Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!pesnta!greipa!decwrl!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!acf4!mms1646
From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Responses to Cramer, AA and Discirmination
Message-ID: <1340271@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Jul-85 04:27:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: acf4.1340271
Posted: Mon Jul  8 04:27:00 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 04:51:19 EDT
References: <510@ttidcc.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 40

>/* mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (SIMON) /  9:24 am  Jul  5, 1985 */

>Note that the attitudes of society did not change significantly until
>the early 1960s, with the March on Washington AND with explicit support
>from the Kennedy Administration, which was followed by explicit legislative
>action by the Johnson Administration, BOTH of which were strongly
>resisted by significant minorities in Congress and the country as a whole.
>This marks a clear case where the attitudes of the country were shaped by
>progressive governmental action. History does not support your claim that
>society changed all by itself, creating a framework for legal action.

Significant minorities do not a majority make.  Try again.

>Wrong. Discrimination has EVERYTHING to do with it, as many women who
>entered the work force during WW 2 found out in 1946, when they were
>bluntly told to go home and have babies.

Clayton went on to say that the wage disparity would be expected to increase
after the war and that this increase could be explained by factors other
than discrimination.  1946 was right after the war, wasn't it?

>> Isn't it true that the disparity between the wages of men and women have
>> *increased* since the 1950s?  I've read that women made 73% of men's wages
>> in the late 1950s --- now it's about 60%.

>Which clearly shows that laws by themselves are not sufficient, but continued
>governmental action is necessary.

When were laws against discrimination in the workplace enacted?

>The business of *individuals* who have been discriminated against being
>the only ones with justified AA claim is meaningless. You yourself have
>said how difficult it is to prove discrimination.

So, since it's difficult for poor people to make it, we should let them
steal, right?

>Marcel Simon

						Mike Sykora