By Bernard Chapin on 2.8.07 @ 12:07AM
An interview with Christina Hoff Sommers, a leading authority on stolen feminism and the war against boys.
Feminists sometimes refer to the instance of their awakening as
being a "click moment," but the term is applicable to the average
person as well. Many of us had such an experience while reading
Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have
Betrayed Women, learning that many of the statistics and slogans
that radical activists have instilled into the common culture with
were, at best, massive exaggerations, and, at worst, propagandistic
lies. The author, Christina Hoff Sommers, followed up with the
superb book The War Against Boys: How Misguided
Feminism is Harming Our Young Men. Her oeuvre clearly illustrates
that feminists are divided between radical "gender feminists," who
are anti-male and pro-socialist, and equity feminists, who embrace
equality and individual rights. Sommers represents the latter. She
also co-authored One Nation Under Therapy: How the
Helping Culture is Eroding Self-Reliance (with Sally Satel).
Currently, Sommers is a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise
Institute. A professor of philosophy at Clark University for two
decades, she obtained her Ph.D. from Brandeis University and her
bachelor's from New York University.
BC: After the publication of Who Stole Feminism
and The War Against Boys did you feel as if feminism
was a topic that had been played out? Did you say everything that
needed to be said?
Sommers: My books certainly made a difference
with journalists. I showed that leading feminist academics are
reckless with facts and carried away by ideology. Reporters are now
more careful about checking feminist claims. There was a time in
the mid-nineties when feminists could make wild and baseless
assertions such as "Violence against women increases 40 percent on
Super Bowl Sunday," or "Girls suffer a massive loss of self-esteem
at age 12" and reporters would take them seriously. That seems to
have stopped. Unfortunately, the feminist scholars themselves have
not changed. Students who take a course with hard-line professors
are still subjected to streams of propaganda. The sad fact is that
students who have spent a lot of time in women's studies classes
would probably benefit from deprogramming. So, to answer your
question, there is still a lot more that needs to be said and
done.
The feminist establishment in the universities claims to speak
for all women. Anyone who disagrees with them is dubbed a
"backlasher" -- a traitor to her gender. I have been called
anti-woman, and on one occasion even a non-woman. One angry critic
called me a "female impersonator." The result of all this hostility
is that moderate, conservative and libertarian women stay far away
from women's studies -- and from feminist groups in general.
BC: I'm sure your name continues to be excoriated in Womyn's
Studies classes all over the country which is an achievement in
itself. Any recent stories of academic Sommers-baiting that you'd
like to share with an inquisitive audience?
Sommers: I am a frequent lecturer on college
campuses. But it is not women's studies professors who invite me.
It is students. With the help of conservative activist groups like
the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, the Young America's
Foundation and the Clare Booth Luce Foundation, students bring me
to campus to challenge feminist orthodoxy. One of the things I say
in my lecture is that American women -- as a group -- are not
oppressed. In fact, they are among the most favored, privileged and
blessed group of human beings in the world. To most students, this
rings true. But for those who have taken a lot of "feminist theory"
or who are heavily involved with the campus "Take Back the
Night"/Vagina Monologue culture, those are fighting words.
They insist they are oppressed and resent the suggestion they are
not. So there is still some hissing and booing -- and, these days,
angry text messaging among feminists in the audience.
BC: How necessary is the myth of oppression for
feminists?
Sommers: Gender feminism thrives on the myth
that American women are the oppressed "second sex." No matter how
much evidence you adduce against this thesis (e.g. women live
longer than men; they are more likely to go to college; they have
far more choices on how to live their lives) the gender feminist
never changes her mind. The education scholar Diane Ravitch was
amazed to find that feminists still claim that our colleges and
universities are "failing at fairness" to females -- even though
women are approaching 60 percent of college enrollments. She asked
a good question: "When will it be fair? When women are 60 percent,
or 75 percent of college enrollments? Perhaps it will be fair when
there are no men at all."
BC: What do you make of a program like The Oprah
Winfrey Show? What is the basis for its appeal? Also, how much
bias do you think is inherent to the host's views?
Sommers: There is no mystery. Women like the
show because it covers topics most of us find interesting --
children, fashion, beauty and relationships. Oh, and diets and
self-improvement! Oprah Winfrey is very good at what she does. And,
unlike many celebrities-- she does not burden us with her
politics.
BC: It seems a distinct possibility that we may well soon
have a female, and feminist, president. What do you think Hillary
Clinton's chances of getting elected are? Also, if she won, how
radical of a President would she be?
Sommers: She is a frontrunner right now. She
may well be our next president. It is hard to say how radical she
would be. There are at least two Hillarys to consider. There is the
mainstream Hillary who attends meetings of the Senate prayer group.
But there is also gender feminist Hillary who delivers angry
diatribes about the pay gap and who thinks poorly of women who
"stayed home to bake cookies." I am still a little worried about
her affinities with the self-described "vagina warrior," Eve
Ensler. Ensler is the author of the poisonously anti-male play the
Vagina Monologues. In 2000, when she was considering
running for the Senate, Hillary chose Ensler to serve on her
"exploratory committee."
BC: Do you miss teaching and daily interactions with
students? Have you considered finding another position at a
university? What kind of reaction would you anticipate from the
faculty?
Sommers: I do miss teaching. For the kind of
work I do, it is important to keep in touch with college-age young
people to make sure your ideas are relevant and fresh. But I
lecture on campuses around the country and meet a lot of students
that way. Also, at my think tank in Washington D.C., the American
Enterprise Institute, we have wonderful college interns, research
assistants and lots of visiting groups of students.
I sometimes think of returning to academia. For example, I have
considered starting a women's studies department -- one that tries
to be fair and objective about gender issues. There is a vast
amount of work to be done just correcting the errors and
misconceptions generated by more than two decades of biased
feminist research. But I am afraid that any college president who
would hire me might risk sharing the fate of Larry Summers.
topics:
Education, Books, NATO