THE CLASS BLOG FOR ENGLISH 110
Sunday, July 10, 2011
2nd group Summary
This week we choose the blog http://www.texasemploymentlawblog.com/articles/sexual-discrimination/. The blog concentrates on the sexual-discrimination. For now the women are experiencing several social problems. For example, women want to get a higher and salaried position but actually they can’t get it because they are female. So this week’s topic, we want to question whether this actual situation is a result of market competition between male and female or just a kind of discrimination.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This might be just me... but i think certain people in society look for reasons to sue. I feel like if somebody believes that they can win money in a ridiculous law suit then they will at least try it. I hear stories about people winning millions for spilling their hot coffee on themselves. The Walmart court of appeals case seems like that type of law suit to me. I understand how frustrating it must be not to get a promotion after being a diligent worker but there are thousands of people in her shoes. The economy is not in the best shape and i understand companies that it is hard to promote people.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting point, but I would counter that the old-as-the-hills "frivolous lawsuit" argument is a a wee bit reductive... and a convenient way to discredit plaintiffs seeking some sort of legitimate recompense. Labeling their lawsuit as frivolous does a disservice to a far deeper issue of sexual discrimination.
ReplyDeleteThen again, unlike Scott, I don't really have as much faith in the free market, nor would I side with a notoriously unethical multi-national conglomerate like Wal-Mart on an issue over this.
(I would also recommend you guys check out the documentary Hot Coffee, which is to some extent about this very issue.)
I agree with Scott in that this is just another lawsuit about a claim that may not even be true. On the other hand, woman have been underrepresented in society so I feel as if Duke was not only standing up for herself, but other female workers as well. I believe that if woman didn't stand up for themselves, even in small instances such as this, woman would get pushed around and would never get a chance to be an equal to men in the workforce. Woman have come along way, and if its the little things that get them to reach their goal, then that's how it'll have to be.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Women's rights need to be more closely monitored. I also read the "Do Judges with Daughters Rule Differently on 'Women's Issues' Than Those Who Don't Have Daughters" article and found this extremely interesting. As I have never thought about this being an issue, I certainly do see a judge being more bias in cases depending on how many children of their own they have and of what gender they are. If a judge has a daughter or multiple daughters, it makes sense that their judging towards gender issues would take more of the liberal side. The judge is going to side with giving women the same rights as men. The question is whether or not this is "ethical" as a judge in a professional career?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jen on that this is probably not the most professional way of going about woman's rights, but I would understand a judge that has daughter's would want his/her daughter's to have the same opportunities as men. As a person in this profession, you do have the upper hand in making some of these decisions.
ReplyDeleteI'm kinda confused (and a little curious). What sort of alternate route should we propose?
ReplyDeleteI have similar ideas with Jackie. If women wants to be equal to men, they need to "fight" for the rights coz the society we live in now, men is still the dominant group. I read "Sheryl Sandberg on why we have too few women leaders." and see the video as well. Sandberg mentioned that no matter in politics or business, the number of women leaders is always less than that of men. Actually, a lot of women admit and deeply believe that they are supposed to have more time at home, not like taking a job as men. Maybe this concept is formed by the culture or whatever reasons. Women in some cases will let men take opportunities and prefer a concession situation. So women should stand out for their desired equality.
ReplyDeleteScott's post caught me first because it was, of course, the first post and i think it's funny. Let me put it this way... have you ever heard of the American dream? If you thought it was 'come to a free land, make money, live a great life,' you were mistaken. It's more like 'find a niche, sue the hell out of them.' I'm witnessing it personally with two friends of mine. One started a fight and lost. He is suing the other person. The person being sued, who is wealthy as all hell, offered $50,000 to drop all charges. Of course, it wasn't enough to the kid who suffered minor injuries and started the fight. I'd gladly let someone punch me in the face for $50,000, I'd even let him do it twice.
ReplyDeleteAnd it doesn't stop there. I'm sure everyone has heard of the strange craze known as planking. Well, Xzibit thinks it's racist. If anyone can do something other than facepalm, I wanna hear about it. How the hell did anyone think that this was racist? For those who don't know, planking is just lying face down (like a plank) in funny positions and posting them online. A similar joke is 241543903. Copy and paste this number in google and search images. I promise it's nothing bad. However, I say we turn this into a racist joke and sue the person who started this because it is obviously making fun of people who live in colder climates.
