Fashion has always been seen as a feminized industry and is dominated by women in the workplace. Throughout time, we have seen everything relating to this art form and industry catered to the female gaze. However, discrimination within creative industries and female-dominated careers is still very prevalent. This idea is displayed through a concept called “the glass ceiling,” which is the acknowledgment of a barrier to advancement within a profession that affects women and minorities. Superior and prestigious positions are generally given to men in the fashion industry, as well as more encouragement throughout their careers. There are hidden advantages sprinkled throughout the profession that allow men to succeed in the workplace.
These advantages are actually shown in creative industries as a whole. While these industries are believed to be dominated by women, the superior positions are mainly held by men. A survey revealed that gender inequality has been witnessed as an issue in fashion by 100% of women. In contrast, less than 50% of men surveyed agreed with this statement. This issue goes unseen by the majority of men, who hold leadership roles within the profession. Inequality is quite pervasive in gendered careers for both men and women, although the effects vary. When looking at executive positions in this profession, there are very few women who hold them at bigger companies. In addition, there is a small amount of female designers that are known in ways such as Michael Kors. I am intrigued to understand the reasoning behind why men are given such a large advantage in a female-dominated industry.
Female-dominated industries, specifically fashion, are presumably catered towards women in the workplace. However, it is shown that men succeed much further in the profession due to advantages that are hidden within the industry. This notion led me to ask, what allows for gender inequality to flourish and overwhelm the fashion industry? How do these advantages allow for men to succeed and continue to put down women? The concept of why these biases exist and how they thrive is a lively debate by sociologists and feminists.
The foundation of these industries is what develops gender inequality, the stereotypes around creative professions are what allow sexism to determine these gendered careers. David Hesmondhalgh, a professor at the University of Leeds and the head of the Media Industries Research Center, encourages the concept of this discrimination being built by these stereotypes with the help of Sarah Baker. Sarah Baker is a Lecturer in Cultural Sociology at Griffith University, Australia. She has written multiple journal articles and book chapters. They conducted a study from 2006-2007 based on interviews and participant observation. The participants were both men and women within creative industries This study exposes the separation between men and women in creative industries. While men are given the more creative and directorial roles, women are given positions that organize and manage their ideas. It stated that the opposing issue is stereotyping and how women are perceived in the workplace.
They further expand on this concept, correlating the characteristics of “female” careers and the common generalization of women. The two both are detailed as passive, nurturance, and cooperativeness; creating a false stereotype that influences the idea of feminine jobs. Following this connection amplifies men into receiving more leadership and creative roles. This leads women to receive lower pay, lower positions, and fewer promotions throughout their career path. Hesmondhalgh expresses how gendered professions “serve to marginalize women from the more prestigious creative roles and even sectors in the cultural industries,” (36). The results of the study show the notion of stereotypes is very harmful in these industries, as it oppresses women in the workplace and diminishes their abilities. The foundation of creative industries encouraged discrimination to arise within the workplace.
Discrimination in creative industries is constantly encouraged by harmful stereotypes. While men in creative industries are usually criticized by others for participating in a female-dominated profession, the reason behind this is due to the initial animosity towards women. Christine L Williams, who is a Professor of Sociology at the University of Texas, interviewed 76 men and 23 women in female-centered industries to inspect the inequalities faced by both genders. The interviews conclude that men are mainly condemned by outsiders in the industries, highlighting them as being perceived as less masculine. On the contrary, their peers within the professions treat them with positive feedback. This guides back to Hesmondhalgh and Baker’s ideas of stereotypes are what fuel discrimination in these careers
The men interviewed recalled that they were consistently told to seek higher positions within the industry. The interviews from both men and women show that creative industries prefer to hire men due to the lack of them in these professions. The study concluded that men are less likely to experience discrimination in these careers, compared to women who are chastised to encourage men. Williams discusses the subtle mechanisms used to aid men in the system. Her study illustrates that “men are given fair -if not preferential treatment- in hiring and promotion decisions, are accepted by supervisors and colleagues, and are well-integrated into the workplace subculture,” (Williams 263). This is influenced by the foundation of these industries, stereotypes; which indulge men as being leaders and fit for more prestigious careers.
