Abstract
Postfeminist and neoliberal ideologies limit young women’s ability to identify and respond to sexism. Although some young women can identify sexism, many find it difficult to reconcile that sexism continues to persist. This study explored the ways young women understand and navigate sexism. In-depth interviews and a focus group were conducted with 11 young women (15–16 years old) from an all-girls’ secondary college in Melbourne, Australia. Young women discussed sexism in multiple ways—sexism as fear, as double standards and as something of the past. Although not naïve to the impacts of gender, these young women were resigned to sexism being an inherent part of girlhood. Centring the voices of young women on the issue of sexism, this study fosters understanding of the ways in which young women negotiate sexism so they can be supported to develop their critical awareness and responses to sexism.
Keywords
Introduction
For adolescent girls, their sociocultural landscape is characterized by a complex weaving of postfeminist and neoliberal sentiments, advancing the view that gender inequality is essentially redundant, downplaying the restrictions they continue to face due to patriarchal sentiments (Pomerantz & Raby, 2017). Postfeminist ideologies argue that girls and women have exceeded their male counterparts; hence, feminism has essentially overreached in rectifying the perceived power imbalances between men and women (McRobbie, 2007). In Australia, women continue to be disadvantaged by a persistent gender pay gap, and they experience sexual violence at rates more than double that of men (ABS, 2023). Despite these economic and social disadvantages, the perception persists that ‘overt’ forms of sexism have become less prevalent, with girls and women being increasingly called on to manage covert forms of sexism, including gender microaggressions (Feigt et al., 2021). Gender-based discrimination is known to cause significant psychological and physical distress (Tao & Fisher, 2025; Watson & Grotewiel, 2016). Bell and Juvonen (2020) specifically point to the ‘development cost during adolescence’ (p. 1865) for young people who experience gender- and race-based discrimination. Costs include reduced academic achievement, difficulties with social adjustment and adverse well-being outcomes (Bell & Juvonen, 2020). Covert forms of sexism are particularly problematic as ‘they may leave the recipient feeling put down but unable to clearly articulate the reason’ (Feigt et al., 2021, p. 2).
In addition to these negative repercussions, young women’s ability to identify and address sexism has been limited by postfeminist and neoliberal sentiments. Such sentiments, rather than moving young women towards calling out of systemic gender disparities and their origins, encourage them to turn within themselves to locate barriers to success (Baker, 2010; McRobbie, 2007). Consistent with these postfeminist sentiments, neoliberalism is an economic and political ideology which also prioritizes individualism, holding individuals accountable for their successes, failures and well-being (Adams et al., 2019; Rottenberg, 2018). Collectively, postfeminist and neoliberal ideologies present a paradoxical social context for young women to navigate, particularly in terms of understanding gender-based discrimination (Amundsen, 2021; Storer & Casey, 2021). Therefore, it is important to gain further insights into how young women conceptualize and respond to contemporary sexism in a postfeminist and neoliberal sociocultural context.
Young Women’s Experiences of and Accounting for Contemporary Sexism
Young people are exposed to sexism from an early age across multiple contexts (Brown & Stone, 2016). Young women witness and are subjected to sex-based discrimination in schools (Bell & Juvonen, 2020), universities (Lewis et al., 2018) and public and online spaces (Keller et al., 2018; Ortiz, 2024). This is in addition to the pervasive forms of sexist and misogynistic rhetoric perpetuating in media and popular culture (Brown & Stone, 2016). There is a paradox in the messages of gender equality and the ongoing sexism experienced by girls and women (Ortiz, 2024).
Young women make sense of and respond to experiences of sexism in diverse ways. Some young women can identify sexism and avenues to critically respond to gender-related prejudice (Lewis et al., 2018). An orientation to feminism has been found to act as a protective factor against the psychological distress caused by sexism (Watson et al., 2018) and impacts a woman’s ability to recognize and respond to sexism (Flores et al., 2020; Watson & Grotewiel, 2016). Young women who belong to culturally marginalized groups are also seemingly more cognisant of sexism, due to experiencing the intersections of other forms of discrimination and oppression such as racism (Ayres & Leaper, 2013). Other young women have been found to seemingly recite postfeminist and neoliberal doctrines, which effectively shift the issue of sexism from the systemic to the individual level (Calder-Dawe & Gavey, 2016). Pomerantz et al. (2013) found that girls utilized postfeminist discourses to refute the idea that experiences of sexism at school were related to systemic gender inequality, rather espousing views locating sexism as something of the past or existing in societies outside the West. Such discourses effectively limit girls’ knowledge and critical vocabulary to call out gender-based discrimination and patriarchal ideologies and practices (Pomerantz et al., 2013). School-aged young people have also been found to commonly adopt a gender-impartial view of sexism (boys and men also are victims of sexism), demonstrating a somewhat nonchalant opinion of this discrimination, downplaying its potential consequences (Calder-Dawe & Gavey, 2016).
