Should I try to mention I'm gay? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I'm a current clerk applying for firms. In interviews should I try to find (if natural of course) a point to say "boyfriend" or something to try to signal that I'm a notch in their diversity column? I'm not obviously flamboyant or anything. I'm not really worried about the knowledge of my sexuality being a problem (and not sure I'd want to work at a firm where it was), but I'm more just a little afraid of mentioning anything personal like that unless specifically asked. But I imagine for at least some firms it would benefit me for them to know.

I was thinking like if they ask why I want to be in City X I can mention that I don't have a boyfriend where I'm at now (as part of a broader answer) in explaining why I'm willing/wanting to move.

Thanks for any advice.

[JohnnieSockran]

Saying "I'd move to city X because I don't have a boyfriend in current city Y" seems too in your face, like you're clearly trying to get it on the record that you're gay. Most people would probably just say "I'm single" or "I don't have any ties or family in my current city" so I think you need to think about a better way to bring it up and make sure that it is actually coming up naturally.

I'd test any answer that you think is a natural way to bring it up on an objective third party like a friend or colleague that you trust will be honest with you, because your first example is not natural, IMHO.

[Anonymous User]

Saying "I'd move to city X because I don't have a boyfriend in current city Y" seems too in your face, like you're clearly trying to get it on the record that you're gay. Most people would probably just say "I'm single" or "I don't have any ties or family in my current city" so I think you need to think about a better way to bring it up and make sure that it is actually coming up naturally.

I'd test any answer that you think is a natural way to bring it up on an objective third party like a friend or colleague that you trust will be honest with you, because your first example is not natural, IMHO.

That's fair, and to be honest I didn't put much thought into it at this point. To the broader point though do you think it's worth trying to think of a natural way?

[sparty99]

If you'd like to signal to firms that you're gay, the easiest way to do that would be through your resume (assuming there is a truthful way to do that).
If you were a member of your law school's LGBT group, participated in your law school's LGBT clinic (if one was available; they're rare), etc., then put that on your resume.
Putting it on your resume also allows the firms' recruiting departments to pair you with LGBT attorneys during interviews. Then, they'll often bring up their firms' LGBT affinity groups, pro bono work, etc., which can begin a conversation.

No one will care. This is not Lavender Law.

[Anonymous User]

I mentioned in a thank you note to an interviewer who had gay affinity groups mentioned in bios that I was interested in the firm because it seemed very open and asked to hear more about how accepting the firm as a whole was, especially older partners, etc. (in a southern city). He called me the next morning offering a callback and responding to my question.

[shock259]

I think the best approach is to put something on your resume to that effect. If it comes up naturally in conversation, don't hide it. But I don't think you need to angle for ways to work it into the conversation. I would focus more on just being a good interviewer.

Also, at least at my firm, LGBT isn't going to be a huge boost. Definitely doesn't hurt, but you're not going to get nearly the attention that a minority candidate is going to get.

[Anonymous User]

I debated this when I was applying as well. A lot of people who seem “straight” are gay and a lot of people who seem gay are straight in biglaw, so it wouldn’t even matter if you were flamboyant.

As a couple posters mentioned, it is a minimal boost to the firm and it could potentially hurt you if the actual interviewer is not so cool with lgbt stuff. I’m at a pretty progressive firm but a lot of partners, including younger partners, are not very progressive in that respect.

I decided against it because of the marginal boost.

Many top firms are already filled with many lgbt attorneys and I honestly think they include lgbt people in the diversity stuff to pay lip service.

Many lgbt attorneys at these firms weren’t marginal candidates either. They are high achievers who probably would have received the offer regardless. So I don’t even think firms think about diversity when hiring these attorneys. Firms make more conscious efforts with AA and Hispanic attorneys because their numbers are abysmal (there are some firms with more LGBT attorneys than AA).

I’d just put LAMBDA or OUTLAW somewhere in the resume if you really want to mention it. But, it may not be worth the potential risk.

[nixy]

I mentioned in a thank you note to an interviewer who had gay affinity groups mentioned in bios that I was interested in the firm because it seemed very open and asked to hear more about how accepting the firm as a whole was, especially older partners, etc. (in a southern city). He called me the next morning offering a callback and responding to my question.

Correlation =/= causation.

(I also don't think sexuality is going to move the needle very far, for the reasons everyone above has said. Which isn't to say you should hide it if it comes up naturally, but I don't think trying to make a point of it to get a diversity bonus is going to do much.)

[Lacepiece23]

The longer I'm in biglaw, the more I realize that no one really gives a shit about diversity. This is coming from a URM. It might even hurt you with the wrong person.

[Anonymous User]

It will be a neutral to positive at the firms you are most likely to be interested in (given your very valid point that you probably would not want to work anywhere where your sexuality is a problem). But I think the way you are proposing to bring it up (mentioning, as an ostensibly single person, that you are open to moving/looking to move because you don't have a boyfriend) would feel artificial - unless, perhaps, you are talking to someone you know to be gay and they perceive it as you wanting to signal that you're in the same camp.

