So i think what they did is really thats kind of the foundation for the black quarterback and as you said fast forward 20 years down the road and i think how well do they read defense and throw the ball down the field if they are running i want them to protect themselves by a prime coaching d teaching them and saying if you have a choice had the choice i r you throw at the teen yards downfield rather than run it and i think that hes been pretty good in terms of knowing his limitations into the bar to valuable to the team and you cant get hurt. Hes probably a talent that i cant say weve never seen in the football league, black or white but you put his talent and surround it with a hiphop culture, some people its going to rub them the wrong way. I remember when a female Sports Reporter that was foreign and now you have women hosting shows during his and her things in all sports, basketball, football, baseball, you name it. So because something is new or doesnt fit the mold it doesnt make it bad. I think his energy has been good for the game and i probably would introduce some of the things that he does but as i said earlier, i know my lane and he knows his lane. But the fact is the coaches were comfortable with him and teammates are comfortable and at the end of the day, thats all that matters. Host it looks like we are out of time and this has been a great conversation that went by fast. Dig deep, finding the strength within. Congratulations. I enjoyed reading it and talking with you. Guest i hope people will buy it and gained some wisdom from my experiences. Thank you. Usually it is authors sharing new releases. Watching on booktv is the best television for serious readers. They can have a longer conversation than to delve into the subject. Booktv weekend they bring you author after author thats the work of fascinating people. I love booktv and im a cspan fan. Next attorney Julian Thomas recalls the impact of title vii of the 1964 Civil Rights Act on working women. [applause] thank you so much for coming. I am overwhelmeim overwhelmed t and the response. I think facebook was created for moments like this. I have heard from so many people its been truly an amazing experience. Also for those that dont do what this book is about in case you were lured here by the title [laughter] now we are going to be talking about oppression and patriarchy. Finally i want to thank clara for being here shes been a champion of my project from when it wasnt anywhere close to being between these covers and frankly i have been a huge fan since i burst into tears on the reading class action. It is a really ugly cry. [laughter] it was a model for me writing this book trying to bring human voices to these lands are cases so im thrilled shes the one sitting here with me tonight. Thanks all for coming and we will start. [applause] this is in conversation but it will be me asking questions and then i want everyone to make sure you get your questions in. But first i finished the book the other night and i read earlier versions but i finished it last night and it is the most powerful chronicle of the last 50 years of the integration of the workforce and all of these women, none of them have heard how amazing are the womens rights and its just a remarkable job what youve done so i wanted to start with why did you write this book and how did you decide to dedicate years of your life to these cases . The brevity is amazing. Thats the hardest part is how you convinced each story. Of title vii is a section of the 1964 act that bans discrimination because of sex and i was working as an employment lawyer so it was my bread and butter. And to think whether her situation fell within its parameters so i started thinking okay this operation would be to bring these coming to new york and have an event with them and then i started thinking i would like to meet them and talk with them and hear about how their cases came to be brand name in my field. So that was the kernel of the idea to explain how i knew that i had been hoped. Trees that harris was the subject of chapter number eight in the second of the two cases in the book and i met with her and her lawyer who had absolutely no reason to take the time to meet with me. But she was so warm and open and told me about the difficult times in her life. They turned to her and said you werent . [laughter] it is a no no when you are to go and meet with your harasser if she thought i could settle the case so she went and met with him and he immediately when he heard how much she wanted which wasnt much, went into effect and said he would ruin her and she said she found strength inside of her and anger inside of her and she pointed out and said you listen to me i dont care how long it takes im going to give everything theyve got and im taking this all the way. Im talking Sandra Day Oconnor. [laughter] she said i dont think that he knew who that was. [laughter] i realized when she told me that story but in her case which was a unanimous case that you dont have to have a nervous breakdown for the claim to harassment that the author of the opinion must Sandra Day Oconnor. And i was hooked. I knew i had to tell the stories in there that there were hundreds or maybe even thousands more. How long did it take the journey . My editor is sitting in the front row and i think she would tell you it was a lot longer than it should have been. [laughter] but it was a little bit more than the time i began the research and submitting the manuscript and then there was a what . [laughter] thats what my contract provided and i breached the contract a couple of times and maybe took a little bit longer than i should have but i started by doing a lot of traveling and interviewing folks. There were a couple that turned me down but overall, people were wonderful and welcomed me into their homes. I had a lovely fruit plate provided for me and they had me stay overnight. We had a few tricks sprinkled here and there in the process. And you must have had thousands and thousands as well. Spent most documents