A Lacanian perspective on bias in language
How women can(not) ever make it in academia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/kkf.v31i3.129747Nøgleord:
unconscious bias, gender bias, language, Lacan, psychoanalysis, female professors, academiaResumé
In this paper, we contribute to the study of gender bias in organizations by showing how adopting a Lacanian psychoanalytic perspective helps us study bias in language while not separating language from the speaker. We use career narratives from female professors to exemplify our argument. We argue that coming into being as a performing subject means satisfying the desire of an organizational, academic other, and argue that this other’s desire rests upon a masculine ideal. To support our arguments, we present and analyze narrative excerpts and show how making it for women in academia is constrained by the continued experience of bias—manifested in language—leading to an unresolvable split between striving to be a successful woman in academia and meeting the masculine-centered standards for the ideal worker. The Lacanian approach thus allows us to show how gender bias is simultaneously contested and reproduced in the career narratives of women with successful careers in neoliberal academia. We conclude the paper by addressing the broader implications and limits of a Lacanian perspective for studying and tackling (gender) bias in organizations.
Referencer
Acker, J. 1990. Hierarchies, Jobs, Bodies: A Theory of Gendered Organizations.Gender & Society.4 (2),
-158.
Archer,L.2008.The New Neoliberal Subjects? Young/er Academics’ Constructions of Professional Identity. Journal of Education Policy.23 (3),265-285. doi:10.1080/02680930701754047.
Arnaud, G. 2002. The Organization and the Symbolic: Organizational Dynamics Viewed from a Lacanian Perspective. Human Relations. 55 (6), 691-716.
Arnaud, G. and Vanheule, S. 2012. The Contribution of Psychoanalysis to Organization Studies and Management: An Overview. Organization Studies. 33 (9), 1121-1335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840612448153
Arnaud, G. and Vidaillet, B. 2018. Clinical and Critical: The Lacanian Contribution to Management and Organization Studies.Organization. 25 (1), 69-97. doi:10.1177/1350508417720021
Bargh, J. A. and Chartrand, T. L. 1999. The Unbearable Automaticity of Being. American Psychologist. 54(7), 462.
Bicknell, M. and Liefooghe, A. 2010. Enjoy Your Stress! Using Lacan to Enrich Transactional Models of Stress. Organization. 17 (3), 317-330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1350508410363120
Carlsson, M. and Rooth, D. O. 2006. Evidence of Ethnic Discrimination in the Swedish Labor Market Using Experimental Data. Labor Economics. 14 (4), 716-729.
Carusi, R. M. 2021. Lacan and Critical Feminism: Subjectivity, Sexuation, and Discourse. London: Routledge. Cederström, C. and Hoedemaekers, C. eds. 2010. Lacan and Organization. London: MayFly.
Chrobot-Mason, D., Hoobler, J. M. and Burno, J. 2019. Lean in Versus the Literature: An Evidence-based Examination. Academy of Management Perspectives. 33 (1), 110-130.
Cohen, L. and Duberley, J. 2017. Gender Equality: Universities are Still All Talk and too Many Trousers. [Online]. [Located April 28, 2018]. Available at: https://language.timeshighereducation.com/comment/gender-equality-universities-are-still-all-talk-and-too-many-trousers.
Cole, K. and Hassel, H. Eds. 2017. Surviving Sexism in Academia: Strategies for Feminist Leadership. New York, NY: Routledge.
Cremin C. 2010. Never Employable Enough: The (Im)possibility of Satisfying the Boss’s Desire.Marketing Theory. 17 (2), 387-403. doi:10.1177/147059310333001
Fine, C. 2013. Delusions of Gender: How our Minds, Society and Neurosexism Create Differences. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Fink, B. 1997. A Clinical Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis: Theory and Technique. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Fink, B. 2004. Lacan to the Letter. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Fotaki, M. 2013. No Woman is Like a Man (in Academia): The Masculine Symbolic Order and the Unwanted Female Body. Organization Studies. 34 (9), 1251-1275. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0170840613483658
Fotaki, M. and Harding, N. 2012. Lacan and Sexual Difference in Organization and Management Theory: Towards a Hysterical Academy? Organization. 20 (2), 153-172. http://org.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/02/05/1350508411435280.
