To the editors:
Bryan Miller's story, "Right Wing Feminists" [October 1], contrasts sharply with the article on Christian feminists a few weeks back ["Was Christ a Feminist?," August 27].
The Christian feminists, while believers who kept within the tradition, worked equally hard at their feminism. Indeed, their primary audience was the Church to whom they presented a feminist perspective.
The right-wingers, on the contrary, bring no feminist perspective to their conservatism. They bring, for that matter, only the most hackneyed conservative perspective to feminists. Unshackle the business sector (and shackle government) and everything will come out all right.
Actual feminists forged a great many tools for achieving their ends, from consciousness-raising groups to lawsuits, from their own magazines to lobbying. If they were wrong to use "statist" tools, then what are the extra nonstatist tools that the conservatives suggest? Apparently, waiting for the Market to deliver.
Dr. Heyden claims that lower tax rates would cause middle-class working mothers to stay home. Laffer and the supply-siders claimed that lower tax rates would cause everybody to work more and harder. Were these economic theories, this would be a direct contradiction. But, of course, neither is an economic theory; they are merely contradictory political arguments to support tax cuts for the rich.
Dr. Heyden belongs to NOW in order to agitate for libertarianism within it; Mrs. Horist feels that is compromising her conservatism too much. Mrs. Horist is treasurer of the United Republican Fund, the voice for reaction within the Illinois Republican Party, and feels no compromise of her feminism. Nor does she tell us of any agitation for feminism within that group.
Spare us such "feminism."