2012-13 JOHN NEAR GRANT Recipient Phyllis Schlafly and Betty Friedan: An Examination of the Political Battle over Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment Apricot Tang, Class of 2013
Phyllis Schlafly and Betty Friedan: An Examination of the Political Battle over Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment
Apricot Tang
Near Scholar Paper Ms. Wheeler, Mentor April 15, 2013
Tang 2
The Equal Rights Amendment In 1923 at the seventy-fifth anniversary of the first women’s rights convention in Seneca Falls, New York, Alice Paul authored and presented the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA).1 Paul’s influence in the feminist community was well-established in her roles as the founder of the National Woman’s Party and the forefront leader of the Suffragist Movement of the 1920s which strived to secure women’s right to vote with the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment.2 In an attempt to legislatively secure the all accomplishments of the 1920s, Paul wrote the ERA as the ultimate corroboration of women’s rights in the United States.3 Seeking an all-encompassing piece of legislation that would ensure women’s equality in employment, family law, education, and civil society4, the ERA read: Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2. The congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.5 Clearly altering the gender norms of society, the ERA was met by harsh criticism from conservatives, but its greatest opponent was Phyllis Schlafly and STOP ERA.6 Schlafly’s STOP ERA movement prevented ratification of the ERA by spinning pro-ERA arguments into issues popular among conservatives within the geographies she targeted, and which pointed to a radicalized future for American society. The Women’s Movement With the success of the Civil Rights Movement continuing into the 1960s, women began petitioning for their own equal rights as a product of the work they had invested in the rights of
Tang 3
other oppressed minorities. Housewives across the nation were awakened after the 1963 publication of Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique. Friedan’s own interpretation of the “‘problem that had no name’ articulated for many women the psychological deprivation they felt when they gave up their jobs after marriage and were confined to childrearing and housework.”7 Finally, women and people of color were recognized by the United States government with the passage of legislation ensuring equal protection and equal rights for people of color and gender. As Senator Sam J. Ervin, Jr. said before the North Carolina General Assembly on January 24, 1977 . . . as advocates of the Equal Rights Amendment complain loudly of discrimination against women in public and private employment, I will note that sections of Title 5 and Title 42 of the United States code, and Executive Orders 11498 and 11521 forbid discrimination on the basis of sex in Federal employment, and the Fair Labor Standard Act of 1938, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlaw discrimination on the ground of sex in respect to the employees and the employments covered by the Acts.8 Although Senator Ervin comments on the conservative politicians believed the ERA would bring, the excerpt mainly highlights the radically progressive period of the 1960s. Politically, the 1960s united disenfranchised groups while simultaneously estranging committed supporters who felt their own needs were being disregarded.9 While this dichotomy was originally unseen and undetected in the midst of the liberation many felt from the new legislation, the 1970s was the decade which represented the backlash from conservative groups who resented the changing nature of their nation.
Tang 4
The 1970s were known for the rise of the conservative counterpart to the liberal groups of the 1960s, also known as the Religious Right. Although the 1950s and 1960s had major successes politically in amending the gender and racial discrimination of American civil society, the 1970s were crucial in the implementation of these new laws and the social reform necessary to amend the stigma many Americans felt about shared equality.10 The Religious Right refers to what is popularly known as the “Christian Right” or the “New Christian Right.”11 A coalition of various organizations and individuals, the Religious Right was focused on electing conservative politicians to positions of power in public office.12 Ideologically, the Religious Right was mainly comprised of evangelical Christians who were “socially, theologically, and economically conservative.”13 Conservatives were often against issues of religious debate such as issues on birth control, abortion, and homosexuality. Geographically, the Religious Right rested in the Mid-Western and Southern portions of the United States. Estranged from the major urban centers, the way of life for conservatives involved communities focused on the family as the center. As they grew in political prominence, the Religious Right was recognized by media and politicians alike as a powerful political and social force of American society. Time magazine dubbed 1976 as the “Year of the Evangelical” in reference to the popularity the Religious Right gained through its conservative campaigns and cultural prominence.14 The Religious Right was critical in the defeat of the ERA.15 When the Amendment was first introduced to Congress, the legislation was met with immediate congressional approval. In October 1971, the ERA was passed by the House of Representatives 354-23, and in March 1972, the ERA was passed by the Senate 84-8; however, in 1973, only thirty states of the necessary three-quarters of state legislatures had ratified the Amendment.16 With two extended deadlines, the amendment awaited the approval of just three more states to be officially ratified by the
Tang 5
