Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff Mom Never told you From how supports
Speaker 1: dot com. Hello, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Kristen
Speaker 1: and I'm Caroline, and today we're going to talk about
Speaker 1: something that pulls in aspects from our episode on modesty,
Speaker 1: things that we've talked about before with women's fashion and
Speaker 1: also women working in more male dominated environments, and that
Speaker 1: is taking a look at what it's like for women
Speaker 1: in law and particularly this aspect of dressing as a
Speaker 1: lady lawyer. Yeah, it really seems like women out there
Speaker 1: practicing law face a lot of flak that their male
Speaker 1: counterparts don't have to. And we got a letter from
Speaker 1: a woman named Bonnie who was actually responding to another
Speaker 1: listener letter we had read on an episode that addressed
Speaker 1: the whole issue of female attorney fashion struggles. And Bonnie
Speaker 1: said that, you know, I would love it if you
Speaker 1: did a podcast on this topic. And she said, I'm
Speaker 1: sure we share a lot of struggles with other professionals
Speaker 1: and women working in a typically male environment. Not only
Speaker 1: are there the typical struggles like work life balance and
Speaker 1: making partner, but there are also things I encountered that
Speaker 1: I never imagine would happen. For one, I've been asked
Speaker 1: if I was a client, a secretary, or a court
Speaker 1: reporter on multiple occasions. It's rarely assumed by default that
Speaker 1: you're the lawyer unless you're standing behind the council table
Speaker 1: by yourself. One time, a witness actually pointed at me
Speaker 1: during a deposition and asked, who's the girl? She says,
Speaker 1: Believe it or not, I've even been touched in mildly
Speaker 1: inappropriate ways by male attorneys and even a judge. This
Speaker 1: wasn't at some cocktail party either. This was during court
Speaker 1: conferences where you'd think nothing like that would ever occur.
Speaker 1: I knew I would encounter misogyny in my career, that
Speaker 1: both these instances were totally unexpected. So Bonnie and to
Speaker 1: all of our other listeners out there working in and
Speaker 1: around the legal profession, this episode is for you, and
Speaker 1: I hope the rest of you guys can also learn
Speaker 1: a thing or two about just the weird kind of
Speaker 1: double standards that go on in a courtroom. Yeah, because
Speaker 1: I have a feeling that this is a lot of
Speaker 1: this will be reflective of a lot of women's experiences,
Speaker 1: just in terms of that question of how to dress
Speaker 1: in a professional manner. So when it comes to court
Speaker 1: room fashions, it's always come with specific decorum and rules
Speaker 1: for how you should dress. So if we look, for instance,
Speaker 1: over to England, the traditional attire for judges is just
Speaker 1: one maybe more extreme example. Yeah, it's there's some fabulous,
Speaker 1: fabulous fashion rules for seventeenth century judges in England. They
Speaker 1: had to wear long robes complete with ermine and taffada
Speaker 1: our silk, a full hood with a cow covering their shoulders,
Speaker 1: and a cloak, and ladies and gentlemen there were colors.
Speaker 1: Their robes were green and summer and violet and winter.
Speaker 1: But all of this fabulous fashion just meant that they
Speaker 1: startorially fit in with everybody else who was attending the
Speaker 1: royal court at the time. For instance, those white powdered
Speaker 1: wigs that we associate with this period and with English
Speaker 1: lawyers was just what was considered polite to wear out
Speaker 1: in society. So it was incorporated into court dress as well,
Speaker 1: And in sixteen thirty five we see possibly the first
Speaker 1: court dress code, which was the definitive guide for judges
Speaker 1: on what to wear in the courtroom. It basically told
Speaker 1: them what robes to wear, when and how. Now, once
Speaker 1: we get into the mid eighteenth century, rules have changed
Speaker 1: just a little bit, so during criminal trials a less
Speaker 1: formal version of the robes was used. This would be
Speaker 1: a scarlet robe, black scarf and scarlet casting hood, also
Speaker 1: known as a tippet or stole. And then in civil
Speaker 1: trials some judges had had begun to wear an all
Speaker 1: black silk gown and in great tafoda in the mid
Speaker 1: eighteenth century was becoming increasingly popular as an alternative to
Speaker 1: the pink tafoa used on some robes. So I love this.
Speaker 1: I love that there are such like strongly delineated rules
Speaker 1: for what these male judges were wearing and how and
Speaker 1: when to wear pink and violet purple. Yeah, exactly. And
Speaker 1: there are so many more fashion dues and down'ts for
Speaker 1: these male judges that we could get into, but you know,
Speaker 1: we have a share to run, so if we move
Speaker 1: over to America. This is coming from an essay written
Speaker 1: by former Supreme Court Justice Standard O'Connor, who's providing us
Speaker 1: historical insights about this side of the pond, and she
Speaker 1: talks about how those colorful rogue traditions and ornate wigs
Speaker 1: they never really took off here and The theory is
Speaker 1: that Thomas Jefferson himself opposed the unnecessary pomp and quote
Speaker 1: needless official apparel, especially the monstrous wig which makes the
Speaker 1: English judges look like rats peeping through bushes of oakum.
