Female scientists are “significantly less likely” than men to be credited as authors on scholarly articles or named on patents to which they contribute — a systemic exclusion that probably has negative impacts on female scientists’ careers, according to a new study published in the journal Nature.
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
Study Shows Hierarchy, Race and Gender Impact Scholarly Networks and Who is Helped on Their Legal Academic Path
Keerthana Nunna, W. Nicholson Price II & Jonathan Tietz, Hierarchy Race and Gender in Legal Scholarly Networks, 75 Stanford Law Review 71 (Feb. 2023)
A potent myth of legal academic scholarship is that it is mostly meritocratic and mostly solitary. Reality is more complicated. In this Article, we plumb the networks of knowledge co-production in legal academia by analyzing the star footnotes that appear at the beginning of most law review articles. Acknowledgments paint a rich picture of both the currency of scholarly credit and the relationships among scholars. Building on others’ prior work characterizing the potent impact of hierarchy, race, and gender in legal academia more generally, we examine the patterns of scholarly networks and probe the effects of those factors. The landscape we illustrate is depressingly unsurprising in basic contours but awash in details. Hierarchy, race, and gender all have substantial effects on who gets acknowledged and how, what networks of knowledge co-production get formed, and who is helped on their path through the legal academic world.
February 28, 2023 in Gender, Law schools, Race, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Friday, January 6, 2023
Webinar, Advice from Gender and Law Journal Editors, Tips for Prospective Authors
Advice from Gender & Law Journal Editors: Tips for Prospective Authors
Live Zoom Webinar
January 20, 2023 2 pm Eastern/11am Pacific
Advance (free) registration required: https://pace.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_iUMHoSY7TNiUby920O9cSA
Specialty law journals are important outlets for legal scholars working on gender-related issues. What are gender journal editors looking for when they review articles? How can authors improve their chances of receiving an offer of publication? What is the best time to submit an article to a gender journal? What role do the author’s cover letter and CV play in the selection process? Hear from current student editors at three journals—the Harvard Journal of Law & Gender, the Michigan Journal of Gender & Law, and the Yale Journal of Law and Feminism—with answers to these questions along with advice and tips for navigating the submission process.
Moderators: Bridget J. Crawford (Pace) and Kathryn M. Stanchi (UNLV)
Participating Editors: Renée Mihail, Yale Law ’24; Hannah Mezzacapa, Michigan Law ’23; Addie Davies, Harvard Law ‘23
This webinar is free and open to the public. It is sponsored by the US Feminist Judgments Project and co-sponsored by the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University and the William S. Boyd School of Law at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, together with The Feminism and Legal Theory Project, The Vulnerability and the Human Condition Initiative, the Institute for Feminist Legal Studies at Osgoode, and the AALS Section on Women in Legal Education.
January 6, 2023 in Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, January 3, 2023
How Gender Bias Worsened the Academic Peer Review Crisis
Chronicle of Higher Ed, How Gender Bias Worsened the Peer Review Crisis
Mounting evidence suggests the peer-review crisis in academic publishing was worsened, in part, by a system that favors male scholars and discourages women.
A new study of nearly 50 journals in the British Medical Journals Publishing Group found that women accounted for less than one in three peer reviewers — scholars who are experts in their field and are critical to vetting new research before it’s published in academic journals. The proportion of female peer reviewers grew by only 2.9 percentage points between 2009 and 2020. ***
At a time when journal editors across fields and publishing houses say finding peer reviewers is harder than ever, why aren’t more tapping into the pool of female professors and researchers?
Ana-Catarina Pinho-Gomes, an academic clinical lecturer at the University College London who researches biases against women in medical research, said the gap can be traced back to how editors select reviewers.
In the early days of peer review, journal editors, who were predominantly white men, would mine their own professional networks — also comprised of mostly white men — to find reviewers. Today, most journals use search engines, like PubMed or Google Scholar, and internal databases to identify, track, and make requests of reviewers. In theory, this system would cut down on individual editor bias. But in practice, Pinho-Gomes said, it carries forward biases from earlier in the pipeline of academic research.
Scholars with more published work are more likely to come up in databases and search engines as potential reviewers, Pinho-Gomes said. For decades, research has shown that women have published less frequently than men in part because women still take on the lion’s share of child and elder care for their families, leaving less time for career advancement and research pursuits. Thus, more-published scholars tend to be men
January 3, 2023 in Books, Gender, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Wednesday, November 30, 2022
Gender is One of the Top Topics Legal Scholars are Writing About in 2022
What Legal Scholars are Writing About: 2022 Edition
As 2022 comes to a close, it’s prime time to catch up on the latest legal scholarship published this year — and there’s no shortage of content to explore!
Are you wondering what topics scholars have been focusing on?
Last year, Scholastica dug into our law review data (anonymized and aggregated) to look at some of the most popular keywords added to law review submissions and shared a list of 25 that stood out with examples of related articles. Since interest was high, we decided to keep it going in 2022.
In this blog post, we highlight the 25 most-used keywords for articles accepted via Scholastica from January 1st, 2022, to present and some notable pieces related to those topics. This list is not meant to be interpreted as a ranking of any kind. It is simply intended to provide a window into what legal scholars have been writing about this year. The keywords appear in no apparent order.
Gender is among the most common topics among articles submitted in the recent submission season. This strikes me as particularly relevant given the historic discounting of law professors writing about "niche" issues like gender.
November 30, 2022 in Gender, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, September 20, 2022
Martha Fineman's Feminist Legal Theory Project Historical Archive at Risk of Being Lost
Preserving Our Legacy: An Important Piece of Feminist History is at Risk of Being Lost
One of these women was Martha Albertson Fineman, who in the early 1980s launched the Feminism and Legal Theory Project at University of Wisconsin Law School. For decades, the project has brought together scholars and activists from the U.S. and abroad to explore the most pressing contemporary legal issues affecting women. In multiple-day sessions, organized around specific, evolving sets of issues, feminists presented working papers and debated women’s legal rights. Fineman recorded and preserved these groundbreaking conversations, as well as the working papers and other written material prepared for these sessions.
