Blog #38: Sandra Day O'Connor

Sandra Day O’Connor was the first women appointed to the Supreme Court. When President Reagan said that he was going to appoint a woman to the bench no one really believed him. They just figured he said it to get elected, but when we was elected that he would sweep it under the bridge. He proved everyone wrong when he gave Sandra Day O’Connor a call in 1981. She said it herself that she more surprised than anyone to receive the call. After she graduated from law school Sandra Day O’Connor could not find a job that would pay her. She got her start by working for free in a small office that she shared with a secretary. Eventually, she had proved herself as a good lawyer and got a salary and an office of her own. She had not done any Federal work and she was just doing her thing in Arizona. She took the job though and said that she felt overwhelmed for the first year or so on the bench. Her whole staff was as green as she was. It was new to all of them. She had so much work to do with the mail alone and she had no idea about how the process worked and what she was supposed to do. She felt her way through it though and makes a great difference on the bench and to women everywhere. She opened the door for so many more women and put a huge crack in the glass ceiling that has been oppressing women for decades. Many people speak of Sandra Day O’Connor as the “swing vote” on the Supreme Court. Being the swing vote means that she was the deciding vote on a lot of issues. It was a topic that she did not like to speak of though.

Blog #37: ABA Report

There were similarities and differences between the report, Charting Our Progress, by the American Bar Association Commission and Holly English’s book, Gender on Trial. The first similarity was as simple as reporting on the presence of women in the law field. The accounted that the number on women as lawyers and who have graduated from lawyer has increased quite significantly. However, they also both reported that women are still facing many barriers in the profession and that a lot of these barriers stem for attitudes that have not changed. Both also talked of the stereotypes that are associated with women lawyers, such as, being too aggressive, too emotional, and too bossy. When these traits are attributed to male lawyers they are seen as good things instead of as negative attributes when applied to women lawyers. They are also talked down to by men in the law field by not addressing them correctly. The report and English’s book both talked of the family friendly policies that are available. The majority of the time these policies are unwritten. When women and men chose to exercise their right to use the policy they are ostracized and penalized. They are also seen as less committed to the job. The both expressed concerns with the billable hours that they are required to meet. This has caused some women to leave their positions. English went further by saying that women are more honest in their billing of hours. The report by the ABA stated concerns that gay and lesbian lawyers were facing; English tried to not get that diverse in the issue. Both the report and English stated that mentoring was very important and that more mentoring programs need to be adapted to the firms. Another similarity was to have more flexible hours for lawyers to be able to utilize. The report and the book were both very educational on learning what women, and some men, go through on a regular basis. It was also obvious that change needs to happen.

Blog #36: Talk of the Nation

Can corporate America lure women back into the workforce? I think corporate America can lure women back into the workforce; it is just going to take a lot of change and understanding. I personally do not see why any man or woman would want to work long hours and then be on-call 24 hours of the day. I understand that Americans are obsessed with success and money, but at what cost. What good is making all this money if you never get to go out and enjoy it? The NPR broadcast “Talk of the Nation” stated that Americans work on average 100 hour more per year than any other industrial nation in the world. I just do not understand why. One of the men who called in to NPR stated that he observed 25 measurable differences between men workers and women workers. Men are concerned with how to make money. The man said that men in general feel like they have an obligation to make more money. Women on the other hand center their work on achieving a balance. The balance women are looked for are: work, family, and having a life. Yes, the glass ceiling is still a problem, but fortunately it has lessened somewhat over the past years. Some people feel that women are forced, but the main consensus was that women opt out and do not want to make the sacrifices that are necessary to be on the top rungs of business. To get women to come back to the workforce businesses need to be more flexible and provide reduced hours. One gentleman said that doctors can still be good doctors if they work 40 hours to 70 hours instead of over a hundred hours a week. It is obvious that women bring great skills and talents to the job. The jobs that have women in the top positions are more successful than the jobs that do not. That should be enough of an incentive to make the necessary changes to get women to come back to work.

