Black,
Blue, and Gray all over:
Destroying
the Misconception of Conventional Clothing in the Courtroom
By:
Tanaera Green
December
17, 2013
Eng
3029*03
Introduction
In a lucrative position such as being a lawyer in the
courtroom, perception is everything. Constantly, lawyers are observed by
jurors, judges, and even other attorneys, so being at your best is imperative.
This being said, women in a male dominated field such as litigation, have to
set a standard that will make them be noticed and taken seriously. But can't
you do that in Calvin Klein or a non-name brand? In my research, I want to
explore the sexist standard that is put on women in terms of their appearance
in the courtroom. By interviewing female law students and using "Beyond a reasonable doubt: One size
does not fit all when it comes to courtroom attire for women" by Maureen A Howard, I hope to show the
misconception that a woman has to dress “bland” in order to be perceived as
confident and taken seriously in all aspects when in a court room. I will
further solidify this statement in showing the correlation between a current
female law student’s perception and current published research, how confident fashion
choice can impact the credibility of a female lawyer at trial. In doing so I
will ask the question, in the courtroom is it more important to be true to
oneself or to dress to the opinions of other courtroom officials such as,
jurors, judges, other attorneys, etc. In so discovering how assumptions of a
women's personal fashion choice straying from the conventional blue, black,
gray skirt suit can positively affect the future female lawyer in the courtroom ?
Literature Review
Using "Beyond a
reasonable doubt: One size does not fit all when it comes to courtroom attire
for women" by Maureen A Howard I hope to show that
there is an misconception of how a woman has to dress in order to be perceived
as confident and taken seriously in all aspects when in a court room. In this
study Howard talks about how regardless of gender, physical appearance does
play a crucial role in the courtroom for any attorney however, this emphasis on
appearance is by far more complicated for that of
the female attorney. “Empirical research
has shown that people (including judges and jurors) can form
extraordinarily quick and lasting opinions about people based on very little
information” (Howard, 2009/10 pg210).
Impressions, be them good or bad such as these, are primarily based
solely on visual information. Therefore, before even a single word is uttered
out of one’s mouth your fashion choices have said all that they needed to say,
so the lawyer wanting to achieve their truly best day in court and the support
of the jurors has to decide whether or not the aspect of physical appearance is
a relevant factor.
According to Howard, there are different
types of female lawyers. Each type of lawyer has to understand herself and her
attire, in understanding herself and committing to it, the lawyer also has to
understand that that means she has been typed.
Howard discusses her first memorable experiencing pondering to as a law
student whether female lawyers really considered their closest before stepping
into court watching a female attorney in the movie “The Jagged Edge”. The
actress wore a skirt two sizes too small in the 1985 movie and Howard was not
the only one to notice quoting one female law professor who said “The message
of her [the actresses] clothing visually undermines any image of competence and
gender-neutral skill”. Both Howard and
the then female law professor had typed the actress in her role. In being typed it implies when doing so you
must do one thing and cannot do another, committing to one type is at the discretion
of the attorney but the lawyer, like the actress, has an audience and has the
goal to appease them. In understanding this it becomes a moral dilemma of the
female attorney to choose between staying to oneself and their chosen style and
addressing and submitting to the reality that you are judged on your appearance
(Howard, 2009/10).
TYPES OF FEMALE ATTORNEYS
Howard observes three different types of
female attorneys who all have their own style that go against the norms and are
viewed as both credible and confident in their clothing: the funky dresser, the
fashionista, and the anti-coiffurista.
The funky dresser was a high profile public defender who was known for
her unconventional, hand sewn and designed courtroom attire. Her love for the dramatic fashion was not
only incorporated into her clothing but also encompassed her hair, makeup and
accessories. This in mind, Howard, despite her unconventional clothing, only
perceived the female attorney as smart and articulate. This was because the
woman was secure in herself and therefore made her audience equally as secure,
thus projecting intellect and becoming the unconventional guardian of her
client’s rights that she truly was.
The fashionista, also a criminal defense
lawyer, was not defined by her impeccable fashion choices but was well known
for them, in and out of the court. This female attorney was defined by Howard
as impressive; noting that she wore the clothes the clothes did not wear her.
At no point was the fashionista upstaged by the designer clothes or shoes that
she wore, because the fact was that how she dressed. The fashionista’s designer
suits and shoes, were the real her, her real style which allowed her to be even
more confident and credible in her arguments because she was confident in
knowing herself.
The anti-coiffurista was a federal
prosecutor who had been observed by Howard in a high-profile case while giving
a “brilliant opening statement” (Howard, 2009/10). This lawyer’s unconventional
fashion came in the form of a hairstyle; she had chosen to wear her hair in
what Howard defined as a “yoga class” or “running to the store for milk in the
morning” messy ponytail (Howard, 2009/10). This extremely informal hairstyle
went against all conventional courtroom coiffure, however it worked to her
advantage, in a way, subliminally, giving off the message that she was a
serious, concerned with the law and the facts and not her hair. This anti-
coiffurista made the fashion decision to make the case about the case and not
herself.