Fineman is now struggling to convince librarians more accustomed to collecting individuals’ or organizations’ papers of the importance of this historic trove of audio, visual and written materials documenting the collective development of feminist concepts, aspirations and theory.***
For close to four decades, Fineman’s Feminism and Legal Theory Project has hosted hundreds of conversations where feminist thinkers from across the United States and world have shaped and explored a wide range of concepts relating to women’s position within law and society. Those conversations delved into the “public nature of private violence,” the legal regulation of motherhood, feminism’s reception in the media, the relevance of economics to feminist thought, the complexities of sexuality, conflicting children’s and parental rights, the origins and implications of dependency and vulnerability, and the extent and nature of social responsibility.
“Feminism teaches us that the best ideas come from working together in inclusive, supportive groups,” said Fineman. “Feminism has grown through consciousness raising and the sharing of experience. The best ideas and the best politics emerge from collective engagements and processes.”***
“In the Feminism and Legal Theory Project, we created what I called ‘uncomfortable conversations’—events where people who shared values, but disagreed about strategies and implementation, could talk,” said Fineman. “If there were areas of disagreement around collective objectives, you could talk about them and work through them hopefully in a constructive manner. That’s how actual progress can be made.”***
Fineman recorded all of these conversations—a treasure trove of close to four decades of feminist intellectual history. But she is now struggling to find a home for this invaluable archive of the first generation of feminist legal thinkers.
“History has something to teach us. If we don’t collect the history and preserve it, then it can’t teach us,” said Fineman.***
After speaking with people at women’s history archives, Fineman is concerned about how decisions to preserve women’s history are made. “Who makes the determination about what and who in the past matters? How and why they make such decisions ultimately shapes what will constitute women’s or feminist history,” said Fineman. “An important piece of feminist history is at risk of being lost or isolated and sidelined.
September 20, 2022 in Conferences, Education, Law schools, Scholarship, Theory | Permalink | Comments (0)
CFP Book Chapters, Women and Conflicts of Law
CFP Call for Chapter Proposals: Women and Conflicts of Law
Call for Book Chapters:
Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Women and Conflicts of Law:
Global Perspectives, 1815-Present
EXTENDED DEADLINE AND BROADENED FOCUS
We invite chapter submission for inclusion in an edited collection on Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Women and Conflicts of Law.
The volume discusses the consequences for women when law systems clashed--between independent nations, colonizers and colonized, majority and minority religions, or between secular and religious laws. The nineteenth and twentieth centuries saw industrial nations draw more and more of the globe into the orbit of their law systems, and these were also the centuries in which women contested their legal positions vigorously. Thus, this period offers an ideal forum for studying the effects of legal differences across the globe. Conflicts of law were inevitable whenever people crossed borders, converted to different religions, or married/divorced someone of a different class, religion, or locality. Women were often harmed by conflicts of law, but this was not inevitable. In other words, these clashes offered both a challenge and an opportunity.
This volume has no geographical limitations; we welcome proposals from historians of all parts of the world. The most important factor for selection will be the authors’ ability to highlight women’s experiences when law systems clashed. Possible topics include, but are not limited to, the following:
- Conflicts between criminal and civil law
- Conflicts over differing national laws of marriage, divorce, and child custody
- Women in imperial law systems
- The interaction between gender and other factors such as race, class, and sexual orientation in the law courts
- Conflict between secular and religious courts
- The consequences of the lack of legal recognition for lesbian and transgender families
- The regulation and criminalization of sex work across national borders
- Women as actors in the international legal community
- Feminist efforts to eliminate women’s disabilities caused by conflicts of law
- Disputes over nationality, dual nationality, and statelessness in peace and war
The proposed schedule is as follows:
January 15, 2023 – Proposals due; these should be of no more than 300 words, accompanied by a one-page C.V.
February 15, 2023 – Authors receive notice of editorial decision.
November 15, 2023 – Full manuscripts due to the editor. Manuscripts should be standard length for journal articles, approximately 7,500-8,500 words (including notes).
Those interested in contributing should direct all correspondence to the volume editor, Dr. Ginger Frost at: email@example.com
September 20, 2022 in Books, Legal History, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Wednesday, September 7, 2022
CFP AALS Annual Meeting Emerging Voices in Feminist Theory
The AALS Section on Women in Legal Education invites submissions for its program Emerging Voices in Feminist Theory at the 2023 AALS Annual Meeting in San Diego, California (January 3-6, 2023).
This works-in-progress session will give scholars writing on any topic concerning feminist theory the opportunity for engagement on a current project with others in the field. Each selected scholar will present a work-in-progress and receive comments from an assigned commentator, as well as from other participants. The session will provide selected scholars with a supportive environment in which to receive constructive feedback.
Full-time faculty members of AALS member and fee-paid law schools are eligible to submit works-in-progress. Visiting faculty (not full-time on a different faculty) and fellows are eligible to apply to present at this session. We especially encourage submissions from members of groups who are underrepresented in the academy, including people with disabilities.
Please submit an abstract (500 words or less). Scholarship may be at any stage of the writing process from early stage to almost-completed article, but cannot yet be accepted for publication at the time of abstract submission. Each potential speaker may submit only one abstract for consideration.
To be considered, abstracts should be emailed to Professor Danielle C. Jefferis, University of Nebraska College of Law, at firstname.lastname@example.org by Friday, September 16, 2022.
Submission review, selection, conference attendance: Abstracts will be reviewed by members of the Section's Works-in-Progress subcommittee, which also includes Katherine Macfarlane, Southern University Law School, Suzanne Kim, Rutgers Law School, and Naomi Cahn, University of Virginia School of Law. Selected presenters will be announced by October 1, 2022. The Call for Paper presenters will be responsible for paying their own AALS registration fee, hotel, and travel expenses. If paper presenters want anything beyond their abstracts discussed at the AALS session, then papers must be submitted by Dec. 15, 2022, to ensure distribution.
September 7, 2022 in Call for Papers, Law schools, Scholarship, Theory | Permalink | Comments (0)
Thursday, August 25, 2022
Book Review, Formidable: American Women and the Fight for Equality 1920-2020
Book Review, Formidable: American Women and the Fight for Equality, 1920-2020
This snapshot illustrates the merits of Elisabeth Griffith’s engaging, relevant and sweeping chronicle of women’s fight for equality in the United States — and by examining 100 years of history through a feminist lens, a pattern emerges: Each blow from the patriarchy is countered by a well-aimed and calculated retaliation from American women.
