Gender in Academic Career Tracks: The Case of Korean Biochemists

How important is academic performance in obtaining a tenure‐track position in academic science? I use data on Korean biochemists and analyze them from both institutionalist and gender perspectives. In so doing, I illustrate the ways academic performance and gender interact with one another to maintain a gender barrier for Ph.D.s entering an academic career. The main findings are as follows. First, academic productivity did influence the job market outcomes, but the male scientists benefited from publications in both SCI and non‐SCI journals, whereas the female scientists benefited only from those in SCI journals. I also found a positive effect of overseas doctoral training only for the female scientists. Such analysis suggests that women as a minority in academic science are pressured to prove their legitimacy through more rigorous criteria of academic performance. Thus, ostensibly gender‐neutral rules of academic performance can be applied in such a way as to maintain gender inequality.     

Continuity and Change in Place Stratification: Spatial Inequality and Middle‐Range Territorial Units*

Abstract Sociologists have produced large, well‐known literatures on inequality across geographic territory at two ends of the spatial scale continuum, within the city and across nation‐states. In this paper, I discuss a different scale of focus, subnational stratification processes across middle‐range spatial units, those between the city and nation‐state. While characterizing much contemporary rural sociological research, this approach to spatial inequality does not tend to be seen as a coherent tradition that cross‐cuts substantive areas. First, I discuss why attention to subnational inequality, rural regions, and middle‐range spatial units are important to social science understanding of stratification processes. Second, I provide an overview of contemporary research traditions in rural sociology which, taken together, form a distinct and innovative approach to spatial inequality. Third, I draw from my own work to explain how factors affecting socioeconomic inequalities across middle‐range territorial units may be conceptualized and provide two sets of empirical examples. Finally, I discuss what should be done in terms of furthering rural sociology's regional approach to spatial inequality.     

Crumbling Ivory Towers: Academic Organizing and its Gender Effects

The under‐representation of women at the top of the academy is a persistent and fascinating issue, mostly analysed as a result of women's choices or as an issue of personnel management. In this article, the focus is on the functioning of universities as social institutions, where gender is ‘done’ in a specific way. We analyse how the structural, cultural and procedural arrangements of academic organizing constitute gender relations and are specifically interested in the social construction of scientific quality. The ‘normal’ standards for scientific quality reflect the traditions of the natural sciences, with the Olympus as dominant image: the excellent scientist as lonely hero at the top, far distanced from everyday practices. This conception reflects a hegemonic position privileging masculinity. Alternatively, in an Agora model, science is not an autonomous institution, but becomes a societal practice tightly bound with other societal practices concerning the production, transmission, translation and exchange of knowledge. The scientific ideal of the Agora entails greater public accountability, social responsibility and transparency. This model reflects to a certain extent the scientific activities and achievements of female scientists, and we expect that gender will be done differently in it. In our view, the integration and mainstreaming of gender issues within the academy will serve as a strong impetus to the necessary modernization of academia and academic organizing. But this implies a critical reflection on the social constructed nature of any conception of ‘quality’.     

Bridging the Gap: ‘Doing Gender’, ‘Hegemonic Masculinity’, and the Educational Troubles of Boys

This article reviews popular and social scientific perspectives on the academic gender gap in education, specifically the finding that boys underperform compared to girls. The article highlights the utility of sociology in analyzing the gender gap and in guiding how educators respond to students’ gender. It suggests that contemporary gender theories ‘doing gender’ and ‘hegemonic masculinity’ offer the best lenses through which to view academic gender differences. These perspectives can frame boys’ academic troubles as an important social problem, but one that is rooted in the social construction of masculinity rather than institutional discrimination against boys.     

The Presentation of Occupational Self in Science

I examine the ways in which scientists create and present self-identities. Previous work, in particular research on social stratification in science, has underplayed identity and its contextual variations. I draw upon interviews with scientists who work in two distinct types of American universities, which provides a comparative basis on which to study identities in different contexts of scientific practice. I focus on three aspects of careers, which ground my comparative analysis: commitment, mobility concerns, and the uses of work history.     

Excellent and gender equal? Academic motherhood and ‘gender blindness' in Norwegian academia

This article explores Norwegian female academics' experiences with academic motherhood in an organizational perspective. A main finding is that academia as an organization is greedy, uncertain, and has ‘blind spots' that reveal gender bias related to gender and parental status, especially mothers. By analysing the link between gendered organization of work and the legitimatizing of gender inequality, the article reveals ‘gender blindness' in the academic organization concerning gender and parental status. The article concludes that changes in academia — in line with academic capitalism — may indicate that the Norwegian model of work–life balance is under pressure. This article suggests that the organizational conditions for academic motherhood are important factors in order to understand the persistence of gender inequality.     

GENDER,MORTALITY, AND CORPOREAL INEQUALITY

Most previous empirical analyses of gender inequality have focused on modern economic indicators such as income. The advancement of theory on gender stratification requires detailed analysis of indicators with greater endurance and prevalence in world-historical terms. Sex mortality differentials are presented as cross-cultural indicators of corporeal gender inequality, defined as differential access to basic bodily resources for life and health. Indeed, mortality differentials represent a more fundamental form of gender inequality, in that women first must be alive before they may be denied access to other resources such as equal pay. Analysis of United Nations and World Bank data on developed and developing countries evidence the importance of ecological, economic, and familial explanations in determining corporeal gender inequality. Women's familial roles are found to be more important for gender inequalities in death at younger ages, and women's economic roles are more important for death at older ages. Implications of the results for mortality decline and gender stratification theory are discussed.     

Revisiting Joan Acker's work with the support of Joan Acker

This article is a personal tribute to working with Joan Acker. I worked with Joan in 2012, helping to edit her own thoughts and reflection on how other academics evaluate and used her own theorizing, specifically her seminal work on the gender substructure and inequality regimes. However, while this article is a tribute to Joan, her work and her thinking; it is also a personal thank you to someone I will miss for her generosity and also her activism in challenging inequalities in organizations and beyond. She continues to inspire me and hopefully others to challenge for social justice. In her 80s, Joan remained committed to addressing inequalities in social relations and how these were experienced within a dynamic social and work environment. During our collaboration, she called upon academics to put theory into practice to help address visible and invisible inequalities in organizational processes. This article is inspired by that experience and it will reveal Joan's views about her own, and other academics, theorizing of her two key concepts: the gender substructure of organizations and inequality regimes in organizations and the overlap with intersectionality. This article will offer a unique opportunity to gain insight into Joan's thinking as an academic sociologist as well as a feminist activist thereby uniting Joan as a person with her concepts.     

Gendered Power and Privilege: Taking Lenski One Step Further

In Power and Privilege , Gerhard Lenski's theory of the evolution of systems of inequality, he showed some recognition of gender inequality but, as universally accepted in sociology at the time, "social" stratification was conceptualized implicitly as inequality between male household heads. To move from this to explaining gender inequality requires consideration of constructs in addition to those developed by Lenski, but in terms of his typology of societies based on technology and size of economic surplus, the level of gender stratification tracks that of "social" stratification and the basic variables he delineates remain centrally important.     

The material and the symbolic in theorizing social stratification: issues of gender, ethnicity and class

Within most approaches to stratification gender and ethnicity are seen to pertain primarily to the symbolic or cultural realms, whilst class is regarded as pertaining to material inequality. This constructs gender and ethnic positioning as entailing honour, deference, worth, value and differential treatment (sometimes expressed through the notion of 'status'), but the social relations around these are themselves not seen as constitutive of social stratification. In this paper I will rethink social stratification away from the polarity between the material and the symbolic, and argue that material inequality, as a set of outcomes relating to life conditions, life chances and solidary processes, is informed by claims and struggles over resources of different types, undertaken in terms of gender, ethnicity/race and class. This formulation allows us to include these categorial formations, alongside class, as important elements of social stratification i.e. as determining the allocation of socially valued resources and social places/locations.     

