credentials might be judged by how she dresses?

[JessieMcJessie]

I have just been reading an article in which a number of top female divorce lawyers are interviewed. Among their “Top Tips”:

“What you wear in Court matters: Sandra Davis suggests that mothers negotiating 'children matters' such as contact arrangements should wear 'something soft, nothing too sharp with edges'.

I am taken aback at this suggestion that a woman has to dress in a particular way to maximise the chances of gaining access to her children. Are judges really that easily swayed by the lack of a cashmere cardigan?

Sorry title fail, it was meant to read “To be shocked that a woman’s maternal credentials might be judged by how she dresses?” but phone cut half off.

I can absolutely believe this. Women are so frequently described in terms that laud 'maternal' qualities like 'softness' (as if that's the main thing we do as mothers!) and put down 'hardness'. Some of the judges will have been through custody battles themselves and some of them will be angry men.

It’s not unbelievable though is it.

Look at how Theresa May has been judged on her work attire (expensive leather trousers - just a cover for mocking her appearance).

It’s wrong. But it isn’t unbelievable

It's unfair but understandable. Lots of studies have found how we dress affects how people perceive us.

I actually think women have an advantage here, because we have more clothing options open to us.

OneStepSideways

But that is a disadvantage. A man in a suit is a cipher. A woman in a suit is a 'career woman' or a 'bitch'.

It works for both men and women. Visual impression is a strong influence on people.

Wouldn't the men be advised to wear a suit rather than jeans and tshirt or something also then?

It shouldn't matter, but judges are human and could have unconscious biases like everyone else.

I imagine that they could get judges to go through unconscious bias training (if they don't already) to help prevent them making judgments which are affected by race etc., but judges might not notice/understand how their decision is being subtly affected by other aspects of appearance.

frasier the article did also say that men should wear suits and ties and that this sometimes came as a shock to “dotcom entrepreneurs” used to hoodies and polo shirts (the interviewees were lawyers who acted in high net worth divorces rather than joe bloggs man on the street but the “tips” were distilled by the interviewer to be more widely relevant)

I think that it’s the idea that unconscious bias should affect judges’decisions Speedy that concerns me. I’m sure that training on it is mandatory now and it concerns me that highly sophisticated thinkers like judges might not absorb it and be hyper-aware, or that decisions are not grounded in hard facts.

JessieMcJessie

I'm sure it does concern you. It's still true. What do you expect to be done about it?

Hmm... I do think that scenario applies to men also though. Not obvious designer / fitted suit for certain scenarios, high end ‘sharp’ stuff for others.

Also, I think it’s a fair point. I dress very differently for a meeting with directors than I do for a meeting with developers for example.

It really pisses me off that I am judged by how I look at work. I don't want to participate in it yet I don't want to disadvantage myself either. I am just as capable in soft clothes as I am in hard ones.

I dunno Penggwyn I just thought I might stimulate a bit of debate on here, did you mean to be so aggressive?

But why is this different to any other situation - interview, first date, etc. Everyone makes assumptions based on visual cues, even if they are trained or otherwise.
All she was saying is be aware of those assumptions and rather than take a risk, play them in your favour.

JessieMcJessie

I wasn't aggressive. It's a straight question. Do you expect anything to be done?

The thing is that I of course agree that knowing how to dress for a particular occasion is important and that generally being clean, well groomed and appropriate is an indicator of how you approach life in general. I think it would be entirely fair to judge a woman on her mothering skills if she turned up at court smelly and in dirty clothes, or in a tracksuit. But what surprised me here was the idea that within an umbrella standard of “dressed appropriately” there was yet another layer of subtlety which apparently would make a difference to outcome.

Why would it be okay to judge a mother who turned up at court in a tracksuit?

No Pengggwyn I think it’s rubbish but hey why try to change bad stuff, not worth the bother is it?

You are not my boss to whom I am obliged to offer a solution when highlighting a problem!

Because a good mother would know that you don’t go to Court in a tracksuit.

Lots of people of both sexes are told how to dress at work. My husband was advised on certain tie colours when meeting clients. Nothing to see here.

I didn't say don't try to change it. I asked whether you expect anything to be done about it. I am asking you what solutions you propose.

And I cannot see what wearing a tracksuit for court (however inappropriate) has to do with one's skills as a parent. At all. You are exhibiting unconscious bias.

Totally applies to men too.

Ex was working hours that no as for with the hours he said he wanted the kids, formed a central part of my argument. Instead of sharp suits and clean shaven, he started turning up to everything in a jumper and the suggestion of a beard. It worked too.

Ironically I started off wearing softer stuff and found a suit went down better as time went on.

It's really good advice but actually not at all on gender grounds

It’s in all walks of life though, I was always told to “dress for the job you want, not the job you have”, so if your Manager wears a suit & so do you then you look more fit for the next promotion.

Doesn’t make it right though.

The important thing is that judges read these things and become aware of their own potential for bias, it should be part of their training. Only by bringing our own prejudices (and we all have them) into the open so we can question ourselves can we make any progress in changing them.