Sex: Sexual Orientation, Sex Stereotyping, and Title VII

D. Kaminer
{"title":"Sex: Sexual Orientation, Sex Stereotyping, and Title VII","authors":"D. Kaminer","doi":"10.5070/L3271047870","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Author(s): Kaminer, Debbie N. | Abstract: The United States Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Altitude Express v. Zarda, a case that addresses whether Title VII’s prohibition of discrimination “on the basis of sex” prohibits sexual orientation discrimination. Relying on three related lines of reasoning, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had held that it did. First, sexual orientation discrimination would not have occurred “but for” the employee’s sex; second, sexual orientation discrimination relies on the sex-stereotype that individuals should be attracted to individuals of the opposite sex; and third, sexual orientation discrimination is a form of prohibited associational discrimination. This Article opines that the strongest and most compelling of these three arguments is sex stereotyping since gays and lesbians fail to conform to the ultimate stereotype that real men are sexually attracted to women and real women are sexually attracted to men. This stereotype is a means of maintaining anachronistic and outdated gender roles for men and women.","PeriodicalId":83388,"journal":{"name":"UCLA women's law journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UCLA women's law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/L3271047870","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Author(s): Kaminer, Debbie N. | Abstract: The United States Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Altitude Express v. Zarda, a case that addresses whether Title VII’s prohibition of discrimination “on the basis of sex” prohibits sexual orientation discrimination. Relying on three related lines of reasoning, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had held that it did. First, sexual orientation discrimination would not have occurred “but for” the employee’s sex; second, sexual orientation discrimination relies on the sex-stereotype that individuals should be attracted to individuals of the opposite sex; and third, sexual orientation discrimination is a form of prohibited associational discrimination. This Article opines that the strongest and most compelling of these three arguments is sex stereotyping since gays and lesbians fail to conform to the ultimate stereotype that real men are sexually attracted to women and real women are sexually attracted to men. This stereotype is a means of maintaining anachronistic and outdated gender roles for men and women.
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:性取向、性刻板印象和第七章
摘要:最近,美国最高法院听取了海拔快车诉扎尔达一案的口头辩论,该案件涉及第七章禁止“基于性别”的歧视是否禁止性取向歧视。美国第二巡回上诉法院依据三条相关的推理线作出判决。首先,“要不是”雇员的性别,性取向歧视就不会发生;第二,性取向歧视依赖于性别刻板印象,即个体应该被异性所吸引;第三,性取向歧视是一种被禁止的联想歧视。本文认为,这三个论点中最有力和最令人信服的是性别刻板印象,因为男女同性恋者不符合最终的刻板印象,即真正的男人对女人有性吸引力,真正的女人对男人有性吸引力。这种刻板印象是维持男性和女性不合时宜和过时的性别角色的一种手段。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
What's Love Got to Do with It? Anti-Love Jihad Laws and the Othering of Muslims in India Self-Defense, Responsibility, and Punishment: Rethinking the Criminalization of Women Who Kill Their Abusive Intimate Partners Stolen Voices: A Linguistic Approach to Understanding Implicit Gender Bias in the Legal Profession Limitations of Current Menstrual Equity Advocacy and a Path Towards Justice Black Women Victims of Police Brutality and the Silencing of Their Stories
×
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