Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T21:09:18.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Working out women in law schools

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Celia Wells
Celia Wells*
Affiliation:
Cardiff Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although well over half of law undergraduates are women, in nearly all law schools they are likely to encounter more male lecturers than women. Few of them will meet a woman law professor and even fewer will see a female head of department. Compared with their male counterparts fewer women students and academic staff will go on to the top of their profession. There is clear evidence that women of all ranks in universities are paid less than their male counterparts. The university sector as a whole is only slowly coming to recognise that some proactive policies might he needed before equal opportunities for women and other groups traditionally excluded from the portals are assured. This paper explores some of the explanations for the position of women in UK law schools.

Type
Research Article
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , March 2001 , pp. 116 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. The Second Sex (1949) (London: Vintage, 1997) p 29.5 (translated and edited by H M Parshley).

2. Why Feminism? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999) p 72.

3. Feminism mid Linguistic Theory (London: Macmillan, 1985).

4. C McGlynn ‘Women, Representation and the Legal Academy’ (1999) 19 LS 68. Of course, the numbers have increased since then, as have the numbers of male professors. There are no centrally collected statistics on law schools. Law forms only part of a cost centre, the categorisation used by the Higher Education Statistics Agency.

5. K Hull and R Nelson ‘Gender Inequality in Law: Problems in Structure and Agency in Recent Studies of Gender in Anglo-American Legal Professions’ (1998) Law and Social Inquiry 681.

6. For higher education generally, see: Becher, T Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1989)Google Scholar: Halsey, A H Decline of Donnish Dominion: The British Academic Professions in the Twentieth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995)Google Scholar; Trow, M Managerialism and the Academic Profession: Quality and Control (London: QSC, 1994)Google Scholar: Heam, J ‘Men, Managers and Management: the Case of Higher Education’ in Whitehead, S and Moodley, R (eds) Transforming Managers: Engendering Change in the Public Sector (London: UCL Press, 1999)Google Scholar; on women see Morley, L and Walsh, V (eds) Breaking Bourzdeiries: Women in Higher Education (London: Taylor and Francis, 1996)Google Scholar: Morley, L Organising Feminisms: The Micropolitics of the Academy (London: MacMillan Press, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar: A Brooks Academic Women (Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University Press, 1997); on senior academics David, M and Woodward, D (eds) Negotiating the Glass Ceiling: Careers of Senior Women in the Academic World (London: Falmer Press, 1998)Google Scholar: on law, R Collier “Nutty Professors”. “Men in Suits” and “New Entrepreneurs”: Corporeality, Subjectivity and Change in the Law School and Legal Practice' (1998) 7 Social and Legal Studies 27: McGlynn, C The Woman Lawyer (London: Butterworths, 1998)Google Scholar: McGlynn, above n 4, and F Cownie ‘Women Legal Academics — A New Research Agenda?’ (1998) 25 J Law and Society 102.

7. Malik, L and Lie, S ‘The Gender Gap in Higher Education: a Conceptual Framework’ in Lie, S, Malik, L and Harris, D The World Yearbook of Education (London: Kogan Page, 1994) p4 Google Scholar.

8. R Sandland ‘Between “Truth” and “Difference”: Poststructuralism, Law and the Power of Feminism’ (1995) Fem LS 3 at 3.

9. R McNabb and V Wass ‘Male-female Salary Differentials in British Universities’ (1997) 49 Oxford Economic Papers 328; Bett Report Independent Review of Higher Education Pay and Conditions (London, 1999).

10. Kirkland, J ‘The Missing Women Library Directors: Deprivation Versus Mentoring’ (1997) 58 Coll Res Libr 376–384 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. And one or two other higher education institutions.

12. C Haight Farley ‘Confronting Expectations: Women in the Legal Academy’ (1996) 8 Yale J Law and Feminism 333 at 334.

13. 4 May 1999.

14. Wajcman, J Managing Like a Man: Women and Men in Corporate Management (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998) p 115.Google Scholar

15. 7 May 1999.

16. McNabb and Wass found that ‘even after controlling for rank, age, tenure and faculty, a gender effect in the remuneration of British academics remains’, above n 9.

17. Hansard Society Report of the Commission on Women at the Top (1990).

18. The genesis of Bett was the (Dearing) National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (London, 1997) which recommended the establishment of an independent review committee to make recommendations on pay and conditions.

