A point of clarification/order. I posted a short piece on Martha Burk, the woman waging a war against Augusta National yesterday both quoting a Ms. magazine article where she posits a “modest proposal” to end the abortion wars: sterilizing men.
A smart blogger (Kevin Drum) calls me on it today: As he notes, I added a parenthetical note after it went up to make clear I knew Burk was probably being overdramatic. True, I did. But not because, as he suspects, I saw the piece only after I wrote my little item. I did, in fact, have the piece. I also suspected Burk didn’t really want to sterilize all men. However, Burk, a feminist writing that in Ms. was not the same as the likes Rod or Jonah writing the same thing on NRO. Ms. folks do believe men are the problem, and, frankly, anyone who has spent too much time exposed to feminist literature knows that. In addition, I do note in my little piece that she was presenting this in the context of abortion.
The point of the piece, too, stands not only on the short Ms. piece (which appears here, in a badly transcribed copy) , but, more importantly, on the numbers Kellyanne Conway’s polling outfit came up with when they started calling members of Martha Burk’s own group. The majority of the sample they surveyed have no interest in joining the crusade against Augusta. It’s an interesting, and newsy, relevant point. (And, if you want to take a look yourself, the full details on the survey will be up on the polling company’s website later today, I understand.)
Martha Burk is all over the place, often on TV and in newspaper stories with little or no counter. On some TV appearances in the last few days hosts have smirked and laughed when referencing the Augusta National’s position on keeping women out. I put up a quick piece giving people a counter view. I respectfully disagree with Mr. Drum that it was a “hatchet job,” but I did want to make sure people realized I knew she was exaggerating and wasn’t trying to pull one over on anyone, thus adding that parenthetical shortly after posting the piece. I should have added something in The Corner clarifying, as one of my colleagues did when his piece was taken too literally on the same day, but I didn’t. In retrospect, I wish I had. I apologize for any misrepresentations or misinterpretations.