Sexism in the Judicial System

A judicial system can be considered sexist because of the nature of gender. Because there is no ungendered perspective, there are is no objective standard from which to base an unbiased judicial system. Gender inequality is inherently apparent because any attempt to address gender within the law ultimately results in a gendered response. The perspective of the assessor will produce a judicial system that, whether intentional or not, is ultimately sexist. Judicial sexism is prevalent in the judicial system today. One example is the mandate for males to register for the draft at age 18. There are strict penalties for noncompliance. Males can lose their right to vote, their drivers licenses, and all forms of federal financial aid for college. If law is defined through male perspective then the mandate for males to register for a draft as well as the sanctions for not registering seem illogical. While this seems to contradict MacKinnon's claims about defining law, there are certainly underlying motivations behind the legislation. Mackinnon's claims are still credible. Surely rape laws have been defined by male perspective. This is apparent through the state's modeling of deviant perpetrator and violent act. If it is against the law, society must be against it and law will serve as a deterrent. MacKinnon points out that this is a male perspective because the state fails to respond to the motivations behind rape and does not alter woman's rapability. Also, the right to consent is denied to certain groups of women. It is not implausible that the majority of legislation is defined through male perspective. It wasn't until 1981 that the first woman, Sandra Day O'Connor, was appointed to the Supreme Court. Every Supreme Court ruling before 1981 lacked a female perspective. Also, because women have never held the majority of Supreme Court Justice seats, all Supreme Court rulings are dominated by male perspective. The damage associated with judicial system cannot be gauged. Every generation of women has been subject to a male perspective dominated judicial system. The injustice that judicial sexism enables and permits has resulted in the suffering of countless victims. I would argue that judicial sexism affects society as a whole. Both males and females suffer as a result of gendered legislation. I do not think that judicial sexism could be effectively combated. To combat judicial sexism would require an objective perspective. Even if every legislative body had equal numbers of men and women, when the two sides are completely divided on an issue based on gender, there is no objective tie-breaking vote. Even the pretenses to neutrality of law represent traditionally male privileges that promote inequallity and further perpetuate the status quo.