FEMINISM: MASK FOR MARXISM?
Tom Valentine's guest on *Radio Free America* (Shortwave, 5.065
MHz, mon-fri, 9 pm cst) on December 28, 1994 was Andrea Pearson,
editor-in-chief of a newsletter called "Americans In Exile"
[contact info to be included below]. Ms. Pearson has some non-
politically correct views on feminism, etc. Note that views
expressed in the following do not necessarily reflect my own
views or those of Conspiracy Nation.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
I can tell ya, being a student in high school in '49, '50, '51,
'52, that that wasn't true.
Oh it certainly isn't true...
Our class valedictorian was a girl! [i.e., young wommon; cf.
*Politically Correct Bedtime Stories* by James Finn Garner.]
Oh yes, absolutely. There *is* no gender inequity in education.
And yet, in the Gender Equity in Education Act what we end up
with is a massive system -- not only re-writing of history,
textbooks intended to create certain opinions in children
regarding gender roles, but really disgusting things like parent
education about gender roles and their influence on learning.
All right. I want to take this up in more detail when we come
My guest is Andrea Pearson. And we're talking about the gender
war, and Marxism. I'm Tom Valentine. This is *Radio Free
We are *live*, again. And on the other end of the telephone is
Andrea Pearson. And we're gonna be continuing to talk about the
Gender Equity in Education Act. I profess a great deal of
ignorance here on this subject.
Andrea, I believe you put out a little newsletter or something on
this, don't you?
Yeah, I sure do.
Tell me about that, too.
Well, anyone who's interested in obtaining the newsletter can
either write to me or call me. The address is: Americans in
Exile, P.O. Box 2636, Pittsfield, Massachusetts, 01202. And my
phone number is (413) 499-3593.
Oh, I have that number! I thought maybe you had a different
number for that. O.K. It's "Americans in Exile". Ah-hah! Are
*you* an "American in exile"?
I think that most people who have the traditional belief systems
about what marriage is, what the parents' role is towards their
children, and so forth and so on, *are* "exiled" in America
O.K. Andrea, will you send out a sample if people write to you
and say that they'd like to see it?
Yeah, I sure will!
O.K. Good. We got that done.
Now, this Gender Equity in Education Act. (I *should* know all
about it.) I don't know a thing about it. When'd they pass this?
It was passed in 1993.
Oh, last year!
Yeah. And what it does is, it allows, first of all, for the
connection of major government systems: Health and Human
Services, uh there's... They call it "The Link-up for Learning".
And what it does is, it puts together a *huge* federal-level
method for tabulating where students are: their socio-economic
status, their race, their sex, and so forth...
Oh, is this the thing that Beverly Eckman has helped uncover in
her book about education?
It's very likely that it may be related to that. I don't know if
she's aware of this or not. But one thing that it says here (I'm
reading), it says, "improve inter-agency communications and
information sharing, including developing local-area
telecommunication networks, software development, database
integration and management." And this is with major areas of the
federal government. There's a federal inter-agency task force
that's been set up "consisting of the Secretary of Education,
Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, and
heads of other federal agencies, as appropriate." This is a huge
bill. It's $360 million in the first year.
All right, now, this is strange. Most Americans, including
myself, would think that's awfully innocuous -- telling the
bureaucrats of our government to get together and computerize.
But what you're saying is, by having government bureaucrats get
together and computerize, they are micro-managing lives in a way
that is detrimental to our traditional society.
Well it *is* invasive to the family. But it's also particularly
disturbing that the kind of things that they're paying attention
to are the gender role socialization within a particular
student's family. And also, you know this bill provides for so
much, it's difficult to talk about *all* of it. But...
Well, wait a minute: gender role socialization inside a
How do they go about doing this? What do they do?
Well, one thing is to change the textbooks so they're considered
to be "gender equitable". Another thing that they do is, they put
monies into different parts of the country: "At least one grant,"
(and I'm quoting here), "in each of the ten federal regions."
