Sunday, December 13, 2009
Blog #26
A 1995 study from the California Bar Association addressed the issue of gender bias in the law. It clearly points out the ongoing presence of bias from acceptance of stereotypes about women to the limitation in career advancement based on gender. Their survey showed that 85% of women lawyers surveyed perceived subtle but pervasive bias but 76 % also responded they would still choose to become lawyers. Two thirds felt they were not accepted as equal by their peers. Interestingly, the more women that worked in particular firm the greater the sense of fairness. It may be when more women are employed at a particular workplace less is attributed gender. Sandra Day O’Connor noted in her last book what a relief it was when Justice Ginsberg arrived at the court; when O’Conner was no longer the only woman the sense that all she did that was different was because she was a woman diminished. In the California study 62% of female lawyers believed that they did not have much opportunity for advancement as male lawyers. Some attributed gender bias to female layers not being part of the old boy network. A full 65% said they did not make any career changes due to these perceptions of negative bias. Interestingly, the sense of bias come from many directions. 76%noted that bias from opposing counsel, 64% noted it from clients, 48% from superiors and 43% from peers. The other data that really provides blatant evidence of gender bias is the sheer number of women who have advanced to levels of partner and to judge or professor or Association leads. Clearly the pipeline theory of putting more women in the pipeline at the bottom level has not caused as much advancement up through the ranks as would be expected if this theory were true. The truth is career development is not just a matter of years in place working hard. There is a great deal to the support and direction of supervising staff, which for the legal field is occupied by men. Guidance to young lawyers focuses on several point that help this development. One is to develop meaningful relationship. This suggests time and effort spent to know people of power inside and outside of the law. Interestingly, when it comes to the business world it seen as equally bereft of women in positions of power. Another suggestion is to find mentors; clearly a step more easily established by males because o f sheer numbers. In one study from the University of Calgary, there was a statistically significant difference in outcomes of satisfaction when mentors for women were women. That relationship building had a different dimension when it was a mentor of the same sex. Still surveys have also shown that many women prefer male bosses. Women employed expected a female boss to be more sympathetic and when the boss was demanding they felt betrayed. Women accepted the hierarchy form men and tolerated their yelling and bad behavior; there just wasn’t an expectation of befriending from their supervisor when he was male. It is simply a fact of the time that men do influence and can assist female lawyers in career advancement because they are holding the seats of power in more numbers, and overcoming the pervasive prejudice is necessary to equalize the opportunities for advancement for women.
Blog #39
English’s “re-imagining the Future” outlines several organization initiatives that need to occur before work/life balance can be obtained and equality among men and women is gained in the legal profession.
She starts by pointing out that the “expectation gap” is to be narrowed down. This can be done by offering a “realistic assessment about the status of gender issues in the profession, tempering disappointment of any perceived lack of progress with the realization that stereotypes don’t disappear overnight, and that one generation is a short time for major social change”. This means to not dwell on the problems, but more so to look upwards, toward the future and those changes cannot be instant and take much time. She also points out that this re-calibrated understanding shouldn’t be an argument for abandoning efforts to influence change that are already in effect, but rather address the question of how change can be pursued profitably. This means that we should ignore the leaps made in the past, but to alter them into being more effective. There is a need of a common set of principles to bracket discussion. This is because it is hard to talk about victims without pointing out the “bad guys”. The final and what I believe the most significant technique that needs to be articulated is the vision of the future. Usually these visions have been displayed in numbers. She exemplifies this as being “more women partners, more women general counsel, and more women in leadership.” But this goal does not need to focus strictly on women because it may alienate men. The benefits need to be produced for both genders.
English describes that these new goals cannot be adjusted until the first principles about how best to deliver legal services (who/what makes a good lawyer, the best way to manage a workplace and the most effective way to deal with the intersection between personal and professional lives) are addressed.
I very much agree with her idea that a different, more flexible view of “commitment” to work during a person’s life span should be re-evaluated. “Rather than viewing every new lawyer as a potential lifer, working day in and day out, this vision assumes from the start that there may be times in people’s lives that they need to expand and contract their work schedules.”
She starts by pointing out that the “expectation gap” is to be narrowed down. This can be done by offering a “realistic assessment about the status of gender issues in the profession, tempering disappointment of any perceived lack of progress with the realization that stereotypes don’t disappear overnight, and that one generation is a short time for major social change”. This means to not dwell on the problems, but more so to look upwards, toward the future and those changes cannot be instant and take much time. She also points out that this re-calibrated understanding shouldn’t be an argument for abandoning efforts to influence change that are already in effect, but rather address the question of how change can be pursued profitably. This means that we should ignore the leaps made in the past, but to alter them into being more effective. There is a need of a common set of principles to bracket discussion. This is because it is hard to talk about victims without pointing out the “bad guys”. The final and what I believe the most significant technique that needs to be articulated is the vision of the future. Usually these visions have been displayed in numbers. She exemplifies this as being “more women partners, more women general counsel, and more women in leadership.” But this goal does not need to focus strictly on women because it may alienate men. The benefits need to be produced for both genders.
English describes that these new goals cannot be adjusted until the first principles about how best to deliver legal services (who/what makes a good lawyer, the best way to manage a workplace and the most effective way to deal with the intersection between personal and professional lives) are addressed.
I very much agree with her idea that a different, more flexible view of “commitment” to work during a person’s life span should be re-evaluated. “Rather than viewing every new lawyer as a potential lifer, working day in and day out, this vision assumes from the start that there may be times in people’s lives that they need to expand and contract their work schedules.”
Blog #38
Sandra Day O’Conner way the first female appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States. She has made many significant contributions during her profession.
