WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.980 OK, so let's unpack a scenario for a minute. 00:00:03.319 --> 00:00:05.480 We tend to have this idea of history, right? 00:00:05.580 --> 00:00:08.960 That it's this this huge, unstoppable force. 00:00:09.039 --> 00:00:11.240 Yeah, like a tidal wave. Something that's shaped 00:00:11.240 --> 00:00:14.439 by, you know, massive social movements or huge 00:00:14.439 --> 00:00:17.960 wars or presidents. Exactly. But sometimes history 00:00:17.960 --> 00:00:21.320 is shaped by a single person. Someone who just 00:00:21.320 --> 00:00:23.399 stands in the middle of the road, puts up a hand 00:00:23.399 --> 00:00:26.350 and says, stop. And in the context of the 20th 00:00:26.350 --> 00:00:29.289 century, I don't think anyone said stop as effectively 00:00:29.289 --> 00:00:32.869 or, frankly, as controversially as Phyllis Schlafly. 00:00:33.070 --> 00:00:35.850 And that is the focus of our deep dive today. 00:00:35.969 --> 00:00:38.979 We are looking at the life. the legacy and just 00:00:38.979 --> 00:00:41.659 the sheer mechanical effectiveness of Phyllis 00:00:41.659 --> 00:00:43.859 Schlafly. And if you want to talk about a figure 00:00:43.859 --> 00:00:45.719 of contradiction. Oh, she's the definition of 00:00:45.719 --> 00:00:47.179 it. I mean, we're talking about a woman who ran 00:00:47.179 --> 00:00:49.399 for Congress, who influenced national elections, 00:00:49.640 --> 00:00:51.560 became one of the most powerful political organizers 00:00:51.560 --> 00:00:54.100 in American history. Right. And she's all of 00:00:54.100 --> 00:00:56.579 this while arguing that a woman's highest calling, 00:00:56.640 --> 00:00:59.200 her absolute best career path was to be a homemaker. 00:00:59.359 --> 00:01:02.189 It's a fascinating paradox, isn't it? To really 00:01:02.189 --> 00:01:05.170 understand the modern American political landscape, 00:01:05.310 --> 00:01:08.109 and I mean specifically the shape of the Republican 00:01:08.109 --> 00:01:11.750 Party and the whole family values platform, you 00:01:11.750 --> 00:01:13.750 just have to understand Schlafly. She wasn't 00:01:13.750 --> 00:01:16.010 just a suburban housewife who decided to get 00:01:16.010 --> 00:01:18.250 involved in local politics. Not at all. She was 00:01:18.250 --> 00:01:20.670 an incredibly sophisticated operator. I mean, 00:01:20.689 --> 00:01:22.909 she mobilized a grassroots army from the ground 00:01:22.909 --> 00:01:25.269 up to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment, the 00:01:25.269 --> 00:01:28.049 ERA, at a time when almost everyone in Washington 00:01:28.049 --> 00:01:30.549 thought its passage was, well, inevitable. So 00:01:30.549 --> 00:01:32.629 that's the myth. mission for this deep dive. 00:01:32.790 --> 00:01:34.810 We really want to understand how she did it. 00:01:34.849 --> 00:01:37.849 How did she stop this thing that seemed unstoppable? 00:01:38.090 --> 00:01:41.030 And how did her movement ripple out and end up 00:01:41.030 --> 00:01:43.650 impacting everything from, say, the Cold War 00:01:43.650 --> 00:01:46.290 all the way up to the rise of Donald Trump? And 00:01:46.290 --> 00:01:48.670 we're pulling from a pretty massive stack of 00:01:48.670 --> 00:01:51.129 biographical and political history here. We're 00:01:51.129 --> 00:01:53.310 going to cover her origins, that famous Stop 00:01:53.310 --> 00:01:56.819 ERA campaign, and her writings on... Well, on 00:01:56.819 --> 00:01:58.659 everything from nuclear weapons to feminism. 00:01:58.799 --> 00:02:00.799 To really get it, you have to transport yourself 00:02:00.799 --> 00:02:03.379 back to the early 1970s. The feminist movement 00:02:03.379 --> 00:02:06.040 is surging. It's at its absolute peak. You've 00:02:06.040 --> 00:02:08.979 got the National Organization for Women. You 00:02:08.979 --> 00:02:10.960 have bipartisan support for the Equal Rights 00:02:10.960 --> 00:02:13.280 Amendment. It really felt like the culture was 00:02:13.280 --> 00:02:15.819 moving in one very specific direction. And then 00:02:15.819 --> 00:02:19.699 enter Phyllis. But before she became this anti 00:02:19.699 --> 00:02:23.900 -feminist icon, she was. Well, she was a lot 00:02:23.900 --> 00:02:25.759 of other things first. Let's start with the origin 00:02:25.759 --> 00:02:27.819 story, because I think a lot of people just assume 00:02:27.819 --> 00:02:29.759 she was born in a kitchen apron, and that is 00:02:29.759 --> 00:02:32.300 just not the case. No, far from it. Phyllis McAlpin 00:02:32.300 --> 00:02:35.419 Stewart was born in St. Louis back in 1924, and 00:02:35.419 --> 00:02:37.599 her early life was really defined by the Great 00:02:37.599 --> 00:02:40.169 Depression. This is such a crucial piece of the 00:02:40.169 --> 00:02:42.409 puzzle because it really complicates the narrative 00:02:42.409 --> 00:02:44.849 that she would later promote about the traditional 00:02:44.849 --> 00:02:46.810 male provider. Right, because I'm looking at 00:02:46.810 --> 00:02:49.530 the notes here. And her own father, he faced 00:02:49.530 --> 00:02:52.250 long -term unemployment starting in 1932. So 00:02:52.250 --> 00:02:54.750 the whole provider system actually failed her 00:02:54.750 --> 00:02:57.810 own family. It completely failed them. Her father 00:02:57.810 --> 00:03:00.129 was a machinist, a salesman for Westinghouse. 