The conventional view holds that adding sex protection to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was an accident—a 'killer amendment' rejected by civil rights opponents.
➡️ Revisiting Title VII's 1964 Amendment
Contrary evidence reveals this as a misconception. Analysis shows Republican-southern Democrat coalitions genuinely supported the sex amendment, aligning with broader Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) advocacy in the mid-20th century.
➡️ Motivations for Support
Direct concern about women's workplace rights was a key driver, not merely instrumental benefits related to labor markets. Proponents preferred the CRA with the sex amendment over one without it.
➡️ Cautions in Interpretation
The study cautions against equating support for specific employment protections with broader women's rights endorsement. This nuanced understanding requires careful consideration.
| Rights by Fortune or Fight? Reexamining the Addition of Sex to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was authored by Katherine Krimmel. It was published by Wiley in LSQ in 2019. |