All of these female lawyers, the funky dresser, the
fashionista, and the anti-coiffurista, knew themselves and their style, and
although unconventional their wardrobe, they were true to who they were and
thus confident and credible in themselves and their work (Howard, 2009/10).
CONFIDENCE, COMMITMENT, AND CREDIBILITY
An attorney’s credibility is defined in
advocacy literature in terms of integrity, sincerity, trustworthiness, and
reputation, but overall the litigator must be authentic. To be recognized as successful, a female lawyer
has to find the common balance between herself and her style to be perceived in
the most favorable light. Howard stresses that in staying true to oneself, your
credibility, as far as visual aspects, defines itself. Dressing in what makes
you as the attorney comfortable allows your confidence to show through in your
words, and when you feel comfortable your audience feels equally as comfortable
listening to you becoming more susceptible to what you have to say. Howard
gives the example of a male attorney that she’d observed at trial that had went
against these rules and in doing so strayed from being himself and was not
perceived as credible. In his trial the attorney, in his early 30’s, before
making his closing argument made the fashion decision to wear a wedding ring
and telling the jurors that he had children at home. The attorney was not a married man nor had he
any children and because he was not true to himself in trying to elude the jury
to perceive him as more worldly to counteract his age, he failed in his
deception and lost his credibility.
One of the jurors was not deceived by the
attorneys fashion lie and accused the lawyer of being either a liar or a cheat
based on the evidence that his words and actions did not match his apparel. The
juror had seen the wedding ring and typed the lawyer as either a married man
with kids who cheated on his wife because she had witnessed him flirting with a
young court reporter, or a liar who had used a wedding ring and a sentimental
fake family story to sway the other jurors.
In both situations the attorney straying from his true style and in
essence strayed from his true self and it cost him his credibility to the
jurors. Though this attorney went against who he was in making his fashion
choices and it backfired, there are effective ways to be one’s self. Straying
from the rules of legal fashion and being who you are can be seen as credible, committed
and confident in yourself, your work, and by others (Howard, 2009/10).
Methods
This study looks at whether the opinions of
a current female law student correlate with research, in the view that a female
attorney can stray from the conventional blue, black, or gray skirt suit in
order to feel confident and be seen as credible to her audience in the
courtroom. The research asks the question of whether, in the courtroom, is it
more important to be true to oneself or to dress to the opinions of other
courtroom officials such as, jurors, judges, other attorneys, etc.? In the
attempts to discover how assumptions of a woman's personal fashion choice
straying from the conventional blue, black, gray skirt suit can positively
affect the future female lawyer in the courtroom, the use of an interview of a
current female law student was used. Being as how the research participant is a
current law student and was very busy, the interview was conducted over a free
online chat room at her convenience. Questions were asked, answered, and later
analyzed to determine any correlation to the published findings found in "Beyond a reasonable doubt: One size does not
fit all when it comes to courtroom attire for women" by Maureen A
Howard.
CATEGORIES OF ANALYSIS
Analyzing the transcript of the chat room
conversation with the female law student Kacey, the same relevant categories
will be used that were assessed in Howard’s research. Focusing on what the
student in her experience sees and understands typing of the lawyer, and how it
can work for the lawyers advantage and additionally looking at credibility,
commitment, and confidence, and how they are obtained and utilized. I will also
look at what female law students think in terms of how they should dress based
on what they have seen and from their own experience also to see if they have
also experienced anything similar to the situations discussed in the article.
If so then analyzing how it may have affected them as a person, in the hopes of
asking the underlying question “If you could wear what you want, would you and
would you be more confident in doing so?”
Data Analysis
During
the chat interview I did not coach the interviewee (Kacey Alias)
when talking about fashion in the court room, I made sure to allow her to feel
free to talk openly about her experience.
TYPING OF FEMALE
LAWYERS
Kacey: first impression is
everything… especially in the court room
Interviewer: What do you mean by
that
Kacey: as a woman in the
court room they aren't looking at you as a lawyer it's a woman first (Alias, 2013, November 19).
In the very early
stages of the chat interview Kacey shows in saying this comment that she
understands the discourse of the legal community that being a woman and being a
lawyer are in a way two separate entities and have to be assessed and addressed
as such in order to coincide. Kacey, like Howard, in her experience also defined
three different types of legal attire that she had witnessed in her three years
as a law student and working in the legal profession: the church suit, modern
looking suits, and the inappropriate (slutty) professional clothes.
Interviewer: When You first met then (Female lawyers) can
you recall there appearance?
...How did she dress?
