Camille Paglia has penned an interesting analysis of the history and future of feminism.  Feminism is a lot like dispensationalism–a lot of people know they don’t like it, even though they don’t really know what it is.

Paglia’s article is one of the most helpful and balanced analyses of the movement. Her conclusion:

In conclusion, my proposals for reform are as follows. First of all, science must be made a fundamental component of all women’s or gender studies programs. Second, every such program must be assessed by qualified faculty (not administrators or politicians) for ideological bias. The writings of conservative opponents of feminism, as well as of dissident feminists, must be included. Without such diversity, students are getting indoctrination, not education. Certainly among current dissident points of view is the abstinence movement, as an evangelical Protestant phenomenon and also as an argument set forth in Wendy Shalit’s first book, A Return to Modesty, which created a storm when it was published nine years ago but whose influence can be detected in today’s campus chastity clubs, including here at Harvard. As a veteran of pro-sex feminism who still endorses pornography and prostitution, I say more power to all these chaste young women who are defending their individuality and defying groupthink and social convention. That is true feminism!

My final recommendation for reform is a massive rollback of the paternalistic system of grievance committees and other meddlesome bureaucratic contrivances which have turned American college campuses into womblike customer-service resorts. The feminists of my baby-boom generation fought to tear down the intrusive in loco parentis rules that insultingly confined women in their dormitories at night. College administrators and academic committees have no competence whatever to investigate crimes, including sexual assault. If an offense has been committed, it should be reported to the police, so that the civil liberties of both the accuser and the accused can be protected. This is not to absolve young men from their duty to behave honorably. Hooliganism cannot be tolerated. But we must stop seeing everything in life through the narrow lens of gender. If women expect equal treatment in society, they must stop asking for infantilizing special protections. With freedom comes personal responsibility.

Paglia’s recommendations are tough to disagree with.  Read the whole thing.

HT:  The Fire and the Rose

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Posted by Matthew Lee Anderson

Matthew Lee Anderson is the Founder and Lead Writer of Mere Orthodoxy. He is the author of Earthen Vessels: Why Our Bodies Matter to our Faith and The End of Our Exploring: A Book about Questioning and the Confidence of Faith. Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook.

2 Comments

  1. Thanks for posting that lecture. I found it both informative and thought provoking – as a christian and a feminist, I have often wondered at the animosity/disdain that feminists have towards parts of the abstinence movement and other strains of christianity that are so clearly influenced by feminism (even if many of the participants would rather die than admit it). I think feminists should do more to acknowledge the proponents of the abstinence movement that emphasize such a bold choice, rather than paternalistic ignorance.

    Reply

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *