Her book about liberal and conservative factions in the Womens Movement from the 1970s to the present day. Place in new york city. The New York Historical society and the reading room cohosted the event. My pleasure to introduce our speaker, an authority on the womens Rights Movement. She is the professor of history at the university of South Carolina and the author of new women of the new south. She has served as an advisor or many museum exhibitions, documentaries, and feature film. She is the former president of the Southern Association or women historians. Her new book is divided we stand, the battle over womens rights. Ladies and gentlemen, marjories parole. It this is an amazing venue. It is wonderful to be here. This is such a great tradition that this institution has, to get book lovers out here on these warm Summer Nights together and talk about books. I am pleased to be part of it and have a chance to talk about my new book. Is about the role of women and women issues in american politics. Of the moderntory Womens Movement, which in the early 70s enjoyed tremendously this and the story of a conservative Womens Movement that organized in opposition and became more powerful. I have tried to load it with juicy anecdotes and colorful characters. There were people and things that happened that you just cant make up. I hope you will find it a good read. Unusual, itt it is puts women at the center of the story. Aboutunusual in books womens history because it deals with feminists and conservative women in the same volume. It has been my goal to describe is fairly and accurately the eye the idease women of the women on both sides. The idea is to shed light and not turn up. There has been plenty of that already. This is about something that is seriously disturbing, something we need to understand better, the transformation of american and the origin of this deeply polarized political culture in which we now live. I am convinced the great debate of the 1970s over womens rights and social roles played a role inand unrecognized that transformation. Yearshe dozen or more ive been working on this book, it has seemed more relevant to contemporary affairs. Never more than during the 2006 election, when the polarization reached the point none of us imagined. It became lightning rods for cultural politics in 1977. It recalled International Womens year or conferences. They were inspired by a Worldwide Movement promoted by the United Nations which declared 1975 to be International Womens year. Commissioned to staff members. They are in the audience. They wrote their own inside story that you should read. He appointed a republican feminist as the presiding it was a conference, an International One that took place in mexico city. Delegates from many nations came together to produce a world plan of action. Nationse participating to have conferences and involve women in drafting policy on womens issues. Leaders whoinist attended the mexico city conference lawrence hired by were inspired. Involving women all over the country in the process of formulating recommendations was going to help introduce them to the Womens Movement, to expand its reach, and to diverse up by the movement it self. In 1975, Congress Approved a bill that mandated and funded his meetings that would be held in 56 states and territories. Together,ld come anybody who was a resident of the state could debate and elect delegates. They would go on to a womens conference that took place in ember, 19 evidence of an 1977 in used in. In houston. It would guide future policy in this country. If it was woken of as a blueprint or future action that congress and the president were supposed to respond to. Conferencehouston and those 56 meetings leading up polarizingd to be events. Supporters putts aside their differences and came together behind an expansive set of goals, conservative women opposed to those goals joined them withoppose enduring consequences for the nation. Conferences are hugely important. They attracted a feeding frenzy at the time. They have largely been forgotten except by the people who participated. Those feminist and conservative leaders regard them as watershed event in American History. Speaks of the National Womens conference as a Constitutional Convention for that, for the milestones divide time. And to that of my editor and publicist, she also made that point in her recent book, her autobiography. She told an interviewer for the new yorker that the conference may take the prize as the most important event that nobody knows about. On the other hand, conservative leader Kilis Schlafly who died the itst year said that was a major strategic blunder. She called up that all of midway in a war between feminist and social conservatives that sealed the fate of the e. R. A. Me, both sides assigned to me that both sides assigned to the iwi has tremendous historical significance. It caught my attention and this was significant that this was an important story that needed to be investigated and that became more and more convinced of this ofi plunged into the sea primary sources that were generated by this historic event. And i interview leading participants, including gloria steinem, Phyllis Schlafly, jimmy and Rosalyn Carter. And jimmy carters presidency, were greatly affected bygacy, the iwi. I realize that in order to understand this event of 1977, i had to go back to the early 1970s and to the events that set up this historic contest that steinem celebrated as the first federally funded revolution and Phyllis Schlafly denounced as federal sponsorship of one side of a national debate. And in the process, i rediscovered an era in our recent past and my adult life so different from the culture of the day, the political culture of today, as to be almost forgotten. An era when the broader womens Rights Movement was enjoying widespread support among republicans and democrats alike. And politicians who were speaking to rally conservative support focused on race or economics or foreign policy, but not on gender. I also needed to look at the period immediately following the to conferences, 19781980, understand the