Had Hillary Clinton been elected president and
someone filed a lawsuit to nullify or seriously
restrict Title IX of the education amendments of
1972 alleging that the egregious sexual
discrimination that inspired those laws is almost
non-existent today, he would have been considered
naïve or mean-spirited. Similarly, when
Madeleine Albright became the first female U. S.
Secretary of State in 1997, had someone declared
the State Department a “post-sexual” environment,
he, too, would have been deemed cruelly out of touch with reality.
If these musings are sane, I wonder if it is fair
to compare Title IX to the 1965 Voting Rights Act
that assured the right to vote to millions of
African Americans long denied it through brutal
intimidation and unconstitutional
subterfuge. Incidentally, the Voting Rights Act
is before the U. S. Supreme Court for possible
restrictions or nullification. Those who filed
the suit(s) assert that the “racial progress” the
South and other affected states have made since
the Selma, Alabama crisis render enforcement of
those laws unnecessary or unfair.
I would also ask those who have declared the
United States a “post-racial” society because of
the election of President Barack Obama, to
compare our country with the "post-sexual" State
Department after Madeleine Albright was appointed in 1997.
The purpose of these musings is to kindle
thoughtful comparison, not to vex anyone … :-)