Speaker 1: And I had no idea what oakum meant. Apparently it's
Speaker 1: a loose fiber from untangled rope that was especially used
Speaker 1: for cocking wooden ships. So there you go, and something
Speaker 1: that apparently you just don't want to look like. It's
Speaker 1: a sick burn from Jefferson. Yeah, he was always dropping
Speaker 1: those those sick oakum burns um. But she talks about
Speaker 1: O'Connor does about the portrait of the first Chief Justice,
Speaker 1: John j that shows him wearing a black and red
Speaker 1: robe with white boarders. But by eighteen o one, when
Speaker 1: John Marshall became Chief Justice, it was all black for
Speaker 1: the justices. But that's all tradition. There are no written
Speaker 1: rules about what judges must wear, which I thought was
Speaker 1: really interesting, although there have been a couple exceptions. For instance,
Speaker 1: O'Connor talks about how she began wearing a white collar,
Speaker 1: which sort of stepped out of via all black unspoken rules.
Speaker 1: But more significantly, former Chief Justice rhyan Quist had gold
Speaker 1: bands sewn onto his robe after he saw it in
Speaker 1: an opera that I believe like involved a judge figure,
Speaker 1: and he liked it so much he had it sewn
Speaker 1: on to his I mean, and you know, if you're
Speaker 1: going to be chief justice, why not add a little flair.
Speaker 1: I imagine that's striking. My father is a former pilot,
Speaker 1: and so he had the gold bands on his black
Speaker 1: uniform as well well. And we've talked to about how
Speaker 1: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has her special jabbows that she wears
Speaker 1: for different occasion. But men don't wear those fancy collars,
Speaker 1: and we are definitely here to talk about those gender divisions.
Speaker 1: That's right, Caroline. Things aren't so black and white though,
Speaker 1: when it comes to people appearing before judges, especially women.
Speaker 1: And this is coming from a gallery over at the
Speaker 1: Cut with New York Magazine from and they wrote, historically,
Speaker 1: the courtroom wardrobes of high profile people have carried meaning
Speaker 1: as well. Right, So if we go back in time,
Speaker 1: and I meant this might seem like a very strange
Speaker 1: jump all of a sudden, but if we go back
Speaker 1: to Joan of arc, so she had a ton of
Speaker 1: trials because you know, she was accused of being a
Speaker 1: heretic for hearing voices, so at the end of one
Speaker 1: of her many trials, she promised, Hey, I am gonna
Speaker 1: stop hearing the voices you guys, and just to throw
Speaker 1: in there something extra, I'm also gonna stop wearing male clothing.
Speaker 1: Of course, she started wearing it again while she was
Speaker 1: in prison, possibly to avoid sexual assault, and she claimed
Speaker 1: that it was more lawful and convenient. Shortly thereafter, Joan
Speaker 1: was judged to be a relapsed heretic and was executed.
Speaker 1: And so as you can tell, we're definitely getting into
Speaker 1: what your clothes say about you when you appear in
Speaker 1: the courtroom. Well, clearly Marie Antoinette thought a lot about that,
Speaker 1: because during her imprisonment she wore a black morning gown
Speaker 1: for six months straight and defiance of a ban on black,
Speaker 1: which at that time symbolized sympathy for the monarchy. And
Speaker 1: when she was later tried on an array of charges,
Speaker 1: including a vindictive glance yikes France, wow that rhymed, she
Speaker 1: came to the courtroom in a tattered dress, which caused
Speaker 1: one guard to note quote her long black dress rendered
Speaker 1: her extraordinary pallor all the more striking and clearly she
Speaker 1: was trying to in gender sympathy. Um, but of course
Speaker 1: that didn't really work because she was executed. But for
Speaker 1: her execution, she wore a pristine white dress. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: she accessed or ezes to match. This lady knew what
Speaker 1: she was doing. I mean, it didn't work, it kind
Speaker 1: of backfired, but she looked fabulous. And then if we
Speaker 1: jump forward to uh, modern times, we have to point
Speaker 1: out Martha Stewart, who was roundly criticized for wearing clothes
Speaker 1: that drew attention to her wealth, things like fancy first dolls,
Speaker 1: broken bags. People were basically saying, like, what are you
Speaker 1: doing flaunting how much money you have? Rich lady? Martha's
Speaker 1: being Martha and Martha will always do Martha. Martha's you
Speaker 1: and Martha. But that brings us to today. What about
Speaker 1: we talked about women in front of the court bench.
