I often read ABA Journal as a great source of legal stories. The journal however has been the center of controversy this month after reporting on the results of a study on the preference of secretaries vis-a-vis male and female partners. The study by Professor Felice Batlan interviewed 142 secretaries at larger law firms and produced a surprising result: not a single secretary preferred female partners. When the ABA Journal reported that surprising fact, professors accused it of fostering gender stereotypes, misrepresenting the results of the study, and displaying a sexist view of the work. Some demanded a retraction and apology from the ABA Journal.
The original story by the ABA Journal put the results of the survey in the second full graph as follows:
Asked whether they preferred to work for male or female partners or associates, 35 percent preferred working for male partners, 15 percent preferred working for male associates, 3 percent preferred working for female associates, none preferred working for female partners, and 47 percent had no opinion.
It also gave Williams and others extensive coverage in explaining the results. Many female secretaries are quoted in the study as explaining their preference for male partners — objecting to how they are treated by some female partners.
The Journal included a full presentation of the views of Williams and others that the survey reflected not a gender difference how partners related to staff but the sexist attitudes of the secretaries. I have read the articles and the underlying research conclusions and I fail to see the basis for the criticism of the ABA Journal. This is a journalistic enterprise and ran a headline isolating the most notable conclusion of the survey. It is very interesting to have a survey where not a single secretary would express a preference for a female partner. Reporter Debra Cassens Weiss then gave the view of feminist scholars that this was the result not of the difference of the partners in their approaches but the distorted view of the secretaries. That is an interesting story presented in a fair way. The Journal then gave a huge follow up story below repeating and expanding on the view of these scholars.
The survey sought to explore gender difference in the workforce between partners and secretaries. If the results came out that most preferred women partners, would the same scholars have argued that that view was due to the gender bias of the secretaries or would it have been explained in a different approach of female partners? Instead, some of the critics refuse to consider if there is a difference in approach among partners and instead insist that it is gender indoctrination of the se secretaries.
I have little expertise in such gender studies and I would expect some results to be shaped by sexist views given the overall problem of sexism in society. However, I do have some experience in legal journalism. In my view, to attack the ABA Journal and demand retraction of the story is unfounded. Debra Cassens Weiss ran with the most striking aspect of the story and then gave the response to that fact — and the other findings are included at the top of the story. The reaction to her piece undermines the credibility of the use and ultimate purpose of the survey.
What do you think?
Source: ABA Journal
Tony C.,
“In my experience male managers have a higher bar to clear when it comes to women in their employ, and although I think most women are honorable, some of them cannot resist the allure of a year two in pay for free, especially if they were thinking of quitting anyway, know they can get a contingency lawyer, and can get a settlement that includes a non-disclosure agreement for both parties, so it doesn’t harm their future employment prospects.
“So I think the legal stars are all aligned, and lawyers would know that better than anyone, such that it is prudent for male lawyer/owners to be scrupulously professional in their dealings with female employees. I’m not saying they all are, but statistically perhaps there is less for female employees to complain about with male bosses versus female bosses.”
**********
I’m sure there are women who may not be able to resist the allure of a year or two of free pay–just as there are male bosses/superiors in the workplace who sexually harass women–most likely women who they think wouldn’t bring charges against them for fear of losing their jobs/women who can’t afford to go a week without a paycheck.
Good point Elaine…..
Thanks, Victoria, for your comments.
Tony C
“(all but two of them male, but the identical demand was made from my female managers)” … prudent advice.
@Elaine: I am just speaking from experience, and my own. I managed a division of a public company (as a consultant), and I managed a small company where two managers answered to me. My demand for managers (all but two of them male, but the identical demand was made from my female managers): After the handshake when you meet somebody, the only reason to ever touch an employee anywhere is in the case of a medical emergency. No hugs, or pats on the shoulder, or even crowding against them in an elevator: All of those have been the basis of lawsuits that have cost employers about a year’s worth of an employee’s salary.
The same goes for sexual innuendo, jokes, or even complimenting people on their clothing, or weight loss or the shape they are in. Same deal, these can be actionable, whether that is fair or not!
The legal criteria for what constitutes sexual harassment is insanely vague, it basically says that if a woman claims she was uncomfortable with an action then it may be sexual harassment and is grounds for proceeding. (I am not a lawyer, however).
I read a story of a woman that sued for sexual harassment because she overheard a conversation in a lunch room, between two men discussing a game, during which one man called a pro football player a “pussy” and she felt that contributed to a hostile work place for woman.
