Ed. note: Above the Law is a bit estrogen-deprived this week, with both Kash and Marin on vacation. So your above-signed writer, who is more in touch with his feminine side than Elie, was called up for duty. He apologizes for not being able to do justice to this subject.
UPDATE (6 PM): The New York State Bar Association has changed the title and description of the panel in question. Details after the jump.
Women in the law: you’ve come a long way, babies. Many of you are partners, even managing partners, at top law firms. Some of you are professors, even deans, at leading law schools. One if you is the Solicitrix General; two of you sit on the Supreme Court.
But maybe you still need some advice for navigating the mean, cutthroat, male-dominated world of the legal profession. Ideally these tips should come from, you know…. MEN.
At the upcoming annual meeting of the New York State Bar Association, the Committee on Women in the Law is sponsoring a program called “Weathering Tough Times: Strategic Planning for Your Practice.” It includes this panel:
So, how do you think women lawyers reacted to the prospect of enlightenment from a “distinguished panel of gentlemen”?
Not very well. We heard from many irate women lawyers about this panel. Like this one:
Women at my firm are outraged. I was hoping it was a facetious title…
And another:
I thought it was a joke until I went to the website myself. One female partner I showed it to is hoping that the NYSBA website was hacked and this still is a joke. She couldn’t believe it came from there.
Still more:
[E]very female attorney I know that has seen this — partners to associates — is outraged. The first reaction is this is a joke. Then next is what year is this from. And the last is shocked and appalled. Most people don’t know where to start.
The “distinguished panel” of male lawyers — who will surely tell female lawyers to be less “sensitive” and “emotional,” especially around “that time of the month,” but praise women lawyers for their “communication skills” and “empathy” (clients love the “empathy” thing) — will be preceded by this panel, cheerfully entitled “What’s Our Problem? Current Issues Facing Women”:
Women lawyers, maybe your “problem” is… self-loathing? And always looking to “distinguished gentlemen” for all the answers? A tipster aptly summarizes:
As for the whole symposium: let’s all get together and discuss our problems in the first panel, and then we can bring in the distinguished gentlemen to tell us how to fix them.
After all, every woman must have the same strengths and weaknesses. You almost expect them to add how to dress to the list of things the gentlemen will be talking about.
I’m willing to give the men on the panel the benefit of the doubt that it was not explained to them this way — otherwise I can’t imagine why they would agree.
Will the panel go forward? Stay tuned. Over at Feminist Law Professors, Professor Bridget Crawford has called for a boycott:
I call for all members of the NYSBA to boycott this panel discussion. Yes, the speakers have a right to speak, but we don’t have to go and listen. Men have been telling us FOR YEARS how we don’t measure up. To have a panel of men, endorsed by the New York State Bar Association, discussing our “strengths and weaknesses,” is a regression and an insult to all women in the legal profession.
Here at ATL, we hope the panel goes forward, if for no reason other than sheer entertainment value. The “distinguished panel of gentlemen” will be walking on the proverbial eggshells before a room full of pissed-off women lawyers.
We can’t wait for some eyewitness reports (from attendees who don’t boycott). Fun times!
P.S. If you’re interested in conferences with less problematic offerings, check out the following:
- Inside Counsel’s Superconference (disclosure: ATL advertiser);
- the PLI Law Firm Leadership and Management Institute (at which yours truly will be presenting, along with a star-studded cast); or
- the ABA Law Student Division Spring Meeting (featuring such speakers as our very own Elie Mystal, and former New York City Mayor Ed Koch).
UPDATE (6 PM): The New York State Bar Association has issued the following statement:
NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION RESPONDS TO CONCERNS REGARDING ANNUAL MEETING PANEL PRESENTATION BY THE COMMITTEE ON WOMEN IN THE LAW
The New York State Bar Association has received concerns regarding a panel discussion organized by the Committee on Women in the Law to be featured during our 2010 Annual Meeting (Their Point of View: Tips from the Other Side, Tuesday, January 26, 2010 at 11:00 a.m.).
Unfortunately, the important objectives of this panel have been overshadowed by issues raised as to the topic description and the composition of the panel.
We have therefore responded by modifying the presentation as follows:
Sharing Their Points of View: Tips from Both Sides
A distinguished panel of attorneys, comprising women and men, will engage in a dialogue about the challenges faced by women in the workplace in the areas of communication, negotiation, mediation, arbitration, organization and management of work, as well as the role of mentoring.
The panel will give specific skill building advice for women to consider in order to strengthen their practice in the above-mentioned areas.
We hope that you will join us on Tuesday, January 26th. For your convenience, you can register online at www.NYSBA.org/am2010.
UPDATE (1/19/10): Read more here (information about participants in the revised panel, as well as a reader poll).
Weathering Tough Times: Strategic Planning For Your Practice [Committee on Women in the Law - NYSBA Annual Meeting - 2010]
The NYSBA Sponsors Panel of Men Opining on Women’s “Strengths and Weaknesses” as Lawyers [Feminist Law Professors]
No more vacations for Kash!!!
Love the name. “Tips” from the other side. Let’s play a little game…
Practitioner’s tip for women desiring success in the legal profession: Act like a man, do not get married and do not reproduce. No need to sacrifice billable hours to attend this dog and pony show. That is all.
I really don’t see what’s so wrong with this. Maybe some of these uptight broads need to learn a thing or two about how not to be raging bitches. In my experience, many (but certainly not all) women walk into the office with a chip on their shoulder, like they expect to be talked down to and treated unfairly for being female. As a result, they feel the need to defend themselves and be on the aggressive from the first moment in all situations. It makes female attorneys, on average, much more aggressive and angry than male attorneys. Most sensible female attorneys will acknowledge this.
This makes me sick. I hope it is a joke, but I think it is real.
