The Sun Journal (March 29) has cranked up my agitation with numerous misquotes and misrepresentations of Phyllis Schlafly.

Grammatically, quotation marks are to be used for direct quotes. The Sun Journal combined a potpourri of Schlafly’s points into one and wrote it as a direct quote. By doing so, the writer misrepresented what she said.

Schlafly did not say “They didn’t put ‘women’ in the Constitution, they put ‘sex’ in the Constitution”; she said that the Constitution was “gender-neutral.”

One student asked Schlafly what her definition of the American woman would be. In my opinion, Schlafly embodies this. She has chosen to have two careers: one as a stay-at-home mother and another as someone who has walked with presidents, influenced legislation on the state and federal level, written a host of books, is an expert in Russian affairs and policy, as well as having multiple advanced degrees from prestigious universities.

Isn’t this the feminist ideal? Does this reflect “a career of denigrating women who aspire to go beyond that role”? Schlafly did not say that homemaking and a career outside the home at the same time “can’t be done;” she said they can, but it would be a very difficult choice.

While she may not have changed her mind in the last 40 years, she was once 20 years old and in the process of becoming the woman that she is today. And I am sure that included changing her mind.

Susan Strickland, Lisbon

Editor’s Note: The Sun Journal stands by the story as reported.

Copy the Story Link