00:03:00.229 --> 00:03:03.169 But the Depression just hit the family so hard. 00:03:03.330 --> 00:03:05.550 And it was actually her mother, Odile Stewart, 00:03:05.849 --> 00:03:08.050 who kept the family afloat. Her mom stepped up. 00:03:08.409 --> 00:03:10.590 She did. She went back to work. She was a librarian 00:03:10.590 --> 00:03:14.030 and a teacher. So the young Phyllis Lafley grew 00:03:14.030 --> 00:03:16.729 up watching her mother be the primary breadwinner, 00:03:16.770 --> 00:03:19.469 the one holding the family together, and even 00:03:19.469 --> 00:03:21.389 managing to keep Phyllis in a private Catholic 00:03:21.389 --> 00:03:23.590 girls' school through it all. Which is just so 00:03:23.590 --> 00:03:25.569 interesting, you know, considering Phyllis would 00:03:25.569 --> 00:03:29.110 later argue so vehemently for the necessity of 00:03:29.110 --> 00:03:31.719 the husband as the sole provider. But clearly 00:03:31.719 --> 00:03:34.000 she valued that education. She wasn't just going 00:03:34.000 --> 00:03:36.719 to school. She was. She was crushing it. She 00:03:36.719 --> 00:03:38.759 was an intellectual powerhouse from the start. 00:03:39.060 --> 00:03:41.360 She went to Washington University in St. Louis, 00:03:41.520 --> 00:03:45.240 graduated in 1944, and not just graduated. She 00:03:45.240 --> 00:03:47.960 was Phi Beta Kappa. Wow. But she didn't stop 00:03:47.960 --> 00:03:50.099 there. She went on to Radcliffe, which was the 00:03:50.099 --> 00:03:52.780 female coordinate institution for Harvard at 00:03:52.780 --> 00:03:55.060 the time, and got a Master of Arts in Government. 00:03:55.419 --> 00:03:57.800 So we're dealing with a Harvard -educated political 00:03:57.800 --> 00:03:59.879 scientist, but here's the detail that I just 00:03:59.879 --> 00:04:01.819 love. It feels like it belongs in a movie or 00:04:01.819 --> 00:04:04.900 something. During World War II, while she was 00:04:04.900 --> 00:04:07.759 getting this top -tier education, she was also 00:04:07.759 --> 00:04:10.280 working. And not just any job. She was working 00:04:10.280 --> 00:04:12.419 at the largest ammunition plant in the entire 00:04:12.419 --> 00:04:15.080 world. As a ballistics gunner and technician. 00:04:15.580 --> 00:04:18.579 A ballistics gunner. She was test -firing ammunition. 00:04:19.019 --> 00:04:21.430 She was literally Rosie the Riveter. I mean, 00:04:21.430 --> 00:04:24.009 she's in a factory testing ammunition, doing 00:04:24.009 --> 00:04:27.269 exactly the kind of nontraditional, heavy industrial 00:04:27.269 --> 00:04:30.389 work that the feminist movement decades later 00:04:30.389 --> 00:04:33.430 celebrated as women breaking barriers. The contrast 00:04:33.430 --> 00:04:37.019 with her later public image is just. It's so 00:04:37.019 --> 00:04:39.439 stark, isn't it? But you can already see the 00:04:39.439 --> 00:04:42.199 threads of her future career forming even back 00:04:42.199 --> 00:04:45.120 then. She moved into political research very, 00:04:45.220 --> 00:04:47.680 very quickly. Yeah. By 1946, she's a researcher 00:04:47.680 --> 00:04:49.420 for the American Enterprise Institute. That's 00:04:49.420 --> 00:04:52.720 a big deal. A very big deal. And then by 1952, 00:04:52.759 --> 00:04:55.180 she's only 28 years old and she decides to run 00:04:55.180 --> 00:04:57.459 for Congress in Illinois. And this wasn't some, 00:04:57.480 --> 00:04:59.699 you know, token run just to make a point. She 00:04:59.699 --> 00:05:01.759 actually won the Republican primary. She did. 00:05:01.860 --> 00:05:04.060 She beat the guy. a man named John Godlowski 00:05:04.060 --> 00:05:06.740 in the primary. She did lose the general election 00:05:06.740 --> 00:05:08.680 to the Democratic incumbent, but you have to 00:05:08.680 --> 00:05:11.019 look at how she ran that campaign. It was a low 00:05:11.019 --> 00:05:13.800 -budget operation, for sure, but she had backing 00:05:13.800 --> 00:05:16.920 from some real heavy hitters, people like the 00:05:16.920 --> 00:05:20.040 old Immunitions family and the Texas oil billionaire 00:05:20.040 --> 00:05:23.420 H .L. Hunt. And her rhetoric back then in 1952, 00:05:23.420 --> 00:05:26.420 it sounds, well, it sounds eerily familiar to 00:05:26.420 --> 00:05:28.800 things we still hear today. She was accusing 00:05:28.800 --> 00:05:31.300 the Truman administration of... demoralizing 00:05:31.300 --> 00:05:33.079 our children. It's the beginning of her signature 00:05:33.079 --> 00:05:36.379 style that mix of moral conservatism and fervent 00:05:36.379 --> 00:05:39.220 anti -communism but her real breakout moment 00:05:39.220 --> 00:05:41.959 the thing that took her from being a local Illinois 00:05:41.959 --> 00:05:46.310 politician to a national kingmaker. that came 00:05:46.310 --> 00:05:49.490 in 1964. This has to be the book. A choice, not 00:05:49.490 --> 00:05:51.829 an echo. That is the one. And she self -published 00:05:51.829 --> 00:05:53.810 it. Now, self -published usually makes you think 00:05:53.810 --> 00:05:55.910 of, you know, a small print run, maybe a few 00:05:55.910 --> 00:05:57.930 boxes in a garage. Right, a passion product. 00:05:58.069 --> 00:06:00.790 This book sold over 3 million copies. 3 million 00:06:00.790 --> 00:06:03.589 in 1964. That's staggering for any political 00:06:03.589 --> 00:06:05.709 book, let alone a self -published one before 00:06:05.709 --> 00:06:08.230 the internet. It was a complete sensation. The 00:06:08.230 --> 00:06:11.720 book was a polemic, a fierce defense. of Barry 00:06:11.720 --> 00:06:14.139 Goldwater, the conservative senator running for 00:06:14.139 --> 00:06:17.360 president. And it was a brutal, no holds barred 00:06:17.360 --> 00:06:19.639 attack on what she called the Rockefeller Republicans. 