Ask Your Question today
I just read somewhere that women were not allowed to open bank-accounts until the 1960s. But banks were still allowed to deny them until 1974. 😮
... and that's why I don't romanticize about how much better things supposedly were in the past, because they weren't!
This reminds me of when I was the one who told my poor, innocent fiance teachers/religious leaders used to be allowed to beat children with belts, paddles, and other instruments.
Yes, back then that was normal because it was a different time.
Nowadays it would not be normal.
For a long time governments didn't recognize women as people. They were considered property. We have come a long way. At least, most of us have. Some still need to work on that.
I think a lot of feminists need to stop treating the west as a backwater and start looking and asia and the middle east with more intrigue about their womens rights (or lack thereof) history.
Women are equal under the law here. Middle east and parts of africa? May as well be back in the 12 century.
I think we place too many labels on things that then get turned into insults by the use of negative storytelling.
Yes, it is absolutely true that there are women around the globe that still have few rights. That doesn't mean we are completely equal here just because we have more than them. And that doesn't mean we should stop striving for balance. Progress shouldn't stop because we took one step. Or after 1000. We keep moving forward, but we do so together.
But we also don't have to be equal in literally everything. Take food as a simple example. Clearly adult males need more food than a non lactating female. So yes, give them more food. And then the gathering and preparation should really be done to the strengths and desires of the individual. Women can shoot just a well as any man, but true, dragging that carcass back may be better suited for a man as they are often stronger. And men can cook too if they so desire. But women tend to be better at multitasking and often have children to tend to so staying close to home makes sense. Does this mean she can't do a traditional male role? Nope. Let her if she wants to, let's not have a battle of the sexes here. We all want to eat. None of these roles makes you superior or inferior to the other.
The point often missed here is that of equal respect and equal opportunity. Men too often act of the offense before they know what's going on. Women aren't attacking your manhood. Do women think there femininity is questioned because a man wants to cook a meal? No, we sit down and take a break. Okay, some women surely bitch amd moan but the point is still true. Equality is about mutual respect and equal opportunities.
This basically forced women to find a man. Which is subjectively bad morally to force but then again it is good for your population to get married. This is why government incentivizes ppl to with tax cuts. In those years the economy was so good there wasnt a need for a woman to work if she was married. This caused the average woman to have a birth rate of 3.2 kids. They were actually worrying that too many ppl were having kids at this time.
Now thanks to the rise of progressivism we have the opposite problem we can not sustain ourselves and fill jobs. "Be a strong independent woman.
Dont have kids, focus on your career." Is the new value system. We have to bring in alot of immigrants to support our economy. I think that the civil rights movement was good morally but every action has a reaction and certainly it had that.