Why did it take so long for women to be regarded as equal?..and do you think they actually are?..I am not putting down women here, just want to know what everybody thinks.
Abraham Lincoln said, “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”
Men have had power for a long time. Their reluctance to share it with the women they claim to love, i.e. wives and daughters, speak volumes as to how they have handled that test of character.
because before that point it was much more of a “might makes right” type of society and the only might women have is the might men give them
and before some female tries to kill me, by that i mean most women are physically weaker then most men. this is a generality, not an absolute.
now society is not as much a “might makes right” society, at least not physically, now intelligence, and money matter more.
‘Feminism’ and ‘equality’ are far more complex and involved than your question allows for. Was there something more specific that you were alluding to?
It didn’t. The notion of gender equality is as old as the notions of matriarchy and patriarchy.
Regarded as equal? Perhaps, by some. But most feminists seem to have little to no interest in gender equality since their claims and policies do more to reinforce unhelpful stereotypes than patriarchy ever did.
As someone on here quotes in their sig -
“A liberated woman is one who rises up and says to her menfolk, ‘I will not be dictated to,’ and proceeds to become a stenographer.” - GK Chesterton
Like I say, equality was never the aim of feminism, from where I see it. More so retention of domestic authority while gaining the ‘right’ to work if and only if the female chooses to do so. That’s not equality, that’s having your cake and eating it.
The War Against Women by Marylin French adds a bit of perspective. I see many of these sorts of discussions and they all seem to surround that issue of women working or women in military or women voting, etc.
There’s a long human history of beatings, rapes, molestations (all that fun stuff) that I believe were about as consistent as grains for staple food. Still, people don’t so often have the stomach to include it for its relevance.
My question is not about who votes and who works. I believe by the time we feel confident about it, that capital system will be obsolete. Nor is my question about rampant crime today. Shit happens.
My question is when the skeletons in the human closet are all getting dug up, do I say: “Sorry, girls. Dang. That’s gotta suck. Water under the bridge?” Do long dead ancestors get away with injustice, both the perpetrators and those sweeping things under the rug? Or is there a price to pay? For whom?
Or is that notion too archaic, and we should just devote ourselves to scientiffic remedy.
Here we go…
Males get beaten, raped, molested. Most wars in history have been fought by men who had little choice in the matter. History is a shithole of oppression and horror, regardless of who you are. Your speculation about what may or may not have happened to women isn’t of the slightest relevance.
It should be, or at least it should be in part…
From that logic we get ‘and it happened in the past, to pretty much everyone’.
If there is a price to pay then it isn’t just women who ‘deserve’ ‘compensation’ - it’s Jews, blacks, homosexuals, anyone outside of the aristocracy, native Americans, Mexicans, Tibetans, most South Americans, all of the Carribean peoples…
The fact is that no matter who you are or how you define yourself, you’ll probably find that other people who can also be defined like that had horrible lives. There is no compensation to pay for past misdeeds, particularly when there are problems of the present of much more significance.
What do you mean by ‘scientific remedy’?