Blog #35: EEOC

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) submitted a document titled “Best Practices”. This document is not a binding document, but was writing to get business to go above and beyond the minimum requirements to promote work/family balance. The EEOC understands that there are so many more necessities for care giving that is required of employees. Most people only think of parents as being childcare providers. They tend to forget that the elderly need to be cared for and that falls to their children most of the time. There are also family members who are suffering from medical conditions, some of which are terminal. The document reminds employers that these caregivers not only work for pay, but when they clock out they are going home to work unpaid hours. I also like how the document from the EEOC mentions the recession and how providing for the family has fallen to a lot of the women because their husbands have been laid off. Now we have women working the double shift and only making ¾ the pay that their male counterparts are making. By making the work environment more family friendly will help to alleviates so much of the stress that caregivers are under. English also refers to the benefits that can be had by companies and firms that adopt more family friendly policies. To give that extra support their company will benefit in overall productivity and they will both earn more money and save money on lowering the turn-over rate. Both English and the EEOC document talk about how most of the care-giving duties fall to women. The EEOC goes further than English did and also extended that colored women do more of the care-giving then their white women counterparts. EEOC document stresses the importance that by making more family-friendly work environments it will improve the care-givers ability to “balance work and life”, which is exactly what English has been stressing throughout her book.

Blog #34: Unbending Gender

Joan William’s interview relates a lot to the material we have read in Gender on Trial. Even with the Family and Medical Leave Act there is a lot of discrimination going on that is related to the work/family balancing issue. Joan Williams speaks of women and men who have been penalized for taking care of a sick loved one. There were cases where the employee was assured that everything was fine and that it would all work out. She was assured that her job would still be there when she go back from being with and taking care of her premature daughter. Then out of the blue she finds out that her job has been terminated and her position has been filled. If she wants to come back and work for the company, then she has to apply for another job and take a lower salary. Then, there was the case of the State Trooper who could not get leave approved and had to keep going to work to get his pay check while his wife was struggling at home with the new born baby. Joan Williams also talks about her book Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What To Do About It (Oxford University Press, 2000). She describes what she means by the term “unbending” and I am glad they asked that question because I was unsure about what it meant as well. “Unbending” means that after all these years of women swarming the work force and having careers of their own, gender roles and expectations have not changed in the least, but instead there are more traits as to what is acceptable for females and what is acceptable for males.

In Gender on Trial, Holly English (2003) reflects on gender stereotypes that are associated with men and women lawyers which makes it hard to have both families and careers. Both English and Williams talk about the characteristics that males are faced with in the workplace. Men are expected to be the providers of the family. When a man expresses his interest in taking time off or reducing his hours to spend time at home with his family or to take care of the kids so his wife can go to work, he is met with questions of “Why?” and complete puzzlement as to his intentions. No one can seem to understand why a man would like to actually spend time with his family and know his kids. Both English and Williams also talked about how employees were penalized after they returned to work after a leave of absence or paternity/maternity leave. Clients were lost or responsibilities were taken away. Williams had some good ideas about how to make America a more family-work friendly place. She suggested prorating salaries for reduced hours, having more subsidies for childcare, and to have benefits for women who are working full-time in the home to take care and raise their children. Americans’ differentiate between “market work” and “family work”, Williams suggests providing benefits for the “family work” aspect of life as well.

Blog #33: Women Advancement

Women have been making their way up the advancement ladder for many decades now. Lawyers are no different. The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court was Sandra Day O’Connor. She was not considered to hold a very high esteem when President Reagan called her up in 1981. No one even knew who she was and she had no experience in a Federal Court System at all. In no way am I implying that Justice O’Connor did not hold her own because she certainly did. Sandra Day O’Connor got her seat on the bench because President Reagan said he would appoint a woman to the Supreme Court. This act opened up the door of opportunity for many women. We now have two women on the Supreme Court and there are women who head Fortune 500 companies and there are women partners in law firms. Women are making advancements in every occupation. The problem is that the number of women in these positions is still very low. Linda Tarr-Whelan stated in “Shared Leadership: The Value Women Leaders Bring,” that if women made up even 1/3 of the boards in America it would make a big difference in the economy and in society. This number, however, is only at 16%. Women have done everything they need to do to prepare and get the education they need to succeed. America just is not “utilizing their talents” (Linda Tarr-Whelan). Women face so many challenges in the form of stereotypes. It is okay for a man to be aggressive; he is just going after what he wants. When a woman is aggressive she is seen a hot-tempered and bitchy. If a woman shows empathy, then she is too emotional and cannot make the tough decisions that are necessary for her to make. When a man shows the same empathy, then he is sensitive and caring. This double standard is only succeeding in keeping women down. As Madeline Albright said, “it is harder to be a woman, then a man” (Madeline Albright on Policy, Sexism, and Politics).