00:06:19.740 --> 00:06:22.259 The moderates. The liberal, moderate establishment 00:06:22.259 --> 00:06:24.480 based in the Northeast. She argued they were 00:06:24.480 --> 00:06:27.540 a corrupt cabal of secret kingmakers who were 00:06:27.540 --> 00:06:29.620 actively diluting the conservative principles 00:06:29.620 --> 00:06:31.939 of the party. So she's taking on the establishment 00:06:31.939 --> 00:06:33.980 of her own party. She's essentially calling out 00:06:33.980 --> 00:06:36.879 the deep state of the GOP before that term even 00:06:36.879 --> 00:06:39.740 existed. Precisely. And in that round, she won. 00:06:40.160 --> 00:06:43.279 Her book is widely, widely credited with helping 00:06:43.279 --> 00:06:46.360 Goldwater secure the Republican nomination. It 00:06:46.360 --> 00:06:48.620 totally established her as a force to be reckoned 00:06:48.620 --> 00:06:51.199 with in conservative circles. She wasn't just 00:06:51.199 --> 00:06:54.279 an outsider anymore. He was a grassroots mobilizer 00:06:54.279 --> 00:06:57.399 who could completely bypass the traditional gatekeepers. 00:06:57.699 --> 00:06:59.759 Now, there is a bit of a shadow over this period, 00:06:59.839 --> 00:07:02.019 though, right? The connection to the John Birch 00:07:02.019 --> 00:07:04.939 Society. That was a pretty controversial, far 00:07:04.939 --> 00:07:08.019 -right, anti -communist group. It was. And her 00:07:08.019 --> 00:07:11.670 connection is... It's complicated. Robert Walsh 00:07:11.670 --> 00:07:13.449 Jr., who was the founder of the John Birch Society, 00:07:13.730 --> 00:07:16.550 he called her a very loyal member. So he said 00:07:16.550 --> 00:07:19.629 she was in. He did. But Phyllis, later in her 00:07:19.629 --> 00:07:22.730 life, denied it. She claimed she either quit 00:07:22.730 --> 00:07:25.089 or was never really that involved because she 00:07:25.089 --> 00:07:26.990 knew that association would hurt the reputation 00:07:26.990 --> 00:07:30.310 of her book and Goldwater's campaign. So a strategic 00:07:30.310 --> 00:07:33.329 move, a strategic distancing. Absolutely. But 00:07:33.329 --> 00:07:36.230 there is just no doubt she moved in those circles 00:07:36.230 --> 00:07:39.730 and shared that same intense, all consuming anti 00:07:39.730 --> 00:07:42.550 -communist zeal. OK, so by the late 60s, she's 00:07:42.550 --> 00:07:45.230 a known quantity in conservative politics, but 00:07:45.230 --> 00:07:47.290 she's mostly known for, you know, defense policy 00:07:47.290 --> 00:07:50.550 and party infighting. Then the 1970s arrive and 00:07:50.550 --> 00:07:53.310 she finds her defining enemy, the Equal Rights 00:07:53.310 --> 00:07:55.750 Amendment. And to really understand how shocking 00:07:55.750 --> 00:07:58.089 her victory against the ERA was, you have to 00:07:58.089 --> 00:08:00.689 put yourself back in 1972. I mean, the amendment 00:08:00.689 --> 00:08:03.389 had passed Congress with huge bipartisan majorities. 00:08:03.509 --> 00:08:05.470 It wasn't even a partisan issue at first. Not 00:08:05.470 --> 00:08:08.170 at all. It had already been ratified by 28 of 00:08:08.170 --> 00:08:11.449 the required 38 states. Presidents Nixon, Ford, 00:08:11.589 --> 00:08:13.850 and Carter all supported it. I mean, it was seen 00:08:13.850 --> 00:08:16.029 as a done deal. Just a matter of paperwork at 00:08:16.029 --> 00:08:18.350 that point. And then Phyllis Schlafly organizes 00:08:18.350 --> 00:08:21.589 Stop ERA. I never knew this until we started 00:08:21.589 --> 00:08:24.269 researching, but STOPDI was actually an acronym. 00:08:24.509 --> 00:08:27.709 It was. It stood for Stop Taking Our Privileges. 00:08:27.829 --> 00:08:30.290 And that is just a brilliant rhetorical flip, 00:08:30.389 --> 00:08:33.149 isn't it? She didn't frame it as don't give us 00:08:33.149 --> 00:08:36.149 new rights. She framed it as don't take away 00:08:36.149 --> 00:08:38.230 the special status we already have. Exactly. 00:08:38.600 --> 00:08:41.220 And that is the absolute core insight into her 00:08:41.220 --> 00:08:44.059 entire strategy. She argued that American women 00:08:44.059 --> 00:08:46.480 were the most fortunate, most privileged class 00:08:46.480 --> 00:08:49.039 of people in the history of the world. She claimed 00:08:49.039 --> 00:08:51.820 the ERA wasn't a step up. It was a huge step 00:08:51.820 --> 00:08:53.899 down. She didn't argue that women were inferior. 00:08:54.139 --> 00:08:56.279 No, she argued they were privileged and that 00:08:56.279 --> 00:08:58.299 the ERA would cruelly strip those privileges 00:08:58.299 --> 00:09:00.440 away. OK, so let's get into the specifics. What 00:09:00.440 --> 00:09:02.679 were the key arguments she used? Because some 00:09:02.679 --> 00:09:04.659 of them were incredibly potent. The biggest one 00:09:04.659 --> 00:09:06.879 has to be about the military draft. That was 00:09:06.879 --> 00:09:08.919 her ace in the hole. It was her most powerful 00:09:08.919 --> 00:09:11.919 weapon. She argued that if you have total legal 00:09:11.919 --> 00:09:14.720 equality written into the Constitution, you cannot 00:09:14.720 --> 00:09:17.539 logically or legally exempt women from the selective 00:09:17.539 --> 00:09:20.139 service. Right. No distinction based on sex. 00:09:20.279 --> 00:09:23.259 No distinction. So she painted this very vivid, 00:09:23.399 --> 00:09:26.379 very frightening picture for parents across America. 00:09:26.860 --> 00:09:29.379 Your 18 -year -old daughter is being drafted, 00:09:29.580 --> 00:09:32.460 being forced into combat, into trenches, right 00:09:32.460 --> 00:09:35.559 alongside men. This terrified mothers and fathers. 