Feature
(Page 2 of 2)
Now after forced busing achieves integration at all schools, we must recognize the justice of women’s demands for creative sexual separatism. We must acknowledge the independent dignity of “‘female culture” by establishing “female studies programs” that will cleanse the sex-bias from our hairychested university curricula.
The “historical sexism” that lavishes attention on Napoleon while downgrading the contributions of Catherine d’Medici and Katherine von Bora must end. We must demand that the time devoted to Catherine the Great be proportionate to the real uniqueness of her behavior. Fairness demands that if Faulkner is studied, there must be equal time for Eudora Welty. The principle of literary sex parity requires trade-offs between Sinclair Lewis and Ayn Rand, or Norman Mailer and Taylor Caldwell. And breathes there a woman with a soul so dead, who never to herself has said, “One Hemingway deserves a Willa Cather?”
Some persons worry that women’s liberation will distract us from the all-important task of fending off environmental apocalypse. But that worry betrays an insufficiently systemic view, for the new science of “issue ecology” teaches that every issue is related to every other issue in this troubled biosphere.
Dr. Mary Calerone, director of the Sex information and Education council of the United States, recently demonstrated awareness of this when she told the Women’s National Democratic Club that, “The primary ecological system that all other systems need to serve is the relationship between a man and a women. It, too, is subject to pollution.” Clearly there are more forms of pollution under the sun than appear in the Sierra Club’s philosophy.
Dr. Calderone understands the charm of “environment” as a political issue. One cannot turn around (or roll over in bed) without rubbing up against environment. This is deliciously egalitarian. Anyone with a grievance is relevant now that “environmental concern” is the measure of relevance.
Fastidious people may claim that Dr. Calderone is contributing to semantic pollution in order to make her cause congruent with this month’s priorities. But it is tolerant to believe that pollution is in the eye of the beholder. Anything that bothers you is a pollutant of your environment.
Of course, when we sweep every one of the world’s disagreeable features into the “environment crisis” we turn the term “environment” into a classification that doesn’t classify. But while the term loses precision, it gains an ability to make one feel au courant, which is how I feel when I can classify bad books, shoddy arguments and Senator Fulbright as “pollutants” and ecological disasters. Women liberators must feel relevant twice over — as freedom fighters and environment cleaners.
Female assertiveness is going to have some dramatic effects on American life. If women shun jobs to which they were once relegated, who will be airline stewardesses? The day may come when the traveler slumps wearily into his seat, only to hear a rich baritone voice asking “Coffee, tea or milk?” Thus the women’s liberation movement may rescue the railroad passenger business. Women may break the sex barriers in many occupations. Someday a woman may play tight end for the Baltimore Colts. Then imagine the spectator interest that would arise over a 15-yard penalty for illegal use of the hands and arms?
Finally there is the stigma of servitude attached to the exclusive use of women in the Playboy centerfold. Equity demands a color centerfold of Joe Namath, stapled in the navel. This will give men a sample of the shame and horror women feel when they are cast in the role of pliable sex objects.
There is one basic reason why women are victims of capitalism, male chauvinism, institutional sexism, imperialism, objectification, Hugh Hefner, psychological deformation, moral mutilation and physical exploitation. The reason? Women have nice bodies, and fortunately, government cannot do much about that.
We are much in need of a conspicuous problem, which clearly cannot be solved by government. Some Americans do not believe such a problem exists. But the soft, warm, intractable fact about women’s problems may teach these Americans an invaluable lesson about the very finite capabilities of government.
Women’s liberation will not be a gift of government. Women must save themselves. Most important, they must not be betrayed into servility by “Aunt Toms,” those collaborationists who trade their birthrights for a mess of service. No woman will be free until all women are willing to step on cockroaches. This is a stern test, but as the philosopher said, if women can’t stand the heat they should stay in the kitchen.
