Universities Put the ‘Men’ in Women’s History Month

Events include transgender ‘gender equity’ speakers, intersectionality seminars, and sex-toy lessons.

Women’s History Month was established in 1980 to recognize women’s achievements—scientific discoveries, humanitarian work, the arts, etc. But this year, American colleges and universities have decided to use the month to advance intersectionality theory, radical feminism, and transgender ideology.

Take Luther College, a private Lutheran liberal arts school in Decorah, Iowa. Founded in 1861 as a Lutheran seminary and now affiliated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the college has a rather unconventional way of marking Women’s History Month.

On March 12, University of Iowa professor Natalie Fixmer-Oraiz delivered a keynote titled “Feminist Futures: WTF (Women/Trans/Femme) Solidarity in the Movement for Reproductive Justice,” framing trans liberation as “essential to reproductive justice” and dismissing any tension between “cisgender” women’s rights and those of trans and queer people as a political fiction.

Scheduled for March 16—though since postponed—is self-described “Decolonial Pathfinder” Shelley Buffalo, who plans to argue for “undoing colonial structures” and “reweaving the fabric of society” through the lens of Indigenous futurism and the myth of “Grandmother Spider.”

Pennsylvania State University is commemorating Women’s History Month in a similar fashion across its 20-something campuses. 

On March 18, Penn State University Park will feature Laurie Essig of Middlebury College and her lecture on “Tracing the Global Anti-Gender Movement: Feminism, Fascism and the Future.” The presentation, covering “anti-gender movements and their impact on feminism, trans rights, reproductive justice and gender studies,” will discuss the possible “strategies of resistance” to combat “anti-gender ideology.” 

At Penn State-Harrisburg, students may tune into “Necessary Bread: AzaleaMagazine and Black Lesbian Feminist Writers, 1977-1983,” by SaraEllen Strongman, an assistant professor of Afro-American and African Studies at the University of Michigan. The lecture, taking place on March 30, will focus on “Black feminisms, Black women’s political and cultural history, and African American literature.” 

A featured Women’s History Month event at Stony Brook University on Long Island, New York, is a “Gender Equity March and Resource Fair,” whose keynote speaker is New York State deputy director of LGBTQ+ Affairs Chanel Lopez, a man identifying as a woman. The University of Colorado-Boulder, meanwhile, offered a “Good Vibrations” workshop—which teaches students, “regardless of anatomy or gender identity,” about different kinds of sex toys—in a “safe, woman-led, queer-led sex education space.”

Leftists have a peculiar way of honoring women: championing their right to abort their children, encouraging them to abandon traditionally female qualities, and insisting that the most pressing women’s issue of our time is making room for men who wish to become women. Intersectionality theory adds another layer, sorting women into oppressors and the oppressed based on skin color—a strange way to build sisterhood.

The result is a Women’s History Month that, on many campuses, says less about women’s achievements than about the ideological preferences of campus administrators. That’s not a celebration. It’s a hostage situation.

  1. I’m waiting for resident troll Jonathan to explain why adherence to biological reality in the face of the left’s currentt cult of peformative genderescapades and child gender mutilation grift is an example of the “MAGA war on ‘science…’”

    1. I view the childhood mutilation in the same context as anorexia.

      If we have a teenage girl who has a delusion that she is fat and tries to starve herself as a result, we tell her that she’s mentally ill, that she’s not fat, and that if she doesn’t get over it, we are going to lock her up in the psych ward. And then we do.

      If we have a teenage girl who has a delusional that she’s a boy — instead of telling her that she’s mentally ill, we slice off her breasts for her. And how do we justify that logical inconsistency?

  2. It is said that Title IX passed because Senators had daughters whom they loved.

    I’m actually glad to see this foolishness because mothers have sons, whom they also love, and it will take this foolishness for them to see how badly their SONS are currently being treated — and have been treated for the past 50 years.

    Let’s start with Title IX, sex equity in athletics. Compliance can be accomplished one of two ways, either increase the number of female athletes (which is what was intended) or REDUCE the number of male athletes (which is what is really happening, because it’s easier and cheaper).

    First, there’s a smaller percentage of female students are interested in playing sports then male students. This isn’t aptitude or ability but interest — they don’t wanna do it. So even if colleges offer full boat scholarships, they are hard-pressed to find female athletes willing to accept them.

    And women’s athletics doesn’t bring in the money that the three big three male sports do (football, basketball, and depending on climate, hockey or soccer). The money is more cost shifting than actual revenue generated, but that’s another issue — these sports have powerful backers.

    So the institutions instead eliminate less widely known male sports like wrestling.

    Men’s skiing is often eliminated, but what people don’t realize is that the women’s team is not viable without a men’s team to share the expenses with — they share coaches, trainers, buses going to the mountain for practices and meets, and bulk lift ticket and equipment discounts.

    So the cost of the women’s ski team doubles, literally, and a couple years later it also gets eliminated. And this benefits female athletes.— how….

    Let’s look at the larger picture: 50 years ago higher education was about 60% male and 40% female, with a small but significant percentage of the female students pursuing what we used to call “the ‘Mrs’ degree” — they were pursuing boys, not a college degree.

    Today higher education is about 60% FEMALE and 40% male, with a lot of the male students only there to pursue girls.

    Let’s take the often mentioned “girl gap“ in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math). It’s real, and documented in the NAEP, a.k.a. “The nation’s report card.“. But the same NAEP also documents an even larger “boy gap“ in language arts skills, and while the “girl gap“ is narrowing, the “boy gap“ is not…

    An unmarried, childless, college educated woman under the age of 40 earns MORE than an unmarried, childless, college educated man of the same age.

    There are entire professions, such as K-12 education that are becoming nearly female only. My MEd program whs 94% female, I was the only male in a lot of my classes, and it was not a friendly atmosphere.

    Then let’s look at society as a whole. 76% of black children today are born to a single mother, and even more (e.g. Barack Obama) have a father who abandoned the family. And what isn’t as well documented is that the mean average tenure of the single mothers live in boyfriend is something like 18 months. And that’s the mean average, my guess is that the median will be closer to 9–10 months.

    That means a boy is living with a man who he’s told to treat us his father and then all of a sudden the man disappears and is replaced with a different man who he then is told to treat as his father. After this happens a few times the boy withdraws into himself and things go downhill from there.

    And every authority figure that boy deals with his female. All the teachers and principals at school, all of the social workers and other medical people, including physicians they he encounters, as is the community police officer. The only male role model encounters is the local drug dealer.

    I’ve worked in public housing, I’ve driven a school bus, I’ve been a classroom teacher — I’ve seen the front line, it’s not pretty, and it’s the boys we need to worry about. The boys and the young men.

    And as to abortion, I have a very different perspective. The girlfriend of a friend of mine murdered both of his babies, and as he then served our country in the US Army, he’s never gonna be able to have any more babies.

    I understand that women find this foolishness to be offensive, heck, I do as well. But what I’m hoping is that it might give women a perspective of how men are being treated, how the men they care about being treated, and that mothers may love their sons enough to stick up for them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *