Third

These pretzels are making me race-baiting-y.

-Elie?

FIRST to be appalled.

MysTTTal

This will be the ugliest thread of the week.

I think Sander over at UCLA has another theory on this, why not cite to him as well to provide a balanced post?

No wonder Elie didn't make partner!

Elie: Knock off the reactionary bullshit and try to analyze these statistics in a rational way.

The ABA is clearly the most trustworthy source on these things. They've tried to make affirmative action a precondition to accreditation, so their perspective on this issue isn't surprising.

Perhaps AA needs to extend to staffing decisions and evaluation processes as well. Failing that, we should find some way to tell judges and jurors that ruling against parties represented by minority lawyers is a sign of subconscious racism.

If grades, SAT scores and LSAT scores are all racist, that must be the tip of the iceberg.

Also, I'm told that minorities are underrepresented among the billionaire population. Perhaps Congress should redress when it considers the next step in the bailout.

The ABA is clearly the most trustworthy source on these things. They've tried to make affirmative action a precondition to accreditation, so their perspective on this issue isn't surprising.

Perhaps AA needs to extend to staffing decisions and evaluation processes as well. Failing that, we should find some way to tell judges and jurors that ruling against parties represented by minority lawyers is a sign of subconscious racism.

If grades, SAT scores and LSAT scores are all racist, that must be the tip of the iceberg.

Also, I'm told that minorities are underrepresented among the billionaire population. Perhaps Congress should redress when it considers the next step in the bailout.

This case is surprising to anyone who has ever followed OCI?

If you are a minority female, you can get hired over non-diverse males who are far stronger candidates with higher academics by just showing up and sitting down.

The problem is with recruiting, not institutional racism. When you give people "points" for being diverse, you are inherently accepting lower talent.

White guys don't have AA to help them get jobs elsewhere. Is it any wonder they're forced to keep working slave hours at Biglaw?

Affirmative Action for the overweight???

Definitely take a look at the Sander article; citation is 57 Stan. L. Rev. 367.

Not surprising at all. All law firms are predominantly white male.

With the numbers we must accept either a) women and minorities are lazier/dumber/not committed to career advancement or b) that there is institutional racism/sexism.

Definitely take a look at the Sander article. The citation is 57 Stan. L. Rev. 367.

Might it be that minority women are bad lawyers?

Alternately, might it be that minority women are bad rainmakers?

Your. Skills. Are. Embarrassing.

18 - bingo.

Can we take a poll re: how many women have cried at work? I've seen several people cry at a biglaw firm and its always a female. Now that is the type of behavior that will keep you from becoming partner.

The only sensible solution is to do away with affirmative action plans that call into question the credentials of all minority professionals.

Might it be that a lot of minority women never should have been hired as "biglaw" material in the first place?

Is it racist to say that African-American males are better, on average, at playing basketball than white males or females of any race? Would this even be a true statement?

The study proves nothing, except as it pertains to NALP employers. Someone should remind Elie that 1,572 offices leaves out an awful lot of solo practitioners, partnerships, and larger firms that don't want to deal with NALP bullshit.

The study also deliberately leaves out satellite offices.

Ugh. Elie, have you not learned your lesson? Your readers aren't interested in your one-sided, poorly reasoned, knee-jerk political advocacy.

The "pipeline" as you define it is heavily influenced by preferences given to ethnic minorities. The ordinary hiring practices at biglaw are admittedly pretty dumb - focusing almost entirely grades and to a lesser degree the ability to speak in complete sentences. Nevertheless, this method is probably somewhat predictive of success as a lawyer or else firms would not use it. Why on earth would you expect that a selection criteria based on the color of one's skin or the amount of hardship one has been exposed to would correlate any better with one's ability to practice law?

We might bemoan the fact that past injustices have resulted in certain ethnic groups not obtaining the same level of educational achievement/aptitude as others, but this does not mean that ignoring this gap will make it go away.

Next Elie post: ATL readership down 40% due to racism.

Mystal,

Why do you find this surprising? Suppose there is a marathon. To enter, you need a qualifying time of 3:00. However, the organizers make an exception for another group of runners, supposedly because this group did not have access to the best training facilities and coaching. Most runners in this second group have a substantially slower qualifying time.

