What about Your Kids and Your Husband? - Gender-Blind Sexism in Women Higher Education Administrators’ Narratives

Oct 15, 2026

Gender-blind sexism and resistance appear in women higher education administrators’ narratives, where systemic inequalities shape everyday leadership experiences. The study uses feminist narrative analysis to examine how participants interpret the intersection of gender and work, and how invisible or hard-to-detect sexism emerges through their stories. Findings highlight double-bind pressures and the emergence of transformative, feminist leadership styles. The research concludes with recommendations aimed at more equitable policies and practices in higher education settings.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction and Background

Conceptual Framework and Purpose

Double Binds and Gendered Leadership Research

Methodology

Research Question

“What about Your Kids and Your Husband?”: Gender-Blind Sexism in Women Higher Education Administrators’Narratives Jill Channing East Tennessee State University Women leaders report facing many systemic inequalities such as unequal family responsibilities, differing and unfair expectations of them as leaders, backbiting from colleagues and subordinates, and a lack ofsupport and encouragement. This qualitative research study’s conceptual framework hinges on feminist narrative analysis research, focusing on women administrators’perceptions of gender’s influences on their work experiences. Patterns in participants’ narratives reveal genderblind sexism, which is sexism that renders itself invisible or uneasily detectable, and a pattern of resistance to this and other oppressive experiences by developing overall transformative and feminist leadership styles. The purpose of this qualitative study was to better understand genderblind scripts revealed in participants’ stories about the intersections of gender and their work lives. Through sharing and analyzing participants’ narratives, this researcher derived recommendations for equitable policies and practices in higher education settings. Keywords: women higher education administrators; gender; leadership; women leaders; narrative analysis research; gender-blind sexism; feminist leadership ICPEL Education Leadership Review, Vol. 21, No. 1– December, 2020 ISSN: 1532-0723 © 2020 International Council of Professors of Educational Leadership Many research studies on women leaders compare women leaders to men leaders and describe gendered leadership stereotypes. Eagly and Johnson (1990) conducted a meta-analysis of the 162 available studies, conducted from 1961–1987, that compared men’s and women’s leadership styles. Eagly and Johnson found that leadership styles were gender stereotypic in laboratory experiments, and women tended to develop interpersonal and democratic styles while men tended to use task-oriented and authoritative approaches. Eagly and Karau (1991) conducted a second meta-analysis of 54 studies on men and women leaders in collaborative work settings, finding that men tended to take on leadership roles more than women did in short-term groups and groups completing tasks not requiring highly interactive collaborations. Appelbaum et al. (2003) and Kezar (2014) found that women were likely to serve as social leaders, encouraging harmony and understanding among group members and sharing perspectives. Many of these studies were conducted in laboratory settings with student participants rather than with actual leaders in realworld contexts. Researchers have made cases for gender-neutral forms of leadership and rejected stereotypical ideas of masculine and feminine leadership. For example, Van Engen et al.’s (2001) meta-analysis of studies published between 1987 and 2000 found that men and women leaders do not differ in many important respects such as style and career trajectories. Rather than classify leaders as displaying more masculine or feminine styles, and thus, reinforcing social constructions of being a woman or a man leader, researchers found that those described as “effective leaders”displayed the best qualities of both sexes’ “stereotypical” behaviors, making a case for androgynous leadership (Appelbaum et al., 2003; Helgesen, 2011; Sargent, 1981) . However, the vast majority of research on gender and leadership in the higher education context has sought to describe the differences in experience and approach of men and women leaders. Researchers found that women administrators tend to be less satisfied than men administrators because of salaries, lack of opportunities for promotions, and job duties (Fields, 2000; Fraser & Hodge, 2000; Redmond et al., 2017). Researchers have consistently discussed that women higher education leaders find themselves in a double bind: “As women, they are expected to be communal, collaborative, and democratic: but as manage

FAQs

What does the study mean by “gender-blind sexism”?

Gender-blind sexism is sexism that renders itself invisible or uneasily detectable, as revealed through patterns in participants’ narratives.

What is the study’s main purpose?

To better understand gender-blind scripts revealed in participants’ stories about the intersections of gender and their work lives.

How were participants selected for the study?

Participants were selected using convenience sampling and snowball sampling, where participants recommended others.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by CatatanPagi