3 ms·
The original comment said, "hostile" to women. What you're describing isn't being 'hostile', otherwise one would have to say society is 'hostile' to children or
by jlawson 3y ago
The original comment said, "hostile" to women. What you're describing isn't being 'hostile', otherwise one would have to say society is 'hostile' to children or old people.
The goal posts have moved to 'equal rights'.
But of course by that measure nobody had equal rights. A man couldn't do things that were just for women, and vice versa.
The argument you need to make is that women had it worse overall than men at the time. (Not worse than women now, or worse than men now.)
This is not obvious, given the brutal ways men lived and died in those eras. Being disallowed from e.g. fighting in a war doesn't sound so bad when fighting in a war means getting conscripted to be stabbed to death on a muddy field. Being disallowed from industry jobs doesn't sound so bad when industry jobs means choking to death on coal dust to earn enough food to eat for yourself and family.
History was brutal for everyone.
- benlivengood 3y agoI think there's ample reason for 'not equal rights' to be treated as hostility. The biggest reason is direct or implied hostile opposition to obtaining equality. There was significant rejection by men for centuries of suffrage and other equal rights for women; this is hostility toward women's historical desires and wishes to be treated as equals. Where it might be argued that individual men were only following cultural, religious, or other beliefs in denying equality to women then those cultures, religions, and other forces were hostile to women and their interests.
- boringuser2 3y agoThis is a, for lack of better terminology, a disgustingly bourgeoise view. You must step outside yourself if you want to CURIOUSLY interrogate history.