19. Tony Parker's work anthologised in K Soothill (ed) Criminal Conversations (London: Routledge, 1999) is a fine example. His methodology is discussed in a chapter by L Smith ‘Only Listen … Some Reflections on Tony Parker's Methodology’ in K Soothill (ed), ibid, p 243.

20. Overall, C Feminist, A I: Reflections from Academia (Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press, 1998)Google Scholar; Heilbrun, C Writing a Woman's Life (London: The Women's Press, 1989)Google Scholar; Griffiths, M Feminisms and the Self (London: Routledge, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The sections in italics are based on my recollections of events in my life and career.

21. Nicola Lacey's account of her own journey from liberal law student to feminist theorist is typically honest and eloquent: Unspeakable Subjects (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1998) Introduction.

22. See Hearn, above n 6.

23. I met the same man 20 years later. He was still patronising —‘You have changed so much — you were such a funny little thing when you started.’ Imagine that I say the same words to one of my younger male colleagues in 20 years — no it can't be imagined.

24. Farley, above n 12 at 336.

25. Brooks, above n 6, ch 1.

26. McGlynn, above n 4 at 69. This is an increase on 1991 when the proportion of posts held by women was 23.3%: Brooks, above n 6 at 30.

27. On men as managers in higher education in UK, see Hearn, above n 6.

28. L Bown ‘Beyond the Degree: Men and Women at the Decision-Making Levels in British Higher Education’ (1999) 11 Gender and Education 5. Her survey was conducted 1996/67.

29. See David and Woodward, above n 6, for some first-hand accounts from senior women.

30. McGlynn, above n 4 at 77.

31. More than one of my pilot interviewees said they decided not to enter the Bar because they perceived it as the elite branch of the profession, by class as well as gender, and ‘not for them’.

32. R Chused ‘The hiring and retention of minorities and women in American law School faculties’ (1988) 1137 U Pennsylvania LR 537; see also Wajcman, above n 14.

33. However, generalisation is again difficult. In some new universities, dean is an appointed managerial position with salaries well above those of professors. In old universities, dean is often an administrative and largely bureaucratic position.

34. Oxford and Cambridge were heavily dominated by men until the 1960s by a factor of 5:1 at Oxford and a staggering 10:1 at Cambridge (Halsey, above n 6 at 66).

35. Halsey, above n 6.

36. I am grateful to Katherine O'Donovan for this insight.

37. McGlynn, above n 4 at 82; Hearn, above n 6 discusses the gender implications of intra- and inter-institutional hierarchies.

38. Brooks, above n 6 at 49.

39. Brooks, above n 6 at 47.

40. Carter, P, Everitt, A and Hudson, A ‘Malestream Training? Women, Feminism and Social Work Education’ in Langan, M and Day, L (eds) Women Oppression and Social Work (London: Routledge, 1992)Google Scholar.

41. Above n 12.

42. Overall above n 20.

43. See also Susan Greenfield, a leading British scientist, who reports that women scientists feel like impostors: The Higher 11 June 1999.

44. Epstein, C and Coser, R (eds) Access to Power: Cross-National Studies of Women and Elites (London: Allen and Unwin, 1981)Google Scholar.

45. Keller, E and Moglen, H ‘Competition and Feminism: Conflicts for Women’ (1987) 12 Signs 493–511 Google ScholarPubMed.

46. Farley, above n 12.

47. Thomton, M ‘Authority and Corporeality: The Conundrum for Women in Law’ (1998) V Fem Leg Studies 147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48. Hagan, J and Kay, F Gender in Practice: A Study of lawyers' Lives (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995) p 33 Google Scholar.

49. Ibid. See also Thornton, above n 47.

50. Morley, above n 6.

51. See Bagilhole, B ‘Being Different is a Very Difficult Row to Hoe: Survival Strategies of Women Academics’ in Davies, S, Lubelska, C and Quinn, J Changing the Subject: Women in Higher Education (London: Taylor and Francis, 1994) p 15 at 22, 23Google Scholar; Delamont, S Knowledgeable Women: Structuralism and the Reproduction of Elites (London: Routledge, 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52. Vasil, L ‘Social Process Skills and Career Achievement among Male and Female Academics’ (1996) 67 J Higher Education 103–114 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53. Collier and Hearn, both above n 6.

