Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
I'd still chalk that up to context. If I'm talking to a bunch of Boy Scouts, I'm going to focus on how being a Scout influences my perspective on things. If I'm talking to a bunch of people over 6 feet tall, I'm going to talk about how being tall influences my perspective on things.
Sort of an aside: there is research that suggests that in states where judges are elected, all other things being equal more voters tend to favor a female over a male.
|
Sure, but even though you were talking to Scouts you probably wouldn't address the Scouts' attitude toward gays. There's something about appropriateness, but there's something about playing it safe with the audience you've got too. It's completely normal and expected, but for some reason, it amuses me in this case.
I don't think that most people in the abstract have a bias against women judges, so your second point isn't really surprising. Most of the time, I think voters imagine that women will be outside of any Good Ol' Boys network, and I think that's what they are hoping for in judges.
(I do think that employees tend to be ridiculously hard on most females in superior employment positions, but that's neither here nor there in this case. I'm just noting that in reality/ direct experience, people frequently hold women to different standards than they do men. )
Threaded Mode
