On Account of Sex: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Making of Gender Equality Law

IF 0.3 Q4 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Labor-Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1215/15476715-10581559
Elizabeth Tandy Shermer
{"title":"On Account of Sex: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Making of Gender Equality Law","authors":"Elizabeth Tandy Shermer","doi":"10.1215/15476715-10581559","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most Americans know Ruth Bader Ginsburg as a feminist icon whose likeness can still be found (more than two years after her passing) on T-shirts, mugs, and stickers. Images of the “Notorious RBG” usually show her in Supreme Court robes with the kind of stylish white collar the justice favored, and fans can now buy or get knitting patterns for the collar online. This cult following really grew in the new millennium, when Ginsburg developed a reputation for fiery opinions that thrilled progressives and liberals frustrated with conservatives on the Court and in Congress.But political scientist and legal expert Philippa Strum boldly argues that Ginsburg made her real impact on the law years before her 1993 nomination. On Account of Sex: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Making of Gender Equality Law focuses on Ginsburg's work in the 1970s for the American Civil Liberty Union's (ACLU) Women's Rights Project. This short, compelling book does a far better job than RBG, the 2018 documentary, to explain the work involved in bringing cases to the Court as well as Ginsburg's legal tactics, failures, and successes. She embraced opportunities to highlight to an all-male Court that sex discrimination affected women and men. She also later admitted taking inspiration from one of those justices, former NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall. He pursued cases that Ginsburg recognized as “building blocks” that had led to the monumental 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision (40). “We copied that,” Ginsburg admitted, because, she insisted, “real change, enduring change . . . happens one step at a time” (40, 53–54). But the Court resisted a clear forward march toward gender equality in the 1970s. Ginsburg pithily summarized it as a halting move “From No Rights to Half Rights to Confusing Rights” in a 1978 law review article published just two years before Jimmy Carter nominated her to the US Court of Appeals (142).Strum's account refreshingly stresses that RBG was never the only person, never the only woman lawyer, advancing the cause of women's rights or fighting sex discrimination. As such, On Account of Sex implicitly critiques the singular focus on RBG as a jurist as well as a lawyer. The book instead illustrates the value of telling the stories of the many people and movements fighting for lasting change. Strum, for example, highlights how legal icons Dorothy Kenyon and Pauli Murray pressured the ACLU to start the Women's Rights Project years before Ginsburg joined. Strum emphasizes that Ginsburg worked with others on or affiliated with that project and that she also relied on the work of her Columbia law students as well as attorneys connected to other important initiatives, like the still-potent Southern Poverty Law Center. Strum, like RBG, also recognizes the bravery of the ordinary people willing to go to court, including Susan Struck, an unwed air force captain who was given the choice to leave the service or terminate her pregnancy before the 1972 Roe decision, and widower Stephen Wiesenfeld, who asked for the child-in-care payments available to widows in the 1935 Social Security Act.On Account of Sex raises important questions for labor historians about what has been and is publicly recognized as an economic right. Strum helpfully explains that the Women's Rights Project could not pursue abortion rights because a principal funder, the Ford Foundation, forbade it. But Ginsburg and other litigators could and did take cases to protect the workplace rights of pregnant people. That imposed siloing of reproductive freedom has had profound consequences, in retrospect, because abortion is often discussed as cultural and religious issues instead of as a right critical to women's ability to work outside the home to support themselves or their families.The importance of employment also underscores how much Ginsburg and other lawyers were wrestling with the inequalities built into the New Deal. Many of the cases that Strum discusses focused on equal access to social welfare programs, job opportunities, and employee benefits. Those basic categories illustrate how the 1970s were not just about the growing power of conservative movements and the declining strength of trade unions. Social justice organizations also looked to the courts to actually enforce the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which barred discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, and country of origin. Yet those lawsuits were also about increasing access to landmark achievements of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt era, including Social Security. Historians have shown how white men working in manufacturing