I grew up at a time that women were not allowed to have many jobs available to men, that pregnant women were often not allowed to work for pay at any stage of pregnancy, etc. etc. And yes I was paid less than my male counterparts even though I worked just as hard and just as long hours and was just as productive. It was only when I was allowed to take jobs once available only to the guys that I earned as much or more than they did.
But I have managed to have a extremely eclectic, interesting, and rewarding career in my working years and I do not feel that anybody owes me anything.
I would be embarrassed and ashamed to ask the government or anybody else to compensate me for those years I had to make do with 'women's work and pay.' And yes. Any able bodied black person who had ability to educate himself/herself, learn a trade, and reach for the American dream should be ashamed to ask for reparations for injustices 60 years ago and should be embarrassed to accept such. Should feel insulted that it was offered actually.
So you are unable or unwilling to answer the questions I asked? Then I guess their BS worked on you huh?
As I previously indicated, many of the things that were done to the Black women in the movie "Hidden Figures" were legal at the time depicted under federal law but are now unlawful due to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. An amendment to the act added gender as a protected class which is one of the reasons that more white women benefitted from affirmative action than Black people overall. The movie depicted
- Unequal pay for the work the "computers" (the Black women) did. Mrs. Johnson let the audience know that they were getting paid less when she stated to the character played by Kevin Cosner who was chewing her out about her daily restroom breaks "they don't pay us enough to afford a string of pearls" after a review of the dress code revealed that a simple string of pearls was allowable. That's why when Mrs. Johnson got married, the wedding gift from her manager of a string of pearls was significant.
- Disparate treatment - the Black women being treated differently (less favorably) that the white women or in the case of Mary Jackson, the white male engineers:
Karl Zielinski: Mary, a person with an engineer's mind should be an engineer. You can't be a computer the rest of your life.
Mary Jackson: Mr. Zielinski, I'm a negro woman. I'm not gonna entertain the impossible.
Karl Zielinski: And I'm a Polish Jew whose parents died in a Nazi prison camp. Now I'm standing beneath a spaceship that's going to carry an astronaut to the stars. I think we can say we are living the impossible. Let me ask you, if you were a white male, would you wish to be an engineer?
Mary Jackson: I wouldn't have to. I'd already be one.
-- Mary Jackson
Also Dorothy Vaughan had been doing the work of a manager, but without a manager's title, recognition, and associated pay. Vaughan made sure that when the work she and the Black women she was basically supervising, started becoming computerized, she learned what was needed to know to make sure that she and her girls were invaluable to the company. She taught herself FORTRAN programming and taught the other women it as well. At the end of the movie you see some of the white women being introduced to Dorothy and being told that she could teach them what they needed to know and these women were warmly welcomed.
- Disparate impact - that the impact or results of the company's policies and procedures disproportionately negatively impacted the Black female employees. Katherine Johnson having her written research contributions credited to her white male co-worker deprives her of her opportunities to advance within the company while bolstering opportunities for him. This is both disparate treatment and disparate impact. Having one's intellectual contributions stolen and credited to another person is actually considered theft of intellectual property in almost any other scenario.
These are just a few of the things I remember off the top of my head however, being a successful Black woman does not neutralize the bile of intentional racial discrimination and the corresponding hostility and sometimes violence that accompanies such a disposition.
Aside from the hostilities, these specific violations are quantifiable. A person can ascertain the difference between pay and opportunities for white males in the environment portrayed in Hidden Figures and come up with a dollar amount that this form of racial and gender discrimination caused.
So for someone who is white to come along and falsely try to claim that acknowledgement of these acts of discrimination by accepting recompense for it is shameful, is just another act of racism in an attempt to prevent Black people from receiving a small measure of compensation for the government sanctioned abuse towards members of the Black race. The beliefs and attitudes that resulted in a white supremacist society and all of the acts taken to prevent that system from being dismantled is what is truly shameful.
This mindset is as stupid of a strategy as someone who is too proud to accept unemployment compensation that they've earned through decades of work because they consider it a form of welfare.
If you believe that you were never entitled to equal pay for equal work or that it was right for you to be deprived of certain jobs you wanted due to your gender, then by all means, leave that money on table and continue feeling good about yourself.
I, for one, don't consider letting other people unlawfully screw me over as something good. At least not without a fight when possible. Have you never received notification that you're a member of a class action where due to the work of one person, it was discovered that a whole group of people were discriminated against or had their rights violated in some manner or another? If you've ever benefitted from a class action lawsuit in which you were a class member but didn't even have the knowledge that your rights were being violated in order to complain, how is that any different than reparations being received for something far much more egregious?
Lilly Ledbetter lost every single one of her lawsuits brought to try to address the unequal pay situation that she found herself a victim of. Yet her fight for equal pay for herself resulted in a law protecting equal rights for ALL women in the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009:
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009
On January 29, 2009, President Obama signed the first piece of legislation of his Administration: the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 ("Act"). This law overturned the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), which severely restricted the time period for filing complaints of employment discrimination concerning compensation.
The Act states the EEOC's longstanding position that each paycheck that contains discriminatory compensation is a separate violation regardless of when the discrimination began. The Ledbetter Act recognizes the "reality of wage discrimination" and restores "bedrock principles of American law." Particularly important for the victims of discrimination, the Act contains an explicit retroactivity provision.
People challenging a wide variety of practices that resulted in discriminatory compensation can benefit from the Act's passage. These practices may include employer decisions about base pay or wages, job classifications, career ladder or other noncompetitive promotion denials, tenure denials, and failure to respond to requests for raises.
Differences in pay that occur because of sex violate the EPA and/or Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. In addition, compensation differences based on race, color, religion, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, and/or retaliation also violate laws enforced by EEOC. For more information regarding equal wages because of any of these reasons, please call the EEOC at:
1-800-669-4000