Based on these facts, would you expect runners from the second group to be proportionately represented among the first 100 finishers?

In conclusion, Mystal is a capital buffoon and douche bag extraordinaire. That. is. embarrassing.

1:06 is clearly a racist.

Guys in my high school used to bang minority women partners all the time. It was no big deal.

29 is clearly an idiot.

LAT FIRE ELIE PLEASE!!!!!!!

1:24 is also clearly a racist. (and incapable of picking up on sarcasm.)

-1:22

I work in-house. Of the 90+ attorneys here many (far, far more than at my previous 2 big law firms) are minorities, including minority women for top law schools and firms. Women in general are less likely to put up with the cr@p required to work at a big law firm and law firms are losing lots of talent to in-house and other non-firm employers b/c of this.

Top firms are making changes to retain this talent. But it often upsets the dime-a-dozen white male lackeys that think they are the smartest people in the room. These guys think their commitment to not crying at work and putting up long hours without whining makes them smart and talented. Sadly, this is not so.

"A 2006 study by the ABA Commission on Women, "Visible Invisibility: Women of Color in Law Firms," concluded that women of color are leaving the profession in droves because they are the victims of an uninterrupted cycle of institutional discrimination. Many women responding to the ABA survey said they felt they were denied the same opportunities to succeed as their male and nonminority counterparts."

What if they left because they were not qualified to begin with? Do you really think they would admit this on a survey? What a bunch of crap.

The issue seems to me to be as much about women partners as minority women partners. By the listed numbers abiout 10% of all female partners are minorities. That is low as compared to national demgraphics, but not quite as skewed as having only 18.74% of all partners be female in the first place, in a population that is, by my estimate, about 50% female..

I can't believe i'm reading this crap. Minority women leave because they are smart, and know that there are more paths to success than biglaw. End of story. So can we please stop painting them as victims? Their departure from biglaw should be portrayed as success.

"With the numbers we must accept either a) women and minorities are lazier/dumber/not committed to career advancement or b) that there is institutional racism/sexism."
-- or, duh, we might even consider whether minorities have a greater range of opportunities for career advancement outside Big Law

12 is right.

BOYCOTT ATL!! THAT WILL GET LATS ATTENTION.

37, shhhhh! Success can only equal partnership in biglaw. Now get back to billing.

Now I remember why I stopped reading this site!

Obviously, the only thing that matters is the color of someone's skin.

So there's a discrepancy. That doesn't mean there is "institutional discrimination." I want to see numbers on things such as, but not limited to comparisons of minority women and gen pop re: (1) desiring to stay, (2) capability doing BigLaw things.

The spurious claims in the survey are "because they are the victims of an uninterrupted cycle of institutional discrimination," which is an open question, and "feel" like they are discriminated against.

It is a perfectly plausible hypothesis, absent additional data, to assume that minority women are so capable that they move on to better jobs than BigLaw, and that they simply have a complex of always "feeling" discriminated against. It is also quite possible that they would be discriminated against, but they leave to early for the discrepancy to be "because" of discrimination, and that they voluntarily leave for any number of other reasons.

The point is: I hate when raw sociological data is misused.

Boo hoo hoo.

Minority women only succeed by GULCing their way to the top.

Is Lat a minority woman

Why sould this surprise anyone? Minority women are rewarded their whole life for just being average. 168 LSAT and 3.5 GPA - You can go to HLS. Top 60% of class at HLS - you can get hired at Big Law if you are minority woman. Finally when these average students are conpeteting against top students at firms, they can't hide behind AA anymore and fail.

37 & 38 have it right.

There's more AA in promotional decisions in the corporate world, and the corporate world is more female-friendly. Why in the world would a minority female stick around in Biglaw under those circumstances?

It's not clear how this is a *problem*.

Time to get rid of MysTTTal. The readers should demand a recount.

