Interrupting sexism at work: What drives men to respond directly or do nothing?

To interrupt or not interrupt: That is the question…

We found that men tend to respond to workplace sexism in a variety of ways, and that these responses can be classified into four categories: taking direct action; redirecting the conversation; indirectly reacting by making a joke or eye-rolling; and by doing nothing.¹ This report addresses the two most contrasting reactions: taking direct action and doing nothing. This approach allows us to learn what mobilizes men who choose to interrupt and to better understand what may lead men to do nothing.

Catalyst’s new study of nearly 1,500 men finds that:

• Personal agency links to men’s intent to take direct action to interrupt workplace sexism.
• Negative organizational climates can stifle men, increasing the likelihood that they do nothing.

Both of these elements—personal agency and organizational climate — predict men’s willingness and ability to intervene.

Understanding what drives men to interrupt sexism—and what inhibits them — can help organizations and leaders build work environments where employees feel valued, trusted, authentic, and psychologically safe. Our study shows it’s not enough for organizations to equip men with strategies to help them directly interrupt sexism. To create an environment that empowers men to interrupt sexism, companies must address their own cultures—within all levels and corners of the organization.

Our findings demonstrate that 44% of men’s intent to interrupt a sexist event in their workplace is explained by four aspects of personal agency.²

• Men more committed to dismantling sexism, confident in their ability to interrupt, aware of the positive benefits of interrupting, and invested in the impact on the common good are more likely to directly interrupt sexism.

In addition, 41% of men’s intent to do nothing to interrupt a sexist event in their workplace is explained by three organizational factors.³

• Organizational climates perceived by men to be more silencing, combative, and futile are associated with doing nothing in response to sexism at work.

About this study

Interrupting sexism at work¹⁰ is a research initiative exploring organizational conditions that encourage or discourage men from responding when they witness incidences of sexism in the workplace. The initiative includes countries in North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific.

Our first study, Interrupting sexism at work: How men respond in a Climate of Silence, drew on insights from Mexico to highlight the negative impacts of a climate of silence in the workplace on men’s intention to comment on sexist behaviours. It further showed that men who experience higher levels of silence in their workplace see more costs and fewer benefits in interrupting sexist behaviours in the workplace.¹¹

This second study explores what drives men to do nothing rather than directly interrupt sexism at work. We employ a mixed methodology, combining large-scale survey data with in-depth qualitative interviews.

All the data for this report was gathered in Canada. The 1,493 men who participated in our survey were employed full-time in the Canadian labour market and represent a diverse group, spanning industries, organizational ranks, job tenure, ages, and ethnic backgrounds.

While Canada is ranked second on the Women’s Workplace Equality Index,¹² Canadian women still fare worse than their male counterparts:¹³ They make up just 25% of vice presidents and 15% of CEOs in Canadian corporations, and are three times less likely to be promoted than men are.¹⁴

We also conducted interviews with 27 men across industries in Canada. These men shared candid, insightful, and sometimes sobering stories about sexism and gender equality, as well as their own views on what it takes to make change. All were engaged in gender-equity causes in their workplaces, had a history of such engagements, and/or expressed a commitment to helping remove gender-based discriminations. Interview questions homed in on interviewees’ perceptions of the factors that can promote or hinder men’s engagement in interrupting day-to-day sexism and achieving gender equity in the workplace.

At the time of the interviews, over 50% reported being in senior-management levels, 33% were in mid-level positions, and the remaining were either in entry-level or other ranks within their companies. Most interviewees (33%) reported fewer than six years of tenure at their current companies, and 15% reported six to 10 years. Interviewees who self-identified as white comprised more than 70% of the sample, while the remaining interviewees identified as Chinese, South Asian, and Indigenous or other.

How do men respond to sexism in the workplace?

There is a large body of research exploring how and why individuals respond to prejudice, including studies that specifically focus on confronting people who make sexist remarks or engage in sexist behaviour.¹⁵ This research has identified several barriers to interrupting sexism. For example, many people don’t recognize sexism in the first place or deem it inappropriate, or they don’t know how to address the behaviour.¹⁶ Research has also shown that men are worse than women at detecting sexism.¹⁷ And if a man can’t see the bias or doesn’t feel it should stop—much less know what to do—it’s unlikely that he’ll step in.

