Are men and women treated equally?
The question that has been cast upon society since the very first society existed has an easy answer: no.
Judy Brady's essay I Want a Wife, published in 1971 — just 51 years after the ratification of the 19th amendment, seven years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and a year before the approval (and subsequent failure to ratify) of the Equal Rights Amendment, slowly progresses into more and more absurd expectations of women, who are essentially equated with wives and mothers.
But were these expectations as absurd to readers in 1971 as they are to us?
Probably not. An in-class read of Brady's essay in 2020 seems humorously ridiculous, but many of these expectations did not seem absurd to many conservative husbands in that age. Needless to say, society has largely advanced in its treatment of women. Unfortunately, the essay still has notable significance and relevance to today's society.
Familial and societal expectations of women have barred them from jobs traditionally "reserved" for men. In fact, women were only granted access to all military combat positions four years ago. Even today, workplace discrimination keeps many women from obtaining positions high on the corporate ladder.
The main legal backing against this type of gender discrimination — Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — is the main law cited in legal cases concerning gender discrimination. So, isn't that all good? Men and women are equal now?
Clearly not. Ignoring the social inequalities, legal framework regarding gender discrimination is unequal. Cases regarding gender discrimination, such as United States v. Virginia, are long and involve citations of various laws and the 14th amendment to finally establish that discriminatory rules are in fact unjust (woah!). These cases make clear the obvious: it is assumed that males hold rights, whereas females — when discriminated against — must prove to the courts that they also hold these same rights.
The Equal Rights Amendment — which, if ratified, would become the 28th amendment — is as simple as this: men and women would have equal rights under the Constitution. It would become a basis for other laws. In other words, future legislation would have to abide by the ERA, and the simple mention of the ERA would be evidence enough that men and women have equal civil rights. Additionally, the amendment would have symbolic importance; the equality of genders would be imbedded into the Constitution, the legal framework for American democracy and government.
Although the Equal Rights Amendment in no way nullifies the de facto gender discrimination in American society, it would be a large step in establishing the full equality of the genders. Unfortunately, the proposal for the amendment — proposed in 1923 and approved by Congress in 1972 — was not ratified by the states at that time, and thus the ratification deadline was passed. However, with Virginia agreeing to the amendment in January of this year (thus becoming the 38th and final state needed), the amendment would be able to proceed if Congress reopens the ratification process of the ERA.
What can we do? Moves as simple as writing or calling a representative of Congress and urging them to support the current legislation for removing the ERA's original deadline can help revive the ERA.
For Troy, this involves the members of Congress:
Representative Haley Stevens: https://stevens.house.gov/contact
Senator Debbie Stabenow: https://www.stabenow.senate.gov/contact
Senator Gary Peters: https://www.peters.senate.gov/contact/email-gary
The resolutions to remove the deadline for the ERA are HJ Res 38 and SJ Res 5 in the House and in the Senate, respectively.
More info: https://www.equalrightsamendment.org/why
The question that has been cast upon society since the very first society existed has an easy answer: no.
Judy Brady's essay I Want a Wife, published in 1971 — just 51 years after the ratification of the 19th amendment, seven years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and a year before the approval (and subsequent failure to ratify) of the Equal Rights Amendment, slowly progresses into more and more absurd expectations of women, who are essentially equated with wives and mothers.
But were these expectations as absurd to readers in 1971 as they are to us?
Probably not. An in-class read of Brady's essay in 2020 seems humorously ridiculous, but many of these expectations did not seem absurd to many conservative husbands in that age. Needless to say, society has largely advanced in its treatment of women. Unfortunately, the essay still has notable significance and relevance to today's society.
Familial and societal expectations of women have barred them from jobs traditionally "reserved" for men. In fact, women were only granted access to all military combat positions four years ago. Even today, workplace discrimination keeps many women from obtaining positions high on the corporate ladder.
The main legal backing against this type of gender discrimination — Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — is the main law cited in legal cases concerning gender discrimination. So, isn't that all good? Men and women are equal now?
Clearly not. Ignoring the social inequalities, legal framework regarding gender discrimination is unequal. Cases regarding gender discrimination, such as United States v. Virginia, are long and involve citations of various laws and the 14th amendment to finally establish that discriminatory rules are in fact unjust (woah!). These cases make clear the obvious: it is assumed that males hold rights, whereas females — when discriminated against — must prove to the courts that they also hold these same rights.
The Equal Rights Amendment — which, if ratified, would become the 28th amendment — is as simple as this: men and women would have equal rights under the Constitution. It would become a basis for other laws. In other words, future legislation would have to abide by the ERA, and the simple mention of the ERA would be evidence enough that men and women have equal civil rights. Additionally, the amendment would have symbolic importance; the equality of genders would be imbedded into the Constitution, the legal framework for American democracy and government.
Although the Equal Rights Amendment in no way nullifies the de facto gender discrimination in American society, it would be a large step in establishing the full equality of the genders. Unfortunately, the proposal for the amendment — proposed in 1923 and approved by Congress in 1972 — was not ratified by the states at that time, and thus the ratification deadline was passed. However, with Virginia agreeing to the amendment in January of this year (thus becoming the 38th and final state needed), the amendment would be able to proceed if Congress reopens the ratification process of the ERA.
What can we do? Moves as simple as writing or calling a representative of Congress and urging them to support the current legislation for removing the ERA's original deadline can help revive the ERA.
For Troy, this involves the members of Congress:
Representative Haley Stevens: https://stevens.house.gov/contact
Senator Debbie Stabenow: https://www.stabenow.senate.gov/contact
Senator Gary Peters: https://www.peters.senate.gov/contact/email-gary
The resolutions to remove the deadline for the ERA are HJ Res 38 and SJ Res 5 in the House and in the Senate, respectively.
More info: https://www.equalrightsamendment.org/why
Comments
Post a Comment