Posted on 11/12/2002 12:01:39 PM PST by weekendwarrior
November 12, 2002
On the Margins By Kathryn Jean Lopez National Review Online Not even feminists are all on board the crusade against Augusta National.
Serious debate pretty much does not exist when it comes to the all-male policy of Augusta National Golf Club, the home of the Masters Tournament. Augusta head Hootie Johnson's willingness to announce that he has no intention of budging on that policy has meant a new media tour for Martha Burk, the woman who started the controversy-her one-woman crusade, backed up by a pliable media, to rid Augusta of men.
The recent controversy stems from feminist Burk's letter of complaint to Augusta. She is the chair of an outlet called the National Council of Women's Organizations, which, of course, somehow represents American women, and president of the Center for Advancement of Public Policy.
But who is this Burk woman? People ought to look a little before they jump on her bandwagon. She has a few issues.
Though she packages herself as a simple "civil-rights activist" she's more like a radical feminist out of touch with either her own membership base or just about any serious American.
Take, for instance, a piece she wrote for the anything-but-mainstream Ms. magazine.
In a piece for the Nov./Dec. 1997 issue of Ms., Ms. Burk presented her solution to the abortion debate: mandatory sterilization of men.
She noted that a man who had "unprotected sexual intercourse once a week" could "theoretically father 1,820 children. Add his increased years of fertility, and his potential for physical domination over women, and we can readily see that the problem of unwanted pregnancy is largely one of uncontrolled sperm."
"So," Burk wrote, "how do we control men's fertility? Mandatory contraception beginning at puberty, with the rule relaxed only for procreation under the right circumstances (he can afford it and has a willing partner) and for the right reasons (determined by a panel of experts, and with the permission of his designated female partner)."
Burk said that "controlling men's fertility would not be a hard restriction to enforce. The fertility authorities could use a combination of punishments for men who failed to get the implants and for doctors who removed them without proper authorization. The men could be required to adopt one orphan per infraction and rear her or him until adulthood. The doctors, could lose their licenses or, in extreme cases, go to prison."
Is this relevant to the debate at hand? Yes. Burk presents herself-and is presented by the media-as a legitimate voice of women, but as the above shows she is far from that, way out on the margins. And, in fact, as new poll numbers show, she's also on the margins of her own movement.
In a poll conducted by the polling company/WomenTrend, 72 percent of surveyed members of the National Council of Women's Organizations, the umbrella under which Burk is waging her crusade, said they have not supported and do not intend to support the intimidation campaign against Augusta National.
So, despite the media's compliance in presenting this as a fairness issue, a "civil rights" issue as Burk calls it, not even the members of Burk's own organization see it as a cause worth fighting for. When asked if they agreed with the statement "Even though I believe in equality, I also believe that it is appropriate for some single-gender organizations that have only female members, or have only male members to exist," 44.8 percent of NCWO members said that they "somewhat agree," and 10.3 percent said they "strongly agree."
It's actually not all that surprising considering that member organizations of the NCWO discriminate-to use Burk's word-against men, including the YWCA, the Federation of Women's Clubs, Girls Incorporated, and the Women's Committee of 100.
The debate will likely carry on as long as media types are willing to give Martha Burk and other self-proclaimed spokeswoman a podium. But if you're putting money up, stick with Augusta National and Hootie Johnson.
Taken from: http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/lopez/lopez111202.asp
I caught some quotes from her husband a little while ago. He calls himself a feminist as well. Can you imagine having to ride a full 18 holes with that limp wristed piece of dung? He must live a Hell on Earth existence.
Oh well, sorry about the rant. This one just really gets me. Imposing her f-ng will on everyone else.
My money's on Hootie.
... "So," Burk wrote, "how do we control men's fertility? ...I would not sleep easily with this woman in my bed.
This woman is a fascist who wants to impart her own "final solution" onto society. No opposition. You will comply with my wishes.
Like all totalitarian schemes, of course, it's done under the guise of righting some supposed inequality or injustice.
If you mean people with gumption and resolve, I agree. However, I understand that Mr. Johnson is actually a Demonrat, and perhaps not even a right-leaning one.
My liberal bump for the day:
Liaberals defend lawless acts.
Ask liberals what laws you don't have to follow relative to them.
Can you lie to them? Rape their daughter? Lie under oath against them? Steal their money? Steal votes from someone they believes in?
Liberals have much tolerance for criminal behavior, but that's because they think of themselves as the person doing the crime, the one getting away with inappropriate acts. The one above the law.
Put the shoe on the other foot and they're just like us. No one likes it being done to them... Democrats are hypocrites with wonderful defense mechanism that prevent them from seeing what they are.
"...Mandatory contraception beginning at puberty, with the rule relaxed only for procreation under the right circumstances (he can afford it and has a willing partner) and for the right reasons (determined by a panel of experts, and with the permission of his designated female partner)."
Forget about my own bed, I wouldn't want this creature anywhere within 500 miles of me, EVER! And this idea of a panel of experts... just imagine whom she would choose for the panel. She would be right at home in Stalin or Mao's polity!
Link?
I wouldn't be too quick to canonize Hootie. I think he often comes across as a fossilized curmudgeon who could lose this fight, but for the fact he started so far ahead and has so many advantages over his scumbag opponent.
Fortunately for him (and Augusta), he's got a position that is a comparatively easy sell. He represents an institution that affects most Americans only one week per year, and then in a very positive way. Americans generally accept the concept of single-gender institutions so long as they don't result in some class of people getting hurt. And, I suspect there are very few women who have both the money and the passion for golf to qualify for membership at Augusta who would want to be the first female member and accept the lightning bolts that would go with that honor.
No, Augusta is going to win this fight, but they will do it in spite of Hootie, not because of him.
Last time I looked, "twit" is an OK expression. Why did you self-censor it??
The Right to Keep and Bear arms is the Right from which all other freedoms flow. If you are not armed, you are not safe from people like this.
I find that having a job, a house and yard to keep up, six children with up to three activities each per week, at least two meetings per week for each spouse, FreeRepublic.com, and the Food Channel ... all together do a pretty good job.
At least it's been almost a year since the last baby, and we're not expecting the next one yet!
"He was always known as one of the most liberal members at Augusta National, and he might have been sympathetic to this cause if it had been handled differently."
"But if Mr. Johnson's career was defined by financial success, it was also dotted with political and social activism. He was a Democratic member of the South Carolina House of Representatives from 1957 to 1958."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.