Women versus Women

Thanks to Historiann for calling attention to an article in The New York Times about why some women undermine one another at work.

In the article, executive coach Peggy Klaus offers a familiar litany of explanations for such (mis)behavior:

Probably the most popular one is the scarcity excuse — the idea that there are too few spots at the top, so women at more senior levels are unwilling to assist female colleagues who could potentially replace them.

Another explanation is what I call the “D.I.Y. Bootstrap Theory,” which goes like this: “If I had to pull myself up by the bootstraps to get ahead with no one to help me, why should I help you? Do it yourself! […]”

Others contend that women mistreat one another because of hyperemotionality, leading them to become overly invested in insignificant nuances and causing them to hold grudges. I’ve encountered this phenomenon among women who feel personally assaulted when someone criticizes them or their ideas.

Historiann, however, shares some other ideas in her excellent post. She suggests that while the “scarcity excuse” might be a real factor in the traditional workplace, inside the ivory tower it makes little sense:

Unlike people outside of academia, who are vulnerable to layoffs and being replaced by younger and cheaper employees, tenured faculty are safe. They’re made men and women, so they have nothing to lose when their junior colleagues succeed, and if they have even a glimmer of civic-mindedness about their jobs they’ll be happy that their colleagues are thriving and making the department look good.

She also takes issue with with idea that “women mistreat one another because of hyperemotionality,” arguing instead that in her experience it is “men who are inclined to lash out emotionally” simply because they can get away with it. While a woman who shouts or gets angry (or, heaven forbid, cries) in the workplace is typically viewed as “a crazy b!tch,” a man can express anger without hurting his career, Historiann writes. In fact, men often “use anger” to their benefit — to make a point or get their way, she adds.

An overlooked, but better explanation is that women are generally “more critical of women, and they hold other women to higher standards than they do their male colleages. No matter what women do, it’s never enough, and it can always be twisted to be evidence of something bad that highlights a defect in your career,” Historiann concludes.

How prevalent is the phenomenon of women bullying other women in academe, and what explains it?