00:09:38.329 --> 00:09:40.429 Legally speaking, she had a point. If the law 00:09:40.429 --> 00:09:42.710 can make no distinction, the draft exemption 00:09:42.710 --> 00:09:45.840 for women becomes unconstitutional. OK, so the 00:09:45.840 --> 00:09:47.980 draft was number one. She also went after financial 00:09:47.980 --> 00:09:50.000 protections, right? This idea of the dependent 00:09:50.000 --> 00:09:53.580 wife. Yes. At the time, a lot of laws around 00:09:53.580 --> 00:09:56.360 Social Security and alimony were written to specifically 00:09:56.360 --> 00:09:58.519 protect women who didn't work outside the home. 00:09:58.659 --> 00:10:01.820 She warned very loudly that the ERA would eliminate 00:10:01.820 --> 00:10:03.740 Social Security benefits for dependent wives 00:10:03.740 --> 00:10:06.120 and widows. So if your husband died, you'd get 00:10:06.120 --> 00:10:09.000 nothing. That was the fear she stoked. She said 00:10:09.000 --> 00:10:12.070 it would abolish alimony completely. Her argument 00:10:12.070 --> 00:10:14.610 was that the ERA would actually liberate men 00:10:14.610 --> 00:10:17.490 from their traditional responsibility of supporting 00:10:17.490 --> 00:10:20.470 their families, leaving housewives with no safety 00:10:20.470 --> 00:10:23.110 net whatsoever. So in her telling, the ERA was 00:10:23.110 --> 00:10:25.889 actually a gift to irresponsible men. Exactly. 00:10:25.909 --> 00:10:28.470 She pitched it as men getting out of their obligations. 00:10:28.870 --> 00:10:32.759 It was a brilliant, if cynical. And then, of 00:10:32.759 --> 00:10:34.440 course, there were the social norms arguments, 00:10:34.679 --> 00:10:37.779 the bathroom argument that we still hear echoes 00:10:37.779 --> 00:10:40.759 of today. Oh, yeah. She famously claimed the 00:10:40.759 --> 00:10:43.200 ERA would lead to unisex bathrooms. She also 00:10:43.200 --> 00:10:45.279 said it would lead to same -sex marriage. Which 00:10:45.279 --> 00:10:46.980 at the time people must have thought was just 00:10:46.980 --> 00:10:49.679 completely absurd. Proponents of the ERA scoffed 00:10:49.679 --> 00:10:52.220 at it. They called it ridiculous fear -mongering. 00:10:52.559 --> 00:10:55.679 But Schlafly was relentless. She insisted that 00:10:55.679 --> 00:10:57.759 if you erase gender distinctions in the Constitution, 00:10:58.200 --> 00:11:00.940 these are the inevitable legal consequences down 00:11:00.940 --> 00:11:03.100 the road. It's kind of wild to look back at that 00:11:03.100 --> 00:11:05.759 because in 2007, she basically took a victory 00:11:05.759 --> 00:11:08.559 lap on that prediction. She did. She said, see, 00:11:08.759 --> 00:11:11.559 I told you so. And beyond just the arguments, 00:11:11.679 --> 00:11:14.500 her tactics were revolutionary. You have to visualize 00:11:14.500 --> 00:11:17.100 the scene playing out at state capitals all over 00:11:17.100 --> 00:11:19.960 the country. On one side, you've got the feminist 00:11:19.960 --> 00:11:22.580 protesters, often younger, chanting, holding 00:11:22.580 --> 00:11:25.580 signs. And on the other side, you have Schlafly's 00:11:25.580 --> 00:11:28.620 army of housewives. Yes. The famous potluck tactic. 00:11:28.940 --> 00:11:31.460 Yes. They would show up with homemade bread. 00:11:32.009 --> 00:11:35.250 fresh jams, apple pies, and they would deliver 00:11:35.250 --> 00:11:37.750 them to the state legislators. That's incredible. 00:11:37.750 --> 00:11:40.129 They have these clever slogans, too. Things like, 00:11:40.129 --> 00:11:43.110 I am for mom and apple pie, and my personal favorite, 00:11:43.289 --> 00:11:46.000 preserve us from a congressional jam. That is 00:11:46.000 --> 00:11:48.840 masterful political branding. It's so disarming. 00:11:48.899 --> 00:11:50.879 I mean, how do you yell at a nice lady who is 00:11:50.879 --> 00:11:53.980 handing you a fresh apple pie? It visually reinforced 00:11:53.980 --> 00:11:56.980 the very image of wholesome domesticity that 00:11:56.980 --> 00:11:59.120 she claimed to be protecting. It created this 00:11:59.120 --> 00:12:01.620 perfect visual contrast that politicians and 00:12:01.620 --> 00:12:03.860 the media couldn't ignore. It made the feminist 00:12:03.860 --> 00:12:05.700 movement look, to the average observer, kind 00:12:05.700 --> 00:12:08.799 of aggressive and anti -family. Why Schlafly's 00:12:08.799 --> 00:12:11.000 crew looked like, well, they looked like everyone's 00:12:11.000 --> 00:12:13.620 mom. And the bottom line is, it worked. It worked 00:12:13.620 --> 00:12:16.480 incredibly well. The momentum to the ERA just 00:12:16.480 --> 00:12:20.700 bent. It hit a brick wall and stopped dead. Five 00:12:20.700 --> 00:12:23.120 states actually took the step of rescinding the 00:12:23.120 --> 00:12:24.919 ratification. They took it back. Wow, I didn't 00:12:24.919 --> 00:12:27.460 know that. Yeah. The ERA died having only reached 00:12:27.460 --> 00:12:30.620 35 states. It needed 38. And political scientists 00:12:30.620 --> 00:12:32.460 who've studied this, like Jane J. Mansbridge, 00:12:32.620 --> 00:12:34.759 have said that without Phyllis Schlafly's organization, 00:12:35.299 --> 00:12:38.320 the ERA likely would have passed easily by 1975. 00:12:38.740 --> 00:12:41.539 So she single -handedly turned the tide. It's 00:12:41.539 --> 00:12:43.220 one of the most effective grassroots campaigns 00:12:43.220 --> 00:12:45.559 in American history. That is a massive impact 00:12:45.559 --> 00:12:48.340 for someone who was, on paper, just a citizen 00:12:48.340 --> 00:12:50.970 activist. But I want to dig a little deeper into 00:12:50.970 --> 00:12:53.409 the ideology behind all this, because it wasn't 00:12:53.409 --> 00:12:55.809 just about the draft or bathrooms for her. She 00:12:55.809 --> 00:12:58.230 had a very specific and very rigid philosophy 00:12:58.230 --> 00:13:01.330 about gender and its role in the world. She absolutely 00:13:01.330 --> 00:13:05.190 did. At her core, Schlafly was a gender essentialist. 