radically different Political Climate that developed in those years when the two parties chose up sides in an increasingly volatile debate about womens rights and family values. A tectonicyears when shift in american political culture, one that had been revealed and encouraged by these iwi conferences in 1977, became increasingly evident. Bookhe early parts of the leading up to the 1977 conferences describe the Widening Division among american women in the 1970s. I began by describing the rise of the womens Rights Movement to a peak period of influence in the first half of the decade. This was a remarkable period in which feminists were highly visible in both parties and working together through bipartisan National Womens political caucus founded in 1971. And conservative women had yet to become organized an active. All three branches of the federal government acted in support of feminist goals. I know you find this hard to believe or to remember, but even richard nixon, no friend of feminism, in fact, bella abzug referred to him as americas number one chauvinist pig, still obliged to cater to them believing that was what women want. Women voters wanted. Congressg the 92nd, 19711972, more womens right sessions were passed than more women rights goals were passed in all previous legislative sessions combined. And that included one that we all talk about all the time which was title ix which banned sex discrimination in education. And people seem to remember it all the time particularly for tis impact on sports but it banned every form of sex discrimination from k through university level. Most dramatic evidence of congressional support for womens rights came in 1972. Overwhelmingal, by margins of the proposed equal Rights Movement, that had the support from the left and the right, from republicans and from democrats. The vote in the house was 350 yes and 15 no. Andhe senate, it was 84 for 8 against. And then the states scramble to ratify. Within a year, 30 of the 38 states that were needed for ratification had approved it. Then the next year, 1973, the Supreme Court acted issuing the roe v. Wade Decision Making abortion legal, and there was widespread support. Gallup poll showed that 34 americans believed abort ion should be legal in some circumstance. Meanwhile, conservative women were quietly simmering, as national politians seem to accept feminists as speaking for all american women. Congressional approval of the reera was the last straw that turned their anger to action. Phyllis schlafly, a season republican activists from the parties far right, quickly emerged as a leader of the conservatives and founded an Organization Called stop era, which meant stop taking our privileges. A few years later, Phyllis Schlafly had been pushed aside as the leader of the National Federation of republican women by Nelson Rockefeller and other liberal and moderate republicans as result of her role in getting very goldwater nominated in 196 4. I dont know how many of you know this but she was the author of the infamous booklet calelle go, thatot at convinced a lot of republicans to support his candidacy. Being pushed out of this leadership role putter and in an ideal position to leave what became a bipartisan movement against the era. As Phyllis Schlafly took up the cause, she already had been a large group of followers, experienced actress with whom she communicated through what they called the foolish left the report. These activists could never have been so effective or done the job without a large body of foot soldiers. And most of them, Christian Conservative women, completely new to politics who saw themselves as defenders of traditional morality and empowered by the conviction that god was on our side. By mid decade, the conservatives had managed to stall the era, four states needed for ratification and for the first time its success seemed in jeopardy. And, encouraged by that success, Phyllis Schlafly created an forum,ation, the egagle which she offered as an alternative to womens lib, and she plays not only to stop th era but rollback other feminist gains. This is an organization that is still flourishing. 5, at this midpoint in this crucial decade, the feminist women continue to have strong support in congress and president gerald force,d, whose wife betty was an ardent feminist, were solidly behind it. Wereonservative women appalled and angry at the establishment of this feministdominated International Womens year program which congress, as i mentioned, mandated with a 5 million appropriation. We turned back to this iwi program. A fight that highend tensions between the two sides that had been brewing and was profoundly polarizing. Came beforeconflict the final houston conference and took place at these preliminaries state meetings leading up to the National Womens conference that took place over a steamy and controversyfilled summer of 1977. In chapter such as armageddon of they staete, out kitchen and into the counterrevolution, i describe this astounding sometimes physically violent conflict that he Womens Movement turned out their troops and forced coalitions and armed themselves with the rules of parliamentary procedure and competed to control the state gatherings and to speak for american women. My central argument for these. In creating the iwi program, congress had done something very unusual and with huge unintended consequences. This unique and rotation from congress propelled feminist and conservatives, already embattled over the proposed era and each claiming to represent the majority of american women, into a formalized, highstakes competition for influence. Feminists, particularly bella abzug, had convinced congress to create the iwi program and president gerald ford and later jimmy carter appointed feminist from the party to lead it. Of so, this success feminists in gaining this mandate for the conferences from congress and from two ofsidents fuleeled the fires conservative resistance. The iwi conferences of 1977 had another crucial effect. Before 1977, matt feminist had thought many had thought to disassociate the era from controversial issues including abortion and gay rights. They chose a different course formally embracing abortion and also taking a new and dramatic step, the feministd to agenda, the protection of lesbian and gay rights. That was a brandnew an extremely volatile political issue in this crucial year of 1977, thanks to Anita Bryants save our childrens campaign, callh you may havre originated out of date county, in floore in dade county florida. Major increases and feminist programs to meet their goals. And the fact that the iwi program had ties to the United Nations a large conservatives to be deeply distrustful of that organization. As the iwi program proceeded through the year 1977, the campaign that had been organized by Phyllis Schlafly in 1972 to block era ratification grew into a fullblown political movement. Phyllis shapley and other leaders forming an iwi citizens review committee, brought together social conservatives, religious conservatives in an unprecedented display of unity among conservative catholics and protestants, Orthodox Jews and mormons. This was the cutting edge of the movement to recruit previously apolitical evangelical and fundamentalist protestants into politics. It was the precursor to what would soon be known as the religious right, in which new r ight leaders would take the credit, or blame. Conservative coalitions protesting feminist leadership of these conferences varied from state to state but in some areas attracted far right groups including the John Birch Society and the american party. Even more shocking ku klux klan leaders claim to have infiltrated iwi conferences. And in some states, including utah, oklahoma, mississippi, and alabama, conservatives gained total control of the conservatives. But it offered a challenge to feminists even in such states as massachusetts, california, hawaii, and the great state of new york where rumors that the conservatives were trying to take over the conference and turned out in large numbers led huge numbers of feminist to change their plans and head for albany to participate in that event. One of the most important developments of these battles between feminists and conservatives for control of these meetings, mind you, and then be able to take voters to the National Conference and dominate the National Plan of action was that an alliance was forged for the first time between a antiera and the Prolife Movement which previously in their efforts to attract as wider range of supporters as possible had chosen to remain single issue movements. Theervatives, when all smoke cleared in the summer, they had succeeded in electing only 20 of the delegates to the houston conference. But they likened it to the victory of david over goliath. The next section and one that many readers have said was their favorite and i have to admit is mine also, focuses on this houston conference, on this grand culminating, starspangled National Womens conference in houston in november of 1977, one of the most dramatic and inspirational moments in the history of the modern Womens Movement. Sometimes referred to as the crest of the second wave. Massiveerence, and a conservative counter conference that took place across the city of houston in the astro arena, put on display for all the world the massive divisions that had developed between feminists and socially conservative women and produced a consciousnessraising experience of massive proportions. Outside the conference, as the delegates arrived, they saw protesters denouncing in signs the National Womens conference as a tax ripoff for lesbian ortion andmmunist , abl antichristian. It was an event that few women in politics would have missed. Women distinguished in many other fields were eager to attend, conjures of it being an event of historic significance. It received extraordinary publicity. There were over 1500 applications for press credentials ranging from Foreign Press to smalltown papers. A list journalist from left, oight and center flocked t houston including tom brokaw, james kilpatrick, and joe kline. In the glare of national and international publicity, the delegates arrived with this cast of celebrities. The poet, maya angelou, billie jean king, scholar margaret mead, actress jean stapleton, who as some of you recall, the mostithn bunker, beloved housewife in america in all in the family. Now, most is significantly, former first ladies lady bird johnson, betty ford, republican, joint Rosalyn Carter on the podium. As well as the first lady of the civil Rights Movement coretta s cott king who declared a new harmony among women. In houston, the feminist succeeded in two of their cherished goals they hope to achieve through iwi. Moving the movement beyond its white middleclass base and ideologicalst the wrangling that had plagued the movement earlier in the decade as newer and younger and more radical women joined a movement that had been kicked off by older, more moderate progressive women. King surrounded by representatives of africanamerican, Asian American and hispanic american women, declared there is a new force, a new understanding, a new sisterhood against injustice that has been born here, and we will not be divided and defeated again. And then spontaneously, most of the audience stood and join hands and as they swayed back and forth saying we shall overcome, many of them with tears streaming down their cheeks. Had warnedan who against feminist embrace of what she once called the lavender menace shocked audiences when she stood and before the cameras seconded the resolution to include gay rights in the National Plan of action. That then prompted conservative delegates to stand and turn th eir backs to the podium, dropping their heads as in prayer. This National Plan of action that they adopted was an historically significant document that incorporated the moderate goals of the founding re radical and, mo younger women who had come into the movement through the antiwar and civil Rights Movement. En 40roposal, which writt years ago, nonetheless seems strikingly prescient today, which included an end to the deportation of undocumented mothers of americanborn children. And a National Healthcare system, if you can believe it. Thewhen near the end of conference delegates adopted the plan calling for the ratification of the era, people went wild. There could be no more Business Done for the day. They were hugging and singing and marching and bella abzug finally just said rapped the gavel and said, good night, loves. Solidarity among feminist was not at all the same thing as solidarity among american women. Schlafly which phyllis and other social conservatives made Crystal Clear to Television Audiences across the nation. As i said, across town, Phyllis Schlafly led a crowd of 10,000 to 15,000 protesters who had come from all over the nation on buses and planes and cars and rally whichssive seems more like a religious revival that a political rally. Denouncing federally funded feminism, and condemning the participation of the first ladies in an event they said indoors perversion endorsed of perversion and the murder babies and their mothers wombs. And insisting they had someone on their side far more powerful than the president and made it clear that the feminists. Did not speak for them nmm. And bold and success in having this tremendous turnout, they announced their determination to rollback feminist gains, to restore american morality and strength to what they called a profamily movement. So the last chapters tell us what happened when these dueling groups of activists, the feminist on one hand, conservatives on the other, and all fired up by their iwi experience left houston, went ho me and ramped up their competition for political influence in the period between november of 1977 and november 1980 president ial election. Feminists were extremely hopeful about the evelyn tatian of the National Plan, which would face about the implementation of the National Plan. A downturn in the economy combined with carters fist cal conservatism left little room for the programs they hope for. Criticize theug president publicly, he fired her unceremoniously as head of his Advisory Committee for women and made her into a feminist marter. Martry. Yr. Many feminist leaders endorsed Teddy Kennedy for nomination. Aidehen carter lost, his said the feminist had gotten in Ronald Reagan what they richly deserved. Carter continue to reach out to womens rights advocates and at the same time to try to mend fences with social conservatives but seems to alienate both in the process. When i interviewed him and asked him about them, he went off on a tirade about how upset he was that the feminist were so upset with him. He clenched red, his face and he was saying, if i didnt agree with them on everything, they gave me credit for being with them on nothing. I said, hold on. The social conservatives turned against you, too. He goes, yeah, but that did not hurt my feelings. As for the other party, the houston republican feminists faced major problems. While women of the profamily movement had made major gains. Profamily women who apply their new political to great affect in these years worked hard for the nomination of Ronald Reagan. They also worked with newright leaders who courted them in an effort to register large numbers of new voters from the upcoming election. Success oflaflys politicizing and united religious conservatives had expanded the ranks of committed conservative activist who found fighting federally funding feminist attractive. This included many white governors, bitter over years of social changes that in their view were imposed or allowed by an intrusive federal government and were eager to take back their country. Shrewd political strategists pointing out the promise of africanamerican, civil rights advocates as well as a bortionists and perverts, use the iwi as a means of appealing to white southerners trying to hang around carters neck, the iwi. Never mind it had been started by republican administration. And they promoted the grand old party as the best means for conservatives to take back their country. Indeed, a major point of the book is this. That in the late 1970s, gender issues began to replace racial issues as socially acceptable rallying points for social conservatives who believed in divinely inspired, innate differences in natural hierarchy. Many profamily women were successful in gaining membership on the gop platform and lead the Republican Party to reverse the 40 year record of support for the equal rights amendment and to adopt a strong prolife position. Republican feminists were over come, they were shocked, they formersmayed that, allies, including george h. W. Bush, who long supported the era, brought no help to them. Bush eve agreeing to acceptn the antifeminist platform provisions as a price to becoming reagans running mate. Of new york condemns or parties decision to let the religious right dictate the issues in return for their votes calling it a faustian bargain. So, what a difference a decade had made. Where as of 1970, both parties supported the womens Rights Movement. In 1980, republicans chose to take sides with the older Womens Movement, the one that saws womens rights as in conflict with family values. A phrase that have become a permanent part of the political discourse of the nation. The platforms of americas two Major National parties in 1980 revealed just how polarized the nation had become over gender issues. Id like to say just a couple of things about what happened from that point forward. Bloomsbury asked me to bring the 1980 to one up from the present. I was doing in the midst of last summer. The contemporary relevance of this story was clearly there. All of that, ito recommend to you that 30 page epilogue but let me say a couple of highlights. In 1980, that election revealed a couple of trance that proved to be enduring and that have shaped our politics ever since. One, women voted in greater numbers than men for the first time. Aannd two, a gender gap favoring democrats became visible. Analysts contributed this gender gap to the Womens Movement, which had taught women to see their own values in political terms. Were quicked by to publicize this gender gap in a last ditch effort to save the era and and has their political cloud. T. Theyarly