BATTLING STAG/NATION | PAGE 1, 2,
- - - - - - - - - -

In a Nov. 24 fund-raising letter, Michael S. Greve, the center's executive director, set out the goals for 1999. Under a section titled "Against Radical Feminism," Greve explains that the center's "most important cases are attacks on two of feminism's sacred cows -- the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 and Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments."

"We are attacking extreme views of what the law requires that are being promoted by feminist groups," offers CIR senior counsel Terry Pell. "We are attacking what we believe is an overextension of Congress' power."

Yet when asked about the Boston College case, Pell does an about-face. "We support Title IX," he says. "We are arguing that it ought to be enforced. If there was a case that was attacking Title IX, this wouldn't be it."

In fact, CIR is fighting such a case: Neal vs. Cal State Bakersfield. In August 1997, Cal State's wrestling team was dropped after the National Organization for Women sued the school for illegally favoring male students, which NOW said was a violation of Title IX's proportionality rule.

In the suit, CIR, which represents wrestler Stephen Neal, argues that the provision conflicts with Title IX's broader aim of banning sex discrimination in higher education because it excludes male wrestlers on the basis of sex. Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Robert E. Coyle barred Cal State from capping the number of males allowed to participate on its wrestling team.

Boston College maintains that CIR's agenda is irrelevant.

"It's an issue to Mary Daly but it's not an issue to us. They haven't sued us," said Boston College spokesman Jack Dunn, adding that Daly is on the wrong side of the law. "We insist that she stop discriminating against students, that she abide by federal policy and by the same rules as everyone else."

For a woman who begrudges the "monoculture" of the patriarchy and laments the "horrible deadening of spirit" sweeping through American universities, abiding by "federal policy" and "the same rules as everyone else" is not easy.

"I hear words like 'separate' and 'equal.' I don't care about those words," she says. "I want there to be women's space, where there can be explosions of thought."

"That's what Mary Daly's classes offer. A place and a time to make the connections with each other, to generate the strength and the willingness to go out and reach out to other people," says senior Christine Safriet. "We don't have a lot of places to do that for women."

Yet not all feminists agree with Daly's pedagogical approach. Radcliffe's Wendy Kaminer doesn't see the logic in setting aside all-woman classes at a coed college.

"When I went to law school in 1972, it was common for the men to tell the women that having us there was too much of a distraction. It's hypocritical for women to be making those arguments," she said.

Kaminer continues: "A classroom is not group therapy. There's nothing wrong with having your own community but don't expect a college classroom to do that for you. It's governed by public policy on discrimination." Kaminer adds that while "B.C. may have a lot of work to do to make itself an egalitarian place for men and women," the remedy isn't to set up an all-women class.

Indeed, Boston College isn't known for being particularly woman-friendly. Aside from a couple of sports clubs, the cheerleaders and the Academy for Women in Management, there's only one women's group on B.C.'s list of 174 student clubs and organizations: the Women's Resource Center. The masthead of the Heights, Boston College's student newspaper, is top-heavy with names like Tim, Nicholas and Michael.

"In our last student government elections, there were 12 candidates in the initial running and they were all men. It's sort of an indication of who's supported here," says Safriet, a geophysics major.

There was a time during Daly's early days at Boston College when she taught male-only classes. That was in 1969, the year before the College of Arts and Sciences admitted women. In fact, it was a group of men, 1,500 of them, who fought for Daly, convincing the university to grant her tenure.

Daly says that soon after she started teaching gender-mixed classes, she saw her female students falling behind, losing luster and being wiped out creatively.

"Very frankly, we're held back in our discussion," Daly told Emily Rooney, the host of "Greater Boston," a local public television news program. "Some women will always try to please the men and they don't even mean to do it consciously."

This is what led to Daly's decision to conduct female-only classes. It didn't cross her mind that a federal law designed to ensure better educational opportunities for women would haunt her nearly 30 years later.

Passed as part of the 1972 Education Amendments, Title IX says, "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."

According to the American Association of University Women, in 1972, many universities were not yet coed. Medical and law schools often limited the number of women admitted to 15. Women applicants were often required to have higher test scores and better grades than their male counterparts.

"It's worse than some of the things in '1984.' It's an example of doublethink," Daly says about being accused of violating Title IX. "What's most disturbing is that many people don't use their brains and don't see that it's bizarre. It's frightening."

Harvey Silverglate, a partner with the Boston law firm Silverglate & Good and author of "The Shadow University: The Portrayal of Liberty on America's Campuses," says that using Title IX to prevent Daly from conducting female-only classes is overkill.

"At a private school I think it's OK if the faculty member can convince the school that there's a practical pedagogical purpose, especially in Mary Daly's case because she has been willing to teach men separately," says Silverglate. "This is an example of Title IX gone crazy."

According to National Woman's Law Center Co-president Marcia Greenberger, Title IX is not a knee-jerk statute.

"B.C. can't stand behind Title IX if there's a compelling reason for keeping the classes the way they've been," she says. "But they have to have a compelling reason for those classes to continue also."

With the Center for Individual Rights looming in the foreground, it's not surprising that Boston College would have chosen to avoid a court battle on behalf of Mary Daly. Instead, it seems, it opted for a court battle against her.

Back at Daly's apartment, Megan Niziol continues reading Daly's mail, a letter of support here, a profane diatribe there.

"When you talk about deadening, you really see how it works, how it functions, [how people are] focused on nothing; consumed every day with petty little things. No one really gets the big picture," says Niziol.

Adds Heekin: "Where do you go for this inspiration, for this spark?"

At Boston College, if you're a woman, you once could enroll in a class with Mary Daly. But all that may be herstory.
SALON | March 17, 1999

Jill Priluck is a freelance writer living in Boston.