For the Equal Rights Amendment

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a landmark achievement of the civil rights movement that aimed to end racial discrimination against African Americans and other marginalized groups. The Act gave Black men the right to vote in the US and prohibited employment discrimination. It also banned segregation in public places and schools. Throughout her speech, Chisolm references the Civil Rights Act as an important legal precedent. She points out that while Congress supported the prohibition of racial discrimination, it has not applied the same logic to gender discrimination, although women constitute “a majority” of the population.

In her speech, Chisholm points out that if the Equal Rights Amendment becomes law, men and women could both benefit from alimony laws. In the case of a divorce, alimony is a payment (or set of payments) made from one spouse to another to maintain a standard of similar to when they were married. Although some policies have changed since the 1970s, it was common at the time of this speech for only men to be required to pay alimony, as many women did not work. With changing social roles, however, Chisholm argues that men could be just as eligible to receive alimony from their wives, and the ERA would make this equal consideration the law.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was established in 1965 to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The federal agency was responsible for enforcing Title VII and investigating cases of employment discrimination. However, Chisholm critiques the EEOC’s limited powers, claiming that in “cases involving sexual discrimination, it has failed in more than one-half” (Paragraph 20).

One argument often presented by opponents of the Equal Rights Amendment was that the new law would lead to exploitation of female workers—in other words, when allowed to treat female employees the same as men, their employers would take advantage of them. Chisholm addresses this concern, arguing that exploitation is wrong, no matter if it is applied to women or men. She explains that “[w]orking conditions and hours harmful to women are harmful to men; wages that are unfair for women are unfair for men” (Paragraph 17).

Chisholm uses this term to draw parallels between the discrimination faced by women because of their sex and discrimination faced by other groups, like racial and religious minorities, because of other aspects of their identity. She argues that many forms of prejudice, or mistreatment of people due to their identity, are beginning to die out. She expresses hope that laws like the ERA and changing social views will help similar prejudice experienced by women to disappear as well.

Ratification is a necessary step in the process of passing an amendment to the United States Constitution. After both branches of Congress approve a proposed amendment, it is sent to the states for ratification. If three-fourths of state legislatures approve, or ratify, the amendment, it can then become law. In the context of the Equal Rights Amendment, although it was approved by both branches of Congress in 1972, it was not approved by enough states in time to be officially added to the US Constitution and has never become law.

In her speech, Shirley Chisholm refers to the Selective Service Law and the impact the ERA would have on this policy. The law requires all men to register with the selective service program upon turning 18, providing their information to the armed services in the case of a military draft. Chisholm points out that the passage of the ERA would require women to also register with the Selective Service. Although some opponents of the amendment pointed to this registration requirement as a reason to reject the ERA, Chisholm argues that while military service is a great responsibility, it “is not without benefits, particularly for young men with limited education or training” (Paragraph 12). Under the ERA, women would have an equal opportunity to access these benefits.

Chisholm argues that under the law of the ERA, husbands of female workers would be eligible for survivorship benefits. In some jobs, the spouse of a worker is eligible for payment from either the government or their spouse’s employer if that worker dies as a result of their work. Though some policies have changed since the time of this speech, it was common in 1970 for only wives to be eligible for these benefits if their husbands died, while husbands did not always receive the same benefits if their wives died at work.