Zoë Thornhill, MA Education, Faculty of Education, Edge Hill University
Misogyny in higher education is often understood as something explicit: clear instances of harassment, discrimination or inappropriate behaviour. However, much of it operates in less visible ways, embedded within everyday interactions, institutional processes and the frameworks used to interpret harm.
This is what makes it difficult to identify. When behaviours do not fit easily within formal definitions, they are more likely to be minimised, reframed or dismissed altogether. In such cases, the absence of clear categorisation can lead to an absence of meaningful response.
This blog draws on research conducted as part of my MA in Education, which explored institutional responses to sexual harassment and misconduct within higher education. A key finding from this research was the tension between policy and practice. While universities have increasingly developed policies designed to address harassment and misconduct, the existence of a policy does not necessarily guarantee recognition, protection or meaningful action. Experiences that fall outside established categories can remain difficult to identify, articulate and address.
Rather than existing solely in individual actions, misogyny can also function structurally. It shapes how experiences are interpreted, whose accounts are considered credible and how institutions respond to reports of harm. In this sense, misogyny is not simply a matter of individual intent, but of wider systems that influence what is seen, acknowledged and acted upon. This reflects Kate Manne’s (2018) argument that misogyny often operates as a system that reinforces existing gendered expectations and norms rather than simply manifesting through overt acts of prejudice.
Higher education institutions have made significant progress in developing formal procedures and reporting mechanisms. These frameworks are essential. However, my research highlighted that institutional responses can sometimes struggle to engage with experiences that do not fit neatly within predefined categories. This can create a disconnect between policy and practice, where formal procedures exist, but individuals continue to experience barriers to recognition.
This challenge is reflected in Alison Phipps’ (2020) work on gender, sexual violence and higher education, which highlights how institutional frameworks can struggle to accommodate the complexity of lived experiences. When individuals are unable to clearly categorise what has happened to them, institutions may default to interpretations that minimise, neutralise or individualise the issue. The ambiguity surrounding an experience does not indicate the absence of harm, but may instead reveal limitations in the frameworks used to understand it.
Structural misogyny often operates through patterns rather than isolated incidents. It can be reflected in recurring dynamics: who is interrupted, who is scrutinised, whose behaviour is normalised and whose concerns are dismissed. As Sara Ahmed’s (2021) work on complaints and institutional culture demonstrates, organisations can find it difficult to recognise forms of harm that challenge established assumptions about how systems operate. The presence of a policy does not automatically mean that individuals feel heard, believed or protected.
If institutions are to respond effectively, they must be willing to engage with these complexities. This means creating space for experiences that do not fit neatly into predefined categories and recognising that effective policy requires more than written procedures alone. It requires a willingness to listen, reflect and critically examine the assumptions that shape institutional responses.
Misogyny in higher education is not always obvious. But its subtlety does not make it any less significant. My research suggests that recognition is often the first barrier to meaningful change. Before institutions can respond to harm, they must first be able to see it, understand it and, crucially, name it.
Biographical Note
Zoë is an Associate Tutor in Higher Education and a Geography specialist with a background as a qualified teacher. Her research interests focus on teacher development, professional wellbeing, and education policy, particularly in relation to how institutional structures influence the experiences of educators and those entering the profession. Follow her work on LinkedIn at Zoë Thornhill | LinkedIn.
Further Reading
Ahmed, S. (2021). Complaint!. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Manne, K. (2018). Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phipps, A. (2020). Me, Not You: The Trouble with Mainstream Feminism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
