there's been a lot of talk about how it's rational for corporations to be for diversity these days. better to hire the better qualified black woman than the less qualified white man, says Michaels. This is an advance over Jim Crow where you would have hired the white man b/c of racism and sexism.
But there are instances where my company *could* choose to systematically pay women less than men or pay blacks men and women less than white men and women or could choose to allow bosses to fire people on a whim or fire anyone on a whim (e.g., recently they've been laying off and giving people severance. in the company handbook, they explicitly say "no severance". they give it out of fear of a lawsuit.)
My company doesn't engage in sexist and racist practices whenever it worries that it might be sued. A worry that comes from them reading various directives from the federal government, state government, and paying attnetion to lawsuits and the like. People at my company *do* engage in sexist and racist practices and articulate sexist and racists ideas whenever it/they do not feel they will suffer any consequences. They are being rational.
The rationality here is about social institutions (the law) that have forced them to stop doing things out of fear of legal recrimination.
Michaels, of course, thinks that sexism is mostly a matter of treating girls nice like you learn how to treat them nice in dance class. It's a matter of chivalry!
thoughts inspired by my continued take down of The Walter Benn Michaels Experience:
http://cleandraws.com/2009/10/11/its-an-eitheror-walter-benn-michaels-world/