Abortion has been a very hot topic that she contributed to. In 1974 she voted against a measure to prohibit abortions in some Arizona hospitals. O’Connor generally dissented from 1980s opinion which took an expansive view of Roe v. Wade; she criticized that decision’s “trimester approach” sharply in her dissent in 1983’s City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health. She is reported as criticizing Roe in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: “…I dispute not only the wisdom but also the legitimacy of the Court's attempt to discredit and pre-empt state abortion regulation regardless of the interests it serves and the impact it has”
She is also widely criticized by her own conservatives. Ramesh Ponnuru wrote that, although O’Conner “has voted reasonably well" from a conservative standpoint, her tendency to issue very case-specific rulings. This is very strong compliment.
Bella Abzug was elected to Congress as a Representative from New York’s 19th district in 1971. She has dedicated much of her efforts as a labor lawyer and the House Abzug has enlarged her advocacy for civil rights and women’s rights such as introducing legislation banning discrimination against women seeking credit. “Abzug opposed the war in Vietnam, called for complete withdrawal of troops and organized Women’s Strike for Peace.”
Abzug served the state of New York in the United States House of Representatives, representing her district in Manhattan, from 1971 to 1977. For part of her term, she also represented part of The Bronx as well. She was one of the first members of Congress to support gay rights, introducing the first federal gay rights bill, known as the Equality Act of 1974.
Abortion has been a very hot topic that she contributed to. In 1974 she voted against a measure to prohibit abortions in some Arizona hospitals. O’Connor generally dissented from 1980s opinion which took an expansive view of Roe v. Wade; she criticized that decision’s “trimester approach” sharply in her dissent in 1983’s City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health. She is reported as criticizing Roe in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: “…I dispute not only the wisdom but also the legitimacy of the Court's attempt to discredit and pre-empt state abortion regulation regardless of the interests it serves and the impact it has”
She is also widely criticized by her own conservatives. Ramesh Ponnuru wrote that, although O’Conner “has voted reasonably well" from a conservative standpoint, her tendency to issue very case-specific rulings. This is very strong compliment.
Bella Abzug was elected to Congress as a Representative from New York’s 19th district in 1971. She has dedicated much of her efforts as a labor lawyer and the House Abzug has enlarged her advocacy for civil rights and women’s rights such as introducing legislation banning discrimination against women seeking credit. “Abzug opposed the war in Vietnam, called for complete withdrawal of troops and organized Women’s Strike for Peace.”
Abzug served the state of New York in the United States House of Representatives, representing her district in Manhattan, from 1971 to 1977. For part of her term, she also represented part of The Bronx as well. She was one of the first members of Congress to support gay rights, introducing the first federal gay rights bill, known as the Equality Act of 1974.
Blog #37
In the report, Charting Our Progress, by the American Bar Association Commission on Women in the Profession outlines several difficulties for women within the profession. Some of these hurtles include gender stereotypes where women report having been referred to as “honey” or “baby” which they fear disadvantage them. English differs in the belief that this is being dealt with more in “chatting up the Wives”. Here she states that “All the talk about sexual harassment, along with widespread fear of lawsuits and story making, causes second-guessing and worry. As a result, many people take affirmative steps such as making strategic alliances so that rumors don’t swirl.” (English, 63) Referrals to law firms that are dominated by male workers are also a problem that still exists. The networks of law firms that are dominated by or equally employ women are not as tight-knit as compare to the male counterparts.
“Schedule creep” is developing into several different problems such as the amount of billable hours asked of lawyers. English considers this “Death by Part Time”. (English, 201) The technology trap now allows lawyers to work at home but also may take time away from home activated such as childrearing and the “Sandwich Generation” is a term used to describe that need of women to care for children and elderly family members. English also talks about these problems of conflicting roles. (English, 228)
This is considered a female obligation. Also the report tells of how “Current data indicate that more and more firms are allowing part time schedules, but women testifying in the 2003 hearings still reported that choosing the part-time option posed professional risks”. Some of the major problems are the simple fact that the barriers faced include the need to repeatedly establish female competence. English uses this as an example in “Getting Beyond Nice”. (English, 128) And now there has developed a “generation gap” in which senior women in the firm had become a part of the “good-old-boy network, rather than railing against it.”
“Schedule creep” is developing into several different problems such as the amount of billable hours asked of lawyers. English considers this “Death by Part Time”. (English, 201) The technology trap now allows lawyers to work at home but also may take time away from home activated such as childrearing and the “Sandwich Generation” is a term used to describe that need of women to care for children and elderly family members. English also talks about these problems of conflicting roles. (English, 228)
This is considered a female obligation. Also the report tells of how “Current data indicate that more and more firms are allowing part time schedules, but women testifying in the 2003 hearings still reported that choosing the part-time option posed professional risks”. Some of the major problems are the simple fact that the barriers faced include the need to repeatedly establish female competence. English uses this as an example in “Getting Beyond Nice”. (English, 128) And now there has developed a “generation gap” in which senior women in the firm had become a part of the “good-old-boy network, rather than railing against it.”
Blog #36
In the Talk of the Nation story in course materials, the glass ceiling is explored. The question discusses was: Can corporate America lure the women back into the workforce? Due to this material I believe the answer is yes, but in an unexpected way. They main issues contributing to women moving out of the workforce was discussed as being the loss of women’s values and control of the workplace. This began to effect women differently than men because women were just not willing to give up on family obligation as some men were. The top job available that women are involved with are becoming more and more unpredictable. A women spoke about how she, her husband and several friends attempt to vacation in Alaska, during which she was consistently needing to be tied into her work life and this had a huge impact on what was supposed to be her vacation time. Amount of actual work in being increase and women must decide whether to prioritize work life over the home life. Also the hazing rituals were discussed such as how the United States work a ridiculous amount more of hours that do out European counter-parts. Not only is this taking away from the family life of women, but more and more men are becoming concerned about the amount of time this takes them away from home. NPR explains that women are just opting out of the glass ceiling rather than try to break it. IT suggests that more women are now choosing to divide up their career around their childrearing. They discussed how women go to school and then begin their career paths, later taking time out of their career in order to raise their children. Then the women go back to work after the children have left the home to peruse their goals. This in effect is not so much breaking the glass ceiling, but more so leaving it, to return when they are more advantaged to break it.
Blog #35
The EEOC Recommendations article outlines the legal treatment of caregivers. They discuss the sex-based disparate treatment of female caregivers, the Pregnancy Discrimination, the discrimination against male caregivers, discrimination against women of color, and the unlawful caregiver stereotyping under ADA; hostile work environment harassment. The article suggests that it does not account for caregivers.
They state that “The notion of "caregivers" comprising a special class of employees is of relatively recent origin. What separates these employees descriptively from others is that they, in addition to doing paid work, are also engaged in significant care giving outside of the workplace.” Most importantly they discuss how care giving is not equally distributed across workers. Not all workers have the same responsibilities or needs of other caregivers.
The “Best Practices” Document adds several points. It suggests that particular workplace policies will not only help employers avoid violating existing law, but also promote better work/life balance for employees with such responsibilities. “Part of the EEOC's justification for prompting employers to exceed legal requirements in this regard is research showing that family-friendly workplace policies enhance productivity and aid in employee retention, both components of lowering employer costs.”
The best practices document is grouped into three categories: general; recruitment, hiring, and promotion; and terms and conditions. Within each category, it suggests specific policies that promote work/life balance. This helps to explain how thoroughly the “Best Practices” would affect the balance.
One of the biggest problems outlined in the readings is the factor that many of the persons not considered major care givers are feeling shafted. They often feel that the part-time workers are very difficult to deal with and oftentimes do not bear their fair share of the work. They find themselves resent the people who are taking advantage of this type of leave and wish they would do the same for their own personal reasons- not necessarily for care giving. As these individuals feel it is unfair, the individuals who attempt to take advantage of the opportunity feel that they are scrutinized. They are seen as not being committed or as “nickel and diming” and not sufficient in their work.
They state that “The notion of "caregivers" comprising a special class of employees is of relatively recent origin. What separates these employees descriptively from others is that they, in addition to doing paid work, are also engaged in significant care giving outside of the workplace.” Most importantly they discuss how care giving is not equally distributed across workers. Not all workers have the same responsibilities or needs of other caregivers.
The “Best Practices” Document adds several points. It suggests that particular workplace policies will not only help employers avoid violating existing law, but also promote better work/life balance for employees with such responsibilities. “Part of the EEOC's justification for prompting employers to exceed legal requirements in this regard is research showing that family-friendly workplace policies enhance productivity and aid in employee retention, both components of lowering employer costs.”
The best practices document is grouped into three categories: general; recruitment, hiring, and promotion; and terms and conditions. Within each category, it suggests specific policies that promote work/life balance. This helps to explain how thoroughly the “Best Practices” would affect the balance.
One of the biggest problems outlined in the readings is the factor that many of the persons not considered major care givers are feeling shafted. They often feel that the part-time workers are very difficult to deal with and oftentimes do not bear their fair share of the work. They find themselves resent the people who are taking advantage of this type of leave and wish they would do the same for their own personal reasons- not necessarily for care giving. As these individuals feel it is unfair, the individuals who attempt to take advantage of the opportunity feel that they are scrutinized. They are seen as not being committed or as “nickel and diming” and not sufficient in their work.
Blog #34
Joan Williams addressed many of the issues discussed in English’s book “Gender on Trial” in her question and answer of her book. The goal of her book was to “unbend gender” which she describes as referring to two different trends. The first trend is that in this country there has been unbending and unyielding; there had been “a lot less changed than we had hoped for 20 or 30 years ago. The sendond she describes as the extent of the things that have changed, “changed have been achieved not by moving toward androgyny, but by widening out the range of socially acceptable masculinities and femininities-preserving ‘la difference’ between men and women”.
She clearly separates “market work” and “family work”. She defines “market work” the work that is done for pay and “family work” which includes childcare, housework, eldercare and other forms of caring work. English defines this “family work” as care giving in general.
Williams discusses some of the emotional challenges faces by women who are stay-at-home moms, women you re-enter the work force after having children immediately and women who attempt to accomplish both. She states that even the mothers who stay at home often feel they are taken less seriously by other adults and feel they are viewed at “just a housewife”. She talks about how mothers who work full time often find themselves on the “mommy track” which mean depressed pay rates, fewer benefits, and blocked advancement. So the mothers, whether employed or not, suffer as a result of the current system. She points out that this even affects non-mother because many employers refuse to take them seriously because of the assumption that they too will eventually become mothers and “drop out”.
According to Williams, most people, when assessing their choices, choose the choices they have, not what they should have. This in effect causes them to become involved in a “false choice”. If they had a choice to cut back their hours or reduce them without marginalization, they might, but many women who are at home might add paid work to their lives, if they had a real choice to do so.
The “ideal worker” has been defined as a person who does a good job, that typically are willing and able to work full time for 40 years straight, taking no time off for childbearing or childrearing. This is a very biased view because it is “framed around men’s bodies”. Men are unaffected by the standards and women desperately are. If women and men were supposed to be considered “ideal workers” than they typically child would be raised without their parents “from 8am to 6, 7, or 8pm. This would then effect whether or not the children of a family would be raised correctly to societies standards.
If women attempt to work part time while raising a family, this disadvantages them greatly as talked about in English’s book. Here there are many testimonials about how other workers feel they are unfairly treated compared to the part-time workers or feel that these workers are not working as hard as they are within their designated time periods.
She clearly separates “market work” and “family work”. She defines “market work” the work that is done for pay and “family work” which includes childcare, housework, eldercare and other forms of caring work. English defines this “family work” as care giving in general.
