Abstract
Tsedale M. Melaku’s You Don’t Look Like a Lawyer offers an account of the experiences of African American women lawyers in elite corporate firms in the United States, and in so doing provides a solid treatise on the intersections of race, gender, and class on the realities of black professionals in elite occupations.
You Don’t Look like a Lawyer identifies elite law firms as distinct racist institutions that are founded on the experiences of and for the benefit of “elite white men” (p. 3). Tracing the systemic nature of power in these institutions, the author shows how black women, as the quintessential outsiders, work to navigate and find upward mobility in institutional settings historically set up to exclude them. By looking at the legal profession broadly, and elite law firms specifically, Melaku builds on scholarship that has drawn our attention to the gendered and racialized nature of organizations. However, Melaku goes beyond a narrow focus on workplace dynamics, to show how institutions form part of what sociologist Joe Feagin has termed an “elite-white male dominance system” that mirrors the very foundational structures of U.S. society. She simultaneously shows how practices of domination and subjugation play out in the everyday, how they manifest in routine interactions, and their deleterious effects on black women.
Developing the twin concepts of the invisible labor clause and the inclusion tax, the author shows the unwritten rules (e.g., about appearance and conduct) that govern the work and expectations of white male–dominated institutions. Melaku captures the additional work, both physical and emotional, that black women must do to navigate complex and hostile work environments. Most of this work, according to Melaku, is invisible and goes unacknowledged. The toll of this labor is captured in her concept of the inclusion tax, the additional resources, such as time, emotional and mental energy, and money that black women must spend to simply function in these elite environments. These theoretical innovations are sound and build on and extend existing theories such as systemic racism theory, systemic gendered racism, intersectionality, and concepts such as white racial frame, color-blind racist ideology, and emotional labor, adding much needed intersectional analysis, while painting a vivid picture of how black women in elite law firms push the boundaries of existing knowledge.
All book chapters succeed in bringing the voices and experiences of black women lawyers in elite law firms, an underrepresented, and before now, invisible group to the fore. These chapters also bring to light systemic patterns of racism and gender subjugation that result in obstacles for black women in recruitment and retention, lack of mentorship and support, bias and disadvantage in performance reviews and assignments, exposure to racial microaggressions, and lack of belonging and inclusivity in work environments.
This book weaves a complex interplay between making broad based claims about gendered racism in legal institutions and paying close attention to the subjectivities, experiences, and voices of research subjects. By so doing, the author achieves quite a feat, but herein also lies one potential weakness of the study. Steeped in a sound analysis of the existing literature and bringing innovative theoretical insights and contributions to bear, the book makes major notable claims about the intersections of race, gender, and class in elite work environments. These claims are credible given the grounding in corroborating studies on the issue; however, the author’s own data sometimes fell short of claims. For instance, powerful and moving quotes opened sections and chapters, from which the author embarked on lengthy analysis. However, corroborating quotations from other research subjects were seldom included, raising the question of how pronounced the themes were in the author’s data. The reader was introduced to key informants, and often analysis circled back to the same informants. These critiques are probably contextualized by the small sample size of the study. However, the small sample size is not a fatal flaw, as the author convinces us with the sheer force and emotive power of the stories and experiences shared. The findings corroborate and extend the analysis found in previous studies, making this study on black women lawyers authoritative, important, and groundbreaking.
You Don’t Look Like A Lawyer is relevant to audiences well beyond the discipline of sociology and should be required reading for interdisciplinary audiences interested in race, gender, class in professional occupations, the legal profession, the black middle class, and experiences of blacks in professional occupations. The author provides an analysis of the intersections of race, gender, and class in professions that is unique in its theoretical insights and innovations and that should shape our understanding of the experiences of black women in the legal profession for years to come.