00:13:05.350 --> 00:13:07.710 She believed that men and women are fundamentally, 00:13:08.090 --> 00:13:11.350 biologically, and emotionally different, and 00:13:11.350 --> 00:13:13.289 that these differences mean they are suited for 00:13:13.289 --> 00:13:16.500 different roles in society. She argued that feminists 00:13:16.500 --> 00:13:18.440 weren't just fighting a political battle. They 00:13:18.440 --> 00:13:20.440 were fighting against nature and, in her view, 00:13:20.600 --> 00:13:23.639 even against God. And this brings us to her take 00:13:23.639 --> 00:13:26.080 on the pay gap. Because usually when someone 00:13:26.080 --> 00:13:28.559 brings up the pay gap, it's to say, this is unfair, 00:13:28.700 --> 00:13:30.720 this is a problem we need to fix. Schlafly looked 00:13:30.720 --> 00:13:32.879 at it and said, no, it's actually a good thing. 00:13:33.080 --> 00:13:35.879 Right. It's a shocking position to hear. She 00:13:35.879 --> 00:13:38.299 called the pay gap itself deceitful propaganda. 00:13:38.820 --> 00:13:41.059 But then she also defended the underlying reality 00:13:41.059 --> 00:13:44.490 of men, on average, earning more. Her logic was, 00:13:44.509 --> 00:13:46.669 well, it was that it is beneficial for society 00:13:46.669 --> 00:13:49.429 as a whole if the average man earns more than 00:13:49.429 --> 00:13:51.289 the average woman. All because of that provider 00:13:51.289 --> 00:13:54.730 role. Exactly. She believed that if men didn't 00:13:54.730 --> 00:13:56.889 earn more, they couldn't fulfill their primary, 00:13:57.110 --> 00:14:00.190 God -given duty as providers. And if they couldn't 00:14:00.190 --> 00:14:02.610 be providers, the entire family unit would crumble. 00:14:02.940 --> 00:14:05.919 She said, and this is a direct quote, we certainly 00:14:05.919 --> 00:14:08.120 don't want a society in which the average wage 00:14:08.120 --> 00:14:10.960 paid to all women equals men because that society 00:14:10.960 --> 00:14:12.860 would have eliminated the role of motherhood. 00:14:12.980 --> 00:14:16.720 That's a stark way to put it. She literally saw 00:14:16.720 --> 00:14:19.500 financial equality as the enemy of motherhood. 00:14:19.679 --> 00:14:22.200 She did. To her, the role of the dependent wife 00:14:22.200 --> 00:14:25.379 and mother was the most socially necessary, most 00:14:25.379 --> 00:14:28.320 critical job in the entire civilization. The 00:14:28.320 --> 00:14:31.139 family was the building block of stability. And 00:14:31.139 --> 00:14:33.620 that stability, in her mind, required a clear 00:14:33.620 --> 00:14:35.919 hierarchy. But this is the paradox that I just 00:14:35.919 --> 00:14:38.299 can't get past. She is preaching day in and day 00:14:38.299 --> 00:14:40.340 out that a woman's place is in the home, serving 00:14:40.340 --> 00:14:43.179 her family. But Phyllis Schlafly herself was 00:14:43.179 --> 00:14:45.519 an incredibly active, powerful career woman. 00:14:45.740 --> 00:14:47.799 Is the elephant in the room of her entire career. 00:14:48.000 --> 00:14:50.799 She was an author, a national speaker, an activist 00:14:50.799 --> 00:14:53.379 who traveled the country constantly. She even 00:14:53.379 --> 00:14:55.120 went back to school and got her law degree in 00:14:55.120 --> 00:14:58.120 1978. Her critics pointed this out all the time, 00:14:58.220 --> 00:15:01.379 that she was rarely home. And she was pressed 00:15:01.379 --> 00:15:04.259 on this constantly in interviews. She had a standard 00:15:04.259 --> 00:15:07.379 rebuttal, a line she always used. She told Time 00:15:07.379 --> 00:15:09.299 magazine once that she would cancel speeches 00:15:09.299 --> 00:15:11.059 whenever her husband thought she'd been away 00:15:11.059 --> 00:15:13.679 from home too much. So she framed her entire 00:15:13.679 --> 00:15:15.960 massive career as something she was only doing 00:15:15.960 --> 00:15:19.059 with her husband's permission. Yes. She was very 00:15:19.059 --> 00:15:21.720 careful to maintain the public optics of submission, 00:15:21.980 --> 00:15:24.700 even while she was privately wielding immense 00:15:24.700 --> 00:15:27.779 political power. She truly believed that every 00:15:27.779 --> 00:15:30.019 marriage required an ultimate decision maker, 00:15:30.200 --> 00:15:33.000 and that person, by definition, had to be the 00:15:33.000 --> 00:15:35.379 husband. She took that concept of the husband's 00:15:35.379 --> 00:15:38.509 absolute authority into some... some very dark 00:15:38.509 --> 00:15:40.809 territory later in life. There was a comment 00:15:40.809 --> 00:15:43.190 she made in 2007 about marital rape that really 00:15:43.190 --> 00:15:45.490 shocked a lot of people. That was during a speech 00:15:45.490 --> 00:15:48.230 she gave at Bates College. She was arguing against 00:15:48.230 --> 00:15:50.669 the very concept of marital rape as a crime. 