these days are computerized or digitized. So i was able to get the entire court docket from that case is. Some of the older ones were not available and i had to look through the books. In the first chapter she was turned down for a job on the Assembly Line in six e. Eight because she had a daughter that was 3yearsold and that they would and i hear women they would hire men. She passed away in 1985 so there was a process of finding her kid, and i interviewed three of them and they actually directed me to the courthouse in orlando where some of the papers were on display because thats where the trial was and so it was in the courthouse. Most i couldnt contact so from los angeles that was from the early 70s and they had all the case files so all of the women that led the movement to challenge the policy i found the notes in the file of the pictures they had sent and so forth so that was the challenge of making the people come alive. Tell me which cases granted you the most. And this is on tv, right . The one that grabbed me the most that i just mentioned i think on the Second Chapter she was one of the first people i interviewed in the process and i knew i was off to the races when i went to montgomery and i met with her. She had grown up in montgomery. She told me that her neighbors would express a surprise that her neighbors had three children because she was so bookish. When she went to college she met this correctional psychology which was basically psychologists have studied relationships and she fell in love with it if is like a box was kicked and she was in college and tuscaloosa but in 1972 want to go and work in these prisons is something she knew her parents wouldnt understand. She was an amazing person to talk to and so much serendipity the way she found her attorney and after college, while she was in college she applied to be a prison guard but she was told that she waited too little. She was below the week minimum. She was 5 pounds to light. You only get the job if you gain 5 pounds. [laughter] the arbitrary as she said ticked me off and she got her boyfriend to montgomery and filed the charge into the time went by but Nothing Happened so she took the job washing hair in montgomery and one day a lawyer from the center came in to get her hair washed and she was turned down for not meeting the weight requirement and she said come into my office i want to talk to you. So that is also someone who is so committed for the entire family around her she didnt want it and she was just bad. So that was inspiring. That case was important because it struck down having the specific requirements. Can you explain that . The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that height and Weight Restrictions had an impact on women and had already been decided the disproportionate impact ruled that an employer can justify these as necessary to do the job and alabama couldnt do that. He had no record of whether they correlated to any sort of prison guard they just felt it was scarier and therefore better but unless an employer can make out what kind of a link between the claimant and the job is invalidated. That was an example of the bluecollar breakthrough but then you also have a good example of the different discrimination on a white collar more psychological level. It was about a decade after employment had been struck down and get the case involved a similar theme which is a woman who wasnt conforming to help people think she was supposed to act or look or be so she was a very accomplished and very bright on track in the Washington Area she was in the Government Services group so she worked on the contracts and the state department all around the world and about in contracts that far exceeded others going up for partner and she had the support of her Department Going forward for partnership and she was denied and was told that it was based on the reviews of she had gotten from the department and was overcompensated for being a woman macho. She rode a motorcycle. She was a little macho, lets be honest. [laughter] but my favorite is that she needed a course at charm school so she went to her mentor and he kind of echoed, you need to block morwalkmore feminine, tale feminine, style your hair, wear makeup and jewelry. She and her determined lawyer coming and i met with jim heller but they enlisted a social psychologist that was very new and common insect there is some backlash against it but he was able to present and he got it explaining that it has a powerful effect on how you interpret behavior and mannerisms from people around you and if they conform to those expectations you like them and if they dont u. R are not that comfortable with them so that was a huge victory because they were saying it is just as bad to reject somebody from being the wrong kind of woman then just. Fullstop. That case has had new vibrant life who was the first person to ever get the federal courts to a word for partnership in the remedy so she was one of the lucky ones in the case in the book as we talked about but the way that a man is supposed to be presenting in that kind of thing has had a great deal of success for the Appellate Court found that it is discrimination. It will come along with lgb t. But my organization and a lot of others enforce title vii and take the position that its encompassed in the provision for that reason. He was trying to help women who might be disadvantaged because if they were protected by the statute where did these women so im sure he wasnt thinking about those that were dressing in mens clothes. That is the point is that it has been expanded. They were groundbreaking and important. Can you tell us a little bit about how much is involved . When you have a statute about men and women being equal in the workplace and you are dealing with a very real physical difference between men and women, what does the quality look like, does it mean treating men and women the same or does it mean taking account and that is caused at one point that caused a very serious risk in the community