However, there is a shortage of data-based research on how individuals spontaneously address sexism, especially in the workplace. Our analyses show four categories of distinct behaviours among men when they’re faced with sexism. They include:¹⁸

• Directly interrupt — Remark on the inappropriateness of a sexist comment, either in the immediate situation or after it has occurred; attempt to educate the colleague who made the comment; or report the offense.
  Example: “A colleague was talking about women not being able to do something and should be in the kitchen. I said [it] is not acceptable to say that, and you should know better.”¹⁹
• Redirect — Attempt to sidestep the sexist behaviour and keep the conversation focused on the current task or redirect the conversation.
  Example: “A number of men were commenting on [the] appearance of women (in their absence)… over drinks. I didn’t say anything and tried to bring up different angles/topics to steer conversation away. But I never said that it wasn’t right to talk in that way.”²⁰
• Unassertively react — Show disagreement through non-verbal cues (e.g., rolling eyes), passive-aggressive comments, or humor or sarcasm.
  Example: “Derogatory comments were made about an individual who was not present. I expressed my disapproval by jokingly saying…’You’re gonna get us fired.’ I didn’t want to cause hard feelings with the person involved, but still wanted to express that I didn’t want to continue that conversation.”²¹
• Do nothing — Ignore the situation and/or rely on others to address it.
  Example: “My boss at the time [made an insensitive comment about a newly hired woman leader]. I was a new employee and did not feel comfortable telling my boss that I thought that his comments were not appropriate.”²²

Our survey asked men how likely they were to engage in each of these behaviours in response to a colleague’s sexist remark.²³ Less than half of respondents felt comfortable directly interrupting, signaling a troubling lack of ability, comfort, or both to take action. Nearly two-thirds of men indicated they would redirect, almost a quarter said they would react unassertively, and 20% said they would do nothing.²⁴

Men’s responses to sexist events

The likelihood of engaging in different types of interrupting behaviour:

Organizations should bear in mind that gender advocacy demands a significant commitment from men. While men can and should use their privileges for the advancement of gender equality, the barriers they face in doing so should not be overlooked, as we discuss below.

A recent study of Canadian men engaged in gender advocacy explores the challenges that can lead to feelings of frustration, isolation, and burnout.²⁵ The men discussed a diverse set of challenges including: limited resources (e.g., funding, trainings, staffing, etc.); lack of interest from their surrounding communities or institutions; failure of gender-equality programs to address men’s vulnerabilities; and the difficulty of balancing their paid work, personal life, and this kind of voluntary engagement.²⁶ These findings may offer additional insight into the sobering gap highlighted in our previous study between men’s level of commitment to dismantling gender inequalities and their confidence in their ability to actually do so.²⁷

What encourages men to interrupt sexism directly?

Our findings show that 46% of men would try to directly interrupt a sexist event in their workplace, and our analysis reveals that certain personal factors differentiate these men. In particular, 44% of men’s intent to directly interrupt a sexist event in their workplace is explained by commitment, confidence, awareness of the personal benefits, and belief in the impact on the common good.³⁴

Factors that influence men’s responses to sexism

Commitment We found that 58% of men had high levels of commitment to interrupting sexism.39 Not surprisingly, our findings show that these men report a greater likelihood of directly interrupting a colleague who made a sexist remark. Specifically, 65% of highly committed men said they would directly interrupt a colleague, compared to 19% of men who were less committed.40

"So I mean I grew up with that, and I think as I’ve evolved I’ve been very lucky to end up in an organization like Company A where that…is a value that we hold dear. And so for me to be true to who I am—as I’ll call it an ‘equity-seeking male’—I feel very comfortable here." — Senior leader in professional services	"I see that as a problem, I see that as a challenge. And…I’m an immigrant, so there’s a little bit of a personal…interest in this. So I got a bit more and more involved. So I do have quite a bit of…ability to influence the outcome, right? Not entirely changing it, but I can do my piece to help." — Senior director in utility
"When I hear things that marginalize other people, it triggers me. So I think that’s why I’m more inclined to stick my neck out." — Mid-level manager in energy	"I think for me it—it’s values-driven first….I’m a big ‘Do the right thing’ kind of [guy]. If for no other reason, just for that." — Executive director in government

