Equality Myth

Fun Fact of the Day: Did You Know Newspaper Want Ads Were Segregated by Gender Until 1973?

Yup. When former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor graduated from Stanford Law in 1952, she couldn’t find a job—because no law firm would hire a woman. In 1968, the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission issued guidelines banning want ad segregation, but the EEOC had little power to enforce the law. It wasn’t until 1973, when a lawsuit filed against The Pittsburgh Press reached the Supreme Court, that segregated ads were officially made illegal.

A couple of gems from the Dec. 1, 1968 issue of the Raleigh News and Observer.

WOMEN

Wanted, settled white lady to work nights in rest home. Some experience and transportation.

Wanted, General Office “Gal Friday” type job for stable, personable lady in one girl office. Starting $80 week.  

MEN

Wanted: Office Supervisor. Wholesale distribution office offers rapid financial advancement to young man who learns over-all operation quickly. Start $400.

Wanted: Experienced man to milk cows. Good salary, 6 room house with electric heat, also electric heat in milking parlor.

“Husky” girls - those who are just a little on the heavy side - are more efficient than their underweight sisters

Feministing points us to the July 1943 issue of Transportation Magazine, written for male supervisors of women during World War II, featuring “helpful tips” on supervising women at work. Excerpts:

1. Pick young married women. They usually have more of a sense of responsibility than their unmarried sisters, they’re less likely to be flirtatious

2. When you have to use older women, try to get ones who have worked outside the home at some time in their lives. Older women who have never contacted the public have a hard time adapting themselves and are inclined to be cantankerous and fussy.

3. General experience indicates that “husky” girls - those who are just a little on the heavy side - are more even tempered and efficient than their underweight sisters.

(via newsweek frangry)

Wow. Wal-Mart to Face Massive Class-Action Suit Over Pay Gap

A sharply divided federal appeals court exposed Wal-Mart to billions in legal damages when it ruled on Monday that a massive class action lawsuit alleging gender discrimination can go to trial.

In its 6-5 ruling, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said the world’s largest private employer will have to face charges that it pays women less than men for the same jobs and that female employees receive fewer promotions and have to wait longer for those promotions than male counterparts.

Judge Sandra Ikuta wrote a blistering dissent, joined by four of her colleagues. “No court has ever certified a class like this one, until now. And with good reason,” Ikuta wrote. “In this case, six women who have worked in 13 of Wal-Mart’s 3,400 stores seek to represent every woman who has worked in those stores over the course of the last decade — a class estimated in 2001 to include more than 1.5 million women.”

Thanks to Slark Pope for bringing this to our attention. UPDATE: Read the fresh ABC story on the case here.

On Language: Phallic v. Yonic, and So On…

Our friend Emily once embarked on a mission: to make “yonic” as much a part of the lexicon as its male counterpart, “phallic.” Her point was a good one—we all know what phallic means, and we use the word all the time. Yonic, however, not so much. Needless to say, her mission failed.

We were reminded of this after the Male Studies press release that referenced “misandry,” which is to misogyny as phallic is to yonic. That “misogyny” (hatred of women) and “phallic” (resembling a male member) are such ingrained parts of our language, while “misandry” (hatred of men) and “yonic” (resembling female genetalia) are, well, basically a foreign language, seems notable, to say the least.

Make of this what you will. But tell us, what’s it all about? Is this a coincidental anomaly? Are there other language disparities that contradict the obvious take-away from this one? Give us your thoughts, people!

Should Universities Have Men’s Studies Programs?

This morning we discovered that in April, a college in Staten Island will be hosting a symposium on “Male Studies,” leading up to a larger conference next fall. The announcement includes this line:

“…the growing problem of misandry—the hatred of males, an unacknowledged but underlying socio-cultural, economic, political and legal phenomenon endangering the well-being of both genders.”

This was the first we’d heard of “misandry.” Are we alone? Do we think that there’s a growing hatred of males that’s endangering our well-being? We may be feminists, but we love men! Thoughts?