Books of true feminist history are rare. Rarer still are these histories intersectional; feminist history tends to be synonymous with white women’s history. Not this book. Griffith delivers a multiracial, inclusive timeline of the struggles and triumphs of both Black and white women in America. “Historically, the white press has not covered the activism of Black women,” she writes. (Her previous book centered on the life of Cady Stanton.) Despite difficult-to-find archival sources, Griffith says, “I’ve named as many women as possible.”
A profoundly illuminating tour de force, Griffith’s book begins with Susan B. Anthony and unfolds chronologically, sorted into chapters that track a “pink” timeline of history. “Fifty years ago, when women’s history was struggling for legitimacy in academia,” Griffith explains, “feminists divided American history into ‘blue’ and ‘pink’ timelines. Conference panels debated whether Zachary Taylor’s presidency was more relevant to women’s lives than the invention of the tin can, or whether Jacksonian democracy deserved a chapter when the suffrage campaign did not.”
“Formidable” is organized around major fights: voting rights, working conditions, education access, health care, racial violence, reproductive rights, race and gender discrimination, the wage gap, electoral office.
August 25, 2022 in Books, Legal History, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Monday, July 11, 2022
Feminist Scholar Presentations This Week at Law & Society Annual Meeting
Law & Society Annual Meeting 2022 (Lisbon & virtual)
Feminist Legal Theory Collaborative Research Network
July 13-16, 2022, in Lisbon, Portugal
Please note: All times listed are in Lisbon time (GMT +1/ -5EST).
prepared by Cyra Choudhury
Wednesday July 13
8:15 – 10:00 AM
Roundtable: #Metoo and Global Gender Justice
Chair Chaitanya Lakkimsetti
Presenters: Vanita Reddy, Ashwini Tambe, Ayesha Khurshid, Ashley Currier
10:15 AM – 12:00 PM
Author Meets Readern (AMR): Accidental Feminism and The Work of Rape: New Directions in Feminist Theory and Queer Governance
Chairs: Stu Marvel, Libby Adler
Authors: Rana Jaleel, Swethaa Balakrishnan
Readers: Liz Montgomery, Aziza Ahmed, Greta LaFleur
12:45 – 2:30 PM
AMR Global Intersectionality and Contemporary Human Rights
Chair: Robin Walker Sterling
Author: Johanna Bond
Readers: Carla LaRoche, Dina Francesca Haynes, Seema Mohapatra
2:45 – 4:30 PM
Paper Session: Gender-Based Violence: Contexts and Comparisons
Chair: Elizabeth MacDowell
Discussants: Aziza Ahmed, Samantha Godwin
Presenters: Meghan Boone, Heidi Matthews, Julie Goldscheid, Rachel Van Cleave, Christine Bailey, Nancy Cantalupo
Roundtable: Femicide: Law and Society (Virtual)
Chair: Dabney Evans
Participants: Martin Di Marco, Claire Branigan, Esther Elisha
Thursday July 14, 2022
8:15 - 10:00 AM
Paper Session: Marriage and Parentage I
Chair: Laura Kessler
Discussant: Courtney Joslin
Presenters: Erez Aloni, Ayelet Blecher-Prigat & Ruth Zafran (with Noy Naaman), Jessica Knouse, Noy Naaman, Cassia Roth
10:15 AM - 12:00 PM
Paper Session: Parentage II
Chair: Anibal Rosario Lebrón
Discussant: Erez Aloni
Presenters: Susan Hazledean, Courtney Joslin (with Douglas NeJaime), Marcia Zug, Dara Purvis, Radhika Rao
12:45 – 2:30PM
Paper Session: Menstruation, Health, and the Law
Chair: Seema Mohapatra
Discussant: Dara Purvis
Presenters: Margaret Johnson, Marci Karin, Inga Winkler, Sarah Lorr
AMR: The New Sex Wars: Sexual Harm in the #MeToo Era
Author: Brenda Cossman
Readers: Penelope Andrews, Joseph Fischel, Ratna Kapur
2:45 – 4:30 PM
Roundtable: Abortion Rights after Roe: International Human Rights and Comparative Legal Approaches
Chair: Rachel Rebouché
Presenters: Mindy Roseman, Satang Nabaneh, Patricia A Skuster, Paola Bergallo
Roundtable: Social Parenthood in Comparative Perspective
Chair: Courtney Joslin
Presenters: Kristina Brant, Corinna Guerzoni, Christiane von Bary, Sofia Trevino, Lauren Hu
Paper Session: Reproductive Rights
Chair: Meghan Boone
Discussant: Elizabeth Kukura
Presenters: Greer Donley (with David Cohen & Rachel Rebouché), Jill Lens (with Greer Donley), Francesca Laguardia, Elizabeth Kukura, Jessica Feinberg
Paper Session: Gender-Based Violence: Rape, Domestic Violence
Chair: Tugçe Ellialti-Kose
Discussant: Jamie Abrams
Presenters: Jayne O’Connor, Tammy Kuennen & Leigh Goodmark, Michal Buchhandler-Raphael, Charisa Smith
Friday, July 15, 2022
2:45 - 4:30 PM
Roundtable: Gender, Power, Law, and Leadership I
Chair: Renee Knake Jefferson
Presenters: Angela Onwuachi-Willig, Laura Rosenbury, Paula Schaefer, Melinda Molina, Erin Buzuvis, Cindy Schipani, Carla Pratt
Paper Session: Infanticide laws in feminist context
Chair: Michelle Oberman
Discussant: Greer Donley
Presenters: Daniel Grey, Emma Milne & Karen Brennan, Susan Ayres, Debra Wilson, Bruna Angotti
Paper Session: Law, Gender, and Democracy in International and Comparative Perspective
Chair: Elizabeth MacDowell
Discussant: Suzanne Kim
Presenters: Ezgi Seref, Jonathan Crock, Jennifer Maher, Carla LaRoche
4:45 – 6:30 PM
Paper Session: Sex and Reproductive Rights
Chair: Jessica Knouse
Discussant: Jill Lens
Presenters: Hillary Berk, Nofar Yakovi Gan-Or, Natalia Levin Schwartz, Bela Walker, Laura Lane-Steele
Paper Session: Speech, Testimony, and Truth: A Feminist Analysis of Human Rights Law
Chair: Valentina Ramia
Discussant: Julie Goldscheid
Presenters: Valentina Ramia, Brenda Dvoskin, Leyla Savloff, Farzana Ali
Paper Session: New Perspectives on Sex in Public
Chair: Brenda Cossman
Discussant: Gabriel Rosenberg
Presenters: Joseph Fischel, India Thusi, Andrew Gilden, Lara Karaian (with Melanie Cantin)
Saturday, July 16, 2022
8:15 - 10:00 AM
AMR Privacy as Anti-Subordination Tool
Chair: Daniel Susser
Author: Scott Skinner-Thompson
Readers: Seda Gurses, Eddie Bruce-Jones, Daniel Susser
10:15 AM – 12:00 PM
Paper Session: Sexual Orientation, Sex, and Privacy
Chair: Susan Hazeldean
Discussant: Andrew Gilden
Presenters: Britni Moore, Anibal Rosario Lebron, Michael Boucai, Naomi Mezey