To deny the existence of systemic and/or cultural prejudice at mostly every level in our society is to be blind of the fact. Recent polls show that white Gen. X and Y are actually less inclined to discuss race that their Civil-Rights Era white counterparts, and that they are no less likely to hold prejudicial views. Whether this is "misused sociological evidence" or not is open. But common sense and life experience tend to show that people are not talking about race but still holding racist views. For example, have you ever heard white colleagues speaking about a "black person" and hear them whisper the word "black," as if it were taboo. Funny, huh. Yet, prejudice is something we should continue to ignore.

That said, there is a problem with taking a by-the-numbers aff. action approach because it leads to individuals who don't necessarily possess the same traits that lead to success at biglaw. Whether that is because institutional prejudice is so deep is something I refuse to comment on. My point is simply this, we need to talk to the NAACP about something.

The NAACP cries out that the numbers need to be right; otherwise, they will threaten lawsuits and make a whole lot of noise. But where, oh where, are the grassroots movements. Why not try to cultivate minorities, or all Americans, from the ground up? Give them the tools for success. In the end, a by-the-numbers approach, without this grassroots installation of focus and drive, will eventually be counter-productive to the cause.

William Ayers

22
While I don't think that crying at work is professional, neither is screaming or cursing people out for minor mistakes. I rarely see women do the latter, but it's certainly not an impetus to many of the men who make partner. My point is that your comment highlights the subtleties of sexism. That is, a display of unprofessionalism which, as you point out, is more apt to be displayed by women, is reason for that person to be passed over for partnership. A display of unprofessionalism which is more apt to be displayed by men is, to quote Frat Stud, no big deal.

Who the hell wants to be partner at a law firm?

Maybe these statistics are really a sign of white male stupidity?

Elie is a hack. I guess he draws hits with his bullshit.

We need to boycott ATL for a week. Send a message that we're sick of Elie.

IVY JD - CHECK
BIG LAW JOB - CHECK
BLACK - CHECK

Is it because of AA? Who cares.

BURN

51 - You have clearly never worked for a female partner. I have never been treated more disrespectfully than by the female partners at my firm. They make our entire gender look bad.

What if minority women choose to make more money while putting in the same hours in careers like banking or consulting? Or choose to go in-house? "Institutional racism" is one way of looking at the numbers. Another may be that minority women are in such high demand that better options than partnership at a law firm are available?

Since I work for an all white male dominated firm, it is not surprising to me when a female attorney (minority or otherwise) leaves. When men can stop making backhanded comments concerning motherhood, lack of ambition or no business sense, perhaps then all women will be able to succeed. These comments are made from men who will only interview candidates in the top 15% of their class and only from a top 20 school and it doesn't matter if you just graduated or have been practicing law for 20 years. Pathetic.

Women might make different choices if they would take a good look at the firm's environment and see how homogeneous it really is. Big law isn't the be all, end all.

55-
Sorry to disappoint- I have (and do).

Hey 51, impetus does not mean what you think it means. Do you mean impediment?

22 = bullshit.

if the world was female dominated, crying to express agner/sadness/frustration would be acceptable, and men would be thrown out for yelling, bullying and excessively withdrawing.

maybe the male-centric expectations about what is appropriate professional behavior (or at least what is annoying but not agregious) set women up to fail.

Hey, I think I know what Elie is getting at:

Elie is a minority and didn't make partner.
Ditto for Lat.
Marin is a woman and didn't make partner.

So there you go, 0% of ATL editors made partner, and all are URM.

Law firms are racist. Case closed, or as Elie would say, That. Is. Embarrassing.

MysTTTal

Hey 51, impetus does not mean what you think it means. Do you mean impediment?

37 and 52 are right. Minority women leave because we *can.* There is a whole world outside of BIGLAW.

Thank God. At least intelligence is still a factor in advancement, since they took it out of admissions.

Guess that being black with a 159 and 2.5 can only take you so far...like penn.

If firms will stop hiring underqualified people for diversity reasons, they'll stop washing them out.

It's 2008. It shouldn't matter if you are white, black, purple, gay, straight or a hermaphrodite. If you can do the job, you get it. If you can't, you don't.

Would be interesting to see a breakdown of which minorities among minorities are better represented.