Williams discusses some of the emotional challenges faces by women who are stay-at-home moms, women you re-enter the work force after having children immediately and women who attempt to accomplish both. She states that even the mothers who stay at home often feel they are taken less seriously by other adults and feel they are viewed at “just a housewife”. She talks about how mothers who work full time often find themselves on the “mommy track” which mean depressed pay rates, fewer benefits, and blocked advancement. So the mothers, whether employed or not, suffer as a result of the current system. She points out that this even affects non-mother because many employers refuse to take them seriously because of the assumption that they too will eventually become mothers and “drop out”.
According to Williams, most people, when assessing their choices, choose the choices they have, not what they should have. This in effect causes them to become involved in a “false choice”. If they had a choice to cut back their hours or reduce them without marginalization, they might, but many women who are at home might add paid work to their lives, if they had a real choice to do so.
The “ideal worker” has been defined as a person who does a good job, that typically are willing and able to work full time for 40 years straight, taking no time off for childbearing or childrearing. This is a very biased view because it is “framed around men’s bodies”. Men are unaffected by the standards and women desperately are. If women and men were supposed to be considered “ideal workers” than they typically child would be raised without their parents “from 8am to 6, 7, or 8pm. This would then effect whether or not the children of a family would be raised correctly to societies standards.
If women attempt to work part time while raising a family, this disadvantages them greatly as talked about in English’s book. Here there are many testimonials about how other workers feel they are unfairly treated compared to the part-time workers or feel that these workers are not working as hard as they are within their designated time periods.
Blog #33
In the NPR “An Argument for More Female Justices” many aspect of women’s capability and qualities are brought up. Dahlia Lithwick speaks about the advantage women serve with they are on the Supreme Court. Though she admits that many of the qualities such as “good listening skills” and “understanding of women’s problems” and educationally unfounded, she believe they still exist. I agree with this statement because women are different individual and to diversify the Supreme Court will only better the country’s identification with it. This is an advancement that has not been pushed as far as preferred, but the steps are being made in the corrective direction.
In the next NPR “What Clinton, Palin Did for the Glass Ceiling” two commentators with somewhat opposing views discussed their perception of what Clinton and Palin are doing for women. They brought up the scrutiny that they have been put through and what they feel should have been done differently. Most prominent in my eyes was the fact of how the media reacted to these women. There was much time dedicated to tearing these women apart from whether they were knowledgeable or not to what type of clothing they had on. Their actual campaigning was but in the background as the gossip took the foreground. Either way these women made progress for women because of the fact that they attempt to attain these high positions. Although there was much controversy and many nasty things said, they stepped out and tried to achieve something that no women have achieved before.
In “Women’s History Month: Closing in On Office Gender Gap”, Rebecca Sptiz takes on a much more positive view. "Increasingly as women have become more educated they've wanted to earn salaries to contribute to the family," says Sheila Wellington, a professor at NYU's Stern School of Business. "As opportunities open up, women have wanted to be part of that upward movement." Spitz also discusses that fact that the wage earner who has lost the job is the male wage earner, so “we’re seeing more and more women be economic necessity entering the work force.”
In the next NPR “What Clinton, Palin Did for the Glass Ceiling” two commentators with somewhat opposing views discussed their perception of what Clinton and Palin are doing for women. They brought up the scrutiny that they have been put through and what they feel should have been done differently. Most prominent in my eyes was the fact of how the media reacted to these women. There was much time dedicated to tearing these women apart from whether they were knowledgeable or not to what type of clothing they had on. Their actual campaigning was but in the background as the gossip took the foreground. Either way these women made progress for women because of the fact that they attempt to attain these high positions. Although there was much controversy and many nasty things said, they stepped out and tried to achieve something that no women have achieved before.
In “Women’s History Month: Closing in On Office Gender Gap”, Rebecca Sptiz takes on a much more positive view. "Increasingly as women have become more educated they've wanted to earn salaries to contribute to the family," says Sheila Wellington, a professor at NYU's Stern School of Business. "As opportunities open up, women have wanted to be part of that upward movement." Spitz also discusses that fact that the wage earner who has lost the job is the male wage earner, so “we’re seeing more and more women be economic necessity entering the work force.”
Blog #32
Parenthood differs between male and female lawyers because of the sheer fact that women’s bodies are the ones having the child. They need time off for maternity where as males do not necessarily need this. Also it is a societal idea that a female needs to raise a baby and that a man may not need time off from work to do this.
Traditional values of motherhood have a great impact on women lawyers and the choices they make. These values may be that the women should stay in the home and raise the child personally and that they cannot return to work until the child has entered school-age. Often this even suggests that they must still only work part-time so that they may be there for their child when they are out of school. This affects women greatly, but for the majority of it, they are affected with guilt. Women no longer are subject to traditional values, nor can they often afford to not work for long periods of time. Traditional values are no longer relevant, but are still, unfairly, applied.
High powered female lawyers with children are viewed as suspect parents because of their time constraints. Society would prefer for women to be the complete care of their children to insure that they are brought up to its standards of “correct”. I think it is hard for society to conceptualize how a female lawyer could possibly have enough time to raise children. This is a ridicules notion because many women may achieve high-powered jobs without having to take away from their children’s upbringing and it completely disregards the fact many fathers can do a perfectly good job of childrearing in the mothers place. I also believe that instead of be suspect parents, they should be recognized for their hard work and achievement. It would be very difficult to achieve the raising of a child as well as a high-powered position as a lawyer, and they should be commended with the highest respect for their ability to do both.
Traditional values of motherhood have a great impact on women lawyers and the choices they make. These values may be that the women should stay in the home and raise the child personally and that they cannot return to work until the child has entered school-age. Often this even suggests that they must still only work part-time so that they may be there for their child when they are out of school. This affects women greatly, but for the majority of it, they are affected with guilt. Women no longer are subject to traditional values, nor can they often afford to not work for long periods of time. Traditional values are no longer relevant, but are still, unfairly, applied.
