Prominent conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly repeatedly called the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) and the 1970s women's liberation movement "detrimental to families" in the United States. What was behind her philosophy about the ERA and families?
Anti-ERA Stance
The deadline for states to ratify the proposed ERA was March 1979, later extended to March 1982. On March 27, 1979, Phyllis Schlafly gave a speech that outlined her position against the ERA and the feminists who had been working for its ratification. She stated:
"It is my belief, based on working with this movement for quite a number of years, that the movement is having an adverse effect on family life, that it is a major cause of divorce today, and that it is highly detrimental to our country and to our families."
(Phyllis Schlafly's speech is included in the book In Our Own Words: Extraordinary Speeches of the American Century, edited by Robert Torricelli and Andrew Carroll, New York: Washington Square Press, 1999.)
The Philosophy of a Wife/Mother Role
Why did Phyllis Schlafly believe that the ERA was detrimental to families? In her 1979 speech, she stated that women need to believe in their worth: to function effectively in the family, a woman must believe her role as wife and mother is "worthy, honorable, useful and fulfilling." Phyllis Schlafly said the fundamental attitude of the women's liberation movement was "self-fulfillment over every other value." This, she explained, was "not compatible with a happy marriage, with a successful family life, with motherhood." (See In Our Own Words, pp. 330-332.)
Incompatible Fulfillment?
Feminist theory, on the other hand, questions the assertion that self-fulfillment and motherhood are mutually exclusive. Feminists also question Phyllis Schalfly's interpretation of feminism as promoting self-fulfillment "over every other value."
Feminist criticism - like critical thinking in general - looks for a double standard in professed beliefs. Feminist theorists of the 1970s pointed out the double standard of patriarchal society that made women solely responsible for the honor and fulfillment of parenthood. One way to see this more clearly is to apply the "worthy mother" rhetoric to the role of father as well.
Phyllis Schlafly said in her speech, "A woman who is unwilling to take care of her own baby is a pathetic sight." There is little to disagree with in this statement, and it can be equally applied to a father who is unwilling to take care of his own baby. However, this is how Phyllis Schlafly supported the idea:
"Motherhood must be a self-sacrificing role. The mother must be able to subordinate her self-fulfillment and her desire for a career to the well being of her children so she can answer her child's call any hour of the day or night. This is what marriage and motherhood are all about."
This presents a double standard. Is fatherhood also a self-sacrificing role? Yes. Then could she say, "The father must be able to subordinate his self-fulfillment and his desire for a career to the well being of his children so he can answer his child's call any hour of the day or night? This is what marriage and fatherhood are all about." Phyllis Schlalfly did not call for that sacrifice, even though it is "what marriage is all about." Therefore, she promoted a double standard.
"Positive Women's Movement"
Phyllis Schlafly told her listeners that the women's movement was not just the women's liberation movement but also her own "positive women's movement." Her movement was born in 1972, when, as she put it, "some of us realized we had to protect ourselves against the takeaway of the legal rights of the homemaker that was embodied in the ERA."
Phyllis Schalfly defined a Positive Woman as dedicated to truth, faith, service, God, family and "this great country" (the United States). Positive Women, she said, did not seek self-fulfillment as the highest value, but instead "had their scale of values in order: no matter what they may seek for their own self-fulfillment, they know that the family is more important." (See In Our Own Words, p.332-334)
Anti-ERA Forces and a Continued Fight
Many organizations supported the ERA during the 1970s, including several dozen religious organizations. Other prominent groups joined Phyllis Schlafly and her Stop ERA movement in oppostion to the ERA, including the Mormon church and the John Birch Society. The ERA eventually was ratified by only 35 of the required 38 states (two-thirds of the 50 states) before the final deadline.
The National Organization for Women (NOW) and others continue to support the passage of an amendment guaranteeing that equal rights shall not be abridged on account of sex. Phyllis Schlafly and the Eagle Forum continue to oppose such an amendment.