Yes, but it didn't recognise the discrimination because it wasn't one of racism or sexism. If the company employed white women & black men, they could openly discriminate against black women (usually due to stereotypes abt aggressiveness & promiscuity) w/out any recourse.
-
-
Not that it matters because this isn't precedent currently, but it did recognize that there was a claim of discrimination and reviewed the claim under the statute. Negative result was on the merits of the sex discrimination claim.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @doublespeak152 @HPluckrose and
With the sex discrimination claim dismissed, the court advised the plaintiff to join with a different suit of black male GE employees for the racial discrimination claim that was ongoing.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @doublespeak152 @HPluckrose and
The rule both suits were claiming was discriminatory was a labor agreement condition in which the most junior people are fired first. Since this condition didn't explicitly target women, blacks or black women, the claims were thrown out
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You're saying there was already a way to claim discrimination as a black woman, not just as black or as woman? Crenshaw was wrong about that? Or she didn't take it to court?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
The plaintiff in the case had 2 bites at the apple. One for sex discrimination and another for race discrimination. Discrimination against black women as a class would be both under this ruling not neither. But the labor agreement didn't say "fire black women first"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That was what she complained about, yes. And argued to be able to complain of discrimination on the intersection. I don't know if discrim against black women was explicitly set out or just suspected to exist. Either way, there needed to be a way to complain of it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @doublespeak152 and
This is where she set it all out anyway. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://uk.search.yahoo.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1052&context=uclf …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I get the argument she's trying to make. But this case wasn't dismissed because black women weren't able to claim discrimination, rather because there was no actual evidence of discrimination.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
There was a way to claim discrimination as a black woman? Evidence of this was able to be submitted and not just for racism OR sexism? I admit. I don't know the law. Crenshaw was a lawyer tho. I hate intersectionality generally but she seemed fairly tight on gaps in the law.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Did you read her account of it? I thought she said there wasn't any way to make a case for discrimination against race & sex at the same time and there wasn't any evidence of just one or the other. I have no idea if she was right that discrimination occurred in those cases.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.