Women’s Rights
You don't have to be anti-man to
be pro-woman. ~Jane Galvin
Lewis
The
emotional, sexual, and
psychological stereotyping of
females begins when the
doctor says, "It's a
girl." ~Shirley Chisholm
 It
was we, the people; not we,
the white male citizens; nor yet
we, the male citizens; but we,
the whole people, who formed
the Union.... Men, their rights
and nothing more; women, their
rights and nothing less. ~Susan
B. Anthony
 I've
yet to be on a campus
where most women weren't
worrying about some aspect of
combining marriage, children,
and a career. I've yet to find
one where many men were
worrying about the same
thing. ~Gloria Steinem
How
good does a female
athlete have to be before we
just call her an
athlete? ~Author Unknown
History and Women’s
Movements in the United
States
First Wave (1840-1925)
1848
First Women’s Rights
Convention: Seneca Falls
Convention, New York
August 26, 1920 19th
Amendment: Granting
women the right to vote
Second Wave (1960-1995)
Radical
Feminism: Women’s
Liberation Movement
Reproductive Rights
Myth of the feminists burned
bras in 1968 to protest the
Miss America pageant
Continued
The
Guerilla Girls
 Betty Friedan
The Feminine Mystique
1972 Equal Rights Amendment
(ERA) and Title lX
Sisters of ‘77
Create a national
plan of action
towards gender
equality, which
would then be
given to the
president and
Congress.
The Equal Rights Amendment
Equality of the
rights under
the law shall
not be denied
or abridged by
the United
States or by
any State on
account of sex
Section 2: The Congress shall
have the power to enforce,
by appropriate legislation, the
provisions of this article.
Section 3: This amendment
shall take effect two years
after the date of ratification.
States Yet to Ratify the ERA
In
order for the ERA to
pass, it had to be
ratified by 38 states.
Indiana was the 35th
and final state to ratify
the amendment in 1977.
As of March 2005, 15 U.S. states have
not ratified the ERA:
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Louisiana
Mississippi
Missouri
Nevada
N.Carolina
Oklahoma
South
Carolina
Utah
Virginia
Third Wave (1990’s)
Women
of different
ethnicities, abilities and
disabilities, classes,
appearances, and sexual
orientations
Title
IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972
 in
2002 the Patsy T. Mink
Equal Opportunity in
Education Act in honor of its
principal author
 United
States law enacted on
June 23, 1972. The law states:
"No person in the United States
shall, on the basis of sex, be
excluded from participation in,
be denied the benefits of, or be
subjected to discrimination under
any education program or
activity receiving Federal
financial assistance..."[1]
Although
the most
prominent aspect of Title
IX is its impact on high
school and collegiate
athletics, the original
statute made no explicit
mention of athletics.[2]
Women in the Workplace
Glass Walls & Glass
Ceilings
Gender Stereotypes in the
Workplace
Women
Sex
Object
Mother
Child
Iron Maiden
Men
Sturdy
Fighter
Bread-
winner
Oak
Sex Object
Judging
based on appearance
and actions
Sexual harassment
Mother
Have
or plan to have children
perceived as “not serious
professionals”
“Emotional labor”
Smile, listen, support, help
others
Child
Not
taken seriously
Less mature
Less competent / capable
“Protecting” women
Combat
Iron Maiden
Independent
Ambitious
Competitive
Tough
Gendered Wages
Equal
Pay Act of 1963
59 cents for every dollar men
earned
2000, 72 cents
2004 80 cents
Mothers still paid less than
then woman who do not have
children
Obama signs Equal Pay Bill
January
29, 2009
Easier for workers to sue for
discrimination on the job
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
Extends the period an
employee can file a claim of
discrimination for making
less money than another
worker doing the same job
“That
there are no second
class citizens in our
workplaces, and that it’s not
just unfair and illegal—but
bad for business—to pay
someone less because of
their gender, age, race,
ethnicity, religion or
disability”
The
bill is named for a
woman who said she didn’t
become aware of a pay
discrepancy until she neared
the end of her career at a
plant owned by Ohio- based
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co
Mean Weekly Salary: Men / Women
Physician
$1,364
Attorney
$1,340
College Fac. $1,038
Bus Driver
$498
Cook
$340
$852
$974
$859
$384
$300
Weekly
earnings of full time
working women were about
¾ of men’s during 2001
(study of earnings history of
over 9,300 Americans for
over 18 years)
Even
accounting for factors
such as occupation, industry,
race, marital status and job
tenure, working women today
earn an average of 80 cents
for every dollar earned by
male counterparts
Women
are less likely to work
a full time schedule and are
more likely to leave the labor
force for longer periods of
time than men, further
suppressing women’s wages
Working
women are
penalized for their dual roles
as wage earners and those
who disproportionately care
for home and family
 Men
with children get an
earnings boost, women lose
earnings
 Men with children earn about 2%
more on average than men
without children
 Women earn 2.5% less than
women without children
Women’s
median earnings:
$638 a week
Men’s: $798
(Department of Labor)
Impact
of wage gap is painful
during our current economics
downturn as families struggle
to make ends meet in face of
wages and job losses
Pay
gap does not necessarily
indicate discrimination
“Employers
pay workers who
have taken time out of the
work force less than those
with more experience on the
job, and many women work
less for family reasons”
Hudson Institute
Differences between Salaries of Male
Faculty and Female Faculty
2005,
The Chronicle of Higher
Education: Highest faculty rank
to the lowest across all 4-year
institutions
Prof.
$94,235 $82,874
Ass. Prof $66,291 $61,539
Lecturer $47,008 $42,584
The Bill for Mom’s Services
What
would be charged for all
of the things typical full-time
mothers do?
According
to Newsweek
(“Mother Matters,” 2005), the
bill would come to $131,471.00
per year!
Cost to hire: cleaning, day
care, cooking, nursing, laundry,
counseling, chauffeuring, and
so forth
 If
paid, Stay at Home Moms
would earn $134,121 annually
(up from 2005's salary of
$131,471). Working Moms would
earn $85,876 annually for the
"mom job" portion of their work,
in addition to their actual "work
job" salary.
 Salary.com
found the job titles
that best matched a mom's
definition of her work to be (in
order of hours spent per week):
housekeeper, day care center
teacher, cook, computer
operator, laundry machine
operator, janitor, facilities
manager, van driver, CEO and
psychologist.
New
job titles that made the
list in 2006 include
psychologist, laundry
machine operator, computer
operator, and facilities
manager. The job title of
nurse fell out of the top 10
this year.
 "We
don't want to add fuel to the
mommy-war fire," said Meredith
Hanrahan, senior vice president
of Salary.com Interactive. "Both
moms struggle with keeping the
house clean and moms of both
types reported making
tremendous sacrifices to make
their children happy, healthy,
and successful.
 Stay
at Home Moms give up the
benefits of working outside the
home, including extra income,
title, and career advancement.
Working Moms give up more
sleep, time for exercise, and skip
lunch to spend quality time
nurturing and educating their
children. In the end, both claim
it was well worth it."
Moms work an average of 90 hours a
week
 Working Moms reported spending 44
hours per week at their "work job" and
49.8 hours at their "mom job," for a total
of 93.8 hours per week. The Stay-atHome Mom works 91.6 hours at her mom
job.

Working Moms get less sleep
 Working Moms reported getting only 6.4
hours of sleep per night, versus 6.7 for
the Stay-at-Home Moms.

Working Moms work 7.2 hours as
housekeeper, versus 22.1 for Stay at
Home Moms
 Taken together, the three lowest paying
roles of housekeeper, laundry machine
operator, and janitor represent 29 percent
of the Working Mom's "mom job," but as
much as 38 percent of the Stay-at-Home
Mom's job, suggesting that Working Moms
need assistance with these tasks.



"My house isn't as clean as I would like and
I want to spend more time with my family"
Working Moms and Stay at Home Moms both
spend roughly 4 hours per week nurturing the
emotional needs of their kids in the "mom job" of
psychologist. The big difference appears to be in
the "mom job" of day care center teacher, with
Stay at Home Moms reporting an average of 15.7
hours per week and Working Moms reporting 7.2
hours per week
Approx.
105,000 married
American fathers choose to
be “stay-at-home” dads- care
for about 189,000 children
under the age of 15
2
million American preschool
children are cared for by their
fathers more hours than by
any other child care provider
while their mothers are at
work
Number
of single fathers has
grown to 2 million, up from
393,000 in 1970
Women in Education
Clearly,
women have made
great strides over the last two
decades in their pursuit of
college diplomas. Indeed,
women account for 56 percent
of college enrollment in the
country, according to the U.S.
Department of Education.
 And
studies have shown that
women are more likely than men
to earn bachelor’s degrees – in
every state, every income
bracket and every racial group.
Women earn 57 percent of all
bachelor’s and 58 percent of all
master’s degrees.
 Still,
women are clearly
underrepresented in science and
engineering higher education
programs – as well as in MBA
programs. Women are earning
from one-third to half of the
science and engineering
undergraduate and graduate
degrees and an astonishingly low
30 percent of the MBAs that are
being awarded.
Sex
Stereotypes affects selfconfidence
Example: Math and Science
Price Waterhouse vs
Hopkins

In 1989, the U.S. Supreme Court held in
Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins that Title VII
– the main federal anti-discrimination
statute -- prohibits employers from
penalizing employees for failing to
conform to the gender stereotypes
associated with their sex. Yet, two
decades later, courts continue to show
ambivalence in sex-stereotyping cases.

More specifically, courts continue to uphold
employers' dress and grooming policies that
differentiate by sex and, in the course of doing
so, demand that their employees adhere to the
stereotypical appearance standards assigned to
their sex. A recent federal court ruling, in Creed
v. Family Express Corporation, involving a
transsexual employee, illustrates – and repeats –
the mistake of many other courts that have
refused to see these policies as a form of illegal
sex-stereotyping.

In Price Waterhouse, the plaintiff, Ann
Hopkins, was denied partnership in an
accounting firm, at least in part because
she was too aggressive, cursed like a
truck driver, and did not walk, talk, or
dress in a feminine manner. In short, she
was a woman who acted like a man, and
for that, she was dealt a career-stunting
blow.

Ruling on Hopkins's sex discrimination lawsuit,
the Court held that Title VII forbids employers
from discriminating against an employee for
failing to live up to gender role expectations. You
can't, in other words, punish a female employee
for not being feminine enough. That sort of
gender policing, the Court ruled, violates Title
VII. In an oft-quoted line, the majority observed
that: "[W]e are beyond the day when an
employer could evaluate employees by assuming
or insisting that they matched the stereotype
associate with their group."

How far does this reasoning reach? Ideally, it would reach
as far as necessary to serve one of the central aims of antidiscrimination law: to promote equal employment
opportunity through the eradication of sex-stereotyped
decision-making. The reach of Price Waterhouse has been
tested primarily in three types of cases: (i) cases of gay
men or lesbians challenging harassment or other
discriminatory behavior; (ii) cases of women challenging
sex-differentiated dress or grooming codes; and (iii) cases
of transsexuals challenging all varieties of employment
policies and decisions. Cases in each category, as well as
cases that involve intersecting categories, reveal both the
limits and the untested waters of the law's protection
against sex stereotyping.
 To
begin, Title VII plainly prohibits
employers from discriminating on the
basis of sex. Other than for a very
small subset of hiring decisions, the
statute contains no defenses to a
claim of facial discrimination -- that
is, discrimination that is pursuant to
a policy that expressly differentiates
persons based on sex. And it contains
no exception for dress codes.
 Yet
courts, in case after case, have
upheld the right of employers to
maintain sex-specific dress and
grooming codes. Men must wear
their hair short; women can wear
theirs long. Men must wear business
suits; women must wear dresses.
Women can have piercings; men
cannot. Men cannot wear makeup;
women not only can, but in some
cases are required to.
 Perhaps
the most objectionable
case in this area is Jespersen v.
Harrah's, a 2006 case in which
an en banc panel of the Ninth
Circuit upheld by a vote of 7-4
the casino's sex-differentiated
grooming policy under Title VII.
The policy was startling in the
degree to which it required
women to maintain a highly
sexualized feminine appearance.
 Employees
at Harrah's were
required to wear the same
uniform, and all were required to
be "well groomed, appealing to
the eye, be firm and body toned,
and be comfortable with
maintaining this look while
wearing the specified uniform."
In addition, men and women had
sex-specific grooming
requirements.
 Male
employees had to wear their
hair short, trim their fingernails and
refrain from wearing makeup or nail
polish. Female employees had to
wear their hair "teased, curled, or
styled," as well as wear stockings,
colored nail polish, and specific types
of facial makeup outlined by an
"image consultant." Employees were
made up by the image consultant,
photographed, and held to the
"personal best" image standard each
day at work.
 Darlene
Jespersen, a longtime, wellregarded bartender at the casino,
objected to the requirements for
female employees. She was not in
the habit of teasing her hair or
wearing makeup and claimed that
being forced to do so interfered with
her chosen identity and constituted
sex discrimination.
 Jespersen's
claim seemed promising,
since the Ninth Circuit had applied
Price Waterhouse broadly in two
prior cases brought by gay men
claiming they were harassed for
being too effeminate. In those cases,
which I have written about in a
previous column, the court correctly
treated gender policing – punishing
gay men for failing to act according
to expectations of masculinity -- as a
form of unlawful sex discrimination.
 But
Jespersen was foiled in her
attempt to take a similar stand
against forced femininity. The court
sidestepped Price Waterhouse by
simply noting that any stereotype
being applied did not inhibit
Jespersen's ability to do the job.
 "The
only evidence in the record to
support the stereotyping claim is
Jespersen's own subjective reaction
to the makeup requirement," the
court claimed. The court ruled, in
effect, that sex-differentiated
grooming and dress codes are
permissible under Title VII as long as
they do not impose unequal burdens
on men and women.

