3 ms·

Devil's advocate: HN's pathological self-moderation towards being polite and down voting/booting anyone who doesn't is the most likely cause of their lack of se

Devil's advocate: HN's pathological self-moderation towards being polite and down voting/booting anyone who doesn't is the most likely cause of their lack of sexist antagonism. They may not act the same at all on other forums. Also: prohibition was arguably much more instrumental in women's lib than "donating to the war effort". Previous wars did not have the same effect. But women were instrumental in introducing prohibition, and speakeasies invited them in during prohibition, and then they were instrumental in revoking prohibition. Each of those was a victory of power and acceptance that hadn't been seen before.

gizmo686 10y ago
I am not sure what causal line you can draw between women's liberation and prohibition. Prohibition was caused mainly by women's groups, so it clearly demonstrated that women had political power. However, it is not clear that prohibition gave them political power. Indeed, the prohibition movement became so powerful because of how narrowly tailored it was to the issues of prohibition, so it seems difficult to make an argument that the infrastructure they built for that fight translated into more general women's rights infrastructure. Prohibition was also a fairly backdoor movement. It did not pass because a bunch of advocates organized to gain mass public support. Instead, they concentrated funds to destroy any politician who opposed them. This might inspire fear and acceptance in the eyes of the positions at the time (in the sense of thinking "I have to take this women's group seriously, they might destroy me"), but would not help with the general public.
pjc50 10y ago
I think that's a bit US-specific; the UK got votes for women in 1918, as a consequence of the war, without Prohibition. There were a few "dry" parishes, but no national success of the movement. (HN moderates active, obvious rudeness, but feminist material tends to get flagged off the front page rapidly.)

gizmo686 10y ago

I am not sure what causal line you can draw between women's liberation and prohibition. Prohibition was caused mainly by women's groups, so it clearly demonstrated that women had political power. However, it is not clear that prohibition gave them political power. Indeed, the prohibition movement became so powerful because of how narrowly tailored it was to the issues of prohibition, so it seems difficult to make an argument that the infrastructure they built for that fight translated into more general women's rights infrastructure. Prohibition was also a fairly backdoor movement. It did not pass because a bunch of advocates organized to gain mass public support. Instead, they concentrated funds to destroy any politician who opposed them. This might inspire fear and acceptance in the eyes of the positions at the time (in the sense of thinking "I have to take this women's group seriously, they might destroy me"), but would not help with the general public.

pjc50 10y ago

I think that's a bit US-specific; the UK got votes for women in 1918, as a consequence of the war, without Prohibition. There were a few "dry" parishes, but no national success of the movement. (HN moderates active, obvious rudeness, but feminist material tends to get flagged off the front page rapidly.)