In this Essay, Brown revisits the issue of single-sex education, questioning the wisdom of her own earlier proposal that a women's law school could remedy the alienation, underachievement, and silencing that women are said to experience in law school. The Essay addresses two questions. First, as a growing body of empiricism in some ways supports but in other ways undermines earlier claims that sex is the characteristic most determinative of law school experience, the Essay considers whether a remedy based on sex is viable. Second, and perhaps more importantly, the Essay draws upon Vivian Paley's work with very young children, documented in her book You Can't Say You Can't Play, and considers the costs of a women's law school for those outside its walls. Recognizing the pain that sex segregation can cause, the Essay considers whether men who are dissatisfied with law school would feel excluded from a remedy that might have helped them. The Essay then explores the rationales for exclusion, particularly when practiced by historically disempowered people, and concludes that norms of inclusion and antisubordination must be balanced in any reform of women's legal education.
Jennifer G. Brown,
Chi.-Kent L. Rev.
Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol75/iss3/10