In this article we clarify and modify Marxian and postindustrial predictions about the structural transformation of the legal profession, especially as they relate to gender differences in the law firm. In doing so, we utilize the concept of cultural capital and highlight the changing gender stratification of legal practice. We find that there is a growing centralization and concentration of cultural capital in law firms, so that both men and women are losing their proportionate shares of partnership positions in the profession, but with women losing more than men. The greatest growth in the profession has been at the middle and lower levels of larger firms, and women are especially likely to be represented in these locations. Women experience their worst partnership prospects in smaller firms, which suggests that male-dominated smaller firms are especially resistant to modifying the work roles assumed by men and women in the profession. We conclude that gender stratification is an important part of the structural transformation of legal practice.

Civil damage awards in wrongful death cases and experimental data from jury simulations reveal that male decedents are typically awarded substantially higher monetary damages than are similarly situated female decedents. These differences in treatment may arise because female decedents are perceived as worth less, female survivors are perceived as more needy, and/or male decedents are perceived to have a longer lost income stream than any female decedents. Mock jurors received written summaries of wrongful death cases stipulating to the liability of the defendant. They were asked to award an appropriate sum in damages and about the factors they considered in making these awards. Male decedents received higher awards in two separate studies. While mock jurors were sensitive to the perceived needs of the surviving spouse, the disparity in awards was primarily attributable to differences in the estimated lost income of the male and female decedents.

How well do conventional perspectives on homicide account for the social distribution of femicide, or the killing of females? An analysis of 670 cases of femicide in Toronto and Vancouver from 1921 to 1988 provides stronger support for an alternative perspective that acknowledges both the intimate, domestic character of femicide and the historically contingent nature of opportunities and motivations for femicide. Rather than coming to resemble male homicide, femicide remains as concentrated in private, domestic locations and relationships as it was seventy years ago. However, the relationships between femicide and some social statuses, such as women's employment, have changed over time.

Criminal prosecution of abusive men is described here as a power resource used by battered women to help bring about satisfactory arrangements for managing conjugal violence. This article examines relevant theory on exchange and power processes to explain the conditions of victim empowerment. It then describes cases of women who filed charges against their conjugal partners to show how victims may file, but later drop, charges as a rational power strategy for determining the future course of their relationships. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of prosecutorial policies that limit battered women's control over criminal justice processes.

In this exploratory study, we ask whether perceptions of and responses to violence in dating relationships are gendered and whether the factors that affect male perceptions also influence females. Using the social control and feminist literatures as a guide, we explore gender differences in perception of sanction risk and attitudes toward resolution of violence when it occurs. Our data reveal several differences in male and female perceptions of formal and informal sanctions (attachment to significant others and stigmatic costs)—although not always in the expected direction—and show that different factors influence male and female perceptions of sanction likelihood and costs. We also find that females are more likely than males to seek relationship termination, informal controls, or formal justice outcomes if assaulted by their partner. However, the conditions that stimulate victims to consider these decisions vary by gender. These findings are discussed, along with implications for further research.

Despite the paucity of research on the death penalty and gender discrimination, it is widely supposed that women murderers are chivalrously spared the death sentence. This supposition is fueled by the relatively small number of women who are condemned. This article argues that women are represented on contemporary U.S. death rows in numbers commensurate with the infrequency of female commission of those crimes which our society labels sufficiently reprehensible to merit capital punishment. Additionally, preliminary investigation suggests that death-sentenced women are more likely than death-sentenced men to have killed intimates, although the explanation for this disparity is not yet at hand. It is further argued, on the basis of a content analysis of state capital statutes, that there is a form of gender bias inimical to the interests of women in our capital punishment law: The death penalty is a dramatic symbol of the imputation of greater seriousness to economic and other predatory murder as compared with domestic murder.

This essay argues that feminist rights analysis should broaden and diversify its reach to include the rights talk from the everyday lives of all sorts of different women—to look at women's rights at least in part as practices. Women's practices within particular, local contexts become crucial to feminist interpretations of rights because here women articulate the significance of rights (and their denials) for their political and social identities and for their thoughts and acts of resistance and acquiescence to hegemonic forces. In presenting this argument, I offer an interpretation of recent Anglo-American feminist and postmodern, pluralist legal scholarship that together fosters an understanding of rights as practices, as mundane legal claims women make in their day-to-day worlds. I analyze and elaborate these views in order to develop and encourage an interpretation of rights and talk about rights as practices of different women.