in the 1980s declare carters defeat a lesson for the democrats, each published books predicting the to majoruld lead advances in feminist goals and warned the politicians ignored it at their peril. Republicans were put on the defensive. You may remember, reagan and atwater. He worried that this could be seeing a sex based political realignment and he advised republicans to be, and you will love this, very careful and the public expressions and to not alienate women. As haso suggested that, ho Many Political sciences ever since, that the gender gap could be read as a decreased and the result of the mens preference for real mantoman like reagan. Gop strategists also took comfort in the idea that this was more of a marriage gap than a gender gap, perhaps even a racial gap. Pointing out that most white married women tended to vote for republicans. Gop republicans underscored the importance of womens votes but for the most part since 1980 they have tried to win womens votes not by changing policy roughions, but th symbolic appointments and gestures and embracing policies that appeal to their profamily base. As disaffected democrats, particularly white southerners signed on with the gop. The Republican Party became more universally conservative and the Democratic Party more uniformly liberal. Democrats continue to support womens rights along with civil rights for African Americans and hispanics and to increasingly supportive of what became known as the lgbt community. Raciallyns became more and ethnically homogenous as well is more socially conservative and double down on its defense of the traditional family. Putattacks on feminism, or different way, defense of family values, proved to be politically useful, especially in the south. Antifeminism offered a new and successful southern strategy that helped thiwith republicanso turn the south red. Feminists have continued to insist that democrats honor their commitment to womens rights. Support for womens rights to legal abortion long ago became a requirement for the partys nomination to the presidency. President mocratic since 1980, bill clinton, and barack obama, clearly identified with feminist movements. Both appointed record numbers of women and minorities to their cabinets and put womens rights supporters like Ruth Bader Ginsburg on this up in court. And obama clearly wanted Hillary Clinton to succeed him, calling her the most qualified person to ever run for president. Both sides of the battle over womens rights and family values gained when their party was in power and experienced losses when they were not. What is the clear his example of that was the socalled mexico city policy where the gag rule that prohibits foreign aid to any agency with any connection to abortion. Implement it by reagan, maintained by bush and lifted by clinton and reinstated by george w. Bush and lifted by obama and reinstated by trump as you r ecall surrounded in a famous photograph by strictly a group of men. On the other hand, the women of the profamily movement, like the look shaft way, have kept the republican seat to the fire. Pundits who often expressed wonder that given the increasingly large gender gap that still the gop did not track to the left on womens issues. Its seemed not to notice that the gop base includes not only angry white women as angry white well. In the 1970s, those were the women who had demanded a politician stop feminism and in the modern era, they are not about to back down. Phyllis shapley, working with a oiled eagle forum, continue to be a force in american politics, a regarded as acon, virtual oracle by many conservatives and her endorsements courted. Like many6 election, washe gops right, she bitter the party a salesman had refused to nominate the most conservative candidate in every election since reagan. She and others on the right were determined this past year that they and not the gop establishment would pick the nominee. And when she endorsed trump early in 2016, after meeting with him and obtaining a promise to honor the platform request of the religious right, she then played a major role in selecting him over cruz as the gop nominee. Phyllis schlafly was a major factor, i am claiming here, in his getting the nomination. And then, as we know, kellyanne conway, helped trump pull victory from the jaws of defeat, late in the campaign. And then, white married women, especially noncollege women, made his victory possible. This, bygosing, let me say 1980, the polarization of feminism conservatives had led to two enduring social movements that still compete over policy regarding women and family. For the rest of the 20th century, and into the 21st, the passion debates on gender related issues proved to be transformative. As the personal became political, and the political became personal, and issues laden with religious or moral significance remained in the forefront of national debates, politicians increasingly found that moderation was devalued, consensus impossible, and compromise no longer tolerated. With democratic and republican politicians lined up on either side of these volatile gender related issues, they tended to demonize their opponents and to define issues strict with in partisan terms, a situation that, as we know, contributed to political gridlock. So, as pundits and politicians and scholars struggle to understand women in politics today, to understand them as voters and candidates, they would do well to pay more attention to the developers of the 1970s when the polarization of feminist and antifeminists also polarized american political culture, giving rise to the politics of today. Book my hope that this will contribute to the National Conversation by shedding light on the origins of this prolonged polarization that continues to keep our political leaders from dealing with the many pressing issues facing our nation and world today. Thank you. [applause] thank you. Thank you. Ms. Spruill thank you. Thank you for that and lightning presentation. Im sure there are some questions from the audience. Anybody was a question, you can come here to the microphone and the professor will take a question. Dont