Ellen Pao talks about her sexism lawsuit:
The most shocking bit for me:
The deck is stacked against plaintiffs in other ways, as well. From the first day of trial, I saw how hard it was going to be to win when every potential juror who expressed a belief that sexism exists in tech — a belief that is widely recognized and documented — was not allowed to serve on the jury.
That's not just stacking the deck, that's taking the deck away completely.
WTF? How on earth is that allowed?
It's absolutely obscene. I bet the prosecution's argument was that if you believe that sexism exists in tech, you're biased towards Pao's case, without taking into account that if you don't believe sexism exists, you're biased against her. I can't believe the judge didn't figure that out... though maybe the judge was sexist too.
I have begun to realise that while judges may be very good at the law, they're pretty much the same as everyone else when it comes to anything else. Given how few people seem able to accept that sexism exists any more in any field (after all, women have equal pay laws, what more do they want?) it doesn't surprise me that the judge didn't realise that allowing those people who accept there is sexism in tech to be excluded constituted unbelievable bias.