study found the 3 female #SCOTUS justices R interrupted much more than males: The Price We Pay for

[riversedge]

Tweet:
The Advocate? Verified account @TheAdvocateMag 44s45 seconds ago

A study found the 3 female #SCOTUS justices are interrupted much more than males. There are serious repercussions

Link to tweet

The Price We Pay for 'Manterrupting'

http://www.advocate.com/women/2017/4/06/price-we-pay-manterrupting


A new study found that the three women on the Supreme Court are often subject to "manterrupting," and it's not good for society.
By Tracy E. Gilchrist
April 06 2017 8:03 PM EDT
31 shares Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook

Donald Trump interrupted Hillary Clinton (and moderator Lester Holt) 55 times compared to the 11 times Clinton interrupted either of them during the first presidential debate last September. During Jeff Sessions’s confirmation hearings in February, Sen. Mitch McConnell famously silenced Elizabeth Warren, who dared to speak out against Trump’s pick for attorney general. While these famous interruptions have placed “manterrupting” on the collective radar, it’s not new, and no woman is immune to it, as evidenced by the results of a study that found that the three female Supreme Court justices are continually on the receiving end of such rude behavior.

“Using a variety of statistical techniques, we find that even though female justices speak less often and use fewer words than male Justices, they are nonetheless interrupted during oral argument at a significantly higher rate. Men interrupt more than women, and they particularly interrupt women more than they interrupt men,” wrote Northwestern School of Law professor Tonja Jacobi and law student Dylan Schweers, who examined patterns of interruptions in Supreme Court oral arguments and found that Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan are routinely interrupted by the court’s male justices and advocates.


In notes on the study, the authors explained that silencing women on the bench can have far-reaching ramifications.

“Oral arguments shape case outcomes. This pattern of gender disparity in interruptions could create a marked difference in the relative degree of influence between the male and female justices,” the authors wrote. “When a justice is interrupted, her point is left unaddressed, and her ability to influence the outcome of a case or the framing of another justice’s reasoning is undermined.”

Seniority plays a role in the frequency of interruptions, as does political ideology in that conservatives interrupt more often than liberals, the study found. However, gender plays about 30 times more of a role in who is being interrupted than seniority, reports Jezebel..........................