Hmm.

So this article basically says that we need to be very cautious about the way we equate "empathy" in the search for a new Supreme Court Justice with the gender of the judge. In other words because Obama suggested that he wanted someone with more empathy, the pundits and general public have taken that to mean that the justice is going to be a woman (nevermind the fact that 5 out of 6 of his shortlist are women...). Because of this, stereotypes and unreasonable expectations abound (Women = empathetic. Men = not.) and the country is left with continued divides and expectations between the genders. This paragraph from the article sums it up: At the risk of sounding like Chief Justice John Roberts, the notion of difference based on gender merely reinforces more divisions based upon gender. It suggests women should be judged by different criteria and enables attacks upon a woman based on the fact that she either fails to measure up to men or is somehow untrue to her own gender. Anyway, I found it all very interesting and nothing I had really thought about because I was too excited about a) the possibility of a new liberal Justice, and b) the fact that it is summer and getting dressed is super easy now-- sundresses ahoy! I do, however, feel incredible empathy towards you men who are still stuck matching pants and a shirt... [Here's the article that I forgot to link to before... http://www.slate.com/id/2218755/]