Speaker 1: What about the lawyers, the people responsible for pleading their
Speaker 1: clients cases. Obviously, male or female lawyers are expected to
Speaker 1: dress professionally in court because you want to be taken
Speaker 1: seriously and yet not distracting or give the jury the
Speaker 1: wrong impression because you're representing your clients. Yeah, but the
Speaker 1: whole thing is that nobody needs to be a jerk
Speaker 1: about it. And preparing for this episode, I was so
Speaker 1: taken aback at how shamey people could be, specifically women,
Speaker 1: let alone men when it comes to advising women attorneys
Speaker 1: how to dress, and how contradictory so much of that
Speaker 1: advice is. Yeah, it's never really been easy for women
Speaker 1: lawyers to dress themselves for court because for men, they
Speaker 1: have a uniform, it's a suit and a tie, whereas
Speaker 1: women have more options perhaps, but they're kind of penalized
Speaker 1: no matter what, because and I've found this surprising, you
Speaker 1: wear a pant suit and you're considered too masculine, but
Speaker 1: sometimes if you wear the wrong skirt and heels, you're
Speaker 1: considered too feminine. And when this conversation really started getting
Speaker 1: off the ground in the nineteen seventies and eighties, women
Speaker 1: try to play it safe by adopting male style. So
Speaker 1: we would wear skirt suits with ham's below the kneecap
Speaker 1: and button down shirts and even these floppy bow ties
Speaker 1: because we needed ties to apparently, but we would often
Speaker 1: accessorize with pearls or ruffles to have as Uh and
Speaker 1: Farmer writing for the American Bar Association's Perspectives magazine to
Speaker 1: have feminine apologetic disclaimers, which actually is a term coined
Speaker 1: by sociologist Jan Felsion. So we would be kind of
Speaker 1: emulating men in the basic styles, but also offering those
Speaker 1: touches to say, oh, still a woman here and don't worry, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, that's totally a fine line that women were
Speaker 1: walking and they were emulating men, because who else were
Speaker 1: they going to emulate? You know? There. It wasn't like
Speaker 1: in the eighties and even now there were a ton
Speaker 1: of women in higher up legal positions. Uh, it definitely
Speaker 1: is and was a male dominated fashion. And so Farmer
Speaker 1: points out that in the eighties women finally did find
Speaker 1: an ounce of inspiration in the form of l a
Speaker 1: law character Grace van Owen, who wore silk V neck blouses,
Speaker 1: and she talked to a Farmer, talked to a judge
Speaker 1: who is discussing how women in the eighties just like
Speaker 1: ran out and everybody had this silk V neck blouse
Speaker 1: because like, well they did it with her on TV
Speaker 1: and it looks nice. You didn't have to have rock
Speaker 1: the floppy floppy bow tie anymore. So, working girl, although
Speaker 1: I mean, I like a floppy bow tie every now
Speaker 1: and then. I'll admit it, um. But even today, things
Speaker 1: have not gotten any easier since the eighties for women
Speaker 1: in law school and practicing law. For instance, in two
Speaker 1: thousand nine, at a Seventh Circuit Bar Association meeting, a
Speaker 1: panel of judges and lawyers complained about women's attire. We
Speaker 1: have Chief Judge Michael P. Mccuski of the U. S.
Speaker 1: District Court for the Central District of Illinois. How does
Speaker 1: he fit all that? On a business card? He said
Speaker 1: that he'd observed female participants at moot court competitions in
Speaker 1: law school wearing quote, skirts so short there's no way
Speaker 1: they can sit down, and blouses so short there's no
Speaker 1: way the judges wouldn't look. Because you know, we've mentioned that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there're if you were female lawyers practicing a lot of times,
Speaker 1: but by far, if you're standing before a judge, you
Speaker 1: have a really good chance and even better chance that
Speaker 1: he is a man. Right. And I think that quote
Speaker 1: sums up attitudes about women and their attire so well,
Speaker 1: because so the first part, the skirts so short, there's
Speaker 1: no way that they can sit down. That's like a blaming,
Speaker 1: blaming the woman who's wearing the attire and then bloustes
Speaker 1: so short, there's no way the judges wouldn't look. That's
Speaker 1: admitting that there's a bunch of pervy old men sitting
Speaker 1: in the courtroom. But in response to this, judge A.
Speaker 1: Benjamin Goldger of the U. S. Bankruptcy Court for the
Speaker 1: Northern District of Illinois said that women lawyers dressing too
Speaker 1: sexually is quote a huge problem. You don't dress in
Speaker 1: court as if it's Saturday night and you're going out
Speaker 1: to a party. Yeah, I mean the true you want
Speaker 1: to dress professionally, but let's not single out women. Okay,
Speaker 1: And he didn't he he was actually equally unhappy with
Speaker 1: men wearing loud graphic ties. But this is not where
Speaker 1: this kind of fashion scrutiny stops, because I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't know if you guys knew it, but judges are
Speaker 1: apparently closet fashion. He says similarly in two thousand ten,
Speaker 1: although this wasn't so judge heavy. Nonetheless, the Chicago Bar
Speaker 1: Association's Young Lawyers section held a What Not to Wear
Speaker 1: fashion show that brought judges, law professors, and law students
Speaker 1: altogether to critique mostly female courtroom fashions on a runway UM,
Speaker 1: which very fact that that happened attracted a lot of
Speaker 1: media attention. I feel like almost every article that we
Speaker 1: read on this topic, Caroline highlighted this, this Chicago Barrow
Speaker 1: Association meeting. Well, yeah, because I think there wasn't like,
Speaker 1: you know, media coverage so to speak, of this event.
Speaker 1: But there were there were two bloggers in particular who
Speaker 1: were present, and one was like, yeah, you tell them,
Speaker 1: and the other one was like seriously, So she she
Speaker 1: laid out the roles as she had interpreted them, which
Speaker 1: was basically like there's nothing that you can wear and
Speaker 1: get away with, like you're darned if you do, darned
Speaker 1: if you don't. Well, and it probably also ties in
Speaker 1: two things that we've talked about, particularly in the modesty
Speaker 1: episode on not only is there that fine line, but
Speaker 1: it probably gets even finer depending on your body type.
