Dear Mr. Foland,The above is an excerpt from an email I received the other day after sending in my application materials for a fall externship. It represents the typical response I get from potential employers; it is polite, informative, and most importantly, the respondent presumes that I am a man.
We are in receipt of your application materials ... Thank you for your interest in our office.
When I apply for jobs, a majority of the responses I get address a Mr. Taylor Foland. As someone with a gender neutral name, I obviously understand why this happens. Taylors come in all shapes, sizes, and genders, and my application materials do not include any gender indicators such as Mr., Ms., or preferred pronouns. But, before I came to law school, this didn't happen at all...not even once. And, it happens often. About 70-80% of the responses I get address Mr. Foland. So, what is it about the legal profession that makes my resume read male?
First of all, let's talk about my resume. I've spent a lot of time crafting my resume over the years, but for the majority of law school my resume has included one or more of the following positions: museum educator at two different history museums, law clerk at the Children's Law Centre, and Law Clerk at the Sacramento City Attorney's Office. In addition to my professional obligations I also list: President of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, Co-Chair of the Women's Law Association, and Member of Law Review. And for a fun little twist to the resume, I've also included a "Personal Interests" section which includes (beware: it's a little cringe): bread and pastry baking (hit me up if you want some baked goods!), aerial dance (a PC way to say pole dancing...it's great exercise for the body and mind!), clothing design (a nod to the sewing machine I break out every now and again), and soccer.
That is, more or less, the sum total of my resume. Again, there are no obvious gender markers such as name prefixes or preferred pronouns. My name "Taylor Foland" is on the top of the page in larger text than anything else. That's about it. So, what is it about that information that leads employers to address me as Mr. Foland?
What strikes me as odd right off the bat is that a lot of the things on my resume indicate a female identity per societal standards and norms. For example, education is a field typically occupied by women and family law is largely comprised of female attorneys. If that wasn't enough, surely most people would think that leadership roles in a reproductive justice society and a women's law club screams, "female!", or that clothing design and dance are extracurriculars associated more often with women. Are the people reading my resume just progressive? Are the people reading my resume even reading it at all??
My experiences as "Mr. Foland" have lead me to consider the ways in which the entire legal system is dominated by men. Male-domination occurs at almost every stage in the process to becoming a lawyer: getting to law school, law school itself, and the legal profession. In such an environment, it is no surprise that an applicant with a gender-neutral name, regardless of the content of their resume, will be presumed male. I will focus on the final stage of domination: the legal profession.
To quickly comment on the first two, barriers often discourage women from applying to law school, and/or lead to "poorer" performances by women in law school, among other things. Some of those barriers include the lack of female law school professors and mentors, emotional labour responsibilities that women often take on in addition to their academic, financial, and personal responsibilities, and systemic sexism that expects certain behaviours of women (agreeable, smiling, pleasant) and pushes women into certain professions (aka "pink-collared jobs" such as nursing, waitressing, and teaching).
But, relevant to Mr. Foland are the barriers in the professional realm of the law, where "his" resume gets read and analyzed. Because although women enrollees have surpassed men enrollees in American law schools for the past three years, female representation in leadership positions (partners and equity partners) and retention rates of female employees demonstrate persisting inequalities.
Why do these inequalities exist? Interpretations of a 2018 Law Society survey suggest some reasons:
In an international survey of over 7,500 women lawyers conducted by the Law Society, the top three barriers to women’s career progression were reported to be unconscious bias on the part of senior colleagues (52% of respondents), an unacceptable work/life balance (48%), and a belief that the traditional networks and routes to promotion in law are male orientated (46%).Another key factor that others writing on the topic have suggested is the "focus on presenteeism" in the legal profession, or the requirement that lawyers be present in the workplace at all times to conduct their work. This approach disproportionately turns women away from the legal profession after a while, because women often rely on flexible work schedules once starting a family (Note: there is a discussion to be had here about why women have to become more flexible, while their male partners - in heterosexual relationships - often do not).
All of these factors contribute to the male domination of the legal profession. Not only is the build up to becoming a lawyer inaccessible to women, but the profession itself is not conducive to female involvement. When it is men who typically succeed in a profession, it is not surprising that an applicant with a name sometimes given to men is presumed to be one.
Having identified that male-domination exists in the legal field, which is probably not a surprising realization, the question remains: what do we do about it? And, what do I do about my alter-ego, Mr. Foland?
Having identified that male-domination exists in the legal field, which is probably not a surprising realization, the question remains: what do we do about it? And, what do I do about my alter-ego, Mr. Foland?
In my opinion, flexibility in all workplaces for both men and women alleviates gender-based pressure to be present/perform at work in ways that go against other commitments. Next, the legal profession must ensure that there are women in senior positions, both at law schools and law firms. Up and coming female lawyers also need greater access to mentoring and sponsorship from those already in the field (e.g. breaking down gender-barriers with respect to networking events). Finally, men need to engage more directly with the equality debate in all aspects of life.