be shy. Could you comment about the impact that both the civil Rights Movement and the Antiwar Movement had in terms of sort of generating activity on either side of gender, you are talking about in the 1970s . Prof. Spruill yes. The modernntioning, womens Rights Movement as i talk about in the book, comes ab factors,result of many but it begins in the early kennedyith the commission that on women that studied the issues and made recommendations and got the government involved for the first time in really addressing these situations. The problems. And pretty soon there were these commissions in every state. But hese, as i said, were largely moderate, pragmatic, middleclass and older women who were then joined by a new Group Younger women, many of the more radical women, that were inspired or lets just say had some grievances as a result of the civil Rights Movement and the new left, the Antiwar Movement, failing to take their issue seriously enough. Many of them were africanamerican women, as well in both cases and inspired by the example of many africanamerican women who work stalwarts of the civil Rights Movement. Ery important. Also, the feminist movement took its tactics and emulated many of the strategies that the civil Rights Movement had made. They clearly recognize that they were building on the successes of the civil Rights Movement. As we mentioned, there were thee who believe that now, National Organization for women, needed to be formed so that the Womens Movement would have an Advocacy Group similar to the naacp that could press outside the government for change. Twoin that way, this movements, one becoming a Mass Movement ahead of the other, inspired and influenced the other and by the time the when his movement is getting underway in the late 1960s and early 1970s, women like bella abzug, who had been very supportive and involved in the civil Rights Movement, even going down to mississippi to risk her life to defend willie mcgee, a black ten accused of raping a whi woman who is executed. A very courageous accurate act. Abzug believe that is an important for the federal government to do for the Womens Movement do what they did for the civil Rights Movement. There is a strong connection between the two movements and rap on theght add, the Womens Movement is that it was always from the beginning a middleclass, White Movement but it was always much more diverse than that. During International Womens year conferences, the leaders were making a very strong effort to diversify it even more. An act of congress specifically spelled out that the delegates to houston who would purchase a paid in formulating who would purchase a paid in formulating the National Plan had to represent the racial makeup of their state. A huge amount of effort to make the delegations as diverse ethnically and religiously and in terms of economic situation, and women of color, including many heroes of the civil Rights Movement, we very prominentlyre engaged in that movement. In a way, it seemed as if in houston that the goal was to merge the womens Rights Movement and the civil Rights Movement into a massive human Rights Movement that included defense of the right of gays and lesbians as well. All way, you might say that of these movements came together to form the modern Democratic Party, in a way, because the modern Democratic Party has stood for working for the rights of all of these groups. Ok, so, that really made a lot of people mad. And a lot of what i saw in the movement against the womens Rights Movement, it seemed as though a whole lot of the same people who had resisted the civil Rights Movement were engaged. And a lot of the tactics that they used were similar. Sam irvin, the senator from north carolina, who had used all of his political skills to resist the civil Rights Movement for so many years, he put every bit of that into trying to fight the era becoming a major ally with Phyllis Schlafly. I mentioned in here, in each one of these states, some more than others, theres the White Nationalist groups became very involved. Many of the women were leading the effort against iwi were women who had been part of the movement to stop the civil Rights Movement. Most notably, an organization that few people never heard of called women for Constitutional Government that started in mississippi during the crisis and then spread to become a National Organization. Its striking to me that the numbers of the women who were part of this movement to fight the iwi, they were part of that movement. I think that they were there were lots of ways these things were interconnected and there were some rather statements that came out of the iwi by these groups of white and black women working together, who in the end concluded that fighting against racism and gender prejudice were really fighting something it was the same thing. Thank you for your question. Thank you for a wonderful lecture. My question deals with roe v. Wade. Despite the gains that Phyllis Shapley had made, despite the fact they had conservative president s, they have yet to overturn it. They had the Supreme Court rejects those things. Do you see them ever overturning wade . Oe v. Prof. Spruill he is saying that for years they have been trying, the for movement has been trying to overturn roe v. Wade. Do i see that as a possibility that it might happen . And absolutely, i think it is keynitely, one of the things that was up in the air in the last political collection election was the issue of the Supreme Court and many people who were concerned about the Supreme Court. That was the issue that was uppermost in their minds. On, from the point at which Phyllis Schlafly believes they had killed the era, she turned her attention to trying to get the Supreme Court in the hands of conservatives. And they started working to get people in the pipeline who would be able to be appointed. Thathe 1980 gop platform dropped the 40 year record of support for the era also put the gop firmly on record as being a Prolife Party or as they called it the party of life. They endorsed the idea of a human life amendment and they called for a litmus test