Towards multispecies inequality regimes through the case of horse showjumping.

Abstract

The idea that a ‘single category’-focus in the study of workplace inequality leads to oversimplification and obscures its complex nature is now generally accepted. Yet little concerns have been raised with regard to the ‘single species’-focus of inequalities in the context of management and organizations. Through the case study of professional show jumpers, I shed light on the complex interplay of multispecies inequalities in the equestrian field, a sector celebrated for its sex integration. Indeed, beliefs of gender equality are typically high in this sector as horses are believed to ‘mediate’ the sex performance relationship, levelling the playing field for male and female riders. An Ackerian analysis however reveals the persistence of gendered patterns despite women’s ‘theoretically’ improved chances of identifying with the ideal worker, following changed breeding preferences and an organizational logic of ‘passion-merit’. Rather, female showjumpers needed to provide proof and reassurance of being ‘unconventional’ indicating an incomplete acceptance of femininity in the field. Popular imageries of horses paradoxically reveal the lack of agency awarded to animals and the instrumental nature of the human-horse bond. This study adds to the literature on gender in organizations by integrating non-humans into a number of core feminist organizational concepts, looking at organizational logics through an interspecies lens. It thereby gives a post-humanistic flavor to earlier claims of how different forms of inequality overlap and interact with each other, producing often-surprising outcomes. Indeed, although sex-based discrimination was deemed unacceptable in the field, such reservations were reserved only to humans, not horses. Similarly, class privilege was only problematized when critiquing showpiece ‘daughters of’ Jobs, Springsteen and Gates but never for men. This study concludes that more-than-human analyses can enrich existing knowledge about inequality regimes in professional fields. Embracing post-humanist perspectives within the study of inequality regimes may thus open up new and challenging ethical, theoretical, methodological and practical issues.