George F. Will graduated from Trinity College in 1962, received a degree from Oxford University, Magdalen College in 1964 and earned his Ph. D. from Princeton in 1968. Mr. Will is twenty-nine and instructs physical education in Washington, D.C.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (24) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by George Will
More Articles From Feature
http://spectator.org/archives/1970/12/01/the-woman-problem
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Eugenic Abortion 2.0
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- A Nation on the Edge
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Appleby| 4.20.12 @ 8:29AM
I was fortunate enough to spend three of my four university years in a small liberal arts church-related [Presbyterian] college in Tennessee, where the student body of 750 was 85% people from New Jersey and New York who were hiding from the draft by studying for the ministry. Because it was such a small, isolated school and the student body were from a large metropolitan area, and there were only 2 television channels and everyone was watching "Laugh-In" and "George of the Jungle", we didn't pay much attention to all this stuff. When I went to take the LSAT, I joined 185 men and 5 women in a large Southern university where we five women were harassed and interrupted during our exam taking, by monitors who clearly thought Girls didn't have any business there, and indeed when I presented myself to the university as a candidate I was told candidly that it was no use training girls to be anything -- they just got pregnant and quit.
Unfortunately, this has in fact proved to be prophetic, although there are more women than men in law schools nowadays.
And the whole plan was blown to bits when Girls accepted the undeniable truth of the statement that men had to have sex every day or they would literally die. University became one giant cat house for the preservation of men, and it all went downhill from there.
That is of course absolutely silly. But it makes as much sense as what people were actually spouting in the 1960s. Me, I was concentrating on my goal of standing on every continent before I turned 22. And I did.
Alan Brooks| 4.20.12 @ 10:14PM
What about El Rushbo and his asinine "feminazi" designation?
Even a High School freshman writing his first piece in a school paper wouldn't write something as imbecilic as "feminazi".
Alan Brooks| 4.20.12 @ 10:21PM
Oh, by the way, chumps, Will last month predicted Obama will be re-elected. He's brighter than you.
Alan Brooks| 4.21.12 @ 1:36AM
I meant Will, but BOTH Will and Obama are wiser and smarter than you rubes.
drudge ette obama| 4.20.12 @ 8:55AM
First, if I comment on this 1970s article, does it make me 42 years younger?
Appleby, thanks for helping pave the way.
My school days were in the late 1970s and early 1980s. This was a time of mass confusion. There was just enough license for women and men to play around, but still enough bridle to cause some restraint.
I truly believe that sexual freedom has destroyed our culture. The young adults today are looking for meaning, a natural response to never being told no. I predict a rebound, and a reduction in tatooing.
Jerry| 4.20.12 @ 11:07AM
You mean 'sexual license'; true freedom liberates, while the unbridled sexual license promoted by our culture enslaves those people who never learned limits or the meaning of "no".
Beer f.m.h.| 4.20.12 @ 11:52AM
Wonderful nostalgia piece! May George Will keep writing for another 42 years.
Bob K.| 4.20.12 @ 11:57AM
This has to be from the days when "The American Spectator" was a large format tabloid magazine published in Indiana on newsprint paper.
I was told that those old magazines have disappeared and that the articles are no longer available. This must have been volunteered and forwarded by the author for publication here.
Those were the days! Somewhere in some boxes I have some of them stored away. I just can't find them after a series of moves.
Thank you, Mr. Will.
Bob K.| 4.20.12 @ 12:09PM
But in all seriousness, this half tongue in cheek article is so prescient it is almost scary!
c. j. acworth| 4.20.12 @ 12:44PM
I remember the old tabloid format TAS. As well as being a great read, you could roll it up and swat yapping liberals across the noe with it.
c. j. acworth| 4.20.12 @ 12:47PM
Or, you could swat them across the *nose*. (sheesh)
Occam's Tool| 4.20.12 @ 12:31PM
Yup. Quite scary, in its way.