Blog #32: Lawyer Parenting

There have always been differences in the way men and women parent their children and stereotypes associated with each gender. Women lawyers and men lawyers differ in parenting and thinking as well. When it comes to parenting it ultimately comes down to what the mother and father want out of their family relations and out of their careers. Women have been stereotyped as the care taker of children and domestic chores at home. With that stereotype in mind women lawyers have many decisions to make. If a woman lawyer goes after her career while she has kids than she is deemed as an unfit mother. How can a lawyer work long hours and be good at her job and be a good mother to her young children? The common thinking is that she cannot do both. If she goes the other way and wants to reduce her hours so she can spend time with her family and do her motherly duties than there is no way she can be a good lawyer too. It is common thinking that you cannot be both a good lawyer and a good parent. This also effects whether or not woman put pictures up in their office or if they decide to not even mention their family lives.

Men are playing on an entirely different playing field. If we go back to the stereotype of women being the care provider, then the men are the financial providers. When a man in the law profession gets married and has a child, then male colleagues welcome him into the “club” and assume that no he is going to work more hours and work even harder to provide for his family. But, when this same man decides that he actually wants to have a life outside the office and be a part of his children’s childhood then he received even more criticism than the woman lawyer. He is going against all the traditional roles men are expected to have. Why would he want to be a part of his kid’s lives? That is a woman’s job. His job is to work and put food on the table. English’s (2003) study showed that there are actually a lot more men out there who do want to be family men (and even if they are not family men she found that they want to have a life outside the office). These men are not free to express their views though. Instead of saying their child is sick so they will not be making it into the office; they just say they will not be in today. No explanation offered at all and none wanted.

Blog #31: Work/Family Balance

In almost every family you will find one or two parent households who are trying to juggling work, kids, school, and extra-curricular activities. The legal profession is no different. In the legal profession lawyers also have to worry about how they are perceived by colleagues and partners. The major problem that lawyers face in the work/family balance is their dedication. Their dedication is constantly under scrutiny and it also leads to feelings of resentment. There is a different feeling among men and women these days. This feeling is that money is not everything. If we were to go back a few decades then we would see a time when women were at home with the kids and the men were absent fathers whose only concern was to provide for his family. Now a day, fathers’ want to be a part of their children’s lives. They do not want to wake up one day to grown children who resent that their fathers were never around.

As a lawyer there is an expectation that you must be in the office 80 hours a week working on cases and racking up “billable hours” for the firm. When lawyers decide to deviate from this expectation and shorten their hours so they can be a part of their children’s lives, then they work more stable hours. One of the solutions proposed for lawyers who want to be involved with their families is to work part time. The problem with this is that when a lawyer goes down to part-time, they are not seen as “real” lawyers (English, 2003). They lose clients and their status in the firm. Another solution to the work/family balance problem was to allow flexible hours. This also leads to problems of dedication and work ethic. Most colleagues see a lawyer working scattered hours and they do not think that they are capable of getting the work done and being proficient. Even telecommuting was looked down upon because the partners or senior associates could not be standing over your should and see exactly what you are doing. It does not even seem to matter that faxes, emails, and phone calls are coming in regularly to show that work is being done even though the lawyer is working from home.

Blog #30: Shared Leadership

There are many different styles that people employ when they are in leadership positions. Some are good, some are bad, and some fall somewhere in between. One of the problems with our country is that we do not have many women in leadership positions yet. I think that gender expectations are the one of the main reasons why we do not have many women in leadership roles yet. The gender expectations are a direct result of gender stereotypes. Gender stereotypes say that women should follow and not lead, be passive and not aggressive, that they are supposed to raise and take care of the family, not go out and do and bring home the bacon. All these stereotypes contribute to America’s apprehension to put women in power, leadership roles. With these stereotypes come the expectations. Americans’ expect women to fold under pressure and to not be able to make the tough military/war decisions that men are able to make. When women go against the norm and take charge, then they are seen by others as trying to be a man. The qualities that are attributed to being a good leader in a man are negative in a woman. Aggression is seen as having a bad temperament instead of going after what he wants when it is applied to a man. The statement made in “Does Gender Matter: Are Women Leaders Different?” that says because we do have women in high power positions (even though it is a rarity) we “miss them where they aren’t”. These statement hits the nail on the head. I know that for me personally, I feel like we have come a long way in this society. Women are breaking out and making a difference. They are going places they have never been and they are proving that they are competent and capable beings. The problem is that when you look at the statistics we have not come as far as I have previously believed.