Despite these findings, some young women find ways of speaking back to and critiquing their experiences of sexism (Keller et al., 2018; Lewis et al., 2018). Online platforms have been utilized by young women and women to challenge sexism (Flores et al., 2020; Li et al., 2021). Keller et al. (2018) examined young feminists’ use of digital media to respond to and resist sexism. This online medium provided an avenue for young feminists to develop connections with other like-minded young women and increase the visibility of and protest the sexism and persistent rape culture they are subject to, including within schools.
Rationale and Research Aims
A young woman’s values concerning gender inequality and the way in which she relates to gendered discourses impacts her sense of self (Ahmed, 2017). This is important as sex-based discrimination continues to impact the worlds of girls and women (Watson & Grotewiel, 2016). Although the connection between gender stereotypes and development has been considered, relatively limited research has explored school-aged young women’s perceptions of gender inequality including everyday and ‘covert’ forms of sexism, particularly in a contemporary Australian context. Within this context, the prevalence of violence against women and girls across Australian political, public, private and digital domains continues, despite public anger and various governmental and legal responses and reforms (Stevenson & Hopkins, 2024; Webster et al., 2018).
Therefore, the aim of this article was to explore and further understand the ways in which adolescent young women experience, recognize (or not recognize) sexism in the current sociocultural context. Adolescence is the period in which young women’s awareness of expectations around gender-role conformity is heightened and age-related developments (e.g., improved cognitive and socio-cognitive capacity) makes their recognition and sense making of sexism more solidified (Bell & Juvonen, 2020; Halimi et al., 2021).
As such, this article centres the voices of adolescent young women and their developing insights. This is important as we require an improved understanding of the pressures, experiences and perspectives of adolescent young women, to better support their emerging awareness and their ability to respond to sexism and inequality both during adolescence and into adulthood.
Methodology
This qualitative study was informed by social constructionism (Burr, 2015), broadly drawing from feminist poststructuralist theories (Gavey, 2011). In line with social constructionism, knowledge is positioned as constructed from the interaction between an individual and their sociocultural context (Burr, 2015). An individual’s experiences, knowledge and meanings are constructed and influenced by their cultural, historical and linguistic context and multiple worldviews and truths are evident (Davis & Gergen, 1997).
This article draws on data collected from a broader qualitative study which examined school-aged young women’s understandings and negotiations of contemporary normative femininities (Chiodo, 2018). This also encompassed the ways in which young women positioned themselves in relation to discourses concerning sexism and feminism. The current research adopted ethnographic methods consistent with previous research investigating young women’s negotiations of gendered discourses (Charles, 2010; Hey, 1997). This ethnographic informed research (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007) was conducted within an all-girls Catholic secondary school in Melbourne, Australia (Chiodo & Morda, 2023). In line with ethnographic research (Hammersley, 2016), the current study was conducted in the everyday context of a single-school setting and multiple qualitative data collection methods were adopted (including semi-structured interviews with teachers and students, focus groups, fieldwork and archival data). The Catholic underpinnings of the school promoted a social justice orientation and provided an opportunity for critical reflection on students’ gendered experiences. These religious underpinnings at times silenced issues important to students’ lived experiences and arguably their understandings of gender inequality (e.g., premarital sex and contraception). For further consideration of the opportunities and limitations, young women were provided in this educational and gendered setting see Chiodo and Morda (2023).
Participants
Eleven young women (15–16 years) participated in the current study (eight semi-structured interviews; one focus group). All but one participant was born in Australia (although some identified as culturally diverse). Majority of participants resided in two-parent homes, with one participant living in a single-parent home and one living in a multigenerational home. See Table 1 for further demographic information.