Kacey: Well… a lot of the
women I see down here are kind of big so they wear what I call church suits…
they're kind of outdated and not really form fitting… but back home I see more modern
looking suits although occasionally you see lawyers wearing the inappropriate
sexy professional clothes
//
Interviewer: Wat would be slutty
or inapropriate
Kacey: short skirts… tight
pants… bright colored suits (Alias, 2013, November 19).
In the transcript
Kacey not only gives general categories like Howard, she also presents a range
of positive and negative fashion choices based on her opinion. Though it was a
chat room interview and we were not in person based on my personal knowledge of
the interviewee, the choice of wording, and the speed of the answers, I could
tell that Kacey, looked down upon the idea of wearing the church suit but wasn’t
as opposed to wearing is as she was the inappropriate (sexy) professional
clothing.
Interviewer: Oh ok and that's
slutty? Do you think that jurors who see a female attorney dressed
"slutty" also don't give them much credibility like the judges?
Kacey: yes… i think
perspective from jurors is always there (Alias, 2013, November 19).
From this portion of
the transcript, you can see that Kacey, is the prospective lawyer that does
want to be perceived in the light most favorable. In taking the time to take
account of her fashion choices in the courtroom, doing her own informal research
and analysis of what works and what doesn’t for women in the legal profession
and they may be perceived, Kacey proves to be the optimal research participant.
CREDIBLE, COMMITTED
AND CONFIDENT
Interviewer: Would you say that
you are fashion forward?
Kacey: I would think so I'm
not a Naomi Campbell though
Interviewer: LOL well do you feel
that it is possible to be fashionably satisfied with your attire while still
being able to be taken serious as a legal professional?
Kacey: I try to look
traditional but have my own little spin… so like I'll wear a skirt suit that's
still knee length and in the right color but I'll have a silk purple blouse
underneath or a cute belt (Alias, 2013, November 19).
Here Kacey is not
showing positive interest in clothing in the courtroom, she defines who she is
and knows what her style.
Interviewer How would you define
your courtroom style? How would you define your everyday style?
Kacey: No bright pink
colors, always neutrals nothing low-cut or form fitting… my everyday style is
like legal but cute it's not courtroom style because of the colors and patterns
I like statement necklaces boyfriend watches pencil skirts etc… courtroom style
is always blue, black, or grey skirt suit white blue or black collar blouse
underneath pearl earrings 3 inch black leather heels light makeup…everyday wise
I like colored lip glaze, eyeliner, mascara, etc court room it's neutral lip
balm, a little mascara that's it 5 minutes or less (Alias, 2013, November 19)
Credible, committed
and confident in her identity as a future lawyer and her prospective fashion
choices, Kacey shares what she feels good in and how she makes what works for
her work for court. Here unlike when talking about the church suits or the inappropriate
(slutty) professional clothing she has clearly categorized herself as the modern
looking suit lawyer. Kacey talks the conventional legal attire and makes it her
own, in essence making it her, and in doing so dressed in the confidence of
being herself. Allowing her to be the future litigator that she was meant to be
without the obscurities of being confined to the blue, black, or gray
stereotypical women’s suit.
Discussion/ Conclusion
By using the opinions of the future
female lawyers to address the questions of whether in the courtroom is it more
important to be true to oneself or to dress to the opinions of other courtroom
officials such as, jurors, judges, other attorneys, etc.? I have shown how a women's personal fashion
choice straying from the conventional blue, black, gray skirt suit can
positively affect the future female lawyer in the courtroom. This analysis will
hopefully open the eyes of other attorneys and allow for them to make a
difference and possible change to their conventional thinking in terms of their
legal attire. The double standard place upon women in power, especially those
in chosen supposed male dominated fields, is ultimately holding back women's
potential in the hopes of reaching true equality in all aspects especially in
the workforce.
Women to this day are still paid 77 cents
on the dollar in comparison to a man, with the addition of that lesser salary,
they also have to focus on the sexism that is associated with fashion choices in
forcing the blue, black, or gray suit stereotype. From my findings, I have
shown that a woman who dresses according to her true self, her true style
despite its unconventional nature can and will be perceived as credible and
confident, in herself and in her words. Not to say that the blue, black, or
gray skirt suits are not an option it’s just not the only option; opinions are
in most cases based upon visual perception. A woman that is visually
comfortable in her skin and clothing is likely to be equally as comfortable in
her words and in the eyes of the court. This analysis has allowed for the
clarity and justification of the need for change what is necessary in order to
create equality, conformability, and credibility at least in the terms of
clothing for present or prospective female lawyers to stay true to their own
style.
References
Alias, K. (2013, November 19). Womens Fashion in the
courtroom [E-mail interview].
Howard, M. A. (2009/10).
Beyond a reasonable doubt: One size does not fit all when it comes to courtroom attire for women. Heinonline Law Journal Library.
Retrieved from http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/gonlr45