Is it possible to attribute positive and negative outcomes to the leadership qualities of men and women? In my opinion, that diminishes everything this class is trying to teach us and make us aware of. We know that there are sensitive men in the world, just as there are aggressive women in the world. Applying certain characteristics and behaviors to them just continues the gender expectations and keeps women oppressed with the double standard they are trying to overcome. We know that men are women are different and that they bring different experiences to the table. I tend to like the way Linda Tarr-Whelan stated her opinion on the matter in the “Shared Leadership: The Value Women Leaders Bring” video. That was that men and women need to come together and lead together. The pipeline myth says that if we get women in the lower tiers of the work force that they will have to be promoted to the higher tiers, but that is not the case. Women have already proved that they are talented and educated, but that is not getting them to the top. They keep hitting that glass ceiling and cannot get any higher. If we get those high power women to leadership positions then they will be able to “move the whole women agenda forward” (Tarr-Whelan). Linda Tarr-Whelan gave a couple of reasons why a shared leadership would be beneficial to America. These reasons include: more money for companies, better economy in general, and more advancement opportunities. Madeline Albright said it correctly when she said that it is harder to be a woman than to be a man. There are sexist comments that are still made in the work place and the worse thing is that they are still tolerated. The comments do more than diminish morale; they also give women the wrong perception on other women. Women tend to judge women harder than the men do. If women and men work together to lead our nation, businesses, companies, schools, and everything else, then we would see improvements everywhere. Each will bring knowledge and experience to the issues and there will be a balance to it. I think that the leadership styles that are the best are those that come from androgynous leaders, those who display both male and female attributes.

Blog #29: Minority Women Lawyers

Four percent of all lawyers are minorities, even less than that are women. The retention rate for keeping minority women at law firms is low. There are many reasons as to why minority women do not stay at their first place of employment. Most minority women experience “exclusion, neglect, and harassment” according to “Why So Few Minority Women Stay at Law Firms”. I can see why minority women would choose to find employment in another establishment. For example, a Korean woman was invited into a meeting with a Korean man so she could see someone who shared the same ethnic background as him. The Korean woman did not play this game though and told the client that he probably speaks better English than she speaks Korean. A lot of the women explained that it can be exhausting to have to endure these biases and stereotypes and that in a lot of the cases it is not even worth the trouble to try and fix the problem. These women prefer to put in the resignation and look for a job somewhere else. There is more to it than using these minority women as buffers with clients or to prove that the law firm is diverse; one woman was asked to sit in a meeting because she was both a minority and a woman and the client did not think that the law firm was diverse. She was a token and used to better than image of the law firm. Most of these women also state that they were subjected to racial jokes and innuendos. One Native American lawyer was asked continually where their tomahawk was and if he/she was going to scalp the employee. When people are subjected to these stereotypes regularly it weighs on them. No one would want to work in an environment like that. Instead of turning the other cheek they decide to turn to another company. Companies lose so much money because they cannot retain their lawyers. Now they have to recruit and re-train more employees who will probably end up leaving for the same reason and the whole ugly cycle continues.

Blog #28: Sonia Sotomayor

Sonia Sotomayor’s behavior as a 2nd Circuit Judge was unfair to say the least. The article hit we read hit on all the gender stereotypes and double standards that are out there for men and for women. Sonia Sotomayor was characterized as being temperamental and that her temperament was wrong to serve on the Supreme Court. The same temperament that is seen on men was looked at with praise and efficiency. With Sonia Sotomayor, however, the same temperament was labeled as being hot-headed and bitchy. Every quality that has been associated with men candidates was looked at with esteem and was considered a great quality to have. You take those same qualities and attribute them to a woman, not only a woman, but a minority woman and those once great qualities are now looked at with disdain. It was also being attributed to her being of Puerto Rican descent; the fiery Latina women. Sonia Sotomayor’s competency was also questioned extensively. Anonymous quotes were taken and reported saying that Sotomayor was not a smart women. It is more than just quoting someone. These quotes were taken out of context and what was meant as a statement of praise got turned around to discredit Sonia Sotomayor. When the truth came out and the actual quote was printed in its entirety the author did not even offer a rebuttal or an apology. I do not see how this can even be question considering Sonia Sotomayor’s credentials. To be make it out of the projects in the Bronx, to earn a law degree from Yale and graduate summa cum laude from Princeton speaks for itself. How can anyone say that she is not smart? After all these decades of women proving that they can make it in the “man’s world” and that they are as qualified, if not more qualified, then men to practice law you would think that this double standard that is applied to women would have fizzled out years ago.