High powered female lawyers with children are viewed as suspect parents because of their time constraints. Society would prefer for women to be the complete care of their children to insure that they are brought up to its standards of “correct”. I think it is hard for society to conceptualize how a female lawyer could possibly have enough time to raise children. This is a ridicules notion because many women may achieve high-powered jobs without having to take away from their children’s upbringing and it completely disregards the fact many fathers can do a perfectly good job of childrearing in the mothers place. I also believe that instead of be suspect parents, they should be recognized for their hard work and achievement. It would be very difficult to achieve the raising of a child as well as a high-powered position as a lawyer, and they should be commended with the highest respect for their ability to do both.
Blog #31
Major problems face individuals that try to balance a work/family life. Many of these problems are outlined in Chapter 7 of English’s book. The most frequently mentioned difficulty of the interviewees in the book were the work/life balance difficulties and were usually expressed as a problem for women and children. (English, 195) Males and females alike are discouraged from flouting accepted work norms. “The ‘real lawyers’ staunchly resist changes to the proven success formula, charging that alternative schedules are inequitable and that part-timers lack commitment.” These tensions make the part-timers feel resentful for the lack of respect they get from their colleagues, but also guilty about “slacking off” on the job. The most prominent solution to finding a work/family balance is the availability of part-time. This has proven in many ways to become an even larger challenge that in effect actually causes many part-timers to leave their positions completely. Part-time is often considered a “death sentence”. (English, 203)
English describes the biggest obstacle for this is the perceptions of equity. “People working traditional schedules believe that the way alternative schedules operate isn’t fair and takes advantage of others. This is a major difficulty when implemented by an employer. The employer must keep all workers satisfied and to do this, they must feel they are equal and treated equally. In several of the interviews in this section of the book, expressions of disgruntled feelings are voiced. Because men, unlike women, may not both bear children, they are subject to different treatment when it comes to things such as family leave and maternity leave.
Another problem faced by those who try to achieve a good work/family balance is that of the hostility to change. This may lead to the feeling that the particular person is not as committed as other who work 40 hour weeks.
English describes the biggest obstacle for this is the perceptions of equity. “People working traditional schedules believe that the way alternative schedules operate isn’t fair and takes advantage of others. This is a major difficulty when implemented by an employer. The employer must keep all workers satisfied and to do this, they must feel they are equal and treated equally. In several of the interviews in this section of the book, expressions of disgruntled feelings are voiced. Because men, unlike women, may not both bear children, they are subject to different treatment when it comes to things such as family leave and maternity leave.
Another problem faced by those who try to achieve a good work/family balance is that of the hostility to change. This may lead to the feeling that the particular person is not as committed as other who work 40 hour weeks.
Blog #30
Conventional views of leadership clearly associate men with roles of power. Just the idea of women in roles of power is limited in American culture. Dr. Rhode, the Stanford Law professor gave a one minute review of American history pointing out how long and how limited the association of women with roles of political leadership has been. She noted that it was 100 years into the history of this country before a woman ran for president and even today, since a black man and a white woman have run the association of woman with weakness and conformity continues to limit what people have as expectations for women. For example, the idea that tearing up was a female sign of weakness when seen in Hillary Clinton as opposed to a sense of passion or concern when seen on Ronald Regan’s face is still common. The media storm of discussion of tears and its meaning for a woman was absurd. There is clear evidence in the business world that the integration of women into business improve profits. The Economist was cited for its commentary on business outcome. It had noted in the fortune 500 businesses that included women there was a significant financial gain. Madeline Albright attributes this to the difference in leadership styles and purports that the combined leadership is the strongest. She notes that women leadership styles often include increase in building relationships and teamwork and feels that enhances the outcomes of male leadership styles common today.
The traditional masculine style tends toward assertive and task-based behaviors, while a feminine style is more relationship oriented and collaborative. Men tend to take risks and may have higher self esteem and a sense of entitlement to leadership. Terms like strong, arrogant, intelligent, driven, assertive, focused and direct are often used to describe the masculine approach. Women tend to be more demeaning or self depreciating. They values efficiency, multi-tasking, emotional, empathetic, intuitive, compassionate, relationship building, verbal, consensus building problem solving styles. The cultural acceptance of competition and the cultural values of the free enterprise system clearly favor the masculine roles of American men. Independence, drive and being self- made are values of both or economic system and political history. As a country based on making new rules and forging into the unknown the masculine roles are more highly valued that the female ones.
Gender expectations put women in a position that no matter what she is doing she should be doing something else. Women still shoulder the burden of the home and are judged according to their home and children. The advances of technology and the lengthening of work day responsibilities pressure them to continue work productivity into their hours at home. There are not many social supports for relieving home, child or wider family responsibilities. Secondly, there is a sense of honor for men who shoulder home responsibilities while there is frequent disparaging of women who dare to request or demand time for their other than work responsibilities. It is readily assumed a women leaving work to attend child care responsibilities are common and because of the stereotype when they work long it is not recognized.
Stereotypes are held quite close and generally reinforced in most of the prejudice women face. In terms of employment and promotion the concept of In group favoritism continues as men in power hire and promote people like themselves. The numbers are clear in government where there is only 15% of the electorate is female despite 50% of the voters being female. Both Madeline Albright and Dr. Rhode point out there is even greater disparity noted in education and the business world. It was very resonant to hear Ms. Chaves describe what it was like running for office in 1997. She described to bias that women showed her because she kept her maiden name. It was assumed she was inadequate as a woman and thus she lost the vote of other women who valued a traditional role. Even the women involved seem limited in their expectation. It was pointed out that men in politics often network with men in business and that women in politics and business do not have theses associations that might strengthen their support systems. In the end, the stereotypes clearly further limit understanding between people and reinforce the prejudices they hold.
While there are different leadership styles that are considered feminine or masculine both have advantages and disadvantages. Aggression and drive can move and organization rapidly and direct it sharply but it can misdirect the course as easily as direct it profitably. Cooperative models move much slower but they have a broader view and with inclusive efforts they can get input that may improve quality. At the same time they can get bogged down and self absorbed and fail to achieve goals in a timely manner. As Albright pointed out the combination of styles provides a better outcome and apparently increased profits.
