首页> 外文学位 >Prenancy at Work: Sex Equality, Reproductive Liberty, and the Workplace, 1964-1993.
【24h】

Prenancy at Work: Sex Equality, Reproductive Liberty, and the Workplace, 1964-1993.

机译:工作中的怀孕:两性平等,生殖自由和工作场所,1964-1993年。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This dissertation examines feminists' legal imagination and advocacy regarding the relationship between sex equality and reproductive liberty, from the civil rights era through the Reagan era. I demonstrate that feminists understood the legal, social, and economic regulation of pregnancy, childrearing, and caregiving as central problems of sex equality. The dissertation enriches a nascent literature on the history of feminism and anti-feminism in the late twentieth century. I join scholarship showing a gap between legal feminists' vision and the Supreme Court's sex discrimination jurisprudence. By focusing on legislative, administrative, and union advocacy, as well as litigation, I highlight the redistributive dimensions of legal feminism.;I argue that feminists held commitments to two interrelated ideals: the elimination of sex-role stereotypes under law and social protection for caregiving. They advocated for equal employment opportunity, as well as an egalitarian division of caregiving labor between women and men, and a shifting of the costs of reproduction from the private family to employers and the state. Opposition to feminist objectives, however, made it difficult to fuse a commitment to ending sex-role stereotypes under the law and to social protection. In particular, three socio-political trends placed constraints on feminists' legal vision and policy objectives: market conservative opposition to redistribution, social conservative fidelity to traditional gender norms, and the tenacity of the sexual division of labor within the family. As a result, heated controversies forced feminists to prioritize between their two broad commitments---sex neutrality and social protection---and splits in the movement emerged repeatedly.;The dissertation analyzes how feminist argumentation evolved in a dialectical relationship with the ideologies and strategies of market and social conservatives. In the mid to late 1960s, a gender-protective legal regime that had prevailed since the New Deal rapidly eroded. The enactment of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the consolidation of a network of feminist attorneys, and working-class women's legal activism placed a new emphasis on sex equality. But what would equality mean? The close of the 1960s was a moment of unstable possibility. Feminists pursued substantive equality via antidiscrimination law and affirmative entitlements. They made rights claims to transform childrearing structures, the legal regulation of pregnancy in the workplace, and the hours of work for men as well as women.;Of these three claims, the temporary disability paradigm for the legal regulation of pregnancy survived into the 1970s. Wielded by labor and legal feminists, the paradigm brought an end to pregnancy dismissal policies. In Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, the Supreme Court struck down these policies as a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Feminists encountered greater resistance when they tried to use the temporary disability paradigm to achieve economic security for childbearing workers. In Geduldig v. Aiello and General Electric Co. v. Gilbert, the Court held that the exclusion of pregnancy from otherwise comprehensive insurance schemes violated neither constitutional nor statutory guarantees of sex equality. Feminists turned from the Court to Congress, achieving a