October 1, 2025

This year marks the 75th anniversary of women in the Singapore Police Force (SPF), a milestone highlighting the significant contributions and achievements of female police officers in Singapore. In recent years, female officers in the SPF have accomplished many ‘firsts’, alluding to their successful integration into a traditionally male-dominated field, and achievement of gender parity in the police force. Despite significant strides made by female police officers, research reveals that gender discrimination remains prevalent in police work. Through in-depth interviews and content analysis, it is evident that policewomen continue to face various forms of gender bias, including navigating masculine norms, a gendered division of labour, and sexual harassment at work. 

In ‘Sexism without Sexists: Gender-Blind Frames in Police Work’ (Gender, Work & Organization, 2023), Senior Lecturer Adelyn Lim (NUS Sociology & Anthropology) and Jenia Lo contend that both the SPF and some of their female officers employ gender-blind frames to interpret and dismiss instances of gender discrimination. They argue that while the SPF publicly espouses gender equality and condemns overt sexism, the use of gender-blind frames obscure the persistence of discriminatory practices. Furthermore, they argue that sexist practices have transitioned from overt forms of discrimination to more subtle, covert manifestations. This leads to a normalisation of sexist practices, where SPF and its police officers view them as routine language and behaviour rather than as manifestations of sexism. 

Through Stoll’s (2013) adaptation of Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s (2003) ‘colour-blind racism’ to gender, the researchers illustrate how ‘gender-blind sexism’ serves to obscure the reality of gender inequality by framing any discussion of gender discrimination as irrelevant or outdated. Similar to the notion of ‘colour-blind racism’, several frames such as naturalisation and the minimisation of sexism are used to argue that sexism is a non-issue. Naturalisation posits that women, unlike men, lack the physical strength required for police work. This belief rationalises gender disparities by attributing them to inherent differences rather than organisational or societal factors. The frame of minimization of sexism then downplays the significance of gender biases by suggesting that women’s preference for nursing over policing is not due to exclusion or marginalisation in police work but rather because they are perceived as less capable in crime-fighting roles. Ultimately, these gender-blind frames obscure gender inequality by framing discrimination discussions as irrelevant, thus preventing meaningful dialogue about underlying gender biases. 

By examining the experiences and everyday practices of SPF officers, Lim and Lo show that the SPF sustains a facade of gender neutrality, through the use of gender-blind frames, to dismiss ongoing discrimination. This leads to the normalisation of sexist practices, creating a ‘sexism without sexists’ scenario, where the SPF’s narrative of progress fails to address the reality of gender inequality faced by policewomen. Beyond this study, addressing these undercurrent forms of discrimination is crucial for truly achieving gender equality in law enforcement.

Read the full article here.