As a 25-year-old female litigator, if I'm not being parented, I'm being hit on. If I'm not being hit on, I'm being competed with. If I'm not being competed with, I'm being dismissed entirely.
A few weeks ago, I'm waiting in line to check in with the court clerk. At 9:30 I've got to be in three different places, on three different floors (all with three different elevator banks, mind you) and it's 9:15. I'm checking in with the second clerk of the morning, and hoping she's a little nicer than the first.
And then I see him. It's Chi-CAH-go's very own Joe Pesci look alike. Only this isn't Goodfellas, and I'm not entertained. He's almost 5'5” and his hair is slicked back (what's left of it) and coated in a thick layer of Aqua Net circa 1985. He's flaunting a bright purple pocket square and has the swagger of a gangster. He's also twirling in his hand – wait for it – an unlit cigar, roughly the size of the Baja California Peninsula. He's having a real heart-to-heart with the woman in line in front of me (who appears to also be in her mid to late 20s). He's explaining how he filed nearly 100 evictions last year and “he's still livin' off of 'em.” Perhaps that explains the unlit cigar.
It's 9:25, and I'm no closer to the front of the line. My eyes intuitively roll deep into the back of my head. Pesci's buddy approaches us and asks if he needs a light. They laugh as if a funny joke has been made, and our new friend in line says, “Here you are, as usual. Always talkin' to the pretty girls.”
I do not speak. I do not smile. I concentrate on the clerk's bright orange lipstick and think about this column.
Was that insensitive and sexist? If I had made some sort of retort, would I come across as a bitter feminist? If I had said anything at all, would it have changed the course of the conversation the next time, with the next group of “pretty girls?”
Today, female litigators are not asked to run and get Starbucks for opposing counsel. They are not asked to type. But they are still reminded, every so often, by a snide glance, an inappropriate stare, or the occasional off-color remark, that they are women living in a man’s world and working in a male-dominated profession.
On its face, it is not okay for a 50-year-old male attorney to tell a 25-year-old female attorney, that she is a “pretty girl.” But maybe we've got bigger fish to fry.
“I look back now and it's almost humorous,” says E. Lynn Grayson, equity partner and environmental law practitioner at Chicago’s Jenner & Block. “I can recall a number of situations and encounters that I've had that just wouldn't occur today.” She's been asked to get coffee, to type things when a court reporter is running late – but not anymore. Grayson thinks that while there are still challenges to being a female litigator, women are increasingly accepted by other litigators, clients, and judges. “There was a time when someone questioned whether I was old enough to be an attorney, much less be in charge of a case.” But those things rarely happen anymore. “People have become much more politically correct.”
Grayson also credits other female litigators who have stuck together and supported each other for this change in the way women in litigation are treated and perceived. “I think it's really important that those of us who are successful in our field reach out and do as much as we can to lay the ground work for other women.”
Being in a position to make a difference is one reason why Grayson co-founded the Chicago Bar Association's Alliance for Women. In 2004, the Alliance issued a “Call to Action” intended to foster female leadership in the Chicago legal community. With 50 signatories, including the most prestigious names in Chicago law firms, the Call to Action accomplished its goal. In just three years, all five of the Alliance's goals had been met: increase women partners by three precent, place women on law firm committees, increase the number of female practice group leaders, ensure flexible hours policies, and improve any disparities in rates in which women and men are hired, recruited, and promoted.
But according to the National Association for Legal Career Professionals (NALP), less than 20 percent of partners at law firms in the United States are women. Even if Chicago has made some progress in the last few years, the overall numbers of women in roles of law firm leadership are disturbingly disproportionate to the number of women working as lawyers.
It remains painfully obvious that female litigators, much more than male litigators, are forced daily to be conscious of their gender. Pantsuit or skirtsuit? Flats or heels? Lipstick or chapstick? Long hair or short? Thinking about how you want a jury to perceive you is – unfortunately or not – part of the trial strategy. It's also part of the professional strategy.
One one hand, we don't want to be perceived solely as women or girls, but on the other hand, it's inevitable that our gender will play some role in how we are seen. But are we better off ignoring the occasional sexist faux paus (intentional or otherwise) if it will give us more credibility when it really matters – like when we're eventually up for partner? Or standing before a judge?
I don't know.
But I do think there's something to be said for learning where to draw the line – and knowing when to draw it.
As litigators, we hardly have enough time to get everything done as it is. By choosing our battles, we can make more progress with the things that really count, like equal pay, fair work/life policies, and a representative number of female litigators in leadership roles within firms.
And maybe, just maybe, I was right to keep my mouth shut this once. Doing more to advance the cause of women in the legal profession rather than wasting lipservice on someone who’s a lost cause seems much more worthwhile and rewarding.