The Evil Petting Zoo

So let me get this straight. Someone -- and by "someone," I mean "someone or a group of someones who is/are supposed to be relatively sane" -- thought it would be a good idea to honor Phyllis Schlaffly for her particular brand of crazy? You know, the woman who single-handedly destroyed Constitutionally enshrined gender equality and who believes that spousal rape doesn't exist and that the Violence Against Women Act should be abolished? So, what possible ass pull of a reason could we have for giving her more academic merit than we do Mr. Ed?

Alumna Phyllis Schlafly's articulation of her perspectives has been a significant part of American life during the last half of the 20th century and now the 21st century, serving as a lightning rod for vigorous debate on difficult issues where differences of opinion are profound and passionate. Not only should a university serve as a place where such discussions take place, but it may also choose to recognize those who provide leadership and articulation — both pro and con — on vital issues. When the University awards an honorary degree, it does so without endorsing viewpoints or taking sides on such issues.

"A lightning rod for vigorous debate." Sure, I can see that, I guess, in the same way that Bull Connor certainly stirred up debate over how the civil rights movement was being received in America.

Phyllis Schlaffly is a woman who has made a living shitting on the rest of her gender. She claims that women should just stay in the house and service the husband while making a fortune leaving the house to spread such a message to women everywhere. She believes that women are weak and inferior, yet shouldn't receive any amount of protection from their obviously more powerful and resourceful husbands. By honoring this woman, Washington University has spat in the faces of every woman who has ever attended its school and sought a degree in something other than Homemaker or Professional Hypocrite.