Gender Trials

Gender's role in the work place has become a highly discussed topic from the twentieth century and well into our modern era. In an interesting study performed by Jennifer L. Pierce, the author of Gender Trials, she dissects the gendered organizational structure of large law firms. She began her study by dedicating time to two different law firms, both where she worked as a paralegal and completed numerous surveys while collecting data and research. She introduces her concern for these sex-segregated law firms and how these organizations have become so institutionalized. She actually describes the structure of gendered roles in the workplace as a process of reproduction. Pierce then gives the reader a historical overview of the development of sex-segregated law firms from the turn of the twentieth century to the present day. While explaining the development of the sex-segregated workplace, Pierce describes the role that each gender plays in the system. She points the reader to a very important question immediately in her book. With all the attention that gender equality has been receiving why is it that these organizations have not changed? She answers this question through various reasoning. In the conclusion of Gender Trials, the reader is able to see why these stereotypical gendered roles in law firms have been and are difficult to change.

As a paralegal herself she spent time within the constraints of the legal and litigation world, she found it fascinating how differentiated the roles in law firms are. Litigators whom are usually men "muscle" the profession, while their assistants the paralegals and secretaries, which normally are women assist them with emotional support. Women paralegals are seen as "caretakers" their job usually consists of being pleasant, which usually consists of being cheerful and always presenting a smile. They also specialize in reassurance, alleviating the anxiety of the attorney for whom one works (Pierce, p.99). She explained how she interpreted the relationship between male litigators and female paralegals as "dependent". Male litigators depend on the emotional support of them by their assistants and paralegals. "These legal workers function to support and maintain the emotional stability of the lawyers they work for, through deferential treatment and caretaking"(Pierce, p.85). This deferential support is seen as a marriage like relationship. "Much like the traditional wife and mother who defers to the wishes of her husband and children and attends to their psychological needs, the paralegals and the legal secretaries in the firms I studied were expected to show deference for the attorneys for whom they work and to take care of their emotional needs"(Pierce, p. 86). However the problem of this dependent relationship is that it only goes one way. Litigators do not share the same support for their assistants as they receive. Male litigators feel that their job is the more important of the two and therefore show very little support for their co-workers.

The role of the Litigator in the modern world is a job that requires a very assertive, strategic, and powerful role, all of which point to men who make up 88 percent of the field. While the role of the paralegal is more for a nurturing character, someone that is pleasant, emotionally hospitable, and kind, which is why women usually hold this job and make up 85 percent of all paralegals. "Paralegal work is feminized not simply because women do it but because taking care of others is construed as something that women are well suited to do" (Pierce, p.24). Women have been caught in a rut and it is very difficult for them to prosper or advance in the field of litigation. Pierce points the reader to prior research done in the field regarding women's advancement in the field as almost impossible. "Research suggests, once jobs have been gendered as masculine, they are very difficult for women workers to break into" (Pierce, p.29). Which brought her to her next point that "men gain better benefits from the gendered division of labor than women do"(Pierce, p. 29). This sex-segregation in the workplace stands to be a big problem, women are entitled to the same career choices as men, although it's difficult for them to "break the mold".

Pierce describes numerous reasons as why it is so challenging for women to advance their roles from paralegals to litigators. "Though legal assistants rarely move up to attorney positions within firms, men were more likely than women to receive encouragement from lawyers to go to school or to professional school" (Pierce, p. 35). This is a discouraging quote that I found within the readings, how can it be that the top tier of the litigation world is still so sexually segregated? Men feel that they make better litigators due to their "zealous advocacy" and their ability to manipulate people's emotions. Lawyering is composed of gamesmanship, including intimidation and strategic friendliness. "The underlying purpose of gamesmanship itself, that is, the control and domination of others through manipulation, reflects a particular cultural conception of masculinity.

Since men make up the top percentage of attorneys, it is in their power to hire whomever they please,