Absolutely.
But it does happen.
Men's average salaries are still higher than women's for the same jobs.
Actually, that's mostly a myth these days. Women earn less in the aggregate than men by some measures, but when you adjust for number of hours worked and compare the same job to the same job, the gap mostly vanishes.
And in Arizona you have to carry papers now to prove your a citizen.
Again, not true, that law simply doesn't say that. The law might be a good or a bad idea, but the popular idea of it produced by the news coverage and political spinning is totally fallacious.
Remember, just because you saw a news report about something doesn't mean it's always the truth. There's an old saw that when you read a story about a subject you're familiar with, you suddenly begin to lose trust on the other coverage because the coverage of what you know about is so full of mistakes and errors and omissions.
Enough about that, though. I just think certain misconceptions should be pointed out whenever encountered precisely because they are so eagerly spread and believed.
Back on main topic:
IMO John is too dry.
Plus he is a little pass the age Harry should be at the beginning.
That's an unavoidable problem with casting a series as long the DF, which is spread out over a period of many books and many years. He's too old to play Harry in SF or FM, but he's too young to play him in
Changes. Same problem applies to any of the 'mortal' characters like Harry and Karrin (Harry's long lifespan hasn't kicked in enough yet to matter for our purposes).
The immortal characters are easier, there's no problem for the actor to look just the same in SF or
Changes if s/he is playing Lara or Nicodemus.
(It crops up in movies, too. For a famous example, Vivian Leigh played Scarlett O'Hara in the move
Gone With The Wind, and looks too mature to be a sixteen year old at the start of the movie (Scarlett's age in 1860), but looks more believable for her supposed age at the end, which was 28.)
Poll