Adults Won’t Put Up With Sexist Insults; Why Must Students?

Shireen Miles, California leader of the National Organization for Women, is concerned about sex discrimination in our schools, and as an example she once told of a sexist joke contest conducted by a high-school teacher during a class. She cited one of the jokes: “Why did God create women? Because he can’t cook.”

Miles got it wrong. The joke actually had a vulgar spin that’s common to choice chauvinistic slurs: “Why did God create women? Because sheep can’t cook.” I know, because I was an unhappy witness of that sexist joke contest and of my fellow students’ reactions.

Many of my classmates were amused, not realizing that sexist jokes, whether they are meant to be taken seriously or not, inherently condone the degradation of women. Other students were shocked but silent. Only two or three people in the entire class knew that they had the right to complain without fear of retribution.

No teacher would dare hold a racist joke contest, yet it was assumed that we’d be entertained by sexist put-downs.

This is a scenario that occurs much more often than most of us, in these “liberated” times, would like to think. At a school in Palo Alto, boys and girls were taught English composition in sex-segregated groups and were given assignments on different topics until an angry parent publicized the situation. In Oroville, one high school gave freshman girls three points toward their athletic sweaters for participation in varsity sports while freshman boys were allotted 12 points. When a parent complained, school administrators replied that they would consider giving girls six points.

Those educators were ignoring the law. Sexual harassment and discriminatory procedures are prohibited by California’s 1977 Sex Equity in Education Act and Title IX of the federal Education Act of 1972.

Although these statutes are philosophically strong, they have the ferocity of pit bulls without teeth. The state Board of Education is required to set up regulations to ensure compliance with sex-discrimination laws, but that has not been done. Title IX requires individual school districts to inform students of their rights and to set up grievance procedures. Many districts, however, choose to perpetuate sexist attitudes and student ignorance by simply ignoring these requirements.

Even districts that have complied have been largely ineffective. The Los Angeles Unified School District, for example, has established a procedure for complaints and has passed out literature about anti-discrimination laws to its students, but it has not created a standard for the punishment of offenders. Complaints are dealt with on an individual basis, and the usual penalty is a quiet reprimand.

By contrast, consider the situation in the workplace. Most employers and workers are well aware of the laws against race and sex discrimination, and offenders are subject to harsh penalties, even punitive damages.

The difference is that school authorities have no interest in students’ rights. In any case, even students who know their rights feel powerless.

Fear of authority is drummed into young heads along with mathematical equations and grammar rules, and the end product is an intimidated or apathetic student body.

It is time for our level of consciousness to be on our consciences. The existing laws must first be enforced, then strengthened. Perhaps those who are guilty of sexism could be compelled to participate in anti-discrimination workshops. Or the Department of Education could make offenders’ names public, as the State Bar does with the names of lawyers who violate the canons of legal ethics.

The depth of this problem became painfully clear to me when I asked a male administrator at my school what he thought of sexism in the classroom. “I’ll have to be careful how I answer you,” he responded in complete seriousness, “because I’m a sexist myself.”