Deservingness and backlash: How gendered advantage is built and defended in equity-accredited universities

Abstract

Despite sustained investment in gender-equity initiatives, hierarchies of authority, legitimacy and reward remain entrenched in higher education. This paper synthesises two staff surveys conducted in Athena Swan-accredited institutions in the United Kingdom and SAGE Athena Swan-accredited institutions in Australia. We develop a processual account of how gendered advantage is accumulated and defended within institutions recognised for equity progress. Across the studies, encouragement, sponsorship, workload protection and recognition operated as informal judgements of deservingness that shaped who entered formal evaluation with credibility and institutional momentum. Resistance became more visible when equity initiatives rendered these arrangements contestable, appearing through appeals to merit, reverse-discrimination claims and institutional withdrawal. We theorise these mechanisms as operating at different organisational speeds: deservingness is slow, cumulative and ordinarily obscured, whereas backlash is faster, reactive and more visible. Backlash is therefore treated as diagnostic evidence of the status, resources and authority being defended. This framework explains how accreditation can generate substantial activity while leaving informal distributions of legitimacy comparatively intact.