'On The Basis of Sex'

Extracted from ’The World is My Classroom, The Universe is My Teacher 

I watched ‘On the Basis of Sex’ over the weekend. 

Well, almost half of it. I caught it halfway when I was switching between channels to see if there was something nice to watch.

That’s when it caught my attention. It’s the story of the young Ruth Bader Ginsburg. 

I have heard that name before. I heard it being mentioned on CNN several times. She is that lady US Supreme Court Judge, right?

Technology is wonderful. I quickly googled her up on my smart phone and was up to speed about her. Whilst the movie was still playing. Yup, she is the one. The US Supreme Court judge. The one that fought discrimination against women.

Ruth Ginsburg challenged laws that on the surface appeared beneficial to women, but in fact reinforced the notion that women needed to be dependent on men. That women were somehow inferior.

The story was set when she was  a young law professor. She is in the midst of preparing a brief to appeal a decision against her client.  The Commissioner of Inland Revenue was on the other side.

Good movie. Captivating final speech in her submission before the Appellate Judges. Heavy stuff, the kind that will make you jump up and start clapping if you were in the court-room.

At the heart of the argument was whether it was unconstitutional to enact laws that treated women differently from men. 

In the pivotal courtroom scene, all the arguments about break in the fabric of society, the end of civilisation as we know it, not being the American way, will cause earth being conquered by the Andromedians and other such grave concerns were thrown at her. By the judges. 

“These laws merely recognised what is self evident,” they said. “Won’t there be anarchy if we ignore nature?” they questioned her. 

  

She daringly stood her grounds and turned the whole argument on its head. We lawyers love that stuff. To be able to sweep our opponents  (we are not allowed to call them that, by the way) and judges off their feet in one smooth motion and do the powerslam on them.

That case set the precedent for other cases. Legislation after legislation that treated women differently were subsequently challenged and nullified. Based on that one case.

The irony of it all is this. 

That case, the one that started it all, that beacon for gender equality, wasn’t about discrimination against  women. It was discrimination against men. 

In that case, a man named Moritz hired a nurse to care for his aging mother so he could continue to work. He was denied tax deduction for the nursing care because at the time the Internal Revenue Code specifically limited the deduction to "a woman, a widower or divorcée, …” The Commissioner ruled that as man who had never married, Moritz did not qualify for the deduction. 

So he challenged. On a matter of principle.

Interesting, the entire legal battle on discrimination against women was started by a case that fought discrimination against men. Well played Ruth.

We men, have been having it easy all this while that we keep forgetting this simple truth. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. 

I am lucky. I have my wife to remind me of that. All the time.

Muru

Wattapad
Medium