Petronius| 4.20.12 @ 2:34PM
The womens lib movement has never been about any kind of advancement. It's another revenge club like the NAACP. The hags want the emasculation of men, and that was not accomplished by them. It was self inflicted. Most of the tough guys of the baby boom generation couldn't wait to get out of school, join the Marines, and go kill commies for Christ. The ones who survived LBJ's half assed crusade to limit communism in Asia drank themselves to death after, or didn't reproduce. The number of weenies in the white male population ballooned and now you meet many males over 40 who never got into a fist fight on the playground and never learned, ergo the crusade against bullies. And the weenies who run our schools want to feminize them too. So it's not just NOW but the girlie men who demand subjugation and extirpation of everything masculine. There are some places in the South and West where feminism never got a toe hold, but the metroplexes are full of 1/2 men and vindictive shrews. All unreconstructed White Men have been aware of what is happening Now for the passed 40 years. The only remaining question is, will this country collapse before we're too old to fight?
Alan Brooks| 4.20.12 @ 10:16PM
You ARE too old to fight, petroleumus. You are over the hill.
Purp| 4.21.12 @ 12:00PM
You tell these creeps Alan. They should become slaves of women and do what they are told. They don't deserve freedom.
Pat| 4.20.12 @ 2:43PM
“Men are pigs” – the decades roll by and that benediction never seems to change. Today, few women would consider Yenta the Matchmaker a suitable third party to arrange their marriage but employing a computer dating service to find a husband isn’t a betrayal of principle. Men are commitment phobic according to leading female dragons like Kay Hymowitz, not to mention perpetual teenagers and shirkers of their adult responsibilities. University admissions personnel can’t find eligible men in quantity to fill the open spots within incoming freshmen classes. Single motherhood is suitable revenge on male dominance and a government agency as the surrogate father and reliable bread winner is perfectly acceptable.
Things American are going to hell in a hand basket according to many, the center does not hold and the best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity – W. B. Yeats saw this rough beast slouching toward 20th century Bethlehem and we seem to fervently agree with his conclusions.
The list of male faults remains long and packed with emotion laden indictments, yet we Americans have supposedly reached the height of economic prosperity and human contentment. We’ve slain the other contemptible “isms”, stalemated the religious fanatics in their quest to remake the world in their own insane image and granted developing countries the freedom to progress in their own unique fashion or remain stuck in their individual squalor.
So, why the universal unhappiness? No more unexplored lands to conquer, no new enlightened causes to die for and no sense of community are perhaps the source of our national malaise. Yet, “Men are pigs” remains the one constant we can agree on. Perhaps our perpetual Child-Man has developed the perfect philosophy for surviving the 21st century.
Appleby| 4.20.12 @ 11:00PM
I saw an article in our local paper recently in which someone admitted to having done research on the "Women and Children First" meme, and discovered that lo and behold, in all cases save the Lusitania and the Titanic, the vast majority of those saved from disasters were men. Women came second, children last.
It seems the truth depends a lot on who's writing the story.
Pat | 4.21.12 @ 12:51AM
Interesting, but did your local story also report the research on how many of the rescuers doing this saving were men and how many were women? Probably right though, it does depend on who is telling the story.
Petronius| 4.20.12 @ 7:33PM
Pat
It's called PeterPantheism.
e track from saq| 4.20.12 @ 8:00PM
Fun question to ask.Can the Godless change reality?It seems they do,but for how long and at what cost.Conformal theory sings this song.Basic patterns are necessary to the fabric of this universe, and these patterns scale up and down.In this logic women are clearly the reversed pole of men.To take it further.women create the world in their minds ,men find out what women want and do it.Or as of late.not so much.Too bad,I hate to blame this messed up planet on bad girls but it sure is tempting.Oh I can be even more engineering,and add other parameters that seem to conform with a deeper structure but don't have quite the candle power to make it come clean.
But women are not men unless they change their spin.
Ed| 4.21.12 @ 2:55AM
Sorry I missed this piece in 1970. But then--I was too busy arguing with my feminist girlfriend that men and women really are different. Bravo George. Or is it Brava?
Pete| 4.21.12 @ 11:58AM
And where the Feminist when I was being drafted in 1970? Shouldn't they have been marching against the discrimination as no women were being drafted?
k. bourg| 4.22.12 @ 10:32PM
George was my gym teacher in 1970. He gave me a wedgy because of my political views. I had to purchase a new gym uniform. I'll never forgive George Will.