The recent controversy stems from feminist Burk's letter of complaint to Augusta. She is the chair of an outlet called the National Council of Women's Organizations, which, of course, somehow represents American women, and president of the Center for Advancement of Public Policy. But who is this Burk woman? People ought to look a little before they jump on her bandwagon. She has a few issues. Though she packages herself as a simple "civil-rights activist" she's more like a radical feminist out of touch with either her own membership base or just about any serious American. Take, for instance, a piece she wrote for the anything-but-mainstream Ms. magazine. In a piece for the Nov./Dec. 1997 issue of Ms., Ms. Burk presented her solution to the abortion debate: mandatory sterilization of men. She noted that a man who had "unprotected sexual intercourse once a week" could "theoretically father 1,820 children. Add his increased years of fertility, and his potential for physical domination over women, and we can readily see that the problem of unwanted pregnancy is largely one of uncontrolled sperm." "So," Burk wrote, "how do we control men's fertility? Mandatory contraception beginning at puberty, with the rule relaxed only for procreation under the right circumstances (he can afford it and has a willing partner) and for the right reasons (determined by a panel of experts, and with the permission of his designated female partner)." Burk said that "controlling men's fertility would not be a hard restriction to enforce. The fertility authorities could use a combination of punishments for men who failed to get the implants and for doctors who removed them without proper authorization. The men could be required to adopt one orphan per infraction and rear her or him until adulthood. The doctors, could lose their licenses or, in extreme cases, go to prison." Is this relevant to the debate at hand? Yes. Burk presents herself and is presented by the media as a legitimate voice of women, but as the above shows she is far from that, way out on the margins. (Even if she purposely being overly dramatic, which a reasonable person prays she is, this is not the work of a persuasive civil-rights leader.) And, in fact, as new poll numbers show, she's also on the margins of her own movement. In a poll conducted by the polling company/WomenTrend, 72 percent of surveyed members of the National Council of Women's Organizations, the umbrella under which Burk is waging her crusade, said they have not supported and do not intend to support the intimidation campaign against Augusta National. So, despite the media's compliance in presenting this as a fairness issue, a "civil rights" issue as Burk calls it, not even the members of Burk's own organization see it as a cause worth fighting for. When asked if they agreed with the statement "Even though I believe in equality, I also believe that it is appropriate for some single-gender organizations that have only female members, or have only male members to exist," 44.8 percent of NCWO members said that they "somewhat agree," and 10.3 percent said they "strongly agree." It's actually not all that surprising considering that member organizations of the NCWO discriminate-to use Burk's word-against men, including the YWCA, the Federation of Women's Clubs, Girls Incorporated, and the Women's Committee of 100. The debate will likely carry on as long as media types are willing to give Martha Burk and other self-proclaimed spokeswoman a podium. But if you're putting money up, stick with Augusta National and Hootie Johnson. |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|||
|
http://www.nationalreview.com/lopez/lopez111202.asp
|
||||