Sex Roles

, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 209–223 | Cite as

Why academic women do not revolt

Implications for affirmative action
  • Lora Liss

Abstract

Low perceptions of sex discrimination among full-time women faculty interviewed at a multicampus northeastern university in a major metropolitan area are explained and compared with statistical data documenting inequities in salary, promotion, rank, and tenure. Structural reasons for the misperceptions are offered, such as concentration in lowest ranks, pluralistic ignorance, merit myths, and cooptation. Data are generalizable because similar patterns prevail at most educational institutions. The study highlights the irony of the way women perceive their status and their own documentation of the day-to-day inequities which cumulatively result in the statistical patterns now accepted by the United States Supreme Court as prima facie evidence of sex discrimination. Solving status inequalities requires strong social networks among women, according to the author. Affirmative action recommendations are outlined to close the gap between women faculty and administrators without resorting to the courts.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Astin, H. S., & Bayer, A. E. Sex discrimination in academe. Educational Record, 1972, Spring.Google Scholar
  2. Bayer, A. E. Teaching faculty in academe: 1972–73. American Council on Education Research Reports, 1973, 8 (2).Google Scholar
  3. Bernard, J. Academic women. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Penn State University Press, 1964.Google Scholar
  4. Blau, P. Parameters of social structure. American Sociological Review, 1974, 39 (5), 615–35.Google Scholar
  5. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. Opportunities for women in higher education. Hightstown, New Jersey: McGraw-Hill, 1973.Google Scholar
  6. Domhoff, G. W. Who rules America? Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967.Google Scholar
  7. Epstein, C. Woman's place. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  8. Miller, S. M. The case for positive discrimination. Social Policy, 1973, Nov. Dec.: 71.Google Scholar
  9. Robinson, L. H. Institutional variations in the status of academic women. In A. S. Rossi & A. Calderwood (Eds.), Academic women on the move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.Google Scholar
  10. Roby, P. Institutional barriers to women in higher education. In A. S. Rossi & A. Calderwood (Eds.), Academic women on the move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.Google Scholar
  11. Rossi, A. S., & Calderwood, A. Academic women on the move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.Google Scholar
  12. Safilios-Rothschild, C. Women and social policy. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1974.Google Scholar
  13. Sandler, B. Little help from our government: WEAL and contract compliance. In A. S. Rossi & A. Calderwood (Eds.), Academic women on the move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.Google Scholar
  14. Sugnet, C. J. The uncertain progress of affirmative action. Change, 1974, 6 (May).Google Scholar
  15. Theodore, A. Academic women in protest. Mimeographed manuscript, 1974. Available from 27 Turning Mill Road, Lexington, Massachusetts.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lora Liss
    • 1
  1. 1.Affirmative Action OfficerLehigh UniversityBethlehem

Personalised recommendations