we heard in workshops in Atlanta, in St. Louis, in San Antonio, in San Francisco and in New York City from hundreds of women agreeing to work through local coalitions for the elimination of sex bias in the housing system. It is knowing that in four of these cities, coalitions of women's organizations are indeed at work. Finally, it is the prospect that the new federal legislation and implementing regulations will, at last, place a "tariff" on sex discrimination, whether overt or subtle, and therefore remove this barrier of prejudice to a truly fair, rational and open housing market. We have laced this Report with more than 20 recommendations in an attempt to encourage solutions to the problems delineated by these findings. Like the problem, which has many facets, its solution hardly lends itself to a simple recipe. Mindful of this, we recommend an attack on many fronts, including public education efforts to inform women vigorous and persistent government com- data collection to facilitate monitoring imaginative and affirmative administration coalitions of women working for reform at the local level; and finally expanding opportunities for women to participate in policy-making decisions which shape the growth and operation of the shelter system. While these recommendations outline important tasks for HUD, we do not believe that any single agency can or should be expected to shoulder this responsi bility alone. Thus our recommendations are made through HUD to others as well -- the American public, the Congress, the State and local governments, industry, and most importantly, to the nation's women. This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity pursuant to a Contract. The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the Contractor and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Government in general, or HUD in particular. Neither the United States Government nor HUD makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information herein. Chapter 1 POWER AND POWERLESSNESS: I definitely think there is a need for edu- -- Woman witness, St. Louis Hearing, For some readers of this Report, this chapter should logically be the last, not the first. It is true that here we jump somewhat ahead of the story by setting forth conclusions for which only later do we offer documentation. It is also true that in Chapter 1 we suggest explanations for institutions' behavior which we do not describe until subsequently. There is, finally, the risk that those who disagree with what we say up front will forsake us and not be around for valuable material more narrowly focused on shelter itself. Yet, these possible shortcomings in the order of our presentation are, in our opinion, outweighed by the need at the beginning of this Report to place "sex discrimination in housing" in its historical and social context. To do this we are required to examine matters which transcend housing; to look back before we can look ahead; to make peace with history before we try to make sense of the present. To do this is also to be faithful to what so many women have told us in workshops and hearings around this land: that inequities women endure at the hands of the housing market are but part and parcel of the web of discrimination women tangle with in many facets of American life. They are inexorably all connected, each related to the other, like the gridwork in a super steel bridge, supporting a male-dominant and male-valuing society. As one witness told the Panel in San Francisco: Few women do, indeed, understand the extent of discrimination What is this "intricate pattern"? What is its genesis? Its present manifestations? Turning to these questions, we devote the ensuing sections to discussions of: Urbanization and the American Family Myths Widely Current about Women in America Male-valuing Society and the Laws of Property and Family Male Domination of the Housing System Powerlessness and the Non-recognition of Ed. Note: Notes are designated by [ ] and follow each chapter. 1. Urbanization and the Husband-Wife Family Paternalism was a pre-industrial scheme of -- Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma "The backbone of American society", so many a political figure has been fond of reciting, "is the American family". It isn't surprising that this kind of rhetoric is less evident in 1975, because the reality of the American family is rapidly irreversibly perhaps in change. What has heretofore been the nature of the American family, and how is it changing? America as a frontier society in the 18th and 19th centuries was of necessity greatly dependent upon European cultural heritages to inform and discipline its emerging democratic way of life. To a large extent the accepted ways of life presupposed a strong father in family life and, still more importantly, dictated the pre-eminence of the traditional husband-wife family over other forms of co-operative living arrangements. While communities, religions, societies and entire cities - for example, Salt Lake City's Mormons were organized applying novel or even revolutionary living arrangements, the vast majority of Americans accepted and reinforced what were essentially European concepts of husband-wife family living. The central feature of these traditions was the belief in the dominance of the husband over the affairs, the life choices, the habits, aspirations and property of his wife. The Americans added to this tradition another key concept, drawn largely from their national struggle with wilderness and undeveloped resources. This American innovation in an essentially European family tradition was a sharp division of labor between the husband and wife in which the husband's work was chiefly outside the habitat and wife's work was almost completely within. |