Blog #27: Competency Gap

Women have come a long way in closing the competency gap. There are still many way, however, that are linked to holding women back. One of the main issues that women have to battle is their dedication. Women have always been seen as the family care giver. Men have always been seen as the providers. This gender stereotype puts a negative stigma on women in the law field. If a woman wants to have a family, then they are categorized as not dedicated enough and they get ostracized from their colleagues. To avoid being ostracized women will hide a pregnancy or not talk about their families at work. Women lawyers have also expressed feelings that they have to work harder than the men to prove their competency and they always have to be more prepared then the men. Men are seen as competent just because they are men. Women are evaluated on a different standard as well. If a woman is too laid back and soft spoken then she is labeled as not being intelligent. If she goes the opposite direction and is overly aggressive then she is seen as a bully and people say she trying too hard. Women lawyers also have to deal with view that because they are women they are not capable of being leaders. Laureen Shaffer, formerly of General Electric, is a perfect example of this. She has worked for years to prove herself as competent and able. She is now suing the company for gender discrimination because GE promoted outside the company when she feels she deserved the position (NPR, 2007). Women lose networking resources due to the competency gap as well. Men tend to associate with other men and women with women. Seeing how law is a male dominated field it provides an unbalance for women. Men give clients and cases to other men that they go golfing with and get drinks with. Men use different strategies to win cases over women. Some of these strategies are to talk over a woman so she cannot get a word in. Other men try to make women look incompetent in the court room. I enjoy the stories that some of the women lawyers tell of being underestimated by their male counterparts and when the right time arises they strike and quiet the men.

Blog #26: Men Help Women

How do males assist women lawyers? I find myself pondering this question and wondering if I am going in the right direction. I think that this goes back to the common thoughts of 30 years ago when most people asked if women were capable of being lawyers (English, 2003). For the most part this type of thinking has been eliminated. Some men see that women get asked to get food and serve coffee because they are women. These men take the initiative and stand up and say that they will do it. This act helps to even the playing field, but there is still the perception of some that the women should be serving the men while the men do they law work. Some men reinforce what a female lawyer has already stated to get a client or co-worker to go with the suggestion. This also points to law as being a gendered organization because women are not seen as being as competent as men, so whatever they say has to be backed up by men, even if these men are not as experienced as the woman. A gendered organization means that the practice of law is a male dominated job and that women are still trying to prove that they can do it too. There are some male partners who know the importance of having women lawyers. They know that women bring something different to firm and have gone out of their way to ensure that a female lawyer will be hired. This points to the law as being a gendered organization because these male partners have to bend over backwards to get women hired. He has to prove to other male partners that women are capable and are intelligent and that they can do the job just as well or better than some of the males. With men there is a given that they can do anything, but women have to continually prove themselves. One error and they are getting the boot and all credibility is lost. There are also senior associates who will mentor female associates and help them to learn the ropes and how to handle challenges that they may face.

Blog #25: Sexual Behavior

As with any weapon you must be careful how you use it. That is no different from using sexualized behaviors to help you achieve your goals or get a decision to go your way while working as a lawyer. Some female lawyers will flirt with colleagues or clients to get what they want. They can sense how people are responding to them and can turn on and off the charm when they see fit. This can be a good thing because it allows the woman to get the reaction she wants, but it can be a bad thing because it puts her skills in questions. Colleagues can see this female lawyer using charm and flirting to get what she wants and not her lawyer prowess, which puts her abilities under scrutiny. Another pro is that using your sexuality gives you an advantage. The problem with this approach is that if you use it too much or if you do not regulate it well, then you give the impression that that is the only thing you have going for you. Some women use their fashion style to get ahead. These women know that if they have a male judge or if a jury member is watching that they can shorten their skirt or show a little more cleavage to get the people to rule in their favor. Again, this can also diminish how the woman is seen. Other people can see her as not being intelligent and that is why she is resorting to “showing skin”. The media portrays female lawyers as being second to males. They are always beautiful and wear the latest fashions. The movie that comes to mind for me is “Law Abiding Citizen”. The female lawyer, Megan, is second to Jamie Foxx’s character. She is young, attractive, and dresses in clothing that shows off her body. The beginning of the movie shows Foxx having to convince their boss to let Megan take lead on a case.