I never realized, until I began working for a firm that, in 20 years of existence, has NEVER had a female partner, just how much bigotry still exists in the legal industry. It’s heartbreaking for me to know that, if I stay in my current job, I will never be anything besides an associate…despite the fact that I work as hard and sacrifice as much as my male colleagues.
This makes me sick. I hope it is a joke, but I think it is real.
I never realized, until I began working for a firm that, in 20 years of existence, has NEVER had a female partner, just how much bigotry still exists in the legal industry. It’s heartbreaking for me to know that, if I stay in my current job, I will never be anything besides an associate…despite the fact that I work as hard and sacrifice as much as my male colleagues.
I think this will go over as well with women as that male alternative to “The View” with Dick Clark, Danny Partridge and the guy from Saved by the Bell (no, not Screetch, the other guy).
5-6: Stop bitching and just do your friggin job.
I’m surprised Lat is not moderating this.
5/6 — The fact that you don’t know how to post on a blog speaks volumes. Maybe it’s not your gender, but your performance and lack of attention to detail that are the issues.
I said, “Do you love me?” and she said, “No, but that’s a really nice ski mask!”
8–stop being an online troll and just do yours.
5/6 — The fact that you don’t know how to post on a blog speaks volumes. Maybe it’s not your gender, but your performance and lack of attention to detail that are the issues.
10/13–Ditto.
next up: old white guys explain the strengths/weaknesses of black people in the workplace.
cool.
10-13: Fail.
Wow. Awful. ATL, please reach out to Taa Grays and Katherine Frink-Hamlett, Chair and Vice-Chair of this cmte for some sort of explanation/response.
5/6, since many NBA teams have never had Jewish players, that must be due to bigotry and anti-Semitism, right?
“what women should be doing to strengthen their practice in the above-mentioned areas”? Bend over and I’ll show you.
19 – You demonstrate that we still have a long way to go in terms of gender equality in the legal profession.
Some people would probably want comments like yours to be moderated, but not me. I WANT to know what people will say, behind anonymity, about women, minorities, etc.
Once people no longer say bigoted things, even anonymously, then we will have achieved equality.
You’ve gotta be shittin me!!!
20, I agree that we have a long way to go in terms of gender equality in the legal profession. At my firm, the secretaries and legal recruiters are all female. How can such blatant bigotry still exist in the 21st century?
this is just taking group identity politics to its logical conclusion. if you’re bothered by it, you should be bothered by the whole idea of treating people as group members as opposed to individuals in the workplace (including, of course, segregated “how to succeed” conferences).
As a woman, I can admit there are certain “weaknesses” women have that men do not possess, generally speaking. However, men also have weaknesses that women do not have. To specifically target women as the topic at a conference on how we (as a gender) can “build credibility” and “manage other’s perceptions” of us is shocking and insulting.
Most women just want to be treated with fairness and respect. That is why this conference is so insulting to all the women who want to do their jobs and have the same chance to succeed as a man.
Guys at my high school used to give girls tips on how to strengthen their practice all the time. It was no big deal.
This is so undescribably awful and unwise. What’s next? A panel of WASPs advising everyone else?
Wake up call to the powers-that-be who think they are the boss of us: We don’t care what your petty rules are; they are not relevant to us and we are busy working on our own business models that will be brilliantly successful in the forward-looking economy… yes, the one that is passing you by right now while you are busy applying touniquets to the hemorrhaging old model.
Pacific Reporter FTW. I miss FRAT STUD!
Lat, please moderated comments by whiny little bitches like 20.
-19
26 – I LOVE the idea of the panel of WASPs advising everyone else! That’s exactly what we need for a good laugh, and a wake up call. Sadly, the WASPs still rule quite a bit, even though we try to deny it.
26: who’s “we” and what’s your business model?
CHECK YOU FEMALES
I think Partner Emeritus should be on the WASP panel.
18–I imagine it would if more than half of new NBA players were Jewish.
Thanks 25, I’ve missed the “guys at my high school” meme.
Wow. Kash looks a lot like Ally McBeal. Has anyone else noticed that?
I agree with 24. Also, the other problem with this panel is it assumes that the way the “gentleman” do things is the “right” way, and the way women do things is the “wrong” way and needs to be corrected.
LOL @ 31!
26,
The word is “indescribably.” I look forward to witnessing your brilliant success.
31 made me LOL
–Elie
Better yet, at least one of the panelists is known as an office philanderer. Eager to see what his advice will be…
I think everybody is getting way too worked up over nothing. As an Hispanic man, I’d have absolutely no problem with a panel of white attorneys giving a lecture on what Hispanics need to do to overcome stereotyping and fit in in the modern workplace. A lot of us have personal affectations that, to be perfectly honest, support negative stereotyping. Many women do to. There’s nothing wrong with a view from the outside to show the common perceptions of your particular group and what you need to do to correct them, and change the perceptions into misconceptions.
But when a panel of women attorneys wants to lecture us men on how to be more enlightened, less cave-man-esque, and how we’re ruthlessly oppressing the women around us without even realizing it, we’re supposed to just smile and take it.
That’s amazing! I haven’t seen anything that chauvinistic this side of Mad Men, and this might even be worse!
This is going straight to the inbox of every professional woman I know.
-unapologetic male
Ladies love it when I play the game “just the tip.”
I’m a senior female associate and I agree with 41.
What does this say about the judgement of the men who agreed to be on the panel? Can you imagine if you were a female associate who worked for one of these tools?
26 – BWA HA HA HA HA! Can’t wait to see the “business models that will be brilliantly successful in the forward-looking economy” that you’re “working on.”
I’m sure all the Fortune 500 companies are just champing at the bit to hire a part-time stay-at-home graduate of Thomas Cooley for all their M&A and securities needs.
