Fix Features

war on women

Notre Dame Professor: Silent Minority Aids America’s Destruction

by Ryan Lovelace - Butler University on January 11, 2013

When Laura Hollis, a Notre Dame University business and law professor, looks at America’s path forward, she cannot help but see a dead end.

“Many people say to me, ‘If it gets worse than this, I’m not sure we can survive it,’ and I’m inclined to agree with them,” Hollis said in an interview with The College Fix. “It’s never been as bad as it is now.”

Hollis, who in addition to her professorship is a popular conservative columnist and political commentator, is the author of a post-election column titled “Post Mortem” that went viral across America. It was reposted on many websites, spread like wildfire across social media sites, and emailed far and wide, landing in mom-and-pop inboxes across the nation.

In fact, just as recently as Dec. 28, the popular left-leaning political blog Daily Kos posted an “open letter to Laura Hollis” denouncing her piece.

This ongoing whirlwind of a world wide web debate was prompted by Hollis’ Nov. 8 column, which analyzed the state of the union the day after President Barack Obama was re-elected.

It argued, among other things, that: conservatives are outnumbered; they’re losing the culture war; too many Americans are immature, seeking only self-gratification; and the so-called Republican War on Women played a role in the election outcome.

“America is on a horrific bender; has been for some time now,” Hollis wrote. “The warning signs of our fiscal profligacy and culture of lack of personal responsibility are everywhere – too many to mention. We need only look at other countries which have gone the route we are walking now to see what is in store. … I see the country I love headed toward its own ‘rock bottom,’ and I cannot seem to reach those who are taking it there.”

In an interview this week with The College Fix, Hollis said feedback she’s received from that piece has led her to believe millions of Americans feel as if they have no voice. But the answer, she argued, is not to cower in the corner and give up.

“Speak up,” Hollis said. “Because being polite does not mean being silent.”

First and foremost, the culture war must to be addressed, she said. It’s time to stop worrying about stepping on people’s toes or hurting people’s feelings, she said.

Some Republican and conservative commentators argued after the election the solution to regain the White House, Congress and the country is to become more moderate, acquiesce to the social norms promulgated by the Left.

Bad idea, Hollis said.

“We have to decide we need to change the tone and tenor of culture in the country,” Hollis said. “In order to change the culture, you have to be a part of the culture.”

Take, for example, the alleged War on Women. During the presidential campaign, women’s rights discussions served as a façade for something more sinister, she said. What appeared to be a discourse about access to birth control was really about expanding abortion services and physician-assisted suicide, Hollis said.

“I’m pro-better choice—all choices are not equal,” Hollis said. “If my father is suffering from advanced dementia, I don’t have the right to smother him with a pillow.”

Hollis said advances in science have provided new and startling information about life from conception through natural death that every American should learn. This is one example of the kinds of things that could help turn the culture war tide in conservatives’ favor.

Hollis said “the left” has become politically adept at demonizing people, but it is important for all Americans to understand everyone wants to make things better, she said.

While Hollis’ first point in her “Post-Mortem” work declared Americans who champion free enterprise are outnumbered by those who want free stuff, she said that did not mean throw in the towel.

“No matter where you are, that can be ground-zero for changing things,” Hollis said.

Fix contributor Ryan Lovelace is a student at Butler University.

Click here to read Hollis’ entire Post-Mortem piece.

Click here to Like The College Fix on Facebook.

IMAGE: Dave Hosford

{ 0 comments }

War on Women: Feminist Professors Use Classrooms As ‘Recruitment Tool’

by Nicole Swinford - Chapman University on December 18, 2012

A women’s history class frequently offered at Chapman University glorifies Margaret Sanger while it avoids her racist beliefs, highlights the feminist revolution while sidesteps the suffrage movement’s family values, and heralds Roe v. Wade and the advent of birth control, all while failing to cite the feminist counter-culture movement.

That’s not only not surprising, it’s expected, as classrooms in colleges across America are used to recruit young women into the feminists ranks, says Carrie Lukas, managing director of the conservative Independent Women’s Forum.

“The purpose here is to advance the feminist movement,” Lukas says. “The college classroom is a recruitment tool.”