Confidence Men’s level of confidence in their ability to interrupt sexism also plays a significant role in their willingness to directly interrupt sexist events. About a third (31%) of survey participants reported high levels of confidence in their ability to interrupt sexism. 41 Of these, 72% said that they would directly do so, whereas just 34% of men who reported being less confident said they would interrupt directly.42 Our interview participants frequently emphasized men’s lack of confidence—in some cases caused by fear or discomfort—as a barrier to their engagement:

"I think the one thing is, they’re afraid….When I speak up and talk about the need to include men in the discussion, to have a really good open discussion that is a safe discussion for men to have, I will have men come up and say, ‘Thank you for saying that. I didn’t know how to say it.’" — Senior leader in professional services

"I think it’s just a mob mentality. They’re afraid to speak up because they don’t want to be the outlier. And if everybody else is doing it, well, just be quiet and go along." — Mid-level leader in energy transmission

Belief in the benefits of interrupting

When employees believe that interrupting sexism will have a beneficial impact, they report an increased likelihood of doing so. Of our survey respondents, 64% reported high levels of seeing benefits to interrupting sexism that accrue to them directly, as in a feeling that they are making a difference and not being complicit.⁴³ Meanwhile, 61% had high levels of understanding how interrupting sexism impacts the common good.⁴⁴

We found that men who saw personal benefits to interrupting sexism were more likely to directly interrupt a colleague who makes a sexist remark. Specifically, 59% of men who were aware of the personal benefits of interrupting were likely to directly interrupt. However, of those who saw less of a personal benefit, only 22% said they were likely to directly interrupt.⁴⁵

Similarly, 62% of men who believed their actions would have an impact on the common good were likely to directly interrupt, while only 20% of men who saw less of an impact on the common good said they would.⁴⁶

"I’m not trying to fix someone that’s broken, I’m trying to raise awareness…And it’s very rewarding when you have a conversation with someone and they say, ‘Okay, well I get it, I’m going to try to change that.’ So I think the motivation…really has to be around opening people’s eyes that we’re really better if we have a workplace that works for everybody."

— Senior director in energy

While some previous research has shown that interrupting sexism may sometimes have negative consequences for the person who intervenes, other research has demonstrated tangible benefits as well. For example, women who confronted sexism felt more confident, more empowered, and had higher self-esteem than those who did not.47 Our study suggests that when men see the potential benefits of interrupting, they are more likely to do so.

Scale your response and avoid making assumptions Don’t assume ill intentions—they can come from lack of exposure and awareness about sexism. When you respond, scale your response to the person engaged in the behaviour.	"I think intention is very important. And I think it’s always about, is this somebody who made a mistake? Because we’ll make mistakes, all of us. And that’ll happen. If it’s a really bad mistake that’s one thing, but if it’s a mistake that people make, then it’s really about education and understanding whether somebody can be educated in a way that they understand that their behaviours are sexist." — Senior leader in professional services
Don’t call out, call in Rather than pointing fingers and causing shame or embarrassment, create an opportunity for personal growth in the person you are interrupting.	"Calling out would be, ‘Hey…quit being such an idiot. You’re such a—whatever—for doing that.’ And it’s very confrontational….If the person in the social structure is then looked at as doing something wrong, then it triggers shame and fear and guilt in them. And it’s not an opportunity to grow. But if you can create a ‘call-in conversation’ where it’s more curiosity-based and it’s like either you take them aside after the fact, or you ask a question, or—’Why did you say that?’ or, ‘Can you explain that?’—it’s a different place to work from." — Executive director in nonprofit
When you witness sexist behaviour, be intentional in your response Be thoughtful in your actions and use your knowledge of the people involved as you decide how to respond.	"I try [to] evaluate my perception of the individuals experiencing the behaviours to see if I believe they’re the type of person who can and would want to self-advocate, or if they’re maybe someone seeking an ally." — Mid-level director in education

What prevents men from interrupting sexism?

When organizations take steps to create an inclusive workplace, they often focus on developing training programs to teach employees which behaviours are appropriate and what to do if they witness sexist remarks or attitudes. In other words, they emphasize actions by individuals.