But even under that standard, it seems
puzzling why Jespersen did not prevail. It
was obvious that women, even apart from
any identity or stereotyping objection,
bore more of a burden in complying with
Harrah's "personal best" policy. It is
neither expensive nor time-consuming for
men to keep their hair and nails short and
to not apply makeup or nail polish.

Women, on the other hand, were
burdened with the expense and time
involved with hair teasing, nail polishing
and the application of heavy facial makeup
every single day. The court refused to
take judicial notice of this difference,
however, and claimed, unpersuasively,
that the record did not support a claim of
unequal burden.

The court in Jespersen did a tremendous
disservice to the cause of sex equality.
Dress and grooming codes may seem
insignificant, but they are not established
in a vacuum. They reflect, instead,
societal stereotypes and prejudices about
what men and women should look like.
These stereotypes punish both men and
women who do not happen to fit
traditional expectations of masculinity and
femininity.

Meanwhile, dress and grooming codes also
reinforce a gender hierarchy, in which a
working woman is evaluated on both
appearance and job performance. The
requirement that women must wear legrevealing business dresses or skirts, for
instance, is not innocuous. (Nor is the
burden of a working woman's need for a
costly, varied wardrobe when a man can
get away with a few nearly-identical
business suits.).

Dress codes serve to emphasize gender
differences, rather than to highlight
similarities of skill, credentials, or effort.
The refusal of courts to confront these
cases head-on – including the refusal to
apply precedent that is obviously
applicable – has only served to perpetuate
existing gender hierarchies
Language in our society
Mankind
The
best man for the job
Manpower
Man the desk
Chairman
Headmaster
Policeman, Fireman
So…
What
does equal really mean to
you?
What do you think about the
stay-at-home mom versus
working mom? What about the
dad staying at home?
Women and education… should
they really have an advantage?
Equal
professional
opportunities?
Taking the man’s name?
Having a female president?
(not uncommon in many
countries)
70 percent of Americans believe that a
woman should change her name when she
marries,
 50 percent believe it should be required
by law.
 5-10 percent of women keep their own
names.

Politics
Rick
Santorum- It Takes A
Family
Accuses “radical feminists” of
undermining families and
trying to convince women
that they could find
fulfillment only in the
workplace
He
says his wife had written
that section on his bookHe said when his wife quit
her job to raise the couple’s
children, she felt many
people “looked down their
nose at that decision”
“Sadly
the propaganda
campaign launched in the
1960’s has taken root”
“The radical feminists
succeeded in undermining the
traditional family and
convincing women that
professional accomplishments
are the key to happiness”
Argues
in the book that many
of the problems facing the
poor could be solved by
building stronger families and
communities, including by
making divorce more difficult
and providing fatherhood
training programs
To
put women in combat
roles “could be a very
compromising situation,
where people naturally may
do things that may not be in
the interest of the mission
because of other types of
emotions that are involved.”
“Men
have emotions when
you see a woman in harm’s
way”
It was a “natural inclination
to not focus on the mission
but to try to be in a position
where you might want to
protect someone.”
Trends and Statistics for Women in
Business
Between
1997-2006
businesses fully womenowned, or majority owned by
women, grew at nearly twice
the rate of all U.S. firms
Happiest Wives in America
University
of Virginia’s
National Marriage Project:
“When Baby Makes Three”
Women who attend church at
least weekly with their
husband and have four or
more children- happiest
Agreeing
that raising children
is “one of life’s greatest joys”
doubles the likelihood that
younger married women
report being very happily
married
Pronatalistic
attitude is one of
the top five predictors of
marital happiness for both
wives and husbands
Religious
commitment also
helps to build a happy
marriage for women- one
when husbands and wives
attend church regularly are
wives more likely to be
happily married
64%
of wives report being
happy when they and their
husbands attend church (or
religious service) regularlycompared to about 50% of
wives in a marriage where
only one spouse goes to
church, or neither spouse
attends
Wives
in marriages where
both spouses go to church
regularly are also only about
1/3 as likely to report their
marriage is at risk for divorce
77%
of wives in marriage
where husband and wife
believe “God is at the center
of my marriage” report being
happy
1% of such wives report
feeling marriages may end in
divorce
Happiest
marriages in the
next generation down are
those who have no children
and those who have four or
more children
Survey
of Marital Generosityreligious husbands with four
or more children “are more
likely to engage in regular
acts of generosity—such as
making coffee in the morning
for their wives or frequently
expressing affection—and to
spend more quality time with
their spouses compared to
other husbands.”
Are Wives Making More Than Their
Husbands?
Liza
Mundy
The Richer Sex: How the
New Majority of Female
Breadwinners Is
Transforming Sex, Love and
Family
2009
Bureau of Labor
Statistics
“almost 40% of U.S. working
wives now out-earn their
husbands”
Female
primary
breadwinners- not just a
product of our recession
Since 1987 the number of
wives taking home more than
their husbands has risen
steadily- by a percentage
point or so every year
More
women than men are
getting undergraduate and
postgrad degrees- by 2050,
there will be 140 college
educated women in the U.S.
for every 100 similar men
2025-
more than half of the
earners in chief in American
households will be women
9/10 of the U.S. job
categories to grow most will
be nursing, accounting,
postsecondary teaching- all
female dominated
Women
are increasingly
preferring to remain
unmarried rather than settle
for men who aren’t their
intellectual and professional
equals
Women
will have “bargaining
power they need to usher in
a new age of fairness,
complete the revolution, and
push us past the unhappy
days of the so-called second
shift, when so many men and
women were mired in
arguments over equity that
always seemed to boil down
to laundry and dishes.”
Men
will be liberated as well“they’ll craft a broader
definition of masculinity, one
that includes domestication
but also more time spent on
manly pursuits: hunting,
fishing, and extreme fitness.”
Women
will choose spouses
who exhibit “supportiveness
(a glass of wine waiting at
the end of the day, a chance
to unburden), parenting
skills, and domestic
achievements.”
Male
college students- when
asked what they look for in a
partner- they say earning
power much more than they
did 50 years ago
2008
Families and Work
Institute- 40% said men
should bring home the bacon
and women to raise the kids,
but in 1977 74% said men
should do this
Surprising Statistics on Women in
the Workplace
Women
comprise 46% of the
total U.S. labor force (in 1900
fewer than 20% of women
participated in the labor
market- today it is about
75%)
Women
make only 77.5 cents
for every dollar that men
earn (2003 census) most
likely due to different
personal choices men and
women make about personal
fulfillment, child rearing,
hours at work
The
more education a woman
has, the greater the disparity
in her wages- professional
specialty occupations earned
72.7% of what men in the
same position earned, and
women in upper level
executive, administrative,
and managerial occupations
earned less at 72.3%
Women
may work longer to
receive the promotions that
provide access to higher paywomen often have to work
three years longer in a
teaching position to be
promoted to principal than
their male counterparts
Women
business owners
employ 35% more people
than all the Fortune 500
companies combined- 9.1
million women owned
businesses in the U.S.
Women
account for 46% of
the labor force, but 59% of
workers make less than $8
an hour- many women are
taking on jobs that pay well
under a living wage- 16% of
U.S. households having
women who are divorced,
widowed, or never married
and are sole providers
Many
women are at a distinct
disadvantage and struggling
to make ends meet
Only
53% of employers
provide at least some
replacement pay during
periods of maternity leavemany employers don’t
provide women with any
benefits if they leave work
temporarily to have a child
While
there is no law
requiring companies to offer
paid maternity leave,
considering it is an issue that
primarily affects women, it is
a blow to their income
potential and ability to care
for their families and
themselves
4/10
businesses worldwide
have no women in senior
management- studies show
that women outnumber men
in field like human resources,
health administration, and
education- but in other fields
a glass ceiling still exists
Women
earned less than men
in 99% of all occupations.
Women can expect to earn
less over their lifetime than
their male counterparts.
Over 47 years of full-time
work will result in $700,000
lost wages for high school
grads
Loss
of $1.2 million for
college grads, and $2 million
for professional school grads
Minority
women fare the
worst when it comes to equal
pay- African American women
earn 64 cents to every dollar
white men make- Hispanic
women just 52 cents per
dollar