Speaker 1: All sorts of factors going into that um. In June, though,
Speaker 1: it's worth noting that in Tennessee Circuit Judge Royce Taylor
Speaker 1: got so fed up with complaints from other attorneys about
Speaker 1: courtroom dress, particularly among women, that he said a dress
Speaker 1: code in his courtroom for female attorneys, and we will
Speaker 1: say that he also found a male attorney in contempt
Speaker 1: for not wearing a blazer. But his reason for this
Speaker 1: was that your personal appearance in court is a reflection
Speaker 1: upon the entire legal profession. Okay, totally valid um. And
Speaker 1: Nashville attorney Carla Miller's response to this was definitely on
Speaker 1: Taylor's side. She said that some ladies are dressing in
Speaker 1: a manner that should be bothersome to other lady lawyers
Speaker 1: who strive to be professional. And she breaks it down, y'all,
Speaker 1: Carla gets Carla gets serious. She says, here's the thing.
Speaker 1: We girls, we like making fashion statements. It's about individualism.
Speaker 1: Maybe the courtroom is not a place to show your
Speaker 1: individualism via fashion. Now I'm just assuming that Miller is
Speaker 1: also from Tennessee, and so I affected the Tennessee accent perfect,
Speaker 1: and you know, all of these things they have points
Speaker 1: to them as far as dressing professionally. But and I'm
Speaker 1: going to keep saying that, but I'm also going to
Speaker 1: keep saying that it's it's just kind of icky though
Speaker 1: when it comes to the focus on women. But all
Speaker 1: of this extends this, these expectations, these rules, they all
Speaker 1: extend back to before you're even in the courtroom, when
Speaker 1: you're just a law student. In March, Loyola Law School
Speaker 1: sent a memo to students about appropriate behavior for their
Speaker 1: externships that included a special note for women, which said,
Speaker 1: I really don't need to mention that cleavage and stiletto
Speaker 1: heels are not appropriate office where outside of ridiculous lawyer
Speaker 1: TV shows do I Yet I'm getting complaints from supervisors
Speaker 1: and it's important to note, uh that there were no
Speaker 1: ash and guidelines in this memo for men, and I
Speaker 1: think you know the content of that message is bad enough.
Speaker 1: Do you really need to be snarky? I feel like
Speaker 1: there was that was snark laden. Well, all of these
Speaker 1: are just various examples of how there really isn't an
Speaker 1: established way for women to dress because it's going to
Speaker 1: vary from judge to judge. Because going into this episode,
Speaker 1: I assumed that, Okay, the proper and safest way for
Speaker 1: a female lawyer to dress in front of a judge
Speaker 1: is to just wear a pant suit. Yeah. I would
Speaker 1: have assumed that as well, you wear a modest button
Speaker 1: down blazer pant suit. Done, But no, because they're also
Speaker 1: judges who do not like pant suits on women because
Speaker 1: they find them too masculinizing. And in fact, this kind
Speaker 1: of blew my mind. A lot of law clerks will
Speaker 1: get word out to female attorneys before a case start,
Speaker 1: before a trial starts, to let them know how judges
Speaker 1: prefer that they dressed, not in the gross sense of
Speaker 1: the term, but in terms of courtroom decorum. But I
Speaker 1: had no idea that courtroom decorum would be that specific
Speaker 1: to how women dress. I mean, this does also apply
Speaker 1: to some men. I mean, we've mentioned the guy who
Speaker 1: held a male attorney in contemptive court for not wearing
Speaker 1: a blazer for instance. However it's still I mean for men, yeah,
Speaker 1: wear a pant suit and you'll be safe, but not
Speaker 1: so much for women. Right, It's very strange that there's
Speaker 1: no advice to men out there to hey, kind of
Speaker 1: kind of feel out the courtroom environment and see what
Speaker 1: is safe for you to wear. But that's the bulk
Speaker 1: of advice to women attorneys. And Anna Akbari is a
Speaker 1: New York University professor who tells herself as a sociologist, entrepreneur,
Speaker 1: and the thinking person stylist, had a lot to say
Speaker 1: for women attorneys about how to dress. She says, if
Speaker 1: you're going to wear a suit, a skirt suit registers
Speaker 1: better than a pant suit. In male dominated fields like law,
Speaker 1: skirts and dresses are particularly rewarded as they are more
Speaker 1: appealing to men. In interview situations, in particular, women should
Speaker 1: always wear a skirt or dress as it is heavily
Speaker 1: favored over pants by interviewers, many of whom are men.
Speaker 1: And at this point, I flipped my laptop over destroyed
Speaker 1: that it caught on fire, and I've since bought a
Speaker 1: new one. Uh, that was my response to Akbari. Well,
Speaker 1: and if you do toss on a skirt or a
Speaker 1: dress and heels, there are even further rules for that
Speaker 1: of well, what's the proper length, what about the bus line?