I read a story about a bakery owner that walked away from two women employees that were laughing about a decoration on a cake that one of them had made sexually explicit (giving a cartoon character an erect penis). The bakery owner was successfully sued by one of the women, who admitted she was laughing at the time, but upon reflection decided she should sue him for creating a hostile workplace. Apparently he was supposed to shut them down and reprimand them.
In my experience male managers have a higher bar to clear when it comes to women in their employ, and although I think most women are honorable, some of them cannot resist the allure of a year two in pay for free, especially if they were thinking of quitting anyway, know they can get a contingency lawyer, and can get a settlement that includes a non-disclosure agreement for both parties, so it doesn’t harm their future employment prospects.
So I think the legal stars are all aligned, and lawyers would know that better than anyone, such that it is prudent for male lawyer/owners to be scrupulously professional in their dealings with female employees. I’m not saying they all are, but statistically perhaps there is less for female employees to complain about with male bosses versus female bosses.
Blouise,
Do you remember the following video? I’ve posted it before a couple of times.
Elaine,
The only thing missing from the Pepsi commercial … white gloves!
Here’s one that has everything … including white gloves and … notice where the women aren’t!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/shenegotiates/2011/11/02/women-lawyers-demand-apology-for-sexist-coverage-by-the-aba-journal/
I know several male legal secretaries. What was the sexual distribution of the secretary/assistant pool? Knowing that would make a difference in the interpretation of the results, for me. I agree that the Journal should not retract. They’ve done nothing illegal or even wrong!
Sexism in American Media:
anon,
Ha … men do the real Overture
Blouise,
Shades of the past:
This thread seems to be becoming filled with brazen overtures.
Elaine,
Fake tears don’t fall … they well-up … and teenage girls use them on male teachers all the time
My suspicion is that if a woman has responded that she prefers a male boss over a female boss … manipulation might be in the mix
Elaine,
Sorry, I missed your second post ’cause I was typing
Nope … the manipulators aren’t typical of the majority of professional women now … manipulation was more necessary when equality was lacking. And, it is heartening to see that the highest number, 47%, of the respondents had no preference. That’s what we’re aiming for
Blouise,
I realized that I had misread your comment and left a follow-up comment for you.
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/11/07/aba-journal-under-fire-for-coverage-of-survey-of-legal-secretaries/#comment-286624
I guess I didn’t witness “fake” tears falling from the eyes of the women with whom I worked. I served as a teacher association rep from my building for several years.
I hope you’re not suggesting that the women you wrote about in your comment are typical of the majority of women. There are manipulators of both sexes. They just have different ways of manipulating people.
There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. . . Mark Twain
victoria:
“`The “truth” is often misleading when torn away from the context in which people behave.”
*********************
I guess the question is: “Do you believe it fair criticism to condemn a periodical for publishing an article about a survey whose results. methodology, and context you don’t like?”
I think you’ve avoided that open market place of ideas issue that Professor Turley was raising.
Elaine,
“I’d ask why you think it’s easier for women to manipulate men than it is for men to manipulate women.” (Elaine)
That wasn’t what I said. I said “it is far easier for a woman to manipulate a man than it is to manipulate another woman.” (meaning it is far easier for a woman to manipulate a man than [for a woman] to manipulate another woman). I followed that assertion with “I would have added a question to the survey geared to exposing that view.” And all of that was bounced off of Tony’s suggestion concerning sexual harassment.
I don’t think it is easier for a woman to manipulate a man than it is for a man to manipulate a woman.
I will give you one example and remember all the time I spent representing both sexes in the work place as a Union rep. Menstrual periods as an excuse for time off or absence from one’s desk, or failure to meet a deadline … etc. Those women into manipulation find this excuse very easy to use with a man in that just suggesting it is all the man needs to hear and wants to hear no more. Not so with another woman.
How about fake tears? Not the real crying that makes one’s face all blotchy but the ones that just water the eyes accomplished by holding one’s eyes wide open until they water. I’ve yanked many a woman out of a bargaining session because she’s starting the fake tears ploy … “We will win this grievance with honest effort so can the tears!” Instant drying up. Never had to do that with a man. With men it’s usually … “Settle down and watch the language.” and it takes him awhile to do so ’cause he’s genuinely madder than hell.
rafflaw,
I don’t have a problem with the ABA publishing a story about the survey. I think, however, there are times when we only get a part of a story. I admit that it bothers me when newspapers and the media report about research studies/surveys/polls but provide little information about how the they were conducted and/or what kinds of questions were asked.