'I wouldn't say it's sexism, except that ... It's all these little subtle things':healthcare scientists' accounts of gender in healthcare science laboratories

We explore healthcare scientists’ accounts of men in healthcare science laboratories. By focussing on subtle masculinist actions that women find disadvantageous to them, we seek to extend knowledge about women’s under-representation in senior positions in healthcare science – despite women being in the majority at junior levels. We maintain that healthcare science continues to be dominated by taken-for-granted masculinities that marginalize women, keeping them in their ‘place’. Our aim is to make visible the subtle practices that are normally invisible by showing masculinities in action. Principally using feminist analyses, our findings show that both women and men are often unaware of taken-for-granted masculinist actions, and even when women do notice, they rarely challenge the subtle sexist behaviour

Reducing the Endorsement of Sexism Using Experiential Learning

In two multipart studies, we tested the effectiveness of an experiential learning-based intervention (Workshop Activity for Gender Equity Simulation–Academic [WAGES-Academic]) to reduce sexism endorsement. We randomly assigned undergraduates to either WAGES ( n = 144) or one of two control conditions ( n = 268): one where participants received the same information as WAGES but without experiential learning or another that included an experiential group activity but no gender equity information. WAGES participants (vs. both controls) reported less endorsement of sexist beliefs after completing the activity and/or at a follow-up 7–11 days later as measured by the Modern Sexism (Study 1), Neo-sexism (Study 2), Hostile Sexism (Study 2), and Gender-Specific System Justification (Studies 1 and 2) scales. Both studies demonstrated that these effects were attributable to WAGES providing more information, evoking less reactance, eliciting more empathy, and instilling more self-efficacy compared to the other conditions. Results suggest that programs to reduce sexist beliefs will be successful only insofar as they invite access to discussion in such a way that does not elicit defensive denial of the problem, create a context in which participants are readily able to empathize with other, and instill feelings of self-efficacy that one can address the problem

Neosexism - Plus-Ca-Change, Plus Cest-Pareil

A scale designed to tap into a new type of gender prejudice, called neosexist beliefs, is proposed Two studies investigating antecedents and consequences of neosexism were conducted In the first study, a predictive model was tested with a sample of 130 male students. It was found, according to hypotheses, that considerations of collective interest (CI) and old-fashioned sexism had an impact on neosexism. However; only the latter and CI triggered opposition to affirmative action (AA). The second study evaluated the effects of Gland neosexism among a sample of 149 male workers employed in a firm where an exhaustive AA program was implemented. For example, it was found that support for the program in place and evaluations of women's qualifications were influenced both by neosexism and by CI. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed