boksana wrote:
During his three years in office, the governor of a state has frequently been accused of having sexist attitudes toward women. Yet he has filled five of the nineteen vacant high-level positions in his administration with women appointees, all of whom are still serving. This shows that the governor is not sexist.
Which of the following statements, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?
A. One of the women appointed by the governor to a high-level position is planning to
resign her post.
B. The platform of the governor’s political party required him to appoint at least five
women to high-level positions.
C. Forty-seven percent of the women who voted in the state gubernatorial election three
years ago voted for the governor
D. A governor of a neighboring state recently appointed seven women to high-level
positions
E. The governor appointed tow Black Americans, tow Hispanic Americans, and one Asian American to high-level positions in his administration.
It seems like B to me. The governor had to do assign five women; if that were in his platform, he has no choice regarding that.
A. - who knows why she're resigning, maybe it's for personal reasons, nothing to do with the governor. Maybe after she leaves, he'll nominate another woman...
C. - this only strengthens the conclusion: if women vote for him, they must like him and wouldn't accuse him of being sexist during the following three years
D. - maybe, a long shot - does cast some doubt, but nothing really substantial - after all 5 vs 7 isn't that much of a difference
E. - out of scope, we're not talking about discrimination in general, but specifically about discrimination against women