Women in law: Navigating the tensions of gender bias and intersectionality at the Cape and Johannesburg Societies of Advocates (the Bar)

Abstract

In recent years gender transformation of the judiciary has come into greater focus. While great gains have been made in terms of race, transformation in terms of gender has noticeably lagged behind. In this context researchers and students like myself have asked the question why. My research sought to uncover some answers by focusing on a particular segment of the profession, Advocates (also known as the Bar). The Bar constitutes a particular locus of study precisely because it has traditionally been considered a pool from which to select judges. In this context the following research questions emerge: firstly, what are some of the aspects of the organisation of the Bar, both social and structural, that impact women; and secondly, how do those aspects impact women? Taking the view that the substance of knowledge and insight sought is to be found with the very women we are concerned with, I investigated this by eliciting the experiences of women via interviews and a survey which took place between January and March 2015. The topic of this research is not unique. There is a depth and breadth of literature on women in the legal profession emanating from jurisdictions such as the United States of America, United Kingdom, Europe and Australia. However, noticeably lacking from the literature is an account of the experiences of women in Asia and Africa. Thus by considering a small segment of women in South Africa, this research attempts to fill this particular knowledge gap.The analysis reveals a range of cross-cutting processes that are borne by women in a manner that impedes their advancements and colours their experiences. Specifically, the Bar’s unique voluntary structure gives rise to a tension, the navigation of which disproportionately affects women due to pervasive yet subtle stereotypes and gender biases.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.