Does Elizabeth Cady Stanton really stand for "Feminists for Life"?
Do the members of "feminists for Life" really stand against the "history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her" in which "He closes against her all the avenues to wealth and distinction, which he considers most honorable to himself" and in which "He has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as his right to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs to her conscience and her God" so that "As a teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known"?
Has the John McCain campaign resolved, for Sarah Palin, "That the speedy success of our cause depends upon the zealous and untiring efforts of both men and women, for the overthrow of the monopoly of the pulpit, and for the securing to women an equal participation with men in the various trades, professions, and commerce" and that "it is self-evidently her right to participate with her brother in teaching them, both in private and in public, by writing and by speaking, by any instrumentalities proper to be used, and in any assemblies proper to be held"?
Have members of "Catholics for choice" been less feminist when resolving that "Keeping abortion legal isn't about liking abortion, . . . it's about trusting women to make decisions that are right for themselves and their families"?
Does a woman (or a man) deciding to stand up against or for another (whether a woman or man) require that the one deciding join, as some card-carrying member, a labeled group against or a labeled group for?
Will the sexists (the female-fearing, woman-hating, choice-and-voice-denying masculinists) just sit down, please?
HT Virginia Rutter, PhD, guest posting at Girl With Pen;
HT Charlotte living "Life as a (sometimes) reluctant academic," Far from Ole's
Should anyone be talking about Sarah Palin because it's sexist?