I'm not saying that they're aren't legitimate court cases where people are racist or sexually harassing others. I'm just sad that a number of people like to sue for something stupid and hopefully make money T.T
tl;dr version:
If you are studying to become something, make money, make something of yourself,do well, be proud... you're doing it wrong.
Sue someone for a huge amount of cash and live properly.
Although, legitimate court cases do exist and are hopefully taken care of properly by our legal system, which I didn't even talk about because I'd rather think about and laugh at the people who sue to make money.
I don't understand how women have had equal rights for decades but still have to struggle to take advantage of this milestone that occurred so long ago. In response to Scott, people would not need to file unnecessary law suits if everyone was treated equally. Although we're in American and it is supposed to be the land of the free, this is not always the case. Take gay marriage for example, it is still illegal despite the equality they should be given.
ReplyDeleteI also feel that if a law suit is created, it may be to prove that they are head strong about their opinions. Most law suits begin with the hope in winning the case in order to achieve what they wanted, such as a raise or money. By the end, the initial reason for the law suit does not matter.
You are right Scott, people do sue for whatever reason they deem fit, but i don't think the lawsuit against Walmart was completely ridiculous. The lawyers do get carried away sometimes and they all seem to have their motives for taking on such cases but maybe, we would have to be in her shoes to really feel what it’s like. Take for instance, in an office. How many men secretaries do you see compared to women boses? And I doubt it’s because the ladies look best in black "overalls".
ReplyDeleteI personally can see both sides of this argument. It is unfair that she would be denied the training to advance, however; how many people do we know of who haven't been able to obtain that promotion they've been shooting for? It stinks that she was not given the chance to advance, but blaming it immediately on sexual discrimination seems like a stretch. Not to say that I'm siding with Wal-Mart, I'm actually not really a fan of their sneaky employment strategies when it comes to employing lots of people part-time with no benefits. In my opinion, this just sounds like another case of the "I worked hard for a promotion but didn't get one," only this time the person in question made an excuse out of sexual discrimination.
ReplyDeleteThe arguments above seem at white heat. All of them are focusing on if that case is a kind of discrimination or not, depending on what they ever heard or they thought. Why not throw those away and pay attention to analyzing this detailed situation? Why does the Supreme court rule every plaintiff has to sue individually with her own lawyer? At this point I do agree with Jackie who said a lot of people chose to side with Duke not for what they suffered, but what they are interested in, such as money and promotion in their Job. I believe the Supreme court realized it and would like to decline such an action because no one should get a free lunch by taking advantage of others. On the other side, the requirement for plaintiffs is little bit excessive, which may exist discrimination. What if a worker do have grievance but cannot afford to have a lawyer? it's a case that does exist. Didn't The Supreme court really take it into account? Why didn't they offer other ways to avoid such situation, such as ruling the minimum number of plaintiffs who can have the same one lawyer?
ReplyDeleteWhat? Women are minorities now?
ReplyDeleteI think this is a terrible decision. Individuals do not have the resources to fight discrimination by corporations when the corporation decides to make a stand to avoid setting a precedent. I personally would love to see more of the reasoning that went into this, and understand why the Supreme Court went this way. I'm sure there was much debate and reasoning involved. I think readers of the decision should be quicker to understand why this is and slower to assume this is 1-to-1 with discrimination in general.
I think individuals have the right to fight self discrimination with corporations, because it happens all the time. Specially with the older crowd to the younger crowd working for them. People should have the right to stick up for them selves, and if they are not being offered a raised, or higher position because you their standards, then they have the right to sue and interrogate the company for such discrimination.
ReplyDeleteTo also to add to my comment, I also think they need to proceed with suing, only if they have others to back up their clam of such discriminations.
ReplyDeleteIn response to scott, i feel like just because there are thousands of people filling those same shoes in the work force, doesn't make it right. There are people that put everything into there job in order to sincerely benefit a company, and those are therefore the ones who deserve to be treated with the with what they deserve no matter who they are. As time has gone on, we clearly have found that there is someone for every job with essentially no limitations. The discrimination is not just limited to race but gender as well in many cases. If some one feels that they are not being treated fairly, they either have the right to find somewhere else that is going to treat them right or fight for that treatment that they do deserve. Above all i feel like it all comes down to a personal decision, one not to be determined by any one else, for obvious reasons of which they may not be experiencing this same type of mistreatment.
ReplyDeleteSo it seems like the major sticking point in our discussion is a matter of legal ethics. Interesting.
