This article relies on the commonly accepted postulate according to which personal characteristics of judges, including gender, could influence the interpretation and application of law, and by consequence, shape the jurisprudence. This assumption is of particular relevance in an international court like the European Court of Human Rights where judges from various cultural and professional backgrounds sit together and where around one third of judges are women. Comparing the findings of empirical studies with key principles such as collegiality and impartiality, the paper explores the existence of a potential “gender effect” in differentiating its expression on the bench from its concretization in judgments. Whereas multiple elements contribute to highlight the existence of “female voices” on the Strasbourg bench, its materialisation in judgments tends to be relative. Nonetheless, the participation of female judges on the bench is crucial in that it enriches deliberations and contributes to bring a gender-sensitive approach of the law of the Convention.