30 Comments

1. Emphasizes the imbalance of education for women and men under separate but equal doctrine. This was also the case for people of color but it wasn’t as separated. I never really thought about how separate but equal impacted the lives of women, but it only goes to show that their really is a hierarchy in society.

   Reply

2. Separate but equal always seems like an ironic phrase to use when we see discrimination, especially in the racially segregated schools. Separate but equal doesn’t even seem theoretically possible. A school is a semi- independent body, it would be impossible to maintain any semblance of equality between two schools, let alone two in different areas, with different funding, different populations, different teachers, students, parents, donations, opportunities, athletes, etc… A body as complex as a school, with the infinite variables which affect its success, would require more federal regulation to remain moderately equal to another, than it would to just regulate one institution against discriminatory policies.

   Reply

3. Chapter 6 introduction, Women and Education, gives a very brief overview of education in the United States and explains how it has evolved from explicit, tangible racial segregation to implicit, intangible segregation and how the Supreme Court has worked to reduce both types of segregation. Reading the piece by Alice De Rivera enlightened me that so many women could have been scientists, doctors, engineers, or other academic professionals, but they were unable to. My grandmother never went to college and is an excellent cook; she had hoped to be a doctor but could not. My mother went to college and graduate school and is now a clinical psychologist who cannot cook at all, and I am very grateful for them both. (My grandparents are not American, but I still feel my anecdote applies.)

   Reply

4. The excerpt from Baer and Goldstein’s “Women and Education” provides a very concise overview of the legal and constitutional developments affecting gender equality in education. I saw it focuses on key legislation like Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded educational programs. The text continues to examine historical barriers to women’s access to higher education and professional training, along with legal efforts to overcome these obstacles. It analyzes significant court decisions that have shaped women’s educational rights and explores how factors such as race and class intersect with gender in educational inequality. The authors thoughfully (in my opinion) frame these issues within broader constitutional interpretations and federal-state dynamics, highlighting the law’s role in both driving and reflecting societal change in the realm of women’s education.

   Reply

5. WHats interesting with the reading and never crossed my mind is that for the federal government to accept women into school, they need to be able to have the resources to support them as well. It makes sense that if the government can teach women that they can enter the workforce, expand and strengthen the economy, it’s more than just wanting equal rights; it’s an investment.

   Reply

6. This chapter claims rightfully that there are differences in education akin to the Plessy ‘separate but equal’ doctrine for schools segregated by gender. That difference, of course, would not be nearly as pronounced as it would be with a difference between white and black segregated schools, but there is still a tangible difference in education for say co-ed schools in comparison to all-girl schools.

   Reply

7. This chapter analyzes the Supreme Court’s decision on ending racial segregation within public schools and how the court’s sentiments about “the intangible but real inequality of educational opportunity offered by racially segregated schools” applied to schools segregated by Sex. The chapter goes on to analyze the fairly common occurrence of private, one-gender schools, such as boarding schools in major cities like Boston and New York, military schools, and state schools. The author claims that despite these being fairly common and generally accepted within society, there have been instances in which a separate education has not been equal between sexes, such as in Stuyvesant High School.

   Reply

8. I remember reading something similar to this, and it’s clear that it is separate but equal,” which wasn’t the case here. There still was oppression, but the court did not want to acknowledge that it was because they didn’t believe it did.

   Reply

9. The chapter focuses on separate but equal schools that were segregated along racial lines, with African-American students attending schools that were often underfunded and lacking in resources compared to their white peers. This perpetuated systemic inequalities and discrimination, as African-American students were denied equal access to quality education and opportunities for advancement. The doctrine of separate but equal remained in effect until the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, which declared racial segregation in public schools to be unconstitutional.

   Reply

10. Before the decision of Brown v. Board of Education which declared that racially “separate” cannot be “equal” in the field of public education, there were two pivotal Court cases. In both of these decisions, the Court cites what are known as intangible and tangible factors. In the University of Oklahoma case, specifically, the Court states that equal protection has been denied due to factors such as “ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and in general, to learn his profession”. These cases reminded me of a line said by MLK Jr. in Selma. When discussing the pursuit of equality with another activist, MLK states “How does it help a Black man to be able to eat at a lunch counter if he doesn’t earn enough to buy the burger? Or worse yet, can’t even read the menu..”. If equality means being given the same opportunities whether that is educational, occupational, or recreational, emphasis must still be placed on the historical oppressions people have faced – and how that may impact their pursuits in these fields.