But even companies dedicated to giving employees the tools and confidence to interrupt sexism at work may find that many employees choose to do nothing when confronted with instances of bias. Indeed, research shows that a combination of factors, including fear, can stamp out or derail a person’s intention to speak out or do something to make a difference.

Our study demonstrates that larger organizational conditions are crucial. Specifically, three factors — a climate of silence, a combative culture, and a sense of futility—explain 41% of the likelihood of men’s doing nothing, showing that negative organizational climates stifle men.

Organizational factors:

Climate of silence⁴⁹

An environment where employees feel restrained from constructively speaking up about organizational or work-related problems, concerns, or challenges.

Combative culture⁵⁰

A hyper-competitive workplace culture in which value is attributed to a quest to dominate others and compete over power, authority, and status.

Climate of futility⁵¹

The sense that efforts to make change will not matter or have desired impact.

A climate of silence: Fear dominates

Our survey found that 44% of men reported high levels of silence in their workplaces.⁵² In a climate of silence, employees believe speaking up will bring negative repercussions, or fear their voice won’t be heard, and are therefore afraid to take actions that will likely backfire.

It’s therefore no surprise that in a climate of silence—where speaking up appears fraught with risk—men report a greater likelihood of doing nothing to interrupt sexism: 39% of men working in organizations with high levels of silence report doing nothing, compared to 5% of men in organizations with lower levels of silence.⁵³

Silence is multifaceted; it is determined by both the estimated risk involved in speaking up, and how much time employees believe they have to decide whether to speak up or not. These decision points can be unconscious, automatic, deliberate, or purposeful. 54 On an individual level, employees don’t always make a calculated decision to remain silent. When they unexpectedly find themselves in a high-pressure situation, they may simply “freeze.”55 In other instances, they may consciously decide not to respond in the moment and take some time to consider what to do.

"The people may take their cues from the leader, but if you have a culture where there is fear of reprisal for speaking up or fear of reprisal for challenging the status quo, I think that creates that environment, I would say beyond just sexism, I mean choose an ism. And it creates an environment where those isms may be possible….I think it takes courage to shift a culture, and so if you don’t have a culture that encourages courage to challenge the status quo to speak up, then you normalize certain behaviours."

— Senior director in financial services

Show no weakness The perception that showing emotion, raising doubts, or asking for advice is a sign of weakness and will not be respected.	"But I think there’s a little bit of, ‘Oh, that’s kind of’—like, just to be frank—‘sissy stuff,’ right? ‘That’s not my macho way of doing things.’" — Senior vice president in engineering design
Strength and stamina The notion that characteristics such as physical size, athleticism, or ability to work long hours are tied to admiration and respect in the workplace.	"I was told that there was a female electrician, she did a job, and she was offered to go torque the nut down properly. After she was done another guy went out to re-torque it because they did not trust that she had the strength to torque it down properly." — Senior director in utility
Put work first The belief that work must always come first, even before personal life and family.	"If you’re working in a very high-stress workplace…sometimes those kinds of things come out. Part of that can be…the expectations around hours and workload and stuff like that." — Executive director in government
Dog eat dog A survival-of-the-fittest mindset; The belief that everyone should advocate only for themselves and not trust others.	"They came from a culture of, ‘If you don’t agree with us, we’ll fire you.’ And I eventually was laid off from that company. Actually, [it was] a week after doing a presentation for women and equality on National Women’s Day." — Mid-level manager in energy

Sensitivity to loss of status This sensitivity is shaped by a zero-sum mindset among some men. This mindset is fed by an incorrect assumption that women’s advancement is a threat to men’s status.65 Some evidence suggests that these beliefs are reinforced in combative workplace cultures and serve as a mechanism for workplace sexism to persist.66

"I think there is almost an expectation that are you promoting gender equity at the expense of men….Which team are you actually on?.…I think the expectation of how you’re going to be viewed by other men can play into that." — Senior director in financial services

Stereotypically male practices These values and practices are aligned with cultural constructions of masculinity. They are prevalent in some workplaces and, if rewarded, can be a path to excluding and othering women and some men.

