The Limits of Sex-Segregated Marketing

Apr 23 2014, 10:57am CDT | by

In a recent Slate article, my daughter describes how in 2009 she and I unsuccessfully sued McDonald’s before the Connecticut Human Rights Commission for discriminating on the basis of sex in its sale of Happy Meal toys.  When 11-year-old Antonia bought a Happy Meal at the counter, she wasn’t asked a question but was just given the “girl’s toy.”  When I ordered a Happy Meal at the drive-thru, an employee would ask me “Is it for a boy or girl?” and gave me a different toy depending on how I answered the question.  We alleged that both these behaviors violated Connecticut’s civil right statute, because the Happy Meal toy that McDonald’s provided was contingent on the customer’s sex.

The Commission’s response to our allegations was dismissive in more than just the legal sense:

It is not the business of the Commission to engage its resources for the purposes of titilation [sic] or sociological experiment. Complainants’ assertion that respondent violated complainants’ civil rights or denied complainants public accommodation or services on the basis of sex is absurd.

Putting aside the Commission’s misspelled suggestion that the civil rights allegations of an 11-year-old girl were made for the purposes of stimulating interest “especially in a sexual way,” the Commission’s dismissal raises important questions about the limits of civil rights law.  Neither statute nor the case law give defendants a discrimination defense for only causing de minimus harm.  But should merely default discrimination should be actionable?  Giving Antonia a girl’s toy without asking her preference might not be a concern as long as Antonia can easily get the so-called boy’s toy just by asking.  Indeed, the Commission’s opinion went on to emphasize that:

Respondent did not require complainant to accept the Happy Meal it offered complainant. All complainants had to do was exchange the Happy Meal toy that respondent gave to Anna Ayres-Brown for the one Anna wanted.

But the ability of companies to adopt gendered frames depends on context.  Back in 2008 Antonia, in a letter to McDonald’s CEO, questioned whether it would be legal for an employer “to ask at a job interview whether someone wanted a man’s job or a woman’s job?”

The Connecticut Supreme Court in 1975 found that “sex-classification” in help-wanted advertising constitutes a per se violation of Connecticut law.  The same Human Rights Commission that dismissed our claims concerning “boy’s toy’s and girl’s toy” had, over thirty years earlier, found that segregating help-wanted advertisements categories (Help Wanted Male, Help Wanted Female, and Help Wanted Male/Female) was discriminatory even though job-seekers remained free to apply to jobs listed in any category.  In upholding the Commission’s order, the Connecticut Supreme Court reasoned:

It is part of a policy to eliminate sex-discrimination in its subtle as well as overt forms. The very act of classifying individuals by means of criteria irrelevant to the ultimate end sought to be accomplished operates in a discriminatory manner. . . . Symbolic discrimination as in the instant case is every bit as restrictive as naked exclusions. The distinction between ‘help wanted men’ and ‘help wanted men only, no women’ is nugatory. . . . The [Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act] operates to eliminate not only the unjustified exclusion of people from occupations, but also the practices leading to and facilitating such discrimination.

Thus, notwithstanding the freedom of jobseekers to apply for either type of job, and the independent duty of employers to consider all jobseekers on a non-discriminatory basis, the mere framing of some jobs as “male” or “female” was held to be a restriction that offended the notion of fair employment. Default discrimination in employment is almost certainly illegal.

In other contexts, however, gendered-descriptions of products is ubiquitous and, as a matter of positive law, almost certainly legal.  The Position Statement that McDonald’s submitted to the Human Rights Commission pointed out that that department stores, cosmetic companies and clothing retailers frequently segregate their offerings into “men’s” and “women’s” categories.  Antonia and I take it as beyond argument that many of these practices fall outside the prohibition of public accommodation law.

But what principles should distinguish between contexts where sex-segregated marketing is illegal (e.g., employment advertisements) and contexts where sex-segregated marketing is legal (e.g., adult clothing advertisements).  In a law review article, that Antonia and I have written (and is forthcoming at the William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law), we propose three context-distinguishing factors concerning:

(a) the strength and legitimacy of customer preferences for sex-segregated categories;

(b) the existence of less restrictive alternatives; and,

(c) the likelihood of cognizable harms.

We argue that these preference, alternative, and harm factors militate toward finding that sex-segregated Happy Meal marketing to be actionable discrimination.  But we also acknowledge that reasonable people can differ, inter alia, about the degree to which gendered framing of toy choice produces a cognizable harm.

Thwarting Customer Choice

In follow-up testing conducted this past summer, we learned that at many stores employees’ behavior went far beyond gendered questions and default discrimination.  As Antonia described on Slate:

In a series of 30 visits, we sent boys and girls, ages 7-11, into 15 McDonald’s stores to independently order a Happy Meal at the counter. We found that 92.9 percent of the time, the storewithout asking, simply gave each child the toy that McDonald’s had designated for that child’s gender—a Justice fashion toy for girls and a Power Rangers toy for boys. What’s worse was the trouble the children encountered when they immediately returned to the counter and asked to exchange their unopened toy: 42.8 percent of stores refused to exchange for an opposite-sex toy.

In the most egregious instance, a McDonald’s employee asked a girl, “Would you like the girl’s toy?” The girl responded, “No, could I have the boy’s toy?” When the girl opened the container a moment later, she learned that notwithstanding her explicit request, a McDonald’s employee had given her the girl’s toy. This girl went back to the counter with the unopened toy and requested, “May I have a boy’s toy, please?” The same McDonald’s employee replied, “There are only girl’s toys.” We then sent an adult male into the store who immediately was given a boy’s toy.