That's *their* words.
Also, in the U.N. [United Nations] treaty, they talk about this
same sort of thing being put into the education system. We're
getting into conformity with U.N. law here.
All right, does that mean... I'm trying to get this in a
practical, down-to-earth, 1950s mentality -- which I'm stuck with
when it comes to education and school. That means that boys don't
go to wood shop anymore, and girls don't go to "home ec." [i.e.,
They all go to sex education.
Well... It's not that simple. There's "set-asides" for pregnant
teenagers. It allows for the erection of day-care centers --
either next to the school or nearby the school, with
transportation provided. It provides for all kinds of special
privileges for girls...
I got ya. All right.
Andrea is my guest, Andrea Pearson and the American in Exile. And
we're gonna open up the phone lines to you.
I'm Tom Valentine. This is *Radio Free America*.
All right. We are back, live. My guest is Andrea. Andrea Pearson,
the producer of "Americans in Exile" newsletter, out of Post
Office Box 2636, in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, 01202.
And Andrea, this Gender Equity in Education Act sounds like a
massive thing, sort of like the crime bill. And it slipped
through in 1993. There wasn't a lot of fanfare, was there?
There wasn't a lot of fanfare. I'd be surprised if most Americans
knew about it. I think that they'd be *horrified* if they knew
what was in it.
Well I'm... I don't even fully understand yet. We've been talking
about it, but um... It's a big bill, and you say it's horrifying.
Yet I don't sense the urgency. Somehow, we're not getting it
across, of how bad it is.
Well, one thing that seems to me like a real whopper is, that an
"at risk" student is defined here. And this is the definition.
(I'd like to read it, 'cause I think it's so serious): "Many 'at
risk' students suffer the effects of inadequate nutrition and
health care, overcrowded and unsafe living conditions and
homelessness, family and gang violence, substance abuse, sexual
abuse and child abuse, involuntary migration, and limited English
proficiency, that often creates severe barriers to learning" the
knowledge and skills, and so forth.
Then it later... This is one thing that they're going to give
grants to support, is grants to local education agencies to
improve educational performances of "at risk" students by
removing barriers to their learning.
The trouble is, is with Bill of Rights, is that what *happens*
is, the government starts stepping in and saying that poverty,
and someone who's unemployed, may in fact be... uh, that
constitutes "dysfunction" within a family. And you know as well
as I do that this monstrous "child protective services" industry
that's been set up, [it] gobbles up people.
They abuse it. I mean, we have had... We've had people (and
you've probably heard 'em on this show) that are *very* concerned
about the social welfare abuse system, where a child can actually
point a finger at the parents and yell, "Mommy and daddy are
treating me bad!" -- and the State's gonna come in and throw
mommy and daddy in the slammer and put the kid in a foster home!
Oh sure. And what it does is, it integrates services,
regulations, databases, eligibility procedures, and funding
sources, "focusing school and community resources on prevention
and early intervention strategies, to address student needs
Now the trouble is, is that what's happening in this country is
we are having Marxism imposed with the force of law on the
people. And Marxists believe that children should be in the care
of the State. Now the forceable removal of children is one thing.
But the coercion of the child away from the American culture and
values, their Christian, or Judeo-Christian values, is something
that I think would disturb a lot of people. And the roles of
husband and wife are something that our government has an
unhealthy interest in.
Well frankly, the federal government especially has *no* business
in *any* of these things, that you're talkin' about. The schools
should be run by the local school districts, or the people who
are sending their kids to that school oughtta run that district.
If you'd like to join us (my guest is Andrea Pearson), and if
you'd like to join us, it's 1-800-878-8255.
Did you know that this Feminism, that she's talking about, had
this Marxist agenda? And it's been insidious! You know, they...
What was it that somebody said? "You don't lose your freedom in
one big fell swoop. You lose it little by little." I think that's
what's happening here, Andrea.
[...to be continued...]