United States.17 Liberals and conservatives around the nation were at a political stalemate as they waited for news of ratification. Progress began to stall as the 1979 ratification deadline was pushed to 1982, and by the end of the ratification period “the final count of 35 states fell short, by three, of the requirement for ratification.”18 Ultimately, the ERA failed to obtain the necessary majority and thus failed to become law.19 STOP ERA Phyllis Schlafly emerged out of these critical decades as the coryphaeus of the Right, willing to fight for her beliefs in the sanctity of the separate spheres ideology and minimal governmental intervention in the private lives of American citizens.20 Born into a conservative middle-class Catholic family in St. Louis Missouri in 1924, Schlafly was raised by a mother who championed education and supported the intellectual curiosity of her children.21 Schlafly attended the Academy of the Sacred Heart, a private Catholic high school committed to educating students through strict interpretations of Christian doctrine.22 In her professional career, Schlafly was introduced to conservative politics at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank dedicated to conducting research and analysis on pervasive national economic problems.23 Aside from her professional career, Schlafly remained active by joining conservative organizations such as the Illinois Federation of Republican Women and the Daughters of the American Revolution. In 1972 when Congress officially passed the ERA and the amendment awaited the ratification of the required thirty-eight states, Schlafly arose as the spokeswoman for the conservative backlash against the ratification of the ERA in her organization named STOP ERA.24 Created to give the appearance of a strong, formal alliance of conservative women determined to impede the ratification of the ERA, STOP ERA was aimed directly at the amendment, standing for Stop Taking Our Privileges Equal Rights Amendment.25
Tang 6
As Schlafly arose as the heroine of the Right in her role as the founder and leader of STOP ERA, Betty Friedan simultaneously became the leader of the Left. After the publication of The Feminine Mystique in 1963, Friedan was seen as a courageous role model, defying the “patriarchal attitudes” on women’s roles as sex objects, housewives, and possessions of the American household by young, white women.26 The Feminine Mystique directly targeted women and forced them to ask themselves “Who am I?” in the midst of their lives as “a server of food and a putter-on of pants and a bedmaker.”27 Educated and unsatisfied women felt compelled to read the words of Friedan and defy the feeling of purposeless they felt as housewives. This bond Friedan created between herself and her readers made her a likeable character in the midst of the chaotic fight for the ratification of the ERA. Although Friedan never formally aligned herself with the image of the spokeswoman for the pro-ERA movement in The Feminine Mystique, women across the nation saw the two as inextricably connected28 The Feminine Mystique touched upon roles of the women in their daily lives and also in the larger political life of the nation. Controversial topics such as war, abortion, and gender roles surfaced throughout the chapters as Friedan made a compelling case as to why women ought to examine their own mindset as they lived the “American dream” of “green lawns and big corner lots.”29 Much of Schlafly’s success in impeding the ratification of the ERA can be attributed to her conservative attack of the new frame of mind Friedan created in her book. Schlafly, an avid reader and well-educated woman herself,30 pinpointed many of the compelling arguments Friedan made only to spin them into the conservative backlash presented by the STOP ERA Movement. Arguments about controversial topics such as abortion, the possibility of female enrollment in the case of a military draft, and the defiance of the separate spheres ideology were
Tang 7
discussed in The Feminine Mystique and then bitterly attacked by Schlafly’s conservative interpretation of the future of America if all of these rights were granted to American women. Although Friedan did not focus solely on these topics in her book, Schlafly was considerate of the Mid-Western and Southern populations who were aligned with her view of the ERA. In that case, Schlafly recognized that more people were likely to listen and make a choice to vote against the ERA if it looked like American women would return to pre-World War II conditions. With these thoughts in mind, Schlafly began her STOP ERA campaign by attacking three distinct arguments in geographic areas prominent for their conservative ideology. First, after the pro-abortion rights ruling on Roe v. Wade (1973), Schlafly presented universal abortion as a realistic possibility in the future of America if the ERA were to be ratified therefore enraging pro-life supporters. Second, targeting an audience of post-World War II veterans and their wives, Schlafly suggested the possibility of female involvement in the case of a military draft if equal rights were truly granted to both sexes. Lastly, Schlafly reminded conservative audiences of the importance of the separate spheres ideology and questioned the future of America if the ERA, which Schlafly interpreted as an attempt to destroy gender roles, were to be ratified. Leaders of the pro-ERA movement recognized the divisive nature of the abortion debate and rather than attack the situation directly, ERA leaders attempted to distinguish the two from each other.31 Pro-choice supporters argued in favor of women’s rights to reproductive rights.32 Pro-life supporters believed that life is an inherent right that begins with conception.33 This divisive split pitted the pro-life and pro-choice groups against each other. In 1977 in Houston, Texas, roughly 10,000 women were members of the Texas chapter of the National Women’s Conference.34 Seventy-seven percent of these women were between 26 and 55 and 64.5 percent were Caucasian with the remainder of the women being African
Tang 8
American, Hispanic, American Indian, and Asian-American.35 Created and sponsored by President Ford’s administration the National Women’s Conference addressed twenty-six topics from lesbian rights to abortion to ultimately the ERA.36 After the United Nations declared the 1970s the Decade for Women, over 130,000 men and women attended state-held conferences that were meant to represent the ideas of the nation’s majority.37 The attendees were mainly conservative and progressive women primarily divided by their party affiliations.38 However, perhaps the most influential speaker at the event was Dr. Mildred Jefferson, president of Right to Life, one of the many anti-abortion groups represented at the conference.39 Along with eight other speakers, including Phyllis Schlafly herself, Jefferson attacked the pro-choice argument that women ought to have the right to the choice of abortion. In her speech, Jefferson stated We cannot accept the idea that women who think they have been oppressed should become the oppressors at the first opportunity… By demanding the freedom of abortion, they become tyrants choosing a victim more helpless than themselves; they become terrorists who threaten a society by destroying its most precious resource, its future generation.40 In her speech Jefferson echoed the sentiments of the thousands of conservative women at the convention. The pro-life debate now encompassed the voice of the unborn. This depiction of abortion as immoral and its alignment with the pro-choice liberal agenda fueled Schlafly’s STOP ERA agenda. In Schafly’s speech on March, 27, 1979, as the official National Chairman of the STOP ERA organization, Schlafly endorsed a “positive woman’s movement” to a congregation of Southern Baptists in Orlando, Florida.41 Schlafly stated:
Tang 9
Many of us believe that the ability to participate in the creation of human life is the great gift that God gave to women. The task of taking care of babies, despite its tedious drudgery, is better than most of the jobs of the world. Women should find out how exhausting most of the rest of the jobs of the world are. Besides, a mother has something to show for her efforts after twenty years: You’ve got a living, breathing human being, a good citizen, a wonderful human being you’ve given to this world.42 By invoking motherhood and future generations, Schlafly targeted the moral conscience of America. As a nation of innovation, it frightened conservatives to think that abortion might call into question the self-perpetuating nature of technological growth. However, Schlafly’s words alone were not powerful enough to conquer the support of thousands. Schlafly strategically targeted certain demographics in order to ensure that her argument echoed in populations condemning the idea of pro-choice abortion. In a 1983 study conducted by the University of Oregon entitled “Who Opposed the ERA? An Analysis of the Social Bases of Antifeminism,” using data from the 1980 National Election Study, researchers studied factors which “were identified as most important in explaining the nonratification of the ERA.”43 The study concluded there was a “strong association between church attendance and opposition to the ERA.”44 Schlafly’s message resonated with the devout because she seemed to understand the importance of religion in the daily lives of mothers and families, reflecting a deep sense of morality. The study also confirmed “the role of organized religion in providing the institutional base for the growth of the [Religious] Right and in perpetuating traditional sex-role attitudes and behaviors.”45 Creating her image as a pro-life fighter in the midst of the heated abortion debate, Schlafly was able to align herself with homemakers and families. Whereas conservative women
Tang 10
could not relate to Betty Friedan, Phyllis Schlafly seemed familiar to many women, a likeable wife and mother. Women of War … I said we had a human responsibility as women to end the Vietnam War. Neither men nor women should be drafted to fight an obscene, immoral war like the one in Vietnam, but we had to take equal responsibility for ending it… I began to see that these young men, saying they didn’t have to napalm all the children in Vietnam and Cambodia to prove they were men, were defying the masculine mystique as we had defied the feminine one. Those young men, and their elders like them, were the other half of what we were doing. The Feminine Mystique46 In 1969, the United States implemented the draft for the Vietnam War, which was met with major resistance because of the politics of the war and the draft lottery system.47 During the war, 60,000 to 100,000 young men fled to Canada where they found refuge from the draft.48 Friedan never stated that the draft was a moral solution to a wartime crisis; however, given the circumstances of World War II, the Cold War, and the Vietnam War, people feared that the next war may endanger the lives of husbands and sons, and perhaps wives and daughters. In The Feminine Mystique Friedan parallels the soldiers’ fight for victory to women’s fight for equality therefore instilling pride amongst women who felt that the fight for the ratification of the ERA was the most important role they played in society as women. However, Schlafly attacked this notion by reminding women about the feminine and submissive role they were assigned because of the inherent force of the separate spheres. Schlafly’s platform depended on the notion that ratification of the ERA would lead to the radicalization of American society. In order to convince swing states such as Virginia, Illinois, and Utah and simultaneously ensure that conservative states would support STOP ERA, Schlafly called upon the importance of gender roles in the construction of civil society. In response to the role of women fighting beside men in battle, Schlafly centered arguments on the integral role of
Tang 11
women as housewives, women’s inability to handle the hardships of war, and the loss of life if women were to serve in war. These controversial arguments allowed Schlafly to publicize her anti-ratification agenda. From the Mormon Church of Utah to Senator Ervin, Jr., voters who agreed with Schlafly united to join STOP ERA. Schlafly had a unique ability to relate to common people; she was a likeable and well-connected public figure who was a mother and wife herself. Her ability to attract influential supporters set her apart from the pro-ERA leaders who lacked support among the politically influential.49 Schlafly’s presentation as a public role model was integral in the success of her campaign, and it also won her major support from right-leaning Republicans, senators such as Ervin, and congregations of powerful religious communities. Schlafly associated expansion of the draft to include women with the radicalization of American society, or what Gloria Steinem eloquently stated as “the woman question.”50 Gloria Steinem, an American feminist and journalist, became the face of women’s rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s.51 As the founder of the women’s magazine Ms. in 1971, Gloria Steinem used the media and Ms. magazine to publicize her support for the ERA. As she became known through her interviews in newspapers, magazines, and TV, Steinem was revered as one of the most influential leaders of the pro-ERA movement.52 Audiences who tuned in to Steinem’s interviews and intently read her articles realized what the ERA cold mean for American society. Steinem created debate and stirred controversy about the role of women which resulted in a major cultural shift in conjunction with the passing of new legislation.53 Steinem’s “the woman question,” similar to the “Who am I?” question proposed in Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique, asked women to question who they were as individuals in the context of their roles. However the “woman question” encouraged women to look beyond themselves to their role in the broader society.54 Building upon the sense of individuality
Tang 12
originally established by Friedan in The Feminine Mystique, “the woman question” empowered women to understand themselves as integral and equal members of society and inspired women to join the ERA’s cause to provide equality to all women. For Schlafly, “the woman question” meant estranging women from American society by deeming them a completely separate entity. In contrast to the pro-ERA movement, STOP ERA depicted the ERA as a disrupter of women’s role in American society. After America endured three brutal conflicts, Schlafly was convinced that the American woman ought to be confined to the comfort of the home, away from the dangers of war. Schlafly’s own conservative sentiments reflected the importance of the separate spheres ideology. Schlafly believed that war was unsuitable for any woman. She felt that men, as the more aggressive of the two sexes, were deemed to be protectors of the home, and on a grander scale, protectors of the nation. Schlafly’s mindset was a product of the “militantly conservative worldview” that many housewives developed through their own experiences of tragedy and loss after World War II.55 In a statement issued on April 1977 regarding the reasons why the ERA was a dangerous and threatening piece of legislation, Schlafly stated: At the federal level the most obvious result would be on the draft and military combat. ERA will take away a young girl’s exemption from the draft in all future wars and force her to register for the draft just like men. The Selective Service Act would have to read ‘all persons’ instead of ‘all male citizens.’56 In an effort to refute the radical arguments of Schlafly and her supporters, Elizabeth L. Chittick, President of the National Woman’s Party (NWP), an integral and major supporter of the ERA, released a statement in April 1977. As a dominant force in the pro-ERA movement, the NWP was critical in the early overwhelming success of the ERA. Chittick wrote:
Tang 13
But women can be drafted now. The U.S. Constitution gives to Congress the power to ‘raise and support armies—to provide and maintain a navy.’ There were no limitations or restrictions on this great power; and the Supreme Court has held that it will not even review the manner in which this power is exercised. Every person is subject to being called for military duty in the public safety.57 Furthermore, Chittick called upon the fact that “women drafted with children in their personal care could be excused just as men could be excused under the circumstances… Thus the fear that mothers with children will be drafted into military service if the ERA is ratified is totally and completely unfounded.”58 Chittick’s rebuttal argued that the ambiguity in existing legislation already allowed women to be drafted. Although Chittick’s statement does not overtly defend the ERA, the fact is that the ERA would not bring about the radical changes that Schlafly her supporters proposed. Chittick argued that she had to control the damage Schlafly had done by getting Americans to imagine a nation devoid of mothers and wives because of their duties as soldiers. Schlafly skillfully targeted audiences where her message would be magnified. By proposing a female draft in conservative, Republican states such as Utah, Nevada, and Arizona, Schlafly was able to convince them the ratification of the ERA would lead to the radicalization of American society.59 Furthermore, the 1970s was a decade in which a strong association had developed “between opposition to the ERA and a more general conservative reaction against liberal social policies” because of the Religious Right and other precipitating factors such as the stereotyping of feminists as radical bra-burning, lesbian white women devoid of moral standards.60 As the ERA caused liberal feminists to unite, Schlafly ensured that the radical arguments were divisive and uncomfortable to conservative, Republican women of the Midwest.
