Gendered Lawyering: Difference and Dominance in Lawyer-Client Interaction

Abstract

This article addresses the debate about the significance of gender differences by analyzing patterns of interaction between lawyers and clients. It examines features of the language of lawyers and clients associated with the dominance and difference paradigms that are at the center of feminist theory. Talk characterized by dominance includes the control of discourse space, interruptions, topic control, and challenges. Features associated with a particular female “voice” include cooperative responses, affiliative requests, indirection, politeness, and the expression of emotion. Results show that women lawyers' talk is role behavior rather than gendered behavior, with little difference between men and women lawyers. Clients' speech is tempered by gender considerations, with both men and women clients expressing greater deference to men lawyers and women clients expressing cooperation and solidarity with all lawyers. It was mainly in reference to the occasional willingness to grant legitimacy to the clients' emotional concerns, as well as the stress on professional identity, that marked women lawyers' specific style of lawyering.

Almost There

“…72 Gilligan (1982). 73 Bogoch (1997). 74 In New Zealand in 1992, a small Upper Hutt firm managed to steal over NZ$65 million, causing the entire New Zealand fidelity fund to become insolvent.…”

“…28 The indices recorded were the amount of talk, topic control, intrusions and challenges. 29 Bogoch (1997) Erlanger and Klegon (1978-79). limitations of their sample size; the sample comprised 136 students -that is, 63 per cent of the class.…”

“…26 Jack (1994). 27 Bogoch (1997). 28 The indices recorded were the amount of talk, topic control, intrusions and challenges.…”

Naming Names: The Impact of Supreme Court Opinion Attribution on Citizen Assessment of Policy Outcomes

“…The literature on gender stereotypes and implicit bias suggests that male and female justices may not be evaluated similarly. Due to stereotypes that link the law with masculine‐associated traits (Pierce ), studies find that implicit bias appears to undermine assessments of the competence and qualifications of female judges (Gill et al ; Sen ) and female attorneys (Bogoch ; Brown and Campbell ). Recent scholarship on the U.S. Supreme Court also shows that female justices tend to be interrupted more often than male justices by lawyers and their male colleagues, reflecting ingrained power dynamics (Jacobi and Schweers ; Patton and Smith ).…”

Naming Names: The Impact of Supreme Court Opinion Attribution on Citizen Assessment of Policy Outcomes

“…The literature on gender stereotypes and implicit bias suggests that male and female justices may not be evaluated similarly. Due to stereotypes that link the law with masculine-associated traits (Pierce 1995), studies find that implicit bias appears to undermine assessments of the competence and qualifications of female judges (Gill et al 2011;Sen 2014) and female attorneys (Bogoch 1997;Brown and Campbell 1997). Recent scholarship on the U.S. Supreme Court also shows that female justices tend to be interrupted more often than male justices by lawyers and their male colleagues, reflecting ingrained power dynamics (Jacobi and Schweers 2017;Patton and Smith 2017).…”