Phyllis Schlafly Has A Great Many Ideas For Keeping Women Out Of College
In swift response to a New York Times article from 2010, vintage Lysol douche ad Phyllis Schlafly has published a missive in World Nut Daily regarding the fact that women outnumber men on college campuses, and what — she believes — can be done to correct this atrocity.
Schlafly, of course, notably made a name for herself by opposing the Equal Rights Amendment and traveling around the country telling other women to stay home. And also being one of the first reasons I heard swear words as a child.
The American Council on Education reports that women have averaged 57 percent of enrollments since the year 2000. Women received nearly 60 percent of all college degrees conferred in 2010.
This has dramatically changed social relationships and interactions among students. Most girls and even some boys do not like this change, but nobody knows what to do about it, and few are even willing to discuss it.
One female student described the new relationship between the sexes like this: “Out of that 40 percent male population, there are maybe 20 percent we would consider dating, and out of those 20 percent, 10 have girlfriends, so all the girls are fighting over that other 10 percent.”
Anybody who understands human nature realizes that this situation changes behavior. Girls do not want to get left out in the cold, so they compete for men on men’s terms.
And you know what this does, don’t you? IT TURNS THEM INTO SLUTS. Indeed, our young women are compelled to engage in frivolous “campus hookups” instead of dedicating themselves to the pursuit of finding a husband, which is what they are supposed to be doing during their time at college. Obviously.
One of the main problems, Schlafly notes, is that schools look at entire academic records when deciding on who to accept to their college, and women tend to have better grades than do men. But, she notes, men do better on the math portion of the SATs than do women! And engineers need to do math! And we need engineers! Except that all the engineering jobs are being taken by golldern ferners who are willing to do the work for less than American engineers are! Or something!
One thing is clear though. Something must be done. Phyllis has a few suggestions!
So, what’s the solution? One solution might be to impose the duty on admissions officers to arbitrarily admit only half women and half men.
Oh really now? So after all the years opposing “Affirmative Action” and crying about “quotas” the concept becomes a swell idea when it could be used to benefit white men too. Except what Phyllis is suggesting would be an actual law, whereas “Affirmative Action” is a tax break.
In 1987, in an essay titled “Why Affirmative Action Is Wrong For Women,” Schlafly explained that “the woman receiving the benefit is not a woman who was ever discriminated against. The benefits are not targeted for the victims. Nobody should be entitled to receive a remedy for any injury suffered by someone else.”
Unless they have a penis, obvs. Then they should get all the benefits.
Schlafly’s second suggestion? Getting rid of school loans!
Another solution might be to stop granting college loans, thereby forcing students to take jobs to pay for their tuition and eliminate time for parties, perhaps even wiping out time for fraternities and sororities.
I am not actually sure how this would lead to more men enrolling in college. It would just make college a lot easier for people with rich parents. Does she think that if school loans were eliminated, that parents would decide to pay for their son’s educations rather than their daughters? Or that men would have an easier time working and going to school compared to women? I honestly don’t know.
And the third, get rid of Title IX because more men might want to go to college if they can do sports there!
Another solution would be to reinstate all the men’s sports that were canceled by an extremist feminist application of Title IX, the federal law that prohibits discrimination against female students. The feminists have misused that law to abolish many men’s sports in order to achieve a statistical equality between the percentage of men playing on college sports teams and the percentage of male enrollment in college.
The feminists have abolished more than 2,200 men’s college sports teams since 1981, such as wrestling, gymnastics, track, golf and even some football in order to limit the number of male players to Title IX guidelines. That removes a primary motivation for young men to go to college, many of whom want to try out for a sport even if they are not good enough to make the team.
The popularity of the new college football playoff system illustrates how successful men’s college sports can be for participants and fans alike. But when colleges eliminate men’s sports, women are hurt by the resulting gender imbalance in enrollment.
Just gonna throw this out there: If your primary motivation to go to college is getting to play golf or wrestle, then perhaps you should just enroll in a gym or country club. The point of Title IX is, of course, not to ruin the fun time men might have playing sports in college, but to ensure that men’s activities are not being overfunded while women get the shaft.
The reasoning for this should be quite obvious to a capitalist like Phyllis Schlafly. Both men and women pay taxes, and both men and women pay tuition. If a much larger percentage of money were going to activities for men, and women had fewer options, then that would be a pretty shitty deal for the women. It would be like holding a sale where only men get a free gift with purchase.
However, it seems that–at least in Schlafly’s case — all ideals can be thrown right out a window if it’s something that benefits men over women. Because she’s Phyllis Schlafly, and let’s face it, the woman is batshit crazy. [h/t RightWingWatch]