Speaker 1: How much arm can I show? How much color can
Speaker 1: I wear? There are even rules about how Um, women
Speaker 1: lawyers want to should avoid wearing high heels with red
Speaker 1: souls because that will draw too much attention, or avoid
Speaker 1: wearing too bright of colors, never wear pink. All these
Speaker 1: things be feminine, but not too feminine. Um. But going
Speaker 1: to Akbari's previsent point of how a little more feminine
Speaker 1: sexy attire is appreciated. Judge Richard Copp caught a lot
Speaker 1: of flak in March on his blog when I Forget,
Speaker 1: I don't remember what this was in response to, but
Speaker 1: he wrote a post about how there was he think
Speaker 1: God left her anonymous a quote very pretty female lawyer
Speaker 1: um in her late twenties, who's brilliant, but also tends
Speaker 1: to where as he calls it very short skirts and
Speaker 1: shows lots of her ample chest, and how he especially
Speaker 1: appreciates the last two attributes and those are direct quotes,
Speaker 1: and he goes on to talk about how female law
Speaker 1: clerks sneered at this woman behind her back and called
Speaker 1: her unprofessional and did directly like get slut shamy with
Speaker 1: her for this. And so his conclude susion for women
Speaker 1: lawyers in considering how to dress is well, you can't win.
Speaker 1: Quote men are both pigs and prudes. Get over it.
Speaker 1: So that um, women listening, if you're in law school,
Speaker 1: what a challenge? What a challenge? Yeah, And a lot
Speaker 1: of the flak that he received was not only for
Speaker 1: just being gross, because he admits in that blog post
Speaker 1: that he's a dirty old man, which is he's probably
Speaker 1: he he would say if he were sitting in this
Speaker 1: studio right now, he would say that was clearly a joke. No. Well,
Speaker 1: in his response he did post response, he apologized for it,
Speaker 1: and he basically said that he tried and failed to
Speaker 1: use edgy humor. And as someone who enjoys reading and writing,
Speaker 1: I say that humor is very tricky. You're right, just
Speaker 1: try not to use it. If you're not very good
Speaker 1: at it. Maybe stay to your day job judge. Oh yeah, hey,
Speaker 1: well I know, yeah, stick to being a judge. And
Speaker 1: a lot of people responded to his really gross blog
Speaker 1: by saying, um, this is embarrassing for you and for
Speaker 1: me for the fact that you're a judge. So the
Speaker 1: question though, is why why are there Why why does
Speaker 1: this tight rope even exist? Um? So they are all
Speaker 1: sorts of theories as to why this happens. Of course,
Speaker 1: we could circle around to evolutionary biology. Um. There was
Speaker 1: a study published in the journal Aggressive Behavior in two
Speaker 1: thousand eleven called the Intolerance of Sexy Peers, and it
Speaker 1: really focuses on women being judgmental toward how other women dress,
Speaker 1: such as the case of those women law clerks throwing
Speaker 1: shade at the lady lawyer. Um. The study would say
Speaker 1: that this was really these women, these law clerks, acting
Speaker 1: in a sexually protective manner, or I should say a
Speaker 1: sexually self protective manner, because the idea, according to this study,
Speaker 1: is that women get judge against other women who we
Speaker 1: think are dressing too provocatively because we consider them a
Speaker 1: sexual threat. Although I really doubt that that's happening in
Speaker 1: a courtroom. Yeah, well, you know, people probably tend not
Speaker 1: to bring their boyfriends or husbands to the courtroom, and
Speaker 1: so they probably don't have to be worried about anyone
Speaker 1: getting stolen because a lady lawyer is wearing a blouse.
Speaker 1: If you have two single ladies listening, if you're looking
Speaker 1: to meet a man, sign up for Jerry Duty I
Speaker 1: s I p um so. Another theory, another conversation that's
Speaker 1: happening about why there are so many perceived or anecdotal
Speaker 1: problems with what women attorneys are wearing has to do
Speaker 1: with this need to control women. And this is coming
Speaker 1: from Valerie LaRue. She was writing in Miss j D
Speaker 1: in June, and she says that it's not just men.
Speaker 1: Women will do the policing of other women for men.
Speaker 1: And she says that basically, you know, our culture still
Speaker 1: judges women, even the most powerful women like Hillary Clinton,
Speaker 1: by a completely different standard, one inferior to men. And
Speaker 1: she goes on to give other nonclothing examples, but it's
Speaker 1: basically that idea of you know, where are all the
Speaker 1: rules for men, like, yes, wear a suit, wear a
Speaker 1: nice tie, don't be too flashy, all that stuff. But
Speaker 1: why why there's so many there's so many websites out
Speaker 1: there and blogs and whatever dedicated to telling women what
Speaker 1: to wear and how they're failing and looking skanky or whatever.
Speaker 1: Don't let your tramp stamp show was part of that
Speaker 1: Chicago fashion show. Um, And it's part of this whole
Speaker 1: thing of like, oh, well, we're nervous maybe subconsciously about
Speaker 1: women being in such a male dominated field. Well, and
Speaker 1: Jill Philipovic, who is a litigator turned journalist who focuses
Speaker 1: a lot on sexism and feminism, has said that it
Speaker 1: quote gives sexist men and women because remember, this is
Speaker 1: not just something perpetuated by men, Women are also doing
Speaker 1: this to women. It gives sexist men and women the
Speaker 1: ability to discriminate both in hiring and giving projects to
Speaker 1: brand female attorneys based on appropriateness, which too often correlates
Speaker 1: to perceived social class, of which race also factors in,
Speaker 1: and to body type. I mean, all of this just
Speaker 1: traces back to policing women's bodies, and also this whole
Speaker 1: thing of law in particular being very much a male domain.
