Why is the author giving up so much ground to the feminists by buying into their caricature of the 1950s?
Tamsey: Are you saying that women had the same educational and career opportunities as men in the 1950's?
SLP: No. Reread the excerpt from the article, reproduced above. The language of the excerpt necessarily implicates the 1950s as a time when women enjoyed no choice at home or in the workplace. Obviously, that's historically inaccurate. Just as obviously, it's the modern feminist line.
You may say the author could have chosen her words better, and indeed she could have. But the fact that her error in word choice just happened to be one that reflects the false femist line and the fact that this error, like other errors in the article, was not caught by the editors suggests many feminist assumptions have been internalized at NRO.
It was extremely limited choice based entirely on gender, not intelligence or ability.
suggests many feminist assumptions have been internalized at NRO.
Yes, an equal playing field based entirely on intelligence and ability was part of the original feminist battle-cry, but it is in fact a core plank of the right-wing with regard to all groups. She simply points out that women have achieved that. I'm suprised more gents here at FR aren't applauding her article... Code Pink is probably frothing at mouth over it ;-)