February 22

I. Name Game... Keeps on Rollin (we are 1/2way finished) 

II.  Defining Intersectionality
  1. Share your intersectionality presentation in small groups today.
  2. Jot down anything that helps you define intersectionality better based on what your colleagues showed you.
Your Definitions and Thoughts on Intersectionality from Last Week 
  • When attending school, we--- and children in general--- lose a sense of identity because we are coerced into conforming to only one idenity. 
  • Women's groups need intersectionality to be more inclusive of LGBTQ, immigrant, multiracial, and differently abled women. 
  • A Real-Life, Current-Day Example: An outside group approached JJay's Students for Justice in Palestine and criticized them for collaborating with the LGBTQ Club.  The organization, in turn, made a public statement that explained that we cannot call for the freedom of Palestinian people and not support LGBTQ rights.  We cannot pick and choose oppressions.
III. IRL--- CASE ONE: Darlene Jespersen v. Harrah's Operating Co. (2002)
Darlene Jespersen in her uniform (photo was placed on Lamda Legal website during trial)
  1. Jespersen argued that the policy put an "unequal burden on women."  What do you think of this?  Why?
  2. Jespersen argued that the company’s make-up requirement was premised on "sex-stereotyping," requiring her to meet a sexual stereotype of what a woman should look like.  What do you think of this? What does this have to do with the gender-binary that we have discussed so far?​ 
  3. Jespersen's sexuality was never explicitly discussed in court. However, since Lamda Legal took on her case, audiences knew that Jespersen was a gay woman.  Why do you think this fact was omitted from the case's framing?  
  4. How might this story change if Jespersen was a Black woman? (see Devon Carbado's quote below)
​Darlene Jespersen worked as a bartender at the Harrah’s Casino in Reno, Nevada for more than 20 years. Though the company always had a dress code, Harrah's took a more drastic approach called the "Personal Best" policy: female employees were required to wear makeup and "teased, curled or styled" hair in addition to wearing their uniforms (and had to meet with a "consultant" for tips.)  Men were forbidden to wear makeup (and nail polish) and had to keep their hair very short.  Jesperson refused to comply with the new policy.  In her own words:
I had to become a sex object. And it was only because I am a woman . . . . The men who worked by my side did not have to conceal their faces. Harrah’s considers them professional when they look like themselves. Although it had nothing to do with mixing drinks and handling customers, keeping my job became more and more about meeting Harrah’s extreme and outdated idea of what a woman should look like.  

Jespersen held her ground and was fired.   She sued Harrah’s arguing that its policy was a form of gender discrimination in violation of Title VII. Lamda Legal took on Jespersen's case. 
IV. IRL--- Case Two: Devon Carbado's Question (feel free to read/skim the article)
"There is another way in which we might broaden our understanding of Jespersen by switching Jespersen's identity from white to black.  Consider, again, Harrah's grooming policy: 'face powder, as well as blush and mascara and lip color must be worn at all times.'  Moreover, women's hair needed to be 'teased, curled, or styled.' Would dreadlocks or braided hair constitute hair that is  'teased, curled, or styled?' Assume that Harrah's answered that question in the negative and prohibited Jespersen, who we are now imagining is black, from wearing her hair in braids."  
  1. Would that constitute gender discrimination?  Why or why not?
  2. Would that constitute race discrimination?  Why or why not?
  3. What does this have to do with intersectionality? NOTE: This is not hypothetical (>>>Rogers v American Airlines)
V. WHOLE CLASS DISCUSSION: What's Intersectionality Got to Do With It?

Double-tap to edit.

Number of Visitors