3 ms·

Disparate impact is illegal, so it's not a "fringe legal theory". If you don't see anything wrong with my example of disparate impact, how about a hypothetical

Disparate impact is illegal, so it's not a "fringe legal theory". If you don't see anything wrong with my example of disparate impact, how about a hypothetical company policy that has a dress code of short hair for all engineers regardless of gender? More women than men would quit, seeing the policy as draconian and controlling (or be fired for non-compliance), while men who already have short hair wouldn't find the policy onerous or difficult.

mpweiher 1y ago
> it's not a "fringe legal theory" 1. It is a legal theory "judicial theory". -- your source 2. Fringe "federal courts have increasingly limited how and when plaintiffs may file disparate-impact claims. As a result, disparate-impact suits have become less successful over time." Also your source. 3. Off topic a) The research I cited was not about fringe legal theories but about reality in the world. b) I am not interested in your hypotheticals that have nothing to do with that research, nothing to do with the publishing bias against research showing no bias against women or bias against men, and probably also nothing to do with the actual legal theory of disparate impact.