Social psychological research suggests that workplace discrimination harms women’s self-confidence and mental health, which may lead them to remain silent or quit their jobs after facing discrimination. However, feminist scholarship argues that discrimination can generate feminist consciousness and resistance. To interrogate these conflicting expectations, we draw on in-depth interviews with professional women to examine exit, voice, and silence in discrimination’s aftermath. We find that some women remain silent or exit organizations in search of less hostile environments. Others, however, develop feminist consciousness, voice complaints, and sometimes accomplish hard-fought changes within their organizations. To explain these divergent responses, we identify support networks as a crucial mechanism. Support networks help women avoid self-blame and rumination by resolving the ambiguity that frequently obscures discrimination. Support networks also spread awareness of discrimination and generate feminist solidarity. In doing so, they encourage women to contest negative treatment by exercising voice. Implications for the study of workplace discrimination, the debate over the stalled gender revolution, and occupational segregation are discussed.
AlperJoe. 1993. The pipeline is leaking women all the way along. Science260 (5106): 409–11. doi:10.1126/science.260.5106.409.
5.
BasfordTessa E.OffermannLynn R.BehrendTara S.2014. Do you see what I see? Perceptions of gender microaggressions in the workplace. Psychology of Women Quarterly38 (3): 340–49. doi:10.1177/0361684313511420.
6.
Bobbitt-ZeherDonna. 2011. Gender discrimination at work: Connecting gender stereotypes, institutional policies, and gender composition of workplace. Gender & Society25 (6): 764–86. doi:10.1177/0891243211424741.
7.
BrakeDeborah L.GrossmanJoanna L.2008. The failure of Title VII as a rights-claiming system. North Carolina Law Review86 (4): 859–936.
8.
CapodilupoChristina M.NadalKevin L.CormanLindsayHamitSahranLyonsOliver B.WeinbergAlexa. 2010. The manifestation of gender microaggressions. In Microaggressions and marginality: Manifestation, dynamics, and impact, edited by SueDerald Wing. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
9.
CarlinerHannahSarvetAaron L.GordonAllegra R.HasinDeborah S.2017. Gender discrimination, educational attainment, and illicit drug use among U.S. women. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology52 (3): 279–89. doi:10.1007/s00127-016-1329-x.
10.
CollinsPatricia Hill. 1986. Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of Black feminist thought. Social Problems33 (6): s14–s32. doi:10.2307/800672.
11.
CorrellShelley J.2017. SWS 2016 Feminist Lecture: Reducing gender biases in modern workplaces: A small wins approach to organizational change. Gender & Society31 (6): 725–50. doi:10.1177/0891243217738518.
12.
DellingerKirsten. 2004. Masculinities in “safe” and “embattled” organizations: Accounting for pornographic and feminist magazines. Gender & Society18 (5): 545–66. doi:10.1177/0891243204267401.
13.
DenissenAmy M.2010. The right tools for the job: Constructing gender meanings and identities in the male-dominated building trades. Human Relations63 (7): 1051–69. doi:10.1177/0018726709349922.
14.
De PaterIrene E.Van VianenAnnelies E. M.BechtoldtMyriam N.2010. Gender differences in job challenge: A matter of task allocation. Gender, Work & Organization17 (4): 433–53. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00477.x.
15.
DeterdingNicole M.WatersMary C.2021. Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: A twenty-first-century approach. Sociological Methods & Research50 (2): 708–39. doi:10.1177/0049124118799377.
16.
De WeldeKrisLaursenSandra. 2011. The glass obstacle course: Informal and formal barriers for women Ph.D. students in STEM fields. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology3 (3): 571–95.
17.
DoeringLauraDoeringJanTilcsikAndrás. 2023. “Was it me or was it gender discrimination?” How women respond to ambiguous incidents at work. Sociological Science10:501–33. doi:10.15195/v10.a18.
18.