First problem is that women think that their issues and problems in law firms are on the level of those faced by minorities. It’s not even close ladies, not even close…
The panel was organized by The Committee on Women in the Law, which is presumably composed largely (or exclusively) of women, right? So some women must have thought this panel was a good idea. They may have been wrong, of course, but its not like some group of men got together and said, “we have to have a panel to put those broads in their place and tell them how to behave.”
If I were one of the guys on the panel, I think I would be developing a bad case of H1N1 flu around now.
And yes, 31 is pretty funny.
Huh?
Women argue that men control all the top spots and achieve, by far, the most success, in the legal profession.
But they are supposed to get all outraged that men are telling them how to succeed? Seems actually like some mentoring.
Playing both ends against the middle. An old feminist game.
41 and 42 make a good point.
Schools and employers have been giving me (and all the men) tips on how to comport myself around women since junior high. And it usually wasn’t something I had the option to skip, as with this conference.
So you don’t like the idea? Skip it. If the idea that something like this exists is, to you, an intolerable statement on the world we live in, you probably don’t get out much.
41: Agreed.
40: Maybe two of them actually.
I just think that if the NYSBA is going to have such a panel (even if sponsored by a women’s group), then there should be an opposite panel, women lawyers telling everyone what needs to be changed in the workplace in order to attract more female attorneys, keep the ones they have, and grow them into partners.
41 has got it backwards. People need to be taught not to stereotype and deal with folks of different races, genders and backgrounds in the modern work place without prejudice, which means reasonable accomodations for diversity.
This stinks of Rudyard Kipling’s “The White Man’s Burden”
54, what are these “reasonable accommodations for diversity”?
Let’s see you answer without stereotyping.
15 FTW
I understand why some women are really pissed off about this, but I don’t really see the big deal (and I’m also female). I agree with 53 that they probably should have countered it with an opposite panel, but it might be somewhat useful to hear what the male lawyers believe are female weaknesses. Or it might be a total waste of time because they have no idea what they’re talking about. I don’t know.
I don’t perceive this as a smear against women lawyers. I imagine the law group who created this thought it might be helpful to get a male perspective, and I think some people might be taking it too seriously as an insult to the gender. It doesn’t seem that much different from getting constructive criticism from your (probably male) boss and applying that to be a better employee. Obviously these guys can’t approach this from that angle, but maybe they see things over and over that women lawyers do that hinder our progress, and maybe we’re completely oblivious that these things are problems until they’re pointed out. Who knows. But I’d probably go to this panel and see what they had to say, and if I thought they were all full of crap, I’d let them know.
15 FTW
I understand why some women are really pissed off about this, but I don’t really see the big deal (and I’m also female). I agree with 53 that they probably should have countered it with an opposite panel, but it might be somewhat useful to hear what the male lawyers believe are female weaknesses. Or it might be a total waste of time because they have no idea what they’re talking about. I don’t know.
I don’t perceive this as a smear against women lawyers. I imagine the law group who created this thought it might be helpful to get a male perspective, and I think some people might be taking it too seriously as an insult to the gender. It doesn’t seem that much different from getting constructive criticism from your (probably male) boss and applying that to be a better employee. Obviously these guys can’t approach this from that angle, but maybe they see things over and over that women lawyers do that hinder our progress, and maybe we’re completely oblivious that these things are problems until they’re pointed out. Who knows. But I’d probably go to this panel and see what they had to say, and if I thought they were all full of crap, I’d let them know.
What outrage! What indignities! Nary a one of the gentlemen know a thing about communication.
anonymous contract lawyer
41 nailed it.
-Also a Hispanic attorney
58 is right.
56 – simple: flexibility around religious practices, e.g., holydays/sabbath; adopting policies against partners taking associates to gender-exclusive activities, such as to strip bars, etc. 41 is backwards.
In my high school, a distinguished panel of senior males used to lecture the co-eds all the time about their strength and weaknesses. It was no big deal.
Women are always getting screwed. If they act like nice broads, they are too soft. If they act like unmitigated bitches, they are over compensating. If they do neither, they have no personality. If they dress hot, they are sluts. If they dress conservative, they are prude. And there is the whole on-her-period schtick.
“I find it distressin there is never no inbetweens . . . .”
~ Mos Def (Black Star)
Word.
All that said, I would rather work with attractive women because it makes it easier to pick up hot broads at happy hour if you’re already with a group of hot broads. I am not sure why that is true, but it is in my experience.
Would any ladies care to enlighten me on that?
62, why are you stereotyping that no woman would ever want to go to strip bar?
That’s blatant sexism and bigotry.
I understand the emotion but not the logic behind the outrage. I would be interested in the answers to the following questions:
1. Would people be as outraged if the “Their point of view” panel was made of women?
2. Why isn’t the “What’s our Problem” panel more offensive than the “Their point of view” panel which on its face offers the perceptions of acknowledged outsiders?
Thank you, 65 – I was scratching my head trying to figure out what this story was doing on ATL when it didn’t seem to have a gay angle. But you have have now provided it.
Someone show do a panel on career self-selection. Maybe another one on why men have consistently underperformed in the teaching, nursing, waitstaff professions.
Anyone who believes that stereotypes are the result of nothing but bigotry is offended by reality. If 10 percent of the general populace personify a stereotype, then it’s 20 percent for the “victimized” group. You can substitute whatever numbers you want for any stereotype. And I say that as one of a group that has been subjected to innumerable stereotypes. There’s at least a grain of truth in just about every one of them. And, no, I’m not ashamed to be part of that group by a long shot — in fact, I’m damn proud of it. But that doesn’t mean I ignore reality.
62 – It absolutely astounds me sometimes how mind numbingly sheltered and ludicrous some lawyers can be. Try spending some time in a firehouse or a military base or a construction site and then come back and tell me about how awful it is that a partner takes some male associates out to a strip club or asks you to work on whatever day you happen to think God wants you to stay home and play videogames.