Tang 14
Destroying the Homemaker Their only dream was to be perfect wives and mothers; their highest ambition to have five children and a beautiful house, their only fight to get and keep their husbands. They had no thought for the unfeminine problems of the world outside the home; they wanted the men to make the major decisions. They gloried in their role as women, and wrote proudly on the census blank: ‘Occupation: housewife. The Feminine Mystique’61 Betty Friedan and Phyllis Schlafly both defied the concept of the submissive female throughout their ERA campaigns. The Feminine Mystique brought to reality the idealized world where men and women both satisfied the roles reflected onto them through the separate spheres ideology. Friedan, a mother and work-at-home journalist herself,62 inspired women to achieve the life she spoke of in The Feminine Mystique by finding their role at home aside from the typical housewife. Schlafly wrote and published the monthly Phyllis Schlafly Report, lobbied against the ratification of the ERA, raised six children, and worked her way through law school.63 However, despite the fact Schlafly was a woman of both the domestic and public domain, ideologically she believed that women ought to be confined to the world of domesticity where the comfort of the home and family served to be protective restrictions. In 1977, Phyllis Schlafly published The Power of the Positive Woman, a book intended to convince the American woman that the pro-ERA feminists made vicious attacks on the lives of homemakers all around the nation.64 Schlafly claimed that the American family was at the center of American society. In an excerpt of Schlafly’s book, she stated that there is an inherent biological subduing of the female role in society because “God ordained that women have babies” and to accommodate for this physical sacrifice, the American government made laws which made it “the obligation of the husband to support his wife financially and provide for her properly.”65 This provider-dependent relationship Schlafly crafted was especially advertised to the women of the South where the women were confined to the domestic sphere out of necessity
Tang 15
rather than pure enjoyment. To women of the South, their role in the family was of great importance because of the integral part they played as maternal guides within the household. Schlafly’s success as a public figure rested in her ability to uplift the spirit of women rather than demean their sense of identity which was a strong tactic for feminists looking to inspire change by imposing the daunting realities of the oppression of women in American society. As Schlafly said in a speech given to a congregation of Southern Baptists in 1979: Women are told that they are not even persons in our society. They are told that they are second-class citizens. I have given speeches where women have been picketing up and down outside, wearing placards saying, ‘I am a second-class citizen.’ I feel so sorry for women who are deliberately inculcating this inferiority complex. Women are not second-class citizens in our society.66 This common trend throughout the pro-ERA media focused on helping women to realize the inequality in American society; that in itself was meant to be uplifting and inspirational. Much like Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique, feminists hoped to inspire anger and to fuel American women into taking a stand against inequality. Instead, Schlafly recognized that this ostracized women who felt content with their role because they felt that they were center of the family. In the same excerpt of Schlafly’s book, she announced that the ERA “would bring a drastic reduction in the rights of the wife and a radical loosening of the legal bonds that tend to keep the family together.”67 Equality of the sexes meant the decay of the family. The woman’s role was defined by the boundaries created through the patriarchal model of the American lifestyle and eliminating the patriarchy meant millions of women left to assume unfamiliar roles. For conservatives the patriarchy served to protect women, imposing moral standards and
Tang 16