Lukas, author of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism,” says the vast majority of women studies classes do not offer fair and balanced approaches to the subject. It’s not unheard of for professors to skip relevant information, slant lesson plans, or skew lectures.

The course at Chapman University, a small liberal arts college in California, is a prime example of that.

When the course was taught in the spring, one student questioned its professor about Margaret Sanger’s widely reported racist beliefs after the professor finished praising the feminist for her work with birth control.

“Yes,” the professor admitted. “But a lot of people were at that time.”

In effect, the professor rendered Sanger’s background as a geneticist who supported the use of birth control and abortion to reduce minority populations moot.

The suffragettes’ pro-family values were also never broached in the class. Meanwhile, a disproportionate amount of of time was spent on the feminist revolution and the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

The fact that Norma McCorvey, the original Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade, has since recanted her claim that she was raped and needed an abortion, and is now a spokeswoman for the prolife movement, also was not raised during the class.

The class at Chapman follows a formula feminists use to garner support, Lukas says.

Take, for example, the left-leaning National Women’s Studies Association, which states in the preamble to its Constitution that it is“committed to being a forum conducive to a dialogue and collective action among women dedicated to feminist education and change.”

The association is not shy about its connection with and dependence on the feminist movement, declaring that “women’s studies owes its existence to the movement for the liberation of women.” And in turn, female professors help feed into that “feminist education and change.”

But this promotion of only one perspective is a disservice to women, Lukas says.

“College is a time when you should be learning to evaluate things on your own,” she says. “This is where we should have the opportunity to learn the benefits and weaknesses to both sides.”

And with all the recent talk about the war on women, perhaps the real war on women is the fact that they are not really learning their own history.

“The study of women and society should be robust and fascinating,” Lukas says. “It’s a shame to push one agenda. Truly a lost opportunity.”

Fix contributor Nicole Swinford is a student at Chapman University.

IMAGE: RRHO/Flickr

Click here to Like The College Fix on Facebook.

{ 3 comments }

Obama’s ‘War on Women’ Backfires

by Elaina Plott - Yale University on May 24, 2012

It seems that Democrats perpetuating the supposed “war on women” have engaged in some friendly fire.

A recent Gallup poll found that Americans identifying as pro-choice are at a record-low of 41%, down six percentage points from last July. Those identifying as pro-life now stand at 50%.

What has changed since last July?

As the mainstream media keeps us well aware, the Obama administration and its followers have exposed a war on women, pegging Republicans as the enemy and Democrats the grand arbiters of equality.

Included in the liberal combat plan is a mission to uphold the reproductive rights of American women, guarding them from the federal government’s unwanted moral advances. The underlying message assumes that a pro-choice stance is synonymous with a crusade for women’s rights.

With a rallying cry this deafening, it seems that a pro-choice citizenry would be more palpable than ever. But as the Gallup numbers indicate, fewer Americans are succumbing to the hype.

The poll continues to show that a larger majority of Americans now believe that abortion should be legal under “certain circumstances,” as opposed to all. This could mean one of two things: that either those formerly committed to a wholly pro-choice stance have added constraints to their definition of legality, or some pro-lifers have liberalized their views. With the dramatic decrease in pro-choice numbers, the former seems much more likely.

Has the once promising war on women backfired on the Democratic Party? The primary mistake of the endeavor was its almost celebratory view of abortion, treating the act of abortion as the ultimate act of liberation. One might guess that even those committed to a pro-choice stance felt moral qualms with this kind of rhetoric. The Gallup numbers certainly suggest it.

Indeed, one might wonder how much longer the White House can promote imagined causes in good conscience. As the American economy worsens, partisan attempts at distraction from the visible issues are becoming less and less effective.

The war on women might now be described as a last ditch, and failed, effort at rallying the Democratic base for a presidential victory, shifting an otherwise strong liberal faction into a grayer camp.

But regardless of November’s outcome, the new data highlights the Obama administration’s inability to legitimize a Republican assault on women, or to make pro-choice views mandatory in order for one to qualify as pro-woman.

With his patronizing “Life of Julia” style campaign rhetoric, Obama wants to cast himself as the guardian and protector of a feeble female underclass. Unfortunately for Democrats, Americans just aren’t buying it.

Elaina Plott is a sophomore at Yale University.