The Silent Goodbye: Why Women’s Careers Go Uncelebrated

Photo by Florian Klauer on Unsplash

When my husband retired from his teaching career, a group of students organized a small celebration for the last day of class. They brought snacks, hung ribbons, and gave him a Happy Retirement card. He was pleasantly surprised that they had gone to so much trouble, especially since he had only taught them for one semester. His department also planned a party, and we talked about having a family gathering to mark the occasion.

Nothing happened when I retired. I had built and run a very successful business for twenty-one years, but there was no celebration. No greeting cards. No lunch or dinner with my employees to mark the milestone. It was as if my thirty years in the industry—and everything I had accomplished—had simply disappeared.

What made it even more painful was that I had taken great care of my employees. I sold my business to an employee-focused company that I believed would be a great place for them. I secured jobs for all of them at the same salary and benefits. I also gave them monetary gifts as a parting kindness. Many had worked for me for several years.

I was absolutely devastated. Why are some accomplishments so easily celebrated, while others are ignored? Why do we come together for some moments and let others quietly pass by?

My experience left me questioning whether something larger was at play. I began to wonder if gender had something to do with it. And the more I reflected, the more certain I became that it did. Research shows that men and women are not celebrated in the same ways. Men’s accomplishments, especially their careers and public achievements, are much more likely to be recognized and honored. This disparity in recognition isn’t limited to retirement celebrations; it runs deep, even into how our lives are remembered after we’re gone. Gender bias has shaped how achievements are recorded in obituaries. Studies of newspaper obituaries show that men’s professional achievements are historically emphasized, whereas women’s obituaries focus more heavily on family roles—even for women who had distinguished careers. An analysis of the New York Times archives revealed that only 15–20% of obituary subjects were women, and those women were more likely to be remembered through their relationships to others rather than for their individual accomplishments (Boyce & Dove, 2022).

The same patterns appear in prestigious awards and public recognitions. A comprehensive analysis of 141 of the world’s most prestigious international research awards found that women received only a small fraction of these honors over a twenty-year period, despite having similar levels of research productivity, publication quality, and collaboration as men (Meho, 2021). Similar patterns have been found in scientific prizes more broadly, where women’s contributions are less likely to be nominated, evaluated, and rewarded at the highest levels—not because of differences in achievement, but because of systemic biases built into the recognition process (Van Miegroet & Glass, 2013). The trend continues across scientific fields. A recent study examining awards in academic psychology found that although women’s share of awards has increased over time, they remain more likely to receive awards for service and teaching—categories traditionally viewed as less prestigious—while men continue to dominate in awards for research contributions (Hopkins-Doyle et al., 2024). The pattern is clear: men are celebrated for what they do, while women are celebrated for who they are to others.

At the heart of these disparities are the deeply ingrained stereotypes about men and women. Decades of research show that people consistently see men and women through different lenses. Men are typically seen as more agentic—assertive, ambitious, and self-directed. Women, in contrast, are seen as more communal—nurturing, supportive, and concerned with others (Rudman & Glick, 2021; Eagly & Steffen, 1984). These stereotypes shape not only how men and women are perceived, but also how their achievements are celebrated. Men are often praised for leadership and innovation, while women’s successes are framed more around their relational and personal qualities.

This bias shows up in professional evaluations. In a study of letters of recommendation for academic positions, researchers found that women were far more likely to be described using communal traits—like being nurturing, supportive, or helpful. Men were more often praised for agentic qualities such as leadership, independence, and achievement (Madera, Hebl, & Martin, 2009). And sadly, the study showed that communal descriptions actually harmed women’s chances of being hired, because achievement-focused traits were more valued in the selection process.

The barriers women face occur right from the beginning of their careers. A landmark study found that science faculty at research-intensive universities rated identical student applications more favorably when the name on the résumé was male rather than female. The male applicant was seen as significantly more competent, more worthy of being hired, and was offered a higher salary and more mentoring support—even though the applications were identical in every respect except the gendered name (Moss-Racusin et al., 2012). These findings reveal that women are less likely to be celebrated for their accomplishments not only because of biases in recognition, but because they are often evaluated as less capable from the start.

When you step back and look at the larger pattern, it’s clear. As a society, we are still more comfortable celebrating men’s careers and women’s relationships. Accomplishments aren’t weighed equally. What we choose to celebrate, and how loudly we celebrate it, reveals what we truly value. And it shows painfully, that women’s professional contributions are still not valued as highly as those of men.

Seeing the broader patterns helped me understand that my experience wasn't isolated. It was part of something systemic. Understanding this didn’t erase the sting of being overlooked when I retired. But it helped me put my experience into a larger context. It wasn’t just about me. It was about how celebration itself is shaped by long-standing ideas about gender, worth, and recognition. Realizing that left me with a new question: How can we do better?

Maybe it starts with something simple. The next time a woman retires, honor it. Bring a card. Plan a lunch. Say thank you. Mark the moment. Small gestures can carry big meaning—and they remind us that women’s professional achievements are worth celebrating, too.

Works Cited

Boyce, C., & Dove, D. M. (2022). Obituary, gender, and posthumous fame: The New York Times Overlooked Project. Celebrity Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/19392397.2022.2135082

Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(4), 735–754. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.735

Hopkins-Doyle, A., Chalmers, J., Toribio-Flórez, D., & Cichocka, A. (2024). Gender disparities in social and personality psychology awards from 1968 to 2021. Communications Psychology, 2, Article 63. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-024-00113-5

Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C. (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1591–1599. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016539

Meho, L. I. (2021). The gender gap in highly prestigious international research awards, 2001–2020. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(2), 976–989. https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article/2/3/976/103157/The-gender-gap-in-highly-prestigious-international

Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474–16479. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109

Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2021). The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. Second Edition. Guilford Press. https://www.amazon.com/Social-Psychology-Gender-Second-Relations/dp/1462546803#

Van Miegroet, H., & Glass, C. (2013). Recognition through awards: A source of gender inequality in science? International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 5(2), 289–315. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=soca_facpub