Agree with 57 and 60. Plenty of white, male, biglaw partners seem to believe that the only way to be a lawyer is to yell (at subordinates, opposing counsel and even judges and their own clients) and bully. I've seen them piss off judges and almost lose deals that would have benefitted their clients because they couldn't take a softer approach. Plenty of women don't engage in this type of childish, and sometimes destructive, behavior and are chided as "not aggressive enough."

Maybe it is because they're given a free pass through college and grad school because of their race and gender, but when it comes time to perform on a level playing field, they haven't been prepared?

Go figure.

Someone needs to post that cheesy story about how if you help a butterfly out of the cocoon, it will die.

Weezy didn't need no Biglaw:

"Fish don't fry in the kitchen;
Beans don't burn on the grill.
Took a whole lotta tryin'
Just to get up that hill.
Now we're up in the big leagues
Gettin' our turn at bat.
As long as we live, it's you and me baby
There ain't nothin wrong with that."

Holla!

Can't help but notice that male partners outnumber female partners over 4:1, but male minority partners only outnumber female minority partners about 2:1.

Asian women are prolly higher ranked then anyone. Understandably. They're smarter.

67 - Yeah, I bet Elie has no problem that Jewish women aren't included in this definition of "minority women."

Dollars to doughnuts this doesn't count Asians. Plenty of Asian female partners up here in the NW.

Agree with 57 and 60. Plenty of white, male, biglaw partners seem to believe that the only way to be a lawyer is to yell (at subordinates, opposing counsel and even judges and their own clients) and bully. I've seen them piss off judges and almost lose deals that would have benefitted their clients because they couldn't take a softer approach. Plenty of women don't engage in this type of childish, and sometimes destructive, behavior and are chided as "not aggressive enough."

Christ, Mystal, I've refrained from joining the chorus until now, but the continuous stream of minority & liberal interest and identity politics stories is REALLY getting old.

Lat, in all seriousness, the site is going downhill here, you need to remember what brought readers around in the first place before you bleed us all off with this tripe.

I serve on the recruiting committee for a BigLaw firm. We give preferential treatment to both women and minorities (i.e., we would give offers to a minority or female over a slightly better qualified white male).

Leaving out the minority issue, does anybody know the percentage of females that start out at BigLaw and are still in BigLaw after say 7 years?

75,

Plagiarism is looked down upon in all legal circles.

Christ, Mystal, I've refrained from joining the chorus until now, but the continuous stream of minority & liberal interest and identity politics stories is REALLY getting old.

Lat, in all seriousness, the site is going downhill here, you need to remember what brought readers around in the first place before you bleed us all off with this tripe.

It doesn't include Asians because they stopped counting as URM's about a decade ago. Mex, afros, and injuns are the only ones that count now. That is the preferred nomenclature, yes?

78, it posted twice. The site keeps doing that when I post. But thanks for your helpful advice.

You know, it's funny. It used to be that Jews and Asians were URMs in certain law firms. Now there are hella Jews and many many more Asians. These were not people who had AA on their side.

What happens when you have someone who was pushed up through AA to a better undergrad, then a better grad school, then a better job, all while remaining average or below, competing with people who were above average? When the boosts happened, there was a 'level' playing field. But when it comes to accountability based on performance, ability to bring in clients, and making partners want to work with you, there is a disconnect - still average or below. It applies to all URMs who are plugged into the equation.

Full disclosure: I am a URM who feels like the culture of AA preps people for failure once they reach that higher level.

REMINDER: WLRK was founded by a bunch of Jews who couldn't get hired at the WASPy white shoe firms. Amazing what hard work + competency (rather than whining) will accomplish.

REMINDER: WLRK was founded by a bunch of Jews who couldn't get hired at the WASPy white shoe firms. Amazing what hard work + competency (rather than whining) will accomplish.

84: And they were from NYJew

Read Sander's article and perhaps you will understand. Even those who support affirmative action may actually realize that it is extraordinarily counterproductive.

"uninterrupted cycle of institutional discrimination." Please.
By this, they mean that firms are not willing to cater to their desire to "balance work and family," which is a euphemism for "take off lots of time when it is convenient for me, and clients be damned."

Didja know that standardized tests were developed to help FIGHT racism?

