“Ballet is woman,” said George Balanchine, one of the most influential classical ballet choreographers in 20th-century America. His words highlight the connection many see between ballet and femininity. The art form is celebrated for its elegance, discipline, and beauty, which are qualities traditionally linked to women. From an early age, significantly more girls than boys are drawn to ballet. Moreover, estimates suggest a 20-to-1 ratio of girls to boys in ballet classes.
Despite the overwhelming presence of women in ballet from an early age, leadership roles in the industry tell a different story. The top positions, such as artistic directors, choreographers, and company leaders, are startlingly dominated by men.
The declining presence of women in Ballet leadership roles
The Data Dance Project (DDP), an organisation focused on promoting equity in classical ballet, analysed 50 major U.S. ballet. They classically influenced companies, as well as 148 classically based professional performing companies across 57 countries. In 2023, DDP identified 198 artistic directors globally, with women making up only 29% (58 women) and men accounting for 71% (140 men). However, in the December 2021 report, DDP found that out of 179 artistic directors worldwide, 59 were women (33%). It shows a concerning decline in the percentage of women in the role of artistic director over the two-year period.
While the total number of artistic directors slightly increased, the percentage of women in this role has dropped. In fact, DDP notes that men continue to replace women in leadership roles at nearly twice the rate, with men holding 61% of ballet leadership roles globally.
Women who become artistic directors face a significant pay gap, earning only 68 cents for every dollar their male counterparts earn. Among the top ten highest-paid artistic directors identified by DDP, only one woman made the list.
The gender gap in choreography is even worse. In the 2018–19 season, men choreographed 81% of all works performed by the top 50 ballet companies. For the 2019–20 season, 79% of the 467 announced works were also choreographed by men.
The hidden gender gap in ‘Female-Dominated’ careers: The male monopoly conundrum
Elizabeth “Liza” Yntema, President and Founder of the Data Dance Project (DDP), points out, “The bigger the company, the more impact, the more likely it is to be led by a man, not just in the US, but globally.” This statement really puts things in perspective. A field can be labelled as “women-dominated” because women make up the majority of workers. However, when it comes to leadership, men often hold power.
Patriarchy has long labelled cooking as a “feminine” task. Just scroll through social media posts celebrating women’s achievements, and you’ll likely see comments like, “Women belong in the kitchen.” Even in 2025, people still see cooking as something only women should do in the home, often viewed as their only means of status within the family. However, the moment we talk about a woman in a position of power, like a head chef, suddenly, people start questioning whether a woman should lead a restaurant kitchen.
If society still insists that “women belong in the kitchen,” why is the culinary industry so male-dominated? The truth is that women are often discouraged from pursuing a career as a chef in a professional kitchen. But they are expected to be chefs in their homes, where they do the work without pay or recognition. This double standard sends the message that a woman’s place is in the kitchen, but only under certain conditions. Those conditions certainly don’t involve leadership or recognition.
More to the male monopoly: The gender power shift
Society used to see hairdressing as a career that was a fallback for women with limited education or opportunities. This perception came from societal norms that associated women with domestic roles, including beauty, grooming, and personal care. However, in recent years, the image of hairdressing has shifted, especially in high-profile sectors like celebrity styling.
Now, many of the top hairdressers, those who work with famous figures and influence trends, are men. Additionally, male entrepreneurs or stylists lead major haircare and styling brands.
Now, take another supposedly “women-dominated” industry: fashion. When we think of fashion, we often picture it as a world for women. It is ingrained in our minds that fashion is a “feminine” field. More than 85% of students at top fashion schools are women. However, when you look at the top fashion brands, only around 14% are led by women.
Many are surprised to learn that there are fewer female CEOs in fashion than in industries like aerospace or finance. Only 12.5% of fashion CEOs are women, and just 26% of fashion board seats are held by women.
If this is what happens in industries that supposedly cater to women, it’s not hard to guess what’s happening in male-dominated sectors.
The final thoughts on the male monopoly taking over
The above data urges us to confront and question the misconception that a “women-dominated” field is synonymous with women empowerment. Having women in the workforce doesn’t automatically equate to women being empowered in that industry. Empowerment is not just about participation. It is about having access to leadership roles, equal pay, and recognition for the work being done.
The real change won’t come until society starts viewing leadership as something gender-neutral, where women have the same opportunities to rise to the top as men. Until then, the gender gap in leadership will persist, no matter how many of them are in the workforce.
Perspective by Changeincontent: The male monopoly in leadership
The dominance of men in leadership roles across industries labelled as “women’s domains” reveals a troubling paradox. At its core, this disparity isn’t just a reflection of societal bias—it highlights how deeply ingrained gender stereotypes perpetuate exclusion. Many individuals mistakenly equate the participation of women in the workforce with empowerment. However, as this article reveals, true empowerment transcends mere presence. It requires equitable representation at decision-making levels, equal pay, and the dismantling of structural barriers that stifle progress.
In this context, we urge organisations and policymakers to challenge the frameworks that sustain such monopolies. Empowerment must become synonymous with opportunity, not merely participation.
For further exploration of these systemic inequalities, we recommend reading our article, The Plight of Women in the Workforce: Underpaid, Overlooked, and Segregated. Together, let us reimagine leadership as a realm defined by inclusivity and merit rather than gender.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are based on the writer’s insights, supported by data and resources available both online and offline, as applicable. Changeincontent.com is committed to promoting inclusivity across all forms of content. We broadly define inclusivity as media, policies, law, and history—encompassing all elements that influence the lives of women and gender-queer individuals. Our goal is to promote understanding and advocate for comprehensive inclusivity.
