Anita Hill on the new allegations: thank you!

from CNN:

Anita Hill called on the federal government to implement a “fair and neutral” way to investigate sexual misconduct complaints after allegations surfaced against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh this week.

Hill, who accused Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of workplace sexual harassment during his confirmation hearing back in 1991, said she has seen “firsthand what happens when such a process is weaponized against an accuser and no one should have to endure that again.”
Then a law professor at the University of Oklahoma, Hill testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that she had been sexually harassed by Thomas when she worked with him at the Education Department and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Thomas denied the allegations and he was confirmed to the bench.
is it possible that the guys/politicians will even have the sense that they’re just doing the same thing again?

The most and least sexist states

from an earlier report in the Washington Post;

The examples are useful.

Sexism in a woman’s state of birth and in her current state of residence both lower her wages and likelihood of labor force participation, and lead her to marry and bear her first child sooner,” they find. Even more striking, the prevalence of sexism in a woman’s birth state seems to affect her later earnings and outcomes even if she moves to a place with less sexism.

The article maintains that political views and state-based sexism can diverge, which is certainly true in my recent experience.  That is, liberal guys in sexist states can be less supportive or tolerant of female assertiveness and disagreement.  OR so it seems to me.

Would that people thinking of jobs had the luxury of thinking of a state’s sexism.