00:15:51.190 --> 00:15:53.769 She said, and I'm quoting here, by getting married, 00:15:53.929 --> 00:15:56.549 the woman has consented to sex and I don't think 00:15:56.549 --> 00:15:59.769 you can call it rape. Wow, that is... That's 00:15:59.769 --> 00:16:02.470 a heavy statement. It really shows how absolute 00:16:02.470 --> 00:16:05.009 her view of the marriage contract was. It wasn't 00:16:05.009 --> 00:16:07.250 just a partnership. No, and her view was a legal 00:16:07.250 --> 00:16:10.269 and spiritual hierarchy where the husband's rights 00:16:10.269 --> 00:16:13.169 were paramount. And she believed that feminism 00:16:13.169 --> 00:16:15.950 was victimizing women by telling them this hierarchy 00:16:15.950 --> 00:16:19.190 was a trap. For Schlafly, the traditional family 00:16:19.190 --> 00:16:22.120 unit with the father at the head was. In her 00:16:22.120 --> 00:16:25.019 own words, the greatest single achievement in 00:16:25.019 --> 00:16:27.320 the entire history of women's rights. She believed 00:16:27.320 --> 00:16:30.279 it protected women. More than any law or any 00:16:30.279 --> 00:16:32.919 government program ever could. OK, we've spent 00:16:32.919 --> 00:16:34.659 a lot of time on gender, but we can't ignore 00:16:34.659 --> 00:16:36.919 the other side of her coin. We mentioned at the 00:16:36.919 --> 00:16:39.320 top that she was a ballistics gunner. Phyllis 00:16:39.320 --> 00:16:42.419 Schlafly was a stone cold, cold warrior. Absolutely. 00:16:42.440 --> 00:16:45.899 You cannot separate her social conservatism from 00:16:45.899 --> 00:16:48.259 her national defense hawkishness. They were two 00:16:48.259 --> 00:16:50.659 sides of the same coin for her. She was just 00:16:50.659 --> 00:16:52.639 as passionate and just as knowledgeable about 00:16:52.639 --> 00:16:55.379 nuclear weapons as she was about apple pie. She 00:16:55.379 --> 00:16:57.500 wrote these books with titles that sound like 00:16:57.500 --> 00:17:00.240 Tom Clancy novels like Strike from Space and 00:17:00.240 --> 00:17:03.460 Kissinger on the Couch. She did. She was deeply, 00:17:03.519 --> 00:17:07.440 deeply suspicious of the whole idea of easing 00:17:07.440 --> 00:17:09.940 tensions with the Soviet Union. She opposed pretty 00:17:09.940 --> 00:17:12.140 much every arms control agreement that was proposed. 00:17:12.440 --> 00:17:14.900 She used this very vivid analogy to describe 00:17:14.900 --> 00:17:17.579 them. What was it? She said signing an arms control 00:17:17.579 --> 00:17:20.349 agreement with the Soviets was like. disarming 00:17:20.349 --> 00:17:22.609 the police in order to stop murder. So she was 00:17:22.609 --> 00:17:24.690 all about peace through strength. More like peace 00:17:24.690 --> 00:17:27.230 through supremacy, really. She believed the U 00:17:27.230 --> 00:17:28.869 .S. needed to maintain overwhelming military 00:17:28.869 --> 00:17:31.650 superiority at all times. And this worldview 00:17:31.650 --> 00:17:33.970 extended to her opinion of international organizations. 00:17:34.369 --> 00:17:36.730 She despised the United Nations. She called it 00:17:36.730 --> 00:17:39.329 a Trojan horse, if I remember correctly. Yes, 00:17:39.349 --> 00:17:43.029 a Trojan horse and a monument to foolish hopes. 00:17:43.710 --> 00:17:46.829 She saw the U .N. and later organizations like 00:17:46.829 --> 00:17:49.329 the World Trade Organization as direct attacks 00:17:49.329 --> 00:17:52.329 on American sovereignty. She was an early and 00:17:52.329 --> 00:17:55.589 very vocal opponent of what we now call globalism. 00:17:55.730 --> 00:17:57.849 She fought against the idea of a North American 00:17:57.849 --> 00:18:00.589 union, right? She did. The idea of merging the 00:18:00.589 --> 00:18:03.029 economies of the U .S., Canada, and Mexico was 00:18:03.029 --> 00:18:06.390 anathema to her. For Schlafly, American sovereignty 00:18:06.390 --> 00:18:08.910 was sacred. No international body, no treaty 00:18:08.910 --> 00:18:11.089 should ever be able to tell America what to do. 00:18:11.390 --> 00:18:13.869 It's just so interesting how that specific thread, 00:18:14.150 --> 00:18:16.970 anti -globalism, sovereignty above all, has become 00:18:16.970 --> 00:18:19.210 so dominant in one wing of the modern Republican 00:18:19.210 --> 00:18:21.710 Party. She was sounding that alarm way back in 00:18:21.710 --> 00:18:24.170 the 60s and 70s. She really was a bridge figure 00:18:24.170 --> 00:18:26.430 between the old right of the 1950s and the modern 00:18:26.430 --> 00:18:28.569 populist right that we see today. Let's pivot 00:18:28.569 --> 00:18:30.309 for a second to her personal life a bit more. 00:18:30.369 --> 00:18:32.549 We mentioned her husband, Fred. John Fred Schlafly 00:18:32.549 --> 00:18:34.630 Jr. He came from a wealthy, prominent family 00:18:34.630 --> 00:18:37.349 in St. Louis and was a successful attorney himself. 00:18:38.170 --> 00:18:39.930 It's important to note that they were a team. 00:18:40.240 --> 00:18:42.200 This wasn't just her project. They were both 00:18:42.200 --> 00:18:45.019 devout Catholics and they explicitly linked their 00:18:45.019 --> 00:18:48.079 Catholicism with their American patriotism. They 00:18:48.079 --> 00:18:50.200 saw the fight against communism as a spiritual 00:18:50.200 --> 00:18:53.019 war. As much as a political one. Yes. It was 00:18:53.019 --> 00:18:55.160 good versus evil. And they had six children together. 00:18:55.460 --> 00:18:58.799 And this leads us to one of the most complex 00:18:58.799 --> 00:19:01.599 and I think revealing dynamics in her family 00:19:01.599 --> 00:19:05.000 life. Her eldest son, John. Yes. So in 1992. 00:19:05.740 --> 00:19:09.299 John Schlafly was publicly outed as gay by a 00:19:09.299 --> 00:19:11.559 magazine called Queer Week. Now you have to just 00:19:11.559 --> 00:19:13.680 imagine the scene. His mother is at that time 00:19:13.680 --> 00:19:16.180 the single most prominent opponent of gay rights 00:19:16.180 --> 00:19:18.319 in the entire country. She called the gay lobby 00:19:18.319 --> 00:19:20.480 an attack on the very definition of marriage. 