Yup. The Ivies used to turn away Jewish candidates by claiming that they did not the right "character" to succeed in Cambridge or New Haven (read: they did not belong to the right country clubs.) In an effort to stamp out the anti-semitism that was allowed to flourish when admissions requirements were so opaque, standardized tests were promulgated. The thinking was that if everyone took the same test, schools would be forced to compare apples to apples and admit people based on merit.

Jews, as it turned out, blew away the standardized tests and earned their way into the Ivies, where they now occupy a disproportionate percentage of students.

Of course, nowadays, standardized tests are considered racist. But it weren't always so, folks.

But see the numerous attacks on Sander's article.

Law firms are crappy at recruiting and retaining talent overall. But people who benefited from affirmative action are very likely to get pushed beyond their actual abilities at a law firm. If a fellow associate can't cut it, they're of no use to me, whatever color their skin is. In my experience, men and women are about equally able to cut it, in the aggregate, but affirmative action beneficiaries are rarely at the level we need.

36 has it right. And why does this matter since making money at Biglaw is evil, according to liberals/Obama.

To all using Sander as evidence against AA:

Please remember that his conclusions were discredited by Daniel Ho in the Yale Law Journal. In short, he misapplied key statistical concepts, which when properly used negate his conclusions.

To all using Sander as evidence against AA:

Please remember that his conclusions were discredited by Daniel Ho in the Yale Law Journal. In short, he misapplied key statistical concepts, which when properly used negate his conclusions.

WLRK is Jewish?

Lat - your site now sucks.

"A NALP report confirms what we see everyday: minority women partners barely exist."

Wrong. All the minority women partners I've encountered fully exist.

The opening sentence, as written, basically makes it sound like minority women partners are barely holding onto their lives, or at least their positions as partners. Not nitpicking at grammar here; it's basic usage of the English language.

It's amazing how most people view biglaw as the pinnacle of success.

I am a black woman who worked extremely hard to ensure that I was in the top 10% of my class. Sadly enough, it was the fear of being labeled an affirmative action hire that fueled my drive to walk into biglaw with an "honors" designation in my bio. This, nothwithstanding my previous accomplishments prior to law school. I knew my colleagues, even the lesser qualified ones from my law school, would scrutinize my bio so as to discount my success long before they had a chance to work with me.

I did my time and moved on to greener pastures at year three. There's something about big law and miserable, "victimized" white men. They make a happy pairing.

Beyond biglaw, I have worked with brilliant people--including older white males--who are willing to work with you side by side, teach you the ropes, and invest in your success. You are not seen as a threat to them, and rarely do they feel the need to tear you down to build up themselves.

We are not victims. Big law, and the scores of emasculated white males that live there, you are being used and you don't even know it.

Amazing how any discussion of minorities inevitably turns into a discussion of how minorities are clearly underqualified for the job and only got where they were because of affirmative action. I mean, there couldn't be plenty of minorities who got where they were because they were smart and capable? Love that affirmative action is suddenly an excuse to be extremely racist and call all minorities stupid.

97,

Good for you. Do you mind if I ask what your law school is ranked??

98,

No one is saying that minorities are stupid and unqualified. In fact, there are many that are qualified, smart and capable. Thos minorities are likely the persons who make partner and/or go on to do wonderful things that successful people do.

What we're arguing against is the notion that racism is the reason minority women are not proportionally represented as partners, or that there is something intnrinsically wrong with that statistic.

Quit whining.

97 wins. Biglaw is for tools. Masochistic, unimaginative white guys are welcome to it, and richly deserve the ulcers they get slaving away in its service.

Thanks for your input 97. I'll remember it when I'm here until 10 tonight and your lazy ass has been home in bed for an hour. You call it being used, I call it hard work. You can put down us emasculated white males all you want, but at the end of the day when you look in the mirror remember one thing - you could not hack it here; you are a slacker.

102: Are you seriously patting yourself on the back for being exploited? "You call it being used, I call it hard work." Give me a break. You do know that those of us with normal jobs and lives laugh at you, right?

"Before everybody explains away the numbers by saying "there aren't as many minority women in the pipeline," note that there are a lot of minority women downstream"

This data is inadequate to support your point.