It’s probable that this employee lied to the girl because of her sex.  To my mind, this is pretty clearly an example of actionable discrimination.  The heartening news is that McDonald’s has taken our empiricism very seriously and in December sent Antonia a letter committing to real change.

Stepping back, I can still empathize with those who react to our efforts as trying to make a mountain at of a molehill.  It might seem unlikely that a small-scale study of toy choice could illuminate an important civil rights issue.  Then again, at least in one instance a small-scale social science study about toy choice did just that.  In Brown vs. Board of Education, the Supreme Court cited to a doll study conducted by Kenneth and Mamie Clark which found that many black children preferred playing with white dolls to black dolls.  While the focus of our toy study is markedly different, the Clark study reminds us that children’s choices of playthings can reflect and reproduce the residue of discrimination in society more generally.

 
 

Don't miss ...

 

<a href="/latest_stories/all/all/30" rel="author">Forbes</a>
Forbes is among the most trusted resources for the world's business and investment leaders, providing them the uncompromising commentary, concise analysis, relevant tools and real-time reporting they need to succeed at work, profit from investing and have fun with the rewards of winning.

 

blog comments powered by Disqus

Latest stories

Pakistan blocks three Saarc connectivity pacts; Modi, Sharif avoid meeting (Intro Roundup)
Kathmandu, Nov 26 (IANS) Pakistan Wednesday played spoilsport by blocking three major Saarc connectivity projects initiated by India, even as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi conspicuously avoided meeting his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif while he met five other South Asian leaders here.
 
 
Way out of debt crisis far from easy: Angela Merkel
Berlin, Nov 26 (IANS) German Chancellor Angela Merkel Wednesday said the way out of the European debt crisis is long and far from easy.
 
 
The Black Friday 2014 Sales You can Shop Today 11/26
The Black Friday 2014 Sales You can Shop Today 11/26
Over 20 Black Friday 2014 sales are already launched. Get the deals early to get your head free for the hard to get Black Friday deals to be released on Thanksgiving Day.
 
 
Pakistan blocks three Saarc connectivity pacts; Modi, Sharif avoid meeting (Roundup)
Kathmandu, Nov 26 (IANS) Pakistan Wednesday played spoilsport by blocking three major Saarc connectivity projects initiated by India, even as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi conspicuously avoided meeting his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif while he met five other South Asian leaders here.
 
 
 

Latest from the Network

Ukrainian president hails NATO, US support in conflicts
Kiev, Nov 26 (IANS) Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko Wednesday appreciated support and help of NATO and the US in dealing with the conflicts with independence-seeking insurgents in eastern Ukraine, Xinhua reported...
Read more on Politics Balla
 
Andy Serkis used dancers for The Avengers
Andy Serkis used ''body-popping experts'' to bring villain Ultron to life in 'The Avengers' sequel. The motion capture genius was asked by Marvel Studios to work on 'The Avengers: Age Of Ultron' to perfect the movements...
Read more on Movie Balla
 
Frank Grillo to play Crossbones in Captain America: Civil War
Frank Grillo will star as Crossbones in 'Captain America: Civil War'. The 51-year-old actor will return for the third movie in the Marvel franchise, in which viewers will see him transform from Brock Rumlow into the...
Read more on Movie Balla
 
Alan Cumming tells people he's a porn star
Alan Cumming tells people who don't recognize him that he's a porn star. The 'Smurfs 2' actor enjoys pretending he's an erotic actor when people realize they've seen him before but can't quite place where he's from,...
Read more on Celebrity Balla
 
Lorde mistaken for Taylor Swift's manager
Lorde was once mistaken for Taylor Swift's manager. The 18-year-old singer, who is pals with the 'Blank Space' hitmaker, has recalled her first meeting with the 24-year-old star was an eventful one in which she had an...
Read more on Celebrity Balla
 
Elizabeth Hurley's pig gives birth
Elizabeth Hurley's pet pig has given birth to six piglets. The 49-year-old actress - who lives on a farm near Cirencester, south west England - has been left overjoyed after her porker Penelope gave birth to a large...
Read more on Celebrity Balla
 
Tom Hanks' son Chet reveals cocaine addiction
Tom Hanks' son Chet has been ''struggling'' with a cocaine addiction. The 24-year-old - whose real name is Chester - took to his Instagram account to reveal he is now sober from the Class A drug and alcohol following a...
Read more on Celebrity Balla
 
Angelina Jolie's Oscar ambition
Angelina Jolie says it would mean a ''great deal'' to her if her new movie 'Unbroken' won her an Oscar. The Hollywood star is very proud of the film she has directed, which is about the life of World War II hero Louis '...
Read more on Celebrity Balla
 
The Black Friday 2014 Sales You can Shop Today 11/26
While most Black Friday 2014 ads state that Black Friday 2014 sales start on Thanksgiving Day, we are already seeing more than 20 Black Friday sales that are live online and even several that launched in stores. The...
Read more on Celebrity Balla
 
Tori Spelling wants to display breast implants
Tori Spelling wants to get her breast implants removed and display them in a glass dome on her wall. The 41-year-old reality TV star is keen to have her fake boobs taken out because they have ''expired and recalled''...
Read more on Celebrity Balla