For my own leadership, I think the most important is to use oneself honestly. Trying to be someone you are not is too difficult to sustain and is not likely to succeed for long. My character is pretty rapidly driven and I tend to attract other by my enthusiasm toward a goal. I am only marginal at consensus building because once I have a clear concept of the goal I am inpatient to move toward it. I can get into conflict if bogged down too long in consensus making. My style while feminine in terms of multitasking and intuitiveness it is more masculine in terms of directness toward the goal. I would put my leadership style somewhere between participative—that leans on consensus with other and pace setting that is very focused on the end goal. I think most people move between styles but have a typical approach. I would agree with Albright that a team approach with both masculine and feminine styles combine provide the most likelihood of success.
The traditional masculine style tends toward assertive and task-based behaviors, while a feminine style is more relationship oriented and collaborative. Men tend to take risks and may have higher self esteem and a sense of entitlement to leadership. Terms like strong, arrogant, intelligent, driven, assertive, focused and direct are often used to describe the masculine approach. Women tend to be more demeaning or self depreciating. They values efficiency, multi-tasking, emotional, empathetic, intuitive, compassionate, relationship building, verbal, consensus building problem solving styles. The cultural acceptance of competition and the cultural values of the free enterprise system clearly favor the masculine roles of American men. Independence, drive and being self- made are values of both or economic system and political history. As a country based on making new rules and forging into the unknown the masculine roles are more highly valued that the female ones.
Gender expectations put women in a position that no matter what she is doing she should be doing something else. Women still shoulder the burden of the home and are judged according to their home and children. The advances of technology and the lengthening of work day responsibilities pressure them to continue work productivity into their hours at home. There are not many social supports for relieving home, child or wider family responsibilities. Secondly, there is a sense of honor for men who shoulder home responsibilities while there is frequent disparaging of women who dare to request or demand time for their other than work responsibilities. It is readily assumed a women leaving work to attend child care responsibilities are common and because of the stereotype when they work long it is not recognized.
Stereotypes are held quite close and generally reinforced in most of the prejudice women face. In terms of employment and promotion the concept of In group favoritism continues as men in power hire and promote people like themselves. The numbers are clear in government where there is only 15% of the electorate is female despite 50% of the voters being female. Both Madeline Albright and Dr. Rhode point out there is even greater disparity noted in education and the business world. It was very resonant to hear Ms. Chaves describe what it was like running for office in 1997. She described to bias that women showed her because she kept her maiden name. It was assumed she was inadequate as a woman and thus she lost the vote of other women who valued a traditional role. Even the women involved seem limited in their expectation. It was pointed out that men in politics often network with men in business and that women in politics and business do not have theses associations that might strengthen their support systems. In the end, the stereotypes clearly further limit understanding between people and reinforce the prejudices they hold.
While there are different leadership styles that are considered feminine or masculine both have advantages and disadvantages. Aggression and drive can move and organization rapidly and direct it sharply but it can misdirect the course as easily as direct it profitably. Cooperative models move much slower but they have a broader view and with inclusive efforts they can get input that may improve quality. At the same time they can get bogged down and self absorbed and fail to achieve goals in a timely manner. As Albright pointed out the combination of styles provides a better outcome and apparently increased profits.
For my own leadership, I think the most important is to use oneself honestly. Trying to be someone you are not is too difficult to sustain and is not likely to succeed for long. My character is pretty rapidly driven and I tend to attract other by my enthusiasm toward a goal. I am only marginal at consensus building because once I have a clear concept of the goal I am inpatient to move toward it. I can get into conflict if bogged down too long in consensus making. My style while feminine in terms of multitasking and intuitiveness it is more masculine in terms of directness toward the goal. I would put my leadership style somewhere between participative—that leans on consensus with other and pace setting that is very focused on the end goal. I think most people move between styles but have a typical approach. I would agree with Albright that a team approach with both masculine and feminine styles combine provide the most likelihood of success.
Blog #29
Barbara Johnson spoke eloquently about why so few woman have stayed in law firms. The statistics are frankly alarming, while 50% of law school students are women only 4% are law firm partners are women and even fewer are minority women. In the data collected from 920 women lawyers there was a resounding sense that they were faced with prejudice. 49% of the responders said they were subject to demeaning attitudes. Largely, they felt they were no longer subject to illegal sexism practices but they were leaving in droves because it was just not worth it to deal with the persistent assumptions of their inadequacy. From the look of doubt or surprise on the powerful when a minority woman took a stand to the annoyance that when a man made the same suggestion and their idea was more fully entertained, they felt the culture demeaned them. The billable hour requirement and the persistent neglect of career development and opportunities all contribute to the sense they are not likely to succeed.
As demonstrated in the text for women in general it is difficult to feel satisfied with work when you are not taken seriously. “Initial impression about confidence matter greatly because judgments are made quickly about perceived ability, especially in law firms. The informal machine quickly swings into gear to decide who is good and who is not, on the assumption that ability is inbred.” (English, 160) This proves the confidence is imperative and when this is taken away from a woman, she will automatically have a poorer performance and less job satisfaction. English also explains that “Because confidence is so critical, and because impressions about confidence morph quickly into predictions about future potential, how workplace leaders decide who is confident and who is not is vital. These leaders frequently draw conclusions based on survey behaviors, such as how people communicate, make decisions, and react to criticism.”
As demonstrated in the text for women in general it is difficult to feel satisfied with work when you are not taken seriously. “Initial impression about confidence matter greatly because judgments are made quickly about perceived ability, especially in law firms. The informal machine quickly swings into gear to decide who is good and who is not, on the assumption that ability is inbred.” (English, 160) This proves the confidence is imperative and when this is taken away from a woman, she will automatically have a poorer performance and less job satisfaction. English also explains that “Because confidence is so critical, and because impressions about confidence morph quickly into predictions about future potential, how workplace leaders decide who is confident and who is not is vital. These leaders frequently draw conclusions based on survey behaviors, such as how people communicate, make decisions, and react to criticism.”