    Reply

11. This section explores the history of school segregation, emphasizing the exclusive access to education for wealthy white boys before the 1900s. It further discusses racial segregation in schools pre-Brown v. Board. The noteworthy case in Texas stands out, where significant efforts were made, to prevent the admission of a Black student to their law school. Even if Texas claimed equality in their segregated schools, Black law students attending the segregated institution would not enjoy the same benefits in terms of reputation and resources, making the education anything but equal.

    Reply

12. Most schools were co-ed, but most of those schools were also segregated by state law. Brown v. Board, made racial segregation in schools unconstitutional which has been a huge factor in the segregation and funding of schools. Brown found that separate schools can’t be equal which is why many schools for black Americans would be in the basement of a building.

    Reply

13. How “separate but equal” impacted race but also gender in schools for education was male dominated. Women were seen to stay at home and do chores for reading just for men. Then in 1900, Segregation in schools was made based on race but little factor on gender was seen. And still can be seen towards sports, of women not being able to play american football with men in the NFL. But can create their separate football teams made solely with women players.

    Reply

14. I think this reading touches upon intersectionality by acknowledging that systems of oppression are often related and/or similar; however, it does skirt around the cornerstone of “intersectionality” by examining these systems separately- in this case, racial segregation and single-sex schools. I’m not sure what an intersectional “reading” of educational segregation/exclusion would exactly look like, but I don’t doubt that there is a way to bring together these issues (sexism and racism) and examine them in this context.

    Reply

15. Brown v. Board of Education is an extremely significant case in U.S. history. This Supreme Court case from 1954 involves the issue of racial segregation in public schools.

    In brief, an African American third-grader named Linda Brown had to walk a considerable distance to catch a school bus to her segregated black elementary school, even though a public elementary school was located just seven blocks from her home. This was because the nearby school only accepted white students.

    Oliver Brown, sued the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, arguing that segregated schools, inherently, were not and could not be “equal,” and that his daughter had the right to attend a local elementary school.

    The case reached the Supreme Court, which made a landmark ruling that racial segregation of public schools was unconstitutional, effectively reversing the “separate but equal” principle set out in the 1896 Supreme Court case of Plessy v. Ferguson. The Brown v. Board of Education case played a crucial part in starting the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.

    Reply

16. The segregation of schools is the main topic of this section. First, it should be mentioned that, prior to the 1900s, only the wealthy, and particularly white boys, had access to school. then emphasizing how schools used to be separated based on race prior to Brown v. Board. In addition,

    Reply

17. This section focuses on the segregation of schools. First mentioning how education before the 1900s was only available to the wealthy, specifically white boys. Then highlighting how before Brown v. Board school used to be segregated on the bases of race. The case they mentioned that caught my attention, however, was that of Texas. In which they performed to build and spend money on a whole new university in order to avoid having a Black student in their law school, which to me is astounding the degree they went to in order to avoid integrating. To top it off, even if to Texas the schools were equal, those Black law students would nowhere near get the same benefits of having attended the other law school, due to the lack of reputation and resources, so nowhere near equal.

    Reply

18. By 1900, all kids were required to attend schools. Most of those schools were co-ed, but most of those school were also segregated by state law. Schools have been improved in recent years through government intervention in a couple ways. First of all Congress has cash. They can fund schools and take it away when they don’t approve of what a school is doing. Second, in 1954 the Supreme Court favored Brown in Brown v. Board, making racial segregation in schools unconstitutional. Key word: racial. What happens if a public school is only open to one gender? Brown found that separate schools can’t be equal, but how far would the courts be willing to go with that philosophy?

