In 2022, legal scholar Leah Goodridge published a paper, “Professionalism as a Racial Construct“, in which she interrogates professionalism’s latent role as a mechanism to regulate people of color within the legal profession. This notion was also explored by Aysa Grey in her 2019 article, “The Bias of ‘Professionalism’ Standards“. The prevailing standards of professionalism, as Grey’s article aptly put forward, are often shaped by systemic and institutional prioritization of whiteness.
One may think of this issue in terms of hair discrimination. A 2023 CROWN Workplace Research study, as reported by the Harvard Business Review in “How Hair Discrimination Affects Black Women at Work“, found that Black women’s hair is perceived as unprofessional two-and-a-half times more often than their counterparts. Moreover, more than half of the Black women surveyed felt compelled to straighten their hair for job interviews, with two-thirds having changed their hair specifically for an interview.
In preparation for the Black Hair Big Law Symposium, a research study was conducted to understand how Black legal professionals – including attorneys, law professors, law students, paralegals and more – wear their hair to work and the experiences they have had. This research draws attention to the intersection of professionalism and racial identity in the legal workplace, particularly focusing on Black legal professionals’ choices regarding their hair, and offers insights into their experiences and perceptions of professionalism within their field.
Respondents were asked how they wear their hair to work and during job interviews. A significant number of respondents confessed to changing their hairstyles to more ‘straight’ styles, eschewing natural or protective styles. For example, for job interviews, common styles included buns, silk presses, blowouts, and ponytails. This, along with other responses, shows a predisposition for Black legal professionals to conform their hair to more ‘White’ or European standards of appearance, at least during the initial interview stages.
A postulated reason for this behavior is the pressure Black women at law firms feel to conform to predominantly white, European standards. This is supported by findings from the CROWN Workplace Research study and Grey’s “The Bias of ‘Professionalism’ Standards“. Furthermore, a UK-based article titled “It’s virtually impossible to reach the top of City firms without straight hair.” claimed that it is nearly impossible to hold a high-ranking position within a law firm without having straight hair.
In the Black Hair Big Law survey, a majority of participants – 60.98% – responded that they have changed their hair to feel more professional at work. Despite this, it’s worth noting that styles such as Wash n’ go (WNG), Bantu knots, braids, locs, twists, and Afros did not appear as common responses in questions about interviewing hairstyles. There are likely many reasons for this, but the study’s findings suggest an industry bias against Afrocentric hairstyles when interviewing for jobs. Such insights reveal the troubling insinuation that hairstyle modification serves as a form of revenue protection.
This investigation into Black hair, professionalism, and the law provides an urgent call to recognize the value and contributions of Black legal professionals beyond physical appearances including hair. Their experiences, talents, and credentials should be the primary focus, eliminating the need for them to bear the emotional or physical toll of conforming to a system that is implicitly biased against them.
The findings of this study and the personal experiences of these professionals underscore the importance of transforming the definitions and standards of professionalism. Ensuring they are inclusive and sensitive to racial constructs would help foster a more equitable and diverse legal profession.