Blog #28
Sonia Sotomayor’s behaviors were characteristic of successful men but since she is a woman they have become sources of criticism rather than accepted as evidence of her readiness to lead. Clearly she is smart: she won Princeton’s highest academic prize. Clearly she is driven: she made to from the South Bronx to an excellent education and federal judgeship. Clearly she sets high standards: she has been demanding, she has asked tough questions and her temper has flared. Each of these characteristics is desirable in a judge but in the critical media she has been demeaned for these very things. The biggest problem is that people readily accept accusations of prejudices they hold. If one thinks that women who succeeds do so because it is the politically correct thing rather than that they are talented, they readily accept accusation that a woman is not really that talented or that prepared. Then when they hear criticism that a woman is that smart they believe it. Rosen, preceded his criticism with the comment that he had not read up on Sotomayor and was not familiar with her judgments but still when he misquoted a circuit court judge to suggest she wasn’t really that smart people who are accept women, and in particular minority women are not that smart, feel affirmed. Secondly, when her background is discussed talent is not considered the cause rather prejudice against white men is sited as the cause for her success. Most glaring however is the ridicule of her demanding style. If a man is now for being “a sharp interrogator who requires lawyers to be ‘on top of it’” he is considered tough. It is considered a good quality. Comparisons to Scalia was made and he was known as strong or sharp. The same behavior in a woman was considered excitable, domineering or bullying. Amazingly temperament rather than talent became a key issue for acceptance. Behavior that is not traditional for women becomes a liability. Sadly, people accept the prejudices they hold without real consideration of the fact behind them.
Blog #27
English tells about the competency gap between men and women. A large perception exists that “female lawyers have to work harder than male lawyers to get the same results” and there is a perception of less respect for women as well. She explains that “female attorney are accorded less respect than male attorneys”. Although females constitute nearly one-third of the profession, and their share of the workforce increased dramatically in a very short time, they remain younger and less experience, and many take time out for raising children. “As a result, women’s very “female-ness” is conspicuous, an exception to the general rule of male dominance.
There is a feeling of dismissal among older women lawyers. Although they may have even been partners they feel very tired of being treated poorly and not having the power they ought to have. Management professor Judith Oadkley defines “competency testing” as “a process by which a person is required to prove herself over and over again”. She writes that men freely admit “That women in upper level positions were subject to competency testing much more often than their male counterparts. This behavior on the part of male executive could be seen as an attempt to band together to preserve the upper ranks as a predominantly male domain by sending the message to females who attempt to infiltrate their domain that they are less than welcome and will have to fight to gain entry.”
One strategy mentioned in the book that exemplifies the way some male lawyers engage in an attempt to win a case against a women lawyer is by a woman who had been very successful. Her firm told her to write the brief, but that another person would present it. When she asked why, she was told it was because of her short stature and that she may not be taken seriously because of it.
There is a feeling of dismissal among older women lawyers. Although they may have even been partners they feel very tired of being treated poorly and not having the power they ought to have. Management professor Judith Oadkley defines “competency testing” as “a process by which a person is required to prove herself over and over again”. She writes that men freely admit “That women in upper level positions were subject to competency testing much more often than their male counterparts. This behavior on the part of male executive could be seen as an attempt to band together to preserve the upper ranks as a predominantly male domain by sending the message to females who attempt to infiltrate their domain that they are less than welcome and will have to fight to gain entry.”
One strategy mentioned in the book that exemplifies the way some male lawyers engage in an attempt to win a case against a women lawyer is by a woman who had been very successful. Her firm told her to write the brief, but that another person would present it. When she asked why, she was told it was because of her short stature and that she may not be taken seriously because of it.
Blog #25
English states that “Many people view sexualized behavior aimed toward workplace success pragmatically, a ‘weapon in the arsenal’ that a women can deploy to gain an edge.” This is a way sexuality may be used to the advantage of an individual in the work place. Many people believe that those who use sexuality as a career advancer will “slide down a slippery slope”. This de-legitimizes a woman by reawakening the stereotype that a woman’s mere presence is “overwhelmingly sexual rather than professional”
One area where sexual behavior has broadened for women is in the workplace. This has to do with several factors. Individuals are working with others in the same field of interest. They are also typically in the same socio-economic class. Workers are also spending the majority of their time with each other. Today, English explains that many studies show that romantic relationships at work are not unusual.
One pro to these situations is the fact that widespread affairs and romance have resulted in more equity between the sexes and a softening of stereotypes, such as the double standard that historically permitted male sexual escapades but shunned sexually active women. “Personality and liability can triumph over those traditional gender roles.” Not only are women less tainted by romantic exploits, but increasingly females approach males for romance.
English still persists with the cons that “the door isn’t swinging wide open for women’s sexuality. The double standard is still around; males can view female come-ons as distasteful or laughable, and women still have less maneuverability than men.” And that although sexual harassment has been unequivocally established as a credible cause of action and, at the same time, women have acquired more freedom to assert sexualized behavior, other problems have sprung up. For example 18% of the harassment of attorneys is from clients.
One area where sexual behavior has broadened for women is in the workplace. This has to do with several factors. Individuals are working with others in the same field of interest. They are also typically in the same socio-economic class. Workers are also spending the majority of their time with each other. Today, English explains that many studies show that romantic relationships at work are not unusual.
One pro to these situations is the fact that widespread affairs and romance have resulted in more equity between the sexes and a softening of stereotypes, such as the double standard that historically permitted male sexual escapades but shunned sexually active women. “Personality and liability can triumph over those traditional gender roles.” Not only are women less tainted by romantic exploits, but increasingly females approach males for romance.