DonagheyJimmyCullinaneNiallDundonTonyWilkinsonAdrian. 2011. Reconceptualising employee silence: Problems and prognosis. Work, Employment and Society25 (1): 51–67. doi:10.1177/0950017010389239.
19.
EnglandPaula. 2010. The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender & Society24 (2): 149–66. doi:10.1177/0891243210361475.
20.
EnglandPaulaPrivalkoIvanLevineAndrew. 2020. Has the gender revolution stalled?The Economic and Social Review51 (4): 463–88.
21.
Fernandez-MateoIsabelKaplanSarah. 2018. Gender and organization science: Introduction to a virtual special issue. Organization Science29 (6): 1229–36. doi:10.1287/orsc.2018.1249.
22.
FordJackieAtkinsonCarolHardingNancyCollinsonDavid. 2021. “You just had to get on with it”: Exploring the persistence of gender inequality through women’s career histories. Work, Employment and Society35 (1): 78–96. doi:10.1177/0950017020910354.
GurinPatriciaMillerArthur H.GurinGerald. 1980. Stratum identification and consciousness. Social Psychology Quarterly43 (1): 30–47. doi:10.2307/3033746.
25.
GutekBarbara A.CohenAaron GroffTsuiAnne. 1996. Reactions to perceived sex discrimination. Human Relations49 (6): 791–813. doi:10.1177/001872679604900604.
26.
HarnoisCatherine E.2015. Race, ethnicity, sexuality, and women’s political consciousness of gender. Social Psychology Quarterly78 (4): 365–86.
27.
HarnoisCatherine E.2017. Intersectional masculinities and gendered political consciousness: How do race, ethnicity and sexuality shape men’s awareness of gender inequality and support for gender activism?Sex Roles77 (3–4): 141–54. doi:10.1007/s11199-016-0702-2.
28.
HarnoisCatherine E.BastosJoão L.2018. Discrimination, harassment, and gendered health inequalities: Do perceptions of workplace mistreatment contribute to the gender gap in self-reported health?Journal of Health and Social Behavior59 (2): 283–99. doi:10.1177/0022146518767407.
29.
HarrisDeborah A.2022. Women, work, and opportunities: From neoliberal to feminist mentoring. Sociology Compass16 (3): e12966. doi:10.1111/soc4.12966.
30.
HartChloe Grace. 2021. Trajectory guarding: Managing unwanted, ambiguously sexual interactions at work. American Sociological Review86 (2): 256–78. doi:10.1177/0003122421993809.
31.
HirschmanAlbert O.1970. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
hooksbell. 1986. Sisterhood: Political solidarity between women. Feminist Review23:125–38. doi:10.2307/1394725.
33.
JonesKristen P.PeddieChad I.GilraneVeronica L.KingEden B.GrayAlexis L.2016. Not so subtle: A meta-analytic investigation of the correlates of subtle and overt discrimination. Journal of Management42 (6): 1588–613. doi:10.1177/0149206313506466.
KimSunhee. 2015. The effect of gender discrimination in organization. International Review of Public Administration20 (1): 51–69. doi:10.1080/12294659.2014.983216.
36.
MandelH.RotmanA.2022. The stalled gender revolution and the rise of top earnings in the United States, 1980 to 2017. Sociological Science9:136–58. doi:10.15195/v9.a6.
37.
MoskosMegan. 2020. Why is the gender revolution uneven and stalled? Gender essentialism and men’s movement into ‘women’s work..’Gender, Work & Organization27 (4): 527–44. doi:10.1111/gwao.12406.
38.
NadalKevin L.HamitSamanthaLyonsOliviaWeinbergAlannaCormanLindsey. 2013. Gender microaggressions: Perceptions, processes, and coping mechanisms of women. In Psychology for business success, Vol. 1: Juggling, balancing, and integrating work and family roles and responsibilities, edited by PaludiMichele A.Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-CLIO.
39.
