"But . . . you don't seem like the lawyer-type." This is the sentiment I hear over and over again when I tell community members that I am a law student. Every time I hear that comment, I cannot help but question what qualities I am missing that make it difficult for others to perceive me (or even respect me) as a law student.
When I think about who I am as a person, a number of different traits cross my mind. For example, I would say that I am empathetic, independent, nurturing, and ambitious. Our socially constructed categories of masculinity and femininity would place independence and ambition in the former category and place empathy and nurturance in the latter category. This separate spheres ideology becomes problematic when people assign value to those categories and decide what qualities are valuable and which ones are not.
I always saw myself as an amalgamation of different qualities, but now these traits were being broken up into categories and instead of syncing up harmoniously, these traits were being weighted, categorized, and assessed differently by others – especially in professional settings. These traits had been set up on opposing sides, with the socially constructed traits of femininity (which I thought of as personal strengths) being considered professional weaknesses and liabilities. In light of this, I constantly wonder who I should be.
In their germinal law review article, Rand Jack and Dana Crowley Jack posit that a number of female professionals, especially female attorneys, have the same internal tension of defining themselves in their profession.
One solution women have adopted is to mute their “feminine” characteristics. Pixar recently released a new animated short film that illustrated this issue. Purl is the story of a ball of pink yarn who begins work at a male-dominated office. The men in the office make it clear to Purl that she doesn’t belong in the office. They ignore her ideas and exclude her from office activities. In an effort to avoid being shut out, she decides to change who she is to fit into her office’s culture – going as far as changing her appearance and speaking in a deeper voice. To her surprise, it worked.
But as Jack’s article finds, even when women mute their feminine characteristics and attempt to assert more masculine characteristics, they are stuck in a catch 22 because no matter what they do, they can never really "get it right".
I always saw myself as an amalgamation of different qualities, but now these traits were being broken up into categories and instead of syncing up harmoniously, these traits were being weighted, categorized, and assessed differently by others – especially in professional settings. These traits had been set up on opposing sides, with the socially constructed traits of femininity (which I thought of as personal strengths) being considered professional weaknesses and liabilities. In light of this, I constantly wonder who I should be.
In their germinal law review article, Rand Jack and Dana Crowley Jack posit that a number of female professionals, especially female attorneys, have the same internal tension of defining themselves in their profession.
One solution women have adopted is to mute their “feminine” characteristics. Pixar recently released a new animated short film that illustrated this issue. Purl is the story of a ball of pink yarn who begins work at a male-dominated office. The men in the office make it clear to Purl that she doesn’t belong in the office. They ignore her ideas and exclude her from office activities. In an effort to avoid being shut out, she decides to change who she is to fit into her office’s culture – going as far as changing her appearance and speaking in a deeper voice. To her surprise, it worked.
But as Jack’s article finds, even when women mute their feminine characteristics and attempt to assert more masculine characteristics, they are stuck in a catch 22 because no matter what they do, they can never really "get it right".
If a woman chooses to reject the usual lawyer image and follow a less combative form of participation, she may be labeled too feminine, and others may doubt her fiber as a tough lawyer. A woman attorney must walk the fine line between being feminine and being assertive. . . If she is too feminine she is accused of trying to use it to her advantage and is therefore resented, but if she is equally assertive to her male counterpart, she is accused of being too aggressive.This identity strain is an added burden on women in the workplace. As women, we exert so much energy to define the "right" persona for our office culture, that it inhibits time, effort, and energy from focusing on the work we were hired to do.
It further shakes me to my core to think that seemingly masculine traits have become the new "gender neutral" characteristics that have embodied the archetype of lawyers. Not only does this signal that women must change themselves to succeed in the legal profession, but an inherent message is sent to women that “feminine” qualities have little to no value in the workplace. It seems like I have to choose between being a lawyer or being myself.
But is it really true that adopting masculine characteristics would make me a better lawyer? Is it really true that masculinity is synonymous with professionalism? An earlier blogger on this forum, Alcestis, posted about how they didn’t agree that “becoming a man in a ‘man's world’ will help produce a better and more efficient working environment.” Just because someone embodies "feminine" characteristics, doesn't relegate their opinions and contributions as meaningless. In fact, these unique traits may help provide valuable perspectives and solutions to increase efficiency and effectiveness in the workplace.
When I think about my future as a lawyer, I think about this balancing game women must play to fit into their office culture. I also think about the importance of incorporating more "feminine" features into the work environment.
I believe that people should not have to mute characteristics society has devalued to fit in. Lawyers need to be fierce, professional, hardworking, and competent advocates. Those traits and femininity are not mutually exclusive. In fact, femininity may even enhance features essential to lawyering.
