Pharmacokinetics@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 1 year agoAt least Quark had some integrity.lemmy.worldimagemessage-square116linkfedilinkarrow-up1967arrow-down138
arrow-up1929arrow-down1imageAt least Quark had some integrity.lemmy.worldPharmacokinetics@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 1 year agomessage-square116linkfedilink
minus-squareWoodScientist@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down1·1 year agoThere are obviously still contacts where the distinction is important.
minus-squarelagoon8622@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·1 year agoSuch as discussing discrimination, statistics, etc
minus-squaresurewhynotlem@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up6arrow-down2·1 year 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-up3·1 year 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