Participant Demographics.
Procedure
Following ethics approval from the relevant institutional ethics committees, individual interviews and a focus group were conducted. Participants were provided the choice to participate in individual interviews or a focus group with the first author. Eight participants consented to participate in individual interviews and three participants elected to participate in a focus group. Interviews and the focus group were completed over two meetings. Meeting with students on multiple occasions assisted in developing rapport and provided the opportunity to follow up on issues raised in more detail. During the interviews and focus group, priority was placed on creating an environment in which participants felt respected and that they could have an impact on the direction of the interview or focus group. It was also important to engage with participants in way that was free from judgement, but also did not collude with them to further strengthen potentially limiting or sexist discourses. Therefore, in line with feminist principles, the objective was to build relationships with participants ‘based on informality, equality, reciprocity, empathy, rapport, and subjectivity’ (Wincup, 2001, p. 20).
Researcher Positioning
The principles of qualitative and feminist research call on researchers to prioritize reflexivity and examine how their social identities, lived experiences and assumptions inform their research practice (Gilbert, 2001; Hesse-Biber, 2012). I (the first author) am an abled-bodied, heterosexual, white, educated woman. I am second-generation Australian who, together with having access to a wealth of privileges, have experienced discrimination based on my gender across social, familial, educational and professional contexts. I came to this research with an interest in how young women negotiate and develop their sense of self in a postfeminist and neoliberal sociocultural context. It is my premise that we need to hear directly from young women regarding what ‘doing’ girl looks like in this climate. With regard to data collection, it was imperative from the perspective of my ethical standing the participants felt respected and safe enough to share their intricate experiences, reflections and opinions. As a researcher, I found myself needing to engage with participants in way that was free from judgement but did not collude with them to further strengthen limiting or sexist discourses (e.g., the inherent and normalized meanness of young women); I remained vigilant in my goal to understand participants in the context of their developmental age and the contradictory sociocultural climate in which they are maturing. As Gilbert (2001) suggests, it was essential to maintain a reflexive stance while also acknowledging the emotional dimensions of qualitative research. This balance helped ensure that I remained connected to my participants’ experiences without becoming so detached that important insights were missed.
Data Analysis
Reflexive thematic analysis—the identification, analysis and interpretation of patterns within data—of the interview and focus group data was conducted (Braun & Clarke, 2021). This data analysis was informed by a social constructionism paradigm (Burr, 2015) and feminist poststructuralist understandings of the role of language and discourse (Gavey, 2011). Consistent with the poststructuralist tradition, Britzman (2000) contends that ‘subjects may well be the tellers of experience; but every telling is constrained, partial, and determined by the discourse and histories that prefigure, even as they might promise representation’ (p. 32). Therefore, the challenge was to ensure that through the current analysis the intricacies and messy negotiations depicted in the talk of participants were represented appropriately and in the context of the complexities of their current sociocultural milieu. Contributing to the rigour of this thematic data analysis, the authors discussed and reviewed at length all transcripts and identified themes until a set of clear and well-evidenced themes were identified.
Findings and Interpretations
One of the central tenets of postfeminism is that sexism and the constraints of gender inequality have dispersed (Ortiz, 2024). In contrast, young women in the current study reported that sexism continues to persist for themselves, their peers and other women in their lives. Three main themes were identified from an analysis of the interview and focus group data: sexism as fear, sexism as double standards and sexism as something of the past. In addition to revealing how participants perceive and articulate experiences of sexism, these findings highlight the limited progress towards achieving gender equality in contemporary Western societies. This stagnation persists despite public concern and policy initiatives aimed at addressing gender inequality both in Australia and internationally (Mastari et al., 2019; Webster et al., 2018).
Sexism as Fear
Prevalent in the young women’s talk was their understanding of sexism in relation to women’s safety and their own perceived risk of being victims of violence. It has been argued that one of the main factors leading to violence against women is systemic gender inequality (Frazier & Falmagne, 2014). Participants identified that their safety was a concern for them and their parents. Alexis states that current forms of sexism young women experience are represented by ‘being in fear of like being attacked’. This issue of her personal safety was an immediate form of inequality she was negotiating in comparison to other issues: ‘I feel like it’s less within equal pay … more like women feeling scared to go out walking. I hate walking by myself, I never do … I feel that would be the biggest impact’.
It is clear this fear of ‘being attacked’ results in Alexis restricting her own behaviour by ‘never’ walking alone. This gender inequality persists by restricting young women’s agency to occupy public space independently. This issue of being alone and the potential risks for young women were also raised in the focus group:
Chiara: We can’t go out alone. Louise: [Emphatically] Oh yeah [laughs] Kate: When you’re going out into public places, especially at night time … your parents are always, ‘Text me every five minutes’ … They don’t want you outside … Like my parents are okay with it if there’s a [pauses] guy with me— Louise: [Laughs] Oh my god … It’s the opposite! [Laughs] ‘There’s a guy going? No, you’re not!’ Kate: But if there’s a guy there, it sort of makes you even more protected. I’m not sure … Mum doesn’t even like going anywhere without my Dad … because the men are always seen in society as like masculine like, you know … they’re the ones that you sort of fear … I feel like they look down on us a bit … you look up to them for example, so when you see Mum sort of scared of people sort of in the streets even, it’s like ohhh [pauses] maybe that’s how I should act … it makes me more careful. I then sort of have a bit of fear, which I guess is a good thing, not a bad thing.
From the above excerpt, evidently for these young women, their freedom to ‘go out alone’ has been challenged due to their gender and concerns regarding their safety. This conversation is indicative of the discourses that young women are privy to, particularly from their parents. One such discourse is the role men (or boys) play in the safety (or unsafety) of young women. For both Kate and Louise, their ability to go out alone was dependent on the presence or absence of boys. Maintaining this notion of men’s traditional role as safeguarding women (and therefore women being dependent on men for their safety) could be considered an example of benevolent sexism (Mastari et al., 2019). Previous research has pointed to the role parents play in solidifying gender stereotypes and gender-related attitudes, inclusive of benevolent sexism (Mastari et al., 2019; Montanes et al., 2012).
Benevolent sexism is characterized as covert and refers to the maintaining of attitudes and stereotypes, which favour customary gender roles, including men’s responsibility to protect women (Mastari et al., 2019). Kate does not consider her ‘fear’ of going out alone to be a bad thing; rather, it acts as a protective measure, preventing Kate from potentially making risky choices. This is in many ways indicative of prevalent discourses commonly circulated in the public sphere, which often blame women for falling victim to crime or hold them solely accountable for their own safety, rather than laying blame on the individuals who target women (Frazier & Falmagne, 2014). This is also indicative of neoliberal sentiment, which mandates individualism and, thus, holds young women responsible not only for their successes but also for what is characterized as their failed choices (Adams et al., 2019).
This personal responsibility discourse was also communicated in school-based self-defence classes conducted at the time of the research. Some teachers were highly critical of the discourses of potential victim blaming and personal responsibility of young women that were being promoted by the external instructors. Nevertheless, as is evident in the following exchange with Alexis, these classes were impactful:
I love learning [self-defence] … But it does make you more scared … It’s the reality of it … People just have to like face it, but it’s annoying that that’s the reality … women are definitely more vulnerable than men, and that when you go walking, girls have to [pauses] like [sighs] look around them, like be really aware … I will always work late at [retail store] … and it’s always the girls’ parents who are coming in and waiting for them and then they walk out together to the car park. But like for the boys, they just walk out.
Alexis recognizes that questions of personal safety are not something her male peers necessarily have to consider. Yet, it is unclear whether at this stage she fully comprehends the systemic or structural inequalities that lead to women being more at risk of (sexual) assault than men. Rather, she has adopted a personal responsibility discourse (Frazier & Falmagne, 2014). Alexis seems resigned to the notion that this is just a ‘reality’ for women.
In contrast, Carissa seems less willing to accept women being positioned as victims:
I sometimes feel like with girls when you go out people are always like, ‘oh dress appropriately … Don’t get yourself into a bad situation’, but I don’t feel like boys are really treated like that … women are seen more as a victim and we have to be more careful not to be the victim … we did self-defence training at school and the instructor … he kind of made me feel like women are all victims … it didn’t feel right to me.
Again, Carissa has been exposed to a discourse, which charges women with keeping themselves safe by dressing appropriately and not putting themselves in vulnerable situations (Frazier & Falmagne, 2014). She also recognizes how these expectations are positioned exclusively towards women and girls. Unlike Alexis or Kate, Carissa is dissatisfied with this positioning of women; her acknowledgement that this ‘didn’t feel right’ demonstrates her discomfort and possible development of her critical awareness regarding gender inequality.
In summary, these young women are not wrong in highlighting violence against women as a continuing and prevalent form of gender inequality (ABS, 2023). In Australia 31% and 22% of women report experiencing physical and sexual violence, respectively, from the age of 15 years (ABS, 2021–2022). Yet their understanding of this form of inequality at a systemic level seems relatively limited. Rather, discourses concerning gendered violence were adopted, which situated young women as responsible for their safety. Such discourses may be symptomatic of the postfeminist and neoliberal sentiment, which downplays the role of gender inequality and patriarchy in the lives of young women, whilst centring the notions of choice and individual responsibility (Adams et al., 2019; Ortiz, 2024).
Sexism as Double Standards
Participants recognized the different expectations being placed on them and other young women, in comparison to their male counterparts, as forms of contemporary sexism. These expectations were often characterized as double standards. Young women’s identification of sexism as double standards centres on two contexts—double standards in the home and in the media. This was somewhat anticipated; despite postfeminist rhetoric, women continue to be responsible for more domestic labour (Montanes et al., 2012) than their male counterparts and are subjected to criticism and objectification in mainstream media (Brown & Stone, 2016).
Double Standards in the Home
Similar to participants’ perceptions regarding the safety of girls and women, the role of parents’ attitudes and family dynamics within the home are fundamental in informing young people’s values, including those pertaining to gender inequality and gender roles (Montanes et al., 2012). Clearly, participants’ understanding of sexism was influenced by their lived experiences in the home:
My parents didn’t make me play with things that I didn’t want to … I wanted to be a palaeontologist and dig up dinosaurs … my parents never really put me into a category of like being a female. But … in recent years in high school, I have really noticed like that women are treated differently. (Carissa)
Carissa’s awareness of how women are treated differently became more apparent since entering secondary school. Young women’s recognition of sexism and gendered expectations are often solidified in adolescence (Bell & Juvonen, 2020). Carissa’s seemingly gender-neutral home environment was not common amongst participants. Talia spoke at length about the inequality she was subjected to within her family home. From Talia’s detailed description of the double standards she negotiates within the home, it is evident she has been exposed to intergenerational sexism:
It’s really unfair. It’s really [pauses] not [pauses] equal at all. Like we say that we are a country that does have equal rights … but … [pauses] there’s all these little loopholes … even like my grandma … with all the men in our family she’s been brought up to do everything for them. We have the stereotype that we do cleaning, this, that … everything … I notice it a lot around my family … because I live with my grandparents, I see it so much with my little cousin who’s a boy and then also my uncle … He has, all the washing done for him … [Mum] has to do heaps of cleaning … I have to do heaps of things for the boys in my family … That’s an argument at the moment … I don’t like it. It’s not [pauses] fair … I have to cook the meals at my house every day and then sometimes do the dishes … all the boys are sitting down watching footy … I’m only 16 and then there’s 40-year-olds and they’re not even helping pick up after their kids or anything … [sighs] it’s just really rude.
Evidently, Talia demonstrates significant frustration with regard to the double standards that the women in her home negotiate. Due to Talia’s current living situation (and to an extent her age) she has limited power in the home, she does demonstrate a level of resistance. Her statement ‘that’s an argument at the moment’ shows that Talia is not just accepting of these double standards, but rather expects more from her family. Talia does not utilize postfeminist discourses, including the gender neutrality of sexism (Calder-Dawe & Gavey, 2016) to explain away her experiences. This is in opposition to postfeminist sentiments which stipulate that to be considered ‘empowered’, young women are required to restrain from critique of their social worlds and experiences of inequality (Baker, 2010).
Similarly, for Yen, the home represented a context in which the double standards placed on women were visible. Yen nominated several circumstances in which her parents’ expectations of her and her brother differed. This included an increased monitoring of what she wore to church in comparison to her brother. These variations in expectations were not as evident with regard to academic achievement. Yen predicted that her parents’ career aspirations for her and her brother would reflect traditional gender roles and norms:
I’m not sure what my parents want for my brother … I guess for him to be [in a] more … a masculine job … to be a doctor, to be like a fireman or something like that, an engineer. But for me, I guess to go to uni and study and do something more feminine maybe. Nurse, whatever.