that is covered in the chapter five case but in the early years after it was enacted, they didnt know what to do about pregnancy they were so confused. Then they finally issued a guidance the law was enacted in 64 and issued a guidance and 72 saying firing someone because she is pregnant is illegal. Eerie sing her sonority while shes out on leave having a bbs illegal. Those kind of punitive measures went to the Supreme Court about a woman who was a teacher in her School District they enacted after the third or fourth month of pregnancy the teacher had to be out of the classroom because she couldnt be anywhere near the kids. Those were struck down but where the court got gum that is when it came to things like should pregnant women be able to participate equally unpaid Disability Program they had in place for everybody so a guy that is out of the way of getting Cancer Treatment or a woman out for the way of having her baby, he wa she was gettinga paycheck and she wasnt. That went to visiting court and they actually found in general electrics favor and it wasnt automatically sex discrimination because there were plenty of women who never got pregnant so this wasnt a distinction between men and women it was between pregnant and on the pregnant persons. [laughter] in 1978 it was in 76 and they definitely cleared things up to an extent that the cases in the book. One of them from my reading looked as if the company was using it as a way of just getting women out of the workforce. They were forced because of affirmative action to hire these women dvd didnt want and then they found a loophole. In the late 1970s, and employers all arounemployers aly were enacting what were called fetal protection policies and they basically were claiming the wellbeing of their female employees future children and more specifically their fetuses. And as you say, there wasnt the same movement in the industry is dominated by women where if you have a protection policie protef said unless you can prove you are infertile you have to get out of the dangerous part of the job which was relegating you to a job like a janitor or Something Like that. The distinctions were not put in place for women they actually worked a lot in the Electronics Industry we know today about nail salons and hair salons, lots of toxic environments but no one was looking to get those off the front line. But in these dominated fields where women had been hired for years in the 1970s under the department of labor was a lot of enforcement saying you cant exclude them out right so they did for a while but then suddenly in the 80s we had a Different Administration and they started being put forth. Some of them got sterilized so they could keep their job. But some of them just accepted i read one news article saying that a woman had been moved from a job working on the Assembly Line to actually cleaning the masks of the man she used to work with and which i thought was especially not bittersweet just bitter. [laughter] so the outcome was the court including the concurrence by Justice Scalia that unanimously held this was unlawful you couldnt say that. It shows the reproductive capacities were harmed or more endangered and the court said even if the motivation is benevolent that is the case that i represented the people that is really dangerous work and more than once i had to write up a letter explaining the Supreme Court had said you cant when you find out a woman is pregnant relegate her to a desk job because she isnt at that point yethe pointyet she isnt physico work. Thats why the case is an interesting one to include and to end the book with because it is about saying a womans biology isnt going to be used against her at goalkeeper out of these wellpaying jobs but on the flipside of that you have someone who is in a job that involves heavy lifting and driving a delivery truck and her doctor gives her some restrictions and says for the duration of your pregnancy which isnt forever, its pretty short but it still seems to have thrown the employers for a loop. They had three different categories of workers to whom it would grant desk jobs and other light duty including people that lost their license for drunk driving. So the pregnancy does Commission Act says that she has to be treated the same as the ability or inability to work and to say that someone that has lost their license due to drunk driving was entitled to better treatment was frankly what i think made the case a good one for the court because it was so outrageous. Others say we only give light duty to people injured on the job. So youre not similar enough to that person. The way the case came down as it was a victory for peggy young but it left a question about just how many people, just how many similar people have to be treated more favorably for the pregnant woman to be entitled. The one in accounting who had a speciahave aspecial seat or gots or rejected the idea was left to be sorted out and more litigants would exactly the test is now. The pregnancy and motherhood are the questions still phasedin today in the social sciences, they are paid less than high your blessed and then get a bump when they have kids and for women it is just the opposite. So talking about the continuing life in that case there is no philosophy. And Sexual Harassment, last but not least. There are two cases that you cover. The first one was the first Sexual Harassment case. Tell us a little bit about that and then harris. Its a harrowing case and i should say shes the one plaintiff in the buck who doesnt speak to me and never explained why she didnt respond to a lot of messages. It was a portable chapter no pun intended that she wanted to leave behind. So that research was done talking to those that worked with the news articles. She worked at a bank in northeast washington, 19yearsold, came from a very broken home and her supervisor was a very fatherly figure and took good care of her for a while and then assaulted her one night and told her i gave you this job and i can take it away. The abuse