Abstract

Research on emotional labor has consistently shown that women’s jobs require the suppression of anger. But in the debt settlement firms we studied, the women who negotiated with creditors were expected to express anger. We show that what made their anger acceptable was that its expression was preceded and followed by positive emotions. Women were praised for their ability to rapidly shift from anger to warmth and back to anger again. But this ability to shift emotional registers was also seen by employers and coworkers as a function of women’s natural emotional plasticity, and was contrasted unfavorably with men’s emotional consistency. What was gendered was not an emotion but an emotional pattern, with the consequence that women’s emotional labor was simultaneously valued and devalued.