Going forward, while I will continue to hold myself to highest professional and ethical standards, I will not mute who I am as a person to fit into an office. While I don't want to be relegated as outsider, I think it would be worse to change who I am and incidentally perpetuate the devaluation of femininity in the workplace. I may not be the lawyer type, but I will do everything in my power to fight the one-dimensional notion of who a lawyer is and can be.
5 comments:
What are your thoughts on how race and ethnicity play into this perception of masculine traits being desirable at the office/firm? Specifically, I see masculinity being performed differently by members of different ethnic groups and therefore I see office culture look different at all white firms versus for example a primarily South Asian firm. In my experience working in both types of offices, I had to code switch a lot between my "work voice/personality" for dealing with the court system and other white people/institutions and my personality and attitude at work surrounded by brown men. I feel like it's important to note the differences between the two situations.
I think this post is spot on. One interesting aspect of this supposed balancing we are meant to perform as women between our true personalities and our masculine, "work" personalities is the fact that it is not just men in the workplace that hold these expectations. In my previous internships and job experiences, I have found that it can sometimes be the women in the office that are harder on one another when it comes to showing "feminine" characteristics. In one instance, a female coworker was broken up with by her boyfriend and, after crying in the bathroom on her break, was told by another female coworker that she needed to "pull it together." On top of this, she also then got a reputation among the girls at work as being over emotional. It always surprises me when I encounter situations where women are the biggest critics of other women, especially in the workplace. I'm not entirely sure how we can fix this problem, but I like your plan of remaining true to yourself and your personality.
Nimra,
Thank you sharing this extremely insightful and relevant post. I really appreciated the stance you took of remaining true to yourself while practicing as an attorney. Balancing the desire to retain your own identity with adapting to different office cultures and expectations proves to be an extremely difficult task. Deviating too far from the masculine ideal may lead to significant negative repercussions that people may not be willing to risk.
However, I believe it is necessary for us as women to take this risk and challenge the status quo. If we fail to stick to our true identities and show the value of possessing our unique characteristics in professional settings, it will be impossible to ever steer away from the masculine ideals deeply embedded in the legal field. Although engaging in conservation with those who perpetrate these masculine ideals may inspire change, change only truly occurs when people take concrete action. Concrete action involves actively expressing feminine traits and demonstrating the value they add.
As you mentioned, feminine traits should be incorporated into the work environment and might even enhance the skills needed to be an effective lawyer. For example, having empathy or a nurturing nature can foster stronger relationships with clients. If clients know that their attorney genuinely understands and relates to their needs or concerns, they will feel more comfortable sharing critical information, thereby enabling the attorney to render effective legal representation and engage in more fruitful negotiations. Prominent figures in the legal field will only take notice of this value that these feminine traits add if more women are willing to take the significant risk of showing them.
Thank you for your post. I really enjoyed your thoughtful exploration of this issue.
After reading your post I reflected on how my own gender expression and sexual orientation have impacted other attorneys' perspective of me. As a lesbian who dresses in a more masculine manner I have experienced men treating me more like "one of the guys" than as a female colleague. I have used this to my advantage, treading the line between being "one of the guys" and being a strong woman.
It's my sense based on this experience that more feminine-presenting women and straight women experience the struggle you described in different ways than myself. So as you say, it's the "feminine" characteristics of feminine women that is the root of the hostility of female attorneys not being envisioned as real attorneys. This is not to say that more "masculine" women are exempt from the stereotypes of what a lawyer looks like, but perhaps it manifests differently.
Nimra,
Thank you so much for sharing part of your story. I was drawn to your question on whether masculine was the new gender neutral. When I have come across "gender neutral" or "unisex" articles, they always seem to be tailored to the "masculine" image. For something to be gender neutral, it cannot be pink or have flowers or be made for someone with curves. This further perpetuates machismo and unhealthy masculine ideas of how a man should look and act. These ideas harm womyn even further because they create a bigger divide between womyn and men and do away with the spectrum that is gender, sex, sexuality, and personality.
I also appreciate your words on what it means for you to be a lawyer and what the qualities are that make someone "lawyerly." I hve second-guessed so much of my personality and gender expression because of the boxes that the legal profession has created in regards to what lawyers look like. I constantly am being told that womyn do not make good lawyers and if somehow a womxn becomes a lawyer, she has to be really feminine because pant suits are not flattering and heels really tie your outfit together. On top of that, if we are kind, we will not be able to win cases but if we are aggressive, we won't win over the judge. All of this is so complex and your thoughts really begin to flesh out the criticisms we receive, not only from the legal profession, but from some of our loved ones who have also been brainwashed to think of a white cis-gendered man when they think of a lawyer. Your analysis really brings up the double standards womyn of color face in the legal profession.
Thank you!
Post a Comment