experienced physical abuse identified a teacher as an abuser (HakiElimu, 2017). In Samoa, 41% of children surveyed in 2013 indicated that they had experienced violence at the hands of their teacher (Office of the Ombudsman and NHRI Samoa, 2015).

Some countries, including Chile, Fiji, Finland, Peru, the Republic of Korea and Sweden, have passed legislation on violence in educational institutions (UNESCO, 2015c, 2017b). The 2013 Anti-Bullying Act in the Philippines requires all schools to adopt policies to prevent and address acts of bullying. It explicitly refers to gender-based bullying, which is described as any act that humiliates or excludes a person on the basis of perceived or actual sexual orientation and gender identity. Yet in the following year just 38% of schools had adopted child protection or anti-bullying policies. The low rate highlighted a lack of communication and a weak monitoring framework.

The Department of Education responded by issuing a memorandum to clarify submission requirements and is working to build implementation capacity (UNESCO, 2015c). Teacher education and codes of conduct can help change teacher attitudes and behaviours. In South Sudan, the UNICEF Communities Care programme engaged with teachers to challenge norms that enable sexual violence and brought about some shifts in teacher attitudes and behaviours (UNGEI, 2017). The Doorways programme in Burkina Faso, Ghana and Malawi trained upper primary and lower secondary school teachers on children’s rights and responsibilities, alternative teaching practices, basic counselling and listening skills, awareness of sexual harassment at school and teacher code of conduct (DevTech Systems, 2008; Queen et al., 2015). The Communication for Change project trained teachers in the Democratic Republic of Congo to act as first responders when they witnessed school-related gender-based violence. The share of participating teachers who were aware of how to prevent gender-based violence in school increased from 56% to 95% after the intervention (C-Change, 2013). Teacher codes of conduct are generally written by teacher unions to guide their members. They promote professional accountability by giving peers a way to hold each other to account for adhering to norms (Poisson, 2009). A recent survey by Education International found that teacher codes of conduct were present in 26 of 50 countries surveyed (EI, 2017). A separate review of 24 countries found that over half of teachers believed the code of conduct had a very significant impact in reducing misconduct (McKelvie-Sebileau, 2011).

Teacher codes of conduct can be effective in reducing school-related gender-based violence if they explicitly refer to violence and abuse and include clear breach reporting and enforcement protocols. Mongolia’s Teachers Code of Ethics for General Education Schools and Kindergartens contains a section on teacher ethical norms, which specifies that teachers should protect student’s health and well-being, including from sexual abuse, and should ensure equal participation without discrimination, including on the basis of sex (Steiner-Khamsi and Batjargal, 2017). Kenya has a range of penalties for breach of professional conduct, including suspension and interdiction. Teachers convicted of sexual offences against students are deregistered (Kenya Teachers Service Commission, 2013). However, even when they exist, these codes are not always successfully disseminated.

The implementation of Ethiopia’s Code of Conduct on Prevention of School-Related Gender-Based Violence in Schools has been patchy. Some school staff reportedly lacked commitment to or a sense of ownership of the code (Parkes et al., 2017). Students are also responsible for ensuring their behaviour does not impinge on others’ right to education (UNICEF and UNESCO, 2007). Schools are increasingly implementing prevention-oriented models to teach students acceptable strategies for interacting with their peers (Horner et al., 2010). These models set clear guidelines for students and define consistent instruction, record-keeping and follow-up procedures for teachers and other adults, such as administrative and custodial staff, playground supervisors, cafeteria workers and parent and community volunteers (Lewis et al., 2014).

Students are more likely to show positive social behaviours and reduce negative behaviours after the implementation of such programmes (Durlak et al., 2011). There is also increasing evidence linking improved social skills to academic achievement (Horner et al., 2010). While these codes of conduct are mostly used in Europe and North America (Sklad et al., 2012), Asian countries such as Singapore have also begun adopting them (Durlak et al., 2011).

GENDER-SENSITIVE FACILITIES CAN INCREASE THE TIME GIRLS SPEND IN SCHOOL

Inadequate sanitation facilities for girls during menstruation can have a negative effect on school attendance. Among 145 countries with data, primary school access to basic sanitation facilities was below 50% in 28 countries, 17 of them in sub-Saharan Africa. Only limited data are available on whether girls have separate facilities, let alone whether the facilities are functional or well maintained. In only 9 of 44 countries did more than 75% of primary schools have single-sex facilities; in Benin and Comoros, under 5% of schools had single-sex facilities. An estimated one in ten African girls miss school during menstruation (HRW, 2016).

Regulations requiring separate toilet facilities for boys and girls can help. Yet analysis of regulations in 71 education systems by the GEM Report team shows that only 61% required sex-separate facilities for public schools and 66% for private schools (UNESCO, 2017a). Regulations alone are not sufficient to ensure facilities are available. Although separate sanitation facilities are mandated by regulations in Bangladesh, a survey found that in 2014 only 12% of girls reported access to female-only toilets with water and soap available. Combined with a lack of waste bins, the poor facilities contributed to girls missing school during menstruation. Two in five girls were absent during menstruation for an average of three days during each cycle (Alam et al., 2014). Girls in Haiti have reported having to go home to change the materials they use to manage their menstruation, resulting in lost instructional time (HRW, 2016).

School inspections play a key role in ensuring that schools adhere to regulations. However, inspections do not always take gender issues into account. In Sweden, the school inspectorate takes gender equality into consideration (Heikkilä, 2016) and in the United Kingdom inspectors evaluate equal opportunities in the classroom and whether the school provides an inclusive environment for boys and girls (Rogers, 2014). By contrast, gender issues are rarely included in inspections in Bangladesh, with sex-separate sanitation facilities only occasionally observed (Chatterley et al., 2014). In any case, inspectorates are severely constrained by human resource shortages in many poor countries. For instance, in Mvomero district, United Republic of Tanzania, although 80% of schools are supposed to be inspected annually, only one in five schools were inspected in 2013 (Holvoet, 2015).

GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION REQUIRES UNBIASED CURRICULA AND TEXTBOOKS

To facilitate gender-responsive instruction, curricula and textbooks should be free from gender bias and promote equality in gender relations. How students perceive themselves and how they project their role in society is shaped to some extent by what they experience at school, including by how they are represented in textbooks.

Comprehensive sexuality education

School-based comprehensive sexuality education programmes equip children and young people with empowering knowledge, skills and attitudes. In many contexts, programmes focus almost exclusively on HIV as a motivator to encourage students to delay sexual activity and have fewer sexual partners and less frequent sexual contacts (Fonner et al., 2014). However, international guidelines and standards, along with emerging evidence about factors influencing programme effectiveness, increasingly stress the value of a comprehensive approach centred on gender and human rights (Ketting and Winkelmann, 2013). A review of 22 studies showed that comprehensive sexuality education programmes that addressed gender power relations were five times more likely to be effective in reducing rates of sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy than those that did not (Haberland, 2015).

In 2009, UNESCO and other UN agencies published the revised International Technical Guidance on Sexual Education to provide an evidence-based, age-appropriate set of topics and learning objectives for comprehensive sexuality education programmes for students aged 5 to 18 (UNESCO, 2009). In 2010, the International Planned Parenthood Federation adopted a rights-based approach in its Framework for Comprehensive Sexuality Education, and the WHO Regional Office for Europe produced Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe as a framework for policy-makers and education and health authorities (WHO Regional Office for Europe and BZgA, 2010). Nearly ten years after the original report, UNESCO’s revised guidance expands coverage to both school-based and out-of-school programmes with a strong focus on human rights, gender equality and skills building. The guidance can act as both an advocacy and accountability tool for programme implementers, NGOs, and youth (UNESCO, 2018).

A 2015 review of the status of comprehensive sexuality education in 48 countries found that almost 80% had supportive policies or strategies. Despite this political will, a significant gap remained between policies and implementation (UNESCO, 2015b). In western and central Africa, UNESCO’s Sexuality Education Review and Assessment Tool was used to assess 10 out of 13 national sexuality education programmes. Fewer than half the curricula met global standards for required content for all age groups, with gender and social norms identified as the weakest areas (Herat et al., 2014; UNESCO and UNFPA, 2012).

Recent studies in Ghana and Kenya provided evidence of gaps in content and delivery. The Kenya study covered 78 public and private secondary schools. While 75% of teachers reported teaching all topics of a comprehensive sexuality education programme, only 2% of students reported learning all topics. Only 20% learned about types of contraceptive methods, and even fewer learned how to use and where to get them (Figure 17). In some cases, incomplete and sometimes inaccurate information was taught. Almost 60% of teachers incorrectly taught that condoms alone were not effective in pregnancy prevention (Sidze et al., 2017). Moreover, 71% of teachers emphasized abstinence as the best or only method to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, and most depicted sex as dangerous or immoral for young people.

FIGURE 17: In Kenya, only one in five students reported learning about contraceptive methods

Barriers to effective implementation of comprehensive programmes include lack of well-trained teachers, poor support of schools, weak regulation and supervision of policy implementation, opposition from religious and conservative groups, and culturally imposed silence about sexuality. In the Ghana study, 77% of teachers reported lacking resources or teaching materials. A smaller share reported conflicts, embarrassment or opposition from the community or students on moral or religious grounds (Awusabo-Asare et al., 2017).

Textbooks increasingly cover gender issues but progress is insufficient

Self-reporting from governments in Cuba, Estonia, Finland, Mexico, Nicaragua, Slovenia and Spain indicates that gender equality is integrated into national school curricula (UN Human Rights Council, 2017). The Ministry of Education, Culture, Science equality as one of the key values in its new core curriculum (Steiner-Khamsi and Batjargal, 2017).

Over the past 50 years, mentions of women and women’s rights in textbooks have increased (Bromley et al., 2016; Nakagawa and Wotipka, 2016). Nevertheless, in many countries women remain under-represented or, when included, are relegated to traditional roles such as housework and childcare (UNESCO, 2016a). Women accounted for only 37% of images in primary and secondary school textbooks in the Islamic Republic of

Iran in 2006–2007 (Paivandi, 2008) and across nine Jordanian secondary school history books only 21% of images were female. From Sweden to the Syrian Arab Republic, despite governments explicitly identifying the importance of gender equality in textbooks, women and men were still routinely portrayed in a stereotypical manner (Bromley et al., 2016).

Both governments and civil society can act to reduce textbook biases. The Human Rights Council has made it clear that ‘states have an obligation to periodically review and revise curricula, textbooks, programmes and teaching methods to ensure that they do not perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes’ (UN Human Rights Council, 2017). Some states include an explicit gender analysis as part of their textbook and review process. In Viet Nam, the National Strategy on Gender Equality for 2011–2020 specifies that textbook content should be reviewed for gender stereotypes (UNESCO, 2016c). In Ghana, the Textbook Development and Distribution Policy for Pre-tertiary Education included gender sensitivity as one of the main criteria for evaluating textbook proposals (Ghana MOE, 2001). By contrast, the Pakistan National Textbook and Learning Materials Policy and Plan of Action does not mention gender as a criterion of textbook review, referring instead to ‘quality of content, presentation, language and specific provincial coverage’ (Pakistan MOE, 2007).

Textbook monitoring by parents and civil society can be effective. In South Africa, a parent’s question posted on Facebook in July 2016 inspired a petition that ultimately led the textbook publisher to amend and issue an apology for content that promoted blaming the victim for sexual assault (Davies, 2016).

TEACHER EDUCATION CAN HELP ADDRESS UNDERLYING GENDER BIASES

Aside from the influence of official curricula and textbooks, teacher practice in the classroom is partly shaped by their assumptions and stereotypes about gender, which in turn affects students’ beliefs and learning. In Australia, female teachers felt particularly responsible for boys’ underachievement relative to male teachers (Hodgetts, 2010). In the United States, anxiety expressed by female mathematics teachers was associated with female students’ belief in the stereotype that boys are better at mathematics (Beilock et al., 2010).

Teacher education can assist teachers to reflect on and overcome their biases. Formal initiatives in teacher education with a focus on gender have taken place in Italy, the Republic of Moldova and Sudan (OHCHR, 2015). In Spain, the University of Oviedo requires teacher candidates to complete a mandatory course on gender and education (Bourn et al., 2017). In Ankara, Turkey preservice teachers that took a semester long course on gender equity in education developed more gender sensitive attitudes (Erden, 2009).

In low and middle income countries, teacher education programmes are often externally funded. The UNESCO Regional Bureau in Bangkok has recently funded a five-year project, Enhancing Girls’ and Women’s Right to Quality Education through Gender Sensitive Policy Making, Teacher Development and Pedagogy, which focuses on training participants from Cambodia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan to conduct gender assessments in teacher education (UNESCO, 2016b).

In Karamoja region, Uganda, the UNICEF Gender Socialization in Schools programme trained over 1,000 primary school teachers to enhance their knowledge, attitudes and practices related to gender equality promotion and conflict resolution. The initial training lasted for two days and was followed by two refresher training sessions. A subset of teachers received reinforcing text messages reminding them of examples of good practice. However, while the programme improved teachers’ knowledge and attitudes on gender equality, classroom practices did not become more gender-responsive (American Institutes for Research and UNICEF, 2016; El-Bushra and Smith, 2016).

Nigeria updated its teacher education curriculum in 2012, in part to address gender issues (Unterhalter et al., 2015). While a policy is in place to ensure minimum standards on gender equality, a survey of 4,500 student teachers in 2014 showed that very few had an in-depth understanding of what gender equality in education might mean, while many were hostile to women’s participation in public life and any form of social engagement. Among respondents employed following graduation, teachers reported receiving no professional development on gender, a point echoed by other colleagues at the schools where they taught. Teachers who had the most egalitarian ideas about gender reported themselves the most frustrated of respondents and said that they were unable to put their ideas into practice (Unterhalter et al., 2017).

The examples from Uganda and Nigeria highlight some of the challenges in changing teacher practices. To be effective, teacher education and training need to be continuous to recognize the time it takes for such practices to change. They also need to incorporate other stakeholders to help build a more supportive environment.

