KATIE COURIC interviews Gloria Steinem on CBS on The Atlantic Monthly’s recent piece “The End of Men.” The women agree that the title of this piece is misleading. Men are still men and women have a long way to go to overcome the evils of patriarchy.

“We’ve been much too nice,” said Steinem.

This is a mind-numbingly boring interview that recounts 50 years of feminist doctrine and grievances. Steinem, who travels around the country still spreading her message and apparently lives in a buried time capsule, found the title of the article offensive and “stupid” because the point of feminism is equality and not female domination. Therefore women should not talk about or celebrate the demise of masculinity. That’s tasteless. Nevertheless, women should work to bring about an end to masculinity. “Men raising children is crucial in every area because it shapes our idea that men can be nurturing and women can be knowledgeable and in authority,” she said. Men “are doing more than their fathers but they’re not doing anywhere near enough.”

“When I read the article I thought, well, this is something to celebrate,” Couric said. However, she was later enlightened by the former New York Times columnist Anna Quindlen that all was not  as happy as this article portrays. Quindlen’s brilliant theory, according to Couric, is that white men are programmed to hire people who “look like them.”

“Why haven’t we come farther?” Couric asks Steinem in the interview.

“Well, you know, patriarchy is behind this and racism is behind this. These are really old systems,” said Steinem. “….. We’re only thirty years into it. This is a long process. We’ve come incredibly far and this is something to celebrate … but we have to do something every day to push the boundaries.” Steinem maintained that women are forced to earn college degrees at a higher rate than men because women are not allowed to be plumbers and other tradesmen. They are kept out of these fields.

Steinmen, I mean Steinem, stated that conservatives are “against any form of sexual expression that doesn’t end in conception.”

Jehmu Greene, the black president of the Women’s Media Center, was also part of the interview.  She complained that “sexism [still] isn’t as repugnant as racism.” The sexually explicit music and appearance of women in popular culture is not something these women choose, but is cooked up in executive offices by white men.

The title of this interview should be “The End of the Female Mind.”

“We still have a hierarchical view of life,” lamented Steinem. “… We’re still in this old paradigm.”

                  — Comments —

N.W. writes:

“Steinem maintained that women are forced to earn college degrees at a higher rate than men because women are not allowed to be plumbers and other tradesmen. They are kept out of these fields.”

 Having worked as an electrician and plumber for a number of years I laughed out loud at this one. That is absolutely hilarious. Now granted, I’ve met women who could handle a reciprocating saw well enough to cut 4″ cast iron pipes full of raw sewage into 6′ and drag them out from underneath a house in a 1′ high crawl space. And I’m sure theres others who wouldn’t have any trouble controlling a hammer drill with a two-inch bit and knocking holes through 16-inch steel reinforced concrete walls (even though I’ve seen them break a man’s arms.) And those same women probably wouldn’t have too much difficulty lifting a quarter-ton transformer up about 16′ and bolting it to the ceiling. Yes, there are women out there who are capable of this and more. However, I can’t say I’m surprised nor do I blame them for deciding to get a good paying comfortable office job instead.

Laura writes:

This is one of the more far-fetched statements ever made in the long and florid annals of feminist whining. Men have prevented women from becoming plumbers! Women don’t become plumbers and electricians because they are far less mechanically inclined; are not as strong; possess less of the entrepreneurial assertiveness needed to succeed in the trades; and, last but not least, they don’t like working alone. Almost any field which involves working alone – whether it’s forest ranger or truck driver – automatically appeals less to women. Not to mention, of course, that being a plumber is not so much fun and does not involve a great wardrobe. The thought of a feminist plumber is inconceivable. What would she complain about? Who would she accuse of harrassment and unfairness? The sewers?

Laura adds:

Ha! Ha! My husband says if there were female plumbers, he would have married one.

Nathan writes:

What’s remarkable is that an abstract ideal such as ‘equality’ can serve as grounds for pretending that biological distinctions and historical, world-wide cultural traditions are of no significance – or further, that they are positively evil ‘systems’ that must be overturned.

What may be even more interesting is the fact that these feminists refuse to talk about, or may be too naive to recognize that the feminist transformation of Western culture is a self-defeating, culturally doomed project that will likely disintegrate in the wake of more expansionist patriarchical societies (albeit in some cases giving way to Arab Muslims, who are in fact opressive of women). And on this I am using Philip Longman’s ‘The Return of Patriarchy’ as a reference.

Much of what Steinem says is indeed hilarious. After the howler about women being systematically excluded from plumbing jobs, Jehmu Greene is here to inform us that the sins of pop and hip hop culture lay at the feet of white men. Why of course. Black hip hop culture is the most pervasive example of ‘sexually explicit music’. That black hip hop culture has indulged itself in a form of music that celebrates the worst human behaviors – violence and sexual objectification – could only be the fault of…white men.

Laura writes:

Women who are making millions in the entertainment industry are the victims of small groups of white men sitting in executive offices plotting their exploitation, as Jehmu put it.

It was interesting when Couric asked Steinem why she thought so many young women dislike being called feminists. This is a great question to ask the icon of feminists. Oh well, said Steinem, that’s how revolution always works. First the movement makes progress and then the establishment demonizes it. Young women are perfectly fine with feminism as long as one uses the term “women’s movement.” I suppose there are people in Russia today saying the same thing of Communism. “If only we had called ourselves something other than Communists, things would have worked out fine.” 

Vanessa writes:

I was astonished at the beginning of the video. Katie starts off stating that fewer men than women are employed, that more women than men have college degrees, etc. Then she goes on to lament the absence of “equality.”