The maintenance of traditional gender roles resulted in Yen having additional responsibilities in the home. Yen was aware that unlike her brother, she was expected to learn how to complete household chores: ‘For girls in the family, you have to like learn how to do the chores (like cook, clean and do all this stuff) but my brother gets away with it; he doesn’t do anything’. Akin to Talia, for Yen this was not only a double standard she experienced, but rather it was a form of intergenerational inequality which she grew up observing and in many ways was explicitly taught:
My parents will tell me … this is what they expect of me as a girl … I see it from my parents and how they interact … my Mum would do everything. She’ll pick up the kids; she’ll cook; she’ll clean … But she also works as well … like same amount of hours as my dad … And my dad, he will like do nothing … just relax … I don’t agree with it. I think partners should have an equal balance in the relationship.
Like Talia, Yen, a self-identified feminist, did not employ discourses which justify or overlook the continued presence of sexism in the home.
Double Standards in the Media
Consistent with previous research (Carey et al., 2014), young women in the current study commonly nominated the media as a site where the communication of double standards continues. Pia recalled the unequal commentary directed towards a female actress in comparison to her male counterparts:
It was some red-carpet event … [an actress] was being judged on her dress … She looked beautiful … the media was all writing about like how she looked and criticizing that, but the supporting actors—the two men were in like track pants and t-shirts and they never said anything [pauses] which is interesting how you know people expect girls to look beautiful and always, judging and criticizing that, but it’s sort of just overlooked with men.
As discussed in the focus group, representations of women in the media focussed on women’s appearance and the objectification of women in advertising. Consistent with modern portrayals of contemporary sexism (Feigt et al., 2021), Chiara characterizes these forms of sexism and double standards as more ‘subtle’:
Chiara: I actually saw it on Buzzfeed … sexist [pauses] ads—throughout the years. At the start it was more about like, ‘You can clean and lose weight at the same time’ … It’s still there—but now it’s more like … perfume ads like for men, you see women like topless … So it’s still there, just more subtle. Linda (Interviewer): What do you think that communicates then about women? Chiara: Like we’re just [pauses] … we’re still like objects. Louise: I guess I don’t really like it but I don’t spend that much time thinking about it, really. Like I’ve just kind of accepted it. But [pauses] I feel like [pauses] if it ever happens to me, I’m gonna be like, ‘No, stop! This isn’t how it is’. Kate: Just try not to dwell on it: like you know it’s there, but just move [on] like [pauses] … almost ignore it.
This focus group discussion illustrates numerous discourses regarding sexism in the media. The objectification of women in the media as a form of sexism is one these young women were aware of. However, these participants have seemingly yet to realize that the climate of the media and advertising directly informs and influences collective expectations of women. Consistent with neoliberal notions of individualism (Adams et al., 2019), Louise recognizes that at an individual level she would not accept such objectification. At the collective level she is disapproving of this mistreatment of women, still accepting it occurs. Like school-aged young women interviewed by Calder-Dawe and Gavey (2016), Kate goes further to position this form of sexism as something which can be simply ignored. Kate and Louise effectively position themselves as unaffected and able to ‘ignore’ or not ‘dwell’ on this form of sexism. It has been suggested that when young women cease to critique or challenge hegemonic discourses and sexism in the media, they are continuing to adhere to this (potentially unrealistic) idea that sexism is non-existent, or at the very least they are not personally affected by such gender-based discrimination (Baker, 2008; McRobbie, 2007). Young women stating that they can overlook or move on from sexism and inequality may be a coping strategy to limit feelings of victimization (Calder-Dawe & Gavey, 2016; Pomerantz & Raby, 2017). In the current postfeminist and neoliberal climate, ‘being offended by sexism is positioned as a ‘choice’, and a woman can enhance her capital by showing herself to be unaffected by ‘sexism’ (Donaghue, 2015, p. 164).