    Reply

19. This chapter primarily focuses on race relations. I wanted to make parallels between the struggles black people went through, such as the “separate but equal” doctrine, how that impacted the gender disparities, and how it affected all women, specifically black women. Nonetheless, I enjoyed the reading; we can all agree that dismantling these segregationist doctrines and implementing laws like Title IX have been crucial in promoting gender equality in education while advancing women’s rights.

    Reply

20. This reminded me of the current gender segregation in sports.Although the initial separation of the sexes in sports may not be inherently wrong, the effects are harmful. Sports are incredibly important parts of adolescents lives and often teach children life-skills. They also provide a sense of community. Since sports are segregated and boys are more often favored, boys will often receive better coaches, facilities, and more excitement around their games. Boys then have an unfair advantage over women when developing the skills that sports provide. In no way do I think that the current gender segregation in sports is as harmful as the segregation of Black people in the 50s and 60s, but I think that this is a great comparison of how “separate but equal” standards are still around today and impacting women.
    This book is a great resource on understanding the harmful effects segregating sports by gender:
    McDonagh, Eileen McDonagh, and Laura Pappano. 2007. Playing with the Boys: Why Separate Is Not Equal in Sports. Cary: Oxford University Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uic/detail.action?docID=679394.

    Reply

    • The book referenced by Lucy is FREE via UIC at the link Lucy provides above. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uic/detail.action?docID=679394

      

      Reply

21. Separate but equal was not that different from only separate. Equality is a lot more than suddenly giving the same opportunities to all people because now you also expect the same things from all people. That expectation is difficult to meet when some groups have been discriminated against for their gender and/or race. Giving different races and/or genders the same opportunity to apply for a job is not the same as understanding that one of them has less formal work experience, went to a lower tier school, took longer to graduate, etc.

    Reply

    • we will discuss then when we cover Bakke

      Reply

22. This is p. 935 in the 4th edition. The passage focuses mostly on race relations, Brown v. Board, and “intangible factors” — a term used by the Court to capture the ways in which ‘separate but equal’ was in fact not equal. Things like “reputation of the faculty, experience of the administration, position and influence of the alumni, standing in the community…” were not material, and so the racists who wanted separate but equal would say something like “the College of Law requires just as many hours, has the same testing protocols, and requires just as much reading as the Law School,” when in fact, the people receiving degrees from those two institutions would not be “similarly situated” upon graduation.

    I’m intrigued by the concept of “intangible factors” in the Court’s decision — how else might that be applied?

    Reply

    • PolS 358. Sweat v Painter, 1950
      I wrote:
      But, Thurgood Marshall expanded his point of attack. After once again pointing out the glaring physical inequities between the two schools—that the state court failed to recognize—Marshall focused on the intangible characteristics of the separate law schools. “They can build an exact duplicate but if it is segregated, it is unequal,” argued Marshall. Marshall touched on the intangible factors like the reputation of the “white” school and the greater opportunities for developing professional contacts and interaction with influential alumni at the “white” school. But opponents refined their positions also. For example, the attorneys general of eleven states filed an amicus brief that, as one commentator put it, “dropped any pretense of legal argument.” These states argued openly that whites “do not want their women folk in intimate social contact with Negro men.” See Lyles, Wading in the Water, chapter 4, available now in PolS 358
      

      Reply

23. It is amazing how far as a country we have come in regards to education. When this country started a little more than two centuries ago, that schooling was not required and not offered to many. The few that were able to experience it were affluent white boys. As the years went on, it was required for both boys and girls to attend school, but they were gender and race based. Later, we were able to make it coeducation but racially separate. When the ruling in Brown v Board of Education, it made it unconstitutional to racially separate schools, and now there are coeducational racially and ethnically mixed schools, with the ability of many to attend higher education, whether that is a community school, a public college, or private college.

    Reply

    • i disagree, see PolS 358

      Reply

24. I think breaching the topic of women and the challenges they face in certain educational and academic fields is very important. In fields like STEM, women aren’t valued or encouraged nearly as much as men are. The disparity starts from an early age for many, with boys being encouraged to pursue these fields more so than women. When I was in high school, a class about STEM was established and it focused on engineering. That class was mostly filled with boys who were recommended by their teachers. The teacher of that class was also male. The few girls that were in that class were often overlooked by the teacher and and never praised like he praised the male students for their designs. A girl dropped that class because she felt very discouraged. It’s behaviors like this that are responsible for gaps in the field as adults. As a result, the girls in my high school who were interested in STEM created a club dedicated to girls in STEM and it helped support each other and connected students with females in STEM fields, and also taught coding. This is why I think it’s important for women to uplift each other in a field that doesn’t shine brightly on women. We almost need to pave our own way.