Why would you use the percentage of minority women currently in the associate classes, when the relevant number is the percentage of minority women in the associate classes of the past 50 years?

The partner set you're drawing from is composed of attorneys who've gone through the pipelines for the past 50 years, therefore take your numbers from the correct set of data.

I know a whole bunch of light bulbs just went off in your heads, thinking "oh yeah..."

102 - I genuinely feel sorry for you and how little joy you must have in your life outside of work.

Right on, 97.

Thanks for being the voice of reason amid all the self-righteous and spoiled whining on this comment board.

102: Grow a pair. May you toil away for years without a properly earned promotion or a raise.

There are plenty of people who can while hours away, pretending to be busy, too, you know. There is a difference between working hard and working smart.

A lawyer is either a social engineer or a parasite on society.

Charles Hamilton Houston

I think you are all intelligent enough to figure out which of you are parasites and which of you are engineers.

102: You're just a lackey. I agree with 106, you're just working hard (and have no life) versus working smart. Remember, there are more ways to skin a cat but when you believe that your way is the only way then you are doomed to living a sheltered life.

As to 106's comment about working hard v. working smart...and to 102, there are, I'm sure, plenty of us on here who can accomplish the same things you do working 8 to 10 by working 9 to 5. Me, I'd rather make a little less and actually spent time with my children.
106 is right on...efficiency is the key.
And I guarantee that regional firms will end up benefitting in the long run by you and your firm's greed. You work hard, but you work for many, many hours. Once a client decides to go with a regional firm specializing in efficient, solid work. and they get the same product at half the price, all your business is gone. And your "work ethic" aka "douchebaggery" will not fly.
Oh, an your boys at biglaw who work until ten, I've read your briefs in my time as a CA3 clerk, and the product is not worth the time for two reasons: (1) the improved quality does not help your case; and (2) the "zealous advocacy" aka put-downs and brainlessly "witty" comparisons are actually a turn off and weaken your standing with the clerks and thereby the Court.

peace

it stinks in here

97 is absolutely right.

Spending your career as a biglaw attorney is moronic. The work is boring, the hours are miserable, your coworkers are insufferable, and you have to spend your precious few hours at home every week worrying that you aren't billing. The only upside is the money, and you never have time to enjoy the goodies that it could buy.

And oh, your next President is going to take most of that money away from you anyway.

So have fun, chumps. 97 and I are on to greener pastures.

I'm a minority woman who went to ivies all the way (my SATs and LSATs can kick all your racist butts) and decided to move out once I realized what a hellhole biglaw is.
The numbers are skewed because it is mostly white males that continue to define success by how many hours they bill annually, while their personal lives wither away into nothingness.
Look around you, look at the lives you're leading. Poor sods. Jokes on y'all.

102 sucks

Way to cite the SA minority women rate of 2008 to support your lack of PARTNERS. These people won't be partners for 10 years. How about the 1998 data?

BigLaw blows. Smart people in general realize you can make a great living and actually enjoy your life. I don't know many happy Biglaw partners, with happy families. BigLawyering isn't advanced molecular physics so please don't come out with "they're not smart enough to make it"... that's garbage. The secret's out-- you white guys with all the advantages in the world are still not the smartest people in the room.

Federal District Court clerk saying amen to 109

116
And they (the biglaw greedsters) say clerkship experience is not valuable.
109

I'm with 115. Anyone who says that the reason minority women aren't making it as biglaw partners because they are not smart enough or can't cut it, obviously don't know enough biglaw partners.

Thanks for posting this Elie!!!!!!!!!! You are the bomb-diggity as EIC.

Agree with 115. Most biglaw partners aren't genuises and many aren't even that bright, but are well-connected, rainmakers, or bullies.

88 is patently wrong. Standardized tests were introduced specifically to keep Jews *out* of college. The thinking was that we weren't so smart, but really hard-working....so if they put together a test (what is now the SAT) that wasn't very studyable, it would weed out the students who got good grades by merely working all hours of the day to memorize class materials.

Applause for 97 and 115.

In any event, these comments are further proof that this board is heavily populated by racist assholes.

