Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Why so few female partners at top firms?  (Read 3942 times)

tacojohn

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 989
  • "I voted. P. Diddy told us to vote"
    • ICQ Messenger - 176834534
    • MSN Messenger - tacojohniu@msn.com
    • AOL Instant Messenger - TacoJohnIU
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - tacojohniu@yahoo.com
    • View Profile
    • Fearfully Optimistic
    • Email
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #10 on: May 30, 2005, 04:10:45 PM »
While a big part is having a kid, I think there is something a little deeper.  The law doesn't lend itself to innovative solutions and risk-taking.  You can't dream up a novel legal theory because it will, more than likely, have to be backed up with precedent.  Law schools have taught virtually the same subjects in the same way for hundreds of years.  Thus innovative solutions to the problems of women having children, like telecommuting for instance, aren't really respected by law firms.  Some people have said there's a little bit of an old boy's club.  I beg to differ.  It's the biggest, strongest, and most firmly entrenched old boy's club in existance.

trust

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #11 on: May 30, 2005, 04:13:55 PM »
OP:  the reason why there are fewer women partners at top firms is because they are smarter than their male counter-parts.  after getting excellent experience as a slave for two or three years at cravath, the women know they have experience they can take with them anywhere.  they lateral to a position where they have an opportunity to actually have a life while still making a respectable salary.

making partner at biglaw is not the end all of a legal career.

hey not you hey

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
  • Hey. Not you. Hey.
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #12 on: May 30, 2005, 05:04:30 PM »
OP:  the reason why there are fewer women partners at top firms is because they are smarter than their male counter-parts.

c'mon now.

Dolcejn

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1129
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #13 on: May 30, 2005, 06:58:11 PM »
lol - trust, that's a bit harsh.  I think that perhaps men find that atmosphere more stimulating than women?  It might satisfy that urge for machismo?  Lol - I don't know what I'm talking about, just making fun. :)

Melinda, really interesting post - same for Lgirl.  I'm working with the same dilemma - I can't imagine wanting to work those hours for more than 2-3 years, just for the experience.  But a lifetime? Doubtful.
HLS

gatechgrad2004

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #14 on: May 30, 2005, 11:43:42 PM »
Hey Dolcejn,

Don't worry, I didnt think you were implying that being a mother was a bad thing or that you believe that all men conscientiously construct a "glass wall" that prohibits all women from progressing in their respective fields.  I just realize that this topic tends to breed such divisive and misleading ideas which is counterproductive. 

I do LOVE healthy debate, though, and i was just getting ready for some inevitable subjective, emotional responses. 

To reiterate, being a mother (or a parent for that matter) is an awesome responsibilty, the most important profession, and for those of us that are able to successfully make a balance with work, I applaud you!

gatechgrad2004

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #15 on: May 30, 2005, 11:48:44 PM »
Oh, for clarification, what did you mean by "mandatory paternity leave"?  Do you mean optional (versus mandatory)?

Dolcejn

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1129
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #16 on: May 31, 2005, 05:26:02 AM »
Phew! Glad you knew what I meant, gatech - the internet is really conducive to misunderstandings :) Well, by mandatory, I have something in mind whereby men are away from the workplace an equal amount of time as women (say, four weeks minimum, paid leave, obviously--I know women are sometimes away for 12, but that would be a bit harsh to impose on men who are having children).  Although then that would give unmarried men an advantage...it's not a perfect solution by any means, and one I doubt will be put into effect.  Still, it might be good for children and society, even, if men were expected to take time off in the same way that women are literally (I mean biologically) forced to take time off.

I'm just making stuff up - I'm actually fairly conservative, so this stuff is very unfamiliar territory to me! Although I grew up being told I could be anything I wanted to be, I also was always completely fine with the fact that women are the ones who have babies.  If anything, I felt (and feel) it is a privilege (although I might feel less like that one day when I'm nine months pregnant and my feet are tired!).  Now that I'm trying to map out my career, I'm having to take that fact into account, and not necessarily in a positive way (that is, the ability to carry children might be positive for life, but negative for the career). 
HLS

Ms.Crawford

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #17 on: May 31, 2005, 06:33:59 AM »
Women can't be top partners for the same reasons blacks can't. Even those that make it have to f.u.c.k their way up, i.e., be available sexually to many male superiors during the years.

Lgirl

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #18 on: May 31, 2005, 08:51:07 AM »
I think that statement is ridiculuos.

Highway

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few female partners at top firms?
« Reply #19 on: May 31, 2005, 08:55:40 AM »
Lgirl: Please don't feed the trolls.