Men's and Women's Beliefs About Gender Inequality: Family Ties,Dependence, and Agreement

This paper addresses an often stated but rarefy tested assumption in feminist theory: that women's dependence on men and the high degree of intimate contact between women and men shape women's consciousness of gender stratification, encouraging them to develop interpretations of gender inequality similar to men's. I explore this issue by examining whether women's dependence on men and family ties to men are associated with the degree of similarity in men's and women's gender-related attitudes, using data from a national probability sample of adults in the United States. The analyses presented are not conclusive, but they do suggest that further inquiry into the role of dependence and family ties in drawing women's interpretations of gender inequality toward men's is merited.     

Stratification in American Science*

Although differential ranking in science is not readily visible to lay observers, American science is, in fact, sharply graded. Rewards and facilities for research are concentrated among relatively few investigators and organizations. This distinctive pattern of stratification, at odds with the egalitarian ethos of science, is not solely attributable to the distribution of talent in the scientific community. There is however a high correlation between assessed contributions to science and investigators' scientific standing. The present pattern of stratification is the outcome of processes of allocation of men and resources among various sectors of science which include selective recruitment and socialization of young investigators, differential access to publication and research facilities, and differential recognition of scientists' contributions through citations to their work and honorific awards. In a time when the legitimacy of reward systems in many social institutions is routinely challenged, scientists are apt to accept their own as just and correct.     

Should trans people be postmodernist in the streets but positivist in the spreadsheets? A reply to Sullivan

ABSTRACT

Accurate census data is essential for a variety of government planning functions and plays an important methodological role in social science. This article responds to issues raised by Alice Sullivan concerning how the UK 2021 census will ask about sex and gender. The two-centuries-old question about male/female sex is not ideal, even with the new guidance proposed; however, I will argue that the proposed changes are unlikely to cause harm. The new open-ended census question on gender identity is welcome and will yield important data. I also respond to Sullivan‘s worries that “queer postmodernists” are “coming for” questionnaires and threaten the sanctity of scientific fact. Sullivan misrepresents trans-inclusive gender theories and how scientific research explaining sex/gender differences is carried out. Finally, I discuss how questioning the ontological reality of trans gender identities leads to transphobic harassment and worse.     

The social stratification of time use patterns

Time use is both a cause of social inequality and a consequence of social inequality. However, how social class stratifies time use patterns is seldom studied. In this paper, I describe the time use patterns in the years 1983 and 2015 by social class, and gender in the British context. Using sequence analysis methods, I show how the diversity of time use patterns in British society is socially stratified. I find that 13 clusters capture the heterogeneity of time use patterns and that these clusters are associated with social class, gender, and day of the week. These clusters capture patterns of paid and unpaid work schedules, as well as leisure patterns. The results show that men have experienced a reduction of the standard Monday to Friday 8-hr working day, while women have experienced a general increase in this type of schedule. On the other hand, patterns of domestic working days have reduced for women and increased for men. Important differences exist in paid and unpaid work patterns between social classes. Working-class women have experienced an important increase in shift work on weekends. They are also much more likely to be doing unpaid work on weekdays compared to upper-class and middle-class women. Working-class men are more likely to experience non-working days and leisure days on both weekdays and weekends and are more likely to be doing shift work. They are also more often doing unpaid work on weekdays compared to men in upper-class households. Patterns of childcare indicate that all families have increased their childcare time. Men in upper-class households in particular have experienced an important growth in childcare time between 1983 and 2015. I conclude by discussing how time use can further our understanding of social stratification.     

What is new with old? What old age teaches us about inequality and stratification

Aging is remarkably unequal. Who survives to grow old in America and the circumstances they face once there reflect durable racial, socioeconomic, and gender inequalities that structure our lives from birth. Yet within the field of social stratification and mainstream sociology proper, examinations of the rapidly growing population of older Americans are often relegated to a “gerontological” periphery. This essay posits that the failure to place aging as a core concern in stratification and inequality is a missed opportunity. We argue for the importance of reintegrating studies on the stratification of aging and explain why such a move is necessary. Specifically, we posit that (a) examining the aging population is necessary for understanding American inequality because aging is an outcome that is ubiquitous yet highly stratified; (b) aging and being seen as “old” in a youth‐focused society are stratifying processes in their own right; and (c) later life provides for analytical comparisons that are illustrative of how key mechanisms of inequality structure and stratify. After examining insights provided by a new wave of research on the aging U.S. population, we revisit the implications for understanding inequality and stratification in a graying and unequal America.     