Roundtable: After Carceral Feminism
Chair: Aziza Ahmed
Presenters: Leigh Goodmark, Aya Gruber, Cynthia Godsoe, Kate Mogulescu
12:45 – 2:30 PM
Paper Session: Race, Gender, and Autonomy in Comparative Perspective
Chair & Discussant: Johanna Bond
Presenters: Rabea Benhalim, Catherine Harnois (with Yaqi Yuan), Caroline Hodes, Amy Dillard, Louise Langevin
2:45 – 4:30 PM
CRN 07 Business Meeting
Paper Session: Feminist Jurisprudence and Adjudication
Chair: Jennifer Hendricks
Discussant: Rachel Rebouché
Presenters: David Cohen (with Elizabeth Kukura), Jill Hasday, Yanira Reyes, Jasmine Samara
Paper Session: Pedagogy and Practice
Chair & Discussant: Paula Monopoli
Presenters: Jamie Abrams, Daniela Kraiem, Chris Demaske
4:45 – 6:30 PM
Roundtable: Theorizing Feminist Solidarity
Chair: Cyra Akila Choudhury
Presenters: Jennifer Hendricks, Lua Yuille, Elizabeth MacDowell, Cyra Akila Choudhury
Roundtable: Gender, Power, Law, & Leadership II
Chair: Hannah Brenner Johnson
Presenters: Kcasey McLoughlin, Paula Monopoli, Abigail Perdue, Tonja Jacobi, Jonathan Stubbs
July 11, 2022 in Conferences, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Thursday, June 23, 2022
Study Shows Female Scientists Don't Get the Authorship Credit They Deserve
Female Scientists Don't Get the Credit They Deserve. A Study Proves It
“These are pretty big gaps, and they’re incredibly persistent,” said co-author Britta Glennon, assistant professor of management at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business.***
The findings — which come from an extensive data set and were confirmed by a survey and follow-up interviews — both partially explain and probably contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science, Glennon said: “If you’re seeing that you’re not getting credit for the work that you do, or even that your senior female colleagues aren’t getting credit for the work that they do, that’s pretty discouraging — so I think we would all be very surprised if there weren’t a significant impact on careers.”
June 23, 2022 in Scholarship, Science | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, February 1, 2022
Hierarchy, Race & Gender in Legal Scholarly Networks
Hierarchy, Race & Gender in Legal Scholarly Networks
Keerthana Nunna - University of Michigan Law School
W. Nicholson Price II - University of Michigan Law School
Jonathan Tietz - University of Michigan Law School
A potent myth of legal academic scholarship is that it is mostly meritocratic and that it is mostly solitary. Reality is more complicated. In this Article, we plumb the networks of knowledge co-production in legal academia by analyzing the star footnotes that appear at the beginning of most law review articles. Acknowledgements paint a rich picture of both the currency of scholarly credit and the relationships among scholars. Building on others’ prior work characterizing the potent impact of hierarchy, race, and gender in legal academia more generally, we examine the patterns of scholarly networks and probe the effects of those factors. The landscape we illustrate is depressingly unsurprising in basic contours but awash in details. Hierarchy, race, and gender all have substantial impacts on who gets acknowledged and how, what networks of knowledge co-production get formed, and who is helped on their path through the legal academic world.
The traditional myth is that legal scholarship is largely meritocratic and largely solitary. Under such a view, what gets you ahead is simply a good idea: a head-turning paper that generates a whirlwind of citations and chatter with its brilliance. Under such a view, demographic considerations like an author’s race, gender, and academic pedigree should matter little in the marketplace of ideas. That myth may comfort those who ended up atop the tower, but it is belied by reality. Hierarchy, race, and gender matter to a legal academic’s success; they matter to the acceptance of her ideas; they matter to her own experience. Against a rich backdrop of theoretical and qualitative work examining these issues, we present here a quantitative study of one way to observe the impact of hierarchy, race, and gender: the acknowledgements sections of law review footnotes, and what they can tell us about legal scholarly networks.
The author footnote—variously known as the star, dagger, biographical, vanity, or bug footnote—gives a peek into who contributed (nominally, at least) to the intellectual product that is the final, published law review article. They provide small, partial portraits of the author’s professional and social networks. Taken in the aggregate, these footnotes give a peek (cloudy, to be sure) into the underlying relationships, interactions, and social networks that make up legal academia. And we can examine that picture for signs of the impact of hierarchy, race, and gender to see whether they show up in a quantitatively observable fashion. (Spoiler alert: they do.)
Here, we examine the star footnotes for nearly 30,000 law review articles published in generalist law journals over about a decade. We probe who acknowledges whom; how school rank matters; and what racial and gender based disparities exist in who gets asked, or who gets credit (it’s hard to tell) for feedback in scholarly papers. Not to hide the ball: we find that authors tend to acknowledge scholars from peer schools, most of all their own school, but also to typically acknowledge folks from somewhat fancier schools. We find that men are acknowledged more than women and nonbinary scholars, and white scholars more than scholars of color. We examine intersectional effects, which are complex; read on to find out more. One bright spot here: networks of scholars of color appear to be particularly robust.
February 1, 2022 in Education, Gender, Law schools, Race, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Wednesday, December 15, 2021
AALS Women in Legal Education Section Programming at 2022 Annual Meeting
From the WILE Newsletter h/t Susan Bisom-Rapp and Victoria Haneman.