Despite a level of ambivalence demonstrated in the focus group regarding the double standards surrounding women’s appearance, the participants’ frustration regarding the double standards in the media’s coverage of women’s sport was more apparent:
Linda (Interviewer): What are some of the stereotypes? Louise: Dependent on men— [Collective laugher] Louise: …so therefore we shouldn’t be in sports because that’s a boys’ thing … It’s completely wrong [laughs]. Girls are just as good in sport as guys and can achieve just as much. Kate: I think media plays a role in that because I mean the coverage of like AFL—men’s cricket—it’s all over the TV but then there’ll be women’s cricket, and it might get like 10 seconds in the news bulletin and that’s about it. Even though they’re just as good on a world level. Just women aren’t … recognized as highly. Louise: Like the soccer team: the women’s team, it’s like higher ranked in the world to men’s but they get paid like $20,000 when the others get paid like $300,000 or something like that. Linda (Interviewer): How does that make you feel? Chiara: A bit stupid, you feel like this day and age, people shouldn’t care about it. Kate: After people fought for all the rights for women and then still to be like ignored.
For Louise and Kate, who both play high-level competitive sport, the double standards between male and female athletes are clearly more of a personal issue, and not one they can simply ‘ignore’. This exchange highlights that for them, there are some inconsistencies between the potential postfeminist messages concerning the achievement of gender equality (Ortiz, 2024), and their daily experiences, at least in the context of women’s sport.
Sexism as Something in the Past (or on the Improve)
Young women are often quick to minimize the significance of sexism or deny any personal disadvantage due to continued gender-based inequality (Calder-Dawe & Gavey, 2016; Pomerantz et al., 2013). This was not evident in the current study to the same extent. This group of young women did not espouse views which entirely rejected the existence of sexism or its negative consequences. However, demonstrating the pervasiveness of the postfeminist myth that sexism is no longer a barrier for girls and women, some participants were tentative in their assessment of contemporary sexism—claiming it exists but it is not in the same way or to the same extent: ‘sexism is definitely like still around, obviously not as much as it used to be’ (Pia).
I don’t really experience it, but I know that there is sexism like people can say, ‘Oh women are equal to men’, but I don’t really think that [pauses] is necessarily the case … it annoys me personally because I don’t think I’m less of a person just because I’m a woman; I think that’s just stupid [laughs] … it actually bothers me a lot. (Sian)
It is evident that Sian is working through several contradictions concerning the prevalence of contemporary sexism. Despite Sian’s awareness of the persistence of sexism, she at least initially retreats from the issue before affirming her annoyance. Calder-Dawe and Gavey (2016) explain that this discourse provides young women with an avenue to highlight sexism, whilst negating the potentially significant consequences inherent in sexism.
The perception of the reduced prevalence of sexism was often evidenced by the increased opportunities young women felt that they had in comparison to previous generations. Alexis reflected on the opportunities women have to work outside the home ‘like a man’:
There’s more opportunities for [women], they’re not just in the household all the time. So many people are working … they’re not just the mother figure that they’re meant to be. They’re like understood as like … just a woman. Just another person, like a man. You know what I mean? Like it’s more equal now.
Alexis’s reference here that women can be understood just ‘like a man’ is in some ways indicative of sentiments which position young women as ‘model neo-liberal citizens’ (Ringrose & Walkerdine, 2007, p. 6), able to straddle the traits of both femininity and masculinity without struggle (Jackson et al., 2013).
Carissa was also positive about the many opportunities she has in her life and did not feel her gender was, or will be, a disadvantage for her in her future science career:
I feel like I have lots of opportunities … I know like there’s not many people in like the science profession and stuff like that for females, but I feel l like I never really thought of it as like a minority group or whatever but I feel like I have the opportunity to do like what I want and I don’t feel like I have to be a person that’s like set for me to be like I can be who I want to be.
Conversely, Talia does not consider sexism as an out-of-date concept. She feels that having the opportunity to speak about gender inequality and sexism has led to advancements and accordingly to ‘things getting better’:
Ages ago it wasn’t like, all these issues weren’t even [pauses] discussed. Like now everything’s in the open … awareness is coming [pauses] so we are given a bit more opportunity as like things are getting [pauses] better.
