Rebecca Rich

Red Group
Feminism Essay
The Equal Rights Amendment, or ERA, was a proposed amendment
that stated men and women would have to be treated completely equally. It
was first conceived in 1923, and was introduced into every session of
Congress after then, until 1972, when it was passed and sent to the states
for ratification. When the deadline for ratification came, the amendment was
3 states short of ratification, so it was never turned into a reality. There was a
strong group of anti-feminists, led by Phyllis Schlafly, which convinced the
remaining states to not ratify the amendment. It turned out that the main
issue regarding the ERA was whether or not women should be considered a
legal minority. Women should be considered a legal minority group because
they would benefit significantly from it.
Phyllis Schlafly, the leader of the movement against the ERA, and
Susan Brownmiller, one of the leaders of the movement favoring the ERA,
both held very strong opinions for their sides of the story. Schlafly stated,
While claiming to benefit women, the ERA would actually have taken away
some of women's rights The amendment would require women to be
drafted into military combat any time men were conscripted, abolish the
presumption that the husband should support his wife, and take away Social
Security benefits for wives and widows (Schlafly). Some of these arguments
may not be completely legitimate, since the feminist movement wanted to
get rid of the presumption that the husband supports his wife, but women do
have slightly different physical capabilities that would be hard to ignore with
complete equality in the military, for example. She would probably not want

women to be considered a legal minority so they could have things the way
they are. Brownmiller, on the other hand, would probably support the ERA,
judging from her opinions on other topics, saying that cultural sexism is a
conscious form of female degradation designed to boost the male ego by
offering proof of his native superiority (and of female inferiority)
everywhere he looks (Brownmiller). This is suggesting that Brownmiller is
strictly against cultural sexism, which the ERA would avoid. She would
probably want women to be considered a legal minority, since she seems to
be convinced that the government can do something to stop cultural sexism.
Overall, these women hold different opinions about the treatment of their
gender and whether the ERA would truly benefit them.
Another perspective that Brownmiller held was whether pornography is
a form of hate speech against women. She compared the act of pornography
to watching people gas Jews or lynch blacks. She said, Is this analogy
extreme? Not if you are a woman who is conscious of the ever-present threat
of rape and the proliferation of a cultural ideology that makes it sound like
liberated fun (Brownmiller). She later suggested that pornography is a
form of hate speech, since showing any other group of people being tortured
would be considered hate speech. One website says about the definition of
hate speech that, In this country there is no right to speak fighting words
those words without social value, directed to a specific individual, that would
provoke a reasonable member of the group about whom the words are
spoken ("Debating Hate Speech"). Pornography is not speech, per se, but it

is directed towards women, making them feel weaker in their skin to make
men feel dominant. True, most of the women that are involved in
pornography are giving their consent to be a part of it, but the women
watching it and hearing about it who are not involved are made to feel
uncomfortable, which might very well provoke somebody particularly
argumentative to do something more violent. So in the end, pornography is a
form of hate speech directed at women.
Being considered a legal minority would benefit women. This would
mean that women would have special treatment just because they have
been discriminated against in the past, so colleges would have to accept
people just because they are women. This is called affirmative action.
Effective affirmative action could lead to less discrimination in the workplace
and in life. The government has proved to be the ultimate solution for many
other groups of minorities, because they have been provided with many
useful tools and laws to get through life more peacefully. Women should also
consider the government their friend, because they have the ability to fix
certain problems within society that women cannot necessarily fix on their
own.
Overall, women should put some of their faith in the government. They
can only benefit from the services it provides. Women today are better off
than they were many years ago, and even more so than when Phyllis Schlafly
and Susan Brownmiller were active in politics, since their rights are gradually
increasing. Their rights have not completely come to fruition, however, since

there is still a wage gap, and some other things that suggest slight
inequality. But the world is no longer in the days of a girl meaning nothing
more than being the daughter of her father, so it has come a long way.
Hopefully, someday the world will be in a place where demeaning acts like
pornography will be out of the question.

Works Cited
Brownmiller, Susan. "Women Fight Back." Against Our Will. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 375-404. Print.
"Debating Hate Speech." American Bar Association. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 May 2015.
<http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiatives_awards/students_in_act
ion/debate_hate.html>.
Schlafly, Phyllis. "'Equal Rights' for Women: Wrong Then, Wrong Now." LA Times. N.p., n.d.
Web. 3 May 2015. <http://www.latimes.com/la-op-schafly8apr08-story.html>.