Gender Sensitivity and Its Relation to Gender Equality

• Reference work entry
• First Online: 01 January 2021
• Cite this reference work entry

• Juana Figueroa Vélez 6 &
• Susana Vélez Ochoa 6  

Part of the book series: Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals ((ENUNSDG))

170 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Abrahams N (1996) Negotiating power, identity, family, and community: women’s community participation. Gend Soc 10(6):768–796

Article   Google Scholar  

Acker J (1990) Hierarchies, jobs, and bodies: a theory of gendered organizations. Gend Soc 4:139–158

Adler RD (2001) Women in the executive suite correlate to high profits. Harv Bus Rev 79(3). Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267822127_Women_in_the_Executive_Suite_Correlate_to_High_Profits

Bertrand M (2018) The glass ceiling. Becker Friedman Institute for Research in Economics (38). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3191467 . Accessed 19 May 2019

Blair IV, Banaji RM (1996) Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. J Pers Soc Psychol 70(1):142–163

Google Scholar  

Bookman A, Morgen S (eds) (1988) Women and the politics of empowerment. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

Brehm SS, Brehm JW (1981) Psychological reactance. Academic, New York

Burke MJ, Salvador RO, Smith-Crowe K, Cahn-Serafin S, Smith A, Sonesh S (2011) The dread factor: how hazards and safety training influence learning and performance. J Appl Psychol 96:46–70

Chattopadhyay R, Duflo E. (2004) Impact of reservation in Panchayati Raj: evidence from a nationwide randomised experiment. Economic and Political Weekly 39(9):979–986. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4414710

Christodoulou J (2005) Glossary of gender-related terms. Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies. European Institute for Gender Equality. https://medinstgenderstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/Gender-Glossary-updated_final.pdf

Conway M (2000) Political participation in the United States, 3rd edn. CQ Press, Washington, DC

Conway M (2001) Women’s political participation. Polit Sci Polit 34(2):231–233

Conway M, Pizzamiglio MT, Mount L (1996) Status, communality, and agency: implications for stereotypes of gender and other groups. J Pers Soc Psychol 71:25–38

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Crenshaw K (1991) Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Rev 43(6):1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Daniels AK (1988) Invisible careers. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Davis (1989) Women, culture, and politics. Vintage, New York

EIGE (2015) European institute for gender equality. Gender Equality Commission of the Council of Europe. Gender Equality Glossary. http://www.coe.int/t/DGHL/STANDARDSETTING/EQUALITY/06resources/Glossarie… . Accessed 22 May 2019

Eubank D, Orzano J, Geffken D, Ricci R (2011) Teaching team membership to family medicine residents: what does it take? Fam Syst Health 29:29–43

Farrelly C (2011) Patriarchy and historical materialism. Hypatia 26(1):1–21. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23016676

Fowler L (1993) Candidates, congress, and the American democracy. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

Book   Google Scholar  

Gilke CT (1980) “Holding back the ocean with a broom”: Black women and community work. In: La Frances Rodgers-Rose (ed) The Black woman. SAGE, Beverly Hills

Gilke CT (1994) If it wasn’t for the women…: African American women, community work, and social change. In: Zinn MB, Dill BT (eds) Women of color in U-S. Society. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

Glick P, Fiske ST (1999) Gender, power dynamics, and social interaction. In: Ferree M, Lorber J, Hess BB (eds) Revisioning gender. SAGE, Thousand Oaks

Glick P, Fiske ST (2001) An ambivalent alliance: hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. Am Psychol 56:109–118

Hardy-Fante C (1993) Latina politics, Latino politics. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

Hunnicutt G (2009) Varieties of patriarchy and violence against women: resurrecting “patriarchy” as a theoretical tool. Violence Against Women 15(5):553–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801208331246

IISD (2017) Achieve gender equality to deliver the SDG’s. http://sdg.iisd.org/commentary/policy-briefs/achieve-gender-equality-to-deliver-the-sdgs/ . Accessed 25 May 2019

Ito TA, Urland GR (2003) Race and gender on the brain: electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. J Pers Soc Psychol 85:616–626

Kaminer W (1984) Women volunteering. Anchor, Garden City

Kattsoff LO (1948) What is behavior? Philos Phenomen Res 9(1):98–102. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2103854 . Accessed 03 June 2019 19:30 UTC

Keays T, McEvoy M, Murison S, Jennings M, Karim F (2001) Gender analysis, UNDP. Available via UNDP: https://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/gender/Institutional%20Development/TLGEN1.6%20UNDP%20GenderAnalysis%20toolkit.pdf . Accessed 15 May 2019

Keeton M, Tate PJ (1978) In: Keeton M. Tate PJ (eds) Learning by experience-what, why, how. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. In: Kolb DA. (2014) Introduction. In: Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. (Kolb DA ed), Pearson Education Inc, Upper Saddle River, p 18

Klingorová K, Havlíček T (2015) Religion and gender inequality: the status of women in the societies of world religions. Moravian Geogr Rep 23(2):2–11. https://doi.org/10.1515/mgr-2015-0006

Kunda Z, Spencer SJ (2003) When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color judgement? A goal- based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application. Psychol Bull 129:522–544

Leduc B, Ahmad F (2009) Guidelines for gender sensitive programming. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242570417_Guidelines_for_Gender_Sensitive_Programming . Accessed 28 May 2019

Lorber J (1994) Paradoxes of gender. Yale University Press, New Haven

MacRae ER, Clasen T, Dasmohapatra M, Caruso BA (2019) ‘It’s like a burden on the head’: redefining adequate menstrual hygiene management throughout women's varied life stages in Odisha, India. PLoS One 14(8):e0220114. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220114

McGlen N, O’Connor K (1998) Women, politics, and public policy. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

McIntosh P (1988) White privilege and male privilege: a personal account of coming to see correspondences through work in women’s studies, pp 94–105. https://www.collegeart.org/pdf/diversity/white-privilege-and-male-privilege.pdf . Accessed 13 May 2019

Merida LJ (2013) Breaking the glass ceiling: structural, cultural, and organizational barriers preventing women from achieving senior and executive positions. Perspect Health Inf Manag 10(Winter): 1e. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3544145/ . Accessed 8 May 2019

Nagel J (1994) Constructing ethnicity: creating and recreating ethnic identity and culture. Soc Probl 41:152–176

Naples NA (1991) “Just what needed to be done”: the political practice of women community workers in low income neighborhoods. Gend Soc 5:478–494. www.jstor.org/stable/190096 . Accessed 15 May 2019

Naples NA (1992) Activist mothering: cross-generational continuity in the community work of women from low-income urban neighborhoods. Gend Soc 6:441–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124392006003006

Rees T (2000) Mainstreaming equality in the European Union, education, training and labour market policies. Routledge, London

Ridgeway CL (2006) Gender as an organizing force in social relations: implications for the future of inequality. In: Blau FD, Brinton MC, Grusky DB (eds) The declining significance of gender? Russell Sage Foundation, New York

Ridgeway CL (2009) Framed before we know it: how gender shapes social relations. Gend Soc 23:145. http://gas.sagepub.com/content/23/2/145 . https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243208330313

Ridgeway CL, England P (2007) Sociological approaches to sex discrimination in employment. In: Crosby FM, Stockdale MS, Ropp AS (eds) Sex discrimination in the workplace: multidisciplinary perspectives. Blackwell, Oxford, UK

Ridgeway CL, Smith-Lovin L (1999) The gender system in interaction. Annu Rev Sociol 25:191–216. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.191

Rinehart ST (1992) Gender consciousness and politics. Routledge, New York

Risman BJ (1998) Gender vertigo: American families in transition. Yale University Press, New Haven

Risman BJ (2004) Gender as a social structure: theory wrestling with activism. Gend Soc 18(4):429–451

Robbins CK, McGowan BL (2016) Intersectional perspectives on gender and gender identity development. New Dir Stud Serv (154):71–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20176

Rogers C (1967) On becoming a person. Constable, London

Sanz B, Evaluation Office, UN Women (2012) Steps to commission and carry out Gender Equality Evaluations. In: Workshop gender-sensitive evaluation: key ideas to commission and carry out it, 10th EES Biennial Conference

Sarikakis K, Shade LR (2012) Feminist interventions in international communication: minding the gap. Littlefield publishers, Toronto

Schilt K, Westbrook L (2009) Doing gender, doing heteronormativity: “Gender normals”, transgender people, and the social maintenance of heterosexuality. Gend Soc 23(4):440–464

Schulpen TWJ (2017) The glass ceiling: a biological phenomenon. Med Hypothesis 106:41–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2017.07.002

Sczesny S, Formanowics M, Moser F (2016) Can gender-fair language reduce gender sterotyping and discrimination? Front Psychol 7:25. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00025

Sinclair K (1986) Women and religion. In: Dudley MI, Edwards MI (eds) The cross-cultural study of women: a comprehensive guide. The Feminist Press, New York, pp 107–124

Snow DA, Burke Rochford E Jr, Wordden SK, Benford RD (1986) Frame alignment process, micromobilization, and movement participation. Am Sociol Rev 51:464–481

Sommer M, Hirsch JS, Nathanson C, Parker RG (2015) Comfortably, safely, and without shame: defining menstrual hygiene management as a public health issue. Am J Public Health 105(7):1302–1311. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.302525

Stangor C, Lynch L, Duan C, Glass B (1992) Categorization of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. J Pers Soc Psychol 62:207–218

Stump R (2008) The geography of religion: faith, place, and space. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Lanham. In: Klingorová K, Havlíček T, 2015. Religion and gender inequality: the status of women in the societies of world religions. Moravian Geographical Reports 23(2):2–11

Swim JK, Aiken KJ, Hall WS, hunter BA (1995) Sexism and racism: old-fashioned and modern prejudices. J Pers Soc Psychol 68:199–214

Thompson J, McGivern J (1995) Sexism in the seminar: strategies for gender sensitivity in management education. Gend Educ 7(3):341–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540259550039040

UN Women (2016) Scoring for gender equality through sport. https://lac.unwomen.org/en/noticias-y-eventos/articulos/2016/09/anotar-puntos-para-la-igualdad . Accessed 15 May 2019

UN Women (2019a) Equal pay for work of equal value. http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/in-focus/csw61/equal-pay . Accessed 15 May 2019

UN Women (2019b) Facts and figures: Leadership and political participation. https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/leadership-and-political-participation/facts-and-figures . Accesed 15 June 2019

UNDP (2001) Gender in development programme learning & information pack. https://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/gender/Institutional%20Development/TLGEN1.6%20UNDP%20GenderAnalysis%20toolkit.pdf . Accessed 15 May 2019

UNESCO (2011) Priority gender equality guidelines. http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/BSP/GENDER/GE%20Guidelines%20December%202_FINAL.pdf . Accessed 15 May 2019

UNIFEM (2007) United Nations Development Fund for Women. Policy briefing paper: gender sensitive police reform in post conflict societies. https://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/gender/Gender%20and%20CPR/Policy%20briefing%20paper%20Gender%20Sensitive%20Police%20Reform%20in%20Post%20Conflict%20Societies.pdf . Accessed 10 May 2019

Verloo MMT (2001) Another velvet revolution? Gender mainstreaming and the politics of implementation. IWM Working paper (5).Vienna. https://repository.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/handle/2066/129386/129386.pdf . Accessed 8 June 2020

Verveer M (2011) The political and economic power of women. Center for International Private Enterprise. http://www.state.gov/s/gwi/rls/rem/2011/167142.htm . Accessed 8 June 2020

Wagner DG, Berger J (1997) Gender and interpersonal task behaviors: status expectation accounts. Sociol Perspect 40:1–32

Young K (1987) Introduction. In: Sharma A (ed) Women in world religions. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp 1–36

Zawadzki M, Danube C, Shields S (2012) How to talk about gender inequity in the workplace: using WAGES as an experiential learning tool to reduce reactance and promote self-efficacy. Sex Roles 67(11–12):605–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0181-z

Zobnina A (2009) Glossary of gender-related terms. Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies. European Institute for Gender Equality. https://medinstgenderstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/Gender-Glossary-updated_final.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Gimnasio Femenino, Bogotá, Colombia

Juana Figueroa Vélez & Susana Vélez Ochoa

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juana Figueroa Vélez .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

European School of Sustainability Science and Research, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany

Walter Leal Filho

Center for Neuroscience and Cell Biology, Institute for Interdisciplinary Research, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Anabela Marisa Azul

Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, The University of Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, Brazil

Luciana Brandli

The University of Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, Brazil

Amanda Lange Salvia

International Centre for Thriving, University of Chester, Chester, UK

Section Editor information

Council for Scientific and Industrial Research - Natural Resources and Environment, Johannesburg, South Africa

Julia Mambo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Figueroa Vélez, J., Vélez Ochoa, S. (2021). Gender Sensitivity and Its Relation to Gender Equality. In: Leal Filho, W., Marisa Azul, A., Brandli, L., Lange Salvia, A., Wall, T. (eds) Gender Equality. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95687-9_46

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95687-9_46

Published : 29 January 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-95686-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-95687-9

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science Reference Module Physical and Materials Science Reference Module Earth and Environmental Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

5 Powerful Essays Advocating for Gender Equality

Gender equality – which becomes reality when all genders are treated fairly and allowed equal opportunities –  is a complicated human rights issue for every country in the world. Recent statistics are sobering. According to the World Economic Forum, it will take 108 years to achieve gender parity . The biggest gaps are found in political empowerment and economics. Also, there are currently just six countries that give women and men equal legal work rights. Generally, women are only given ¾ of the rights given to men. To learn more about how gender equality is measured, how it affects both women and men, and what can be done, here are five essays making a fair point.

Take a free course on Gender Equality offered by top universities!

“Countries With Less Gender Equity Have More Women In STEM — Huh?” – Adam Mastroianni and Dakota McCoy

This essay from two Harvard PhD candidates (Mastroianni in psychology and McCoy in biology) takes a closer look at a recent study that showed that in countries with lower gender equity, more women are in STEM. The study’s researchers suggested that this is because women are actually especially interested in STEM fields, and because they are given more choice in Western countries, they go with different careers. Mastroianni and McCoy disagree.

They argue the research actually shows that cultural attitudes and discrimination are impacting women’s interests, and that bias and discrimination is present even in countries with better gender equality. The problem may lie in the Gender Gap Index (GGI), which tracks factors like wage disparity and government representation. To learn why there’s more women in STEM from countries with less gender equality, a more nuanced and complex approach is needed.

“Men’s health is better, too, in countries with more gender equality” – Liz Plank

When it comes to discussions about gender equality, it isn’t uncommon for someone in the room to say, “What about the men?” Achieving gender equality has been difficult because of the underlying belief that giving women more rights and freedom somehow takes rights away from men. The reality, however, is that gender equality is good for everyone. In Liz Plank’s essay, which is an adaption from her book For the Love of Men: A Vision for Mindful Masculinity, she explores how in Iceland, the #1 ranked country for gender equality, men live longer. Plank lays out the research for why this is, revealing that men who hold “traditional” ideas about masculinity are more likely to die by suicide and suffer worse health. Anxiety about being the only financial provider plays a big role in this, so in countries where women are allowed education and equal earning power, men don’t shoulder the burden alone.

Liz Plank is an author and award-winning journalist with Vox, where she works as a senior producer and political correspondent. In 2015, Forbes named her one of their “30 Under 30” in the Media category. She’s focused on feminist issues throughout her career.

“China’s #MeToo Moment” –  Jiayang Fan

Some of the most visible examples of gender inequality and discrimination comes from “Me Too” stories. Women are coming forward in huge numbers relating how they’ve been harassed and abused by men who have power over them. Most of the time, established systems protect these men from accountability. In this article from Jiayang Fan, a New Yorker staff writer, we get a look at what’s happening in China.

The essay opens with a story from a PhD student inspired by the United States’ Me Too movement to open up about her experience with an academic adviser. Her story led to more accusations against the adviser, and he was eventually dismissed. This is a rare victory, because as Fan says, China employs a more rigid system of patriarchy and hierarchy. There aren’t clear definitions or laws surrounding sexual harassment. Activists are charting unfamiliar territory, which this essay explores.

“Men built this system. No wonder gender equality remains as far off as ever.” – Ellie Mae O’Hagan

Freelance journalist Ellie Mae O’Hagan (whose book The New Normal is scheduled for a May 2020 release) is discouraged that gender equality is so many years away. She argues that it’s because the global system of power at its core is broken.  Even when women are in power, which is proportionally rare on a global scale, they deal with a system built by the patriarchy. O’Hagan’s essay lays out ideas for how to fix what’s fundamentally flawed, so gender equality can become a reality.

Ideas include investing in welfare; reducing gender-based violence (which is mostly men committing violence against women); and strengthening trade unions and improving work conditions. With a system that’s not designed to put women down, the world can finally achieve gender equality.

“Invisibility of Race in Gender Pay Gap Discussions” – Bonnie Chu

The gender pay gap has been a pressing issue for many years in the United States, but most discussions miss the factor of race. In this concise essay, Senior Contributor Bonnie Chu examines the reality, writing that within the gender pay gap, there’s other gaps when it comes to black, Native American, and Latina women. Asian-American women, on the other hand, are paid 85 cents for every dollar. This data is extremely important and should be present in discussions about the gender pay gap. It reminds us that when it comes to gender equality, there’s other factors at play, like racism.

Bonnie Chu is a gender equality advocate and a Forbes 30 Under 30 social entrepreneur. She’s the founder and CEO of Lensational, which empowers women through photography, and the Managing Director of The Social Investment Consultancy.

You may also like

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Social Change 101: Meaning, Examples, Learning Opportunities

Rosa Parks: Biography, Quotes, Impact

Top 20 Issues Women Are Facing Today

Top 20 Issues Children Are Facing Today

15 Root Causes of Climate Change

15 Facts about Rosa Parks

Abolitionist Movement: History, Main Ideas, and Activism Today

The Biggest 15 NGOs in the UK

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Gender Equality Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on gender equality essay.