WILE ANNUAL MEETING SCHEDULE AT A GLANCE (virtual conference)
◆ Wednesday, January 5, 12:35 - 1:50 pm Eastern: AALS Awards Ceremony (the inaugural Deborah L. Rhode Award will be presented to Professors Stacy Butler and Wendy Greene)
◆ Wednesday, January 5, 2:00 - 3:00 pm Eastern: WILE Networking Session
◆ Wednesday, January 5, 3:10 - 4:25 pm Eastern: Open Source Program on the Impact of Deborah Rhode (planned by Section on WILE, the Section on Professional Responsibility, Section on Pro Bono, Section on Leadership)
◆ Wednesday, January 5, 4:45 pm - 6:00 pm Eastern: WILE Works-in-Progress: Other Voices in Feminist Legal Theory
◆ Thursday, January 6, 12:35 - 1:50 pm Eastern: WILE Primary Program - Equality, Intersectionality, and Status in the Legal Academy
◆ Thursday, January 6, 2:00 - 3:00 pm Eastern: WILE Award Ceremony (the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lifetime Achievement Award will be presented to LSAC Deputy for Legal and Global Higher Education Camille deJorna)
◆ Friday, January 7, 4:45 - 6:00 pm Eastern: Introducing and Supporting Intersectionality in Pedagogy
WILE kicks off the 2022 Annual Meeting at the AALS Awards Ceremony (Wednesday, January 5, 12:35 – 1:50 pm Eastern) during which the inaugural Deborah L. Rhode Award will be presented to Professors Stacy Butler (Arizona) and Wendy Greene (Drexel). The award, created by WILE and the Sections on Leadership, Professional Responsibility, and Pro Bono & Public Service, honors the contributions, service, and leadership of the late Deborah Rhode by recognizing new trailblazers in legal education and the legal profession. Professor Butler is being honored for founding and directing Innovation for Justice (i4J), a social justice-focused innovation lab. Professor Greene is being recognized for her scholarship, activism, and law reform work aimed at prohibiting race-based natural hair discrimination. I am grateful for the hard work of the award selection committee: Interim Dean Douglas Blaze (Tennessee), Professor Renee Knake Jefferson (Houston), Assistant Director Nadine Mompremier (Columbia), and Associate Dean Adrien Wing (Iowa).
Our second event is the WILE Section Networking Session (Wednesday, January 5, 2:00 – 3:00 pm Eastern), which will afford our members a chance to meet and learn in a more informal format. Thanks to WILE Secretary Victoria Haneman (Creighton) and Executive Committee member Milena Sterio (Cleveland-Marshall) for moderating that session. I encourage you all to attend this valuable session.
Following that session will be the Open Source Program – The Impact of Deborah Rhode (Wednesday, January 5, 3:10 – 4:25 pm Eastern) (Co-Sponsored by the Sections on Leadership, Professional Responsibility, Pro Bono & Public Service Opportunities, and WILE). A distinguished panel representing Deborah Rhode’s diverse interests has been assembled to reflect on her legacy and its impact on future projects and initiatives. The panelists are Professor Ben Barton (Tennessee), Dean Garry Jenkins (Minnesota), former Assistant Dean Tom Schoenherr (Fordham), and Associate Dean Adrien Wing (Iowa). Topics include Deborah Rhode’s impact on women and diversity in legal education, legal ethics, the imperative of pro bono within the legal academy and the profession, and leadership. Thanks to Lucy Ricca (Stanford), who is the Policy and Program Director at the Stanford Center on the Legal Profession, for expertly organizing and serving as moderator for the Open Source Program. Chair Elect Lisa Mazzie (Marquette) served on a multi-Section subcommittee, which selected the program’s speakers.
Our fourth program at the Annual Meeting is the WILE Works-in-Progress Session – Other Voices in Feminist Legal Theory (Wednesday, January 5, 4:45 – 6:00 pm Eastern). This program, based on a call for papers, focuses on the views of scholars whose work marks them as feminist legal theorists even if they have not traditionally been labeled as such. The scholars presenting work are: Noa Ben-Asher (Pace), Gender Identity, The New Legal Sex; Kim D. Ricardo (UIC), Comparative Study of Abortion Laws in Argentina and the United States; and Anna Offit (SMU), Benevolent Exclusion. Professor Bridget Crawford (Pace) is our discussant. The session moderator is Dean Lolita Buckner Inniss (Colorado). The session was organized by Dean Inniss (Colorado), Rachel Croskery-Roberts (UCI), Catherine Hardee (California Western), Fernanda Nicola (American), and Nancy Soonpaa (Texas Tech)
The following day, WILE hosts its primary program, Equality, Intersectionality, and Status in the Legal Academy (Thursday, January 6, 12:35 – 1:50 pm Eastern)(Co-Sponsored by the Section on Minority Groups, and the Section on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues). Based on a call for papers, this session will explore visible and invisible status distinctions in the legal academy, how people of color and women are affected by them, and whether various solutions can improve equality. Scholars presenting work are Angela Mae Kupenda (Mississippi College), Killing Me Softly with His Song, and Options toward Professing the Truth; Rachel Lopez (Drexel), Untitled: The Power of Designation in the Legal Academy; Shefali Milczarek-Desai & Sylvia Lett (Arizona), Flipping the Script: Two BIPOC Law Professors Embrace and Enunciate Difference to Further Equality in the Legal Academy; and Melissa Weresh (Drake), Hierarchy Maintained: Gender Inequity in the Legal Academy. As WILE Section Chair, Susan Bison-Rapp will moderate the session. The session was organized by WILE Chair Elect Lisa Mazzie (Marquette) along with Executive Committee members Naomi Cahn (Virginia), Rachel Croskery-Roberts (UCI), Rona Kaufman (Duquesne), Ashley London (Duquesne), Linda McClain (Boston), Nancy Soonpaa (Texas Tech), and Milena Sterio (Cleveland-Marshall).
