Single-sex schools | ScienceGate

This chapter traces the changes in federal and state protective policies from the New Deal through the 1950s. In contrast to the setbacks of the 1920s, the New Deal revived the prospects of protective laws and of their proponents. The victory of the minimum wage for women workers in federal court in 1937 and the passage in 1938 of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which extended labor standards to men, represented a peak of protectionist achievement. This achievement rested firmly on the precedent of single-sex labor laws for which social feminists—led by the NCL—had long campaigned. However, “equal rights” gained momentum in the postwar years, 1945–60. By the start of the 1960s, single-sex protective laws had resumed their role as a focus of contention in the women's movement.

Get full-text (via PubEx)

Different versus Equal: The 1920s

10.23943/princeton/9780691002590.003.0006 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Nancy Woloch

Keyword(s):

Women Workers ◽

Minimum Wage ◽

Women's Movement ◽

Equal Rights Amendment ◽

Equal Rights ◽

State Laws ◽

Single Sex ◽

The Social ◽

National Woman's Party ◽

Women's Politics

This chapter revisits Adkins and considers the feud over protective laws that arose in the women's movement in the 1920s. The clash between friends and foes of the Equal Rights Amendment—and over the protective laws for women workers that it would surely invalidate—fueled women's politics in the 1920s. Both sides claimed precedent-setting accomplishments. In 1923, the National Woman's Party proposed the historic ERA, which incurred conflict that lasted for decades. The social feminist contingent—larger and more powerful—gained favor briefly among congressional lawmakers, expanded the number and strength of state laws, saw the minimum wage gain a foothold, and promoted protection through the federal Women's Bureau. Neither faction, however, achieved the advances it sought. Instead, a fight between factions underscored competing contentions about single-sex protective laws and their effect on women workers.

Get full-text (via PubEx)

Introduction

10.23943/princeton/9780691002590.003.0001 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Nancy Woloch

Keyword(s):

Labor Market ◽

Women Reformers ◽

Single Sex ◽

Feminist Organization ◽

And Shifts ◽

Women's Bureau

This introductory chapter provides an overview of single-sex protective laws. The longevity of protective laws rests in part on reformers' bifocal defense. The goal of such laws, their proponents claimed, was to compensate for women's disadvantages in the labor market and to serve as the linchpin of a larger plan to achieve wage-and-hour standards for all employees. This double-planked rationale—though contradictory—proved versatile and enduring; it suited constituents with varied priorities. Protective laws' longevity also rested on effective social feminist organization and, after 1920, on the federal Women's Bureau. In retrospect, single-sex protective laws were an unwieldy means to achieve egalitarian ends—or what women reformers of the 1920s called “industrial equality.” However, critics charged that the laws failed to redress disadvantage and even compounded it. Protection's supporters also confronted developments they could not anticipate and shifts in attitude they could not foresee.

Get full-text (via PubEx)

Chutes, Not Ladders

Boyhood Studies ◽

10.3167/bhs.2018.110207 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 114-130

Author(s):

Pavithra Nagarajan

Keyword(s):

School Success ◽

Cultural Practices ◽

Self Regulation ◽

Research Data ◽

Self Awareness ◽

Self Reflection ◽

Single Sex ◽

Black Bodies ◽

Boys Of Color ◽

And Control

This article explores how a single-sex school for boys of color intentionally and unintentionally (re)defines masculinity through rules and rituals. The school’s mission posits that boys become men through developing three skills: selfregulation, self-awareness, and self-reflection. Drawing from qualitative research data, I examine how disciplinary practices prioritize boys’ ability to control their bodies and image, or “self-regulate.” When boys fail to self-regulate, they enter the punitive system. School staff describe self-regulation as integral to out-of-school success, but these practices may inadvertently reproduce negative labeling and control of black bodies. This article argues for school cultural practices that affirm, rather than deny, the benefits of boyhood.

Get full-text (via PubEx)