This article examines the sexist work experiences of a sample of women lawyers in a mediumsized midwestern city. Specifically, it focuses on reports of discrimination, gender disparagement, and sexual harassment as components of gendered systems that maintain and reinforce inequalities between men and women on the job. The relationships between these experiences, professional role orientation and structural work characteristics are explored. Respondents report lower levels of discrimination at the more visible and legally protected “front door” than on the job. For (...) the most part, private sector employees and those in token positions report higher levels of sexist behavior. Contrary to expectations, those with careerist orientations report more sexual harassment. The interrelations and implications of these findings for women's careers in the law are discussed. (shrink)

To reduce sex differences in employment outcomes, we must examine them in the context of the sex-gender hierarchy. The conventional explanation for wage gap—job segregation—is incorrect because it ignores men's incentive to preserve their advantages and their ability to do so by establishing the rules that distribute rewards. The primary method through which all dominant groups maintain their hegemony is by differentiating the subordinate group and defining it as inferior and hence meriting inferior treatment. My argument implies that neither sex-integrating (...) jobs nor implementing comparable worth will markedly improve women's employment status because men can subvert these mechanisms or even change the rules by which rewards are allocated. As evidence, I show that occupational integration has failed to advance women appreciably, and I argue that comparable worth is not likely to be much more effective. Instead, we must seek political analyses and political solutions. (shrink)

Research on the entry of women into occupational settings confirms the importance of the structural composition of the workplace insofar as women are treated as tokens. This study examines women lawyers in terms of three consequences of tokenism: visibility, polarization, and stereotyping. The results from a survey of lawyers in southern Arizona indicate support for the theory of tokenism. Women are more likely than men to report hearing sexist jokes and remarks, to be referred to by their first names, to (...) be asked whether they are lawyers, and to receive compliments about their appearance rather than their achievements. These results highlight important gender differences in legal careers; it remains to be seen whether changes in women's numerical representation alone will be sufficient for changing the relations between dominants and tokens in legal workplaces. (shrink)