IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/gender/v33y2026i3p931-946.html

Eyes Wide Shut: Gender Blindness and the Market of Privilege in Polish Academia

Author

Listed:
  • Anna M. Gorska
  • Elena P. Antonacopoulou
  • Nina Kotula

Abstract

This article makes a compelling contribution in advancing our understanding of the unintended consequences of gender equality initiatives within Polish higher education institutions (HEIs) by demonstrating the willful ignorance of the persistent inequalities, which we term the phenomenon of “eyes wide shut.” Consistent with the previous reference to neoliberal policies perpetuating a “market of privilege” that fosters gender blindness and enhances systemic inequalities, our analysis extends these by drawing attention to the lack of ownership and accountability in addressing these inequalities. It is about the emerging phenomenon of willfully ignoring persistent gender inequalities by choosing not to take a stance, despite being afforded that choice as a social actor. Drawing on in‐depth qualitative research involving 30 academics from Polish business schools, we reveal a widespread belief in meritocracy, especially among male participants, who claim that academic work is solely competence‐based and thus disregard gender inequalities. This gender‐blind stance not only neglects the structural challenges faced by women but also perpetuates male‐dominated and hegemonic academic norms. We identify a paradox where gender equality initiatives, often viewed as unnecessary or forced, provoke resistance from some male academics, who perceive them as discriminatory. Men in the study expressed feelings of reverse discrimination, citing concerns over women's increasing presence in leadership roles and all‐female research teams. At the same time, female academics frequently recount experiences of marginalization and inequality. These narratives showcase how gender blindness reinforces a market of privilege by willfully ignoring them. We make the case that alongside concepts such as gender blindness as a mechanism that upholds a market of privilege in academia, where perceived neutrality conceals persistent gender biases, there is also the reluctance to own up and to exercise the choice afforded to social actors to address gender inequalities. We conceptualize this willful refusal to act as part of the phenomenon we term “eyes wide shut.” We explain this phenomenon as another unintended consequence of neoliberal systems modeled after Western standards that fail to create genuine equality. We adopt a place‐based orientation that helps us explain this willful ignorance as a consequence of the broader sociocultural and historical context in which Polish HEIs operate.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna M. Gorska & Elena P. Antonacopoulou & Nina Kotula, 2026. "Eyes Wide Shut: Gender Blindness and the Market of Privilege in Polish Academia," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 931-946, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:33:y:2026:i:3:p:931-946
    DOI: 10.1111/gwao.70097
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.70097
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/gwao.70097?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elena P. Antonacopoulou & Andri Georgiadou, 2021. "Leading through social distancing: The future of work, corporations and leadership from home," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 749-767, March.
    2. Margaret Sims, 2021. "Women Academics in the World of Neoliberal, Managerial Higher Education," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-7, March.
    3. Emanuel Kulczycki & Tim C. E. Engels & Janne Pölönen & Kasper Bruun & Marta Dušková & Raf Guns & Robert Nowotniak & Michal Petr & Gunnar Sivertsen & Andreja Istenič Starčič & Alesia Zuccala, 2018. "Publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities: evidence from eight European countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 463-486, July.
    4. Friederike Mengel & Jan Sauermann & Ulf Zölitz, 2019. "Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 535-566.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Masso, Jaan & Meriküll, Jaanika & Roosaar, Liis & Rõigas, Kärt & Paas, Tiiu, 2025. "What determines the gender pay gap in academia?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2018. "Gender & Collaboration," Working Papers 856, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    3. Sarah Shandera & Jes L Matsick & David R Hunter & Louis Leblond, 2021. "RASE: Modeling cumulative disadvantage due to marginalized group status in academia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Paula Franklin & Wouter Zwysen & Agnieszka Piasna, 2022. "Temporal Dimensions of Job Quality and Gender: Exploring Differences in the Associations of Working Time and Health between Women and Men," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Pantea Kamrani & Isabelle Dorsch & Wolfgang G. Stock, 2021. "Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5489-5508, July.
    6. Daniela De Filippo & Fernanda Morillo & Borja González-Albo, 2023. "Measuring the Impact and Influence of Scientific Activity in the Humanities and Social Sciences," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Ayllón, Sara, 2022. "Online teaching and gender bias," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    8. Boring, Anne & Philippe, Arnaud, 2021. "Reducing discrimination in the field: Evidence from an awareness raising intervention targeting gender biases in student evaluations of teaching," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    9. Dakota Murray & Clara Boothby & Huimeng Zhao & Vanessa Minik & Nicolas Bérubé & Vincent Larivière & Cassidy R Sugimoto, 2020. "Exploring the personal and professional factors associated with student evaluations of tenure-track faculty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-21, June.
    10. Funk, Patricia & Iriberri, Nagore & Savio, Giulia, 2024. "Does scarcity of female instructors create demand for diversity among students? Evidence from an M-Turk experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    11. Lazebnik, Teddy & Aviv-Reuven, Shir & Rosenfeld, Ariel, 2025. "Publishing instincts: An exploration-exploitation framework for studying academic publishing behavior and “Home Venues”," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3).
    12. Paul Heidhues & Botond KH{o}szegi & Philipp Strack, 2019. "Overconfidence and Prejudice," Papers 1909.08497, arXiv.org.
    13. Matúš Adamkovič & Michal Kentoš & Pavol Kačmár & Lenka Vargová & Gabriel Baník & Marcel Martončik, 2025. "The state of Slovak scientific literature published between 1993 and 2022: a bibliometric overview focused on social sciences and humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(10), pages 5571-5589, October.
    14. Valerio Capraro & Hélène Barcelo, 2021. "Punishing defectors and rewarding cooperators: Do people discriminate between genders?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(1), pages 19-32, September.
    15. Marina N. Astakhova & Violet T. Ho & Alexander S. McKay, 2024. "Passion Amid the Pandemic: Applying a Person‐Centered Approach to Examine Cross‐Domain Multi‐Passion Profiles during a Crisis," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 1457-1497, June.
    16. Hani Mansour & Daniel I. Rees & Bryson M. Rintala & Nathan N. Wozny, 2022. "The Effects of Professor Gender on the Postgraduation Outcomes of Female Students," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(3), pages 693-715, May.
    17. Francine D. Blau & Lisa M. Lynch, 2024. "Fifty Years of Breakthroughs and Barriers: Women in Economics, Policy, and Leadership," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 711(1), pages 225-244, January.
    18. Friederike Mengel & Jan Sauermann & Ulf Zölitz, 2019. "Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 535-566.
    19. Anna Schlueter & Stefan Gold, 2025. "Contextualization and Context Effects: An Integrative Review of Studies on the Outcomes of Diversity Management Practices," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 6461-6474, September.
    20. Jordi Ardanuy & Llorenç Arguimbau & Ángel Borrego, 2022. "Social sciences and humanities research funded under the European Union Sixth Framework Programme (2002–2006): a long-term assessment of projects, acknowledgements and publications," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:33:y:2026:i:3:p:931-946. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0968-6673 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.