Deborah Rhode (Stanford) is now speaking at the MSU Symposium on "Gender and the Legal Profession's Pipeline to Power."
She began her talk with two framing points. First, progress [on gender issues] seems to be stalled. Second, there is a lack of consensus that there is an issue of gender inequality in the legal profession.
Professor Rhode gave thumbnail sketches of several pioneering women lawyers from the 19th century to more contemporary examples of Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Professor Rhode's research suggests that in contempoary legal practice, many lawyers prefer to explain the absence of women in positions of leadership to "choice" without an investigation of unconscious stereotypes, workplace structures and institutions impede gender progress. Women who self-promote are considered unlikeable, power-hungry and aggressive. Professor Rhode explains some of the cognitive biases that may be in operation. People are more likely to recall information that confirms their biases, so may more easily remember a time that a woman leaves early to pick up her children than the time she stays late.
Professor Rhodes spoke about challenges that attorneys of color face. They are more likely than white attorneys to be asked to take on specific work in order to satisfy a firm's desire to present a public face of diversity. This is typically at the expense of the individual lawyer's preferences or career goals.
So what's the legal profession to do? Support for diversity needs support from leaders who are interested in gender equity and who will hold the institution accountable when those goals not met, Professor Rhode says.
Comments