domestic responsibilities that provided meaning to the daily life of a homemaker. However, the ERA supporters believed the ratification of the amendment would liberate women from these confinements and create a society where the patriarchy and matriarchy shared in the power dynamic. By specifically threatening the women of the Mid-West and South with the destruction of their homemaker role, Schlafly was able to inspire opposition from states of lesser population, but equal legislative power. Out of the fifteen states that did not ratify the ERA, the majority were states with largely rural comminutes and agriculturally based economies. This is especially true of southern states such as Mississippi and Arkansas where populations were well under three million; however, their ability to reject the ERA was just as important as California’s, the most populous state in the nation, which voted to ratify the amendment.68 The states that did not ratify the amendment or rescinded their ratification accounted for 40 percent of the states, but only 33 percent of the U.S. population.69 In three states specifically, Utah, Nevada, and Arizona, representing only 2 percent of the national population, non-ratification of the ERA was sufficient to result in the ultimate defeat of the amendment.70 Phyllis Schlafly’s passionate outcry for the liberalization of the 1970s led to the manifestation of STOP ERA, the most powerful anti-ERA ratification organization. Numerous political patterns of the mid-1900s influenced the rise of the conservative men and women of America; however, without the support of the members of the Religious Right, Schlafly’s message would not have impacted the masses. Furthermore, with Schlafly at the head of the movement, conservative women who related to her own frustration at the liberal state of the 1970s joined the ranks of STOP ERA in order to maintain the status quo of gender roles in American society. By spinning the arguments presented by pro-ERA supporters and Betty
Tang 17
Friedan herself, Schlafly was able to convince numerous states of the dangers of the ERA. Her choice in audience and geographic destination made her arguments well-received by concaves of conservative Americans. Men and women across the nation were inspired by Schlafly’s dedication and well-educated nature.
Tang 18
Notes 1
Griffiths, Bayh, and Cook, "Equal Rights Amendment," in Human and Civil Rights, 51. Ibid., 51. 3 "Alice Paul," in American Social Reform Movements, 3:220. 4 Griffiths, Bayh, and Cook, 51. 5 ERA. 6 Strom, Women's Rights, 5. 7 Strom, 250. 8 Ervin, "The Question of Ratification," 175. 9 Luker, 35. 10 Stein, "The Seventies," The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. 11 Peterson, "Religious Right," in St. James Encyclopedia of Popular, 4:197. 12 Ibid., 197. 13 Ibid., 197. 14 Ibid., 198. 15 American Social Reform Movements, 220. 16 Noble, "The Rise and Fall," 32. 17 American Social Reform Movements, 220. 18 Noble, 32. 19 American Social Reform Movements, 220. 20 Critchlow, Phyllis Schlafly and Grassroots, 12. 21 Ibid., 13. 22 Quirke, "Schlafly, Phyllis (1924– )," in Encyclopedia of Activism and Social, 3:1270. 23 Critchlow, 26. 24 Critchlow, 219. 25 Ibid., 219. 26 "Feminism, Second Wave," in International Encyclopedia of the Social, 123. 27 Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 12. 28 International Encyclopedia of the Social, 123. 29 Friedan, 13. 30 Critchlow, 26. 31 Ibid., 225. 32 Purdy, 261. 33 Ibid., 261. 34 Kilpatrick, "Abortion, Equal Rights, and Robert's," 1481. 35 Ibid., 1481. 36 Ford, "National Women's Conference (1977)," in Encyclopedia of Women and American, 338. 37 Ibid., 337. 38 Kilpatrick, 1481. 39 Ibid., 1481. 40 Ibid., 1484. 41 Torricelli and Carroll, In Our Own Words, 329. 42 Ibid,, 332-333. 43 Burris, "Who Opposed the ERA?," 305. 44 Ibid., 315. 2
Tang 19 45
Ibid., 315. Friedan, 528. 47 Friedman, "Draft Resistance," in Encyclopedia of Activism and Social, 1:478. 48 Ibid., 479. 49 Burris, 315. 50 Steinem, "After Black Power, Women's," 8. 51 Speace, "Gloria Steinem (1934—)," in St. James Encyclopedia of Popular, 4:524. 52 Ibid., 524. 53 Ibid., 526. 54 Steinem, "After Black Power, Women's," 8. 55 Nickerson, 20. 56 Schlafly, "The Question of the Ratification," 189. 57 Chittick, "PRO by National Woman's," 176. 58 Ibid., 176. 59 Burris, 315. 60 Ibid., 316. 61 Friedan, 61. 62 International Encyclopedia of the Social, 123. 63 Allitt, 216. 64 Strom, 259. 65 Strom, 259. 66 Torricelli and Carroll, 331. 67 Strom, 260. 68 Ibid., 315. 69 Ibid., 315-316. 70 Ibid., 316 46
The Harker School | 500 Saratoga Ave., San Jose CA 95129 OofC: 4/13 (RM)