    Reply

25. It is so important for women to fight for equal opportunities in education and academic spaces. If they aren’t offered the same treatment as male students or white students, women and people of color need to make their own space because admissions in schools of higher education remain biased.

    Reply

26. Nicole Solayman11:48 AM Apr 5
    The STEM field is a literal nightmare for women, but I am glad that there are women like Alice Rivera who are pursuing those careers regardless of gender discimation. The idea that STEM is a more masculine field is incredibly sexist and pushes the narrative that men are more rational and stable than women, when that is just a trope.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Desiree Estrada
    Desiree Estrada1:57 PM Mar 17
    Like many of my classmates it was inspiring to learn about Alice Rivera, it’s disappointing once again the gender biases. STEM does not have a gender specific orientation it is the social stigma that men have to have these jobs no one is inherently better simply because of their gender.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Jacqueline Harmon
    Jacqueline Harmon9:37 AM Mar 9
    Good for Alice, her accomplishments are great and give other women someone to look up to. Its so frustrating to see that STEM careers are seen as a mans job, and this is why more women do not pursue these types of careers. I have heard many stories from women who are in STEM and how they feel discriminated against.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Daniela Guerrero Rodriguez
    Daniela Guerrero Rodriguez9:25 AM Mar 9
    I agree with my classmates, the idea that men are stronger at STEM fields has no other reasoning but pure discrimination and gender roles. Because men have been considered historically as rational leaders and breadwinners, while women have been encouraged to stay home caring for the children, men are expected to succeed in these areas that require logic. I am happy that Alice de Rivera is recognized for efforts to fight back against an only-male school that did not give equal opportunities for both men and women.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Grace Castillo Rojo Moreno
    Grace Castillo Rojo Moreno1:18 AM Mar 9
    I would never understand why math or engineering are seen as a “man’s field” ?

