CRM/LAW C113 Lecture Notes - Lecture 11: Feminist Legal Theory, Anita Hill, Educational Technology
14 Nov 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Jessica Mangold
C113 Gender & Social Control
Professor Berk
Week 6 Lecture 1
11/6/18
Intersectionality & Multiracial/Critical Race Feminism
Kimberle Crenshaw – Intersectionality
- Crenshaw’s work has had huge influence in this field & others
- not just about the intersection of race & gender, or multiple identity, but the legal
consequences of intersecting multiple identities
- more than simply intersectionality -> have to look at the law
- origins come from specific place in time in feminist legal theory
- around 1989 & 1990
- Crenshaw argued that anti-discrimination law (Title VII) fails to comprehend the
nature of societal level discrimination that is faced by people who are members of
multiple disadvantaged groups
- a few examples:
- Anita Hill -> a black woman
- pro-typical example & one that Crenshaw extensively discusses
- primarily identified by gender & race
- accused Clarence Thomas of sexually harassing her before his
nomination & confirmation to the US Supreme Court
- Matt Getze -> differently abled man
- Getze is at the University of Colorado
- educational technologist -> speaks about issues regarding ability
- Margaret Montoya -> older Hispanic woman
- talks about the dimension of age, her Latina, & gender identity
*experience their lives through multiple lenses
Intersectionality
- societal discrimination is not just “additive”, it is unique
- not just gender + race +…
- need to identify the unique space that would justify a different understanding in
law
- experience same discrimination as those with one disadvantage as well as intersectional
forms of discrimination
- Crenshaw: they actually experience more discrimination
- black women experience societal discrimination aimed at African Americans &
the discrimination that is aimed at women -> also experience unique intersectional
forms of discrimination
- ex. employer might hire white women & might hire black men but refuses to
hire a black woman -> according to Crenshaw that is a unique injury that civil
rights law should address
- employer: worried that customer stereotypes against black women will
harm their business or because employer made uncomfortable by Afro-
centric hairstyle
- Rogers v. American Airlines
- Renee Rogers was flight attendant who wore her hair in cornrows
- American Airlines instructed her that she needed to change her hairstyle, or she
would be fired from her job
- sued under Title VII for race & sex discrimination
- treated differently based on her hairstyle worn specifically by African
American women
- American Airlines won the case
- hairstyles are not an immutable characteristic -> can be changed
- does not need to “put on new skin” to align with the grooming policy of
the company
- Degraf & Reed v. General Motor Company
- filed Title VII alleging that General Motors discriminated systematically against
black women
- seniority based layoff system
- had only recently encouraged the hiring of African American women -> were
therefore the first hired & then consequentially the first fired
- these women came together saying that have unique injury
- were retaining black men & their white female employees
- these women also lost their case -> courts declared that there was no injury
- civil rights law fails to recognize intersectional discrimination
- requires race OR sex & evaluates only binary categories
- relies on binary categories including male/female, black/white, abled/disabled
- law only recognizes these separate binary categories -> have to select one binary
& sue on the principle
- harder to sue if person that identifies on multiple disadvantaged levels -> law
doesn’t protect you & you tend to be marginalized
iClicker Question
- Q: I have an intersectional identity.
- B. no, that doesn’t describe me
- many of us are not just one identity anymore -> multiple identities affecting them
- Lam v. University of Hawaii
- Lam -> Vietnamese American woman
- applied for a job at their law school to be part of Pacific Asian legal studies
program
- first time -> was one of finalist nominees & for some reason University of
Hawaii hired no one from that round
- second time -> applied again when University of Hawaii said that they were
hiring for that position again
- selected a candidate that turned down the job offer & then they closed the job
offer -> did not consider her even though she was still a finalist
- sued under Title VII -> was discriminated against for this position as both Asian
& a woman
- lower court: there is no such thing as an intersectional claim -> you lose
- 9th circuit court of appeals -> wait there is something happening
- Title VII should recognize intersectional claims
Document Summary
More than simply intersectionality -> have to look at the law. Crenshaw argued that anti-discrimination law (title vii) fails to comprehend the nature of societal level discrimination that is faced by people who are members of multiple disadvantaged groups. Pro-typical example & one that crenshaw extensively discusses. Accused clarence thomas of sexually harassing her before his nomination & confirmation to the us supreme court. Crenshaw"s work has had huge influence in this field & others. Not just about the intersection of race & gender, or multiple identity, but the legal consequences of intersecting multiple identities. Origins come from specific place in time in feminist legal theory. Need to identify the unique space that would justify a different understanding in law. Societal discrimination is not just additive , it is unique. Experience same discrimination as those with one disadvantage as well as intersectional forms of discrimination.
