January 27, 2012

Does the ABA Journal shed any new light on last year's troubles in the Wisconsin Supreme Court?

Well, there's new junk commentary from far-off observers, like this:
Also, it’s possible that some of [Chief Justice Shirley] Abrahamson’s colleagues have had problems taking directions from a woman, says Deborah Rhode, a Stanford Law School professor whose work focuses on gender, law and public policy. She notes that many studies suggest women in leadership positions face trade-offs that men don’t.

“What’s assertive in a man is abrasive in a woman,” Rhode says, mentioning a report on women in leadership roles by Catalyst, a nonprofit group that focuses on expanding opportunities for women in business. It surveyed female executives, and many of them attributed some of their success to finding a management style that made men feel comfortable.
Speaking of things that are "possible"... it's possible to say something more generic about the relations between men and women in the workplace.

And there's this from Leah Ward Sears, the former chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court:
“You have to know when to hold them, and know when to fold them. Sometimes people don’t know when to walk away... Because everybody is a sovereign state... sometimes you have to push hard, because some justices can be bullies. But that doesn’t mean you choke anyone or push anyone out the window.”
Noted.

14 comments:

Henry said...

Career advice: Don't defenestrate during debate.

edutcher said...

Standard feminist boilerpalte and some cliches.

With all that education, you'd think there'd be something a little more elevating or eloquent.

Jaske said...

What’s assertive in a man is abrasive in a woman

We have a live example. Do your students find you assertive or abrasive?

AlphaLiberal said...

Justice Gableman should resign now, today, with no further delay. He has compromised himself by accepting free legal services from Republican law firm Michael, Best and Friederich. Among other things.

David "the Choker" Prosser should apologize, at the very least, as well as taking anger management classes. His example to others is that it is okay to physically assault someone you are having disagreements with. Bad role mode, bad, bad.

Jay said...

David "the Choker" Prosser should apologize, at the very least, as well as taking anger management classes. His example to others is that it is okay to physically assault someone you are having disagreements with.

Except for the fact that Justice Prosser didn't choke anyone.

There is no evidence he choked anyone.

You are ridiculous.

garage mahal said...

Gablewho? Huh? What? Who's he?

Ann Althouse said...

"David "the Choker" Prosser should apologize, at the very least, as well as taking anger management classes. His example to others is that it is okay to physically assault someone you are having disagreements with. Bad role mode, bad, bad."

Whatever happened to that judicial ethics investigation we were supposed to get? And why are you characterizing "his example" that way when the police report depicted Justice Bradley rushing toward him?

Really, aren't you ashamed -- the topic is ethics! -- to misrepresent the facts that have been reported?

I feel dirty just writing out the question to confront you with it.

garage mahal said...

Good thing Bradley didn't do anything blatantly unethical, like accepting free counsel from a law firm and then in turn decide cases in their favor.

Ethics for thee, not for me!

Bender said...

it’s possible that some of [Chief Justice Shirley] Abrahamson’s colleagues have had problems taking directions from a woman, says Deborah Rhode

You know, if a man had said this, we should enthusiastically agree. But because it was a mere woman who made this assertion, we will refuse to even bother considering it and instead will dismiss it out of hand.

Jeff with one 'f' said...

"What’s assertive in a man is abrasive in a woman".

I've only seen female coworkers yell, point fingers, throw things and violate another's personal space. In the office. I have NEVER seen a man act out in such aggressive ways in a professional setting.

My theory is that these educated, accomplished, adult women never learned the boundaries of confrontation. A man acting in such a way would risk firing if not arrest. But the women get away from it because, well, they're women. They can't be expected to behave in a genteel manner because they're victims of the patriarchy.

Erik Robert Nelson said...

When your only tool is a hammer, every problem starts looking like nails.

Damn, I suspect Rhode would probably think that's too phallic a symbolism.

PaulV said...

I though that womyn hated working with a female boss? If a man had rushed at a woman would he be defended by anyone?

Carol_Herman said...

When pigs fly out the window.

Where, here, we have yet another demonstration that women who are flung up on benches are bitches. And, none too bright.

Considering how long Abrahamson's sat on the Wisconsin's supreme court bench ... she has NOTHING IN WRITING TO SHOW FOR IT!

Oh, here's a fact. Wisconsin is a TOSS UP STATE! What it does next November will be very telling.

Do you know how many people have already made up their minds?

vet66 said...

There is no evident discipline when the rule of law is usurped by ideology. Judges are expected to set aside passions and biases when interpreting the law. Their decisions must be based on the bedrock of the Constitution. Failure to do so results in disrespect for the civilizing influence of law and those who interpret it. That is the road to totalitarianism and anarchy.