![]() ![]() Not only do we - and I mean we, men and women - continue to dismiss the anger and truth of women with certitude as old as Eden, we are obsessed by the need to consider this bias from all sides. Throw a rock and you’ll hit a think piece about how Hillary Clinton has to do everything the men do, only backwards, in high heels, and without sounding angry. A 2015 study from Arizona State University that focused on jury reactions showed how angry men gain influence while angry women lose it nothing underscores this dichotomy better than the 2016 presidential election. Unfortunately, events like the Stanford rape case bring to light how this disbelief affects issues of consent, and how our legal system (juries both formal and self-appointed on social media) handles victim statements even after women say they are attacked. ![]() This has ever been the case, but 2016 has been a cavalcade of dismissed female voices. We mostly don’t believe women, especially angry women. Sign up for our newsletter to get submission announcements and stay on top of our best work. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |