Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Sears, Roebuck and Company: A Personal Account

Feminist Review 25 (1):46-69 (1987)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article was first published in Radical History Review No. 25, 1986. Since then the controversy has escalated dramatically, with articles in the New York Times and Ms magazine and editorials in the Washington Post. Most of the media have used the controversy as a vehicle to attack women's history and women's studies in general. Had I known the direction that this publicity would take I would have written a much stronger piece. Feminist Studies is planning to publish a piece by Ruth Milkman outlining the issues involved in the case, and Signs will publish some of the written testimony in forthcoming issues.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,853

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Women's History and the Sears Case.Ruth Milkman - 1986 - Feminist Studies 12 (2):375.
Against competitive equal opportunity.Paul Gomberg - 1995 - Journal of Social Philosophy 26 (3):59-73.
Why equal opportunity is not a valuable goal.Stephen Kershnar - 2004 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (2):159–172.
Employment and privacy: A problem for our time. [REVIEW]M. Newman & G. Marks Chabris - 1987 - Journal of Business Ethics 6 (2):153 - 163.
Employment and Privacy: A Problem for Our Time.Michael Newman & G. Marks de Chabris - 1987 - Journal of Business Ethics 6 (2):153-163.
Equality of Opportunity Globalized?Darrel Moellendorf - 2006 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 19 (2).

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-11-24

Downloads
4 (#1,623,074)

6 months
2 (#1,196,523)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references