CWA Doesn’t Want Women’s History Museum

Congress is considering funding for a National Women’s History Museum and Concerned Women for America Against Women are highly agitated because it might actually celebrate the movement that made women more equal instead of, say, anti-female women like Phyllis Schlafly.

While the idea of celebrating women is admirable, the content of such a museum would create a shrine to the leftist ideology and would not provide an accurate portrayal of American women. It is for this reason we object to the National Women’s History Museum as currently structured…

• In 2010, Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC) opposed the building of the NWHM on the National Mall and successfully requested Senators Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) and Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma) to place a hold on this bill.

• During the 112th Congress, CWALAC worked with Republican House leadership to ensure this bill did not come to the House floor for a vote…

• The NWHM does not accurately portray women’s history and for this reason we oppose the NWHM. The museum’s online exhibits tout the “progressive era” and feminism but do not acknowledge their ramifications, the destruction of marriage and the family. The online exhibits highlight the feminists’ view of “free love” (like Victoria Woodhull) but do not acknowledge their pro-life ones.

• The NWHM will indoctrinate those who visit the museum to a jaundiced view of women’s history. The NWHM website attached to this proposed museum references Margaret Sanger nine times and Victoria Woodhull over 20, while referencing Phyllis Schlafly once and not mentioning Beverly LaHaye at all. It also highlights Sandra Fluke, while ignoring Kay Coles James, Alveda King, and Star Parker.

Gosh, a women’s history museum that celebrates Margaret Sanger rather than Phyllis Schlafly? That’s like the Pro Football Hall of Fame celebrating Joe Montana instead of Tim Tebow. What a shock.

"The details are important, aren't they? For all I know, the text of the rule ..."

Bakker Declares Victory in Mythical War ..."
"She'd vote for Derrick Dearman, charged with six counts of capital murder in Alabama in ..."

AL Governor Thinks Moore Did It, ..."
"I don't want him elected because I don't like to mix politics and religion. The ..."

Moore Controversy Shines Spotlight on Evangelical ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • democommie

    Cantankerous Witches of America hasn’t got anything better to do? Is this, like, “summer replacement” for the ongoing war to overturn Roe v Wade and the EWOK*?

    * Eternal War On KKKhristmas

  • Ellie

    I don’t know much about this museum, but this article did inspire me to make another donation to the National Women’s Hall of Fame in Seneca Falls.

  • Loqi

    That’s like the Pro Football Hall of Fame celebrating Joe Montana instead of Tim Tebow.

    I’d say it’s more like honoring Joe Montana instead of Kathy Bates’ character from The Waterboy. At least Tim Tebow played the same sport as Montana instead of thinking it was the devil.

  • Synfandel

    …the destruction of marriage and the family.

    I hadn’t realized that marriage and the family had been destroyed. My wife and family are going to be very unhappy about this.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    This proposed “museum” doesn’t have either a hall dedicated to CWA or a pair of skeletons showing comparative rib count between the sexes, nor a 100-ft statue of June Cleaver holding a fresh-baked apple pie out in front.

    That’s downright unanti-American!

  • busterggi

    I’m sure the CWA will change its position if the museum promises to build an exact replica of June Cleaver’s kitchen and have no other exhibits.

  • Chiroptera

    If the Museum were to have a wing designated as “The Hall of Shame,” then there would be a perfect place of an exhibit analyzing Schlafly, the CWA, and their ilk.

  • Marcus Ranum

    They’re setting up to fund the ark park.

  • doublereed

    That’s right! Let’s never forget the women who fought bravely against the right to vote!

  • Crimson Clupeidae

    I’m pretty sure CWA, the organization, is mostly made up of old white men. Do they even bother putting a feminine nom de plume on their press releases?

  • D. C. Sessions

    I wonder what would happen if someone pointed out to them that the producers refused to cast a stay-at-home mother as June Cleaver?

  • dingojack

    I’m sorry, but every time I see such headlines I immediately think of the Country Women’s Association. What are they gonna do, knit a nice tea-cosy, bake some sconces, make a really good cup of tea?

    :) Dingo

  • Modusoperandi


  • lofgren

    CWA are one of those groups that, if you were to describe their rhetoric, beliefs, and activities to me, and I were unfamiliar with the right wing in this country, I would probably accuse you of demonizing people you disagree with or possibly outright making shit up.

  • democommie

    “bake some sconces”

    The’d be hard on the dentures, mate.

  • dingojack

    Demo – wimp!’

    :) Dingo

  • caseloweraz

    A brief trip through right-wing Christian history:

    1978: Beverly LaHaye founds Concerned Women for America in response to Betty Friedan’s misguided attempt to dismantle the bedrock of American culture: the family. Intended to be a local organization in San Diego, CWA goes national within two years.

    1982: Even with its deadline artificially extended by Congress, the Equal Rights Amendment fails to achieve ratification. The family is preserved.

    2010: Action by CWA prevents a bill to establish the National Women’s History Museum from moving forward. Once again the family is preserved.

    2014: Beverly and Tim LaHaye celebrate their sixty-seventh year of matrimony. This would not have been possible if the ERA had passed, or the NWHM had been established. Praise the Lord!