Following immediately after the WILE primary program, the Section will host its Annual Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lifetime Achievement Award Ceremony (Thursday, January 6, 2:00 – 3:00 pm Eastern). Since 2013, WILE has given out a lifetime achievement award to an individual who has impacted women, the legal community, the academy, and the issues that affect women through mentoring, writing, speaking, activism, and providing opportunities to others. Our 2022 recipient is Camille deJorna, who serves as Deputy for Legal and Global Higher Education at the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC). Before that post, she served in a top role in the ABA’s Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar and oversaw the admissions and student affairs offices at several law schools, including Columbia, Hofstra, and the University of Iowa. She was selected by the WILE Executive Committee for her pathbreaking work on diversity and inclusion in the legal academy and profession. Special thanks to Dean Lolita Buckner Inniss (Colorado) for managing the nomination process and to Dean Tamara Lawson (St. Thomas) for providing the beautiful plaque for the occasion.
The Section’s seventh and final program is a session on pedagogy titled Introducing and Supporting Intersectionality in Pedagogy (Friday, January 7, 4:45 – 6:00 pm Eastern). Discussions related to gender, race, class, sexual orientation, age, immigration, and/or disability visibly shape the law and richly impact classroom outcomes. The goal of this session is to consider new pedagogical tools and ideas both for incorporating intersectional feminism into the law school classroom, and for exploring these ideas with faculty colleagues who may be resistant. Speakers include Jamie Abrams (Louisville), Bridget
Crawford (Pace), Teri McMurtry-Chubb (John Marshall), and Kathryn Stanchi (UNLV). Serving as commentators are Dean Angela Onwuachi-Willig (Boston) and Dean Sean Scott (California Western). WILE Secretary Victoria Haneman (Creighton) will moderate. Assisting Victoria Haneman (Creighton) in organizing the session were Executive Committee members Jill Engle (Penn State Law), Catherine Hardee (California Western), Fernanda Nicola (American), and Kerri Stone (Florida International).
December 15, 2021 in Conferences, Education, Law schools, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Monday, October 25, 2021
Using Videos to Boost Your Scholarly Impact
As blog readers consider how to boost their scholarly impact, check out Academia.edu's video upload feature added in January 2021. It is an intriguing tool. Here is one example of this feature in action posted on Academia.edu by Hilary Parsons Dick sharing a video presentation of her scholarly talk. Here is the written summary of her particular project too, which is of substantive relevance to readers too:
Since the early twentieth century, US immigration policy regimes have created a discriminatory ontology of migration that conflates the legal category of the “illegal alien” and a cultural image of Mexican and Central American migrants as dangerous, criminal Others. The production of this ontology is rooted in a highly racialized process of gendering that reinscribes long-standing white supremacist views of “dangerous brown men” and “submissive brown women.” I explore these processes through an investigation of the massive regulatory changes the Trump administration made to the US asylum system, which have disproportionately affected women and children from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. I focus on a precedential ruling by Trump's Attorney General Jeff Sessions on an asylum case called the Matter of AB. I argue that Sessions deploys a semiotics of individuation to construct violence against women as a private matter that does not warrant asylum protections.
Here are instructions on how to post videos on Academia.edu.
October 25, 2021 in Conferences, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, October 12, 2021
Unequal Profession, Unleashed
By: Meera Deo
Published in: Rutgers Law Review, Vol. 73, No. 3, 2021
This Essay initiates the Rutgers Law Review symposium, "Taking Our Space: Women of Color and Antiracism in Legal Academia," a collection of essays inspired by my book, Unequal Profession: Race and Gender in Legal Academia (Stanford University Press, 2019). After briefly tracing the origins of the book project, I focus on five themes that outline responses as well as updates to Unequal Profession: (1) claiming my worth; (2) jumping on the bandwagon; (3) centering structural solutions; (4) being part of the solution—not the solution; and (5) understanding pandemic effects on legal academia. Together, these themes reveal the depth and difficulty of the work that the legal academy must take on in order to move our profession closer to equity.
The five themes presented here are insights I have gleaned along the way since Unequal Profession was published. Just as a qualitative researcher draws out patterns and observations from the data, I have performed some preliminary analyses on two-plus years’ worth of responses to Unequal Profession, as well as crafted a brief update on how various events of this past unfathomable year exacerbate raceXgender biases in legal academia. I share these observations so that aspiring authors, current academics, allies in practice, and administrative leaders can work together with me to craft a more equal profession. As the five themes outlined here demonstrate, achieving a more equal profession involves working not only to address naysayers, whose implicit and explicit biases may reinforce inequities, but also for each one of us to critically reflect on our own individual prejudices and opportunities for improvement.
October 12, 2021 in Books, Education, Gender, Law schools, Race, Scholarship, Workplace | Permalink | Comments (0)
Wednesday, October 6, 2021
CFP Feminist Legal Theory Network at Law and Society Annual Meeting
SUBMISSION LINK UPDATED (10/27): email@example.com
The Feminist Legal Theory Collaborative Research Network of the Law and Society Association
Global Meeting on Law & Society, Lisbon, Portugal & Virtual, July 13-16, 2022
Call for Papers – Friday, October 29 Deadline
Dear friends and colleagues,
We write to invite you to participate in panels sponsored by the Feminist Legal Theory Collaborative Research Network (FLT CRN) at the LSA-sponsored Global Meeting on Law & Society, July 13-16, 2022. Information about the conference (including registration and planning your visit) is at: https://www.lawandsociety.org/lisbon-2022-homepage. Please note that the meeting is going to be held later than usual.
The theme for the Global Meeting is Rage, Reckoning, & Remedy. Feminist legal theory should and does have a lot to say about all three topics and the urgency with which we confront them now – globally but amidst vast and escalating inequality and a crisis of rising hate, fascism, and illiberal policies across the globe.
In this context, we are especially interested in papers that bring a critical feminist lens to their topics and that embrace the international character of the conference. Such papers will address the intersectional, gendered aspects of their subjects.
The following non-exhaustive list is intended to provide examples of topic areas, and not to limit scholarly and creative engagement of feminist legal theory with the conference themes:
● Present-day inequalities caused by unacknowledged and unaddressed (or inadequately addressed) legacies of slavery and colonialism.
● Consequences of neoliberal economic and social policies amidst (so-called) globalization.
● World health and environmental crises such as HIV/AIDS, Covid 19, climate change, and military, police, and other pervasive violence against marginalized people and communities around the globe.
● Critiques of international law and human rights approaches and institutions.
● Rule of law, access to justice, and legal empowerment issues and approaches.
● Inequalities related to reproduction and reproductive technologies.
● Perspectives on exploitation and resistance movements.