Equality or non-discrimination is that state where every individual gets equal opportunities and rights. Every individual of the society yearns for equal status, opportunity, and rights. However, it is a general observation that there exists lots of discrimination between humans. Discrimination exists because of cultural differences, geographical differences, and gender. Inequality based on gender is a concern that is prevalent in the entire world.  Even in the 21 st century, across globe men and women do not enjoy equal privileges. Gender equality means providing equal opportunities to both men and women in political, economic, education and health aspects.

Importance of Gender Equality

A nation can progress and attain higher development growth only when both men and women are entitled to equal opportunities. Women in the society are often cornered and are refrained from getting equal rights as men to health, education, decision-making and economic independence in terms of wages.

The social structure that prevails since long in such a way that girls do not get equal opportunities as men. Women generally are the caregivers in the family. Because of this, women are mostly involved in household activities. There is lesser participation of women in higher education, decision-making roles, and leadership roles. This gender disparity is a hindrance in the growth rate of a country. When women participate in the workforce increases the economic growth rate of the country increases. Gender equality increases the overall wellbeing of the nation along with economic prosperity .

How is Gender Equality Measured?

Gender equality is an important factor in determining a country’s overall growth. There are several indexes to measure gender equality.

Gender-Related Development Index (GDI) –   GDI is a gender centric measure of Human Development Index. GDI considers parameters like life expectancy, education, and incomes in assessing the gender equality of a country.

Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) – This measure includes much detail aspects like the proportion of seats than women candidates hold in national parliament, percentage of women at economic decision-making role, the income share of female employees.

Gender Equity Index (GEI) – GEI ranks countries on three parameters of gender inequality, those are education, economic participation, and empowerment. However, GEI ignores the health parameter.

Global Gender Gap Index – The World Economic Forum introduced the Global Gender Gap Index in 2006. This index focuses more on identifying the level of female disadvantage. The four important areas that the index considers are economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, political empowerment, health, and survival rate.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Gender Inequality in India

As per the World Economic Forum’s gender gap ranking, India stands at rank 108 out of 149 countries. This rank is a major concern as it highlights the immense gap in opportunities in women with comparison to men. In Indian society from a long time back, the social structure has been such that the women are neglected in many areas like education, health, decision-making areas, financial independence, etc.

Another major reason, which contributes to the discriminatory behavior towards women in India, is the dowry system in marriage.  Because of this dowry system, most Indian families consider girls as a burden.  Preference for son still prevails. Girls have refrained from higher education. Women are not entitled to equal job opportunities and wages. In the 21 st century, women are still preferred gender in home managing activities. Many women quit their job and opt-out from leadership roles because of family commitments. However, such actions are very uncommon among men.

For overall wellbeing and growth of a nation, scoring high on gender equality is the most crucial aspect. Countries with less disparity in gender equality have progressed a lot. The government of India has also started taking steps to ensure gender equality. Several laws and policies are prepared to encourage girls. “Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao Yojana ” (Save girl, and make girls educated) campaign is created to spread awareness of the importance of girl child.  Several laws to protect girls are also there. However, we need more awareness of spreading knowledge of women rights . In addition, the government should take initiatives to check the correct and proper implementation of policies.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Corporate Updates
• Early Childhood
• Exclusive Story
• Government News
• Higher Education
• Human Resource
• Policy Matters
• Pre Schools
• Preschool Leaders Interview
• Schools News
• Uncategorized
• Weekly Newsletter Archive
• Newsletter Subscribe
• Our Magazine
• Magazine Subscribe
• Upcoming/Past Education Conferences
• Event Reports
• Write for Us

IIT Kanpur’s IFACET and Skyy Skill Academy join forces to launch…

Prayagraj making 48 public primary schools “smart”, e-learning and ict, driving the digital education revolution, west bengal council of higher secondary education introduces comprehensive curriculum revisions….

Importance of Nurturing Gender Sensitivity Through Education

Gender inequality is treated as a punishable offence as per laws of most of the countries. It is important for parents and teachers to make the children sensitive towards the other gender, writes Hema Kalakoti , Principal, APS Academy, Lucknow, for Elets News Network (ENN) .

Gender inequality refers to unequal treatment or perceptions of individuals based on their gender. It arises from differences in socially constructed gender roles. Gender systems are often dichotomous and hierarchical, gender binary systems may reflect the inequalities that manifest in numerous dimensions of daily life. Discrimination based on gender is a common civil rights violation that takes many forms including sexual harassment, pregnancy –discrimination, unequal pay for women who do the same jobs as men and discrimination in employment and education.T o overcome gender inequality we need to have gender sensitive society.

What is Gender Sensitivity?

Gender awareness is more analytical and critical since it clarifies issues about gender disparities and gender issues. It pertains to one’s effort to show how gender shapes the role of women and men in society including their role in development and how it affects relations between them. Our education system needs to be gender sensitive and gender friendly. One of the best possible strategies to minimise gender discrimination in society is to promote gender awareness at all levels of society.

Gender Issues In Homes

We can promote gender awareness in parents by

• School-parent partnership needs to be strengthened to identify gender issues in homes
• Promoting girl education in rural areas
• NGOs awareness training and counseling

Parents should be advised to treat both their sons and daughters as equals. Instead of telling their daughters to behave properly, mothers should teach their sons to respect all women as equal. It is important that children should grow up seeing women in their homes being respected by the men in the family. All household females should stop telling the young girls of their families that they need to learn how to cook, serve the husband and in-laws, and always adjust. And whatever else says to make a growing girl feel like she has less access to choice of freedom than her male counterpart.

Schools can play an important role in inculcating gender sensitivity in etiquettes and manners of students. It is necessary to create a gender responsive school in which the academic, social and physical environment and its surrounding community take into account the specific needs of girls and boys. A detailed action plan with a definite road map is required in the school curriculum to achieve gender equality.

Gender Sensitivity among Teachers

Teachers play a very important role in the early upbringing of a child. Their idea and beliefs can change the thought processes of young children. Children in the formative years easily nurture values and virtues taught to them. Gender sensitivity training should be mandatory for teachers. The training will enable them to disseminate the desirable attitude based on mutual respect and trust between girls and boys.

We all know that the teachers sometimes “inadvertently” make disparaging remarks about capabilities or characteristics of either gender, so we need to cope with knowledge, attitude, skills and methodologies that promote gender equality.

With growing concern over the lack of gender sensitization among youth, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has developed “a kit on gender sensitivity” for teachers to enable them to ensure unbiased participation of both boys and girls in the learning process.

Gender Sensitive Classrooms

Classrooms need to be gender sensitive. We have to take care of few do’s and don’ts for making classroom interaction gender sensitive.

• Encourage both males and females to be class leaders (perhaps one of each sex). Appoint two monitors in each classroom, a boy and a girl
• Address and call on girls and boys equally. Do not segregate boys and girls in the classroom in primary classes
• Make mixes groups for group activities and games
• Try to ‘switch role’ for breaking down gender barriers and stereotyping of gender roles
• Make both boys and girls share activities like cleaning, moving furniture, to the chalkboard during a lesson.
• Plan and conduct activities that give opportunity to all children accepting one another as equals.

Gender Sensitivity in Curriculum and text

Academic contents with lessons on gender sensitivity and moral traditions will unconsciously mould the character of the tender mind. It is time to transform all text reading materials and books which should be free of notion of gender equality as bias is embedded in textbooks and lessons. In this connection, our government has started taking initiatives regarding gender concerns have been included in the curriculum and in the textbooks drawn up by the National Council of Educational Research and Training(NCERT). (Views expressed by author are personal).

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Disruptive innovations transforming education landscape – november 2022, growth of edtech in pandemic february – march 2022, celebrating higher education leaders, latest news, iit kanpur’s ifacet and skyy skill academy join forces to launch..., pune gears up for the 4th elets education innovation summit: a..., west bengal council of higher secondary education introduces comprehensive curriculum revisions..., maharashtra state innovation society forms strategic partnership with jetro to boost..., iim kashipur and max healthcare launch executive programme in hospital management, cbse announces new exam format for classes 11 and 12, wbchse proposes ai warm-up course for class 10 students, k. r. mangalam university welcomes prof. (dr.) raghuvir singh as the....

For latest jobs, events and exciting company updates!

Welcome to Elets Technomedia

Sign in into your account

For continuing, Please agree our Terms & Conditions and acknowledge our Privacy Policy . This same account can be used across all Elets News portals.

Top Trending News

Iit kanpur’s ifacet and skyy skill academy join forces to launch cutting-edge technology courses..., pune gears up for the 4th elets education innovation summit: a platform to explore..., west bengal council of higher secondary education introduces comprehensive curriculum revisions for class 12..., maharashtra state innovation society forms strategic partnership with jetro to boost startups and innovation, k. r. mangalam university welcomes prof. (dr.) raghuvir singh as the vice-chancellor, ncert to roll out new syllabus textbooks for classes 3 and 6 in upcoming..., iim-lucknow names prof archana shukla as director-in-charge, aviotron aerospace secures rs 4.96 crore in funding to expand its edtech reach, byju’s announces new layoffs amid financial challenges, iit kharagpur announces major reforms in undergraduate programs aligning with national educational policy, integrating holistic education with technological advancement, top trending categories.

• Magazine 3079
• Higher Education 2291
• Article 1075
• Interviews 849
• Corporate Updates 843
• Policy Matters 706
• Schools News 325
• Government News 271
• Features 166
• Editorial 146
• B-schools 74
• Startup News 51
• Press Release 43
• Budget 2022 41
• Women's Day 39
• Pre Schools 27
• Privacy Policy
• Magazine Subscription
• Upcoming Events

CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS article

Better together: a model for women and lgbtq equality in the workplace.

• Faculty of Psychology, Work and Organizational Psychology, Philipps University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany

Much has been achieved in terms of human rights for women and people of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, and queer (LGBTQ) community. However, human resources management (HRM) initiatives for gender equality in the workplace focus almost exclusively on white, heterosexual, cisgender women, leaving the problems of other gender, and social minorities out of the analysis. This article develops an integrative model of gender equality in the workplace for HRM academics and practitioners. First, it analyzes relevant antecedents and consequences of gender-based discrimination and harassment (GBDH) in the workplace. Second, it incorporates the feminist, queer, and intersectional perspectives in the analysis. Third, it integrates literature findings about women and the LGBTQ at work, making the case for an inclusive HRM. The authors underscore the importance of industry-university collaboration and offer a starters' toolkit that includes suggestions for diagnosis, intervention, and applied research on GBDH. Finally, avenues for future research are identified to explore gendered practices that hinder the career development of women and the LGBTQ in the workplace.

Introduction

Gender has diversified itself. More than four decades have passed since Bem (1974) published her groundbreaking article on psychological androgyny. With her work, she challenged the binary conception of gender in the western academia, calling for the disposal of gender as a stable trait consistent of discrete categories ( Mehta and Keener, 2017 ). Nowadays, people from the LGBTQ community find safe spaces to express their gender in most developed countries (see ILGA-Europe, 2017 ). Also, women-rights movements have impulsed changes for the emancipation and integration of women at every social level, enabling them to achieve things barely imaginable before (see Hooks, 2000 ).

However, there is still a lot to do to improve the situation of women and people from the LGBTQ community ( International Labour Office, 2016 ; ILGA-Europe, 2017 ). Some actions to increase gender inclusion in organizations actually conceal inequality against women, and many problems faced by the LGBTQ originate within frameworks that anti-discrimination policy reinforce (see Benschop and Doorewaard, 1998 , 2012 ; Verloo, 2006 ). For example, the gender equality, gender management, and gender mainstreaming approaches overlook most problems faced by people from the LGBTQ community and from women of color, framing their target stakeholders as white, cisgender, and heterosexual (see Tomic, 2011 ; Hanappi-Egger, 2013 ; Klein, 2016 ). These problems seem to originate in the neoliberalization of former radical movements when adopted by the mainstream (see Cho et al., 2013 ). This translates into actions addressing sexism and heterosexism that overlook other forms of discrimination (e.g., racism, ableism), resisting an intersectional approach that would question white, able-bodied, and other forms of privilege (see Crenshaw, 1991 ; Cho et al., 2013 ; Liasidou, 2013 ; van Amsterdam, 2013 ).

The purpose of this paper is to support the claim that gender equality shall be done within a queer, feminist, and intersectional framework. This argument is developed by integrating available evidence on the antecedents and consequences of GBDH against women and people from the LGBTQ community in the workplace. The authors believe that GBDH against these groups has its origin in the different manifestations of sexism in organizations. A model with the antecedents and consequences of GBDH in the workplace is proposed. It considers an inclusive definition of gender and integrates the queer-feminist approach to HRM ( Gedro and Mizzi, 2014 ) with the intersectional perspective ( Crenshaw, 1991 ; McCall, 2005 ; Verloo, 2006 ). In this way, it provides a framework for HRM scholars and practitioners working to counteract sexism, heterosexism, and other forms of discrimination in organizations.

GBDH in the Workplace

GBDH is the umbrella term we propose to refer to the different manifestations of sexism and heterosexism in the workplace. The roots of GBDH are beyond the forms that discriminatory acts and behaviors take, being rather “about the power relations that are brought into play in the act of harassing” ( Connell, 2006 , p. 838). This requires acknowledging that gender harassment is a technology of sexism, that “perpetuates, enforces, and polices a set of gender roles that seek to feminize women and masculinize men” ( Franke, 1997 , p. 696). Harassment against the LGBTQ is rooted in a heterosexist ideology that establishes heterosexuality as the superior, valid, and natural form of expressing sexuality (see Wright and Wegner, 2012 ; Rabelo and Cortina, 2014 ). Furthermore, women and the LGBTQ are oppressed by the institutionalized sexism that underscores the supremacy of hegemonic masculinity (male, white, heterosexual, strong, objective, rational) over femininity (female, non-white, non-heterosexual, weak, emotional, irrational; Wright, 2013 ; Denissen and Saguy, 2014 ; Dougherty and Goldstein Hode, 2016 ). In addition, GBDH overlaps with other frameworks (e.g., racism, ableism, anti-fat discrimination) that concurrently work to maintain white, able-bodied, and thin privilege, impeding changes in the broader social structure (see Yoder, 1991 ; Yoder and Aniakudo, 1997 ; Buchanan and Ormerod, 2002 ; Acker, 2006 ; Liasidou, 2013 ; van Amsterdam, 2013 ). The next paragraphs offer a definition of some of the most studied forms of GBDH in the workplace.

Sexual Harassment

Sexual harassment was first defined in its different dimensions as gender harassment, unwanted sexual attention, and sexual coercion ( Gelfand et al., 1995 ). Later, Leskinen and Cortina (2013) focused on the gender-harassment subcomponent of sexual harassment and developed a broadened taxonomy of the term. This was motivated by the fact that legal practices gave little importance to gender-harassment forms of sexual harassment, despite of the negative impact they have on the targets' well-being ( Leskinen et al., 2011 ). Gender harassment consists of rejection or “put down” forms of sexual harassment such as sexist remarks, sexually crude/offensive behavior, infantilization, work/family policing, and gender policing ( Leskinen and Cortina, 2013 ). The concepts of sexual harassment and gender harassment were initially developed to refer to the experiences of women in the workplace, but there is also evidence of sexual and gender harassment against LGBTQ individuals ( Lombardi et al., 2002 ; Silverschanz et al., 2008 ; Denissen and Saguy, 2014 ). In addition, studies have shown how gender harassment and heterosexist harassment are complementary and frequently simultaneous phenomena accounting for mistreatment against members of the LGBTQ community ( Rabelo and Cortina, 2014 ).

