Agentic women face backlash because agency is accepted only in men

Evidence

From this perspective, to undermine gender hegemony, women need only present themselves as independent, competitive, and forceful creatures (i.e., “act like men”). Although this solution sounds simple, it has turned out to be untenable for women because agency is not only more expected of men, it is more accepted in men. For example, women who selfpromote, argue assertively, or defend themselves aggressively are viewed less favorably than identical male counterparts (see Rudman, 1998; Rudman & Fairchild, 2004, for reviews). Likewise, agentic women (but not men) are discriminated against when vying for leadership positions, even though agency is necessary for being viewed as competent and qualified (Rudman & Glick, 1999). When women do obtain leadership positions, they have a difficult time balancing the requisites of the work role with their gender role (Gutek, 1985). For example, female supervisors who lead in a taskoriented (versus a people-oriented) style are evaluated more negatively than male counterparts (Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992). These findings have led gender researchers to posit that sex stereotypes are not only descriptive (delineating what men and women are), but also prescriptive (delineating how men and women should be; Eagly, 1987). Thus, gendered beliefs overlap with attitudes, resulting in more prejudice directed toward women in masculine than feminine roles (Eagly & Diekman, ch. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 756

Categorization

• SHARE: Good candidate for sharing with someone in HR or leadership coaching: the empirical finding that female leaders using task-oriented styles are rated more negatively than male counterparts, even though that same agency is required to be seen as competent.
• XREF: connects to: Brands hired women as sales agents to exploit perceived female trustworthiness — Brooke Erin Duffy, (Not) Getting Paid to Do What You Love:…, 375