victory when Congress passed the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 (PDA).;The legalization of birth control and abortion played a significant role in debates about pregnancy discrimination. Even as Roe v. Wade opened up substantive due process arguments against pregnancy discrimination for feminists, it enabled market conservatives to use choice rhetoric to argue that the costs of reproduction should remain private. In the mid-1970s, market conservatives modernized their opposition by applying liberal conceptions of choice, rational decisionmaking, and autonomy to childbearing women. The Supreme Court adopted this logic in its decisions in Geduldig and Gilbert. By contrast, in the political arena, the legalization of abortion fostered social conservatives' support for making the costs of reproduction public. A political trend that coupled reinvigorated support for social protection for motherhood with newer commitments to sex equality, which I term "neomaternalism," contributed to the enactment of the PDA.;In the 1980s, legal feminism underwent a crisis. Market conservatism largely foreclosed redistributive interpretations of the temporary disability paradigm codified in the PDA. A neomaternalist trend in state political cultures, however, led to the passage of pregnancy-leave laws that enabled women to maintain labor-force attachment when they bore children. When employers challenged the pregnancy-leave laws in the case of California Federal Savings and Loan v. Guerra, feminists had to prioritize either a robust commitment to sex neutrality under the law or antidiscrimination protection for childbearing workers.;In examining debates among feminists, market conservatives, and social conservatives from the 1960s through the 1980s, this dissertation uncovers the historical origins of contemporary work-family conflict.
机译:本文探讨了从民权时代到里根时代的女权主义者关于性别平等与生殖自由之间关系的法律想象和主张。我证明女权主义者将怀孕,育儿和照料的法律,社会和经济法规理解为性别平等的中心问题。这篇论文丰富了关于二十世纪后期女权主义和反女权主义历史的新生文献。我参加的奖学金表明,法律女性主义者的看法与最高法院的性别歧视法学之间存在差距。通过关注立法,行政和工会的倡导以及诉讼,我强调了法律女权主义的再分配维度。我认为女权主义者对两个相互关联的理想作出了承诺:消除法律规定的性别角色定型观念和对妇女的社会保护照顾他们提倡平等的就业机会,男女之间的看护工作的平等划分,以及将生育成本从私人家庭转移到雇主和国家。但是,由于反对女权主义的目标,很难将对终结法律规定的性角色定型观念和社会保护的承诺进行融合。特别是,三个社会政治趋势对女权主义者的法律视野和政策目标施加了限制:市场保守主义对再分配的反对,社会保守主义对传统性别规范的忠诚以及家庭内部性别分工的顽强性。结果,激烈的争论迫使女权主义者在他们的两项广泛承诺(性中立和社会保护)之间优先考虑,并且运动中的分歧反复出现。;论文分析了女权主义者的论证是如何与意识形态和思想的辩证关系演变的。市场和社会保守派策略。 1960年代中期至后期,自新政迅速侵蚀以来,保护性别的法律制度盛行。 1964年《民权法》第七章的制定,女权律师网络的巩固以及工人阶级的妇女法律行动主义,把新的重点放在了性别平等上。但是平等意味着什么? 1960年代末期是不稳定的时刻。女权主义者通过反歧视法和平等权利追求实质平等。他们提出权利要求以改变育儿结构,工作场所对怀孕的法律规定以及男女工作时间;在这三项主张中,对怀孕进行法律规定的临时残疾范式一直延续到1970年代。 。在劳工和法律女权主义者的控制下,这种模式终止了终止怀孕的政策。在克利夫兰教育委员会诉LaFleur案中,最高法院否决了这些政策,因为这违反了第十四条修正案的正当程序条款。女权主义者试图利用暂时的残疾范例为育龄工人实现经济安全时遇到了更大的阻力。在Geduldig诉Aiello案和General Electric Co.诉Gilbert案中,法院裁定,将怀孕排除在其他全面的保险计划之外,既没有违反宪法,也没有违反性别平等的法定保证。女权主义者从法院转向国会,当国会通过1978年《怀孕歧视法》(PDA)时取得了胜利。避孕和堕胎的合法化在有关怀孕歧视的辩论中发挥了重要作用。即使Roe v。Wade提出了反对女权主义者歧视怀孕的实质性正当程序论点,它也使市场保守主义者能够使用选择性言论来主张生殖成本应保持私有。在1970年代中期,市场保守主义者通过将自由选择的观念,理性的决策和自治权应用于育龄妇女,使反对派现代化。最高法院在Geduldig和Gilbert的判决中采用了这种逻辑。相比之下,在政治舞台上,堕胎的合法化促进了社会保守主义者对公开生殖成本的支持。一种政治趋势将对母亲的社会保护的支持与对性别平等的新承诺(我称之为“ neomaternalism”)重新结合起来,推动了PDA的制定;在1980年代,法律女权主义经历了危机。市场保守主义在很大程度上禁止了对PDA中编纂的暂时性残疾范式的重新分配解释。但是,国家政治文化中的新母权主义趋势导致通过了休假法,使妇女在生育孩子时能够保持对劳动力的依恋。当雇主在加利福尼亚联邦储蓄与贷款诉Guerra案中质疑休假法律时,女权主义者必须优先考虑根据法律对性中立做出强有力的承诺,或者优先考虑对生育工人采取反歧视保护措施。在研究1960年代至1980年代的女权主义者,市场保守主义者和社会保守主义者之间的辩论时,本论文揭示了当代的历史渊源工作家庭冲突。

著录项

  • 作者

    Dinner, Deborah.;

  • 作者单位

    Yale University.;

  • 授予单位 Yale University.;
  • 学科 History United States.;Law.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2012
  • 页码 445 p.
  • 总页数 445
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号