    I do think that women normally choose careers that are “normally”for them because they’re afraid of being part where predominantly male are, the discrimination they can feel and the ideas of “ you can’t study that because that’s too hard for you or that’s not your field” that women grew up with, are important factors
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Catherine Ortega
    Catherine Ortega10:19 PM Mar 8
    How exciting! I watched one of the videos posted by the Factual Feminist on YouTube that was about whether or not there is sex disrimination in education, or if it’s just that boys and girls are simply more inclined towards different interests! I found the question frustrating because of she provided statistics which showed how many men v women veered into certain fields in a given population, but followed it with no discussion surounding societal pressure or internalized gender roles. Sex and race desegregation are hand in hand, but in the case of sex opening up, opportunity isn’t the only issue. We see the conflict between interest and opportunity when looking at the controversy surrounding Title lX. I can’t wait to see where we go with this one.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Donny Situ
    Donny Situ10:14 PM Mar 8
    Very inspiring to read up on what Alice de Rivera had accomplished at such a young age. I did some more reading on this and it was frustrating to learn that even after Stuyvesant HS lost in court and were forced to accept girls, they only enrolled 12 girls in the first year. I wonder what the rational was when these schools were first established in the early 1900s and completely disregarded any accommodations for girls. Did they did not believe girls needed to be in a school specializing in math/science or did they not want women to succeed in these fields? Or both?
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Jeff Gemini
    Jeff Gemini7:24 PM Mar 8
    Pushing one gender into specific jobs is gender discrimination and if females want to be engineers they should have that chance and be accepted into universities based on merits not based on gender.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Marina Pascual
    Marina Pascual6:19 PM Mar 8
    I thought the reading was very interesting. It’s great that the Court started considering intangible factors to evaluate if education was actually equal. I agree with some of the comments below that mention that public universities should never deny admission on the basis of sex (or any other protected class). If the university is receiving grants from the government, it should not discriminate. However, the reading does make me question whether private and parochial schools should continue to be able to deny students admission on the basis of sex. Although these schools may not always get money directly from the government, they are often benefiting from their 501c(3) status by paying less in taxes which is arguably an indirect government subsidy.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Annmarie Gobin
    Annmarie Gobin9:27 AM Mar 8
    What I found interesting in the reading was the emphasis that state schools had on pushing women to be nurses or teachers. I think the comparison between the segregation of race and sex shares many similarities. We saw how black people did not get the same opportunities as their white peers and we saw how men got much more educational opportunities compared to women. In terms of education, I feel like women have come a long way in advancing the fields that they are in. Nowadays, we see more women in STEM fields as well as business or other areas that were prodominently male oriented.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Ana Al Saad
    Ana Al Saad11:19 AM Mar 5
    In my History 433 class, we had a presentation from a professor that specializes in Romania during and after Communism. The focus of the presentation was women and gender and one thing that stood out to me was the cover of a children’s magazine that promoted STEM fields for girls and boys. As I was reading Alice’s story, it reminded me of that because here is a girl who became interested in science (biology), but she can’t go to a high school that specialized in that field because it was limited to only boys or the only other one a girl can apply to is plagued with stiff competition. Alice’s story happened in 1969, but it’s only more recently that women are starting to learn more about various STEM fields (the high school I went to became a STEM school during my first year). A figure of how many women work in STEM fields puts them at 28% (https://www.aauw.org/resources/research/the-stem-gap/) but it could be much higher if women were given the opportunity to learn about them and encouraged to take part in it in middle school and high school.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Jose Perez
    Jose PerezMar 10, 2020
    This article points out the barriers that involve gender and race. Alice was not afraid to apply to a school she knew would deny her and her willingness to fight for what was right. The school ended up settling and allowing her to enroll but she still did not attend the school as her family moved further away. Even though she did not attend the school, her actions paved the way for many young girls after her.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Elizabeth Peralta
    Elizabeth PeraltaMar 10, 2020
    I think that Alice’s story is important to the intersectionality that women or color face in institutions that are constructed against them. I think Alice’s story is inspiring because of how old she was at the time of all this and her determination despite all of the people that spoke against her and discourage her, given that she was only 13. I think it is also important to note that there were a lack of students of color in the school in which Alice was trying to get into. This shows how hard it was for minorities to get into the school, let alone a woman of color.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Liliana Diaz
    Liliana DiazMar 8, 2020
    I think Alice’s story shows us the importance of considering intersectionality because women of color, not only face discrimination on the basis of sex — but, because of the color of their skin. Even though it is illegal for a school to only accept white students, this made me think of modern day segregation and how uneven the opportunities are for students based on where they live and what they can afford and how we have set up barriers for minorities. I think Alice’s story is important because her case set off a wave of allowing women into certain schools and institutions.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 11, 2019
    I find Alice’s story interesting but also I do find it sad however sad that still today females most importantly women of color still today find it hard to be admitted into schools as Alice did. Still, in law schools medical school, masters and Ph.D.’ program, there is still a lack of female students as wells lack of diversity in female students and think while women have come far in the long struggle to fight for institutions to open doors the struggle still continues in terms of getting female diversity in our education system.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Jung Kim
    Jung KimMar 11, 2019
    Interesting read on Alice’s story: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/how-a-thirteen-year-old-girl-smashed-the-gender-divide-in-american-high-schools
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 11, 2019
    Summary for Team 3

