Suzanne Venker, the niece of anti-feminist Phyllis Schlafly, is back on FoxNews.com for some more of her unqualified and unscientific pronouncements about the so-called "war on men." Although Fox is determined to have its viewers believe there is no such thing as the war on women, it seems equally determined to persuade them that there is a war on men. But we could end the war or have a truce if only women would just submit to men, let them drive and "become comfortable with sacrifice and capitulation."
Think Progress summed up Venker's latest op-ed nicely:
The author believes the crudest of crude gender stereotypes are built into male and female brains, arguing that women “like to gather and nest and take care of people” while men “are hunters: they like to build things and kill things.” As a consequence, she maintains a man’s place is in the office; “his” woman should simply “surrender” to his rule.
And here's an example of just that kind of thinking from Venker in her latest on Fox:
If the ultimate goal is lasting love, women are going to have to become comfortable with sacrifice and capitulation. Because those are the underpinnings of a long-term marriage – for both sexes. If you don’t believe me, ask your grandparents. Or anyone else who’s been married for decades.
Love today has become a power struggle, largely because women have been conditioned to keep their guard up – as though men and marriage will swallow them whole. As Sandra Bullock once said to Barbara Walters, “I’d always had this feeling that if you got married, it was like the end of who you were.” That attitude is commonplace, and it’s the direct result of a generation of feminists who told their daughters never to depend on a man.
In this op-ed, Venker throws in a professional-sounding paragraph:
Fortunately, there’s been an explosion of brain research in the past several years to help explain male and female anatomy. The best books are Dr. Louann Brizendine’s “The Male Brain” and “The Female Brain.”
But while she'd like you to believe here that she's some kind of expert in her field, as I wrote in a previous post about her, Venker boasts about not having any professional credentials beyond a messy marriage and a willingness "to speak out about things" she knows "from experience to be true."
So why is this woman with no credentials being given so much credibility on Fox? I've got to believe it's because they like her message.
Oh, and by the way? Yes, I do have a degree in journalism.
Maybe someone needs to introduce a new word into Venker’s vocabulary: Hypocrite.