Years ago I attended a cultural anthropology conference at Intel. Raising questions around gender differences — in this case around women’s functional use of computers, down to the mouse in her hand — I was scorned by a group of PhD women from Berkeley, for suggesting that women’s and men’s brains are different.
We know now that gender differences do exist in perception, logic and reasoning processes. It tough to lie about brain scan imaging, regardless of how these gender-based differences arose.
Dahlia Lithwick’s Slate piece The Fairer Sex makes the case why Obama will not only replace Supreme Court judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a female judge, but probably the next justice as well.
On the face of it, logic argues that the American justice system should no longer be ‘governed’ by nine male judges, or even eight. That’s a ‘wow’, if we think about it.
But is the question about more than ‘social legitimacy’?
Lithwick takes up a reasoned case for a “female jurisprudence” that’s different than “male jurisprudence”, documenting very measurable differences in judicial rulings, when a woman serves on the court.
Who argues that this is an irrelevant fact of American life, when discussing the highest law in the land? A