Editor: This is Part Two of the series “Is there a feminist in the house?” See here for Part One.
“Feminism is doomed to failure because it is based on an attempt to repeal and restructure human nature.” … “What I am defending is the real rights of women. A woman should have the right to be in the home as a wife and mother.” Phyllis Schlafly
“Schlafly’s discussion reveals a paradox. She was able to have it all: family and career. And she did it by fighting those who said they were trying to get it all for her.…” Pia de Solenni
When I walked into the unisex bathroom at the Livingroom coffeehouse, I deftly threw a kung fu kick, successfully lowering the toilet seat from its upright position with a soul satisfying BANG! accompanied by my hissed words “Here’s to you Phyllis Schlafly!”
Schlafly spear headed the anti-Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) movement in 1974, maintaining that the ERA’s passage would lead to compulsory military service for women, same sex marriage and (drum roll please…) public unisex bathrooms!
Here’s the complete text of the Equal Rights Amendment, which affirms the equal application of the U.S. Constitution to both females and males. And yes, it is the COMPLETE text.
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
Schlafly either ignored or was completely out of touch with the larger societal dynamics that would lead to the end of the Draft, the broad support of gay rights, or the inclusive role of women in the military. And she didn’t have a clue about the changes that would be made to public bathrooms. She was utterly wrong in thinking that she could stop these changes and a myriad of others by simply trying to tie them all to the ERA and killing them forever when that legislation failed to pass.
While Schlafly successfully threw a monkey wrench into the ERA ratification process, she could not stop history- although she is still trying. And of course the terrible irony is that she has gained a place in history, or at least in kids’ history books, by virtue of the reactionary victories in the Texas textbook wars.
Schlafly ginned up fear about the unspeakable horrors ahead if the ERA passed, and she ginned up an equal amount of fear by prophesying an end to the “special protections” afforded to women in the past. For those of you who didn’t grow up before the mid 1970’s here are just a few of those “special protections:”
- Sex discrimination in schools and athletics was not banned until 1972. Prior to that time, girls and women were “protected” from having their athletic interests and abilities supported. No swim teams, basketball, volleyball or tennis teams for girls, and hence no athletic scholarships to go to college, but hey- we got to learn square dancing and nine of us every year made the cut to be a cheerleader!
- University housing policies “protected” women by requiring them to live in campus housing and to observe a midnight curfew. Men could live in off campus housing and come and go as they pleased. Doesn’t this sound positively quaint?
- Women were “protected” from becoming human beings who could eat or drink in some of the most popular established after hour venues that served alcohol. After 7:00 pm a male escort was required. Women out there- can you imagine going to Portugalia some evening and being turned away from the door because you don’t have a male escort?
- Women were “protected” from financial decision making and power over those decisions. Many of us lived in states where we could not get a credit card in our own name. Hubby had to sign off for us. No hubby- no credit- unless Daddy stepped in, of course.
- Depending on which state they were married in, women often did not have the legal option of keeping their own name. They would have to pay to go through a legal process to change their name back.
- Women were protected from “potty parity” by being required to pay to use the few public restrooms for women, in airports, for example. While guys peed for free, women could be seen pushing their toddlers under a public restroom door because they didn’t have a quarter, anxiously directing “Jimmy honey” to “open the door for Mommy. Come on Jimmy…. No sweetie, don’t unroll all the toilet paper…Open the door for Mommy…”
The list above does not even begin to address the grim inequality of pay, nor the lack of access to better paying jobs that were historically filled by men. But I believe that the majority of men and women today would look at this list and say- “That’s nuts. Absolutely nuts.” And of course it’s nuts, and thankfully it is not the world in which most of you grew up- except for the equality of pay thing, which is still a significant problem. This is however, the “pro-family,” protected woman’s world upon which the first mama grizzly- Phyllis Schlafly- developed half of her “the world will end” strategy if the ERA were to pass.
In the early 70’s I was involved with a small group of women who started the first National Organization for Women (NOW) chapter in Key West, Florida. One of our first acts was to donate a subscription of MS to the Key West library. We also drove to Orlando to participate in a national strategy to pass the ERA. What I remember most about that conference was the remarks of one of the speakers.
That speaker maintained that women cannot claim the victory of women’s equality simply because a few women are able to break through the glass ceilings in their respective fields. Rather, equality would be achieved only when an utterly mediocre, dull woman could achieve the same pay and stature as her mediocre and dull male colleague. That remark has stuck with me over the past 40 years.
In the intervening years I have seen the reversal and elimination of laws and social mores that I listed in the “protections” above. I have seen a woman- Hillary Clinton- get “this close” to becoming the president of the United States. And I have also seen women on the right proudly wrap themselves in the flag of feminism. We live in strange times. The reality is that Sarah Palin is much smarter than say, Louie Gohmert, who is not exactly the brightest bulb in Congress.
Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell and Phyllis Schlafly are far from stupid women, and feminists and everyone else should be very, very careful about appending that judgment to these women. While each of these women can be rather dull, incurious about the world around them and out of touch with the prevailing concerns in this country- they are no worse than many men running for or holding political office. But the sticking point for me is that they are no better. I repeat- the sticking point is that they are no better and I am not going to vote on the basis of sex chromosomes.
My question remains- Is there a feminist in the house? Stay tuned for Part Three in this series- Unfinished business