Gender Microaggressions

Gender microaggressions account for GBDH against women and people from the LGBTQ community that presents itself in ways that are subtle and troublesome to notice ( Basford et al., 2014 ; Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). Following the taxonomy on racial microaggressions developed by Sue et al. (2007) , the construct was adapted to account for gender-based forms of discrimination ( Basford et al., 2014 ). Gender microaggressions consist of microassaults, microinsults, and microinvalidations, and although they may appear to be innocent, they exert considerably negative effects in the targets' well-being ( Sue et al., 2007 ; Basford et al., 2014 ; Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). As an example of microassault imagine an individual commenting their colleague that their way of dressing looks unprofessional (because it is not “masculine enough,” “too” feminine, or not according to traditional gender-binary standards). A microinsult is for example when the supervisor asks the subordinate about who helped them with their work (which was “too good” to be developed by the subordinate alone). An example of microinvalidation would be if in a corporate meeting the CEO dismisses information related to women or the LGBTQ in the company regarding it as unimportant, reinforcing the message that women and LGBTQ issues are inexistent or irrelevant (for more examples see Basford et al., 2014 ; Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). Because gender is not explicitly addressed in microaggressions, it can be especially difficult for the victims to address the offense as such and act upon them (see Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). Hence, they are not only emotionally distressing, but also tend to be highly ubiquitous, belonging to the daily expressions of a determined context ( Nadal et al., 2011 , 2014 ; Gartner and Sterzing, 2016 ).

Disguised Forms of GBDH

It is also the case that some forms of workplace mistreatment constitute disguised forms of GBDH. Rospenda et al. (2008) found in their US study that women presented higher rates of generalized workplace abuse (i.e., workplace bullying or mobbing). In the UK, a representative study detected that a high proportion of lesbian, gay, and bisexual respondents have faced workplace bullying ( Hoel et al., 2017 ). Specifically, the results indicated that while the bullying rate for heterosexuals over a six-months period was of 6.4%, this number was tripled for bisexuals (19.2%), and more than doubled for lesbians (16.9%) and gay (13.7%) individuals ( Hoel et al., 2017 ). Moreover, 90% of the transgender sample in a US study reported experiencing “harassment, mistreatment or discrimination on the job” ( Grant et al., 2011 , p. 3). These findings suggest that many of the individuals facing workplace harassment that appears to be gender neutral are actually targets of GBDH. Hence, they experience “ disguised gender-based harassment and discrimination” ( Rospenda et al., 2009 , p. 837) that should not be addressed as a gender-neutral issue.

Intersectional, Queer, and Feminist Approaches in Organizations

In this section, a short introduction to the feminist, queer, and intersectional approaches is given, as they are applied to the analyses throughout this article.

Feminist Approaches

In the beginning there was feminism.

In the words of bell hooks, “[f]eminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression” ( Hooks, 2000 , viii). However, feminism can be a movement, a methodology, or a theoretical approach, and it is probably better to talk about feminisms than considering it a unitary concept. In this paper, different feminist approaches (see Bendl, 2000 ) are applied to the analysis. Gender as a variable takes gender as a politically neutral, uncontested variable; the feminist standpoint focuses on women as a group; and the feminist poststructuralist approach searches to deconstruct hegemonic discourses that perpetuate inequality (for the complete definitions see Bendl, 2000 ).

Gender Subtext

The gender subtext refers to an approach to the managerial discourse that brings attention to how official speeches of inclusion work to conceal inequalities ( Benschop and Doorewaard, 1998 ). Its methodology -subtext analysis- brings discourse analysis and feminist deconstruction together to scrutiny the managerial discourse and practices in organizations ( Benschop and Doorewaard, 1998 ; Bendl, 2000 ; Bendl, 2008 ; Benschop and Doorewaard, 2012 ).

Integration and Applications of Feminist Approaches and the Gender Subtext

The gender subtext serves to understand the role that organizational factors play in the occurrence of GBDH. Gender as a variable serves to underscore how the hegemonic definition of gender excludes and otherizes the LGBTQ from HRM approaches to gender equality. The feminist standpoint is applied in this paper as a framework in which two groups—women and the LGBTQ—are recognized in their heterogeneity, and still brought together to search for synergies to counteract sexism as a common source of institutionalized oppression (see Oliver, 1992 ; Franke, 1997 ). Finally, the feminist-poststructuralist approach enables conceiving gender as deconstructed and reconstructed, and to apply the subtext analysis to the organizational discourse (see Benschop and Doorewaard, 1998 ; Monro, 2005 ).

Queer Approach

Queer theory and politics.

The origins of the queer movement can be traced to the late eighties, when lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and the transgender took distance from the LGBT community as a sign of disconformity with the depoliticization of its agenda ( Woltersdorff, 2003 ). However, the “Queer” label was later incorporated in the broader movement ( Woltersdorff, 2003 ). In terms of queer theory, the most recognized scholar is Judith Butler, whose work Gender Trouble (1990) was revolutionary because it made visible the oppressive character of the categories used to signify gender, and insisted in its performative nature (see Butler, 1990 ; Woltersdorff, 2003 ).

Queer Standpoint, the LGBTQ, and HRM

In the presented model, queer theory brings attention to the exclusion of the LGBTQ community from the organizational and HRM speech. This exclusion is observed in the policies and politics supported by the HRM literature and practitioners, as well as in the way the LGBTQ are otherized by their discursive practices (e.g., validating only a binary vision of gender, Carrotte et al., 2016 ). Although the categories that the queer theory criticizes are applied in this model, its constructed nature is acknowledged (see Monro, 2005 ). In this way, McCall's (2005) argument in favor of the strategic use of categories for the intersectional analysis of oppression is supported. This analysis is conducted adopting a queer-feminist perspective ( Marinucci, 2016 ) and the intersectional approach.

Integration of Intersectionality With the Queer and Feminist Approaches

Origin and approaches.

The concept of intersectionality was initially introduced to frame the problem of double exclusion and discrimination that black women face in the United States ( Crenshaw, 1989 , 1991 ). Crenshaw (1991) analyzed how making visible the specific violence faced by black women conflicted with the political agendas of the feminist and anti-racist movements. This situation left those women devoid of a framework to direct political attention and resources toward ending with the violence they were (and still are) subjected to ( Crenshaw, 1991 ). Intersectionality theory has evolved since then, and different approaches exist within it ( McCall, 2005 ). These approaches range from fully deconstructivist (total rejection of categories), to intracategorical (focused on the differences within groups), to intercategorical (exploring the experiences of groups in the intersections), and are compatible with queer-feminist approaches (see Parker, 2002 ; McCall, 2005 ; Chapman and Gedro, 2009 ; Hill, 2009 ).

The intracategorical approach acknowledges the heterogeneity that exist within repressed groups (see Bendl, 2000 ; McCall, 2005 ). Within this framework (also called intracategorical complexity, see McCall, 2005 ), the intersectional analysis emerges, calling for attention to historically marginalized groups, [as in Crenshaw (1989 , 1991 )]. The deconstructivist view helps to de-essentialize categories as gender, race, and ableness, making visible the power dynamics they contribute to maintain (see Acker, 2006 ). The intercategorical approach takes constructed social categories and analyzes the power dynamics occurring between groups ( McCall, 2005 ).

Integration: Queer-Feminist Intersectional Synergy

Applying these complementary approaches helps to analyze how women and people from the LGBTQ community are defined (e.g., deconstructivist approach), essentialized (e.g., deconstructivist and intracategorical approaches), and oppressed by social actors (e.g., intercategorical approach) and institutionalized sexism (e.g., Oliver, 1992 ; Franke, 1997 ). It also allows the analysis of the oppression reinforced by members of the dominant group (intercategorical approach), as well as by minority members that enjoy other forms of privilege (e.g., white privilege), and endorse hegemonic values (deconstructivist and intracategorical approaches). In addition, the analyses within the inter- and intra-categorical framework allow approaching the problems faced by individuals in the intersections between sexism, heterosexism, cissexism, and monosexism (e.g., transgender women, lesbians, bisexuals), as well as considering the way classism, racism, ableism, and ethnocentrism shape their experiences (e.g., disabled women, transgender men of color).

Support for an Integrative HRM Model of GBDH in the Workplace

This section describes an integrative model of GBDH in the workplace ( Figure 1 ). First, the effects of GBDH on the health and occupational well-being of targeted individuals are illustrated (P1 and P2). Afterwards, the model deals with the direct and moderation effects of organizational climate, culture, policy, and politics (OCCPP) on GBDH in the workplace. OCCPP acts as a “switch” that enables or disables the other paths to GBDH. OCCPP's effects on GBDH are described as: a direct effect on GBDH (P3), the moderation of the relationship between gender diversity and GBDH (P3a), the moderation of the relationship between individual characteristics and GBDH (P3b), and the moderation (P3c) of the moderation effect of gender diversity on the relationship between individual's characteristics and GBDH (P4). In other words, when OCCPP produce environments that are adverse for gender minorities, gender diversity and gender characteristics become relevant to explain GBDH. When OCCPP generate respectful and integrative environments, gender diversity, and gender characteristics are no longer relevant predictors of harassment.

Figure 1 . Integrative model of GBDH in the workplace. Continuous paths represent direct relationships. Dashed paths represent fully moderated relationships. The double-ended arrow signals the relationship between gender diversity and OCCPP, which follows a circular causation logic.

Consequences of GBDH in the Workplace

Gbdh and individuals' health.

Evidence suggests that exposure to sexist discrimination and harassment in the workplace negatively affects women's well-being ( Yoder and McDonald, 2016 ; Manuel et al., 2017 ), and that different forms of sexual harassment can constitute trauma and lead to posttraumatic stress disorder ( Avina and O'Donohue, 2002 ). In their meta-analysis ( N = 89.382), Chan et al. (2008) found a negative relationship between workplace sexual harassment, psychological health, and physical health conditions. Regarding the LGBTQ at work, Flanders (2015) found a positive relationship between negative identity events, microaggressions, and feelings of stress and anxiety among a sample of bisexual individuals in the US. This is consistent with Galupo and Resnick's (2016) results about the negative effects of microaggressions for the well-being of lesbian, bisexual, and gay workers. In another study, Seelman et al. (2017) found that microaggressions and other forms of gender discrimination relate to lowered self-esteem and increased stress and anxiety in LGBTQ individuals, with the most negative effects reported by the transgender. In a study among gay, lesbian, and bisexual emerging adults in the US, exposure to the phrase “that's so gay” related to feelings of isolation and physical health symptoms as headaches, poor appetite, and eating problems ( Woodford et al., 2012 ). In the literature on gender discrimination, Khan et al. (2017) found that harassment relates to depression risk factors among the LGBTQ. Finally, according to Chan et al. (2008) meta-analysis, targets of workplace sexual harassment suffer its detrimental job-related, psychological, and physical consequences regardless of their gender.

Proposition P1: GBDH negatively affects women and LGBTQ individuals' health in the workplace .

GBDH and Occupational Well-Being

Occupational well-being refers to the relationship between job characteristics and individuals' well-being ( Warr, 1990 ). It is defined “as a positive evaluation of various aspects of one's job, including affective, motivational, behavioral, cognitive, and psychosomatic dimensions” ( Horn et al., 2004 , p. 366). It has a positive relationship with general well-being ( Warr, 1990 ) and work-related outcomes like task performance ( Devonish, 2013 ; Taris and Schaufeli, 2015 ).

There is robust evidence on the negative effects of GBDH on indicators of occupational well-being, such as overall job satisfaction, engagement, commitment, performance, job withdrawal, and job-related stress ( Stedham and Mitchell, 1998 ; Lapierre et al., 2005 ; Chan et al., 2008 ; Cogin and Fish, 2009 ; Sojo et al., 2016 ). Its negative effects have been reported among women ( Fitzgerald et al., 1997 ), gay and heterosexual men ( Stockdale et al., 1999 ), lesbians ( Denissen and Saguy, 2014 ), and transgender individuals ( Lombardi et al., 2002 ), to name some.

Proposition P2: GBDH negatively affects the occupational well-being of women and people from the LGBTQ community in the workplace .

Antecedents of GBDH in the Workplace

Direct effect of occpp on gbdh.

In the next lines, the direct effects of OCCPP on GBDH against women and people from the LGBTQ community are explored, supporting the next proposition of this model.

Proposition P3: OCCPP affect the incidence of GBDH against women and the LGBTQ .

Organizational Culture and GBDH

Organizational culture refers to the shared norms, values, and assumptions that are relatively stable and greatly affect the functioning of organizations ( Schein, 1996 ). The most plausible link between organizational culture and GBDH seems to be the endorsement of sexist beliefs and attitudes. This is supported by evidence that sexism endorsement encourages GBDH attitudes and behavior (see Pryor et al., 1993 ; Fitzgerald et al., 1997 ; Stockdale et al., 1999 ; Stoll et al., 2016 ). The literature on sexism has mainly adopted a binary conception of gender (see Carrotte et al., 2016 ). However, the last decade more research has focused on heterosexism and anti-LGBTQ attitudes, uncovering their negative effects in the lives of LGBTQ individuals.

Sexism Against Women

Scholars focusing on sexism against women have categorized it in different ways. Old-fashioned sexism refers to the explicit endorsement of traditional beliefs about women's inferiority ( Morrison et al., 1999 ). Modern and neo sexism define the denial of gender inequality in society and resentment against measures that support women as a group ( Campbell et al., 1997 ; Morrison et al., 1999 ). Gender-blind sexism refers to the denial of the existence of sexism against women ( Stoll et al., 2016 ). Benevolent sexism defines the endorsement of an idealized vision of women that is used to reinforce their submission ( Glick et al., 2000 ). Finally, ambivalent sexism is the term for the endorsement of both hostile and “benevolent” sexist attitudes ( Glick and Fiske, 1997 , 2001 , 2011 ).

Sexism Against the LGBTQ

Sexism directed against the LGBTQ takes different forms, that can be also held by members of the LGBTQ community, as the evidence about biphobia and transphobia points out (see Vernallis, 1999 ; Weiss, 2011 ). Heterosexism is the endorsement of beliefs stating that heterosexuality is the normal and desirable manifestation of sexuality, while framing other sexual orientations as deviant, inferior, or flawed (see Habarth, 2013 ; Rabelo and Cortina, 2014 ). Monosexism and biphobia refer to negative beliefs toward people that are not monosexual , namely, whose sexual orientation is not defined by the attraction to people from only one gender (see Vernallis, 1999 ). Cissexism (also transphobia ) refers to “an ideology that denigrates and subordinates trans* people because their sex and gender identities exist outside the gender binary. Transgender people are thus positioned as less authentic and inferior to cisgender people” ( Yavorsky, 2016 , p. 950). Hence, transgender individuals experience concurrently sexism, heterosexism, and cissexism/transphobia in their workplaces (see Yavorsky, 2016 ).

Organizational Climate and GBDH

Organizational climate reflects the “social perceptions of the appropriateness of particular behaviors and attitudes [in an organization]” ( Sliter et al., 2014 ). There is evidence linking organizational climate with workplace harassment ( Bowling and Beehr, 2006 ), sexual harassment ( Fitzgerald et al., 1997 , p. 578), and gender microaggressions ( Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ).

Diversity climate is “the extent to which employees perceive their organization to be supportive of underrepresented groups, both in terms of policy implementation and social integration” ( Sliter et al., 2014 ). Hence, a gender-diversity climate reflects the employees' perceptions of their workplace as welcoming and positively appreciating gender differences ( Jansen et al., 2015 ). It has been associated with an increased perception of inclusion by members of an organization, buffering the negative effects of gender dissimilarity (i.e., gender diversity) between individuals in a group ( Jansen et al., 2015 ). Sliter et al. (2014) found a negative relationship between diversity climate perceptions and conflict at work. Also, it has been suggested that it plays a crucial role for workers' active support of diversity initiatives, which is determinant for their successful implementation ( Avery, 2011 ). A similar construct, climate for inclusion has also shown to be a positive factor in gender-diverse groups, protecting against the negative effects of group conflict over unit-level satisfaction ( Nishii, 2013 ).