00:19:20.799 --> 00:19:23.420 So how did she react when her own son was outed? 00:19:23.420 --> 00:19:25.799 Did she disown him? No. And this is where all 00:19:25.799 --> 00:19:28.220 the nuance and complexity comes in. She did not 00:19:28.220 --> 00:19:30.579 disown him. She maintained a relationship with 00:19:30.579 --> 00:19:32.900 him. But then this is a very big but. She did 00:19:32.900 --> 00:19:35.299 not change her politics one bit. And neither 00:19:35.299 --> 00:19:37.420 did he. Wait, what do you mean? John acknowledged 00:19:37.420 --> 00:19:40.200 that he was gay, but he publicly stated that 00:19:40.200 --> 00:19:42.579 he supported his mother's opposition to same 00:19:42.579 --> 00:19:46.019 -sex marriage. That is really hard to wrap your 00:19:46.019 --> 00:19:48.140 head around. He agreed with her that he himself 00:19:48.140 --> 00:19:50.299 shouldn't have the right to marry. Essentially, 00:19:50.299 --> 00:19:53.839 yes. It seems he compartmentalized his personal 00:19:53.839 --> 00:19:56.319 life from his political beliefs, much like his 00:19:56.319 --> 00:19:58.720 mother did with her professional career and her 00:19:58.720 --> 00:20:01.500 domestic ideals. It's a fascinating psychological 00:20:01.500 --> 00:20:05.099 dynamic. Schlafly continued to attack the gay 00:20:05.099 --> 00:20:07.980 lobby relentlessly, even while her own son was 00:20:07.980 --> 00:20:10.059 living as a gay man. That family Thanksgiving 00:20:10.059 --> 00:20:12.839 must have been intense. And her other children 00:20:12.839 --> 00:20:14.460 were also very active in the movement, right? 00:20:14.579 --> 00:20:17.079 Her son Andrew founded Conservapedia. That's 00:20:17.079 --> 00:20:19.720 right. Andrew Schlafly founded Conservapedia, 00:20:19.859 --> 00:20:22.259 which was created as a conservative alternative 00:20:22.259 --> 00:20:24.940 to Wikipedia because he felt Wikipedia had a 00:20:24.940 --> 00:20:28.240 liberal bias. And her daughter, Anne, eventually 00:20:28.240 --> 00:20:30.259 became the chairman of the Eagle Forum, the very 00:20:30.259 --> 00:20:32.480 organization Phyllis had founded. Well, speaking 00:20:32.480 --> 00:20:34.240 of the Eagle Forum and her children, that brings 00:20:34.240 --> 00:20:36.279 us right to the end of her life. The year is 00:20:36.279 --> 00:20:39.640 2016. Phyllis is in her 90s. And there is one 00:20:39.640 --> 00:20:42.819 last political explosion. It was a truly dramatic 00:20:42.819 --> 00:20:46.440 finale to her career. In the 2016 Republican 00:20:46.440 --> 00:20:48.779 primary, most of the conservative establishment, 00:20:49.039 --> 00:20:50.500 I mean, the people Phyllis had worked with for 00:20:50.500 --> 00:20:53.259 decades, they were backing Ted Cruz. They saw 00:20:53.259 --> 00:20:55.480 him as the true conservatives in the race. But 00:20:55.480 --> 00:20:58.740 Phyllis, she went a different way. She endorsed 00:20:58.740 --> 00:21:01.859 Donald Trump. And she did it very early, when 00:21:01.859 --> 00:21:04.420 almost no one in her circle was taking him seriously. 00:21:04.759 --> 00:21:07.740 Why Trump? I mean, he seems like the polar opposite 00:21:07.740 --> 00:21:11.160 of the pious, Catholic, traditional family man 00:21:11.160 --> 00:21:13.480 image that she cultivated. She liked that he 00:21:13.480 --> 00:21:15.799 was a disruptor. She liked that he was willing 00:21:15.799 --> 00:21:17.759 to fight the kingmakers that she had written 00:21:17.759 --> 00:21:21.359 about all the way back in 1964. She saw in Trump 00:21:21.359 --> 00:21:23.640 a fighter who would actually enforce the border 00:21:23.640 --> 00:21:26.039 and stand up to globalism. She even co -authored 00:21:26.039 --> 00:21:28.359 a book. I saw this, The Conservative Case for 00:21:28.359 --> 00:21:30.839 Trump. And that endorsement tore her beloved 00:21:30.839 --> 00:21:33.740 organization apart. Really? It caused a massive 00:21:33.740 --> 00:21:36.319 bitter rift in the Eagle Forum. Six board members 00:21:36.319 --> 00:21:38.779 rebelled against her endorsement. They tried 00:21:38.779 --> 00:21:41.500 to oust her. And one of those six board members 00:21:41.500 --> 00:21:44.140 was her own daughter, Anne. Her daughter sided 00:21:44.140 --> 00:21:47.559 against her in a boardroom coup. She did. And 00:21:47.559 --> 00:21:50.519 was a Ted Cruz supporter. The board split and 00:21:50.519 --> 00:21:52.660 Phyllis actually broke with the dissident members, 00:21:52.839 --> 00:21:55.559 including her daughter. It was an incredibly 00:21:55.559 --> 00:21:58.180 bitter internal struggle right at the very end 00:21:58.180 --> 00:22:01.579 of her life. But Phyllis stuck to her guns. And 00:22:01.579 --> 00:22:04.000 the book, The Conservative Case for Trump, was 00:22:04.000 --> 00:22:07.549 published on September 6, 2016. Yes. One day 00:22:07.549 --> 00:22:09.970 after she died. That timing is just incredible. 00:22:10.130 --> 00:22:12.470 She died on September 5th. She lived just long 00:22:12.470 --> 00:22:14.509 enough to see Trump officially accept the nomination. 