Gaustad, T. and Raknes, K. 2015. Menn som ikke liker karrierekvinner: hovedresultater fra en eksperimentell undersøgelse. Norge: Markedshøyskolen og Tankesmien Agenda.
Grosz, E. 1990. Jacques Lacan: A Feminist Introduction. New York: Routledge.
Guarino, C. M. and Borden, V. 2017. Faculty Service Loads and Gender: Are Women Taking Care of the Academic Family?Research in Higher Education. 58 (6), 672-694. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9454-2
Harding, N. 2007. On Lacan and the ‘Becoming-ness’ of Organizations/selves. Organization Studies. 28, 1761-1773. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0170840607082225
Hassin, R. R., Uleman, J. S. and Bargh, J. A. 2005. The New Unconscious. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heilman, M. E. 1995. Sex Stereotypes and their Effects in the Workplace: What we Know and What we Don’t Know. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 10, 3-26.
Heilman, M. E. 2001. Description and Prescription: How Gender Stereotypes Prevent Women’s Ascent up the Organizational Ladder. Journal of Social Issues. 57 (4), 657-674. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00234
Hoedemaekers, C. 2007. Bringing Back the Subject: Contracting and the Discipline of the Market. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 20 (1), 145-150
Hoedemaekers, C. and Keegan, A. 2010. Performance Pinned Down: Studying Subjectivity and the Language of Performance. Organization Studies. 31 (8), 1021-1044.
Holroyd, J. 2012. Responsibility for Implicit Bias. Journal of Social Philosophy. 43 (3), 274-306.
Holroyd, J. 2015. Implicit Bias, Awareness and Imperfect Cognitions. Consciousness and Cognition. 33, 511-523.
Hook, D. 2006. Lacan, the Meaning of the Phallus and the ‘Sexed’ Subject. In: Shefer, T., Boonzaier, F. and Kiguwa P. eds. The Gender of Psychology. Lansdowne: Juta Academic Publishing, 60-84.
Huopalainen, A. and Satama, S. 2019. Mothers and Researchers in the Making: Negotiating ‘New’ Motherhood within the ‘New’ Scademia. Human Relations. 72 (1), 98-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718764571
Irigaray, L. 1985. This Sex that is Not One. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Irigaray, L. 1993. An Ethics of Sexual Difference. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kapoor, I. 2014. Psychoanalysis and Development: Contributions, Examples, Limits. Third World Quarterly. 35 (7), 1120-1143. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2014.926101
Kenny, K., Haugh, H. and Fotaki, M. 2019. Organizational Form and Pro-social Fantasy in Social Enterprise Creation.Human Relations.73 (1), 94-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718821413
Kimmel, M. 2016. The Gendered Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Koskinen Sandberg, P., Törnroos, M. and Kohvakka, R. 2018. The Institutionalized Undervaluation of Women’s Work: The Case of Local Government Sector Collective Agreements. Work, Employment and Society. 32 (4), 707-725. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017017711100
Kristeva, J. 1980. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Translated by Gora, T., Jardine, A. and Roudiez, L. S. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lacan, J. 2006. É crits. The fi rst Complete Edition in English. Translated by B. Fink. New York: London.