Heterosexist climate refers to an organizational climate in which heterosexist attitudes and behaviors are accepted and reinforced, propitiating GBDH against the LGBTQ (see Rabelo and Cortina, 2014 ; Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). For example, Burn et al. (2005) conducted a study using hypothethical scenarios to test the effects of indirect heterosexism on lesbians, gays, and bisexuals. The participants of their study reported that hearing heterosexist comments would be experienced as an offense, affecting their decision to share information about their sexual orientation ( Burn et al., 2005 ). In addition, it has been found that LGBTQ-friendly climates (hence, low in heterosexism), can have a positive impact on the individual and organizational level ( Eliason et al., 2011 ). Examples of positive outcomes are reduced discrimination, better health, increased job satisfaction, job commitment ( Badgett et al., 2013 ), perceived organizational support ( Pichler et al., 2017 ), and feelings of validation for lesbians that become mothers ( Hennekam and Ladge, 2017 ).

Workplace Policy and GBDH

Workplace policy plays an important role in the incidence of GBDH. Finally, evidence shows that policy affects the extent to which the work environment presents itself as LGBTQ-friendly, influencing the experience of LGBTQ individuals at work ( Riger, 1991 ; Eliason et al., 2011 ; Döring, 2013 ; Dougherty and Goldstein Hode, 2016 ; Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ; Gruber, 2016 ). Eliason et al. (2011) found that inclusive language, domestic partner benefits, child-care solutions, and hiring policies are relevant for the constitution of a gender-inclusive work environment for the LGBTQ. Calafell (2014) wrote about how the absence of policy addressing discrimination against people with simultaneous minority identities (e.g., queer Latina) contributes to cover harassment against them. Galupo and Resnick (2016) found that weak policy contributes to the incidence of microaggressions against people from the LGBTQ community. Some of the situations they found include refusal of policy reinforcement, leak of confidential information, and refusal to acknowledge the gender identity of a worker ( Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). Moreover, existent policy may serve to reinforce inequalities if its discourse is based on power binaries (e.g., rational/masculine vs. emotional/feminine) that discredit, oppress, and marginalize minority groups ( Riger, 1991 ; Dougherty and Goldstein Hode, 2016 ). For example, Peterson and Albrecht (1999) analyzed maternity-policy and found how discourse is shaped to protect organizational interest at the cost of the precarization of women's conditions in organizations. Finally, it is very important to address the mishandling of processes and backlash after GBDH complaints are filed, since they keep targets of harassment from seeking help within their organizations (see Vijayasiri, 2008 ).

Organizational Politics and GBDH

Organizations are political entities ( Mayes and Allen, 1977 ). In the workplace, power, conceived as access to information and resources, is negotiated through political networks embedded in communication practices ( Mayes and Allen, 1977 ; Mumby, 2001 ; Dougherty and Goldstein Hode, 2016 ). These communication practices operate within power dynamics in which the majority group sets the terms of the discussion and frames what is thematized ( Mumby, 1987 , 2001 ). Since gender affects the nature of these power relations, the effects of politics in gender issues and of gender issues in politics must be considered.

Full Moderation of OCCPP of the Relationship Between Gender Diversity and GBDH

Gender diversity refers to heterogeneity regarding gender characteristics of individuals in an organization. Broadly, an organization in which most workers are cisgender, male, and heterosexual would be low in gender diversity, and one in which individuals are evenly distributed in terms of their gender identity, sexual orientation, and gender expression, would be high on gender diversity. In this section, the moderation effect of OCCPP on the relationship between gender diversity and GBDH is discussed to support the next proposition of the model.

Proposition P3a: The relationship between gender diversity and GBDH is fully moderated by OCCPP. When OCCPP propitiate a hostile environment for gender minorities, low gender diversity will lead to high GBDH. When OCCPP propitiate a context of respect and integration of gender minorities, low gender diversity will not lead to higher GBDH .

Male-Dominated Workplace

In male-dominated organizations, a hypermasculine culture is predominant, male workers represent a numerical majority, and most positions of power are occupied by men (e.g., Carrington et al., 2010 ). These organizations present an increased frequency and intensity of GBDH against women, men who do not do gender in a hypermasculine form, and individuals from the LGBTQ community ( Stockdale et al., 1999 ; Street et al., 2007 ; Chan, 2013 ; Wright, 2013 ). Women in a male-dominated workplace may be confronted with misogyny at work ( Denissen and Saguy, 2014 ), becoming targets of more intense and frequent GBDH as they depart from the policed gender-rule that demands them to behave feminine, submissive, and heterosexual ( Berdahl, 2007 ). Women refusing sexual objectification in these contexts may become targets of serious forms of mistreatment, with the case that certain women “—including lesbians and those who present as butch, large, or black—may be less able to access emphasized femininity as a resource and thus [become] more subject to open hostility” ( Denissen and Saguy, 2014 , p. 383). In other words, the more they depart from the sexist and heteronormative standard, the worse is the mistreatment they will face. At the same time, the strategies some women apply to avoid hostility have a high cost for their identity and validation at work, as pointed by Denissen and Saguy (2014 , p. 383),

the presence of lesbians threatens heteronormativity and men's sexual subordination of women […] [b]y sexually objectifying tradeswomen, tradesmen, in effect, attempt to neutralize this threat. While tradeswomen, in turn, are sometimes able to deploy femininity to manage men's conduct and gain some measure of acceptance as women, it often comes at the cost of their perceived professional competence and sexual autonomy and—in the case of lesbians—sexual identity.

However, GBDH is not only directed to women in hypermasculine contexts, as suggested by Denissen and Saguy (2014) , who observed that “tradesmen unapologetically use homophobic slurs to repudiate both homosexuality and femininity (in men)” ( Denissen and Saguy, 2014 , p. 388). Hence, men working in a male-dominated context are also expected to perform hegemonic masculinity, being punished when they do not comply. This leaves men who do not present dominant traits, that are feminine, or that are not heterosexual, at risk of becoming targets of GBDH ( Franke, 1997 ; Stockdale et al., 1999 ; Carrington et al., (2010) .

Female-Dominated Workplace

Female-dominated workplaces are those where women represent a numeric majority. It has been suggested that in these contexts (e.g., nursing) women with care responsibilities can find more tools to balance work-family schedules ( Caroly, 2011 ), and face less harassment ( Konrad et al., 2010 ). However, evidence about heterosexism and harassment against people from the LGBTQ community uncovers heteronormativity in female-dominated workplaces (e.g., among nurses, see Eliason et al., 2011 ). For example, an experiment about discrimination of gays and lesbians in recruitment processes showed that while gay males were discriminated in male-dominated occupations, lesbians were discriminated in female-dominated ones ( Ahmed et al., 2013 ).

Representation of the LGBTQ in the Workplace

At the moment this paper is being written, the authors have not found research that specifically targets LGBTQ-dominated organizations. There is evidence suggesting that having more lesbian, gay, and non-binary coworkers contributes to the development of LGBTQ-friendly workplaces ( Eliason et al., 2011 ). In addition, evidence supports the positive effects of having LGBTQ leaders that advocate for the respect and integration of LGBTQ individuals in organizations ( Moore, 2017 ).

Gender Diversity, Tokenism, Glass Escalator, and GBDH

When gender-minority individuals are pioneers entering a gender-homogeneous workplace, they face a heightened probability of experiencing tokenism ( Maranto and Griffin, 2011 ). Tokenism refers to the performance pressures, social isolation, and role encapsulation that individuals from social minorities face in organizations in which they are underrepresented numerically ( Yoder, 1991 ). Gardiner and Tiggemann (1999) conducted a study comparing the effects of male- and female-dominated work environments on individuals' well-being and tokenism experiences. They found that women, in comparison to men, experience the highest levels of tokenism and discrimination in male-dominated sectors, and that they endure more pressure than men, even in female -dominated contexts ( Gardiner and Tiggemann, 1999 ). There is also an increasing number of reports on the experiences of tokenism by the LGBTQ ( LaSala et al., 2008 ; Colvin, 2015 ) and research on how to hinder the negative consequences of tokenism against them in organizations ( Davis, 2017 ; Nourafshan, 2018 ). The fact that men in female- dominated work settings report less levels of pressure than women in male dominated workplaces is compatible with Yoder's (1991) conception of tokenism as the oppression of social-minority members who are simultaneously a numerical minority. Because white men are a social majority, they do not experience the negative effects of tokenism when they are underrepresented numerically. Actually, evidence on the glass escalator effect shows that white men experience advantages when they enter female-dominated fields ( Williams, 1992 , 2013 , 2015 ; Woodhams et al., 2015 ). However, tokenism might be also present in female-dominated settings, as can be inferred from studies on LGBTQ experiences in women-dominated professions ( Eliason et al., 2011 ; Ahmed et al., 2013 ). Moreover, research in the US suggests that female CEOs tend to advance policies related to domestic-partner benefits and discrimination against women, but not necessarily advocate for a wider range of LGBTQ-inclusion policies ( Cook and Glass, 2016 ).

Gender Diversity, Contradictions, and the Role of OCCPP

The evidence on the effects of gender diversity in organizations is not free of contradictions. It has been found that the integration of male coworkers in female-dominated workplaces increases conflict between women ( Haile, 2012 ), and that as the proportion of male doctors in workgroups increases, the same happens with sexual harassment against female doctors ( Konrad et al., 2010 ). If taken together, it makes sense to consider an interaction of OCCPP and gender diversity to explain GBDH. In other words, it seems that gender diversity alone is not enough to end GBDH in the workplace, but can interact in a positive way with organizational factors to diminish conflict and GBDH (see Nishii, 2013 ). White, middle class, cisgender, heterosexual men would most likely not be targeted for GBDH in female-dominated contexts, since they are not a social minority, rather benefiting from their underrepresentation (see Williams, 1992 ). Finally, it is expected that gender diversity and OCCPP present a circular causation (see double-ended arrow in Figure 1 ), so that a higher representation of a particular minority group will traduce into OCCPP that promote inclusion for that group. At the same time, an organization whose OCCPP invites to respect and integrate gender minorities will attract more women and LGBTQ individuals (see Bajdo and Dickson, 2001 ; Moore, 2017 ).

OCCPP Full Moderation of the Relationship Between Individuals' Characteristics and GBDH

Individuals' gender characteristics intersect with race, class, ethnicity, and disability configuring complex identities and dynamics that affect individuals' experience of inequality in organizations (see Oliver, 1992 ; Acker, 2006 ; Verloo, 2006 ; Cunningham, 2008 ; Ericksen and Schultheiss, 2009 ; Cho et al., 2013 ; Donovan et al., 2013 ; Liasidou, 2013 ; Wright, 2013 ; Calafell, 2014 ; Moodley and Graham, 2015 ; Senyonga, 2017 ). In other words, it is difficult to isolate causes for exclusion, since they derive from complex power dynamics that shape individuals' experience. It was mentioned above that women and the LGBTQ tend to be more targeted for GBDH than white heterosexual men. However, it is in sexist organizational contexts that gender characteristics are made salient to propitiate GBDH.

Proposition P3b: The link between individuals' gender characteristics and GBDH in the workplace is fully moderated by OCCPP. This means that in a context of sexist OCCPP, individuals with gender-minority status will experience more GBDH. In contexts in which OCCPP propitiate respect and integration of gender minorities, GBDH will be low .

In other words, if the organizational context is tolerant of GBDH, harassment will occur based on individuals' sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, gender expression, or an intersection of those ( Crenshaw, 1991 ; Pryor et al., 1993 ; Franke, 1997 ; Stockdale et al., 1999 ; Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). Some examples of how gender characteristics are used as grounds for GBDH are described in the following lines.

Sex assigned at birth refers to the gender category assigned to individuals according to their physical characteristics at birth ( ILGA-Europe, 2016 ). At the moment, the intersex category for those whose physical characteristics do not match the binary conception of gender at birth is not officially recognized in many countries ( ILGA-Europe, 2016 ).

Gender identity is the “deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth” ( International Commission of Jurists, 2009 , p. 6). Despite the claims to adopt inclusive conceptions of gender, organizations continue to direct their gender-equality programs to white cisgender women, excluding the transgender and genderqueer (see Carrotte et al., 2016 ; Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ).

Gender expression is the way people handle their physical or external appearance so that it reflects their gender identity ( European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014 ). In highly sexist organizations, gender policing and harassment is directed against less gender-conforming individuals (e.g., Stockdale et al., 1999 ; Wright, 2013 ).

Sexual orientation refers to the “person's capacity for profound affection, emotional and sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual relations with, individuals of a different gender or the same gender or more than one gender” ( ILGA-Europe, 2016 , p. 180). It is often the case that family policy in organizations consider only workers whose families are conformed by heterosexual couples and their children (e.g., Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). This excludes those who are in same-sex or non-monosexual partnerships and families, sending the message that they are “different,” abnormal, or unnatural (see Galupo and Resnick, 2016 ). There is evidence that gender-exclusive language (using he and his instead of gender-inclusive forms) negatively affects the sense of belongingness, identification, and motivation of women in work settings ( Stout and Dasgupta, 2011 ). In the same way, the exclusion of people with non-binary or non-heterosexual gender characteristics in the organizational discourse makes them experience feelings of exclusion and otherization ( Carrotte et al., 2016 ).

Double Moderation of OCCPP: Its Effects on the Moderation of Gender Diversity of the Relationship Between Individuals' Characteristics and GBDH

Considering the literature on tokenism, gender characteristics (e.g., transgender) are expected to be a relevant predictor of GBDH if there is a reduced number of people with those characteristics in the organization (i.e., low gender diversity). Also, it is expected that this relationship will only take place in those situations in which the OCCPP propitiate a discriminatory and harassing environment for gender minorities.

Proposition P3c and P4: When OCCPP propitiate a discriminatory and harassing environment for gender minorities, women and the LGBTQ will experience more GBDH in a context low in gender diversity. If the OCCPP configure an environment that is inclusive and respectful of gender minorities, a low gender diversity will not lead to GBDH against women and the LGBTQ in that organization .

Recommendations for Academics and Practitioners

Need for industry-university collaborations: from the lab to the field.

Research that emerges from industry-university collaboration (IUC) is needed to better understand and counteract GBDH. Porter and Birdi (2018) identified twenty-two factors for a successful IUC. Some of these factors are: capacity of the stakeholders to enact change, a clear and shared vision, trust between the actors, and effective communication ( Porter and Birdi, 2018 ). Rajalo and Vadi (2017) developed a model of IUC, according to which success is more likely when preconditions from the involved partners (i.e., academics and practitioners) match. These preconditions are explained in terms of absorptive capacity (ability to process and incorporate new information), and motivation to collaborate ( Rajalo and Vadi, 2017 ). In other words, those involved in IUC need top management support, economic resources, a shared vision of gender equality, trust in each other, effective communication channels, and high motivation to collaborate. It is not a simple endeavor, but it is a necessary and possible one (see Porter and Birdi, 2018 ).

In collaborations, scholars and practitioners have the opportunity to work together in the design, development, implementation, and follow-up of HRM strategies. This must be done ensuring that projects are appropriate for each organization, and that the raised information is suitable for research purposes. Evidence on IUC spillover points out that firms and academics benefit from these collaborations (see Jensen et al., 2010 ). In the case of HRM, scholars can gain access to samples that are difficult to reach and economic resources to finance their research, while practitioners benefit from the academic expertise (see Jensen et al., 2010 ). In the context of gender equality, this can be useful to develop and implement evidence-based procedures to counteract GBDH (see Briner and Rousseau, 2011 ). To build the networks necessary for such collaborative alliances, public and private initiative must be taken (see Lee, 2018 ). Congresses and events that approach gender issues in organizations and aim to build bridges between the industry and the academia can offer opportunities for collaboration to occur. Finally, practitioners must gain awareness of gender issues in the workplace, and organizational-feminist scholars should write and reach for the practitioner audience as well.

