Final answer:
Sophisticates may use a bona fide occupational qualification defense to justify not hiring Tod, as it permits sex-specific hiring when necessary for the job and customer privacy. However, they must demonstrate that no reasonable accommodation is possible without affecting the business's essence.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the case where Sophisticates, a women's clothing store, did not hire Tod, a forty-one-year-old male, as an attendant to assist customers in the dressing rooms, the store may invoke a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) defense under Title VII. This legal defense allows an employer to restrict employment based on sex if it is a genuine and necessary qualification for the job. The use of a BFOQ defense has been supported in situations where privacy is a concern or where the essence of the business operation, such as sex-specific facilities or roles, would be undermined by not restricting employment to one sex. Sophisticates could argue that having female attendants is essential for customer privacy and comfort, and this need could not be met by hiring men to assist in women's dressing rooms. However, it's important to note that BFOQs are typically subject to a strict scrutiny test and are decided on a case-by-case basis; therefore, the store would need to convincingly establish that no reasonable accommodation could be made that would allow for a male attendant without compromising the essential nature of the business.