Weezy? Seriously? You are very sad.

This firm is a good proof of 97's point. The firm is a well regarded management side labor and employment boutique. Of the 15 partners, 5 (33%) are female including 1 black female (6.66%). Note how the partners are ex big firm lawyers with top law schools on their resume. Also, note how they look much happier than your average big firm partner.
http://www.kmm.com/attorneys.html

http://obamaisscum.blogspot.com/

124,

You have just confirmed that this country is still plagued with racism. I hope rationalizing who somebody socially associates with as a justification for hatred of a very well-qualified candidate lets you sleep better at night.

Separately, how does your blog have anything to do with this discussion? I think it is just a tacky attempt to self-promote!

@97 You fail to state what you are actually doing for work. "Greener pastures" could be anything from a small firm, in house counsel, the government or a law school professor. So, what exactly are you doing that is so much better than the firm you were at.

When I saw the picture for this post, I thought Elie was going to write about pre-crime or Scientology. Either would have been more interesting than the jibberish that was actually posted. Elie, too bad that the movie "Minority Report" wasn't about minorities at all.

I agree wholeheartedly with #97. If you honestly believe that succeeding in Big Law IS succeeding as a lawyer, you must lead a sad, sad life. The years you spend slaving for Big Law, and the time taken from friends and family, cannot be recouped no matter how much money you're paid.

Men and women of all backgrounds are leaving the big firms in droves. Can anyone here really say that all of them were "unqualified" or "couldn't cut it?" More likely they decided they actually wanted to practice law instead of be an overpaid paralegal and went elsewhere.

102, just because you are more successful at working long hours than you are at maintaining a relationship or making friends or being a parent, that doesn't make you successful. And chosing to live your life and accept a fulfilling job rather than be an overworked dollar sign doesn't make you "unqualified." If you think that 2400 hours of doc review makes you a success, then more power to you!

I think the problem with this article is the complete failure to recognize that perhaps many minority women, like so many others, have just realized that Big Law does not make you a better, happier, or more satisfied lawyer, and because there are fewer of them to begin with, their attrition is just the more noticable.

Comments 100-127= TTT

also 128

The secret's out-- you white guys with all the advantages in the world are still not the smartest people in the room.

Right on. That's why Obama's candidacy is so scary for them.

Cannot wait until I'm in a position of power so that I can start playing favorites too.

- angry minority woman, v10 firm.

The secret's out-- you white guys with all the advantages in the world are still not the smartest people in the room.

Right on. That's why Obama's candidacy is so scary for them.

Cannot wait until I'm in a position of power so that I can start playing favorites too.

- angry minority woman, v10 firm.

34- right on! I'm an asian female who just left a midsize law firm for government work, and am so happy I did.
For all of you out there who assume that the minorities and women who say they were discriminated against are delusional, I'd like to say that I too initially discounted stories of discrimination until I became a victim of it. For a few months, just pay attention to which associates get the plum assignments, or the client face time, and you'll begin to realize what happens to minorities and women in firms. And for the record, I was a double ivy, top 33% of my law school and had way better qualifications, billables, and evaluations than the men I worked with.
12--That is so not true for asians, particularly in litigation. interviewers and partners seem to assume you will be afraid to be aggressive or that you would rather work on ADR than be in court.
47 and 69--If you want to talk about unfairness, you should start with college admissions, and how whites are actually the beneficiaries of AA in them vs. asians.

132 and 133, perhaps the attitude of victimhood and entitlement that is so obvious in your posts is obvious to your colleagues as well. Consider how this affects people's opinions of you.

The truly brilliant people are those who realize one doesn't need to be the "smartest in the room" (whatever that means) to succeed.

Thanks for your input 102. What TTT law firm do you work for that allows you to leave at 10? Surely you haven't chased all of the commas and fixed the formatting in your crap document by then! Make sure to say hi to your inbred friends and family when you go home to Ohio to vote next month. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0

My thought is that attrition of minority women is so high partially because minority women "get it" (i.e. and get out) faster. With few exceptions I'd imagine, walking the BigLaw "partnership track" requires a degree of masochism and dedicated lack of vision.