The fashion industry is one of these female-dominated industries that continues to motivate men by putting down women. Allyson Stokes, an assistant professor in sociology at Memorial University, conducted a study from compiled research and data to examine the praise given the male designers over women. The study is based upon Stokes’ personal research on 157 designers under Voguepedia, Vogue’s list of top designers. Stokes articulates the empowerment given to gay men over women of any sexual orientation. Within the fashion industry, women are framed with the same passive role previously discussed, once again uplifting men to pursue leadership careers. It is shown that male designers benefit from these stereotypes of being dominant, which is supported by both Williams and Hesmondhalgh’s discussions as well. Their work is considered more unique and authentic due to the fact they are considered the “outlier” within the industry.
This study articulates the benefits male designers receive in an industry people see as predominantly female. Stokes illuminates the experiences of men in this workplace and states that they “are shaped by disadvantages in the broader labor market, gender inequality within the field, and essentialist ideas about gender and sexual difference,” (252). Women are consistently withheld from better opportunities within design and fashion, proving there are hidden advantages in this industry. Furthermore, the study shows that family relationships have a big impact on these women by placing them in a maternal characterization. It addresses how women have lost prestigious job positions due to having children, her employer stating he did not want to “share her with her kids” (232). This nuclear family concept, where the wife stays at home while her husband works, influences the stereotypes that harm women in the workplace. Men are still seen as the providers for families and women are urged to be the sole caregivers, giving men in any industry an advantage to more prestigious jobs.
Stokes’ study builds upon the previously mentioned studies by Hesmondhalgh and Williams by inspecting the discrimination at a specific position. All of the researchers come to the same conclusion of what is causing it: stereotypes. The passive and nurturing nature that women are characterized by has caused them to lose jobs due to being seen as the caregivers of their families. This further encourages the notion of men being seen as the providers, increasing their chances for higher and more prestigious positions. Hesmondhalgh and Williams discuss this discrimination in a broader source, which provides Stokes’ research to be dissected on a larger scale. It explains why and how behind the inequality in fashion and female-dominated careers.
The fashion industry, although a female-dominated industry, continuously discriminates against women and uplifts men. It is seen that men still face forms of inequality in creative industries but in forms outside of the workplace. The LGBTQ+ community is very connected to fashion, embracing its fluidity and expression. Homophobia is faced frequently by gay male designers, but this discrimination is influenced by people outside of the fashion industry. This is not to discredit their work, however, it is to examine how these inequalities are formed and portrayed within the industry. The foundation of the industry is what creates these negative stereotypes that harm both men and women. Dismantling this patriarchal mindset throughout creative industries will allow for more equal opportunities for everyone.
There is an invisible advantage to men in creative industries, which is endorsed by stereotypes that have been around for centuries. Although on the outside fashion seems to be dominated by women, it is controlled by men, along with many other careers. The main disadvantages women face consist of the underrepresentation of their voices, equal pay for work of equal value, unpaid care work, and exposure to discrimination and violence. As I have noted, the stereotypical nature of how women are perceived is the driving force behind this discrimination. Men and women both experience hatred and ridicule in this genre of career, either by their peers or outsiders. The importance is to break down the generalizations based on gendered careers and encourage equal opportunities in every area.
Fashion is perceived as a female-dominated industry, however, my research has led me to believe that while the majority of workers may be women, men still hold higher positions. This is due to the stereotypes built into the foundation of all creative industries and gendered organizations. These generalizations allow for discrimination to seep its way into the fashion industry in different ways. Women are guided towards lower positions and are underrepresented by the profession, men are praised by their peers and ridiculed by their peers. These harmful ideas impact both men and women of all positions in female-dominated industries, destroying the negativity will allow both parties to succeed to their fullest based on talent and personality.
No comments yet.