54. J Kettle ‘Good Practices, Bad Attitudes: an Examination of the Factors Influencing Women's Academic Careers’ in Morley Walsh, above n 6 at 54. They spoke of top-down management, their universities seeming to be ‘men's clubs’, the invisibility of women at decision-making fora, and exclusion of women from informal networking.

55. Ibid at 63.

56. Wajcman, above n 14 at 7.

57. A Belcher ‘Gendered Company: Views of Corporate Governance at the Institute of Directors’ (1997) V Fern LS 57 at 60, 62.

58. Farley, above n 12 at 340.

59. Belcher, above n 57 at 62.

60. In Shultz, U and Shaw, G (eds) Women in the Legal Profession Onati International Series in Law and Society (Oxford:Hart Publishing, forthcoming)Google Scholar.

61. Wajcman, above n 14 at 2.

62. Heilbrun, above n 20.

63. Wajcman, above n 14 at 30.

64. Hem, above n 6.

65. Ibid.

66. Ogasawara, Y Office Ladies and Salaried Men: Power, Gender, and Work in Japanese Companies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

67. Ogasawara, above n 66, p 156.

68. Greer, G The Whole Woman (London: Transworld, 1999)Google ScholarPubMed. On equal treatment and difference, see C Littleton ‘Reconstructing Sexual Equality’ (1987) 75 California LR 1279 and see generally J Conaghan ‘Reassessing the Feminist’ heoretical Project in Law' (2000) 27 J Law and Society 351.

69. Lacey, above n 21.

70. Wajcman, above n 14 at 26.

71. McIntyre, S ‘Gender Bias within the Law School: The Memo and Its Impact’ in the Chilly Collective (eds) Breaking Anonymity: The Chilly Climate for Women Faculty' (Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier Press, 1995) p 222 Google Scholar.

72. The idea that motherhood and career can be happily combined has been dubbed the ‘cultural cover-up’: Hoschild, A The Second Shift: Working Parents and the Revolution at Home (London: Piatkus, 1989)Google Scholar.

73. Farley, above n 12, quoting a woman law professor (in n 63).

74. Commission on University Career Opportunity A Report on Universities’ Policies and Practices on Equal Opportunities in Employment (London: CUCO, 1994).

75. Commission on University Career Opportunity A report on policies on equal opportunities in employment in universities and colleges in higher education (London: CUCO, 1997).

76. Morley and Walsh, above n 6 at 53.

77. Gherardi, S Gender Symbolism and Organizational Cultures (London: Sage, 1995)Google Scholar; see also Alvesson, M and Billing, Y Understanding Gender and Organizations (London: Sage, 1997)Google Scholar.

78. The Higher 31 March 2000, p 3.

79. Thornton, M Dissonance and Distrust: Women in the Legal Profession (Melbourne: OUP Australia, 1996)Google Scholar.

80. Annas, J ‘Women and the Quality of Life: Two Norms or One?’ in Nussbaum, M and Sen, A (eds) The Quality of Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993) 279 at 282CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

81. A Wylie ‘The Contexts of Activism on “Climate” Issues’ in Chilly Collective (eds), above n 71 at 29.

82. Annas, above n 80 at 286.

83. M Stacey ‘A Flying Start’ in David and Woodward, above n 6. 83 at 99.

84. Davies, Lubelska and Quinn, above n 51 at 4.

85. Thomton, above n 47.

86. The Guardian, 13 July 1999.

87. Thornton, above n 47 at 157, emphasis in original.

88. Thornton, above n 47 at 160.

89. Ibid at 163.

90. The Chilly Collective (eds), above n 71.

91. Wylie, above n 81 at 29.

92. Aisenberg, N and Harrington, M Women of Academe: Outsiders in the Sacred Grove (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1988)Google Scholar.

93. L Guinier et al ‘Becoming Gentlemen: Women's Experiences at One Ivy League Law School’ (1994) 143 Penn LR 51 at 73.

94. S Bell and J Gordon ‘Scholarship, the new dimensions of equity issues for academic women’ (1999) 22 Women's Studies International Forum 645–658 at 646.

95. E Keller and H Moglen ‘Competition and Feminism: Conflicts for Women’ (1987) 12 Signs 493–511.

96. As happened to me in 1988.

97. P Leonard and D Malina ‘Caught between two worlds: mothers as academics’ in Davies, Lubelska and Quinn, above n 51 at 29.

98. Cownie, above n 6.