Women in Academia: The Myth of Merit — International Women's Day 2026 #GiveToGain
Vol. 31, Issue 1 (March 2026)
Alizeh Arshad, MA (Hons)
Graduate, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Senior Customer Service Advisor, Pensions Department
Lloyds Banking Group
United Kingdom
Lubna Kamani, MD, FCPS, MRCP, FRCP
Professor & Director, Gastroenterology Residency Program
Liaquat National Hospital
Consultant, Aga Khan University Hospital
Karachi, Pakistan
Throughout history, academia has always been upheld as a merit-based system, one where hard work and perseverance dictate the success achieved. However, while this may work in theory, it is seldom the truth in practice. Unfortunately, women in academia face systemic barriers at every stage, whether that be in terms of harassment, reduced funding, the gap in authorship, or the lack of promotional opportunities received. These disparities are not just isolated failures, but rather, they outline a system that consistently works against marginalized groups and continues to favor the privileged class.
In the UK, it is estimated that 68% of young women have experienced academic harassment while at university or college.1 Some examples include but are not limited to unwanted comments or advances, exclusions from networks, and even credit theft. The rise of social and political movements focusing on the mistreatment of women such as Time’s Up and #MeToo have catapulted these issues into the public sphere to the point where the general public have a greater awareness. These systemic inequalities are often exacerbated in male-dominated fields where many may feel they are offered little protection and must survive in a ‘Man’s World.’
Power hierarchies often benefit from keeping systems in place where those who are underrepresented are disproportionately affected. In this case it is women, especially those who may be from minority ethnic or religious backgrounds. The consequences of these or advances, exclusions from networks, and even credit effects could lead to reduced productivity, a strain on their mental health, and eventually a decision to leave academia for good. These experiences unequally affect women and, in turn, have long lasting negative impacts on their career trajectories.
When it comes to research articles and academic papers, women’s scholarly contributions are grossly undervalued. Conventionally, it is the first and last authors that are given the most importance because they signify the primary drivers of the research, with the first author doing a majority of the hands-on work and the last author providing the overall supervision. It was reported that only around 30% of primary authors in globally renowned journals are women. On average, articles written by women are more likely to be cited than those written by men2 however, women often experience shorter publishing career lengths due to many contributing factors such as lack of research collaborations, lower levels of specialization, and external familial responsibility. This also leads to a reduction of total published pieces across a woman’s career, leaving fewer opportunities to gain those coveted first and last author spots. The lack of acknowledgment of female labor leads to less visibility and affects CV strength, which in turn impacts future funding opportunities, thus becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Women occupy just under half (45%) of all academic jobs and publish at rates that are comparable to men, however they take more years to reach professorship even with the same number of published manuscripts. In the sector, only about 20.5% of professors are women with just 29 out of 166 institutions being led by women in 2013/14.3 The ‘Motherhood Penalty,’ coined by Claudia Goldman, sheds light on the fact that the inequality women face when it comes to pay and career gaps is magnified after having their first child, due to career interruptions and caregiving expectations. When looking at promotions, those factors along with committee biases and fewer leadership and mentorship opportunities all play a role in delayed promotion, which some argue compounds inequality over time.
When it comes to the medical profession as a whole, over half of medical students are female. However, when the role transitions to residency and leadership positions, the scales shift, favoring the men in the industry and awarding them with more decision-making and budget powers. How is it that a head start can circle back into detriment, and what does it take to turn majority into minority? Gastroenterology is no exception. This especially rings true in endoscopy, which has the lowest rate of first female authors. Groups like the World Gastroenterology Organisation (WGO) are combating this by ensuring that they balance their main agenda with the United Nations sustainability goals in order to bring about long-term change in a way that perseveres. A main focus is ensuring gender equality on a global scale, whether that is through academic articles and research or through conferences and committee events.
The theme for International Women’s Day 2026, ‘Give to Gain,’ is a crucial stepping point and much-needed demonstration on how we can implement structural changes that combat these setbacks. The ‘Give to Gain’ pose itself involves two cupped hands, symbolizing giving and receiving. Just as energy cannot be created nor destroyed, in a similar way, we cannot expect to receive if there is nothing contributed in the first place. By setting target areas and focusing on economic independence, education, and STEM leadership, this theme empowers women and provides them the resources to move towards their goals.
These issues are not isolated, and by being interconnected they build on one another to perpetuate the cycle of inequality. Disadvantages and drawbacks accumulate and accelerate the negative impact that results in many women being left behind in academia. Addressing (and in the future eliminating) gender inequality requires a structural change in how institutions evaluate, fund, and promote academics.
References
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Adult Obesity Facts. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Published May 14, 2014. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/adult-obesity-facts/index.html
- Kim JH, Oh CM, Yoo JH. Obesity and novel management of inflammatory bowel disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2023;29(12):1779-1794.
- Sands BE, Kaplan GG. The role of TNF alpha in ulcerative colitis. J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;47(8):930-941.
