These results were presented at Baltic Criminological Seminar at Vilnius University on 03/07/2025.
How is it possible that gender discrimination persists globally, despite the profound cultural, historical, and linguistic differences among societies? This question forms the core of my ERA fellowship, funded under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions programme.
Culture is widely recognised as one of the main factors influencing gender-based violence and discrimination. Yet, women and marginalised gender subjectivities continue to face similar barriers across vastly different contexts. This apparent contradiction led me to investigate the interplay between individual factors, social environments, culture, and inequality, drawing inspiration from Bronfenbrenner’s socio-ecological theory.
To shed light on this paradox, my research compares two countries that, at first glance, could not be more different: Italy and Lithuania. Italy’s modern history is shaped by Fascism and the enduring influence of the Catholic Church, while Lithuania’s identity has been profoundly marked by Soviet domination and its post-socialist transition. Despite their distinct trajectories, both societies exhibit gender discrimination dynamics that strikingly mirror each other.
Focus and Scope
The findings shared at Baltic Criminological Seminar are part of a broader investigation into the causes and expressions of gender discrimination. Specifically, in this first part of the research the focus is on the meso-system — the social environment — examining three areas of comparison between Italy and Lithuania: family, work and education, and social interactions.
In each sphere, I ask:
- Do you have any examples of gender-base discrimination in [context]?
- How did you felt in those occasion or how do you feel now, reshaping those memories?
- Do you think there are different expectations/treatments according to gender?
- Where would you put yourself in these episodes? (felt/witnessed/enacted discrimination)
At the heart of this work is the conviction that discrimination is not only explicit or legally codified; it is embedded in daily life, relationships, language, and gestures that shape what societies define as “normal”.
Defining and Recognising Discrimination
When people think of “gender discrimination”, they often imagine clear-cut examples: a denied promotion, intrusive questions during a job interview, or harassment on the street. Yet the reality is far more nuanced and insidious. The CEDAW definition reminds us that discrimination is any limitation that compromises equality between men and women — but it is more than a set of written rules. It is a system that persists through stereotypes, prejudices, everyday behaviours, and structural conditions that reward certain profiles while penalising others.
A striking observation emerged early in my fieldwork: although Italy and Lithuania have similar legal frameworks aligned with European equality directives, the cultural discourse around discrimination differs significantly. In Lithuania, the word “discrimination” is rarely used in everyday conversation — people often refer instead to “tradition” or “natural choices”. In Italy, the concept of “equality” is widespread in discourse but encounters strong resistance in daily practice. The result is that discrimination acquires a different density depending on the context — a phenomenon that shapes whether and how it is recognised.
Preliminary Results: Families, Workplaces, Schools, Social Spaces
Drawing on approximately 100 interviews conducted across Italy and Lithuania, these early findings — presented at Baltic Criminological Seminar — illustrate how deeply embedded and culturally specific, yet strikingly similar, gender discrimination can be.
Family
The family is often the first site where gender roles are learned and reproduced.
- In Lithuania, the post-Soviet legacy means that while women have long participated in paid labour, care responsibilities remain almost entirely their domain — producing a persistent double burden. Traditional gender expectations continue to assign men the role of primary breadwinner and emotional stoic, while women manage domestic life.
- In Italy, families provide networks of affection and support but can also exert tight social control. Traditional divisions persist, with women more likely to interrupt careers for childcare. Research shows that while younger generations in both countries express shifting attitudes, these shifts are unevenly distributed and often contested.
Work and Education
- In Lithuania, women participate in the labour force at rates comparable to men but are concentrated in care-oriented sectors — education, health, and social services — with leadership positions remaining predominantly male. The gender pay gap, though sometimes minimised in public discourse, is significant.
- In Italy, the main issue remains access to stable and secure employment. Motherhood is still frequently perceived as a “risk” by employers.
- In schools, patterns echo each other: gender segregation in subject choice (underrepresentation in STEM), subtle harassment, and stereotypes persist. Many interviewees described how women in top academic positions remain an exception rather than the norm, and informal remarks or biases continue to shape evaluations.
Social Spaces and Everyday Atmospheres
Discrimination is not always explicit. It can take the form of a pervasive atmosphere shaped by stereotypes, micro-discriminations, and exclusions. Many participants spoke of:
- Normalised expectations that women “serve” male family members,
- Social messages that a woman should not appear “alone” or “too independent”,
- Men’s learned emotional restrictions,
- The persistence of male-dominated spaces — from casual conversation to media narratives.
Towards Awareness and Change
The preliminary insights presented at Baltic Criminological Seminar reinforce a clear message: discrimination is not merely a matter of legal frameworks or statistical indicators — it lives in the fabric of everyday life. Italy and Lithuania demonstrate how diverse histories and cultures can still produce comparable obstacles for women and marginalised gender identities.
However, these obstacles are not immovable. Change begins with awareness, critical reflection, and the courage to name what often goes unnamed. It also begins with listening to those who have experienced discrimination directly.