The Authoritarian Mastery of Women-Centered Organizing

The Phyllis Schlafly Blueprint: "Weaponized Housewifery"

Strategic Innovation:

Phyllis Schlafly created a distinct model of conservative women's activism called “weaponized housewifery” that combined surveillance, coercion, and gendered performativity to shape politics on interpersonal, national, and international scales. She "unearthed the political gold of misogyny" and steered white women toward public acceptance while folding them into efforts to fight gender parity measures.

Organizational Power:

Schlafly founded Eagle Forum in 1972, which became a grassroots organization at the center of every conservative battle for five decades. Her 1964 book “A Choice Not an Echo” sold over 3 million copies and established her as a national voice. She taught housewives how to organize letter-writing campaigns and answer reporters' questions in 15 seconds to prevent editing.

Institutional Impact:

Eagle Forum defeated the Equal Rights Amendment despite it having passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support. When the ERA began, 28 states had already ratified it, but Schlafly's organizing prevented the final 10 states needed for ratification from approving the amendment.

Beverly LaHaye and Concerned Women for America: Scaling Religious Conservative Women

Counter-Mobilization Strategy:

Beverly LaHaye founded Concerned Women for America in 1979 after watching Barbara Walters interview Betty Friedan. LaHaye was “convicted that she must speak on behalf of millions of women who were not being represented by the radical feminist philosophy.” She described Friedan's purpose as promoting “homosexuality, abortion on demand” and undermining “the core of American culture: the family.”

Rapid Growth Model:

CWA began in LaHaye's living room but quickly grew into the nation's largest public policy women's organization with 500,000 participating members, over 450 Prayer/Action Chapters, and more than 30 Young Women for America chapters on college campuses. It became known as “the largest women's organization of the Christian Right during the 1980s and 1990s.”

Political Integration:

LaHaye's growing influence led to prominence during Reagan and George H.W. Bush presidencies. She regularly testified in congressional hearings including Supreme Court nominations for Antonin Scalia, Robert Bork, and Clarence Thomas. CWA has close ties to the Koch network and received funding from Freedom Partners and DonorsTrust.

Moms for Liberty: The Modern Authoritarian Women's Playbook

Rapid National Expansion:

Founded January 1, 2021, by three Florida women, Moms for Liberty quickly expanded nationwide with chapters campaigning against COVID safety measures, book bans, and curricula addressing LGBTQ rights and race. The organization channels “powerful frustration among conservative mothers who feel increasingly sidelined by school administrators.”

Elite Political Integration:

Despite claiming to be grassroots, Moms for Liberty has close ties to GOP operatives. Co-founder Bridget Ziegler is married to Florida Republican Party chairman and serves on the Leadership Institute board. The group quickly gained ally Ron DeSantis and became a national player hosting Republican presidential candidates.

Strategic Professional Structure:

The group received $2.1 million in revenue in 2022, mostly from anonymous mega-donors, plus $25,000 from Heritage Foundation. Executive Director Marie Rogerson is an experienced political strategist. Despite grassroots claims, the group was featured on major conservative media within two months of formation.

Historical Patterns and Strategic Advantages

Tea Party Model:

The Tea Party demonstrated how seemingly decentralized movements can be strategically supported. While claiming organic grassroots credentials, groups like Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks provided guidance and organization. Polls showed a majority of Tea Party activists were women, not angry white men, countering Democratic narratives.

Authoritarian Characteristics:

Research found Tea Party supporters displayed “a strong authoritarian pulse among its most ardent supporters” despite appeals to freedom and liberty. Social scientists noted Tea Party followers seemed to demonstrate classic authoritarian characteristics, making “the research on authoritarianism look good.”

Why Authoritarians Excel at Women-Centered Organizing

Strategic Use of Gender Expectations

Protective Mother Narrative:

Modern groups like Moms for Liberty position themselves as “War Moms” protecting children, similar to WWII calls for women to step out of traditional roles. They use “parental rights” to galvanize conservative parents while describing school policies as threats to family autonomy.

Legitimacy Through Marginalization:

Phyllis Schlafly occupied a bridge role within the conservative movement, neither grassroots nor elite but inhabiting both simultaneously. This allowed her to create frameworks of institutional support while maintaining outsider credibility.

Organizational Sophistication

Professional Training Infrastructure:

These groups provide extensive political training. Eagle Forum taught organizing skills and media tactics. Moms for Liberty partnerships with Leadership Institute provide campaign training and candidate development. Strategy sessions cover everything from media relations to running political campaigns.

Financial Networks:

Despite grassroots rhetoric, these organizations access sophisticated dark money networks. CWA received funding from Koch-affiliated organizations. Moms for Liberty got major anonymous donations and Heritage Foundation grants while claiming to represent ordinary parents.

The Pro-Democracy Movement's Critical Gap

Underestimating Women-Centered Organizing

Missing the Strategic Significance:

While pro-democracy forces focus on electoral politics, authoritarian women's groups operate at foundational levels: school boards, local politics, and cultural institutions. As one researcher noted, “those on the left were slow to recognize the significance of school board races” that can be flipped with relatively few votes.

Failing to Counter-Organize:

Opposition groups like Defense of Democracy and Neighbors for Education have emerged to counter Moms for Liberty, but they're reactive, which is necessary but insufficient. We need to get on the offense and be proactive. The pro-democracy movement needs systematic women-centered organizing that builds power rather than just responds to threats.

Lessons for Pro-Democracy Forces

Scale and Systematize:

Phyllis Schlafly “almost single-handedly transformed the image of a conservative woman from the little old lady in tennis shoes, searching for communists under her bed, to a movement of well-organized, sophisticated women volunteers who moved into party politics.” Pro-democracy movements need similar transformation and systematization.

Long-Term Institution Building:

Eagle Forum created “frameworks of institutional support that continue to shape the conservative movement.” These weren't just advocacy groups but infrastructure for ongoing political power across decades.

Professional Development:

Authoritarian women's groups provide sophisticated political training, media strategy, and campaign skills. Pro-democracy movements need equivalent professional development for women organizers rather than assuming enthusiasm alone suffices.

The Urgency of Catching Up

The evidence demonstrates that authoritarian movements have been strategically building women-centered organizing infrastructure for over 50 years, from Schlafly's Eagle Forum in the 1970s through today's Moms for Liberty. These aren't spontaneous grassroots movements but sophisticated political operations that:

• Systematically train women in political organizing and media tactics

• Access elite financial networks while maintaining grassroots credibility

• Build long-term institutional power across multiple levels of government

• Use gender expectations strategically to gain political legitimacy

• Create pipeline from local activism to national political influence

Pro-democracy movements that fail to recognize this sophistication and build equivalent women-centered organizing infrastructure will continue to be outflanked by authoritarians who understand that women are not just participants in social movements, they are often the most effective organizers, communicators, and institution-builders in American politics.

The time for treating women's organizing as auxiliary to “real” political work is over. Authoritarians have already demonstrated women’s centrality to building and maintaining power. Democracy's survival may depend on whether pro-democracy forces can learn these lessons and build our own systematic, well-funded women-centered organizing infrastructure before it's too late.