Who-Stole-Feminism.-How-Women-Have-Betrayed-Women

172 WHO STOLE FEMINISM?schools." All that aired of her comments was that isolated exasperatedremark. 49No fewer than fifty members of Congress sent a letter to Lamar Alexander,professing themselves outraged by Ravitch's comment, and theycited the AAUW/Wellesley report "How Schools Shortchange Girls"to contradict her. They demanded that the secretary take serious stepswith regard to Ms. Ravitch. The letter also put the secretary on notice:if he opposed the Gender Equity in Education Act, there would be fireworks.Stone Phillips may well have been right when he said on a recent"Dateline" update on the Gender Equity in Education Act, "With womenplaying a bigger role than ever in Washington . . . this may be one billimmune from congressional gridlock." 50But the women who are playinga bigger role are not necessarily members of Congress; they are morelikely to be the determined women of organizations like the AAUW andthe Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.Jane Pauley was clearly moved by the Wellesley Report. Her husband,Garry Trudeau, was too; he used his "Doonesbury" column to popularizeits findings. It is understandable that Ms. Pauley and Mr. Trudeau shouldassume that the Wellesley scholars and the AAUW had been fair andcompetent in their research. To Pauley and Trudeau, as to most otherintelligent and informed Americans, Wellesley and the AAUW are synonymouswith professional integrity and scholarly authority.On the other hand, the American public relies on Ms. Pauley's reputationas an investigative reporter to be accurate—even on issues thatpassionately concern her. Ironically, the title of her gender bias documentarywas "Failing at Fairness."I have had yet another brush with the Sadkers. On the afternoon ofMonday, January 10, 1994,1 received a call from a producer of the OprahWinfrey show. The Sadkers would be appearing on the show on Thursdaymorning to discuss their findings on how girls are being shortchanged inthe nation's schools. I was invited to join them on the show to provide acontrasting point of view. Despite the short notice, I was delighted. It isso rare that the gender-bias experts are confronted with any kind ofcriticism. I accepted and we planned that I would leave for ChicagoWednesday morning to avoid transportation problems from a predictedstorm. But on late Tuesday afternoon, the producer called to tell me thatthere had been an extraordinary development. The Sadkers were refusingto appear with me. The producer was apologetic, but he was in a bind.The show would go on without my criticism—which is just what theSadkers wanted. I told the producer that this was a pattern with gender-