Speaker 1: I mean, at the top of the podcast, when we
Speaker 1: were talking about judges fashions, it was exclusive to men
Speaker 1: because they were the only judges there. And only now
Speaker 1: are we even starting to see more of uh something
Speaker 1: akin to gender parity in the courtroom. Yeah, and we're
Speaker 1: going to talk more about this gender divide with fashion.
Speaker 1: We come right back from a quick break. So when
Speaker 1: we left off, I had mentioned that at the top
Speaker 1: of the podcast we were talking about those British judges
Speaker 1: that it was all men. Um. There was a source
Speaker 1: that we found talking about how today in Britain, their
Speaker 1: court room decorum of wearing the robes and wigs might
Speaker 1: seem sillier old fashioned, but it's a lot easier to
Speaker 1: follow than these rules stateside, because quote, at least you
Speaker 1: can wear basically anything you want under the rope and
Speaker 1: still look just like your male colleagues. No one would
Speaker 1: mistake you, as in the case of the stuff. I've
Speaker 1: never told you listener we heard from no one would
Speaker 1: mistake you for a core reporter or paralegal. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: those rules, those dress codes that involve wearing robes could
Speaker 1: actually be pretty pretty beneficial. It's specially in a male
Speaker 1: dominated courtroom or if just hanging out in your house
Speaker 1: robes for all. Anyone who keeps up with celebrity news
Speaker 1: lately would probably know what we're talking about. If you're
Speaker 1: not already, you know, living in England would be really
Speaker 1: familiar with this whole wig thing because the woman that
Speaker 1: George Clooney just married, who is a lawyer in England,
Speaker 1: had barristaff she is. She had her picture circulating in
Speaker 1: the media with her tiny little white wig on. Ah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so it's it's a thing and women do it too,
Speaker 1: and it you know, it's it's got to make things easier.
Speaker 1: It has to one with things. I mean, yeah, well,
Speaker 1: never mind how to solve sexism in the courtroom. Wigs
Speaker 1: and robes done end of podcasts perfect well, So part
Speaker 1: of this whole issue. You know, we've talked about the
Speaker 1: male dominated stuff a bunch and the fact that women
Speaker 1: lack role models, and Amanda has talked about this over
Speaker 1: it's slate talking about how many law firms still lack
Speaker 1: female partners who can kind of show the rookies how
Speaker 1: it's done. She says that only four of the top
Speaker 1: two hundred law firms in the US have female managing partners,
Speaker 1: and so following the advice on the website Corporate run
Speaker 1: by attorney Cat Griffin can really prove to be a bummer,
Speaker 1: because Griffin's advice is to play it safe, ladies, until
Speaker 1: you see a senior lawyer do it. But the whole
Speaker 1: problem is that statistically, there just aren't a whole lot
Speaker 1: of women partners and judges out there to look to
Speaker 1: for your fashion guidelines. However, there are plenty of women
Speaker 1: in law school. Um, I mean, if we just look
Speaker 1: at law firms, it's kind of astounding to compare those
Speaker 1: statistics to statistics of the numbers of women in law school,
Speaker 1: because it's fairly equal. There are just slightly fewer women
Speaker 1: pursuing their j d s in the US as there
Speaker 1: are men. Um And these stats are coming from a
Speaker 1: Catalyst report from and it talked about how law firms
Speaker 1: in particular might not have as many women among their
Speaker 1: ranks because they're very much set up around a male
Speaker 1: model because they don't have family friendly environments. I mean,
Speaker 1: law is notorious for its long hours, particularly if you're
Speaker 1: in a private practice where billable hours rule the day,
Speaker 1: and so you make your money and get the attention
Speaker 1: by putting in those long days. It's a lot of
Speaker 1: tedious work. If a client calls, you have to, you know,
Speaker 1: be able to pick up and respond. And it talks
Speaker 1: about how motherhood stirs up a benevolent paternalism as well,
Speaker 1: and so it creates a drain because even though there
Speaker 1: are lots of women in law school, they start to
Speaker 1: siphon off the higher up you climb, right, and so
Speaker 1: Deborah Epstein Henry who's who's an author and former lawyer,
Speaker 1: talks about what we need to kind of help with this,
Speaker 1: both in the what do I wear arena as well
Speaker 1: as in the how do I Progress in my career arena.
Speaker 1: She says that until you have representation of women on
Speaker 1: influential committees and boards a critical mass. She says, women
Speaker 1: are not comfortable voicing their opinions. And this also applies
Speaker 1: to taking chances and all sorts of things, all the
Speaker 1: way down to what they wear in court. And so
Speaker 1: let's take a deeper dive into some of the numbers.