I salute the brave men who are appearing on the panel. Yes, they have much to gain in the eyes of women by offering their opinions on this topic. I also encourage them to honestly answer their wives when asked “does this make me look fat?”
5/6: I’m assuming that it’s your time of the month and you’re just overly emotional right now. Try not to menstruate on any important legal documents.
41- here’s a tip- when the white man tells you how to behave, don’t say si senor.
5/6: I’m assuming that it’s your time of the month and you’re just overly emotional right now. Try not to menstruate on any important legal documents.
58 – “It doesn’t seem that much different from getting constructive criticism from your (probably male) boss and applying that to be a better employee.”
Actually, it *is* different. Constructive criticism on your performance from your boss is completely subjective; a panel on how “women” can improve is objective. This panel is basically saying that all women are alike and all women have the same weaknesses. However, being critiqued by a male boss on work performance is specific to the employee in question.
Will these gentlemen be discussing the virtues of pounding women in the ass at the office?
15 (“old white guys”),
26 and 29 (“WASPs”)
55 (Kipling’s “White Man’s Burden”)
Zachary Carter is a black man. At least he was when I knew him at NYU L in the 70s. Maybe the fact escaped you because he doesn’t have a “Negro dialect”.
Also, while I do not know the moderator, for some reason “Earamichia” does not sound like the kind of first name that was common at Andover. Where all white males (in your imagination) went to school.
You fucking stains.
How to dress for success: wear a white penis.
62, I think it’s very sexist for you to make those assumptions. Are you telling me that minorities are more likely to practice other religions? Are you going to tell me that blacks are muslim and asians are buddhist? Also, please explain why strip clubs are gender exclusive. Are you assuming that females aren’t as sexual as their male counterparts?
Also, I note that you spelled it “holydays.” I hope you understand that “holidays” is derived from “holy” days. But, English might be a second language for you and European cultural influences on that language might not be your specialty.
This cannot end well. Men opining on the strengths and weaknesses of women? Yes, let’s stereotype an entire sex and see what happens. I think the challenges women face in a male-dominated workplace is less about their weaknesses and more about their perceived weaknesses. If men would stop looking at us in the same way as their mothers, sisters, wives, and girlfriends at work we’d be better off. You can take your panel and shove it.
79: like Zach Carter. Supra, at 78.
Tool.
Why does Lat think he’s more in touch with his feminine side? Just because he likes the cock?
79: yes. Like Zach Carter. Supra, at 78.
Tool.
62 = fail.
42: correct.
It may be congenital. Women seem unable to refrain from lecturing men about their supposed shortcomings.
I remember an ABA Tax Section meeting, where a 4-woman panel on the then-new innocent spouse provisions of Sec. 6015 enlightened the predominantly male audience on their sins. The moderator, a hawk-nosed, beady-eyed stiletto, presumed to tell us that Sec. 6015 was a “gender issue”.
I doubt very strongly that any of these panels presumes to lecture its audience. But if they did, it would serve the audience right.
This is an awsome panel discussion – much better than the usual topics at legal conferences.
I recommend that they add a panel on “How to give a good BJ without banging your head on the underside of the partner’s desk.” I understand that’s a problem area as well and it’s high time that we all have an open and thoughtful discussion about it.
I’m a man, so I’m probably missing something, but it seems to me that the basic premise of the panel, if not its execution, is pretty reasonable. Most people (excluding the chauvinistic “bend over and I’ll show you” types) recognize that lack of advancement by women is a problem in the legal profession. Among other discussions at a conference to talk about this problem, hearing from the “other side” is not a bad thing. The framing of the panel is atrocious, but the concept seems sound.
78: Then Zach Carter ought to know better. I’m glad this is starting to get better focused on the morons who agreed to speak on this panel. Zachy (as we chaps used to call him back in the 70s) dropped his dialect to fit in better with the whiteys after attending a similar panel.
Since racism/sexism are obviously cool (in fact necessitated) in Biglaw, as most of the comments suggest, let me be the first to say: I hate whiteys. Stupid crackers.
Please moderate 90.
Why are the voices of Black women so loud and screechy?
It would be worthwhile to assemble a panel of distinguished women attorneys to discuss the financial woes of the male-run BigLaw firms. They would then offer their advice on how the strengths and weaknesses of male managers led to the firms’ troubles, and state what the men should be doing to strengthen their pracfices.
Isaac Laquedem
78,
The name “Earamichia” never occurred among the young ladies at my preparatory academy’s sister school. Such a name would have been most conspicuous indeed.
- Fraternity Lothario
The men need to be lectured about how these supposed shortcomings aren’t shortcoming. Same goes for the treatment of minorities.
95 gets it right: one of the few of the posters. I agree with 90. White people suck.
88 – I totally agree with you. In fact, I considered commenting on that point but did not want to make a massively long post.
I think most people know their weaknesses as employees. I would gladly take a class to learn how to communicate effectively. But if I’m taking a class from a man who is telling me how I, as a woman, am failing at communicating, I’m going to be annoyed.
The trouble is that most women take it too far and they want to both a) steamroll men and b) demand respect and equal treatment from men. Obviously there are differences (generally speaking) between men and women and how we communicate, do business, carry ourselves professionally, etc. The issue is whether this panel is going to foster additional communication between men and women so we may have a greater understanding of one another, or whether this panel is going to cause women to “act more like men” in the workplace. I would suggest that an entire symposium on women in the law would NOT serve the purpose of helping men and women communicate with one another – it will likely continue to polarize men and women from one another. This is, at the very least, unbeneficial; at worst, it is sexist.
