Quote:
Originally Posted by SydneyK
I don't think this is a gender issue (criticizing the woman based on looks); I think there would be a similar response if the nominee were an effeminate male.
|
You may be right. So the "problem" is more that she looks masculine than she wouldn't be considered attractive? That makes some sense, although I still think it's extremely pathetic. Because there are certainly some male justices who are extremely hard on the eyes (for example, Scalia), and I don't remember people bringing looks into the conversation when they were nominated---but they don't exactly look effeminate.
Threaded Mode
