Phyllis Schlafly, perhaps the original anti-feminist of the second wave era, recently argued that the (mythical) “pay gap” would promote marriage if it actually existed, citing women’s hypergamous instincts[.]

...

We could hold her opposition to the ERA against her, but let’s be realistic: it never would have been used to level the playing field. Instead, it would have been used as a cudgel against the “patriarchy,” resulting in interminable lawsuits and an even more powerful feminist legal regime than we have today (if such is possible). Because men and women are not equal, no human law can make them so; it can only make life worse for most of us.

More legislation purporting to equalize men and women will have the same effect this legislation always has had: it will grow and enrich legal professionals and bureaucracies and introduce more expense and complexity into the lives of the common people. Schlafly is right to oppose it, and it’s good to see she’s taking some cues from the manosphere as well.