-76
I’m a female BigLaw associate and I would totally go to this. Men run these places, and although I might not like everything they think or have to say about women lawyers, I think it could only be helpful to hear it.
@92 – Its just the way it is.
95 – Really? Taking time off from work to spend with your kids isn’t a shortcoming? Taking up firm resources by insisting on installing a seperate bathroom just so you don’t have to use one men go in? Maternity leave?
If a man just decides to take five months off because he feels like his family is more important than his firm, he’ll be fired. But if a woman does it, we have to put up with it?
I’m sorry, but all of those things are universal to female employees (well, at least the ones that have kids), and they’re all shortcomings.
100,
I’m a guy. The answer is no, that is not a shortcoming. Deal with it. Just because the white male partners have stay at home wives who take care of their every need does not mean that every single person who does not choose to live life like the old white folks is worthy of opprobrium.
101 – I’m also a guy. And I chose to not get married or have kids because work has to come first. I have to be prepared to be at the office 24 hours a day, even if, yes, it means missing my parents’ funerals. If you’re willing to put something in your life other than work ahead of work, then you don’t belong in my firm. Sorry about that; that’s just the way it is.
- 100
101,
not all men are white.
some men have wives who also work.
some women have husbands who don’t work.
HTH you bigot.
76 / 97 – you make some valid points.
- 88 (knowing that someone will accuse 76, 88, 97, and this post as being the same person with multiple personality disorder).
102,
Sorry to break it to you. The work you do isn’t that important. Go to talk to an ER doctor and compare notes.
Now get back to reviewing documents before your pasty ass gets fired.
The real problem is that we associate success with broad, stereotypical gender characteristics rather than characteristics of successful people. As a woman, it is incredibly offensive for someone to tell me that I need a man, not just a successful person (of either gender), to tell me how to build my career.
102/100 – you are a fool if that’s your approach. Your life will pass by and you’ll end up (maybe) rich and (certainly) hated. The best associates are valued sufficiently so as to be able to take the time they need. You must suck as an associate. Sorry about that; that’s just the way it is.
So now I’m chauvinistic?
76, I think you got the definitions of “objective” and “subjective” switched. FAIL. But if you didn’t, then I completely agree with you that a man can give an objective lecture to an audience of women on the shortcomings of their sex.
105 – If you’re going to do something, you do it wholeheartedly or not at all. People complain about baseball players not running out grounders to second, but then they leave the office by 8 to go have dinner with their spouse. The hypocrisy of some people is astounding.
If you’re going to do something, do it well. If you give less than 100%, you’re not doing it well. Any time you spend out of the office other than the bare minimum amount to sleep enough to stay healthy and focused is detracting from your performance. If you don’t want to work that hard, leave. Nobody’s stopping you. If you really, really, really want those things, then retire first.
108 – I’ve been doing it for over twenty years, so I must be doing something right. Take a lesson.
- 102
100/102/110 = very good troll.
112 – It’s depressing that some people actually thought it wasn’t a troll. What kind of psychopaths do you people work with?
100/102/110/111
102 – you’ve been an associate for 20 years? That sucks! If you’re a partner and don’t realize you can take vacation and time off by knowing how to delegate, then you are an even bigger fool.
With a brain a third the size of us. It’s science.
113, I don’t know about missing a parent’s funeral, but I once worked with a partner who missed the birth of his child because he was away at trial. True story.
“Be less ’sensitive’ and ‘emotional,’ especially around ‘that time of the month’” — I think some of the posts and the reactions quoted in the article prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is very sound and reasonable advice.
100/102/110/111: if you think the panel sounds valuable, then it must be because you realize that understanding people’s perceptions of you in the workplace can be useful; know, therefore, that more people than not would find this singular focus on career unreasonable.
i agree with those who say this is similar to panels full of women telling the men how to adjust to us. while management in probably every field is still pretty male-dominated, there are more and more women now too, and just as we always accuse men of treating us differently, i am sure in a general way we treat them differently too. it may not even really have anything to do with success in terms of how you empathize or how many clients you serve, but rather with how many people would love to work with you because you make them comfortable by taking the time to consider the way your interactions might affect the other person, not just poor you. i know it is different when the speakers are among the group that generally has more power, as long as the panelists haven’t lost sight of that though, I think this could be interesting.
18:
Jews are short and bad athletes. Last I checked, women have the same brain capacity as men. Nice try, jerky.
You girls on this thread are why I couldn’t stand law school and most of the females there (who lived on this theoretical feminist planet that doesn’t exist ).
It would do most of you good to attend this panel. True, male associates have deficiencies, but since most firms are run by other men, these deficiencies are understood.
Therefore, the opposite panel isn’t necessary because male deficiencies don’t pose the same potential career pitfalls as those of female attorneys–sorry but it’s true. You can bitch about it and talk about how things should be, but the reality is what it is and considering that this won’t change in the next eight years (before you become partner) you should get tips that will enable you to advance your career.
As a black female, I’ve had to learn this and marvel at how my Caucasian counterparts complain about everything and think the world should bend to their abilities and inabilities. I’ve spent my life bending to a Caucasian world and a Caucasian standard, there are worse things in life. Get. over. it. Work to be the change you want to be, but in the meantime understand that you’ve got to sometimes find a way to work within a given system to achieve your personal goals.
Also, I would argue that the male personality is better suited for the pragmatic corporate world. In general, men don’t take things personally (look no further than the women “hurt” by the idea of this panel), know to keep their personal lives at home and maintain a positive face at all times, are able to accept constructive criticism, and don’t view every slight as a personal attack that is the result of gender bias. So stop complaining. If I were in NYC I would probably attend this panel and take copious notes!
Women, in trying to get the right to vote in this country more than 100 years ago, made a pact with the devil. Their mistreatment in law firms is God’s wrath toward them.
