Director Niki Caro's North Country is a fictionalized version of the sexual harassment suit brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Minnesota Human Rights Act by Lois Jenson, Patricia Kosmach, and Kathleen O'Brien Anderson on behalf of themselves and their fellow women mineworkers at the Eveleth Taconite mine in the Mesabi Iron Range of northern Minnesota. Jenson had originally filed a sex discrimination charge with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on 26 October 1984.
Nearly four years later, with no effective action having been taken, Jenson and Kosmach filed their class action complaint on 15 August 1988, adding Anderson as a plaintiff on 14 March 1989. There's a book about the case, Clara Bingham and Laura Leedy Gansler's Class Action: The Story of Lois Jenson and the Landmark Case That Changed Sexual Harassment Law, and this article from the Fall 2003 issue of The Labor Lawyer, which summarizes both the facts and the law as it was eventually established in the District Court of Minnesota and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In its decision certifying the class, reported at Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co., 139 F.R.D. 657, 663 (D. Minn. 1991), the District Court noted the following as "evidence of pervasive offensive conduct":
Sexually explicit graffiti and posters were found on the walls and in lunchroom areas, tool rooms, lockers, desks, and offices. Such material was found in women's vehicles, on elevators, in women's restrooms, in inter-office mail, and in locked company bulletin boards. [The sign inside the locked case read, "Sexual Harassment in this area will not be reported. However, it will be graded."]
Women reported incidents of unwelcome touching, including kissing, pinching, and grabbing. Women reported offensive language directed at individuals as well as frequent "generic" comments that women did not belong in the mines, kept jobs from men, and belonged home with their children.
In addition, as the Labor Lawyer article relates, "Although each worker had his or her own private locker, with a separate locker room for the women, one or more men would enter the women's locker room and ejaculate on the clothing in their lockers." Acquaintance with the facts makes it plain that the behavior the women were subjected to was so scurrilous that moviemakers wouldn't have to make anything up.
Discovery (i.e., requests for information by both parties to a suit in preparation for trial) was first overseen in the Jenson case by Magistrate Judge McNulty, who permitted defense attorneys to gather data for a "nuts-and-sluts defense." As the Eighth Circuit noted in its opinion, "Personal events [that the] defendants sought to discover included detailed medical histories, childhood experiences, domestic abuse, abortions, and sexual relationships, etc." (The Eighth Circuit's decision, reported at Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co., 130 F.3d 1287 (8th Cir. 1997), is available free online.) For instance, McNulty allowed the defense to depose the fathers of Jenson's two children, one of whom had gotten Jenson pregnant when he raped her. (Such overbroad investigation is one form of what is called "abusive discovery" or "discovery abuse.") The Eighth Circuit eventually agreed with the plaintiffs that "much of the discovery … was not relevant or was so remote in time, that it should not have been allowed." 130 F.3d at 1292-93.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - Bill Fraser
This is a superb movie review. In fact, the review is more engaging than the movie. It analyzes North Country in the level of detail I'd like to see in every movie review. The disingenuous attitude film makers adopt that they have to alter historical facts drastically to engage the audience's attention in the story is a combination of laziness and contempt for the audience. In fact, in claiming to represent the true interests of the protagonists, by using distortion and outright fiction to bolster the audience’s supposed lack of interest in historical storytelling, they actual work *against* the interests of the protagonists " the audience is left with no clear belief in what’s real and what’s made up. It’s like Barry Bonds and steroids " how do we know how many of his accomplishments are legitimate?
We all understand that no one can capture the whole truth, that truth is always a composite of multiple viewpoints, and every director’s choice to leave something in or out is a subjective editing decision. But it’s a lazy copout to substitute fiction for fact for the majority of a movie’s content, as a reaction to the daunting task of presenting a compelling story which is generally true to historical accuracy, though by necessity truncated via subjective editing decisions.
What a shame that Lois Jenson’s and a few of the plaintiffs’ gritty, persistent heroism has been turned into a sort of Hallmark movie card, which cheapens the immense sacrifices they made. As the reviewer Alan Dale says, “Acquaintance with the facts makes it plain that the behavior the women were subjected to was so scurrilous that moviemakers wouldn't have to make anything up.” Throughout the movie I was discussing with my wife (we watched at home) how this character’s actions and that situation didn’t ring true, while simultaneously expressing admiration and sympathy for the main character’s plight and courage. This isn’t the way I like to watch a movie. I prefer to be drawn in to a movie’s plot and characters because of the ring of truth that resounds in every scene. However, the movie did make me aware of the Jenson vs. Evelyth Mines case and prompt me to do some research, bring me to this excellent movie review, The Kitchen Cabinet, and del.icio.us, where I hope to find more thought-provoking and well-written articles.
2 - Alan Dale
Thanks for the comment, Bill, and the praise. I was disgusted to read this news report, that a New York Women in Film & Television survey had declared North Country the most-important film for women to see in 2005. To learn from by negative example? I'm afraid the survey respondents must have liked it not despite the movie's evident flaws but because of them--because of the slick way it sells "feminism." If people want candy they're going to have candy, no matter how much more nutritious and subtly flavorful fruit may be.