for all ,ederal appointed judges on they must have prolife positions. Of course, reagan probably nominated sandra day oconnor, which infuriated Phyllis Schlafly because she was not officially there. But they had been working ever since to get to that point. Has promised that if he gets another appointed that it will be someone who would take a prolife position. So, absolutely, that could happen. A wouldnt there be tremendous cost of that overthrowing something that existed for 45 years, as with the Health Care Issue . Prof. Spruill i think absolutely there would be a tremendous, you saw the january 21st marches in the streets. If that happened, i think you would see about twice as many people show up. Absolutely. It is absolutely something that a whole generation of people have grown up with believing that that issue was result. Was resolved. There has been a tremendous increase in support for the Prolife Movement, in part as th e years go by since people remember the huge number of babies, fetuses in trash cans and women bleeding to death from back alley abortions, as those instances have faded from memory ad as it has been put in position in which there is less emphasis on punishing women but seeing women who seek to get abortions as victims who should be supported. Unwed the stigma of anherhood has faded, in effort to keep people from getting abortions. There has been a shift in thinking. That one of the major victories of the profamily movement has been to increase the amount of abortion, butding at the same time, every National Poll indicates that majority of americans continue to believe that abortion should be legal in ame form and that its largely a matter to be decided between a woman and her doctor. Absolutely think there would be there are cynics who say that the republicans do not really want to get rid of roe v. Wade because then contributions would drive up dry up and voters would be less active. I take the activist more at their word that this is something that matters to them, about, but carriee it definitely would be a huge upheaval and it is almost hard to imagine how stronger reaction that would bring. I also want to thank you for a really interesting, pretty riveting lecture. This is not my question, but ive always considered race the kind of stop was the issue, you know, in this country into here, to hear a gender take on it is. Really provocative and interesting that. Ank you for my question has to do with the time that you undoubtedly spent living the iwi conference. And, you know, putting your revisionist history hat on, which im sure you hate to do, but im going to ask you because this is a public forum, what do think, is there anything you think they could have done lly sort of,to rea you know, forestall the rise of the eagle forum . That they have not taken all these issues into their platform, or emphasize Economic Issues . What you think couldve been done different . Prof. Spruill that is an excellent question. And there have been times when byple reacted to all of this saying, wait a minute, youre blaming all this on the women. You are blaming all the feminists. Did they really make a straight people blame everything on us. This is the reaction i have gone. That is not at all my intent. I definitely believe that there was a strong counter reaction to the fact that the feminists came roadther with this b platform in which they put their ndamp of approval on these a created a wide target. There were people, and you will remember this, that thought that all of this may be was not such a great idea. One of the things i discovered and put in the book was that the feminists who were heading the National Mission on the observance of iwi during the ford years, when bella abzug first propose they have the state meetings open to all issues were not quite so sure that this was a good idea. I think is sensing that if you open these meetings up to anybody that anything could happen. And being very aware by that time of how determined and capable fill a schlafly was Phyllis Schlafly was she very quickly announced her determination to either stop these conferences from happening or, if not, to make the libbers sorry they ever had them. That was what she said. Strategic error . Know, because the thing is, i mentioned at the beginning, both sides claimed victory. The National WomensConference Get a great deal for the womens Rights Movement. Gloria steinem said it was the most important thing that nobody knows about. What she is talking about is that it is those huge numbers of people around the country to the Womens Movement, to real feminists rather than media created stereotypes. And in towns all over the country, women who felt like they were the only ones that had a feminist perspective or who ere or felt they were the only one in town, suddenly made allies and build networks and they were encouraged and they were psychologically supported. And they got to work. The one study of the shows that soul was not, hardly a that was a delegate in houston that did not lobby actively to try to get the National Plan of action done, give interviews to the local media, give speeches. They were really fired up. You might notice if you were to look at that National Plan of action that the goals that they lndorsed at that time are stil ones that the Womens Movement is working on achieving today, and a whole lot of them have been achieved. There have been a lot of progress. You also have to remember always that when a big backlash forms, what that means is you have really accomplished something. Say, t and i would also he civil Rights Movement created, inspired a really big backlash. Should they not have done it . Should they have not tried . I dont believe that. Thank you for that answer. I like that. Anyone else . Over to the microphone. I cant hear. You have to come to the microphone. We cant hear you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much for being here. Ok, so, i recently saw film called equal means equal, a documentary. Have you seen it . One of the most disturbing films about women i have ever seen and ive seen an awful lot of documentaries in my