–Pat Robertson
100,102, 111
I seriously pity you. You’re wasting your life on an unimportant career in the hopes of obtaining enough wealth and “prestige” to give all your hard work meaning.
also, please explain how multiple posts on a stupid legal blog does not “detract from your performance.”
I agree, it may not be ideal, but until women (and other minorities) reach the highest levels of power we have to play the game according to the rules of those in power. Once we know the rules, we can manipulate them in our favor. Only then can we cut off their heads! So go easy on men trying to empathize and just laugh at the rest’s naivety.
Maternity leave and raising children is an issue for all of society. Not just those who chose to, or have the luxury to have them. Who do you think is going to fund your social security or run this country when you are drooling pea soup?
Oh and 102 I feel very sorry that you have no life outside of work. You need a hug because someday you will likely come to regret your lifestyle choices.
100, et al. – If you spend all your non-sleeping time working, no woman would probably want to marry you anyway (at least no one that wasn’t solely interested in what money you had). Thanks for not passing down your genes.
I don’t see anything wrong with this.
A panel discussing the “strengths and weaknesses of WOMEN,” where the panelists are all MEN, is ridiculous.
Here’s a fun game. Try to predict what the MALE panelists will say.
A strength of WOMEN is ________________.
A weakness of WOMEN is _______________.
How can a MALE attorney publicly divulge what he honestly thinks about general strengths and weaknesses of WOMEN without looking like an asshole?
This is not the same as groups of women and minorities, who are subtly and not-subtly suffering discrimination (lower pay, failure to promote to partner, etc.) taking great risks by making their grievances known to firm management.
Look at your firm. Of associates promoted to partner in your *department* in the past 5 years and past 10 years, how many have been women? Some of you will see that even in highly regarded firms that pay lip service to being women-friendly, pro-diversity, etc., the answer is ZERO.
What clear-thinking man would sign up for this panel if he knew it’s subject was discussing the strengths and weaknesses of women?
One of the 3 members of the Davis Polk management committee? What percentage of your partners are women, Davis Polk?
A Mayer Brown partner?
They must not have know what they were doing when they agreed to be on the panel.
ATL: Reach out to them and ask!!!
20:
Learn to take a joke. Until then, bend over so we can play a game of just the tip like I used to do back in high school.
Unbelievable…have any of you ever heard of due diligence? Apparently not, b/c most of you who are making comments are making assumptions and criticizing without any facts or information at your disposal. WOMEN are putting this program together for WOMEN and WOMEN’S advancement in the legal world. Further, if you dig a little deeper, most of these women are of a culturally diverse background (Guess the race parallel goes out the window…huh). So what…men will be speaking about women in the legal world? Last time I checked, the legal world was mostly comprised of men. Given this, shouldn’t we afford them the opportunity to speak regardless if we like what they say or not. Of course it is always easier to have a whole panel of women, or at least one woman, on a panel of men, to “level things out” when talking about women’s issues. But really, what does this accomplish? For real, I think we can all agree that we have been there and done that. Unless we as women are willing to have an open and bold dialogue about gender in the legal field and unless we are willing to allow the opposite gender to express themselves freely with no restraints, we will never be able to truly touch upon “ALL” of the issues that affect women and their struggle. Of course no one is asking you to agree, condone, or even follow the advice of the men on the panel. Yet can’t we at least listen??? The women I know are strong enough to handle some criticism and are willing to expand their mind some and hear opposing views. For god sakes, even if there is one piece of information to take home; one comment or topic discussed that is useful and helpful to women in the legal profession, isn’t it worth it? To me it is!! I would much rather be challenged by the opposite gender and have them express their views. Why you ask? Because obviously they bring a different perspective and insight to the table that is much, much different they we can ever imagine and hope to imagine when only hearing ourselves speak. Maybe we won’t like what the opposite sex has to say, maybe we will, but can’t we at least step out of our “safe zone” for one moment and listen? Based on what I reading the answer is no and it is a shame. Until women are willing to open up and take a chance, we will only continue to perpetuate our own stereotypes and halt the progress of women in the professional world.
NYSBA member 7 years. When I read this, I really thought it was an ATL joke.
NYSBA, how about just a diverse panel of speakers addressing a topic like “ENHANCING COMMUNICATION SKILLS”? If the panel is sufficiently diverse, you will cover all sorts of worthwhile points, including gender differences. But even that is limited; what about gays and lesbians — are there specific communication strengths and weaknesses that purportedly are due to sex/gender? See how silly this is getting? Because it’s all too specific and it all leads to stereotyping. This is a huge no-win. NYSBA, run away FAST!
A general gripe: Too many woman-aimed topics in the name of biglaw diversity really are aimed at MOTHERS and the hassle of the existence of their CHILDREN. That’s not so subtle or nice. On the other hand, how about all of us female non-parents and never-will-be-parents who have to sit through 55 minutes of mommy-track chatter before we hear 5 minutes of something relevant to our life? Work-life balance isn’t just for moms.
129 – FUN GAME! Here are my answers:
A strength of WOMEN is big boobs.
A weakness of WOMEN is little boobs.
…
A strength of WOMEN is ability to cook and clean.
A weakness of WOMEN is ability to nag.
I like games i am good at.
Davis Polk: From your website, looks like 34 of 165 partners, or roughly 20%, are women. Now, what was that you were saying about the strengths and weaknesses of women, Mr. Dunne???
132: Sure, we women can handle the truth; but the men on that panel are never going to tell you the truth of what they really think. Total career-ender! Their comments will haunt them forever, no matter how carefully they try to spin them. The best they can do is, what, a powerpoint of successful women attorneys they admire and what they think makes them so great?
Better bet is to have a group of male friends from law school or colleagues from your last firm who *might* tell you if you are close enough. Or read what’s written on an anonymous board, like ATL commenters whose comments are very telling about the discrimination and sexism that lingers on. Sigh.