00:22:14.890 --> 00:22:17.109 But she passed away just before the election 00:22:17.109 --> 00:22:20.029 itself. It was a final, powerful act. There was 00:22:20.029 --> 00:22:22.349 another incident near the end of her life that 00:22:22.349 --> 00:22:24.710 I think really sums up her relationship with 00:22:24.710 --> 00:22:27.069 the broader culture. It involved her alma mater, 00:22:27.269 --> 00:22:29.990 Washington University. Yes, this was back in 00:22:29.990 --> 00:22:33.329 2008. Washington University in St. Louis announced 00:22:33.329 --> 00:22:34.990 that they were going to give Phyllis Schlafly 00:22:34.990 --> 00:22:37.819 an honorary degree. I mean, she was, after all, 00:22:37.859 --> 00:22:40.279 a highly accomplished and famous alumna. And 00:22:40.279 --> 00:22:42.440 I can imagine that went over well. The student 00:22:42.440 --> 00:22:45.039 body and a large portion of the faculty went 00:22:45.039 --> 00:22:47.759 ballistic. There were huge protests. A group 00:22:47.759 --> 00:22:50.000 of law professors wrote a public letter calling 00:22:50.000 --> 00:22:54.400 her entire career an exercise in anti intellectualism 00:22:54.400 --> 00:22:57.660 in pursuit of a political agenda. But the university 00:22:57.660 --> 00:23:00.380 didn't back down? No. The ceremony went ahead, 00:23:00.500 --> 00:23:02.880 and when Phyllis Schlafly stood up to receive 00:23:02.880 --> 00:23:05.319 her degree, hundreds of students and faculty 00:23:05.319 --> 00:23:08.019 members in the audience stood up as well and 00:23:08.019 --> 00:23:10.579 silently turned their backs on her. A silent 00:23:10.579 --> 00:23:13.200 protest. How did she handle that? In classic 00:23:13.200 --> 00:23:15.839 Schlafly fashion. She didn't blink. She later 00:23:15.839 --> 00:23:18.799 called the protesters a bunch of losers and juveniles. 00:23:18.799 --> 00:23:20.559 She said, I'm not sure they're mature enough 00:23:20.559 --> 00:23:24.059 to graduate. She never, ever. sought approval 00:23:24.059 --> 00:23:26.720 from her enemies. In fact, I think she thrived 00:23:26.720 --> 00:23:28.599 on their disapproval. It's clear she left a huge 00:23:28.599 --> 00:23:31.339 mark. I mean, we see her in pop culture now more 00:23:31.339 --> 00:23:34.039 than ever. She was the central figure, the anti 00:23:34.039 --> 00:23:36.960 -hero in the miniseries Mrs. America, played 00:23:36.960 --> 00:23:38.940 by Cate Blanchett. She's even mentioned in Margaret 00:23:38.940 --> 00:23:41.440 Atwood's sequel to The Handmaid's Tale, The Testaments. 00:23:41.759 --> 00:23:44.460 There's a Schlafly Cafe. She's become a symbol. 00:23:44.599 --> 00:23:47.339 For the left, she's the ultimate betrayer of 00:23:47.339 --> 00:23:49.240 her gender, the woman who got to the top and 00:23:49.240 --> 00:23:51.500 then pulled up the ladder behind her. For the 00:23:51.500 --> 00:23:54.420 right, she's the godmother of the modern conservative 00:23:54.420 --> 00:23:57.279 movement, the woman who proved that you can stop 00:23:57.279 --> 00:23:59.680 the progressive tide if you organize effectively. 00:24:00.180 --> 00:24:02.839 So as we wrap this up, how do we summarize a 00:24:02.839 --> 00:24:05.579 figure like Phyllis Schlafly? A lawyer who argued 00:24:05.579 --> 00:24:08.500 against expanding women's rights. A career woman 00:24:08.500 --> 00:24:11.839 who preached domesticity. A polite, well -spoken 00:24:11.839 --> 00:24:13.940 lady from the Midwest who fought some of the 00:24:13.940 --> 00:24:16.500 most brutal political wars of her time. I think 00:24:16.500 --> 00:24:18.519 you have to see her as the primary architect 00:24:18.519 --> 00:24:22.299 of the modern family values platform. Before 00:24:22.299 --> 00:24:24.660 Schlafly, the Republican Party was mostly focused 00:24:24.660 --> 00:24:27.279 on business, economics, and anti -communism. 00:24:27.630 --> 00:24:29.990 She was the one who fused social conservatism, 00:24:30.069 --> 00:24:32.509 abortion, gay rights, traditional gender roles 00:24:32.509 --> 00:24:35.109 with national defense. She realized you could 00:24:35.109 --> 00:24:37.230 mobilize millions of voters not by talking about 00:24:37.230 --> 00:24:39.269 tax rates, but by talking about their children, 00:24:39.470 --> 00:24:42.009 their values and their deepest fears. She tapped 00:24:42.009 --> 00:24:43.910 into the silent majority before that was even 00:24:43.910 --> 00:24:46.430 a popular term. She practically invented the 00:24:46.430 --> 00:24:50.130 playbook for it. And that that really leads to 00:24:50.130 --> 00:24:51.930 the big question, the provocative thought to 00:24:51.930 --> 00:24:53.880 leave you with today. Let's hear it. Phyllis 00:24:53.880 --> 00:24:56.819 Schlafly showed the world that a well -organized 00:24:56.819 --> 00:25:00.240 grassroots movement, one that focuses on specific 00:25:00.240 --> 00:25:03.519 tangible fears like the draft and traditional 00:25:03.519 --> 00:25:06.839 symbols like mom and apple pie, could stop a 00:25:06.839 --> 00:25:08.859 constitutional amendment that had bipartisan 00:25:08.859 --> 00:25:12.839 support and seemed absolutely inevitable. She 00:25:12.839 --> 00:25:14.720 defeated the elites with an army of ordinary 00:25:14.720 --> 00:25:17.839 people. So in our current era of intense political 00:25:17.839 --> 00:25:20.039 polarization, when you look at the success of 00:25:20.039 --> 00:25:22.940 modern populist movements on the right. You have 00:25:22.940 --> 00:25:25.700 to ask, is this just the Schlafly playbook on 00:25:25.700 --> 00:25:28.259 repeat? Did she write the code that is still 00:25:28.259 --> 00:25:30.680 running modern American politics today? That 00:25:30.680 --> 00:25:32.799 is definitely something to chew on. She might 00:25:32.799 --> 00:25:34.700 be gone, but it seems her playbook is very much 00:25:34.700 --> 00:25:37.200 still in use. That's it for this deep dive into 00:25:37.200 --> 00:25:39.140 Phyllis Schlafly. Thanks for listening, and we'll 00:25:39.140 --> 00:25:39.920 catch you on the next one.