Why Men Are Perceived as More Confident — and Why Few Women Lead in Ballet

Despite the prominence of female dancers on stage, women remain strikingly underrepresented in leadership roles within the world of ballet, a disparity that persists both in Poland and globally. This phenomenon has been the subject of a rigorous investigation by Dr. Emilia Cholewicka, a cultural economist and dancer affiliated with SWPS University in Warsaw. Her research, published in the upcoming issue of Research in Dance Education, uncovers the complex, self-perpetuating structures within classical ballet education and professional environments that contribute to the persistent scarcity of female ballet leaders.

Historically, ballet, an art form steeped in tradition and rigid hierarchies, has seldom witnessed women occupying top-tier leadership positions, such as artistic directors or choreographers. Although women comprise the majority of dancers worldwide, the leadership landscape remains male-dominated. Recent data from the Dance Data Project highlights that in 2022, only 29% of artistic directors in classically based ballet companies globally were female, with this percentage having declined by 4% since 2021. This imbalance is not just a reflection of numbers but underscores deeper systemic issues.

Poland presents a microcosm of this phenomenon. During the 2019/2020 season, women made up 59% of ballet company employees, with female dancers almost doubling male dancers in number. Yet, the upper-management echelons are predominantly male, with women occupying barely one-fifth of choreographer positions and seldom reaching executive roles. Leadership in ballet holds significant sway over the repertoire choices and, by extension, the preservation and evolution of ballet as an artistic discipline. Thus, the lack of female leaders affects not only workplace equity but also the cultural legacy of ballet.

Dr. Cholewicka’s research delves into the intricacies of this imbalance through a mixed-methods approach that combines statistical analysis of Poland’s top nine ballet companies with in-depth interviews involving seventeen professional dancers. These dancers, graduates of Polish ballet schools, offer firsthand insight into the challenges and cultural undercurrents that shape career trajectories. Her study characterizes the ballet ecosystem as an autopoietic system—self-sustaining and resistant to change—where prevailing norms and power dynamics perpetuate gender inequalities.

Among the factors contributing to the paucity of female ballet leaders are the intense physical demands of the profession, especially the necessity for women to master pointe technique, which emphasizes a highly specific body ideal that is youth-centric and exacting. The high risk of injury, combined with unpaid overtime and the inherent sense of interchangeability among dancers, creates an environment where long-term career advancement, particularly into leadership, is fraught with obstacles. Moreover, humility and conformity—traits traditionally fostered in female dancers—are paradoxically at odds with the assertiveness required for leadership roles, further complicating progression.

The culture within ballet education in Poland is a critical locus for the entrenchment of these inequities. Numerous dancers recount a highly competitive and hierarchical studio environment where proximity to mirrors and teachers at the barre symbolizes status and opportunity. The discipline enforced often fosters a perpetual sense of inadequacy, pitting young dancers against each other and undermining self-worth. While this rigor cultivates essential qualities such as diligence and time management, it also reinforces detrimental psychological dynamics that can stifle ambition and collaboration among female dancers.

Beyond the education stage, the cyclical nature of ballet careers perpetuates these conditions. After retirement from performance, many dancers transition into teaching roles within ballet schools, where they embody and transmit the same cultural codes and hierarchical paradigms they once navigated. This replication of systemic dynamics underscores the autopoietic nature of the ballet profession, where change is resisted by the very structures that sustain it. Several interviewees revealed enduring emotional scars so severe that they avoided ballet institutions for years post-graduation.

An additional layer of complexity arises from the privileged status granted to male dancers within this ecosystem. Due to their minority status, men tend to receive preferential treatment during training and subsequently ascend leadership ladders more swiftly. According to Dr. Cholewicka’s interviewees, this advantage often translates into disproportionate influence, as men "have the power and are just deciding," a dynamic that underscores the intersection of gender and power within ballet’s institutional frameworks.

Dr. Cholewicka posits that meaningful progress hinges significantly on top-down institutional support—where leaders consciously adopt gender-inclusive policies and practices—to disrupt entrenched disparities. An increase in women occupying roles such as artistic directors and choreographers has the potential to reshape both the narratives portrayed on stage and the working conditions behind the scenes. These shifts can ultimately transform ballet’s cultural fabric by broadening the representation of female experiences and perspectives.

Equally critical is the transformation of ballet education. It must evolve beyond the replication of hierarchical, competitive paradigms toward nurturing supportive environments that promote solidarity rather than rivalry. The concept of sisterhood and peer support emerges as a fundamental counterforce to isolation and internal competition among women in ballet. Dr. Cholewicka highlights that fostering mutual understanding and assistance among women can instigate significant positive change within this autopoietic system, potentially initiating a shift in its trajectory even if the system self-perpetuates.

This systemic recalibration involves embracing a holistic approach where changes at individual, institutional, and cultural levels coalesce. Visibility of female choreographers’ works on stage, equitable gender representation in leadership, and supportive educational frameworks form the pillars of this transformative agenda. The potential ripple effects include evolving repertoire themes, diverse portrayals of female dancers, and equitable labor roles, thereby redefining ballet as both an art form and a workplace.

The study’s findings emphasize that while the ballet world’s autopoietic nature makes it resistant to swift reform, it does not render change impossible. Particularly, moments of intervention—whether policy-driven or grassroots—can alter the system’s dynamics and set ballet on a path toward inclusivity. The relationship dynamics among women, marked by solidarity rather than competition, emerge as one of the promising catalysts for this change.

In essence, the ballet community stands at a crossroads. The recognition and active confrontation of gender disparities in leadership not only advance equity but also expand the artistic possibilities of ballet as a living tradition. Dr. Cholewicka’s research underscores that fostering sisterhood and institutional accountability are not merely progressive ideals but necessary imperatives for the sustainability and evolution of ballet in Poland and beyond.

1. Dance Data Project®. 2023. Global Leadership Report.
2. Garcia-Mainar, I., V. M. Montuenga, and G. García-Martín. 2018. “Occupational Prestige and Gender-Occupational Segregation.” Work, Employment and Society 32 (2): 348–367.
3. Hooks, B. Sisterhood: Political Solidarity between Women. 1986. Feminist Review no. 23.
   Image Credits: SWPS University, Source: Emilia Cholewicka
   Keywords: ballet, gender inequality, leadership, Poland, female choreographers, classical dance education, autopoiesis, cultural economics, ballet companies, sisterhood, gender disparities, dance education