The Independent Women's Forum (IWF) is an American conservative, non-profit organization focused on economic policy issues of concern to women.[4][5] IWF was founded by activist Rosalie Silberman to promote a "conservative alternative to feminist tenets" following the controversial Supreme Court nomination of Clarence Thomas in 1992.[6] IWF's sister organization is the Independent Women's Voice (IWV), a 501(c)(4) organization.
The group advocates "equity feminism", a term first used by IWF author Christina Hoff Sommers to distinguish "traditional, classically liberal, humanistic feminism" from "gender feminism", which she says opposes gender roles and patriarchy.[7] According to Sommers, the gender feminist view is "the prevailing ideology among contemporary feminist philosophers and leaders",[7] and "thrives on the myth that American women are the oppressed 'second sex.'"[8] Sommers' equity feminism has been described as anti-feminist by critics.[9]
Origin and history
Founded in 1992 by Rosalie Silberman, Anita K. Blair, and Barbara Olson,[6][10] the IWF grew out of the ad hoc group "Women for Judge Thomas," created to reinforce Clarence Thomas against allegations of sexual harassment and other sex-based illegal behavior and in his stance as EEOC Chair refusing to enforce of laws against sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace.[11] By 1996 the organization had some 700 dues-paying members who met regularly at luncheons to network and share ideas.[12] Silberman was the IWF's first president; subsequent leaders have included Nancy Pfotenhauer and Anita Blair. The current president of the organization is Carrie Lukas.[13] The IWF has been described as "a virtual 'Who's Who' of Washington's Republican establishment."[12][14] In 2006, the organization had 20,337 members and a budget of $1.05 million.[4]
Equity feminism
The IWF opposes many mainstream feminist positions, describing them as "radical feminism", but rather focuses on equity feminism.[7] IWF-affiliated writers have argued that the sex gap in income exists because of IWF women's greater demand for flexibility, fewer hours, and less travel in their careers, rather than because of sexism. In an article for the Dallas Morning News, IWF Vice-president Carrie Lukas attributed sex disparities in income to "[IWF] women's own choices", writing that [IWF] women "tend to place a higher priority on flexibility and personal fulfillment than do men, who focus more on pay. [IWF women] tend to avoid jobs that require travel or relocation, and they take more time off and spend fewer hours in the office than men do. Men disproportionately take on the most dirty, dangerous and depressing jobs."[15]
The IWF also argues that feminists manufacture domestic violence legislation that "is misleading because it is premised on and mean to advance feminist ideology."[16] This falls under their larger belief that "feminists ... lie about data, are opportunistic, construct men as the enemy, and cast women as helpless victims."[16]
Conservative commentators have praised the IWF; Linda Chavez credited Women's Figures: An Illustrated Guide to the Economic Progress of Women in America, a 1999 book published in part by the IWF, with "debunk[ing] much of the feminists' voodoo economics."[17] Writing in Capitalism Magazine, John Stossel cited Michelle Bernard's 2007 book Women's Progress as evidence that "American women have never enjoyed more options or such a high quality of life."[18]
Some writers have asserted that feminist rhetoric is used by the IWF for anti-feminist ends.[19][4] A New York Times editorial described the IWF as "a right-wing public policy group that provides pseudofeminist support for extreme positions that are in fact dangerous to women."[20]
Domestic policy and programs
United States healthcare policy
In 2009, IWF produced a political advertisement run on YouTube and in eight states arguing that "300,000 American women with breast cancer might have died" if U.S. healthcare included a government-funded option.[21][22]FactCheck.org labeled the IWF ad "a false appeal to women's fears", finding that the IWF ad relied on "old statistics, faulty logic and false insinuations."[23]
Title IX enforcement
Since shortly after the organization's inception, the IWF has joined with groups like the National Wrestling Coaches Association in opposing the manner in which the United States Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights has enforced Title IX legislation requiring sex equality in public educational investment. The 1972 Title IX law that states: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."[24][25][26]
Campus programs
The organization emphasizes patriarchal sex roles and cultural norms as essential for civil society. In particular, IWF encourages young women to embrace what it presents as a healthy attitude towards dating, courtship, and marriage.[27] This emphasis is reflected by high-profile, sometimes controversial[28] work on college campuses where IWF sponsors advertising campaigns and literature distribution to promote its views. One such effort included the running of advertisements with provocative headings such as "The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths."[29] IWF also offers internships and sponsors an annual essay contest open to full-time female undergraduate students.[30]
As a reaction to reports of growing promiscuity on college campuses[31] and the V-Day movement founded by Eve Ensler, IWF created its "Take Back the Date" campus program to "reclaim Valentine's Day from radical feminists on campus who use a day of love and romance to promote vulgar and promiscuous behavior through activities like The Vagina Monologues."[32] Specifically addressing the controversial play, IWF's "Take Back the Date" release states that, "although the play raises money for a good cause, the hyper-sexualized play counteracts the positive contributions of the feminist movement and degrades women."
