Numerology calculator heres what your birth date says about you. Was the Addition of Sex to Title VII a Joke Two Viewpoints. Scott Highhouse. Bowling Green State University. Note This edition of the History Corner includes two views on how sex ended up as a protected class under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1. I initially wrote an essay advocating the con side it was not a joke and asked Art Gutman if he would provide commentsand possible corrections to my legalese. Art liked my article but was still sympathetic to the pro side it was a joke. So, I thought it would be best to present both sides. North South University is the first private university of Bangladesh, was established in 1992. The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Modest Proposal, by Jonathan Swift This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. Chemistry is too universal and dynamicallychanging a subject to be confined to a fixed definition it might be better to think of chemistry more as a point of view. After all, history is all about providing unique interpretations of events. Art Gutmans addendum directly follows this article. I O Urban Legend. Scott Highhouse. Bowling Green State University. The addition of sex to protected classes under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1. It not only provided protection against unfair discrimination in hiring, firing, and promotion, it also set the stage for protection against sexual harassment in the workplace. California Common Core. State Standards. English Language Arts Literacy in. HistorySocial Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. Adopted by the. Froguts Inc is a BioeLearning company focused on creating the most engaging virtual dissection, general science, life science, and lab software available. Expectancy violations theory EVT is a theory of communication that analyzes how individuals respond to unanticipated violations of social norms and expectations. When academics embraced scientific racism, immigration restrictions, and the suppression of the unfit. Access our free college textbooks and lowcost learning materials. Title VII was the foundation upon which the hostile work environment theory was built into case law. Many students of employment law are aware that sex was added at the last minute to race, religion, color, and national origin as protected classes. In fact, conventional wisdom suggests that sex was added to the bill in order to kill it This conclusion was reached by legal scholars of the period e. Vaas, 1. 96. 6 and is repeated in I O psychology textbooks on employee selection. Paul Anka Papa Midi Downloads. For example, Guion 1. Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/2/12/1360696219544/European-Union-flag-A-lev-009.jpg?w=1200&h=630&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&crop=faces%2Centropy&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=6798f9fef8e9d1e548359ddc864ea209' alt='Viewpoints 12 Textbook' title='Viewpoints 12 Textbook' />Act p. Berry 2. According to Gold 1. The conventional view is that sex was added as a protected class to the employment discrimination title of the Civil Rights Act of 1. Was the addition of sex to Title VII really a joke gone terribly wrong for the hapless jokester The arguments in favor of the joke hypothesis are fairly strong. The amendment to add sex to Title VII was introduced 2 days before the vote by Representative Howard W. Smith aka Judge Smith, a Democrat from Virginia who was vocally opposed to civil rights for Blacks. His introduction of the amendment stimulated hours of humorous debate in the House of Representatives, which some referred to as ladies day in the House. Adding to the hilarity, Judge Smith read a letter from a constituent who wanted him to introduce another amendment on behalf of women I suggest that you might also favor an amendment or a bill to correct the present imbalance which exists between males and females in the United States. The census of 1. 96. Just why the Creator would set up such an imbalance of spinsters, shutting off the right of every female to have a husband of her own, is, of course, known only to nature. But I am sure you will agree that this is a grave injustice to womankind and something the congress and president Johnson should take immediate steps to correct, especially in this election year. Would you have any suggestions as to what course our Government might pursue to protect our spinster friends in their right to a nice husband and familyOne can imagine this scene playing out like an episode of Mad Men, a fictional television series set in the 1. Indeed, it seems that Judge Smith was introducing this amendment because it would be seen, in 1. After all, Smith ultimately voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1. One problem with this hypothesis, however, is that it ignores Judge Smiths close relationship with the National Womens Party NWP. Smith had a history of speaking in favor of a sex amendment since 1. NWP as our Rock of Gibraltar see Freeman, 1. In fact, prior to his introduction of the amendment, Judge Smith responded on Meet the Press to a question from a female reporter also a member of the NWP about whether he planned to put equal rights for women in Title VII I might do that, he said. This episode suggests that the introduction of Smiths amendment was not a last minute ambush on the Civil Rights Act but an anticipated behavior by a politician seen as an ally in the fight for womens rights. The notion that the addition of sex to the bill was intended to derail it is also belied by the fact that the sex provision was barely mentioned during the 8. Senate Gold, 1. 98. If the amendment was meant to create rioting in the halls of Congress, then the sponsor would have been wildly off in his prediction. It seems unlikely that Smith, a very powerful Rules Committee chairman and leader of the conservative coalition, would have misjudged the landscape so completely. Smith was also concerned that Title VII as written would hurt White women disproportionately. Smith commented The first thing that an employer will look at unless the Smith amendment is approved will be the provision with regard to the records he must keep. If he does not employ that colored woman and has to make that record, the employer will say, Well, now, if I hire the colored woman I will not be in any trouble, but if I do not hire the colored woman and hire the white woman, then the EEO Commission is going to be looking down my throat and will want to know why I did not. I may be in a lawsuit. That will happen as surely as we are here this afternoon. Delete Upper Filter Lower Filter Vista on this page. You all know it. This issue would have been especially salient in an era when mens and womens jobs were highly segregated by gender stereotypes. Thus, the Smith amendment seemed motivated not only by a desire to end sex discrimination in employment but also to ensure that White women did not get the short end of the stick. Why, therefore, did Smith vote against the Civil Rights Act of 1. Smith was a noted racist, but he was aware that the tide of public sentiment was overwhelmingly in favor of having the bill pass. In other words, Smith may have felt that, as long as the bill was going to pass, he was going to ensure that protection for women in the workplace was going to be part of it. His vote against the bill was predictable, given his beliefs about White superiority and pressure from his conservative coalition. It seems that the conventional wisdom about how sex ended up in Title VII is another example of an I O urban legend. As Freeman 1. 99. Despite the humor that Smith injected into the Ladies Day debate, what evidence there is does not indicate that he had proposed his amendment as a joke p. Interesting, however, is how early this legend originated. Title VII Legislative History by Francis Vaas was written in 1. Smith offered the amendment in a spirit of satire and ironic cajolery. Although Vaas never says that the amendment was introduced to derail the bill, he certainly implies it when he points out that Edith Green, author of the Equal Pay Act, spoke out against the amendment. Later scholars have noted, however, that Green was the only congresswoman to speak against the amendment five congresswomen spoke in favor of it and was concerned that ending discrimination toward Blacks was a more pressing societal issue. Many supporters of the Civil Rights Act, including the Johnson administration, felt that it was necessary to separate legislation aimed at racial discrimination from legislation aimed at sex discrimination. A negative outcome of the early interpretation i. EEOC to take sex discrimination less seriously than racial discrimination. Freeman commented that the EEOC viewed the sex amendment as a fluke that was conceived out of wedlock, and tried to ignore its existence 1.