benefited most from the New Deal, which privileged a male head of household's ability to bargain for a family wage. The widening of inequality as well as the persistence of wage and wealth gaps since the 1970s suggests real limits on what even the Notorious RBG could do to ensure equality, let alone equity, in a system of benefits (not rights) paid through taxes on income and employment. Even in the 1930s, only some citizens would be eligible, but all remained dependent on the pensions, health care plans, and other benefits that employers offered.The need for an American to be employed full time in an eligible sector to receive what other industrialized countries treat as citizenship rights indicates that legal strategies for achieving lasting change, including Marshall's and Ginsburg's incremental approaches, have real limits. On Account of Sex indicates that judicial building blocks could not, for example, provide the parental leave and childcare support that excited Ginsburg when she studied Sweden's post–World War II experiments. There was public demand for and legislative interest in that basic need in the 1970s, but the best Ginsburg could do as a lawyer was win access to the Social Security Act's child-in-care payments for Wiesenfeld and other widowers. Only an act of Congress, the 1993 Family Medical Leave Act, assured Americans twelve weeks of unpaid leave. No one person can be given credit for that small but important step, which illustrates that the kind of hagiography that Strum is writing against obscures more than it reveals about the many battles to make sure every American is treated equally on and off the job.","PeriodicalId":43329,"journal":{"name":"Labor-Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Labor-Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/15476715-10581559","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most Americans know Ruth Bader Ginsburg as a feminist icon whose likeness can still be found (more than two years after her passing) on T-shirts, mugs, and stickers. Images of the “Notorious RBG” usually show her in Supreme Court robes with the kind of stylish white collar the justice favored, and fans can now buy or get knitting patterns for the collar online. This cult following really grew in the new millennium, when Ginsburg developed a reputation for fiery opinions that thrilled progressives and liberals frustrated with conservatives on the Court and in Congress.But political scientist and legal expert Philippa Strum boldly argues that Ginsburg made her real impact on the law years before her 1993 nomination. On Account of Sex: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Making of Gender Equality Law focuses on Ginsburg's work in the 1970s for the American Civil Liberty Union's (ACLU) Women's Rights Project. This short, compelling book does a far better job than RBG, the 2018 documentary, to explain the work involved in bringing cases to the Court as well as Ginsburg's legal tactics, failures, and successes. She embraced opportunities to highlight to an all-male Court that sex discrimination affected women and men. She also later admitted taking inspiration from one of those justices, former NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall. He pursued cases that Ginsburg recognized as “building blocks” that had led to the monumental 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision (40). “We copied that,” Ginsburg admitted, because, she insisted, “real change, enduring change . . . happens one step at a time” (40, 53–54). But the Court resisted a clear forward march toward gender equality in the 1970s. Ginsburg pithily summarized it as a halting move “From No Rights to Half Rights to Confusing Rights” in a 1978 law review article published just two years before Jimmy Carter nominated her to the US Court of Appeals (142).Strum's account refreshingly stresses that RBG was never the only person, never the only woman lawyer, advancing the cause of women's rights or fighting sex discrimination. As such, On Account of Sex implicitly critiques the singular focus on RBG as a jurist as well as a lawyer. The book instead illustrates the value of telling the stories of the many people and movements fighting for lasting change. Strum, for example, highlights how legal icons Dorothy Kenyon and Pauli Murray pressured the ACLU to start the Women's Rights Project years before Ginsburg joined. Strum emphasizes that Ginsburg worked with others on or affiliated with that project and that she also relied on the work of her Columbia law students as well as attorneys connected to other important initiatives, like the still-potent Southern Poverty Law Center. Strum, like RBG, also recognizes the bravery of the ordinary people willing to go to court, including Susan Struck, an unwed air force captain who was given the choice to leave the service or terminate her pregnancy before the 1972 Roe decision, and widower Stephen Wiesenfeld, who asked for the child-in-care payments available to widows in the 1935 Social Security Act.On Account of Sex raises important questions for labor historians about what has been and is publicly recognized as an economic right. Strum helpfully explains that the Women's Rights