Pharmacokinetics@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 months agoAt least Quark had some integrity.lemmy.worldimagemessage-square116linkfedilinkarrow-up1940arrow-down135
arrow-up1905arrow-down1imageAt least Quark had some integrity.lemmy.worldPharmacokinetics@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 months agomessage-square116linkfedilink
minus-squareWoodScientist@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down1·2 months agoThere are obviously still contacts where the distinction is important.
minus-squarelagoon8622@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·2 months agoSuch as discussing discrimination, statistics, etc
minus-squaresurewhynotlem@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up6arrow-down2·2 months 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-up3·2 months 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