    By applying intangible factors to cases, the Court was able to bring to light the impacts of state-imposed racial segregation in our public schools. I agree with what Samantha said below. If you are a public institution which relies on federal/state funding to operate, it is unlawful to discriminate against any student seeking admission based on their sex/gender. Imagine if UIC started to deny women’s applications. If an institution is private and does not receive money from the government, then I believe that they should be able to set their guidelines for admissions and who they exactly want to admit to a certain extent. Imagine if UIC started denying women from being admitted simply because they were women? Public institutions should be accessible for all people.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Samantha Cazares
    Samantha CazaresMar 10, 2019
    Once the court started applying “intangible factors” to cases, the more interactional experiences of the effects of discrimination came to light. For example, when a black student was allowed admission to an all-white college, but was required to use “colored” sections of the college, he was technically not being discriminated against attending, but still being racially discriminated against nonetheless. Separate but equal was not so in that case because by requiring the student to sit and use limited sections of the college, he was unable to fully enjoy all the amenities of the college thus violating his rights guaranteed by the 14th amendment. When it comes to single-sex public schools, I think it’s unfair and unlawful to deny any student admission based on sex/gender. However, if the institution is private and relies on no federal assistance, then I think they are able to se their own guidelines of who they want to admit.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Ines Josefina Castaneda
    Ines Josefina CastanedaMar 9, 2019
    This was a topic that touched on in my CLJ Law and Society class because the law stated that everything had to be equal and the only difference was who could enter and use the infrastructure. This also reminded me of the scene of The Help when one of the women needs to complete some college level degree to work in her department and she ends up in court because non of the colored schools had the classes she needed. For this topic I think it is more race than gender but there can be some gender aspect if we look at it closely.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 20, 2018
    I see separate, but equal when it comes to girls similarly, but not exactly the same as I do race, especially when it comes to schools. In Rivera’s case, she wanted to go to a specialized school and there literally was no specialized math and science schools just for girls for her to go. So it makes sense that the schools had to become desegregated. Today, there are several all boys and all girls schools, but the girls at those schools get just as quality an education as other schools. When it comes to race, students at majority black or hispanic schools fare considerably worse than their peers. Inequality in this sphere is more pronounced in terms of race, than it is in gender.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 13, 2018
    So basically, she was admitted into Stuyvesant High school to avoid the establishment of legal precedent for all women to enter predominately male schools. If accepted she would have possibly suffered the same scrutiny as the little rock nine, but without the racial bigotry. It is interesting the accomplishments that she was able to make regardless of her attendance to Stuyvesant (shout out to Avneet for the article). It would have been nice to see the turnout of their case had she continued to the hearing for May 13. It may have led to strict scrutiny for gender…
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 12, 2018
    Out of personal curiosity, I looked further into Alice de Rivera’s story and the beginning of Stuyvesant High School allowing women to attend.

    Though rejected and later accepted, Alice de Rivera did not actually attend Stuyvesant. She moved elsewhere, got her GED and went to med school, and was awarded a degree from Stuyvesant 40 years late. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-mager/alice-gets-her-stuyvesant_b_3491841.html

    Here’s an article detailing a female student’s experiences on being in the female entering class the year after Alice de Rivera and 9 other women were admitted. https://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/24/education/perspectives-girl-in-a-boys-school-the-way-it-was.html

    Here’s an article detailing an African American female student’s experiences at Stuy. This is moreso about the lack of racial diversity at the school, #358, which is an interesting insight after learning of the path and struggle to more gender diversity at the school. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/education/black-at-stuyvesant-high-one-girls-experience.html?pagewanted=all
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Christopher Nevarez
    Christopher NevarezMar 10, 2018
    It is interesting to see all of the overlaps between POLS 356 and POLS 358, where both women and people of color fight for their rights. I had read about the University of Texas Law School but to be reminded about this case is very important. How completely bigoted and diluted must someone be, to prefer the construction of a new school and the purchasing of new materials, all just to avoid the simple admission of a black student?
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 9, 2017
    Many of the same struggles that African Americans went through and continue to go through are similar to those struggles which women go through. The worst part is that in today’s day and age we understand that diversity in classrooms broadens the perspectives, scope, and thus the students ability to learn and think about issues from different angles. It is to the benefit of everyone that classrooms are as diverse as possible but this was apparently not understood at that time.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 5, 2017
    Christen Lee wrote a comment earlier pondering what distinguishes race and gender under the Constitution and why one is considered a suspect class and not the other.

    Lee writes, “My answer would be that there is essentially never a reason to discriminate on account of race, while there are in fact differences between men and women that may be addressed in laws. This is the reason that it is unlikely that sex will ever be a suspect classification in the view of the Court.”