Conference reports

The lack of women engaging themselves in science has been thoroughly discussed in feminist and nonfeminist science studies. It has remained a mystery why so few female students take professional careers as scientists. Though more and more female students enroll in physics studies, for example, they seem to disappear before they reach academic positions. Instead of discussing this as a query of gender inequality in this article, I discuss the more general issues of inclusion and exclusion in communities of practices. I argue that selection mechanisms in a group of students can be connected to their premises for engaging themselves in an activity. As students have different embodied experiences, they also have different premises for engaging themselves. What seems like the same practice can, in fact, be analyzed as practices belonging to different activities. This approach might bring us a small step further in the discussions of the relations between gender and science.     

Political Inequality is International,Interdisciplinary, and Intersectional

Political inequality refers to the unequal influence over decisions made by political bodies and the unequal outcomes of those decisions. Political inequality is a subtype of power inequality, visible within the political processes of all kinds of political structures. In modern democracies, political inequality is simultaneously a dimension of democracy and a dimension of stratification. Two key theoretical and empirical questions are How much political inequality is there? and is political inequality rising, falling, or staying the same? The answer to these key questions requires us to specify the kind of political inequality – voice, response, and their subtypes – and whether we mean equality of political opportunities or of political outcomes. I argue that we need to understand better the form, duration, and magnitude of political inequality within and across nations. We need to study it systematically, continuously, and diligently, and in an inclusive, open‐minded way, inclining our ears to the varied contributions of the many academic disciplines. We should begin by studying political inequality as an international phenomenon and as an interdisciplinary enterprise, and from an intersectional approach.     

Outsider Scholars and Outsider Sociologists

If we take the time to look at the academy writ large and sociology as a discipline specifically, we can readily find the evidence to confirm a long‐standing exclusion of certain scholars from the academic mainstream. This exclusion is especially evident in the case of scholars of color, but also includes women, nonelites (e.g., college and graduate students who lack academic social capital from elders who have been through it and could help), and those who wish to push for a more humanist scientific agenda over purist positivist science. Sexism and racism keep us from seeing the best of our ideas emerge to bring the discipline forward. As if the pursuit of good work and good works are mutually exclusive, an embrace of purist positivism leads us to shun antiracist, antisexist, nonhumanist science, labeling it “advocacy” or worse, “activist,” and conversely, ceding ground to those who wrap themselves in “objectivity” even as they may further regressive agendas. This article makes a case for the existence of an “outsider scholar,” and outlines sociology's outsider problem. I argue that this problem endures at all levels of the academic endeavor, from undergraduate education all the way through to the ranks of administration. I conclude by offering remedies to lead us toward a more inclusive and social justice‐oriented sociology.     

“The Littlest Science” Revisited

I revisit Allan Mazur’s 1968 claim that sociology is “The Littlest Science.” In doing so, I review four decades of disciplinary battles on how sociology might raise its scientific profile. I examine data on public attitudes toward sociology as a science and how sociology is perceived by the larger scientific community. I conclude that taking a more interdisciplinary perspective will improve the scientific status of sociology.     

Beyond Presentism and Historicism: Understanding the History of Social Science

The revival of interest in the social scientific past has stimulated a growing literature on the methodology of the history of social science. Existing "presentist" type histories have been criticized for their "Whiggish" assumptions about scientific progress. The critique of presentism is the product of a new school of historians of social science who advocate a "historicist" historiography. My paper is addressed to this discussion and falls into three parts. First, I review the principles of presentist and historicist historiographies, relating their methodological positions to their theories of science. Second, I take up the argument of the "new historicism" in more detail, criticizing its theory of textual interpretation and its theory of social scientific development. I conclude by offering an alternative historiographic model of social scientific development based upon a theory of science that I outline.