The Masculine Mystique: Living Large from Law School to Later Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The careers of male lawyers are radically altered by their experiences in the formation of families. These understudied male experiences fuel income differences, creating a highly hierarchical profession focused around a male mystique of "living large." This study traces these processes across a 20-year longitudinal study of Toronto lawyers. We argue that time with corporate clients is a very specialized investment that is rewarded with partnership and earnings and that, among men, bears an unexpectedly unique relationship to having children, and that this specialized investment and its relationship to family are more culturally driven than biologically derived. Les carrières des hommes avocats sont radicalement altérées par les évènements au moment de fonder une familie. Insuffisamment étudiées, ces expériences masculines contribuent à des inégalités salariales, créant une profession éminemment hiérarchique centrée sur une mystique masculine de la « vie d'abondance ». Cet article examine ces processus à l'aide d'une étude longitudinale des expériences des avocats de Toronto, effectuée sur une période de vingt ans. Selon nous, le temps consacré aux clients corporatifs constitue un investissement spécialisé qui est récompensé par l'obtention d'un partenariat ainsi que par des gains monétaires. Parmi les hommes, cet investissement est lié inopinément avec le fait d'avoir ou non des enfants. Nous démontrons comment cet investissement spécialisé ainsi que sa relation à la familie sont dictés davantage par des facteurs culturels que par des facteurs biologiques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".