Question Description
There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice There are six basic arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference. The first three arguments are symbolic. Firstly, the presence of women judges increases the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary, because a bench including women is more representative of the wider society which it serves than a bench with no women. Ideally, women should be represented on the judiciary in equal numbers with men, since this would reflect their proportions both in the general population and in the population of law graduates for at least the past 15 years.Secondly, the presence of women judges signals equality of opportunity for women in the legal profession who aspire to judicial office,and demonstrates that judicial appointment processes are what they claim to be—fair, meritocratic, and non-discriminatory. Thirdly, the presence of women judges provides encouragement and active mentoring for women in the legal profession, law students, and indeed younger women and girls, to aspire to, seek, and obtain judicial appointment, thus creating a virtuous circle enabling the gender balance in the judiciary to be improved.To the extent that women judges engage in active mentoring, this may be seen as a practical rather than merely symbolic effect of their presence. The fourth and fifth arguments as to why and how women judges make a difference are also practical. The fourth argument is that women judges are likely to have more empathy with women litigants and witnesses, including victims of crime, and thus may provide a better courtroom experience for these participants in the justice system, or at least one in which they (and women lawyers) are not subjected to sexist comments or other forms of gender bias from the bench, and in which overt sexism and gender bias by others in the courtroom in the course of proceedings is not tolerated.The fifth argument is that women judges will exercise this same lack of toleration behind the scenes, and so operate to educate and civilize their male colleagues by not allowing sexist comments, stereotyping, and gender bias to go unquestioned.This putative approach by women judges leads on to the sixth, substantive, argument, that women judges will bring a gendered sensibility to the process of decision-making, and thus (at least sometimes) alter the outcomes of cases.Q.According to the author why is it important to have women judges in the panel?a)For want of a more diverse judiciary, and in particular, whether it would make any difference to judicial decision-making.b)Non-traditional judges clearlymayreach different decisions, but their willingness and ability to do so are constrained.c)Their experiences of pregnancy, child-birth, child-rearing, and juggling work and family responsibilities, as well as often of sexism and discrimination-are very different from men’s. Thus, the inclusion of women’s experiences will make law more representative of the variety of human experience.d)Given the predominance of male judges, suggests a systematic tendency for judgments based on male life experience to prevail.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.