A Small Help to Begin With: The Gender-Equality Starters' Toolkit

We know that for practitioners and researchers that are not familiarized with the poststructuralist, intersectional, queer-feminist theories, our recommendations may sound quite cryptic. For this reason, we developed a very simplified starters' toolkit ( Table 1 ). In its “HRM diagnose” section, we suggest ways to develop a first diagnose of the organization in relation to gender issues. The “HRM interventions” section refers to actions that can be taken in case further intervention is needed. In the “applied-research” section, we provide applied-research ideas to better understand GBDH and develop evidence-based tools for HRM. Finally, in the “references and resources” section we include references that support and complement the suggestions provided. Each row of the toolkit refers to one of the components of our model (health and occupational well-being were grouped together). As mentioned, the aim of this toolkit is to provide material for a first approach to GBDH in organizations, and inspire those interested in conducting applied research on GBDH in the workplace.

Table 1 . Recommendations for HRM practitioners and applied researchers: a starters' toolkit.

A Change of Perspective: Looking at the Organization with Queer-Feminist Lens

Change organizational politics, change the organization.

Organizational politics result from the interplay of discursive practices and power negotiations, and refer to who and how is determining the terms of these negotiations ( Mumby, 1987 , 2001 ). To understand organizational politics, the hegemonic discourse has to be analyzed utilizing deconstructive lens that uncover the operating power dynamics (e.g., Benschop and Doorewaard, 1998 ; Dougherty and Goldstein Hode, 2016 ). In other words, when deconstructing the organizational discourse, the researcher or practitioner analyzes both the content and structural elements of the particular text (see Peterson and Albrecht, 1999 ; Buzzanell and Liu, 2005 ). Organizational-text examples are: the sexual harassment policy of the organization, brochures from the last organizational-change campaign, the transcript of interviews on gender issues, the chart of values of the firm. The analysis of this material allows to observe the way gender issues are approached and defined (or not approached nor defined), to develop a first diagnose and lines of action (for an example see Dougherty and Goldstein Hode, 2016 ). Some questions that may help in the analysis are:

How is gender defined? (Whose gender is [not] validated?),

What actions or behaviors are constitutive of GBDH in this organization? (What forms of aggression and discrimination are hence allowed?),

What are the procedures if action is to be taken? (What is left out of procedure leaving space for leaks or inadequacies?), and

What is the organizational history in relation to GBDH claims? (Who has enjoyed impunity? Whose claims are [not] listened to?).

For example, the researcher or practitioner may realize that the sexual-harassment policy of a particular organization refers to cisgender individuals only. Moreover, it may be that this policy defines GBDH as harassment of men against women, excluding same-sex sexual harassment (see Stockdale et al., 1999 ). Furthermore, it may become evident that this policy is framed in a discourse of binary logics that serve to blame the victims and victimize harassers (see Dougherty and Goldstein Hode, 2016 ). Finally, after a follow-up of archived organization's processes, it may come out that harassers have historically enjoyed impunity (see Calafell, 2014 ). This initial analysis might be useful to develop a plan for change. Continuing with the example, this policy may be redefined so that it adopts an integrative conception of gender. In addition, it can be adapted to include cases of same-sex sexual harassment. It can be also reframed using a discourse that allows fairness for all parties involved. Finally, cases from the past may be analyzed to avoid committing old mistakes in the future, and if some of these cases are recent, rectification may be considered.

Reading Between the Lines: Disguised Forms of GBDH

Bullying and mobbing as disguised gbdh.

We argue that at least some workplace mistreatment that appears as “gender neutral” is actually gendered. Available evidence points to a higher frequency of bullying/mobbing against women and the LGBTQ in the workplace ( Rospenda et al., 2008 , 2009 ; Grant et al., 2011 ; Hoel et al., 2017 ). Hence, once data on workplace mistreatment is raised, it is advisable to evaluate gender disparities (e.g., statistically comparing means) that may point to cases of disguised GBDH. The importance of addressing disguised GBDH (i.e., “sexist” mobbing and bullying) lies on solving the problem (i.e., mistreatment) at its roots. According to our model, if sexist OCCPP are intervened and changed, their consequences (i.e., overt and disguised forms of GBDH) should disappear.

Disguised GBDH at the Task Level

We also believe that disguised GBDH might take place through task allocation processes. In other words, it may be that the processes of task allocation are such that they keep gender minorities away from career-development opportunities. Evidence signaling that women receive less challenging tasks that are relevant for career development suggests that the process of task allocation is not gender neutral ( de Pater et al., 2009 ). There is also research on the effects of illegitimate tasks that suggests that their assignation to individuals in organizations may be gendered ( Omansky et al., 2016 ). Illegitimate tasks are perceived as unreasonable and/or unnecessary by the person that undertakes them, and constitute a task-level stressor ( Semmer et al., 2010 , 2015 ). It was found that illegitimate tasks exert a stronger negative effect on perceptions of effort-reward imbalance (ERI) among male than female professionals ( Omansky et al., 2016 ). One explanation is that women are socialized to undertake these tasks, which is why they feel less disrupted by them ( Omansky et al., 2016 ). However, if this causes women to undertake more illegitimate tasks than men, that might bring negative consequences for their occupational development and well-being. Available evidence shows no gender differences in the reports of illegitimate tasks between women and men (see Semmer et al., 2010 , 2015 ; Omansky et al., 2016 ). However, it is unclear if this is because women do not perceive the tasks they undertake to be illegitimate, or if there is no difference de facto . To our knowledge, there is no evidence on illegitimate tasks assigned to LGBTQ individuals. We think that the findings on task-allocation and illegitimate-tasks call for more research in this subject, especially regarding the role of illegitimate tasks and task-allocation processes for the career development of women and the LGBTQ.

Lavender Over the Glass Ceiling

It is important to evaluate if, when, and what kind of leadership positions are available for gender minorities in organizations. This includes spotting cases when a single person or a small group is tokenized and expected to compensate for a lack of diversity of the whole organization (see Benschop and Doorewaard, 1998 ). The glass ceiling in the case of women and lavender ceiling in the case of LGBTQ individuals refer to the burdens faced by these groups to reach leadership positions as a consequence of sexism in organizations ( Hill, 2009 ; Ezzedeen et al., 2015 ). There is also evidence that female executives are appointed to leadership positions when odds of failing are high ( Ryan and Haslam, 2005 ). Regarding the LGBTQ, it is necessary to raise more evidence on the factors that make it possible for them to break through the lavender ceiling ( Gedro, 2010 ).

Limitations of This Study and Future Research

Our model was developed based on the review of available literature. The fact that it is based on secondary sources leaves space for bias and calls for its empirical testing. The mediation path that links the antecedents and consequences of GBDH should be tested in longitudinal studies, and the moderations proposed can be better assessed utilizing experimental designs. In this paper we argued for an integrative conception of gender in the HRM approach to GBDH. Nevertheless, data on the experiences of the LGBTQ in the workplace are mostly based on small samples, especially for the transgender. In addition, although we discussed the constructed nature of categories and pointed to their limitations, we considered women and the LGBTQ as relatively stable concepts. The experience of women and the LGBTQ greatly differs when looking to the heterogeneity between and within these groups. We thematized intersectionality mostly referring to sex assigned at birth, gender identity, and sexual orientation, and thus acknowledge our difficulty to account for exclusion dynamics involving identities in the intersection of race, gender, ableness, body form, and class. More research that focuses on these groups (e.g., transgender people of color) is needed. Finally, we made conjectures on the role that task-allocation processes may play as disguised GBDH that needs to be tested empirically as well. We think that since overt expressions of GBDH are in the decline in western workplaces, it is necessary to reach for gendered practices that disadvantage women and the LGBTQ in organizations.

Conclusions

There is a potential for synergy when HRM considers the needs of women and people from the LGBTQ community together, especially to propitiate gender equality and counteract gender-based discrimination and harassment. To start, organizational resources can be employed to neutralize the mechanisms through which gender oppression acts against women and members from the LGBTQ community. In this way, actions for gender equality help create safe spaces for both groups. In addition, framing gender and sexuality in inclusive ways helps dismantle heterosexist, cissexist, and monosexist paradigms that contribute to create discriminatory and harassing workplaces. Finally, queer and feminist perspectives should be integrated with the intersectional approach to counteract discrimination against those in the intersection of multiple marginalized identities. Hence, the needs of people of all genders, people of color, disabled people, people with different body shapes, and people with different cultural backgrounds are made visible and addressed. This assists in developing truly inclusive and respectful workplace environments in which workers can feel safe to be themselves and unleash their full potential.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed to the definition of the subject and the development of the hypotheses and model presented. CG drafted the manuscript and KO provided close support and supervision during the writing process and conducted revisions at all stages of the manuscript development. All authors contributed to the manuscript revision and approved the submitted version.

The authors received no specific funding for this work. CG acknowledges a doctoral scholarship (research grant) from the German Academic Exchange Service (Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, DAAD).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acker, J. (2006). Inequality regimes. Gender Soc. 20, 441–464. doi: 10.1177/0891243206289499

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ahmed, A. M., Andersson, L., and Hammarstedt, M. (2013). Are gay men and lesbians discriminated against in the hiring process? South. Econ. J. 79, 565–585. doi: 10.4284/0038-4038-2011.317

Ali, S., and Coate, K. (2012). Impeccable advice: supporting women academics through supervision and mentoring. Gend. Educ. 25, 23–36. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2012.742219

Avery, D. R. (2011). Support for diversity in organizations. Organ. Psychol. Rev. 1, 239–256. doi: 10.1177/2041386611402115

Avina, C., and O'Donohue, W. (2002). Sexual harassment and PTSD: is sexual harassment diagnosable trauma? J. Trauma. Stress 15, 69–75. doi: 10.1023/A:1014387429057

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Badgett, M. V. L., Durso, L., Kastanis, A., and Mallory, C. (2013). The Business Impact of LGBT-Supportive Policies. Los Angeles, CA: The Williams Institute.

Google Scholar

Bajdo, L. M., and Dickson, M. W. (2001). Perceptions of organizational culture and women's advancement in organizations: a cross-cultural examination. Sex Roles 45, 399–414. doi: 10.1023/A:1014365716222

Basford, T. E., Offermann, L. R., and Behrend, T. S. (2014). Do you see what i see? Perceptions of gender microaggressions in the workplace. Psychol. Women Q. 38, 340–349. doi: 10.1177/0361684313511420

Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 42, 155–162. doi: 10.1037/h0036215

Bendl, R. (2000). Gendering organization studies: a guide for reading gender subtexts in organizational theories. Finish J. Bus. Econ. 373–393.

Bendl, R. (2008). Gender subtexts – reproduction of exclusion in organizational discourse. Br. J. Manage. 19, S50–S64. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00571.x

Bendl, R., Fleischmann, A., and Walenta, C. (2008). Diversity management discourse meets queer theory. Gender Manage. 23, 382–394. doi: 10.1108/17542410810897517

Benschop, Y., and Doorewaard, H. (1998). Covered by equality: the gender subtext of organizations. Organ. Stud. 19, 787–805. doi: 10.1177/017084069801900504

Benschop, Y., and Doorewaard, H. (2012). Gender subtext revisited. Equal. Divers. Inclusion Int. J. 31, 225–235. doi: 10.1108/02610151211209081

Berdahl, J. L. (2007). The sexual harassment of uppity women. J. Appl. Psychol. 92, 425–437. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.425

Bowling, N. A., and Beehr, T. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim's perspective: a theoretical model and meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 91, 998–1012. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.998

Briner, R. B., and Rousseau, D. M. (2011). Evidence-based I–O psychology: not there yet. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 4, 3–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01287.x

Buchanan, N. T., and Ormerod, A. J. (2002). Racialized sexual harassment in the lives of African American women. Women Ther. 25, 107–124. doi: 10.1300/J015v25n03_08

Burn, S. M., Kadlec, K., and Rexer, R. (2005). Effects of subtle heterosexism on gays, lesbians, bisexuals. J. Homosex. 49, 23–38. doi: 10.1300/J082v49n02_02

Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity . New York, NY; London: Routledge.

Buzzanell, P. M., and Liu, M. (2005). Struggling with maternity leave policies and practices: a poststructuralist feminist analysis of gendered organizing. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 33, 1–25. doi: 10.1080/0090988042000318495

Calafell, B. M. (2014). Did it happen because of your race or sex?: university sexual harassment policies and the move against intersectionality. Front. J. Women Stud. 35, 75–95.doi: 10.1353/fro.2014.0034

Cameron, E., and Green, M. (2009). Making Sense of Change Management: A Complete Guide to the Models, Tools & Techniques of Organizational Change, 2nd Edn. London; Philadelphia: Kogan Page.

Campbell, B., Schellenberg, E. G., and Senn, C. Y. (1997). Evaluating measures of contemporary sexism. Psychol. Women Q. 21, 89–102. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00102.x

Caroly, S. (2011). How police officers and nurses regulate combined domestic and paid workloads to manage schedules: a gender analysis. Work 40(Suppl 1):S71–82. doi: 10.3233/WOR-2011-1269

Carrington, K., Mcintosh, A., and Scott, J. (2010). Globalization, frontier masculinities and violence: booze, blokes and brawls. Br. J. Criminol. 50, 393–413. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azq003

Carrotte, E. R., Vella, A. M., Bowring, A. L., Douglass, C., Hellard, M. E., and Lim, M. S. C. (2016). “I am yet to encounter any survey that actually reflects my life”: a qualitative study of inclusivity in sexual health research. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 16:86. doi: 10.1186/s12874-016-0193-4

Chan, D. K.-S., Chow, S. Y., Lam, C. B., and Cheung, S. F. (2008). Examining the job-related, psychological, and physical outcomes of workplace sexual harassment: a meta-analytic review. Psychol. Women Q. 32, 362–376. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00451.x

Chan, P. W. (2013). Queer eye on a ‘straight’ life: deconstructing masculinities in construction. Construct. Manage. Econ. 31, 816–831. doi: 10.1080/01446193.2013.832028

Chapman, D. D., and Gedro, J. (2009). Queering the HRD curriculum: preparing students for success in the diverse workforce. Adv. Dev. Hum. Resour. 11, 95–108. doi: 10.1177/1523422308329091

Cho, S., Crenshaw, K. W., and McCall, L. (2013). Toward a field of intersectionality studies: theory, applications, and praxis. Signs J. Women Cult. Soc. 38, 785–810. doi: 10.1086/669608

Cogin, J. A., and Fish, A. (2009). An empirical investigation of sexual harassment and work engagement: surprising differences between men and women. J. Manage. Organ. 15, 47–61. doi: 10.1017/S183336720000287X

Colvin, R. (2015). Shared workplace experiences of lesbian and gay police officers in the United Kingdom. Policing 38, 333–349. doi: 10.1108/PIJPSM-11-2014-0121

Connell, R. (2006). Glass ceilings or gendered institutions? Mapping the gender regimes of public sector worksites. Public Adm. Rev. 66, 837–849. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00652.x

Cook, A., and Glass, C. (2016). Do women advance equity? The effect of gender leadership composition on LGBT-friendly policies in American firms. Hum. Relat. 69, 1431–1456. doi: 10.1177/0018726715611734

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University Chicago Legal Forum 1989, 139–167.