Blog #24: Advice

All the advice articles that I read for women lawyers revolved around one piece of advice: do not give up. They center on the fact that there are a different set of rules out there that women have to follow. In no situation does the advice for these female lawyers say that it will be easy sailing. It was quite the opposite actually. In “Advice for Female Law Students About to Graduate”, it tells these lawyers that they are going to have to overcome so many more obstacles than they ever thought they would have to (Law Vibe, 2008). Law Vibe goes further by telling these soon to be graduates that they have the power to change the law profession. That if they do not like the way a policy or situation is then they have the power, skills, and knowledge to change it. Law Vibe tells them that they are going to be subjected to “overt discrimination and /or some form of under evaluation” and that it is up to them to change it. If they are not getting what they need out of a big law firm then they need to start their own business and make their own rules. “Young Female Lawyers Play by Their Own Rules” is a perfect example of this. Erica Leathem got some unofficial advice from an older associate at the law firm she was employed by when she was expecting her first child. That advice was to get back to work as soon as possible. Erica did not agree with this philosophy, so she and some co-workers decided to play by their own rules. They left the large firm and started their own firm. These women now have the flexibility to work when they want to without feeling pressure from anyone else that they are not pulling their weight. Erica does not take away anything from what these older women have done for new female lawyers making their way up the ranks. She is just determined to make it by her own set of rules.

Blog #23: Fashion and Politics

Style, confidence, and competency all seem to go hand in hand. Some of the women lawyers in our reading have learned to use their sexuality to their advantage. They have learned to use their charm to get what they want and they have learned how to survive in a male dominated occupation. These lawyers have progressed from dressing “frumpy” and in dull colors because that is what they thought was expected of them to dressing in the latest fashions that accentuate their bodies and their minds. They found that when they changed their way of dressing they also changed the way they thought about themselves and the way co-workers and clients saw them (English, 2003). I find it odd that so much is attributed to one’s fashion sense. It is as if the Law Degree does not mean anything. I was surprised that the NPR had a whole segment on Michelle Obama’s style and the difference that it makes on her status to the public. The radio broadcasters commented that American women like that Michelle Obama dresses like a professional working woman that shows off her curves (Fashion Laws of Politics). Americans also want to be able to relate to the First Woman. When she was on Jay Leno and commented that her ensemble was bought on-line from J. Crew the audience went crazy. It was also stated that Michelle Obama needs to be very conscientious of what her clothing says to others. This means that her style needs to show that she is not submissive, but she is not threatening either. Women are under constant scrutiny. What makes it worse is that no matter where you go you are always going to get contradicting style issues. In “Gender on Trial”, the older litigators feel that the younger lawyers dress to sexy and that it gives the wrong impressions. Judges have even gone as far as telling women lawyers that their skirt was too short (English, 2003). When are we going to be past all these double standards and value what is really important. It is not about the clothes a lawyer wears, it is about their credentials and accomplishments that should earn merit.

Blog #22: Sonia Sotomayor

Sonia Sotomayor is a Puerto Rican female who was raised in the projects of the Bronx, New York. When I started my research for this blog the only information I could find for Sonia Sotomayor were comments on her excellence and her accomplishes, which were very lengthy as it was. I watched a video on YouTube titled “A biological sketch of Sonia Sotomayor” where Judge Sotomayor states that she never knew what it meant to be a minority until after she left to go college. Judge Sotomayor said that she was grew up with Puerto Ricans where everyone was the same and she was not seen as different, but at college she learned that other people had thoughts about minorities that she did not know until then.

“Senator Graham Gets Personal with Sonia Sotomayor” was another YouTube video I watched. This video demonstrates the different stereotypes that are attributed to men and women. Senator Graham attacked Judge Sotomayor’s temperament as a judge on the Second Circuit Appeals Court. He read anonymous comments that portrayed Judge Sotomayor as being a “terror on the bench”, “temperamental”, and that she “behaves out of control”. When Judge Sotomayor tried to respond to his remarks he would cut her off and move on to another comment. A man being referred to as “temperamental” has never been an issue because he is a man and that is a stereotypical quality. He is male so he is allowed to act and behave in that way. Sonia Sotomayor is a woman, and not only that, but a “hot tempered” Latina woman. I have heard people accuse Judge Sotomayor as being racist and that she practices reverse discrimination against white people. Judge Sotomayor is also working against remarks made that she was chosen as an “Affirmative Action pick”. From what I have read and seen in these videos it does not seem worth it to me to get into the law field or politics. The men continually steam roll over what women are saying and they attack personal attributes that have nothing to do with the issues at hand. It is women like Judge Sotomayor that help pave the way for other women.