English still persists with the cons that “the door isn’t swinging wide open for women’s sexuality. The double standard is still around; males can view female come-ons as distasteful or laughable, and women still have less maneuverability than men.” And that although sexual harassment has been unequivocally established as a credible cause of action and, at the same time, women have acquired more freedom to assert sexualized behavior, other problems have sprung up. For example 18% of the harassment of attorneys is from clients.
Blog #24
I chose to do my informal interview with a female law student named Susan that I met during a summer internship the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression. She is currently a second year law student at the University Of Virginia School Of Law. She was a mentor for me in many ways especially when explaining the ins and outs of law school.
From her experience, she claims to not have been scrutinized because of her gender to her knowledge when applying for law school although believes there may have been some factors regarding gender representation at the school. She finds her classes to be very fair and that all of the requirements asked of the students to be gender-neutral. Albeit this has been easy, she says she has found some difficulties in the school’s extracurricular activities. She explained that although classes and grades and assignments are important, unmentioned is the extreme desperation for participating in the schools out-of-class organizations. She claims that these are just as important as other factors in her law school career because they understand that law firms look at this participation as equally important.
Her difficulties with the involvement are that she find that many of the group are male-lead. She finds that although academically the school does a wonderful job being gender-neutral, this does not seep into the extracurricular activities.
She also finds that when she forms study groups, she often will find herself joining the more male-dominated groups. Susan stated that although they may be equal, from her personal experience, the male-dominated groups tend to take school in a stride that she would like to incorporate in her school work. She blames this on her personal, bad experience she had on a single occasion and claims that it may possibly be the fact that she prefers to be subject to masculine personalities rather that feminine.
From her experience, she claims to not have been scrutinized because of her gender to her knowledge when applying for law school although believes there may have been some factors regarding gender representation at the school. She finds her classes to be very fair and that all of the requirements asked of the students to be gender-neutral. Albeit this has been easy, she says she has found some difficulties in the school’s extracurricular activities. She explained that although classes and grades and assignments are important, unmentioned is the extreme desperation for participating in the schools out-of-class organizations. She claims that these are just as important as other factors in her law school career because they understand that law firms look at this participation as equally important.
Her difficulties with the involvement are that she find that many of the group are male-lead. She finds that although academically the school does a wonderful job being gender-neutral, this does not seep into the extracurricular activities.
She also finds that when she forms study groups, she often will find herself joining the more male-dominated groups. Susan stated that although they may be equal, from her personal experience, the male-dominated groups tend to take school in a stride that she would like to incorporate in her school work. She blames this on her personal, bad experience she had on a single occasion and claims that it may possibly be the fact that she prefers to be subject to masculine personalities rather that feminine.
Blog #23
When the Wall Street Journal Law Blog comments “that pantyhose and makeup are rarely, if ever, issues for male [law] colleagues” it opened a firestorm of comments about the issue fashion for women practicing law. There was a great deal of passion concerning female lawyer attire. While not everyone agrees what the rules of attire were there was clear consensus that a woman’s attire mattered and that the window of acceptable was narrow. No stilettos and no flats when it comes to shoes were expected. Looking put together was important. Being frumpy or boring sent the message you didn’t care. Beyond the public commentary on a blog is the specific guidance from some companies. There was citation that the firm of Freshfields, Bruckhause and Deringer had been advising female associates to “embrace their femininity” by wearing stilettos and skirts to work because they felt it projected a professional image. Gender stereotyping may be equivalent to workplace discrimination but it is still widely practiced. Clearly value is placed on appearance rather than talent as far female lawyers are concerned. Likewise, women in the world of politics face these issues. It was suggested in the discussion of Micelle Obama that the first ladies’ role even back to the time of Dolly Madison was to impart some fashion statement. It was suggested that the first ladies charisma and style provided the emotional and psychosocial tone of the presidency. In this era of media immediacy and excitement Michele Obama faces much scrutiny and a lot of limitations. Fashion commentators described her has modern, progressive, preppy, with a degree of sex appeal and felt this was part of the philosophical message the president wanted to confer. They noted too that those scrutinizing her imposed a number of limits. They felt that a traditional back fashion such as corn rows in her hair would be unacceptable and inappropriate in her role and position. These limitations on women in terms of appearance are a clear and direct form of discrimination because of gender and role disparity.
Blog #22
Sotomayor, was discussed in the media during her nomination to the Supreme Court. Not only were the news reports but also reviews from professional organization and an extensive number of comedian skit about her and the investigation process. There was a great deal of media input that illustrated the gender and race bias she faced. One of the most grievous offenses was the extensive discussion in the media of her temperament. Her detractors described her as outspoken, difficult, temperamental and excitable. The gender bias is an expectation for a woman to have soft and kind demeanor. Aggression and directness are considered masculine characteristics and while they are characteristics that have carried her far in her carried and qualified her as an astute and effective lawyer they were used against her in the media. Scott Moss form the University of Colorado Law school, stated: “ [S]ome of the complaints struck me as suspiciously common attacks on outspoken, high-powered women. How many men are criticized for being "very outspoken"? Do Sotomayor's critics see it as a bad thing that [Supreme Court Justice Antonin] Scalia frequently is "overly aggressive" on the bench and in his notoriously entertaining public speeches?” He concluded that these type A characteristics were praised in men but used against Sotomayor. The racial bias fell more toward the low expectation Anglo’s had for Latinos. In review of the literature it was point out that for Anglos in general there is little to no differentiation in subtypes of Latino Americans and that seen as a group the stereotype is that they are not smart, can be lazy unreliable and aggressive. A host of unsubstantiated comments were offered about Sotomayor not being bright enough for the job. Throughout May 09 comments suggesting she was “not so bright” circulated and were repeated despite her clear exception performance in school and in her career. For people who hold the stereotype about limited capabilities there is easy acceptance of general suggestion of this deficiency. Clearly as a woman reaching beyond expectation of Americans at large the immediate resistance leap to the low level of prejudice.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)