● Transnational/International/Comparative feminist critiques of any topic.
We especially welcome proposals that would permit us to collaborate with other CRNs and that are (give the multidisciplinary character of LSA) multidisciplinary in approach. We strongly encourage colleagues from the Global South and indigenous colleagues to submit proposals.
Our goal is to stimulate focused discussion of papers on which scholars are currently working. Thus, while proposals may reference work that is well on the way to publication, we are particularly eager to solicit proposals for works-in-progress that are at an earlier stage and will benefit from the discussion that the panels will provide.
Per the LSA guidelines, there are several types of submissions:
1. Individual papers
2. Paper Sessions: Panels that are formed around a single theme. These consist of 4-5 paper presenters, 1 Chair and 1 Discussant (who can be the same person), and last 1 hour and 45 minutes.
3. Roundtables: These may be formed around a topic and consist of 4-8 participants, 1 Chair, and last 1 hour and 45 minutes.
4. Author Meets Reader (AMR): These are for scholarly books published in 2021. For more information, please see https://www.lawandsociety.org/author-meets-reader-newbooks- in-the-field/
LSA also encourages submission of other “creative” formats for this conference. If you have an idea that you think would work well in one of these formats, please let us know.
CRN PRIORITIES FOR THIS CONFERENCE
Individual paper submissions. The CRN gives preference this year to individual submissions. A committee of the CRN will assign individual papers to panels based on the subject. Our panels will use the conference format, which requires four papers, but we will continue our custom of assigning a chair for the panel and a commentator for each individual paper. As a condition of participating as a panelist, you must also agree to serve as a chair or commentator for another panel or participant. We will of course take into account your scheduling and topic preferences to the degree possible.
Pre-formed group submissions. Although we prefer individual paper submissions, we will consider pre-formed panels, roundtables, AMR sessions, and other group submissions that meet the following guidelines:
1. The presenters have not presented together at LSA before.
2. Junior colleagues are included.
3. A diversity of institutions are represented.
4. Interdisciplinary and international perspectives are included.
If you are already planning a conference session with at least four panelists and papers that you would like to see included in the Feminist Legal Theory CRN, please let the organizers know.
The duties of a chair are to organize the panel logistically, including registering it online with the LSA and moderating the panel. The chair will develop a 100–250-word description for the session and submit the session proposal to LSA before their upcoming deadline on November 10, 2021, so that each panelist can submit his or her proposal using the panel number assigned. Chairs will also be responsible for assigning commentators but may wait to do so until panels have been scheduled later this winter.
The duties of a commentator are to read a minimum of two papers and provide verbal comments as well as brief written (email is fine) comments.
SUBMISSION PROCESS AND GUIDELINES
Individual Papers: Please email your abstract, up to three key terms (e.g., International law, violence against women, criminal law), and whether you will be virtual to firstname.lastname@example.org with the Email Subject: Individual Paper Last Name.
Panels and Roundtables: Please email your abstract and up to three key terms (e.g., International law, violence against women, criminal law) and all proposal members, identifying chair and discussant and whether any member will be virtual to
email@example.com with the Email Subject: Panel Proposal or Roundtable Proposal Last Name.
Author Meets Reader Panels: Please email your book title and all panel members, identify chair and, whether any panelist will be virtual to firstname.lastname@example.org with the Email Subject: AMR Proposal Last Name.
Please remember that group proposals that are repeated from previous years, that are composed of scholars from a single institution, that contain no junior scholars and other forms of diversity may be rejected.
Be sure to first carefully read the LSA guidelines for submission formats here:
https://www.lawandsociety.org/types-of-submissions/. Please note that LSA rules limit you to participating only once as a paper panelist or roundtable participant.
Please submit all proposals by Friday, October 29. This will permit us to organize papers into panels (and potentially other formats) and submit them prior to the LSA’s deadline on November 10. If we are unable to accept your proposal for the CRN, we will notify you by early November so that you can submit an independent proposal to the conference.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
Please send any questions or comments to the CRN email address: email@example.com. Please do not send questions or submissions to individual committee members or in response to this email.
We look forward to the conference and hope you’ll join us in Lisbon or virtually to discuss our scholarship and connect with others doing work on feminist legal theory.
LSA Planning Committee
Cyra Akila Choudhury (co-chair)
Elizabeth MacDowell (co-chair)
Sheila Velez Martin
October 6, 2021 in Call for Papers, Conferences, International, Scholarship, Theory | Permalink | Comments (0)
Thursday, May 27, 2021
Book Review: The Imperatives of Supporting New Scholarly Voices
Jamie Abrams, The Imperatives of Supporting New Scholarly Voices, 69 Journal of Legal Education No. 3 (2020).
The Legal Scholar’s Guidebook is dedicated “to all the voices longing to be heard,” previewing for readers the important values that the book champions of inviting more scholars to the table. The book is grounded in values of inclusivity and accessibility. It describes the analytic paradigms and organizational frameworks that govern traditional legal scholarship. The book implicitly reveals to readers something of a tension between conformity and inclusion. How do supervisors and mentors cultivate the development of new scholarly voices, particularly marginalized voices, within a context of reverent conformity to existing paradigms, methods, and schemas? In teaching scholarly writing, is the reverence and conformity to existing scholarship lifting up voices longing to be heard or is it conforming the voices longing to be heard with the dominant voices already being heard?
The Legal Scholar’s Guidebook is savvy in its quest to help the voices longing to be heard, and in its efforts to help address the self-doubts that nag so many scholars. It introduces important concepts of inclusion and imposter syndrome, boldly addressing them head-on, which is worthy of great gratitude. It embeds guidance throughout each chapter to “squelch the imposter voice” that can compromise the production of scholarship. The solution to the “imposter syndrome” though may not be more instruction. Mentors can reinforce the problem if those mentors share a different pedigree, background, resume from the scholar or if those mentors are confused or conflated with supervisors.