LERU. 2018. Implicit Bias in Academia: A Challenge to the Meritocratic Principle and to Women’s Careers—And What to do About it. [Online]. Available at: https://www.leru.org/fi les/implicit-bias-in-academia-full-paper.pdf
LERU. 2019. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion at Universities: The Power of a Systemic Approach. [Online]. Available at: https://www.leru.org/fi les/LERU-EDI-paper_fi nal.pdf
Long, J., Scott, A., Paul, D. and McGinnis, R. 1993. Rank Advancement in Academic Careers: Sex Differences and Effects on Productivity. American Sociological Review. 58, 703-722. doi: 10.2307/2096282
Lund, R. 2012. Publishing to Become an ‘Ideal Academic’: An Institutional Ethnography and a Feminist Critique. Scandinavian Journal of Management. 28 (3), 218-228. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0956522112000784?via%3Dihub
Moi, T. 2004. From Femininity to Finitude: Freud, Lacan, and Feminism, Again. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. 29 (3),841-78. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/380630
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. and Handelsman, J. 2012. Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences for the United States of America. 109 (41), 16474-16479.
Muhr, S. L. 2011. Caught in the Gendered Machine: On the Masculine and Feminine in Cyborg Leadership. Gender, Work and Organization. 18 (3), 337-357.
Muhr, S. L. 2019. Ledelse af køn. Hvordan kønsstereotyper former kvinders og mænds karrierer. En bog om barrierer og nye strategier. København: DJØFs Forlag.
Munar, A. M. and Villesèche, F. 2016. Gender and Academic Leadership Practices at Copenhagen Business School. Frederiksberg: Copenhagen Business School, CBS. https://research.cbs.dk/en/publications/gender-and-academic-leadership-practices-at-copenhagen-business-s
Munar, A. M. 2018. Hyper Academia. International Journal of Tourism Cities. 5 (2), 219-231. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJTC-12-2017-0083
Naulleau, M. 2013. From the Organizational Other to the Managerial Other. Conference on Re-Working Lacan at Work, June, ESCP Europe, Paris.
Parker, I. 2005. Lacanian Discourse Analysis in Psychology: Seven Theoretical Elements. Theory and Psychology. 15 (2), 163-182.
Phills, C. E., Kawakami, K., Krusemark, D. R. and Nguyen, J. 2019. Does Reducing Implicit Prejudice Increase Out-group Identifi cation? The Downstream Consequences of Evaluative Training on Associations between the Self and Racial Categories. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 10 (1), 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617732817
Rippon, G. 2019. The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience that Shatters the Myth of the Female Brain. London: Penguin Random House.
Risberg, A. and Pilhofer, K. 2018. Diversity and Difference Research: A Refl ection on Categories and Categorization. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organizations. 18 (1), 131-148.
Saini, A. 2018. How Science got Women Wrong and the New Research that’s Rewriting the Story. London: 4th Estate.
Salinas, P. C. and Bagni, C. 2017. Gender Equality from a European Perspective: Myth and Reality. Neuron. 6 (4), 721-729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.10.002
Sandberg, S. 2013. Lean in: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
Segal, L. 1996. Feminism in Psychoanalysis: Creativity, Conservatism, and Confi nement. New Formations. 28, 85-100.
Toffoletti, K. and Starr, K. 2016. Women Academics and Work–life Balance: Gendered Discourses of Work and Care. Gender, Work & Organization. 23 (5), 489-504. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12133
UNESCO. 2019. Women in Science Report. [Online]. Available at: http://uis.unesco.org/en/topic/women-science
van den Brink, M., Benschop, Y. and Jansen, W. 2010. Transparency in Academic Recruitment: A Problematic Tool for Gender Equality? Organization Studies. 31 (11), 1459-1483. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840610380812
van den Brink, M. and Benschop, Y. 2012. Gender Practices in the Construction of Academic Excellence: Sheep with Five Legs. Organization. 19, 507-524. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508411414293
Žižek, S. 1989. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso.
Žižek, S. 1997. The Plague of Fantasies. London: Verso.
Ž iž ek, S. 2006. How to Read Lacan. London: Norton.
Downloads
Publiceret
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Dette værk er under følgende licens Creative Commons Navngivelse –Ikke-kommerciel (by-nc).
Udgivelser i Kvinder, Køn og Forskning er beskyttet under Creative Commons License: CC Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0