continued for about three years and she had sex with him 40 to 50 times including on the floor at the bank and it was just torture. One of the lawyers described as sexual slavery. So she finally was divorcing her husband from whom she had been estranged for a while and just started crying. I hope you will be okay. She said thats not it. Its what happening at work. So up until that time, it had basically been dismissed as a personal digression into personal inclination basically you cant blame a guy for trying kind of approach. What year was it were . It was like 82. And so people were losing these cases and the only time that they could win is if they could show there was an advance made and it was robust and tangible. They were fired, demoted, theyve got given a promotion. If it hurt the wallet, courts were a little more able to see it as discrimination. But this environmental issue someone was complimenting you and making you uncomfortable i think this is one of those times the paradigm for the discrimination was primarily raised in their mind and they felt that it was an animus base defense. This is a happy thing. Why arent you flattered. So i think it was hard for the switch to be turned and then finally she happened to come across a very progressive circuit. They got it including catherines father by the way and they got it and issued positive rulings and the centers for robert bork and Antonin Scalia and kenneth star. [laughter] the Supreme Court ultimately decided to come and this is absolutely revolutionary as the hostile environment affects the terms, conditions and employment of the language just as much is losing money. They never contested that she deserved to be an assistant manager which is what she was promoting to. The hearings were five years after that. Service was six years after. Veneta drives on for another at least five years but i think the hearings are whats changed the conversations that happened but it really wasnt until this discussion really started. Then the case very briefly she it was a hostile Work Environment she was the manager in a company. All i can think of is Daphne Coleman and 95 he would drop a pencil on the floor for women to bend over to pick up and he wouldve turnewould turn the aig down really cold to see what would happen to women when it was really cold, just gross. I have a quarter down here in my pocket can you get it out for me. So anyway she finally couldnt take it anymore and she quit and got an attorney to take the case through new but the big issue was this was a horrible case we can all agree the standard that was created. The standard created have to create an abusive environment. Well of course that happened in her case but here in this case she went home at night and drank too much and yelled at her kids and cried in her Office Every Day but kept doing her job and doing it well so outward she didnt look like she was suffering that much so when you dont have someone that doesnt seem to be suffering and is functional, have you crossed the line into illegality so the take away that was significant imagine if the lion had been kept at the Michele Vincent point you had to be physically assaulted with a theresa harrisothe teresa harrisoncase y said no title vii comes into play before someone has a nervous breakdown. Thats what they said in the position and do so by that point of course there were two women on the court, Sandra Day Oconnor and ruth Peter Ginsberg delete the ruth bader ginsburg. So it has to be would be considered abusive to the reasonable person by an objective standard a reasonable person. It still was revolutionary that you dont have to necessarily be touched or endure three years of abuse to claim that you had your rights violated. Does anyone have any questions . Today people have the impression that all the cases were brought by white women and its not true at all if you could speak to that a little bit. The question is the intersection between the Racial Justice advocates and womens rights advocate bringing the cases and who brought the cases. I think that its fair to say in the earlier years there was an uneasy relationship between the Racial Justice advocates and the womens advocates. So the case in the book isnt the most critical example because she was a white woman who come a white lawyer actually in jacksonville and he said, were in Orlando Ansari he said i dont think theres anything there but i will get an africanamerican lawyer, i bet he would understand how to bring a case like this so she ended up with a younger guy who had been apprenticing at the end of the Legal Defense funding in new york and continued with a more experienced lawyer and he was completely on board and blind to the racial aspects because the case was progressing he kept trying to interest the bigtime groups like the naacp defense fund but he couldnt get any traction. Its finally been the case had been granted by the Supreme Court that they started saying wait a minute. The provision actually applies to them as file and they got on board and started realizing that if you are excluding a subset of women like mothers of Young Children that it was almost more disproportionate. But second of all. We wont hire any black people that dont have a drivers license. By excluding these classes youve got the race discrimination lawyers interested in thinking its something we have to do something about. There had always been this sense that the differences are okay to tolerate. Theres even a provision allowing for certain jobs pic naked and circumstances that doesnt exist for race survey hasnt always been an easy relationship but i think its improved over the years and is better now. The philips case ended up being helpful to women that live at the intersection who can show they were treated badly that an older woman can have a claim or an africanamerican woman if she were being treated poorly she still has a title vii claim. We have one more question. I wanted to speak of the caseat thecases that the circuit level that could potentially be game cer