In an article in The Guardian, feminist writer Jessica Valenti asserted that the program was merely "[r]evamping outdated notions of femininity and positioning them as cutting edge."[33]
Condoleezza Rice speaking to an IWF audience in 2006 after receiving the organization's "Woman of Valor" award
Since its founding, IWF has sponsored numerous conferences, panels, and other programs designed to promote its message to an international audience. These primarily include activities and events discussing or taking place in the countries of Iraq[36] and Afghanistan, and focus on promoting female participation in democracy.[37]
The IWF has also had a hand in international women's programs and initiatives. For example, "in the spring of 2002, the IWF's President, Nancy Pfotenhauer, was appointed by U.S. President George W. Bush to be a delegate to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women."[38]
Tabor, Nathan (January 23, 2007). "WF in the News: Strong Women for a Strong America". iwf.org. Independent Women's Forum. Archived from the original on September 23, 2018. Retrieved September 22, 2016. "However, our visitor from another planet would be surprised to discover there are many groups out there that represent conservative women who believe in equality but shun socialism and big government. One of those organizations is the Independent Women's Forum."
Schreiber, Ronnee (October 2002). "Injecting a woman's voice: Conservative women's organizations, gender consciousness, and the expression of women's policy preferences". Sex Roles. 47 (7): 331–342. doi:10.1023/A:1021479030885. S2CID140980839. "In this article I examine two national conservative women's organizations—the Concerned Women for America (CWA) and the Independent Women's Forum (IWF)—to show how conservative women leaders link gender identity and policy preferences. I describe these organizations below. Like feminists, these women, through their organizations, not only act collectively as women, but also bring a "woman's perspective" to policy issues. Although some scholars have not denied the impact of right-wing movements on feminist goals and activities (Conover & Gray, 1983; Klatch, 1987; Marshall, 1995), others have characterized conservative women as victims of false consciousness, pawns of conservative men or right-wing funders (Dworkin, 1983; Hammer, 2002), or women's auxillar[ies] of the conservative elite" (Kaminer, 1996), thus diminishing the attention and serious consideration appropriate to such a political force."
^Pozner, Jennifer (1997), "Female Anti-Feminism for Fame and Profit", in Cowan, Rich (ed.), Uncovering the Right on Campus: a Guide to Resisting Conservative Attacks on Equality and Social Justice, Houston, TX Cambridge, MA: Center for Campus Organizing, ISBN978-0-945210-07-8. Excerpt. via Internet Archive
^Spindel, Barbara (2003). "Conservatism as the "Sensible Middle": The Independent Women's Forum, Politics, and the Media". Social Text. 21: 99. doi:10.1215/01642472-21-4_77-99. S2CID144134935.
^Schreiber, Ronnee (2011), "Pro-Women, Pro-Palin, Antifeminist: Conservative Women and Conservative Movement Politics", in Peele, Gillian; Aberbach, Joel D. (eds.), Crisis of Conservatism? The Republican Party, the Conservative Movement, & American Politics After Bush, Oxford New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 134–135, ISBN978-0-19-976402-0.
.jpg)