The Legal Scholar’s Guidebook, when read during a global pandemic and amid a crescendo of calls for racial justice in our communities, calls for our self-reflection as a community of scholars. Conquering imposter syndrome requires a strong sense of authenticity and belonging. This requires an alignment between one’s authentic values and identity and acceptance in a setting, institution, or task. For readers of this book in modern political, economic, and social times, it might be a springboard to deeper conversations about the chasms between the communities that feel like they belong in legal scholarship and those that do not. It might call for us all to strengthen the intentionality of our mentoring of students of color, nontraditional students, LGBTQ students, and women students. There has never been a better moment for us all to revisit how we produce and define “good” scholarship, the breadth of the scholarly voices we reproduce and consume, and the entrenched assumptions and hierarchies that shape our scholarly practices. In that sense, this guidebook might guide us all to a more inclusive and inviting place uplifting new scholarly voices.
May 27, 2021 in Books, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, May 25, 2021
Feminist Legal Theory Sessions at Law & Society Meeting this Week
This week at the Law & Society Association annual meeting (by Zoom), the Feminist Legal Theory Collaborative Research Network will offer 26 sessions from May 26 to May 30.
Here is a listing and description of the FLT Program.
Download FLT-CRN events at LSA 2021
For more information about the rest of the Law & Society program, see Law & Society Conference 2021
May 25, 2021 in Conferences, Scholarship, Theory | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, December 1, 2020
New Book: Women and the Law (2020), Annual Edition of Selected Greatest Hits in Legal Scholarship on Women's Rights
I've just published the 2020 edition of Women and the Law (Thomson Reuters). It is an annual edition of selected works on women and the law likely to be of interest to practitioners in the field. Kind of a "greatest hits" if you will of the legal scholarship from the prior year.
Here is this year's Table of Contents:
Part A Special Issue: The Nineteenth Amendment
Chapter 1 More Than the Vote: The Nineteenth Amendment as Proxy for Gender Equality, Tracy A. Thomas
Chapter 2 The Nineteenth Amendment and the Democratization of the Family, Reva B. Siegel
Chapter 3 The Constitutional Development of the Nineteenth Amendment In the Decade Following Ratification, Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 4 Thin and Thick Conceptions of the Nineteenth Amendment Right To Vote and Congress's Power To Enforce It, Richard Hasen and Leah M. Litman
Chapter 5 The “Welfare Queen” Goes to the Polls: Race Based Fractures in Gender Politics and Opportunities for Intersectional Coalitions, Catherine Powell and Camille Gear Rich
Part B Women in the Workplace
Chapter 6 Sexual Harassment Litigation with a Dose of Reality, Diane P. Wood
Chapter 7 What's Reasonable Now? Sexual Harassment Law After the Norm Cascade, Joan C. Williams, Jodi Short, Margot Brooks, Hilary Hardcastle, Tiffanie Ellis, and Rayna Saron
Chapter 8 Beyond the Bad Apple—Transforming the American Workplace for Women After #MeToo, Claudia Flores
Chapter 9 Knowledge Pays: Reversing Information Flows and the Future of Pay Equity, Orly Lobel
Part C Reproductive Rights
Chapter 10 The Continued Rise of the Reproductive Justice Lawyer, Leigh Creighton Bond and Monika Taliaferro
Chapter 11 Contracting Pregnancy, Rachel Rebouché
Part D Feminism and the Family
Chapter 12 Unsexing Pregnancy, David Fontana and Naomi Schoenbaum
Chapter 13 Settling in the Shadow of Sex: Gender Bias in Marital Asset Division, Jennifer Bennett Shinall
Part E Violence Against Women
Chapter 14 Straight Outta SCOTUS: Domestic Violence, True Threats, and Free Speech, Jessica Miles
Chapter 15 Retraumatized in Court, Negar Katirai
Chapter 16 #MeToo and Mass Incarceration, Aya Gruber
Part F Theory
Chapter 17 Sex in Public, Elizabeth Sepper and Deborah Dinner
Chapter 18 Leveling Down Gender Equality, Tracy A. Thomas
Chapter 19 Engendering Trust, Deborah S. Gordon
Chapter 20 The Body Politic: Federalism as Feminism in Health Reform, Elizabeth Y. McCuskey
December 1, 2020 in Books, Gender, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, August 4, 2020
Bibliography: Gender and Law Scholarship in Japan
Mark Levin & Kallista Hiraoka, Gender and Law Scholarship in the Law in Japan Field: A Comprehensive Bibliographic Study, 21 Asia-Pacific Law & Policy J. 1 (2020)
This bibliography, inspired by a 1990 journal article by Professor Veronica Taylor titled, Teaching about Law and Society in Japan: Does Gender Matter?, 10 JAPANESE STUD. 47 (1990), and Professor Vera Mackie’s commanding body of work in this field of study [N.1], aims to offer a tool for students and researchers interested in issues relating to gender and law in Japan. We started this bibliography by compiling and snowballing from sources in Levin’s office collection and a variety of title word searches in legal journal databases. We shared our findings first to a select list of scholars who kindly shared feedback and advised us of missing items, and secondly, on SSRN, which also allowed us to obtain additional input. The bibliography contains more than 150 publications including monographs, book chapters, textbook materials, and journal articles from 1962 to 2019.
N.1 Vera Mackie, Equal Opportunity in an Unequal Labour Market: The Japanese Situation, 4 AUSTL. FEMINIST STUD. 97 (1989); Vera Mackie, Equal Opportunity and Gender Identity: Feminist Encounters with Modernity and Postmodernity in Japan, in JAPANESE ENCOUNTERS WITH POSTMODERNITY 95 (Jóhann Páll Árnason & Yoshio Sugimoto eds., 1995); VERA MACKIE, FEMINISM IN MODERN JAPAN: CITIZENSHIP,
EMBODIMENT AND SEXUALITY (2003).
August 4, 2020 in International, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (1)
Wednesday, June 24, 2020
Study Documents Disparity in Research Productivity during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Ruomeng Cui, Hao Ding & Feng Zhu, Gender Inequality in Research Productivity During the COVID-19 Pandemic"
We study the disproportionate impact of the lockdown as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak on female and male academics' research productivity in social science. We collect data from the largest open-access preprint repository for social science on 41,858 research preprints in 18 disciplines produced by 76,832 authors across 25 countries in a span of two years. We find that during the 10 weeks after the lockdown in the United States, although the total research productivity increased by 35%, female academics' productivity dropped by 13.9% relative to that of male academics. We also show that several disciplines drive such gender inequality. Finally, we find that this intensified productivity gap is more pronounced for academics in top-ranked universities, and the effect exists in six other countries.
June 24, 2020 in Gender, Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)