Apparently, it's significant that she's a woman. But I'm not entirely sure why.
Is her appointment supposed to symbolize some kind of "equality" or advancement of women in society? Is it supposed to signal to little girls everywhere--you too can aspire to the highest pinnacle of worldly achievement?
I suppose those messages are being sent by Kagan's ascension to the high court. But I also hear another message that isn't quite so "empowering". I hear--If you want to climb the ranks to the top, you have to give up on healthy relationships (and a family in particular)--especially if you're a woman. At least that seems to be how it is in the legal field.
The legal profession has seen required work hours climbing ever higher for decades, crowding out any opportunity for legal careerists to do anything other than work and take care of their hygiene and health (which too many unfortunately forgo).
I think it's telling and chilling that the only women justices who've ever had families were born in the early 30's--when times were slower-paced. Men, however, still benefit from the bias of traditional gender roles within the family. And being an absentee father is and has always been more acceptable than an absentee mother.
What Kagan and Sotomayor (both unmarried and childless) represent to me is The Choice. The Fork in the Road. In the legal profession, you can climb higher, or you can have a family.
But cheer up ladies, at least you have a choice! (spoken with only mild sarcasm intended)
No comments:
Post a Comment