evolution of Title VII regarding gender?
550126
according to scientists that preach the THEORY of evolution. we evolved from other animals that evolved from single celled organisms that evolved from a puddle of goo that contained the building blocks of life. problem is that the puddle of goo either came from dissolving rocks or a form of acid rain caused by the volcanoes of the time period.\nso basically scientists believe we evolved from rocks or magma.\n\ni think the idea That we were Created by God much more logical. considering the order thoughout the universe.
784293
I'm a woman, and I'm kind of against affirmative action.  I think that a person should be hired based on merit, not his or her race or gender.  I really wouldn't like working at a job where I was hired mainly because I am a woman, and the company doesn't want to appear sexist.
929076
try this for a change\n\nhttp://www.makerere.ac.ug/womenstudies/congress/abstarct/Gender,%20the%20Economy%20and%20the%20Workplace.htm
727724
I'm fairly sure it's about the same across the board- gender issues are very complex, but in a simple way, as well.\n\nI just can't say more without some details.
624742
I think National Defense is the only one that doesn't produce a gender gap.  In this topic you are dealing with a collective group, the nation, and safety is not gender related when looking at it from a national level.\n\nThe rest are gender related, even war when you have to debate about gender roles in the military...
315215
It hasn't. Females are still not allowed in infantry, and anyways, title IX is geared toward equality in school activities rather than... everything in the united states being equal to both genders. \n\nTitle IX isn't doing anything unless it happens in a PUBLIC school. Private schools are still allowed to discriminate.
944045
The European Union has recently taken concrete steps to address sexual harassment in its Member States. In September 2002, the European Parliament and Council adopted Directive 2002/73/EC amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions. \n\nCouncil Directive 76/207/EEC is the foundation of EU law and policy in the area of gender equality in employment. As amended in 2002, the Equal Treatment Directive states that "the principle of equal treatment means that there shall be no direct or indirect discrimination on the grounds of sex in the public or private sectors, including public bodies, in relation to" conditions for access to employment, vocational guidance and training, employment and working conditions, including dismissal and membership in organizations of workers or employers. In Commission v. United Kingdom, Case 165/82, [1983] ECR 3431, the European Court of Justice held that EU Member States could not exclude certain small businesses from application of the equal treatment principle as does the United States in its legislation prohibiting sex discrimination in employment, Title VII. Please see the section on domestic law and policy for more information on Title VII.\n\nGo to: http://www.stopvaw.org/1976_Equal_Treatment_Directive_and_2002_Sexual_Harassment_Amendment.html\nfor more info.\n\ncc
732752
I don't know if this fits in with the emphasis in your class, but this is my personal view...\n\nHistorically, when human rights were being defined women were not included.\n\nFor example: The US Constitution was written to protect and preserve the rights of citizens of the newly-formed United States. Women, however, were not believed to have all of the rights enshrined in that document and had to struggle to have their rights as citizens recognized.\n.\nAlthough any discussion of human rights includes women by definition, the overall umbrella of "human rights" is not always seen as addressing issues specific to the female gender. These issues include child-bearing, sexual abuse and oppressive cultural traditions/laws which prevent women from enjoying the "human rights" that men have.\n\nIn a nutshell, when someone says "women's rights" they are  talking about human rights that women do not have yet---or they are discussing something gender-specific.\n\nI hope this helps.
891067
When boy/girl or man/women are in classes together there could be less attention to the books! As opposed to male/female classes there is more attention to details of study!\n\nSuggest putting words relating to your question at "google" and there you will get 1000,s of answers, to narrow down to exactly what you need just keep adding or rewording entry...\n\nGood Luck!
783693
Many people are also apparently unaware that the 1973 Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which would have made women equal, was struck down for two reasons:\n1.  Society couldn't stomach women in combat, and\n2.  It opened the door to gay rights.\n\nWhy do people assume women are equal?\n\nAnd, I think liberals have given Bush god status, not conservatives.
743689
Hopefully it'll be the most qualified person, no matter what gender or ethnicity they are.\n\nHowever, given America's past, I'd probably bet on a woman before a minority, and that's sad.  Most of America has come around to equality for women and are getting used to seeing them in lots of jobs they couldn't get before...but racism still runs deep, and in some places is severe.  We've a way to go before we overcome that entirely.
15011
According to the website "Gender Specific Colors," it would seem that assigning color to gender is mostly a 20th century trait.   It would\nalso seem that at one time, the color associations were reversed when color first came into use as a gender identifier.\n\nIn fact, this reversal of what we consider "normal" was considered conventional, even in the early 20th century.\n\n"At one point pink was considered more of a boy's color, (as a watered-down red, which is a fierce color) and blue was more forgirls. The associate of pink with bold, dramatic red clearly affected\nits use for boys. The reason is that pink being a more decided and stronger color is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty,is prettier for the girl." [Ladies Home Journal, June, 1918]\n\nhttp://histclo.hispeed.com/gender/color.html - "Gender Specific\nColors"\n\nAccording to Jo B. Paoletti and Carol Kregloh, "The Children's Department," in Claudia Brush Kidwell and Valerie Steele, ed., Men and Women:  Dressing the Part, (Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989).  -\nIn the United States: "The current pink for girls and blue for boys wasn't uniform until the 1950's.\n\nIt would also seem that Nazi Germany had something to do with the association of pink with femininity:\n\n"Catholic traditions in Germany and neighboring countries reverse the current color coding, because of the strong association of blue with\nthe Virgin Mary...the NAZIs in their concentration camps use a pink triangle to identify homosexuals. (The yellow star of David is the best known symbol, used of course to identify Jews. The German system\nwas quite complicated, using various symbols an colors to identify criminals, political prisinors, an a whole range of other groups). The\nNAZI's choice of pink suggests that it by the 1930s was a color that in Germany had become associate with girls." - "Gender Specific Colors"\n\nWhile there are also myths and legends supporting both or either color for gender identification, those resources dealing with straight history date the identification of pink with femininity to the period of World War II or later.
1137587
The 14th Amend. protects your from govt discrimination - equal protection cluase (unless you are a white male trying to get into a public college)\n\nSeveral laws, most notably Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, make it illegal to discirminate agsint someone in a variety of contexts
297056
Women getting the same rights as men.
1103815
Males: 72 \nFemales: 79\n\nThis may be a year off, I know there is a 7 year gap. And I know it's in the 70's.
767448
Hopefully sooner rather than later.  I have a link that outlines the recent history of the same sex marriage legal battle in California along with a collection of relevant links at the bottom.  Hope it helps!\n\nOh, and the second link is to a same-sex marriage advocacy organization in Cali.  Hope THAT helps too!
233550
No different than a male as long as you are legal.