ReplyDeleteI also feel the need to point out that in America, we have to right to create a law suit if we deem is necessary. Just because a certain lawsuit seems absurd to someone doesn't mean that it's not important. Everyone has different opinions which is why everyone is given a fair trial. So saying the Walmart case is unnecessary is a bias statement.
ReplyDeleteMolly, I agree with you in that it's hard to claim one case to be absurd or not. These are all opinions that may be biased from personal experience, beliefs, etc. Generally speaking though, I do agree that many people dig for reasons to sue someone just to make a case and get money out of it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, like Zhou Quan had said, for women to have their rights, they need to fight for them. By this I do not mean start a riot, but rather prove the people wrong that women are as capable of running a business, being a CEO of a major company, being a doctor, or having a law firm. They simply have to make a place for themselves that shows they have the same capabilities as men do.
ReplyDeleteJen stated that women didn't need to start a riot, and that they needed to be able to prove themselves in the work field. Some women aren't even able to receive a position where they can even prove themselves, because of the stigma that they aren't as good as their male counterparts. There needs to be some other way that women can prove themselves. If there were a hypothetical situation where a woman and a man with the same exact resumé and stats applied for the same position, most companies would choose the man. I have even heard of some women trying to just put their first initial on their resumé, so that the companies couldn't just dismiss their spot in a position they were applying for.
ReplyDeleteActually, in my opinion, the current situation that women are experiencing is a deeper layer of quetion confronting contemporary different outlooks on life. Some fiminist tend to argue that they are treated equal in many realms. But in fact, the inequaty truly exits in man's thought of career life. For example, in some companies, women with pretty looks will get higher opportunity of promoting in jobs than those dilligent hardworking gentlemen. For this situation, I consider it as a manupulating society controlled by minority. Because they have right to level people up, they may master everything. If everything is grasped in the majority, and kind of being dealed with most of people, I don't think the discrimination problem will continue existing in occupatuon areas.
ReplyDeleteReading the article"Supreme Court Blocks Class Action Sex Discrimination Suit", I feel this is fairly common in any company. And just like Scott said, some people sue someone charge for something. In this case, those people may require money or promotion. So I don't think this is a women discrimination case, because I believe men definitely have same problem. Getting promoted not only depends on how long you have worked and your well you performed, but also on how well you get along with your manager. So I believe communication is also important and the problem may be solved by good communication. I admit that in some situation, discrimination might exist. But I think the statement that 1.6 million women were discriminated in Wal-mart is ridiculous, especially in a developed country.
ReplyDeleteIt is an interesting point that Congcong has come up with. It is more like an ideal society where public vote to make dicisions and live equaly. But actually, it is impossible to realize this so-called dream stuff, because the definite equalty is a result of big mass of substances. If everyone will not live and struggle just for money, they may treat the world and people surrounding better.For example, in the developing countries, people still work hard for food but in developed countries, people can care less about the life. Thus, when women in developing countries tend to confront more difficulty and obstacles in discrimination, they will choose to bear them because of the big pressure of life instead of fighting for it, which may insist the discrimination.
ReplyDeleteI think Congcong's argument is interesting and I agree that sexual discrimination has been eliminated in modern society, especially in countries like America that such well-developed country. I heard that some women get really high degree from famous university and have a really good job. But she quit her job after having a baby because she likes taking care of her family and being a house wife. So some women don't work may have such reason, but the statistics may reveals a different result. As women workers is less than men workers, it is normal that the number of male superiors is larger than female.
ReplyDeleteI agree with part of Jackie Deicher’s opinion. A fact we cannot ignore is that in the modern society, though the social status has been improved much better, the sexual-discrimination exists in many aspects of our daily life, male still control most of the world. Also as a female, I want to believe that Duke is not only stand up for herself but also for her female colleagues. We need some brave one to stand out to against the inequality and lead the female to achieve the real right to be treated as same as male. Anyway, it must be a long way and many things need to be done, after all, some issues such as woman president and woman astronaut, are still hot spots of society. From my point of view, may be someday, when people treat these issues as normal things, then that is really a symbol of the feminist victory.
ReplyDeleteFor me, I believe the sexual discrimination should be more focused on the family issues instead of job issues. As a girl, I have to admit there is something that I know man could do better than me. Like I don't think I could be a fireman as other guys. So I mean we have to admit that the physical and mental differences between man and woman makes is reasonable they suitable for different jobs. The real discrimination in my mind is although woman also work in the society as man, they are expected more to responsible for the housework. That's the unfair thing in my point of view.
ReplyDelete