Apart from listing any LGBT group affiliations on your resume, I think the easiest way to put the topic in issue if you want to is by requesting the in-firm recruiter to schedule you to speak with at least one LGBT attorney and/or member of the firm's LGBT affinity group. Same inference will be drawn; it won't be awkward; and you will then have at least one person with whom you can comfortably discuss the firm's commitment to diversity and/or how it feels to be a gay person working at the firm (whereas simply listing a LGBT group membership on your resume won't guarantee that the firm will take this step). I did one interview round in biglaw where I was out, and this approach allowed me to learn about each firm's level of LGBT inclusion even before receiving an offer. If there was any diversity benefit to be had from outing myself, I suppose I received that as well. I do share other posters' uncertainty regarding the extent to which there is a LGBT preference in most biglaw hiring. I have seen most firms (in my major market, coastal city) seem genuinely committed to making sure that LGBT attorneys are comfortable/feel accepted, but I have not necessarily heard as much discussion about needing to ensure improvement regarding LGBT retention/promotion as I have on the gender and racial diversity fronts. This can be because LGBT folks are not always underrepresented, when white gay male statistics are taken into account, in the same way as women and racial minorities consistently tend to be.

ETA The "in-firm recruiter approach" also means that - if you want to keep your orientation OFF your resume to avoid blasting your orientation to everyone including homophobes - you probably can. The recruiter and the gay attorneys s/he pairs you with will know you identify as gay, but other attorneys with whom you don't share this during your interview are less likely to be aware of your orientation when they complete their evaluations after your interview - although, of course, they won't be GUARANTEED to be unaware of your orientation once you put it in issue. It is a way of hedging your bets, though.

[Anonymous User]

It will be a neutral to positive at the firms you are most likely to be interested in (given your very valid point that you probably would not want to work anywhere where your sexuality is a problem). But I think the way you are proposing to bring it up (mentioning, as an ostensibly single person, that you are open to moving/looking to move because you don't have a boyfriend) would feel artificial - unless, perhaps, you are talking to someone you know to be gay and they perceive it as you wanting to signal that you're in the same camp.

Apart from listing any LGBT group affiliations on your resume, I think the easiest way to put the topic in issue if you want to is by requesting the in-firm recruiter to schedule you to speak with at least one LGBT attorney and/or member of the firm's LGBT affinity group. Same inference will be drawn; it won't be awkward; and you will then have at least one person with whom you can comfortably discuss the firm's commitment to diversity and/or how it feels to be a gay person working at the firm (whereas simply listing a LGBT group membership on your resume won't guarantee that the firm will take this step). I did one interview round in biglaw where I was out, and this approach allowed me to learn about each firm's level of LGBT inclusion even before receiving an offer. If there was any diversity benefit to be had from outing myself, I suppose I received that as well. I do share other posters' uncertainty regarding the extent to which there is a LGBT preference in most biglaw hiring. I have seen most firms (in my major market, coastal city) seem genuinely committed to making sure that LGBT attorneys are comfortable/feel accepted, but I have not necessarily heard as much discussion about needing to ensure improvement regarding LGBT retention/promotion as I have on the gender and racial diversity fronts. This can be because LGBT folks are not always underrepresented, when white gay male statistics are taken into account, in the same way as women and racial minorities consistently tend to be.

ETA The "in-firm recruiter approach" also means that - if you want to keep your orientation OFF your resume to avoid blasting your orientation to everyone including homophobes - you probably can. The recruiter and the gay attorneys s/he pairs you with will know you identify as gay, but other attorneys with whom you don't share this during your interview are less likely to be aware of your orientation when they complete their evaluations after your interview - although, of course, they won't be GUARANTEED to be unaware of your orientation once you put it in issue. It is a way of hedging your bets, though.

Thank you, I really appreciate and like that idea, especially when they specifically ask you who you would like to speak to like many firms do.

And thanks everyone for all your advice, I was never under the impression it was anything more than a nominal boost, I just didn't want to give it up if I could but I think most of the things I was thinking about probably would come across awkward enough that it wouldn't be worth that nominal boost.

Thanks again!

[Npret]

I’m not clear. Do you want to use being gay as a reason firms might hire you or are you concerned about how firms will react to your being gay? Probably both.

It varies from firm to firm but I doubt it will make a difference in your being hired. Be careful about saying you don’t want to be at a firm where it might be seen as a negative by some partners. You can’t judge the attitude of an entire firm by a few people. You need a job so keep an open mind.

What will hurt you in hiring is having a bad or awkward interview. As you said above, it’s better to avoid the subject if it doesn’t come up naturally. I’m not sure how the question if your being gay would ever be raised by an interviewer.

[QContinuum]

I mentioned in a thank you note to an interviewer who had gay affinity groups mentioned in bios that I was interested in the firm because it seemed very open and asked to hear more about how accepting the firm as a whole was, especially older partners, etc. (in a southern city). He called me the next morning offering a callback and responding to my question.

Correlation =/= causation.

(I also don't think sexuality is going to move the needle very far, for the reasons everyone above has said. Which isn't to say you should hide it if it comes up naturally, but I don't think trying to make a point of it to get a diversity bonus is going to do much.)

Of course we can't say that the thank-you note was outcome-determinative, moving that poster from a ding to a CB. But it certainly sounds like it made a positive impression, given that that partner personally called the next morning to respond.

But I agree that in general, LGBT status won't move the needle very far (to the extent it'd help at all). It might make an associate more likely to be featured on the firm's website if/when they're trying to promote their diversity efforts, but that's probably about it.

[nixy]

Sure, but they could have already decided to give that person a callback, so the thank-you was just an opportunity to call, not moving the needle.