Vice President Mike Pence has been flooded with politically correct mockery for an arrangement he once had (and may still have) with his wife, that she’s the only woman he’ll dine with privately.
Some wags have gone even further. Employment lawyer Joanna Grossman wrote in Vox that Pence’s practice – intended to shield his marriage from infidelity – is “clearly illegal” because it denies “equal access” to him from female employees.
This attack on Pence shows that “the left wants to police every aspect of life,” particularly for white males, and it’s related to the left’s mission to selectively obliterate freedom of association for “the last few all-male clubs” at Harvard, John Zmirak writes at The Stream:
A man cannot decide whom to eat with. He cannot take basic steps to guard the sanctity of his marriage. His every decision, however personal, stands beneath the prying eyes of prosecutors and tort lawyers.
But a member of almost any other group, if fired or chided or slighted, can call in napalm strikes from federal, state, and local regulators with very deep pockets. You need not even prove the intent to discriminate. An accidental “disparate impact” is enough to win a fat legal judgment.
Zmirak says Pence-mockers and coed crusaders are the intellectual heirs of the Jim Crow states that “used gun control laws to disarm ex-slaves,” and who now “use anti-discrimination laws to make white males into second-class citizens”:
When I got my Ph.D. in English lit, I didn’t even bother to apply for a teaching job. Every single job posting I saw explicitly said that it was especially looking for nonwhites and women. They might as well have read, “No Irish Need Apply.” But that was all perfectly legal. …
Aren’t fraternities the constant focus of attacks by school administrators and muckraking journalists? Harvard is trying to quash the last few all-male clubs on campus. Most of the all-male colleges in America have been made co-ed under pressure. All-female schools still survive because they claim to serve a feminist goal: forging female leaders, without the “suppressive” presence of men. …
Social justice warriors don’t care about human rights for individual humans — just evening the score for past sins committed by the long-dead.