NadalKevin L.HaynesKristal. 2011. The effects of sexism, gender microaggressions, and other forms of discrimination on women’s mental health and development. In Women and mental disorders, edited by Lundberg-LovePaula K.NadalKevin L.PaludiMichele A.Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
40.
PascoeElizabeth A.RichmanLaura Smart. 2009. Perceived discrimination and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin135 (4): 531–54. doi:10.1037/a0016059.
41.
QuadlinNatasha. 2018. The mark of a woman’s record: Gender and academic performance in hiring. American Sociological Review83 (2): 331–60.
42.
ReskinBarbara. 1993. Sex segregation in the workplace. Annual Review of Sociology19:241–70. doi:10.1146/annurev.so.19.080193.001325.
43.
RidgewayCecilia L.2009. Framed before we know it: How gender shapes social relations. Gender & Society23 (2): 145–60. doi:10.1177/0891243208330313.
44.
RidgewayCecilia L.2011. Framed by Gender: How Gender Inequality Persists in the Modern World. New York: Oxford University Press.
45.
RismanBarbara J.2004. Gender as a social structure: Theory wrestling with activism. Gender & Society18 (4): 429–50. doi:10.1177/0891243204265349.
46.
RismanBarbara J.2018. Gender as a social structure. In Handbook of the sociology of gender, edited by RismanBarbara J.FroyumCarissa M.ScarboroughWilliam J.Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-76333-0_2.
47.
RiveraLauren A.TilcsikAndrás. 2019. Scaling down inequality: Rating scales, gender bias, and the architecture of evaluation. American Sociological Review84 (2): 248–74. doi:10.1177/0003122419833601.
48.
RuddickSara. 1989. Maternal Thinking: Toward a Politics of Peace. Boston: Beacon Press.
49.
ScarboroughWilliam J.SinRayRismanBarbara J.2019. Attitudes and the stalled gender revolution: Egalitarianism, traditionalism, and ambivalence from 1977 through 2016. Gender & Society33 (2): 173–200. doi:10.1177/0891243218809604.
50.
SchmittMichael T.EllemersNaomiBranscombeNyla R.2003. Perceiving and responding to gender discrimination in organizations. In Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational practices, edited by HaslamS. Alexandervan KnippenbergDaanPlatowMichael J.EllemersNaomi. New York: Psychology Press.
51.
SheltonJ. NicoleStewartRebecca E.2004. Confronting perpetrators of prejudice: The inhibitory effects of social costs. Psychology of Women Quarterly28 (3): 215–23. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00138.x.
52.
ShuXiaolingMeagherKelsey D.2018. Beyond the stalled gender revolution: Historical and cohort dynamics in gender attitudes from 1977 to 2016. Social Forces96 (3): 1243–74. doi:10.1093/sf/sox090.
53.
SmallMario Luis. 2009. “How many cases do I need?” On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography10 (1): 5–38.
54.
SmithDorothy E.1987. The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
55.
StonePamela. 2007. Opting Out? Why Women Really Quit Careers and Head Home. Berkeley: University of California Press. doi:10.1525/9780520941793.
TorreMargarita. 2014. The scarring effect of “women’s work”: The determinants of women’s attrition from male-dominated occupations. Social Forces93 (1): 1–29. doi:10.1093/sf/sou059.
58.
TorreMargaritaJacobsJerry A.2021. The gender mobility paradox: Gender segregation and women’s mobility across gender-type boundaries, 1970–2018. Gender & Society35 (6): 853–83. doi:10.1177/08912432211046328.
59.
WebberGretchen R.GiuffrePatti. 2019. Women’s relationships with women at work: Barriers to solidarity. Sociology Compass13 (6): e12698. doi:10.1111/soc4.12698.
60.
WeissRobert S.1995. Learning from Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies. New York: Free Press.
61.
WilliamsChristine L.2023. Feminist sociology and the future of work: A tribute to Joan Acker and the. AJS Special Issue on Women. American Journal of Sociology129 (3): 948–54. doi:10.1086/728971.
