Phyliss Schlafly's Eagle Forum has a photo with a caption on the front page of its website that is worth contemplating. Here is what the caption says:
EAGLE FORUM DC OFFICE PROTESTS TITLE IX. The confirmation hearings for John Roberts provided the perfect opportunity for the feminists to air their laundry list of complaints about government and society. Each day this week, the National Organization for Women held a themed protest, which ranged from Title IX to comparable worth and abortion. Eagle Forum's DC staff lead several counter protests exposing such feminist fantasies.
Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 is the landmark legislation that bans sex discrimination in schools, in academics and athletics. It has infuriated the intolerant, anti-woman movement ever since.
The provision relating to non-discrimination in athletics has created the strongest backlash from the ridiculous and radical right, but its gains in education and academics are equally significant. Before Title IX, many schools refused to admit women or enforced strict limits. Here is how far we have been able to come as a result of Title IX in academics:
In 1994, women received 38% of medical degrees, compared with 9% in 1972.
In 1994, women earned 43% of law degrees, compared with 7% in 1972.
In 1994, 44% of all doctoral degrees to U.S. citizens went to women, up from 25% in 1977.
Phyliss Schlafly would have us believe this is a feminist fantasy?
Why is it that Schlafly's Eagle Forum also wishes comparable worth to be a feminist fantasy? Here's a simple idea: Women deserve to be paid the same as men for the same job. I suppose it's a fantasy because it has not come true yet, but what is it that drives a woman to oppose this human rights effort?
While I understand Schlafly's radical opposition to abortion, I don't understand Eagle Forum's characterization of it as a fantasy.
If you examine the photograph that accompanies the caption closely, you may gain some insight into their thinking.
While I am happy to see that Phyliss Schlafly practices affirmative action in her hiring policies (the staff is mostly women), I wonder if she pays the men on her staff more than the women. Do male interns get paid more than the female Executive Director? and if not, why not?
In any event, it's the signs I am most interested in.
One of them says: We (heart) Men's Sports.
Another says: Judge Roberts, Former Wrestler, Football Player, Track Star, Our Kind of Man
A Third Says: Real Women Don't Cry Over Title IX
Don't most American's support men's sports? Is that a good reason to oppose giving women an equal chance to compete?
I find the photo fascinating in one last way. With the exception of one young man, all the people in the photo, presumably Eagle Forum staff members, are very athletic looking young women. I wonder how many of them competed in collegiate women's sport of some kind. And I wonder how many of them went to schools where 30 or 40 years ago, young women were not allowed entrance.
Finally, while I was surfing through the Eagle Forum website, I found the photo and caption which probably is the most disturbing thing on the whole site, reflecting a very troubled and deeply woman-hating attitude ingrained in this organization. Here's the photo with their caption:
How Feminists Dream of Treating Men