Wouldn’t equality be reached when parity is achieved? So shouldn’t there now be affirmative action for men, in order to make things more equal? Or is it simply that they are not looking for equality, but for female supremacy? They don’t even believe their own nonsense. Did you see how she smirked while announcing the news that girl babies are favored over boys? Disgusting.

This is why I don’t have television. And I’ve been reminded today of why I don’t miss it.

Laura writes:

She then went on to explain that these figures were misleading because fewer women are law partners, top politicans and CEOs, etc. That’s another howler. Here we have one of the highest-paid media stars ever complaining  about how women are denied entry to the highest ranks of power. How does one play a rhetorical stunt like that and get away with it? How does one do that unless one is surrounded by sycophants who refuse to say the Empress has no clothes? These women are so illogical and nonsensical, with their proclamations that men can be mothers, that revolution takes time, and that nature is not hierarchical except in the case of the weak and unborn or unless a woman’s right to do anything is challenged, in which case the natural order is very hierarchical, it’s as if they are rambling through the world in a state of intellectual undress. Yet no one has the nerve to say to them, “You are wearing nothing!”

Elizabeth Wright writes:

This program was, indeed, the recitation of tired, old stuff.  I remember Betty Friedan, who was on a never-ending talk circuit, once remarked that she got tired of listening to her own rhetoric. I wonder how Gloria Steinem can stand repeating this worn out stuff.  Gloria married very late (about a decade ago), and seemed to be very happy. I guess it goes without saying that her guy is in agreement with her continuing views on masculinity and patriarchy. Since she doesn’t sound like she has changed a bit, he would have to be a male feminist.

Elizabeth adds:

N.W. wrote:

Now granted, I’ve met women who could handle a reciprocating saw well enough to cut 4″ cast iron pipes full of raw sewage into 6′ and drag them out from underneath a house … others who wouldn’t have any trouble controlling a hammer drill with a two-inch bit and knocking holes through 16-inch steel reinforced concrete walls.

For months, my landlord and, I suppose, the landlord across the yard of my apartment building have been engaged in some kind of renovation of both buildings’ back yards, which I can view from my third floor window. About a half dozen men have been working their butts off — first to take down and eliminate the roots of two large, living trees (I’ve ceased grieving over them), then they cut up (sawed) the wood of both trees (interminable noise!), then they hauled the wood out of the area. Then they created some kind of whatchamacallit that they filled in with concrete. And still they are working away with some set goal in mind. (I’ve been too lazy to ask the Super where it will all end.) Throughout all this labor, these workmen have employed all kinds of tools and contraptions, but most of all they’ve employed their muscle. And what muscle this has taken! 

Now, what sane woman would think of picketing and protesting this work site, so that she can get in on this laborious and wearying work? Only feminist loons would entertain such notions.

Laura writes:

Women don’t want this work. They do want to keep alive the idea that they are denied something.

Elizabeth P. writes:

I watched the Couric/Steinem interview per your link and I was amazed to see the “wishy-washy” thinking of these supposedly educated women. What hogwash! 

Steinem stated that “women cannot do two full time jobs.” Then later she said, “They (fathers) are doing more than their fathers, but they are still not doing like as much as women are doing, so it’s on the way, but it’s not there yet.” (What a run-on sentence!) I am confused, but isn’t feminism about “equality” in all things, including making personal choices? Steinem also stated that “we need to tune in to ourselves and find our inner authority to do as we want.” Is this the same inner authority to make choices? Like my own personal choice to not do two full time jobs? 

Katie and Gloria also pointed out that you cannot be against abortion and still truly be a feminist. But, wait a minute? I thought feminism was about equality? By their own stated definition, “Feminism (is) the doctrine advocating social, political and all other rights of women equal to those of men.” So, where does, for instance, Sarah Palin’s stance on abortion come in to this definition? If she wants to say she is a feminist, then she has the equal right to do so same as Couric or Steinem. This is about equality with “humanity” not abortion. And yet, abortion was given a considerable time slot in their discussion on equality. In fact, Gloria stated, rather pompously, that “1 in 3 women needs an abortion at some point in her life.” If feminism is about choice and equality, then why not choose to not be promiscuous in the first place? These women pointed out that the Hyde Ammendment needs to be repealed because “it penalizes poor women” from receiving federal funding for their abortions. Again, folks, it’s about the choice. The women seem to feel that being equal with men means making poor personal choices and then having “men” pay for their choices. 

Then they go on to discuss the evils of white men who determine the objectivity of women in pop culture who have the right, according to Steinem, to “demonstrate their own sexuality”. Well, now wait a minute. If I understand all of this correctly, women have the right to “express themselves” by showing off their bodies, by being promiscuous, by getting pregnant and then killing their own child, but if anything goes wrong, it is the fault of the evil white man. He should pay. He should submit himself to the will of the women, and that is “equal”. Steinem tries to make the point that “Race is a fiction. We all came from Egypt and then just adapted to wherever we ended up. So, race is a fiction and gender is a fiction.” Well, then what the heck are we talking about? You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say you want the choice and then hold men responsible for that choice. You cannot say we want equality between men and women and then say that gender doesn’t really exist. 

I am a very happy and very contented stay-at-home wife of one very manly man and the homeschooling mother of six beautiful daughters. If these women are examples of the modern, educated, enlightened feminist, then I hope to keep my daughters from such “privilege”. I hold a very powerful position. Even Steinem inadvertantly recognizes this when she references men and their mothers in this statement, ” The last time they (men) saw a powerful woman, they were 8.” Praise the Lord for powerful mothers! May I raise my daughters to such an esteemed position!

Please follow and like us: