Stephen Moore’s Paper Trail: Bashing Women, Gay Rights and More

In a September 2000 commentary, Mr. Moore lamented the “radical feminism” at universities and outlined what he saw as a dangerous trend on campus. The piece highlighted a Men’s Health article “rating of the least and most anti-male colleges in the country.”

Parents beware: There is a new oppressed minority on college campuses these days, and it is not women, blacks, Latinos or gays. In fact in this era of ultra-political correctness at universities, these other groups enjoy such an exalted status of privilege that even the most unintended slur can lead a student to instant expulsion. No, the group that has fallen into great disfavor is the white male. You see, your son is an oppressor and is being forced to pay for the sins of his father and grandfathers.

It is a well-established fact that radical feminism has taken over the culture, especially at the elite East Coast universities. In a recent, brilliant article in the Boston Globe titled “Women’s rights, men wrong,” a junior at the University of Massachusetts complains, “It’s getting tough to be a guy around here.” A rape on campus had converted the entire white male population into a suspected class. The anti-male bias has started to border on the preposterous. At Antioch College, the school has issued a dos-and-don’ts rule book for how to round the bases with a co-ed. You now have to get verbal permission from the woman at each stage of courtship — i.e., “May I kiss you?” This may seem to take the allure and spontaneity out of a relationship, but better to ask than risk a lawsuit.

They also seem hell bent on draining all the fun out of college life. Colleges are places for rabble-rousing. For men to lose their boyhood innocence. To do stupid things. To stay out way too late drinking. To chase skirts. (At the University of Illinois, we used to say that the best thing about Sunday nights was sleeping alone.) It’s all a time-tested rite of passage into adulthood. And the women seemed to survive just fine. If they were so oppressed and offended by drunken, lustful frat boys, why is it that on Friday nights they showed up in droves in tight skirts to the keg parties?

Later in the piece: Parents with daughters should also take note of the list unless you want your little girl to come back home four years later radically feminized and inculcated with a creed that makes them angry at half the human race. One tipoff is how many resources the college devotes to programs like “women’s studies” and black history.

— “Cornered on Campus” in The Washington Times, Sept. 5, 2000

Mr. Moore wrote frequently and often disparagingly about female athletic ability and women’s sports. Much of his commentary was aimed at professional athletes, but Mr. Moore also wrote about the inequity of coed sports at more junior levels.

No one seems to care much that co-ed sports is doing irreparable harm to the psyche of America’s little boys.

At this pre-puberty state of life girls tower over the boys and typically have greater coordination. Last year the Pele of my son’s league was a kindergartner named Kate Lynn—Secretariat in pig tails. During one game, Kate Lynn stampeded over Justin repeatedly, which, of course, did wonders for his fledgling self-esteem. After the third knockdown, I quietly pulled him aside and advised: “Remember that rule about never hitting a girl. Let’s suspend that for the next 40 minutes.” But he never did because she was bigger than he was.

If the girls are bad, the moms are worse. They berate the referees. Taunt opposing players. Nag the coach unmercifully to put their no-talent kid back in.

— ‘Soccer-Mom Hell” in National Review, 1998

The women tennis pros don’t really want equal pay for equal work. They want equal pay for inferior work. There’s a very practical reason why Pete Sampras, for example, makes a lot more money than Martina Hingis does. He’s much, much better than she is. The day that Martina can return Pete’s serve is the day she should get paid what he does.

If there is an injustice in tennis, it’s that women like Martina Hingis and Monica Seles make millions of dollars a year, even though there are hundreds of men at the collegiate level (assuming their schools haven’t dropped the sport) who could beat them handily.

— “Battle of the Sexes” in National Review Online, June 7, 2000

Mr. Moore made clear that he was not a fan of women’s involvement in basketball at any level, though he made an exception for Bonnie Bernstein, the ESPN commentator, who he said should wear a halter top. In a column about March Madness that Mr. Moore said was intended as a joke, he offered up a list of seven N.C.A.A. features “that are simply un-American and must be stopped.”

1. No Women. Here’s the rule change I propose: No more women refs, no women announcers, no women beer venders, no women anything. There is, of course, an exception to this rule. Women are permitted to participate, if and only if, they look like Bonnie Bernstein. The fact that Bonnie knows nothing about basketball is entirely irrelevant.

2. Bonnie Bernstein should wear a halter top. This is a no-brainer, CBS. What in the world are you waiting for? To quote the immortal Wayne of Wayne’s World, “If Bonnie were president of the United States, she’d be Babe-raham Lincoln.

7. More probing interviews by Bonnie Bernstein. Did I say this already? I welcome readers’ ideas about further reforms in this sacred institution.

— “March Madness” in National Review Online, March 19, 2002


Source link