"The culture was more typical of how some people might stereotype male culture. So lots of drinking, lots of going to events, sporting events or whatever else. And it was very much about who you know and that sort of thing.… I didn’t have the same interest in those things. And so at times you kind of feel, well, what am I missing out on?" — Senior manager in professional services

Normalization of traditional men’s lifestyle Work norms and expectations that reflect the lifestyle of married heterosexual men can lead to systematic discrimination against people who don’t have that lifestyle.

"The things you can do to be successful I believe are predicated on a system that…A…would assume that you’re male in the workplace, and B…would assume that you have a full-time spouse at home. … So I think we apply very paternalistic, a very traditional, family model into our work environment and what we expect. … I have heard more than once that, oh, everyone needs a work wife." — Mid-level director in education

Aggressive and intense work conditions Insensitive behaviours such as sexism often emerge in intense environments that require long work hours and complete dedication. These workplaces promote a competitive, goal-oriented culture, as opposed to one that’s communal and ethics-oriented.

"When an organization values results more than…the ‘how,’ you’ll see those bad behaviours forgiven, looked the other way…which then allows those to continue, potentially multiply, potentially get worse….If someone’s successful, we’ll let them get away with this: ‘Well, they didn’t really mean that.’ And there’s a lot of excuses that can be attributed to that." — Senior partner in consulting

“Boys’ Club” cultures Predominantly male institutions can challenge men’s engagement in interrupting sexism because masculine work cultures can make it difficult for men to break out and stand up to sexism.

"The last comany I was at, it was a construction company…and in a lot of the internal meetings, there was a lot of talk about cheerleaders and secretaries and sort of objectifying women….A lot of that came from senior leadership, and [it] created this…locker room culture. And so, I would say at that company, I was far less comfortable sticking my neck out." — Mid-level manager in energy

A climate of futility: When men believe they can’t make a difference In our survey, 45% of men indicated high levels of a climate of futility related to speaking up against sexism.67 Furthermore, we found a direct link between participants’ perception of futility and their likelihood of doing nothing to interrupt sexism: 36% of men who reported higher perceptions that their actions wouldn’t make a difference said they would do nothing, whereas only 7% of men who didn’t share that sense of futility reported doing nothing.68 As noted in the Harvard Business Review, “The desire to speak up is fundamentally about the wish to change something and make a difference. But, if you continue to cement employees’ belief that speaking up is a waste of time, they’ll save their breath.”69

External factors may also play a role. In times of uncertainty and turbulence, employees may choose to suppress their ideas, feeling that no one will be open to hearing anything that could be viewed as inessential to keeping the organization strong.⁷¹

A few interviewees shed light on how power dynamics and a sense of futility can discourage men from acting when faced with sexism:

"In that organization…I didn’t feel safe, and I didn’t feel like there was any point….It felt like no matter what I did, nothing was going to change." — Senior leader in mining

"[I felt] you know, frustration, disappointment…in people and in…the organization sometimes that in the year 2020…people still think and talk that way. [And]…a little bit helpless where that individual being more senior, et cetera…[so] I didn’t do anything about it." — Senior director in food manufacturing

"When new ideas come in, sometimes people will say, ‘Oh, we’ve tried that before.’ …The other thing is that you have to dress up the proposal in such a way that the other person…sees a benefit to them. …You need to be very careful not to put them on the defensive because in an environment where it’s hyper-conservative and not a lot changes, or change happens ridiculously slow, you have to slowly…lead them."

— Entry-level engineer in energy transmission

Costs increase in more negative climates

Men are much more likely to do nothing in the face of a sexist event when the perceived costs of interrupting are high. The impact of a climate of silence, combative culture, and a climate of futility on the tendency to do nothing is exacerbated when men perceive higher potential costs, such as being passed over for an important assignment or damaging their relationships with peers.⁷²

"It’s about finding yourself in situations where you know that you should say something, but there’s that little voice in your head that tells you not to rock the boat. It tells you to ignore it, to move on…[that] it’s easier just to get past this, let them finish what they’re doing and then keep moving on. And that I think comes from fear. Whether it’s fear of embarrassment, whether it’s fear of ostracization, fear of disrupting the status quo, fear of conflict, fear of not having the right words."

— Senior director in financial services

"I think the biggest thing that people fear is job security and whether they’re appearing to be too liberal or too annoying or…too righteous, if you will, by sticking our neck out and standing up for other people."

— Mid-level manager in energy