I Can Be a Lawyer

I Can Be a LawyerI Can Be A Lawyer

Submitter: Someone actually submitted an ILL request for this book.  I gave it out in hopes that it would not find its way home.  Unfortunately, like the proverbial cat, it came back.  It, and a few of its brethren, were summarily weeded.  You will note that men are lawyers and women are assistants.  If the massive blocks on their desks were not described as being computers, I doubt the children reading the book would know what they were.  It is also good to know that “many lawyers” use computers.

Holly: There seems to be no end to this delightful series.  Career books go out of date so fast!

Lawyer and Assistant

Lawyer at computer


    1. yes! it looks as tho’ a dissatisfied client had taken a tire iron to the man’s head, perhaps…

  1. We have the reporter one from this set…I tried to suggest getting rid of it, but it’s still there LOL

  2. There goes that dream of being a lawyer. I certainly have the asking questions part down pat. I swear someone could make a drinking game of my blog posts with all the questions that just end up scattered throughout them. That computer the guy’s at looks a bit like a microwave with a keyboard.

  3. I just noticed the software books he had sitting next to the computer. My dad threw those out in 1992. Career books like these need to go the way of the Buffalo.

  4. I’d love to update this for today. “Today, many lawyers avoid using computers to prepare for their cases because Westlaw/Lexis-Nexis charges through the nose every time you so much as think you want to look something up in their database. “

  5. I graduated from law school in 1983. At that point, nearly half of all law students were women. It’s inexcusable that a book published in 1987 would perpetuate such plainly erroneous stereotypes — and foist them on children! Ugh! I’m now a school librarian and I think we have some of this series on the shelves — I’ll be doing some weeding in the fall!

    1. I’m in law school now, and my school–and virtually every law school I applied to–very pointedly has an even 50/50 split between the genders. And women had been allowed to be lawyers for over 100 years when this was published. And it was published post-women’s lib! That depiction is an atrocity on many levels.

      1. There’s a law school on Harbor Blvd that I often drive by when going to South Coast Plaza or CostCo and I’d say judging from what I’ve seen more then 50% of the student body are female.

        What annoys me though is 90% of those females are dressed in the manner of their future clients. Micro-miniskirts and sky high stiletto heels. Most without nylons (which is a tacky and gross look) but a few with fishnets. Ladies, how do you expect people to ever take you seriously as a lawyer and a woman if you dress like a hooker? Like it or not, people DO and WILL ALWAYS judge you first off by how you look/dress. And if you look like a cheap tramp no matter how good a lawyer you are, you’re not going to be taken seriously.

        And then you’ll see even more books like above.

  6. Atrocity?! Hah! Methinks you do not know the meaning of the word.

    Funny book, but hypersensitivity about gender stereotypes is as outdated as this book is.

    1. And pedantry about hyperbole on the internet is the mainstay of those without anything else to add to the conversation.

      My point was merely that these stereotypes were outdated when this book was published, which adds to its weedability.

  7. Ma’am, “atrocities” are really bad things. Like someone’s life being snuffed out by a train that wasn’t properly signaled at an intersection. Or a runaway hot dog machine that winds up spilling scalding water all over a youngster, thereby leaving him disfigured for the rest of his life.

    My not being included in an “I can be a basketball player” book, or your not being included in an “I can be a lawyer” book is not an atrocity. It’s because I’m short and you’re a woman.

    1. If you are going to be pedantic about my hyperbolic use of atrocity, then please use an accurate definition of the word. The Holocaust was an atrocity. Darfur is an atrocity. What you named are unfortunate occurrences (for which, by the way, lawyers would be able to get their families a good deal of money for their pain and suffering).

      And if you’re going to make a sexist joke about women not being included in a book about lawyers, your best bet is NOT to make it to a woman who is actually in law school and stated so in the very comment you’re responding to. Because it’s not edgy or ironically offensive, it just makes you look stupid.

  8. On the subject of atrocities: I wonder whether it is worth considering the notion that there is actually no more suffering in the world than can be felt by a single organism. One person’s suffering can be great, but that is as bad as it gets, experientially. In that sense, the holocaust is an atrocity, but maybe being burned by a runaway hot-dog stand is also an atrocity, as it is measured by the experience of suffering of the burned individual.

    Also, I guess folks can be as hyperbolic or as pedantic as they like. This will never actually be a conversation. Just a long series of brief opinions each standing alone.