Pharmacokinetics@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 8 days agoAt least Quark had some integrity.lemmy.worldimagemessage-square65fedilinkarrow-up1743arrow-down128
arrow-up1715arrow-down1imageAt least Quark had some integrity.lemmy.worldPharmacokinetics@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 8 days agomessage-square65fedilink
minus-squareWoodScientist@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9arrow-down1·8 days agoThere are obviously still contacts where the distinction is important.
minus-squarelagoon8622@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·8 days agoSuch as discussing discrimination, statistics, etc
minus-squaresurewhynotlem@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down1·8 days agoMaybe from an equity perspective, but not from a lawyer perspective. So you’d probably say “we need more women in law”. Because the topic is women. If the topic was lawyering, then sex won’t come up.
minus-squarebrbposting@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·8 days agoImmediate scenario that came to mind here is The client demanded any other public defender, as long as they weren’t black or female.
There are obviously still contacts where the distinction is important.
Such as discussing discrimination, statistics, etc
Maybe from an equity perspective, but not from a lawyer perspective. So you’d probably say “we need more women in law”.
Because the topic is women. If the topic was lawyering, then sex won’t come up.
Immediate scenario that came to mind here is