Project could not pursue abortion rights because a principal funder, the Ford Foundation, forbade it. But Ginsburg and other litigators could and did take cases to protect the workplace rights of pregnant people. That imposed siloing of reproductive freedom has had profound consequences, in retrospect, because abortion is often discussed as cultural and religious issues instead of as a right critical to women's ability to work outside the home to support themselves or their families.The importance of employment also underscores how much Ginsburg and other lawyers were wrestling with the inequalities built into the New Deal. Many of the cases that Strum discusses focused on equal access to social welfare programs, job opportunities, and employee benefits. Those basic categories illustrate how the 1970s were not just about the growing power of conservative movements and the declining strength of trade unions. Social justice organizations also looked to the courts to actually enforce the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which barred discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, and country of origin. Yet those lawsuits were also about increasing access to landmark achievements of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt era, including Social Security. Historians have shown how white men working in manufacturing benefited most from the New Deal, which privileged a male head of household's ability to bargain for a family wage. The widening of inequality as well as the persistence of wage and wealth gaps since the 1970s suggests real limits on what even the Notorious RBG could do to ensure equality, let alone equity, in a system of benefits (not rights) paid through taxes on income and employment. Even in the 1930s, only some citizens would be eligible, but all remained dependent on the pensions, health care plans, and other benefits that employers offered.The need for an American to be employed full time in an eligible sector to receive what other industrialized countries treat as citizenship rights indicates that legal strategies for achieving lasting change, including Marshall's and Ginsburg's incremental approaches, have real limits. On Account of Sex indicates that judicial building blocks could not, for example, provide the parental leave and childcare support that excited Ginsburg when she studied Sweden's post–World War II experiments. There was public demand for and legislative interest in that basic need in the 1970s, but the best Ginsburg could do as a lawyer was win access to the Social Security Act's child-in-care payments for Wiesenfeld and other widowers. Only an act of Congress, the 1993 Family Medical Leave Act, assured Americans twelve weeks of unpaid leave. No one person can be given credit for that small but important step, which illustrates that the kind of hagiography that Strum is writing against obscures more than it reveals about the many battles to make sure every American is treated equally on and off the job.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
性别的理由:露丝·巴德·金斯伯格与性别平等法的制定
大多数美国人都知道露丝·巴德·金斯伯格(Ruth Bader Ginsburg)是一位女权主义偶像,她的肖像(在她去世两年多后)仍然可以在t恤、马克杯和贴纸上找到。“臭名昭著的RBG”的照片通常是她穿着最高法院的长袍,戴着法官喜欢的那种时髦的白领,粉丝们现在可以在网上购买或获得这种衣领的针织图案。这种狂热的追随者在新千年中真正成长起来,当时金斯伯格以其激烈的观点而闻名,这让法院和国会的进步主义者和自由主义者感到兴奋,他们对保守派感到沮丧。但政治学家和法律专家菲利帕·斯特伦姆大胆地认为,金斯伯格在1993年被提名前几年就对法律界产生了真正的影响。《性别的原因:露丝·巴德·金斯伯格和性别平等法的制定》聚焦于金斯伯格在20世纪70年代为美国公民自由联盟(ACLU)妇女权利项目所做的工作。这本短小精悍的书比2018年的纪录片《RBG》做得好得多,它解释了将案件提交最高法院的工作,以及金斯伯格的法律策略、失败和成功。她抓住机会向全是男性的法院强调性别歧视影响着女性和男性。她后来还承认,她的灵感来自其中一位法官,前全国有色人种协进会律师瑟古德·马歇尔。他继续追查那些被金斯伯格视为“基石”的案件,这些案件导致了1954年具有里程碑意义的布朗诉教育委员会案(40)。“我们照搬了,”金斯伯格承认,因为,她坚持认为,“真正的改变,持久的改变……一次只发生一步”(40,53 - 54)。但在20世纪70年代,最高法院拒绝向性别平等的方向明确迈进。金斯伯格在1978年发表的一篇法律评论文章中简洁地将其概括为“从没有权利到一半权利再到令人困惑的权利”,这篇文章发表在吉米·卡特提名她为美国上诉法院法官的两年前(142年)。斯特伦姆的叙述令人耳目一新地强调,RBG从来都不是唯一一个推动妇女权利事业或反对性别歧视的人,也不是唯一的女律师。因此,《论性的理由》含蓄地批评了把同性恋作为法学家和律师的单一关注点。相反,这本书说明了讲述许多人为持久变革而奋斗的人和运动的故事的价值。例如,斯特拉姆强调了法律偶像多萝西·凯尼恩(Dorothy Kenyon)和保利·默里(Pauli Murray)如何在金斯伯格加入前几年向美国公民自由联盟施压,要求其启动“女权项目”。斯特拉姆强调,金斯伯格与其他人一起参与或与该项目有关联,她也依赖于哥伦比亚大学法律系学生的工作,以及与其他重要倡议有关的律师的工作,比如仍然强大的南方贫困法律中心。和RBG一样,斯特鲁姆也承认愿意诉诸法庭的普通人的勇气,其中包括苏珊·斯特拉克(Susan Struck),她是一名未婚空军上尉,在1972年罗伊案判决之前,她可以选择离开军队或终止妊娠;还有丧偶的斯蒂芬·维森菲尔德(Stephen Wiesenfeld),他要求根据1935年《社会保障法》(Social Security Act)向丧偶的妇女提供儿童抚养费。《性的原因》为劳工历史学家提出了一个重要的问题,即什么是被公众认可的经济权利。斯特伦姆很有帮助地解释说,妇女权利项目不能追求堕胎权利,因为主要资助者福特基金会禁止它。但金斯伯格和其他诉讼律师可以也确实提起诉讼,保护孕妇的工作场所权利。回想起来,这种对生育自由的限制产生了深远的影响,因为堕胎经常被当作文化和宗教问题来讨论,而不是作为一项对妇女外出工作以养活自己或家人的能力至关重要的权利来讨论。就业问题的重要性也突显出金斯伯格和其他律师是如何努力解决新政中存在的不平等问题的。斯特鲁姆讨论的许多案例都集中在平等获得社会福利项目、工作机会和员工福利方面。这些基本分类说明,20世纪70年代不仅仅是保守运动力量的增强和工会力量的衰落。社会正义组织也希望法院能切实执行1964年的《民权法案》,该法案禁止基于种族、肤色、性别和原籍国的歧视。然而,这些诉讼也是为了增加获得富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福(Franklin Delano Roosevelt)时代标志性成就的机会,包括社会保障。历史学家已经证明,在制造业工作的白人男性是如何从“新政”(New Deal)中获益最多的,因为“新政”赋予了男性户主讨价还价家庭工资的特权。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
期刊最新文献
London's Working-Class Youth and the Making of Post-Victorian Britain, 1958–1971 On Account of Sex: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Making of Gender Equality Law The Shadow of El Centro: A History of Migrant Incarceration and Solidarity Editor's Introduction Tending the Fire
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1