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Rev. 43, 1241–1299. doi: 10.2307/1229039

Cunningham, G. B. (2008). Creating and sustaining gender diversity in sport organizations. Sex Roles 58, 136–145. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9312-3

Dahlborg-Lyckhage, E., and Pilhammar-Anderson, E. (2009). Predominant discourses in Swedish nursing. Policy Politics Nurs. Pract. 10, 163–171. doi: 10.1177/1527154409338493

Dashper, K. (2018). Challenging the gendered rhetoric of success? The limitations of women-only mentoring for tackling gender inequality in the workplace. Gender Work Organ. 4:139. doi: 10.1111/gwao.12262

Davis, G. K. (2017). Creating a roadmap to a LGBTQ affirmative action scheme: an article on parallel histories, the diversity rationale, and escaping strict scrutiny. Natl. Black Law J. 26, 43–84. Available online at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9925t9sp

de Pater, I. E., van Vianen, A. E. M., and Bechtoldt, M. N. (2009). Gender differences in job challenge: a matter of task allocation. Gender Work Organ. 39:1538. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00477.x

Denissen, A. M., and Saguy, A. C. (2014). Gendered homophobia and the contradictions of workplace discrimination for women in the building trades. Gender Soc. 28, 381–403. doi: 10.1177/0891243213510781

Devonish, D. (2013). Workplace bullying, employee performance and behaviors. Empl. Relat. 35, 630–647. doi: 10.1108/ER-01-2013-0004

Donovan, R. A., Galban, D. J., Grace, R. K., Bennett, J. K., and Felicié, S. Z. (2013). Impact of racial macro- and microaggressions in Black women's lives. J. Black Psychol. 39, 185–196. doi: 10.1177/0095798412443259

Döring, N. (2013). Zur operationalisierung von geschlecht im fragebogen : probleme und lösungsansätze aus sicht von mess-, umfrage-, gender- und queer-theorie. Gender 2, 94–113. Available online at: https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/39660

Dougherty, D. S., and Goldstein Hode, M. (2016). Binary logics and the discursive interpretation of organizational policy: making meaning of sexual harassment policy. Hum. Relat. 69, 1729–1755. doi: 10.1177/0018726715624956

Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., and Notelaers, G. (2009). Measuring exposure to bullying and harassment at work: validity, factor structure and psychometric properties of the negative acts questionnaire-revised. Work Stress 23, 24–44. doi: 10.1080/02678370902815673

Eliason, M. J., Dejoseph, J., Dibble, S., Deevey, S., and Chinn, P. (2011). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning nurses' experiences in the workplace. J. Profession. Nurs. 27, 237–244. doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2011.03.003

Else-Quest, N. M., and Hyde, J. S. (2016a). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research. Psychol. Women Q. 40, 155–170. doi: 10.1177/0361684316629797

Else-Quest, N. M., and Hyde, J. S. (2016b). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research. Psychol. Women Q. 40, 319–336. doi: 10.1177/0361684316647953

Ericksen, J. A., and Schultheiss, D. E. P. (2009). Women pursuing careers in trades and construction. J. Career Dev. 36, 68–89. doi: 10.1177/0894845309340797

Estrada, A. X., Olson, K. J., Harbke, C. R., and Berggren, A. W. (2011). Evaluating a brief scale measuring psychological climate for sexual harassment. Military Psychol. 23, 410–432. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2011.589353

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2014). Violence Against Women: An EU-Wide Survey; Results at a Glance. Dignity. Luxembourg: Public Office of the European Union. Available online at http://publications.europa.eu/de/publication-detail/-/publication/42467476-532b-405e-a6f7-a80c5b48babc

Ezzedeen, S. R., Budworth, M.-H., and Baker, S. D. (2015). The Glass ceiling and executive careers: still an issue for pre-career women. J. Career Dev. 42, 355–369. doi: 10.1177/0894845314566943

Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hulin, C. L., Gelfand, M. J., and Magley, V. J. (1997). Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: a test of an integrated model. J. Appl. Psychol. 82, 578–589. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.82.4.578

Fitzgerald, L. F., Magley, V. J., Drasgow, F., and Waldo, C. R. (1999). Measuring sexual harassment in the military: the sexual experiences questionnaire (SEQ—DoD). Milit. Psychol. 11, 243–263. doi: 10.1207/s15327876mp1103_3

Flanders, C. E. (2015). Bisexual health: a daily diary analysis of stress and anxiety. Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. 37, 319–335. doi: 10.1080/01973533.2015.1079202

Franke, K. M. (1997). What's wrong with sexual harassment? Stanford Law Rev. 49, 691–772. doi: 10.2307/1229336

Galupo, M. P., and Resnick, C. A. (2016). “Experiences of LGBT microaggressions in the workplace: implications for policy,” in Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues in Organizations , eds K. Thomas (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 271–287.

Gardiner, M., and Tiggemann, M. (1999). Gender differences in leadership style, job stress and mental health in male-and female-dominated industries. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 72, 301–315. doi: 10.1348/096317999166699

Gartner, R. E., and Sterzing, P. R. (2016). Gender microaggressions as a gateway to sexual harassment and sexual assault. Affilia 31, 491–503. doi: 10.1177/0886109916654732

Gedro, J. (2010). The lavender ceiling atop the global closet: human resource development and lesbian expatriates. Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 9, 385–404. doi: 10.1177/1534484310380242

Gedro, J., and Mizzi, R. C. (2014). Feminist theory and queer theory. Adv. Dev. Hum. Resour. 16, 445–456. doi: 10.1177/1523422314543820

Gelfand, M. J., Fitzgerald, L. F., and Drasgow, F. (1995). The structure of sexual harassment: a confirmatory analysis across cultures and settings. J. Vocat. Behav. 47, 164–177. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1995.1033

Gibson, S. K. (2006). Mentoring of women faculty: the role of organizational politics and culture. Innovat. Higher Educ. 31, 63–79. doi: 10.1007/s10755-006-9007-7

Glick, P., and Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism. Psychol. Women Q. 21, 119–135. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00104.x

Glick, P., and Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. Am. Psychol. 56, 109–118. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109

Glick, P., and Fiske, S. T. (2011). Ambivalent sexism revisited. Psychol. Women Q. 35, 530–535. doi: 10.1177/0361684311414832

Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J. L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 79, 763–775. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.763

Goldberg, A. E., and Smith, J. Z. (2013). Work conditions and mental health in lesbian and gay dual-earner parents. Fam. Relat. 62, 727–740. doi: 10.1111/fare.12042

CrossRef Full Text

Grant, J. M., Mottet, L. A., Tanis, J., Harrison, J., Herman, J. L., and Keisling, M. (2011). Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey . Washington, DC: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

Gruber, J. E. (2016). The impact of male work environments and organizational policies on women's experiences of sexual harassment. Gender Soc. 12, 301–320. doi: 10.1177/0891243298012003004

Habarth, J. M. (2013). Development of the heteronormative attitudes and beliefs scale. Psychol. Sex. 6, 166–188. doi: 10.1080/19419899.2013.876444

Haile, G. A. (2012). Unhappy working with men? Workplace gender diversity and job-related well-being in britain. IZA discussion paper No. 4077. Labour Econ. 19, 329–350. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2012.02.002

Hanappi-Egger, E. (2013). Gender and diversity from a management perspective: synonyms or complements? J. Organ. Transform. Soc. Change 3, 121–134. doi: 10.1386/jots.3.2.121_1

Hennekam, S. A. M., and Ladge, J. J. (2017). When lesbians become mothers: Identity validation and the role of diversity climate. J. Vocat. Behav. 103, 40–55. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2017.08.006

Hill, R. J. (2009). Incorporating queers: blowback, backlash, and other forms of resistance to workplace diversity initiatives that support sexual minorities. Adv. Dev. Hum. Resour. 11, 37–53. doi: 10.1177/1523422308328128

Hirsh, E., and Cha, Y. (2016). Mandating change. Indust. Labor Relat. Rev. 70, 42–72. doi: 10.1177/0019793916668880

Hoel, H., Lewis, D., and Einarsdottir, A. (2017). Debate: bullying and harassment of lesbians, gay men and bisexual employees: findings from a representative british national study. Public Money Manage. 37, 312–314. doi: 10.1080/09540962.2017.1328169

Hooks, B. (2000). Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

Horn, J. E., Taris, T. W., Schaufeli, W. B., and Schreurs, P. J. G. (2004). The Structure of Occupational Well-Being: A Study Among Dutch Teachers. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 77, 365–375. doi: 10.1348/0963179041752718

ILGA-Europe (2016). Annual Review of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe. Available online at https://www.ilga-europe.org/resources/rainbow-europe/2016

ILGA-Europe (2017). Annual Review of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe. Available online at https://www.ilga-europe.org/resources/rainbow-europe/rainbow-europe-2017

International Commission of Jurists (2009). Yogyakarta principles on the application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity. Asia Pacific J. Hum. Rights Law 9, 86–113. doi: 10.1163/157181509789025200

International Labour Office (2016). Women at Work: Trends 2016. Geneva: International Labour Office.

Jansen, W. S., Otten, S., and Van Der Zee, K. I. (2015). Being different at work: how gender dissimilarity relates to social inclusion and absenteeism. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 20, 879–893. doi: 10.1177/1368430215625783

Jensen, R., Thursby, J., and Thursby, M. (2010). University-Industry Spillovers, Government Funding, and Industrial Consulting . Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Khan, M., Ilcisin, M., and Saxton, K. (2017). Multifactorial discrimination as a fundamental cause of mental health inequities. Int. J. Equity Health 16:43. doi: 10.1186/s12939-017-0532-z

Khubchandani, J., and Price, J. H. (2015). Workplace harassment and morbidity among US adults: results from the national health interview survey. J. Community Health 40, 555–563. doi: 10.1007/s10900-014-9971-2

Klein, U. (2016). Gender equality and diversity politics in higher education: conflicts, challenges and requirements for collaboration. Women's Stud. Int. Forum 54, 147–156. doi: 10.1016/j.wsif.2015.06.017

Kleiner, B. H., and Takeyama, D. (1998). How to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. Equal Opportunities Int. 17, 6–12. doi: 10.1108/02610159810785539

Konrad, A. M., Cannings, K., and Goldberg, C. B. (2010). Asymmetrical demography effects on psychological climate for gender diversity: differential effects of leader gender and work unit gender composition among Swedish doctors. Hum. Relat. 63, 1661–1685. doi: 10.1177/0018726710369397

Lapierre, L. M., Spector, P. E., and Leck, J. D. (2005). Sexual versus nonsexual workplace aggression and victims' overall job satisfaction: a meta-analysis. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 10, 155–169. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.10.2.155

LaSala, M. C., Jenkins, D. A., Wheeler, D. P., and Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I. (2008). LGBT faculty, research, and researchers: risks and rewards. J. Gay Lesbian Soc. Services 20, 253–267. doi: 10.1080/10538720802235351

Lee, K.-J. (2018). Strategic human resource management for university-industry collaborations in Korea: financial incentives for academic faculty and employment security of industry liaison offices. Technol. Anal. Strat. Manage . 30, 461–472. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2017.1337885

Leskinen, E. A., and Cortina, L. M. (2013). Dimensions of disrespect. Psychol. Women Q. 38, 107–123. doi: 10.1177/0361684313496549

Leskinen, E. A., Cortina, L. M., and Kabat, D. B. (2011). Gender harassment: broadening our understanding of sex-based harassment at work. Law Hum. Behav. 35, 25–39. doi: 10.1007/s10979-010-9241-5

Liasidou, A. (2013). Intersectional understandings of disability and implications for a social justice reform agenda in education policy and practice. Disability Soc. 28, 299–312. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2012.710012

Liddle, B. J., Luzzo, D. A., Hauenstein, A. L., and Schuck, K. (2004). Construction and validation of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered climate inventory. J. Career Assessm. 12, 33–50. doi: 10.1177/1069072703257722

Lloren, A., and Parini, L. (2017). How LGBT-supportive workplace policies shape the experience of lesbian, gay men, and bisexual employees. Sexuality Research Soc. Policy 14, 289–299. doi: 10.1007/s13178-016-0253-x

Lombardi, E. L., Wilchins, R. A., Priesing, D., and Malouf, D. (2002). Gender violence: transgender experiences with violence and discrimination. J. Homosex. 42, 89–101. doi: 10.1300/J082v42n01_05

Manuel, S. K., Howansky, K., Chaney, K. E., and Sanchez, D. T. (2017). No rest for the stigmatized: a model of organizational health and workplace sexism (OHWS). Sex Roles 77, 697–708. doi: 10.1007/s11199-017-0755-x

Maranto, C. L., and Griffin, A. E. C. (2011). The antecedents of a ‘chilly climate’ for women faculty in higher education. Human Relat. 64, 139–159. doi: 10.1177/0018726710377932

Marinucci, M. (2016). Feminism is Queer: The Intimate Connection Between Queer and Feminist Theory . Second edition. London: Zed Books.

Mayes, B. T., and Allen, R. W. (1977). Toward a definition of organizational politics. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2, 672–678. doi: 10.5465/amr.1977.4406753

McAllister, C. A., Harold, R. D., Ahmedani, B. K., and Cramer, E. P. (2009). Targeted mentoring: evaluation of a program. J. Soc. Work Educ. 45, 89–104. doi: 10.5175/JSWE.2009.200700107

McCall, L. (2005). The Complexity of Intersectionality. Signs 30, 1771–1800. doi: 10.1086/426800

McDonald, P., Charlesworth, S., and Graham, T. (2015). Developing a framework of effective prevention and response strategies in workplace sexual harassment. Asia Pacific J. Hum. Resour. 53, 41–58. doi: 10.1111/1744-7941.12046

Mehta, C. M., and Keener, E. (2017). Oh the places we'll go! where will Sandra Bem's work lead us next? Sex Roles 76, 637–642. doi: 10.1007/s11199-017-0735-1

Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement 42, 34–36. doi: 10.1002/pfi.4930420508

Monro, S. (2005). Beyond male and female: poststructuralism and the spectrum of gender. Int. J. Transgender. 8, 3–22. doi: 10.1300/J485v08n01_02

Moodley, J., and Graham, L. (2015). The importance of intersectionality in disability and gender studies. Agenda 29, 24–33. doi: 10.1080/10130950.2015.1041802

Moore, J. (2017). A Phenomenological Study of Lesbian, and Gay People in Leadership Roles: How Perspectives and Priorities Shift in the Workplace as Sexual Orientation Evolves Through Social Constructs . The Faculty of the School of Education, University of San Francisco. Available online at: https://repository.usfca.edu/diss/405

Mor Barak, M. E., Cherin, D. A., and Berkman, S. (1998). Organizational and personal dimensions in diversity climate: ethnic and gender differences in employee perceptions. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 34, 82–104. doi: 10.1177/0021886398341006

Morrison, M. A., Morrison, T. G., Pope, G. A., and Zumbo, B. D. (1999). An investigation of measures of modern and old-fashioned sexism. Soc. Indic. Res. 48, 39–49. doi: 10.1023/A:1006873203349

Mumby, D. K. (1987). The political function of narrative in organizations. Commun. Monogr. 54, 113–127. doi: 10.1080/03637758709390221

Mumby, D. K. (1996). Feminism, postmodernism, and organizational communication studies. Manage. Commun. Quart. 9, 259–295. doi: 10.1177/0893318996009003001

Mumby, D. K. (2001). “Power and politics,” in The New Handbook of Organizational Communication: Advances in Theory, Research, and Methods , eds M. J. Fredric, and L. L. Putnam (Thousand Oaks, CA; London: Sage Publications), 586–624. doi: 10.4135/9781412986243.n15

Nadal, K. L., Davidoff, K. C., Davis, L. S., and Wong, Y. (2014). Emotional, behavioral, and cognitive reactions to microaggressions: transgender perspectives. Psychol. Sex. Orient. Gender Divers. 1, 72–81. doi: 10.1037/sgd0000011

Nadal, K. L., Issa, M.-A., Leon, J., Meterko, V., Wideman, M., and Wong, Y. (2011). Sexual orientation microaggressions: death by a thousand cuts for lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. J. LGBT Youth 8, 234–259. doi: 10.1080/19361653.2011.584204

Newman, P. K. (2018). Training Must be a Part of Every Employer's Action Plan to Stop Sexual Harassment in Their Workplaces . Columbus, OH: Ohio State Bar Association.

Nishii, L. H. (2013). The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender-diverse groups. Acad. Manage. J. 56, 1754–1774. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.0823

Nourafshan, A. M. (2018). From the closet to the boardroom: regulating LGBT diversity on corporate boards. Albany Law Rev. 81, 439–487.

