![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
catsittingstillWomen are slightly over half the population. So women should be slightly over half the Supreme Court. There are nine Supreme Court judges, so that means five of them should be women.
The most we've ever had is two. George W. Bush left us with only one. Of course the next Supreme Court judge should be a woman. The next four Supreme Court judges should be women. Unless Ruth Bader Ginsberg retires in that time, in which case the next five Supreme Court judges should be women.
Duh.
And I'm being moderate and patient, here. If I was really going for true equality and fairness, the Supreme Court should have only women on it for the next one hundred and ninety years, at which point a single male would be allowed to serve and twelve years later, a second male would be allowed to serve, with the court only opening up to allow a total of four males sixteen years after that.
The most we've ever had is two. George W. Bush left us with only one. Of course the next Supreme Court judge should be a woman. The next four Supreme Court judges should be women. Unless Ruth Bader Ginsberg retires in that time, in which case the next five Supreme Court judges should be women.
Duh.
And I'm being moderate and patient, here. If I was really going for true equality and fairness, the Supreme Court should have only women on it for the next one hundred and ninety years, at which point a single male would be allowed to serve and twelve years later, a second male would be allowed to serve, with the court only opening up to allow a total of four males sixteen years after that.
no subject
Date: 2009-05-05 09:47 pm (UTC)In a world...
We have been in that world for 20 years, and your theory has not been borne out. Far too few women in the law stick it out for long enough. Heck, even Sandra Day O'Connor bailed, to take care of her huband. And to make about 10 times more from the lecture circuit and book sales than she was making as a justice.
I know you'll be doing some research and coming up with names of women you would like to see on the Supreme Court. I look forward to seeing those names. This might be a good place to start: http://www.nawj.org/
no subject
Date: 2009-05-06 02:05 pm (UTC)Err, not me. You're the one saying we can't have women Supreme Court Justices because we don't have any qualified women.
That is in fact what you're saying, right? That we don't have enough, or even any, qualified women and thus we shouldn't try for five, or even one, female SCJ?
We have been in that world for 20 years, and your theory has not been borne out.
I realize that you're part of the priveledged gender in this case, and thus the tilted playing field honestly looks level to you because you're at the top of it. I'm here to tell you about the view from the other end of the field.
At the other end of the field, you're expected to do all the work for your job, and then the vast majority of the housework and the vast majority of the childcare (if you have children) when you get home. Unless you're unmarried, in which case you have to do all the housework, but at least you don't have to pick up after anybody else or meet anyone's standards but your own.
If you *are* married, and your partner makes some effort do so some (any) of either of these extra jobs, you are expected to 1) be his manager--reminding him of what needs to be done, checking to see that it *got* done, and done properly (poor housecleaning isn't a problem, but clean dishes are a health issue), and reminding him again, or taking up the slack yourself, if necessary, all so delicately that he never realizes you're managing him, because then it becomes a status issue for him to resist and 2) pretend that this isn't more work than just doing it yourself and 3) be grateful, because most women honestly don't have it so good.
I remember the summer I was working and my partner at the time was free; he agreed to do the laundry and the dishes (which I normally did) and what actually happened was that he played videogames all day during the week while I was working, because it was his vacation, and then on the weekends he played videogames while I did the dishes and the laundry that had piled up over the week. Yes, you bet that kind of thing affects how much energy you have to give to your job, and whether you take on extra responsibilities there that would mean working longer hours.
Yes, women for make choices that take the genuinely tilted expectations of the real world into account. No, that doesn't mean it's our own fault and we should be shut out of positions of power as a consequence.