As to what I, Mr./Ms. Foland should do, I admit that it is something I still grapple with. On the one hand, misgendering has provided me a unique advantage in interviews. Surprising (or correcting in an email) an interviewer with my true gender identity often puts me in a better position in an interview. In a weird way, I have a slight upper hand because they made a mistake.
On the other hand, I recognize the problems associated with this method, which I have followed up until this point. First, misgendering is a real problem for trans and nonbinary individuals. As a cis-female, is my capitalization of misgendering disrespectful and trivializing of trans/nonbinary issues? I think it probably is. Secondly, by failing to put gender markers on my resume, am I taking advantage of male domination by knowing I may pass as male and thus get a (potential) leg up in the application process? To what extent does feeding into the current state perpetuate it? These are all questions I have that I have not figured out the answer to. But, they are questions I will keep asking myself as I edit and submit my resume in the future.
That's all that Ms. Foland has to say about the matter for now.
That's all that Ms. Foland has to say about the matter for now.
5 comments:
Hi Taylor,
Thank you for sharing your story. It is so interesting that you have been misgendered as often as you have! Part of my surprise stems from knowing you as the president of both If/When/How and KWLA. But also, when you listed your work experience, it definitely read as feminine to me. This is likely due to my having worked in the education field so long before law school. I had a few male colleagues here and there, but the vast majority were women. With this in mind, it seems so strange that you are presumed male by those in charge of hiring. Like you said, it most likely has a lot to do with how male-dominated the legal profession is. Though, I also wonder if that results in them assuming it is more respectful to assume you are a man in the way that sometimes people call women "Mrs." rather than "Ms." because society thinks its more respectful to assume a woman is married. It is problematic either way, and I hope that when you correct those recruiters, it makes them think twice about assuming gender.
Thanks for sharing your story, Taylor! It was a fascinating read and it made me think about the way many employers' initial interaction with a person via their resume - a seemingly objective form of communication - has been colored by a gendered lens. This phenomenon can also be compared with racially-based hiring bias. There is a study that found that even if two resumes with the exact same experience and education were given to a single employer, the applicant with the white sounding name was more likely to be granted an interview than an applicant with a black or Hispanic sounding name.
A name can reveal a lot about a person. My name is uncommon in the United States, but it reveals to an employer that I am likely going to be a person of color. A part of me hopes that this "revelation" doesn't matter, but another part knows that this likely is part of their hiring calculus when deciding whether or not I will be granted an interview.
I'm not sure how to mitigate this issue, but it is one that should be addressed soon because it likely plays a big role in employment disparity.
Amazing post! I identify a lot with the gender-neutral name issue. Anytime I pick up a phone, I am addressed with she pronouns. I also have just learned to roll with it, as it takes more time to explain that I am in fact a man then to end the conversation.
I understand that for your situation it is clearly different. Most people assume that men are the ones applying for jobs in the legal field because the field is still dominated by men. What is worse, not only is it dominated by men, it is run by men at a much higher rate. While women have been doing a great job at breaking through glass ceilings in the legal field, it is still clear that men are the ones who are in partner positions. Men are the ones who make the hiring decisions. Men are the ones who you will likely be in charge of you. It becomes more and more difficult as you get deeper into the problem.
Additionally, for the resume issue specifically, I just wanted to point out that similar things have happened when a name was associated with a race. People were less likely to hire more "Black" sounding names, but more likely to hire "White" sounding names. So, it appears that names can cause problems for people in an plethora of ways. (I am now thinking of how tough it must be for women of color who have "Black" sounding names while also being female.)
I do want to say good luck on whatever interview/application you are currently working on. You are extremely bright and charismatic, so they would be idiots not to hire you. And maybe one day, after you get higher up in the organization, you can help more women get involved at your organization.
This is a really interesting issue, and I think many of us don’t think about the implications of these assumptions. I actually didn’t realize that they assumed your gender as male the majority of the time, because I think of your name as more typically belonging to women than men (though maybe that’s just our generation).
This also made me think of another, similar experience I’ve had with responses to my emails. I work remotely as a student advisor for a high school, which involves a lot of communication with students’ parents. I sign my name without a prefix, and usually people address me by my first name anyway. However, if not using my first name, they almost always go with “Mrs.” rather than “Ms.” I’m not sure if this is the assumption because they have no idea how old I am, or because they think it’s more respectful to assume that a woman is married. Additionally, it’s a religiously-affiliated private school, so it’s possible that such a culture promotes the assumption that people pursue marriage from a young age.
In any case, I’ve noticed a growing trend of people using their preferred pronouns in email signatures (she / her / hers). This would solve at least the misgendering issue, and is helpful in promoting the practice of never assuming someone else’s gender. Maybe if this catches on it will send a message that we shouldn’t automatically assume anything based on someone’s name.
Post a Comment