"Congress intended to strike at the entire spectrum of disparate treatment of men and women resulting from sex stereotypes."

—rule prohibiting female stewardesses but not male stewards from getting married found discriminatory

The Court thus created a cause of action for "gender-plus" discrimination; that is, Title VII not only forbids discrimination against women in general, but also discrimination against subclasses of women, such as women with pre-school-age children.

—holding that employer's policy of terminating married female flight attendants, but not males, violates Title VII

"The effect of the statute is not to be diluted because discrimination adversely affects only a portion of the protected class."

The court did note that "[clourts also have found discrimination in situations in which, although the basis of discrimination was not strictly immutable, a fundamental right was thought to be involved."

The phrase "terms, conditions, or privileges of employment" evinces a congressional intent " `to strike at the entire spectrum of disparate treatment of men and women'"in employment.

"At a minimum, this rule requires the class to be defined before the merits of the case have been decided.... A procedure which permits a claim to be treated as a class action if plaintiff wins, but merely as an individual claim if plaintiff loses, is strikingly unfair."

The Court noted that "[i] t is now well recognized that employment decisions cannot be predicated on mere'stereotyped'impressions about the characteristics of males or females." Id

Therefore, a court should grant instatement unless there are "special circumstances" which justify its denial.