Speaker 1: So as opposed to the just over forty seven percent
Speaker 1: of women who make up j D students just in
Speaker 1: the United States, according to the American Bar Association, women
Speaker 1: as of make up only thirty three percent of the
Speaker 1: legal profession. And if you look just at lawyers, you
Speaker 1: also see the pipeline start to thin. So when it
Speaker 1: comes to summer associates probably rush out of law school,
Speaker 1: forty seven point seven percent of them are women, and
Speaker 1: then forty percent or associate our associates excuse me, and
Speaker 1: then are full blown lawyers. But of course when we
Speaker 1: move from being a lawyer to being a partner, even
Speaker 1: fewer women in there. That's right. In two eleven, women
Speaker 1: made up just nineteen point five percent of partners, and
Speaker 1: eleven percent of the largest US law firms had no
Speaker 1: women on their governing committees. Women did appear, however, to
Speaker 1: be more successful in single tier firms, where promotion rates
Speaker 1: for them as equity partners was strongest. And basically, an
Speaker 1: equity partner is a part owner of the business. But
Speaker 1: one little fact about women equity partners and law firms,
Speaker 1: They do, on average make about eighty six percent of
Speaker 1: what their male equity partners make, So the wage gap
Speaker 1: still exists even at that top tier. Moving out of
Speaker 1: law firms though, and looking at general councils at Fortune
Speaker 1: five hundred companies, women comprise about eighteen point eight percent
Speaker 1: of those lawyers. And I just mentioned a wage gap. Yes,
Speaker 1: in fact, it exists for lawyers as well. Women lawyers
Speaker 1: are making about twenty percent less than male lawyers as
Speaker 1: of two thousand twelve, and so in terms of numbers
Speaker 1: for lawyers, it's even worse for women of color. Women
Speaker 1: of color makeup just eleven percent of associates, two percent
Speaker 1: of partners, and there are only fifteen general councils who
Speaker 1: are women of color in Fortune five companies. And if
Speaker 1: we bring it full circle and get back to talking
Speaker 1: about judges and look at the courts. In twenty three
Speaker 1: of all federal judge ships were held by women, and
Speaker 1: just of state judgeships were held by women. So I
Speaker 1: do wonder, then, what whether this conversation would be happening
Speaker 1: at least as much if there were more women behind
Speaker 1: the bench, Because regardless of what the gender makeup is
Speaker 1: in a courtroom, there will still and always be rules
Speaker 1: of decorum, as I think there should be. But it
Speaker 1: seems like something needs to happen in terms of making
Speaker 1: these fashion rules not so much a part of the
Speaker 1: daily grind of being a woman lawyer, because shouldn't they
Speaker 1: be focusing more of their attention and concerns on, oh,
Speaker 1: I don't know, the actual law in cases. It seems
Speaker 1: like a lot of energy is possibly being diverted into
Speaker 1: these other kinds of things. Yeah, as my therapist would say, interesting,
Speaker 1: you're you're showing a lot of energy around this topic.
Speaker 1: I wonder why that is, And I do think that
Speaker 1: a lot of it has to do with there is
Speaker 1: still even after all of this time, there is still
Speaker 1: so much like shaming going on, like making almost trying
Speaker 1: to make women feel unwelcome in the courtroom and so
Speaker 1: putting the focus on their appearance rather than their actual deeds. Well,
Speaker 1: I think too that this is we could have this
Speaker 1: same conversation just about again about women dressing professionally period,
Speaker 1: because it started off in the eighties, Yeah, where women
Speaker 1: were essentially like, okay, well we could just wear this
Speaker 1: slightly more feminine version of the men's uniform. But then
Speaker 1: we're like, no, we want to wear what we want
Speaker 1: to wear, let's wear skirts, let's accessorize, let's wear our
Speaker 1: flouncy bows or not. So I think that this is
Speaker 1: probably an issue that a lot of women confront and
Speaker 1: probably a big thing for women in college too, of
Speaker 1: figuring out how to transition their fashion into the professional world,
Speaker 1: whether they are heading toward a law firm or not.
Speaker 1: So I'm really curious to hear from our listeners on
Speaker 1: this one. Are there any law students or women lawyers
Speaker 1: listening to where this really rings a bell and is
Speaker 1: this actually problem because that is one thing A lot
Speaker 1: of these you know, the memos and these uh these
Speaker 1: fashion shows really seem to frame this as something that
Speaker 1: far too many female lawyers are violating. That we're just
Speaker 1: dressing like we're going to the club. What is this
Speaker 1: club also that everyone is apparently always going to. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, is it so much an issue of a
Speaker 1: large number of women dressing inappropriately or is it just
Speaker 1: you know, as we talked about some quote unquote self
Speaker 1: described dirty old men, judges jumping to conclusions and judge
Speaker 1: women judging jumping to the conclusions. So many so much
Speaker 1: judging much judging. Well, because think about it too, I mean,
Speaker 1: the role that women play, possibly not only just flutge
Speaker 1: shaming behind some lawyers backs, but also doing if they're
Speaker 1: a law clerk for a judge, doing the message delivery
Speaker 1: to female lawyers to let them know. I mean, on
Speaker 1: the one hand, you could say they're doing them a solid,
Speaker 1: but on the other hand, they're perpetuating all the stuff
Speaker 1: we're talking about too. Yeah, so lawyers, we need a
Speaker 1: lawyer up. We'd like to hear from you and other
Speaker 1: women who have encountered this too in their professional goings on.
Speaker 1: Let us know your thoughts. Mom Stuff at how stuff
Speaker 1: works dot com is where you can reach us. You
Speaker 1: can also tweet us at Mom's Stuff podcast or message
Speaker 1: us on Facebook, and we've got a couple of messages
Speaker 1: to share with you right now. Well, I have a
Speaker 1: letter here from Clara in response to our Mama's Boys
Speaker 1: and Daddy's Girls series. Uh. She says, my boyfriend of
Speaker 1: five years is one of three sons who I believe
Speaker 1: make an interesting case study on the developmental effects of
Speaker 1: having a closer relationship with a mother versus a father
Speaker 1: during formative years. My boyfriend is twenty six, with an
Speaker 1: older and younger brother, all about two years apart, as
Speaker 1: the boys were entering out lessons there. Then, married parents
Speaker 1: decided to move across country to Montana for a career
Speaker 1: move for their dad. Soon after the move, my boyfriend's
Speaker 1: parents made the decision to divorce, but the result being
Speaker 1: that my boyfriend's older brother would stay temporarily with their
Speaker 1: dad in Montana, while my boyfriend and his younger brother
Speaker 1: moved back to the mid West with their mom. This
Speaker 1: temporary fix turned into a year long situation, and the
Speaker 1: after effects of this dynamic resonate to this day. Well,
Speaker 1: I love all my boyfriend's family. His older brother is
Speaker 1: admittedly anxious, socially awkward, and has had continual struggles developing
Speaker 1: and maintaining strong relationships with women. Alternatively, my boyfriend and
Speaker 1: his younger brother have much more emotionally sensitive demeanors and
Speaker 1: are much more socially fluent than their oldest sibling. I've
Speaker 1: always just taken this dynamic at face value, but listening
Speaker 1: to your podcast really got me thinking about why there
Speaker 1: is such a stark contrast in the personalities of three
Speaker 1: otherwise incredibly similar brothers. Granted, all behavior is circumstantial, but
Speaker 1: I think that building a stronger relationship with their mom
Speaker 1: versus their dad, and the formative of years of early
Speaker 1: adolescence had a profoundly positive impact on my boyfriend and
Speaker 1: his little brother. I love the podcast. You ladies keep
Speaker 1: on being fabulous, and you keep on being fabulous. To Clara,
Speaker 1: thanks for writing in. Well. I've got a letter here
Speaker 1: from Kate and it's in response to an episode it
Speaker 1: quite a while back on girls fascinations with horses, and
Speaker 1: I loved it so much I had to read it.
Speaker 1: So Kate works on a ranch managing a tiny little herd.
Speaker 1: She says, I trim hooves, train a baby and a
Speaker 1: four year old, and generally keep this nine horse herd
Speaker 1: and all around good health. And she talks about the
Speaker 1: two kinds of women in the horse world. The one
Speaker 1: kind of woman uses horses essentially as a status symbol.
Speaker 1: And then she says, there are horse girls like myself
Speaker 1: and others I know. We trim our own horses hooves. Doctor,
Speaker 1: they're gaping gashes, clean the parts of them. We'd rather
Speaker 1: not them until our bus or store or they get
Speaker 1: the point of the lesson, whichever comes first. Throw thousands
Speaker 1: of pounds of hay in tiny, little and closed barns
Speaker 1: choking on random haybits that get lodged in our throats
Speaker 1: when the wind kicks up. But most of all, when
Speaker 1: we fall, we get back on instead of handing our
Speaker 1: horse off for someone else to fix. Girls like myself
Speaker 1: have cut our hands with hoof knives, but finish the
Speaker 1: job because your horse can't very well walk around on
Speaker 1: three trimmed hoofs because of a little blood. Girls like
Speaker 1: me get bucked so hard we wear these nasty black
Speaker 1: bruises between our thighs for a month because we rode
Speaker 1: the buck and refused to stop wearing our pretty skirts.
Speaker 1: Girls like me get thrown around over our horses heads,
Speaker 1: smack into a light pole upside down, face first, and
Speaker 1: still finish the lesson. Girls like me are badass, just
Speaker 1: saying it's more than riding a big, pretty animal. It's real,
Speaker 1: true blue, unconditional love. If you screw up, they forgive
Speaker 1: you without strings. If they screw up, you have to
Speaker 1: learn how to forgive them no strings. You have to
Speaker 1: learn open communication. If you can't openly communicate, you'll get
Speaker 1: hurt badly. And she goes on to say, you learn
Speaker 1: what a truly happy human relationship can and should be
Speaker 1: when you apply to what you've learned from your horse relationships.
Speaker 1: You start learning what trust, honesty, and love feels like
Speaker 1: instead of what others make it sound like. So that's
Speaker 1: the basis of my fascination with horses for what it's worth.
Speaker 1: So thanks so much Kate for that insight, especially with
Speaker 1: hoof knives. I didn't know hoof knife existed, So thanks
Speaker 1: and anyone else who'd like to write to us Mom
Speaker 1: stuff at how stuff works dot com is our email
Speaker 1: address and for links to all of our social media
Speaker 1: as well as all of our blogs, videos, and podcasts,
Speaker 1: including this one, which has links to all of our
Speaker 1: sources that you can read along with us. You can
Speaker 1: find it all at stuff Mom Never Told You dot
Speaker 1: com For more on this and thousands of other topics,
Speaker 1: does it how stuff works dot com Show