life. So, im wondering one of the things i learned is that the equal rights of men has never been past the equal rights amendment has never been passed. So, what you believe, if anything, needs to happen for that amendment to be revived and passed. When you see this film equal means equal, you would be very, very interested in seeing this film. I would recommend holly you could probably watch it online. I would recommend highly. Prof. Spruill is it a film about what what happened . No. It is about women and how not far weve come. Prof. Spruill first of all, a person think we have, very long way. And i do not think that the feminist movement lost. And i do not think the feminist movement not being able to get the era has men that we lost. It was so much has meant that we lost. It was so much a symbol of the womens Rights Movement that usually numbers of people have taken its failure to mean that we lost and we didnt. The main thing, the two main accomplishments of the conservative Womens Movement to have been7 greatly restrict access to abortion, and the other one to make feminism a dirty word. And the way they did that was to take the utterances of the most extreme, left, people with points of view that are very the entirend paint movement as if, as if there were no such thing as a moderate feminist. It was like they refuse to recognize that it even existed. And to try to discredit that movement. S amazing how effective they were in doing that for many years. But, as you know, in recent years, all of a sudden feminism popularme cool and again. And there are people of different ideas about what it means, everyone from laura bush to sarah palin to emma watson to all embracing the term. But it any rate, even that history has not been a lasting one. Ok, but the equal rights ofndment, there is a lot speculation about why, the impact of it not becoming added to the constitution. Calia, before he died would give speeches at law schools in which he said that principles of womens equality is not in the constitution. But large numbers of other people, whether they were for womens white or against, would say that they are, and that they were in there through the 14th amendment. The trouble was that in till the 1970s, none of the courts interpreted that way. A result, people were believing that in the 1970s there should be a twofold strategy. Era which alles paul envisioned as a blanket in one fell swoop would cause all of the discrimination to go away. And then the were other such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg who in the 1970s was leading a Program Sponsored by the aclu for womens Equity Project in which you would take up issues case by case by case, all with the goal of getting womens rights to equal protection recognized and that 14th amend provisions apply to them, too. Was that in the fight over the equal rights amendment, there were people who said you do not need an equal rights amendment, because the courts are already ruling over and over again in your favor. Yale friend of mine a constitutional law professor has written an article i would recommend called the defective era, ande de facto was she says we have an era, opponentsen the era conceded the principle of womens equality and said, you do not need era because you have equality anyway. Is that, side of that and were seeing reasons for this today, once power changes and you have different people who make legislative decisions in congress and the white house, ra, thoseout the eer gains are at risk. There you go. It puzzles me that conservatives are very much against big government. Below andment in government being too much regulation and interfering in our lives. Of legalizedse abortion, they seem to be in our bedrooms. So i cant seem to get my head wrapped around that. Too much bigit is government but on the other hand, they want to interfere with our private lives. Id like you to comment on that. I all i can say is that understand your point. Each side once the government to do something different. And i have to say that it points out one of the Biggest Challenges to us ever getting past the polarization of our country, that there are some issues about which people feel feel in the core of there being that they are loaded with moral and religious significance and that they cannot compromise on. And that particular issue seems than thehaps even more gayrights issue. One about which there is an impasse. And i dont know where that would go. 1990s, clinton raresed safe, legal and prolife,ple who are that the fact that they happen at each one, it is a murderer. And a sin and it is not supposed to happen. So i dont know how we ever will get past that. Think there are many issues about which people fight and dont compromise which they are to be able to. And they are to find ways to listen to each other. Trying to not demonize our opponent and be reasonable. The reasons, for you say, it is a tough one. I want to thank you. Cracks my pleasure. Thank you for your patience. We have a facebook question from peter who says, are their Historical Resources on those who died in detroit . There is one. You could be featured during our next live program. Join our conversation on facebook. Nd on twitter cspan history. Cspan, where history unfolds daily. 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. This week at 8 00 p. M. Eastern ,n cspan3, a civil war special featuring American History tv highlights. Monday, we are at the American Civil War blog symposium. Where we look at gettysburg, antietam and the siege of vicksburg. Tuesday, we focus on civil war leadership at the Longwood University civil war seminar with talks on robert e lee, ulysses s. Grant and john mosby. Wednesdayfriday, were at Gettysburg College featuring harold holzer. On friday, we conclude the conference with an author. , civil warstory tv special, all this week beginning monday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan3. Born on july 18, 1921, it john glenn was a decorated u. S. Marine, aviator, astronaut, the First American to orbit the earth and later in life, the oldest person to travel. In theesented ohio senate from