Oliver, C. (1992). The antecedents of deinstitutionalization. Organ. Stud. 13, 563–588. doi: 10.1177/017084069201300403

Omansky, R., Eatough, E. M., and Fila, M. J. (2016). Illegitimate tasks as an impediment to job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation: moderated mediation effects of gender and effort-reward imbalance. Front. Psychol. 7:1818. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01818

Owen, J., Tao, K., and Rodolfa, E. (2010). Microaggressions and women in short-term psychotherapy: initial evidence. Couns. Psychol. 38, 923–946. doi: 10.1177/0011000010376093

Parker, M. (2002). Queering management and organization. Gender Work Org. 9, 146–166. doi: 10.1111/1468-0432.00153

Peterson, L. W., and Albrecht, T. L. (1999). Where gender/power/politics collide. J. Manage. Inquiry 8, 168–181. doi: 10.1177/105649269982011

Pichler, S., Ruggs, E., and Trau, R. (2017). Worker outcomes of LGBT-supportive policies: a cross-level model. Equal. Div. Incl. Int. J. 36, 17–32. doi: 10.1108/EDI-07-2016-0058

Porter, J. J., and Birdi, K. (2018). 22 Reasons why collaborations fail: lessons from water innovation research. Environ. Sci. Policy 89, 100–108. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2018.07.004

Pryor, J. B., Lavite, C. M., and Stoller, L. M. (1993). A social psychological analysis of sexual harassment: the person/situation interaction. J. Vocat. Behav. 42, 68–83. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1993.1005

Rabelo, V. C., and Cortina, L. M. (2014). Two sides of the same coin: gender harassment and heterosexist harassment in LGBQ work lives. Law Hum. Behav. 38, 378–391. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000087

Rajalo, S., and Vadi, M. (2017). University-industry innovation collaboration: reconceptualization. Technovation 62–63, 42–54. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2017.04.003

Riger, S. (1991). Gender dilemmas in sexual harassment policies and procedures. Am. Psychol. 46, 497–505. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.46.5.497

Rospenda, K. M., Fujishiro, K., Shannon, C. A., and Richman, J. A. (2008). Workplace harassment, stress, and drinking behavior over time: gender differences in a national sample. Addict. Behav. 33, 964–967. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.02.009

Rospenda, K. M., Richman, J. A., and Shannon, C. A. (2009). Prevalence and mental health correlates of harassment and discrimination in the workplace: results from a national study. J. Interpers. Violence 24, 819–843. doi: 10.1177/0886260508317182

Ryan, M. K., and Haslam, S. A. (2005). The Glass cliff: evidence that women are over-represented in precarious leadership positions. Br. J. Manage. 16, 81–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00433.x

Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational Culture. Am. Psychol. 45, 109–119. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.109

Schein, E. H. (1996). Culture: the missing concept in organization studies. Adm. Sci. Q. 41:229. doi: 10.2307/2393715

Seelman, K. L., Woodford, M. R., and Nicolazzo, Z. (2017). Victimization and microaggressions targeting LGBTQ college students: gender identity as a moderator of psychological distress. J. Ethnic Cultural Diversity Soc. Work 26, 112–125. doi: 10.1080/15313204.2016.1263816

Semmer, N. K., Jacobshagen, N., Meier, L. L., Elfering, A., Beehr, T. A., Kälin, W., et al. (2015). Illegitimate tasks as a source of work stress. Work Stress 29, 32–56. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2014.1003996

Semmer, N. K., Tschan, F., Meier, L. L., Facchin, S., and Jacobshagen, N. (2010). Illegitimate tasks and counterproductive work behavior. Appl. Psychol. 59, 70–96. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00416.x

Senyonga, M. (2017). Microaggressions, marginality, and mediation at the intersections: experiences of black fat women in academia. Interactions UCLA J. Edu. Inform. Stud. 13, 1–23. Available online at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9934r39k

Silverschanz, P., Cortina, L. M., Konik, J., and Magley, V. J. (2008). Slurs, snubs, and queer jokes: incidence and impact of heterosexist harassment in academia. Sex Roles 58, 179–191. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9329-7

Sliter, M., Boyd, E., Sinclair, R., Cheung, J., and Mcfadden, A. (2014). Inching toward inclusiveness: diversity climate, interpersonal conflict and well-being in women nurses. Sex Roles 71, 43–54. doi: 10.1007/s11199-013-0337-5

Sojo, V. E., Wood, R. E., and Genat, A. E. (2016). Harmful workplace experiences and women's occupational well-being. Psychol. Women Q. 40, 10–40. doi: 10.1177/0361684315599346

Stedham, Y., and Mitchell, M. C. (1998). Sexual harassment in casinos: effects on employee attitudes and behaviors. J. Gambling Stud. 14, 381–400. doi: 10.1023/A:1023025110307

Stockdale, M. S., Visio, M., and Batra, L. (1999). The sexual harassment of men: evidence for a broader theory of sexual harassment and sex discrimination. Psychol. Public Policy Law 5, 630–664. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.5.3.630

Stoll, L. C., Lilley, T. G., and Pinter, K. (2016). Gender-blind sexism and rape myth acceptance. Violence Against Women 23, 28–45. doi: 10.1177/1077801216636239

Stout, J. G., and Dasgupta, N. (2011). When he doesn't mean you: gender-exclusive language as ostracism. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 37, 757–769. doi: 10.1177/0146167211406434

Street, A. E., Gradus, J. L., Stafford, J., and Kelly, K. (2007). Gender differences in experiences of sexual harassment: data from a male-dominated environment. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 75, 464–474. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.75.3.464

Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., et al. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: implications for clinical practice. Am. Psychol. 62, 271–286. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.62.4.271

Taris, T. W., and Schaufeli, W. B. (2015). “Individual well-being and performance at work: a conceptual and theoretical overview,” in Well-Being and Performance at Work: The Role of Context , Current Issues in Work and Organizational Psychology. ed M. Van Veldhoven (London UA: Psychology Press), 15–34.

Tomic, M. (2011). Gender Mainstreaming in der EU [Elektronische Ressource]: Wirtschaftlicher Mehrwert oder Soziale Gerechtigkeit? Wiesbaden, Berlin [U.A.]: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Springer

van Amsterdam, N. (2013). Big fat inequalities, thin privilege: an intersectional perspective on ‘body size’. Eur. J. Women's Stud. 20, 155–169. doi: 10.1177/1350506812456461

Verloo, M. (2006). Multiple inequalities, intersectionality and the european union. Eur. J. Women's Stud. 13, 211–228. doi: 10.1177/1350506806065753

Vernallis, K. (1999). Bisexual Monogamy: twice the temptation but half the fun? J. Soc. Philos. 30, 347–368. doi: 10.1111/0047-2786.00022

Vijayasiri, G. (2008). Reporting sexual harassment: the importance of organizational culture and trust. Gender Issues 25, 43–61. doi: 10.1007/s12147-008-9049-5

Warr, P. (1990). The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. J. Occupation. Psychol. 63, 193–210. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00521.x

Wegner, R., and Wright, A. J. (2016). A psychometric evaluation of the homonegative microaggressions scale. J. Gay Lesbian Ment. Health 20, 299–318. doi: 10.1080/19359705.2016.1177627

Weiss, J. (2011). Reflective Paper: GL Versus BT: the archaeology of biphobia and transphobia within the U.S. Gay and Lesbian Community. J. Bisexual. 11, 498–502. doi: 10.1080/15299716.2011.620848

Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: hidden advantages for men in the “Female” Professions. Soc. Probl. 39, 253–267 doi: 10.2307/3096961

Williams, C. L. (2013). The glass escalator, revisited. Gender Soc. 27, 609–629. doi: 10.1177/0891243213490232

Williams, C. L. (2015). Crossing over: interdisciplinary research on men who do women's work. Sex Roles 72, 390–395. doi: 10.1007/s11199-015-0477-x

Woltersdorff, V. (2003). “(Lore Logorrhöe).queer theory and queer politics,” in Utopie Kreativ , 156, 914–913. Available online at: https://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/156_woltersdorff.pdf

Woodford, M. R., Howell, M. L., Silverschanz, P., and Yu, L. (2012). “That's so gay!”: Examining the covariates of hearing this expression among gay, lesbian, and bisexual college students. J. Am. Coll. Health 60, 429–434. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2012.673519

Woodhams, C., Lupton, B., and Cowling, M. (2015). The presence of ethnic minority and disabled men in feminised work: intersectionality, vertical segregation and the glass escalator. Sex Roles 72, 277–293. doi: 10.1007/s11199-014-0427-z

Wright, A. J., and Wegner, R. (2012). Homonegative microaggressions and their impact on LGB individuals: a measure validity study. J. LGBT Issues Couns. 6, 34–54. doi: 10.1080/15538605.2012.648578

Wright, T. (2013). Uncovering sexuality and gender: an intersectional examination of women's experience in UK construction. Construct. Manage. Econom. 31, 832–844. doi: 10.1080/01446193.2013.794297

Yavorsky, J. E. (2016). Cisgendered organizations: trans women and inequality in the workplace. Sociol Forum 31, 948–969. doi: 10.1111/socf.12291

Yoder, J. D. (1991). Rethinking tokenism. Gender Soc. 5, 178–192. doi: 10.1177/089124391005002003

Yoder, J. D., and Aniakudo, P. (1997). “Outsider Within” the firehouse: subordination and difference in the social interactions of african american women firefighters. Gender Soc. 11, 324–341 doi: 10.1177/089124397011003004

Yoder, J. D., and McDonald, T. W. (2016). Measuring sexist discrimination in the workplace. Psychol. Women Q. 22, 487–491. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00170.x

Keywords: diversity, gender equality, gender management, heteronormativity, heterosexism, human resources, intersectionality, LGBTQ

Citation: García Johnson CP and Otto K (2019) Better Together: A Model for Women and LGBTQ Equality in the Workplace. Front. Psychol. 10:272. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00272

Received: 21 February 2018; Accepted: 28 January 2019; Published: 20 February 2019.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2019 García Johnson and Otto. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Carolina Pía García Johnson, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity

Various organizational structures, processes, and practices are some of the issues which undermine gender equality. Women, just like men, have rewarding ideas if given opportunities to be heard. Female employees are made to live with aspects of discrimination, yet their work production capability is substantial. Much worse, human resource managers have a responsibility for handling this concern, yet they are not as influential as expected. The majority of recruiters’ practices are controlled by the aspects of decision-making, policies, and their respective enactments which affect training, hiring, promotion, and payments of employees. Negativity towards women make most proprietors fail to employ these mechanisms positively. The processes demean these individuals’ ability to influence and confidently shape most administrative constructions, which would equalize duties of the working environment. These processes cause job limitation and gender sensitivity concerns, which affect women the most. Work restriction is a gender sensitive issue preventing women from attaining their potential in employment.

Women are limited to certain types of jobs because of obstacles preventing them from becoming who they want in terms of pursuing their professions. Unfortunately, society influences the resistance of these individuals’ efforts in becoming reliable experts. Writing professions were considered male jobs, hence limiting women from expressing themselves through this niche (Woolf 1). In a speech delivered by Virginia Woolf, women struggle to be appreciated as professionals in the writing profession (Woolf 1). Talking about herself, she admits struggling to overcome formidable barriers by sharing her own experience and journey to become the writer she is (Madgavkar et al. 2). Woolf overcame this notion by first dealing with her own personality, which she refers to as “angel in the house” (Woolf 1). The affirmation reveals that women have a duty of incapacitating their boundaries if they should be accepted to take part in the profession, which is men-dominated. This, therefore, proves that women are confined to certain jobs, but can manage this problem if they are able to work beyond their personality.

Women have talents, considering every person is born with specific gifts, but a few manage to utilize them. Although being gifted and talented, Philis Wheatley did not thrive during her life in the 1700s because she was a slave who was not independent in decision-making (Walker 402). According to Walker’s assertion, she was a black sick woman who needed a servant of her own (Walker 403). If she were white, Walker suggests, Wheatley would be considered for her intellectual superiority, which would affect both genders positively (404). Poetry is another field which was dominated by the male gender in ancient Europe. From Walker’s revelation, Philis Wheatley was exceptionally gifted in poetry, but she could not express the talent professionally because men dominated her (Walker 407). Women are limited in jobs because they cannot overcome the hindrances to their success when they secure a place among the working class. With their talents, the majority do not favorably serve in the midst of male-dominated areas.

The women’s place in society during ancient times was to serve the household, as per the ancient society’s believes. Wheatley’s case applies here as well considering that, instead of using her talent to enrich herself, she died poor and with no friends (Walker 406). The above statement deduces that she was meaningful and impactful solemnly to her family. In ancient times, women were considered to have their rightful place at home. As any other woman of her period, she labored to give her family food, she would work strenuously, yet she had writing talent. It is not clear whether her husband was still living at this time, but it is evident she worked to serve her family on her own. From societal beliefs, she represents many women, who had a limited place in terms of serving in their area of professionalism. Females are, therefore, are given attention in the context of what they can serve conveniently, a fact that questions their ability to be effective. This cultural notion is what limits women in the context of what job they need or should be given when seeking employment.

Whether it is through cultural or societal command, limiting women to the jobs they can manage is an unworthy idea. In terms of achievement, women are rated low as compared to men (Madgavkar et al. 3). When they are undermined in their duties, women refrain from fully devoting to their work, a fact which further creates aspects of discrimination in society. When females are limited in terms of jobs, society tends to be exercising discrimination, a fact which should be avoided. (Madgavkar et al. 1). A part of society, divided in this respect, does not value women and discourages them from working to their capacity to serve the community. The repercussion for such an activity means women are irrelevant in their efforts to contribute to empowering others. The aspect of limiting women creates from attaining the work positions they deserve, make them appear unproductive and unqualified which might not be true.

The world is moving to the age of artificial intelligence, and limiting women in terms of job opportunities is one way restricting the rate of technology use in society. Various opportunities arise when people are subjected to reliable communication and implementation systems (Madgavkar et al. 1). Empowering women is another way of ensuring society is innovative and it vests everyone in terms of being useful in their professions. When females are restricted, they withhold the government’s efforts to serve its community suitably. Therefore, there is a need to ensure that society enjoys cohesiveness while attracting innovation by incorporating both the two genders in accessing job. Otherwise, many potential and valuable minds will disappear without utilizing their potential. As much as the limitation is against the feminine gender it affects the community by disrupting creativeness and modernization.

In conclusion, job limitations in the context of gender are a concern in the current society. Men are dominating job sectors, a fact, which makes women fail to execute their powers of innovation as expected. Working as a writer or a poet is an example of jobs which discouraged females such as Woolf and Wheatley who were writers, from achieving their potential because of their gender’s societal interferences. Women’s personalities and their environment act as obstacles in their strive to serve the community. Much worse, the aspect of limiting women causes the aspect of discrimination, which hinders an organization’s smooth progress. When it happens, society will prioritize one gender instead of utilizing them both. As an alternative to creating discrimination in terms of job limitations, it is essential to give the participants a chance to contribute in their capacity. Women are subjected to work limits because their male counterparts think they are not well endowed to serve them.

Works Cited

Madgavkar, Anu et al. “ The Future of Women at Work: Transitions in the Age of Automation .” McKinsey Global Institute . 2020. Web.

Quadlin, Natasha. “The Mark of a Woman’s Record: Gender and Academic Performance in Hiring.” American Sociological Review Journal, vol. 83, no. 2, 2018.

Walker, Alice. “In Search of Our Mothers’ Gardens.” Anthropology of African American Literary. 2020. Web.

Woolf, Virginia. “ Professions For Women .” Women’s Service League.  2020. Web.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, March 25). Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity. https://studycorgi.com/job-limitation-and-gender-sensitivity/

"Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity." StudyCorgi , 25 Mar. 2022, studycorgi.com/job-limitation-and-gender-sensitivity/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity'. 25 March.

1. StudyCorgi . "Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity." March 25, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/job-limitation-and-gender-sensitivity/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity." March 25, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/job-limitation-and-gender-sensitivity/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity." March 25, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/job-limitation-and-gender-sensitivity/.

This paper, “Job Limitation and Gender Sensitivity”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: March 25, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.