Symbolic violence as a practice of authority: (non)recognition of discrimination manifestations by students in the university environment

Abstract

This article examines the problem of non-recognition of discriminatory practices in university settings through the theoretical lens of Pierre Bourdieu's concept of symbolic violence. Gender-based violence is approached not as a series of isolated incidents, but as a structural effect of institutional, linguistic, and pedagogical practices that reproduce power hierarchies and normalize inequality. The study draws on empirical data obtained from anonymous student surveys conducted in 2024–2025, focusing on experiences of discriminatory remarks and practices within academic interactions, particularly in relationships between students and teaching staff. The theoretical framework integrates Bourdieu's concepts of symbolic violence, pedagogical authority, habitus, and inculcation with an analytical model developed by Suruchi Thapar-Björkert, Lotta Samelius, and Gurchathen S. Sanghera. This model identifies four interrelated mechanisms through which symbolic violence is reproduced in everyday institutional contexts: misrecognition, condescension, consent, and complicity. These mechanisms allow for an analysis of how discriminatory practices are perceived as normal, benign, or pedagogically justified, rather than as forms of violence or domination. The article argues that students may possess abstract knowledge about discrimination and gender-based violence while failing to recognize these phenomena in concrete educational interactions. This gap is explained not by a lack of awareness, but by the long-term process of inculcation through which dominant norms, hierarchies, and modes of communication are internalized as natural and self-evident. Furthermore, the university is conceptualized as a linguistic and epistemic authority that monopolizes the definition of legitimate speech, knowledge, and complaint, thereby limiting the possibility of articulating experiences of discrimination as institutional problems. By situating everyday discriminatory practices within a broader structure of symbolic power, the article demonstrates how universities may simultaneously declare commitments to equality while reproducing subtle forms of domination through pedagogical communication, institutional silence, and normalized hierarchies. The findings contribute to critical discussions on gender, power, and violence in higher education by highlighting the structural conditions that render discrimination both persistent and largely invisible.