    I find this argument to be troubling for a few reasons. To say there are differences between men and women, differences that justify potential inequality under the law, is how we used to justify segregation of blacks in America. During the time of segregation, futile “scientific” studies on the brain sizes of African Americans in comparison to whites, for example, was enough justification to ascertain their second-class citizenship. You can argue today that there is “essentially never a reason to discriminate on account of race,” but that wasn’t the case some decades ago.

    I would also like to know what reasons Lee has that would justify Constitutionalized inequality of genders. Is it the same argument that women should stray away from the work force because they’re “scientifically” proven to be better parents and because a father is inherently better at working and making money? Or because women are too emotional and that is why they are not fit to participate in certain jobs? As you can see, many of the justifications we have against women hold as much water as comparing brain sizes between races.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 9, 2016
    This section was an excellent way to link 356 and 358. The first part of this section states that federal government and state governments play at least equal roles in education in contemporary society due to (1) the lack of sufficient state funding; and (2) SCOTUS has interpreted EPC to prohibit much of race/sex discrimination. While the rest of the section goes into great detail about the role of racial discrimination and the Equal Protection Clause, I think it is also instructive to question whether these two points held equal weight in the distribution of state/federal power in the education system, or if one (perhaps the former) may have (in reality) held more. Or, did these two variables hold different weight in different areas of the country (e.g. small towns vs cities, state to state, etc).
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 7, 2016
    This was a very interesting read. The text went through the steps that were essentially taken by schools in Texas (and likely other places) during this time period. First the Court pressures schools to provide more equality so Texas basically sets up a University of Texas Law school for blacks. Obviously that law school wasn’t anywhere near equal to its white counterpart so the Court again pressures schools to provide similar tangible and intangible qualities. As a result schools begin letting blacks into the better white schools, but only to seperate them there where they still lack many intangible qualities, such as interacting with different people and exchanging ideas. This is where the link with gender specific schools comes in. Seperating men and women robs both sexes of that intangible quality of interaction as previously stated. Having a diverse group of people with different backgrounds helps to provide an exchange of different ideas. This is a vital part of any education. If you are only taught one way, how do you know its the best without having looked at any others?
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 2, 2015
    The points that Tom and Kelly bring up makes me ask myself, what is the difference between racial distinction and sex distinction? The answer to this question will help to realize why the Court has never used Strict Scrutiny when dealing with laws that discriminate on account of sex.

    My answer would be that there is essentially never a reason to discriminate on account of race, while there are in fact differences between men and women that may be addressed in laws. This is the reason that it is unlikely that sex will ever be a suspect classification in the view of the Court.

    Christen Lee
    Reply
    Kevin Lyles
    Kevin Lyles
    NO, or is this is a typo? “the Court has never used Strict Scrutiny when dealing with laws that discriminate on account of race.” You mean, on account of Gender….right?
    Mar 2, 2015 (edited Mar 2, 2015)•Edit•Delete
    Comments above copied from original document
    Kevin Lyles
    Deleted user
    Deleted userMar 2, 2015
    “[T]o what extent do the Court’s statements about the intangible but real inequity of educational opportunity offered by racially segregated schools apply to sex-segregated schools?”

    As mentioned, the ability to broaden the application of these elements is largely hinged on the level of scrutiny used by the Court, and in this respect, gender has presented a lower hurdle to justify gender discrimination. As a result, the ability to apply the equal protection standards concerning racially segregated schools to those that are sex-segregated relies on placing race and gender on an even plane in regard to their equal protection standards.
    Reply
    Comments above copied from original document
    Deleted user
    Deleted userFeb 28, 2015
    The courts have to address two distinctions when dealing with legally mandated sex segregation under the equal protection clause: (1) Does the separation amount to unequal treatment? and (2) If so, is the unequal treatment nonetheless justified under equal protection standards?

    I think that these two distinctions are important to understanding the court’s thought process in regards to legally mandated sex segregation. The only problem I have is the “justification” aspect of the second distinction. The justification they seek is based off the level of scrutiny they use; as we have seen the Justices have trouble agreeing on which level of scrutiny to use in regrades to gender-based classifications. Therefore, distinction number 2 is easier said than done.

    Reply