90:
Mr. Carter is the former long term U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. He put a lot of bad guys away, including some serious Mafia types. I expect he’d be surprised to hear that he’s just been sucking up to Mighty Whitey all this time.
But I’m not concerned that the facts will get in the way of your peabrained racism. They haven’t so far.
What a tool.
I’m an old broad by anyone’s standards and loving this string for oh so many reasons.
David, I hope you preserve this string for many years for the benefit of new law school grads (in any decade) who think they’re living in a post-feminist era.
BTW, # 121 has posted the most sensible response of all. Well done.
And, David, I also hope you are recovering nicely from your recent surgery.
Fondly, …. O.B.
132- are you kidding me? Men telling women how to act is an outrage. Maybe a panel that had both genders- women and men who have made it to the top in the legal workd discussing the barriers that are still prohibiting women from equity in this profession.
I literally want to thow up all over this panel.
And if women were involved with this sexist, demeaning panel then I want to throw up all over them as well.
Do you want me to tell you how I really feel?
132- are you kidding me? Men telling women how to act is an outrage. Maybe a panel that had both genders- women and men who have made it to the top in the legal workd discussing the barriers that are still prohibiting women from equity in this profession.
I literally want to thow up all over this panel.
And if women were involved with this sexist, demeaning panel then I want to throw up all over them as well.
Do you want me to tell you how I really feel?
122:
Yes, and we men have given women all the advice they need because we paid income taxes.
–Rush
139 – Thanks for proving my point…this just shows another woman being emotional and reactionary rather than rational.
Thank you, 138!
–121
The NYSBA has REVISED the panel title and description. Look at the UPDATE that Lat just added.
121–
You are generalizing your example, a sample of 1, to all women. I guess you did not take (or pass) statistics.
You are saying an opposite panel (presumably, by men for men, but the true opposite would be by women for men) isn’t necessary because male deficiencies are “understood.” On the panel of men for women, who is supposed to have an increased understanding after the session—the men or the women? What are the deficiencies you think that need to be better understood by those men/women? If the men are the ones who need the better understanding, why are they the panelists?
145–
I understand statistics, my father is a statistician and we talked statistics around the dinner table. (He would giggle at your 101 analysis of the problems in my example!)
I stand by my statements because they are not about what is statistically accurate but about real life. An opposite panel may be helpful but no, I do not think it is as necessary. (And only reason there is a call for one on this board is because of the panel for females.)
I work at an excellent law firm. But then again, I’m not surprised that you don’t grasp the validity in my statement, you obviously have not graduated from law school!
–121
121&146:
My “101″ analysis is hardly rebutted by your father’s giggles. You continue to generalize the “real life” sample of 1 (N=1) to all women (P=approx. 3000000000) (and indeed, in one fell swoop, all minorities, too!). While the N insufficiency is a “101″ problem, it leads to “validity threats” that continue to be explained through 6000 and above (Ph.D. level) courses. When your father stops giggling, ask him about that (did he take any of those courses? because most people who did are not “statisticians”).
You also did not clarify your unclear remarks about who is to benefit from the panel or what information is supposedly going to be of benefit.
–145
I would like to see a panel of jewish lawyers give a presentation to white people like me on the subject of how to be a good lawyer and make lots of money. Seriously, I want to know the secrets of the elders. The partners at Fried Frank wouldn’t tell us, they would just sit in their offices like the Emperor on Star Wars and mumble their instructions. You couldn’t even see through Fraiden’s coke-bottle glasses and he wouldn’t look you in the eye. Why would any client work with someone like that? I want to know why are they super-rich and I’m looking for day old bagels at the back of the bakery? Enquiring minds want to know.
64 is right. As a woman working in a man’s world, I have two options (or so I believe from my experiences):
1. Try and “be a man” in a man’s world. The women who do this are the abrasive coworkers you hope your daughter does not grow up to emulate. Also, this option means not wearing cute outfits (and not doing hair and makeup in the morning). She may be partner, but is it worth it?
2. Retain your femininity. You may or may not rise to the top (i.e. partner status) while doing this. But you will get to be a woman (just be happy with who God made you, for crying out loud) and enjoy it. I have found that more men respect me for being a lady and being feminine and at the end of the day, I’ll take that.
146 – my father was a gynecologist so I understand pussy. Perhaps I should be on this panel?
I don’t know how many people who are posting have actually attended any of this Committee’s past programs, I’ve attended many. I can say, based on my EXPERIENCE (and not some random irrational rambling) that ALL of their prior programs have always had ONLY women panels. I am actually happy that they thought to change it up a bit by having a male panel. I think a new perspective is refreshing. Afterall, who knows what they’ll say. And why the heck are we all scared of what they MAY say – from what I can tell this program hasn’t even happened yet so how does anyone really know what’s going to be said.
Besides, why are so many people attacking the WOMEN who put this program together? Has anyone even reached out to talk to them to hear their side and what their intentions were?
I actually know some of the committee people, and I was told that no one spoke to them. That they were just forwarded some random emails by people condemning the program and asking people to boycott as versus just contacting the committee people and asking about the program and getting more information.
Wow. Can you imagine people jumping to conclusions and reaching irrational decisions without getting the whole story? That never happens!!! Right?? It’s like going to court not having prepared, read anything or spoken to any of yours or your adversary’s witnesses and just advocating that your position is the right one. Afterall, we’re only lawyers. Why should we be interested in doing due diligence. (for those of you who are slow, I’m being sarcastic).
I am a black woman and I take exception to the fact that somehow race and gender are interchangeable. They are not. Women’s history and race history in this country are not identical and I am getting sick and tired of people saying that we can somehow interchange “women” with “black” or “hispanic” or “asian.” It’s NOT interchangeable people! I can imagine that it’s probably the white people who think that race and gender are interchangeable, how telling.