This notion that sexism has diminished due to the increased opportunities and ‘choices’ young women perceive themselves to have was anticipated. Young women often demonstrate enthusiasm with regard to their futures and the wide range of choices and opportunities available to them (Baker, 2008). Young women are cited as ‘the success stories of current times through persuasive and up-beat narratives and are positioned as the winners in education and a ‘feminised’ workforce’ (Baker, 2008, p. 54). Therefore, it would be difficult for the young women interviewed to dispute or resist these notions of absolute autonomy and thus accept postfeminist discourses, which centre on sexism as an out-of-date phenomenon.
Overall, in contrast to previous findings (Maxwell & Aggleton, 2010), many participants were aware of the role gender played in their own and other young women’s experiences, including the consequences accompanying contemporary forms of gender inequality. They were also able to nominate the ways in which young women were directly impacted by gender-based inequality. This supports the notion that young women are not naïve but rather cognisant to sexism (Lewis et al., 2018).
Conclusion
Recognizing and negotiating sexism and gender-role expectations is a developmental task of adolescence (Bell & Juvonen, 2020; Halimi et al., 2021). For young women, their understanding and often internalization of gender-based discrimination have significant implications for their well-being and academic and career outcomes (Bell & Juvonen, 2020; Halimi et al., 2021). Consistent with previous findings (Keller et al., 2018; Lewis et al., 2018), several young women in the current study were gender aware and clear in their identification of sexism and double standards across varied contexts. This awareness is in direct contrast to prominent and arguably detrimental postfeminist ideologies, which characterizes gender inequality as extinct (Amundsen, 2021; Storer & Casey, 2021). Although several of the young women did rearticulate discourses which inaccurately position sexism as a reduced concern in contemporary times, no one drew on postfeminist discourses, characterizing sexism as gender-neutral (Calder-Dawe & Gavey, 2016). Sexism was clearly discussed as something young women (or women) exclusively encountered.
Despite their awareness of gender inequality, it was not common for participants to draw connections between broader issues of sexism and their gendered experiences as young women. They approached these disadvantages as an individual-level issue, hence allowing some young women to ‘choose’ to ignore or minimize gender-based disparities. This tendency to ‘minimize’ sexism must be understood in relation to pervasive postfeminist and neoliberal rhetoric. Young women who draw attention to gender inequality unfortunately risk being considered misguided (Pomerantz et al., 2013), labelled ‘too opinionated’ or an extreme feminist (Calder-Dawe & Gavey, 2016). Instead of questioning such inequalities, young women essentially incorporate such notions into their understandings of normative femininities and alter the ways in which they ‘do’ girlhood to comply with the social climate. It was apparent (and anticipated) that these young women were still negotiating and developing their understanding of gender inequality. However, what was concerning is that in some cases young women were resigned to the notion that inequality and restriction based on their gender were an inherent part of being a young woman. The minimal progress women have witnessed with regard to gender-based discrimination and gender equality does little to challenge this perception. This acceptance of sexism is concerning, as gender inequality has implications for not only the mental health and well-being of girls and women, but for the ways in which they choose to, and not to partake in, educational and vocational spheres (Bell & Juvonen, 2020; Halimi et al., 2021). Also, their views will continue to impact the trajectory which gender inequality takes and the collective role of feminism. Further research should continue to examine school-aged young women’s understandings and experiences of sexism as gender inequality continues to be at the forefront of global discourse (for example #MeToo). Particularly, in the Australian landscape, women such as Grace Tame and Brittany Higgins as well as the media coverage of several women who have been victims of violence (including instances of partner and family violence) have influenced the rhetoric concerning violence against women and gender inequality across social media and media platforms, as well as in public and political spheres (Stevenson & Hopkins, 2024). Thus, it is necessary to continue to understand what ways, if any, these have filtered into the understandings and conversations of everyday young women in Australia, allowing or restricting their ability to respond and talk back to sexism. But at least for now, instead of being critical of participants’ rationalization of, or accounting for, sexism, it is important to be appreciative of their developmental stage and the complex and limiting postfeminist social terrain in which they are maturing and making sense of their lived experiences. It is imperative that young women have the opportunity to continue to develop their critical consciousness regarding gender inequality as this is the cornerstone for social change.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Ethical Approval
This study was approved by the Victoria University Human Research Ethics Committee. This research was performed in accordance with relevant guidelines/regulations applicable when human participants are involved as outlined in the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007).
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.