If women were objectively good enough then there’d be no discrimination in the long run. “In the long run” is one problem–no one knows when it is. “Good enough” is another–like PE implies at the top, the quality of work may be the same, but either that or the consistency thereof is necessarily going to drop when that biological clock starts ticking. Which won’t happen for EVERY woman, but even if it happens to SOME, it’s still going to affect the decision to make any particular woman a partner.
154 again–
BTW this problem would be reduced if the ABA stopped accrediting too many law schools. I’m serious. Less schools–> less attorneys–> more work to go around–> more bargaining power for all attorneys in setting a work/life balance.
145 & 147
My father is a PhD and teaches these upper level statistics courses. My problem with your point is that in my opinion it’s beside the point. The women benefit from gaining a potentially new perspective on how they are perceived by the men who run the firms where they work. Sure these men do not represent EVERY man at EVERY firm–nor do my experiences represent EVERY woman … although I believe that my top 10 law school is extremely similar to its peer schools, and their female populations–but it is beneficial to gain new perspective when your ultimate goal is furthering your career, navigating an unfamiliar corporate structure, and combating perceived barriers.
My point with your 101 problem is that you are creating a statistical “problem” in response to something that just isn’t scientific (it’s like medical school syndrome–you know a bit about statistics and then start to find “problems” everywhere). Yes, I only spoke from my experience, I did so admittedly on a blog where everyone is speaking from their experiences … so. what!
And you didn’t answer my question about whether you have completed law school. I’m guessing my generalized hypothesis was correct. Lawyers in the field often analogize to peoples’ life experiences. Your inability to grasp that this is what I was doing is disturbing and again highlights my point that law students often have a difficult time living in the real world (as opposed to a theoretical or numeric universe)! Best of luck to you in the future.
Earamichia, Earamichia.
Earamichia?
Earamichia!
OK, I just like the sound of it.
Wow. All of this over a group of women stepping outside the typical panel style and having men give their perspective after the women present theirs first.
Does anyone know if the proposed moderator is a women? If so then its not just men because if its a woman she will be moderating/directing the panelists. If a man oh well I still don’t see why you can’t hear from both sides.
Second. If the state bar has changed the panel, what about those folks that signed up for the original panel?
Third. Did this professor reach out to the chairs and committee people before she began this tirade of did she act in what is seen as stereotypical female reaction – screaming bloody hell without getting the facts.
Lastly. Why do the people who have a problem with this, feel they are justified in attacking a group of their own, WOMEN who seem to be working for the common good of their agenda. Last I checked these are not paying positions and programs don’t happen over night. and from the looks of these blogs and the emails I have seen. Noone has talked to the women that worked to create this CLE.
Wow. All of this over a group of women stepping outside the typical panel style and having men give their perspective after the women present theirs first.
Does anyone know if the proposed moderator is a women? If so then its not just men because if its a woman she will be moderating/directing the panelists. If a man oh well I still don’t see why you can’t hear from both sides.
Second. If the state bar has changed the panel, what about those folks that signed up for the original panel?
Third. Did this professor reach out to the chairs and committee people before she began this tirade of did she act in what is seen as stereotypical female reaction – screaming bloody hell without getting the facts.
Lastly. Why do the people who have a problem with this, feel they are justified in attacking a group of their own, WOMEN who seem to be working for the common good of their agenda. Last I checked these are not paying positions and programs don’t happen over night. and from the looks of these blogs and the emails I have seen. Noone has talked to the women that worked to create this CLE.
The feminist issues aside, I love how 25 minutes will be devoted to teaching skills like legal analysis, brief writing, client counseling and negotiation.
To think, it cost me a small fortune and 3 years of law school for the kind of education that the girls will distill into 25 minutes…
You are all idiots.
I am so glad I don’t know any of you
I believe diversity is an old, old wooden ship, used during the civil war era.
As Samuel Johnson famously said, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Don’t know whether he was an attorney or not….I honestly believe these fellows thought they were being helpful and “pro-woman.” But it is a good barometer of the gap that still exists in communication between the sexes that so many guys who have posted here can’t understand why this was offensive. How would YOU like to be lectured by a gaggle of female attorneys about how you’re not sensitive and emotional enough and think too much about money and status?
164 – Not sure if you’re aware, but most males have to go through that pretty much constantly from about the age of fifteen on, getting lectured by females on the proper way to act and behave around females and how to make them more comfortable and adjust ourselves to their needs.
Awesome. Now BigLaw will go on a huge “diversity” kick, and kick my post-graduation plans in the balls. White, male, and straight….damn!
@ 89: First of all, kudos to you for phrasing your comment in a respectful manner. I think that yes, the idea of approaching this lack of advancement by women is not in itself a negative idea. The problem is that instead of a panel on why negative stereotypes exist and how everyone can work together to subvert them, we’re getting a panel that seems to be saying it’s women’s fault that a lot of people in the legal field are misogynistic. I realize that’s not true of everyone, but the vast number of trolls and generally angry people on this list attests to the existence of this hatred toward women. (Note to true misogynists, if you really wanted to win your argument, you’d stop trolling this kinda stuff. Seriously, you’re making people aware of sexism and woman hating who may have had no idea before you did it) . This metaphor is probably going to end up causing a lot of unpleasant trolling, but a similar discussion revolves around the question of rape, and how women are frequently blamed for being raped. Yes, we should address the prevalence of rape in our culture, no we should not do so by saying that it’s women’s fault for existing and having female genitals. Anyway, hope that helps, and I really liked the way you phrased your comment.
I have to agree that this “panel discussion” sounds like a joke. If it’s not, well then I guess we still have a long way to go. i certainly wouldn’t attend. Adele Bernhard