Why is important to keep Women unsuppressed?

SweetChildofMine

http://www.womenforwomen.org/assets/fil ... -women.pdf

Because its against the machine thats why!


I thought maybe some people would like to join in start a thread why societies keep women suppressed and the ramifications of failure within societies that continually do so. Maybe place articles of concern here.

redrock

Women have always been the backbone of society. Unfortunately these societies are patriarchal (most anyway - there are a minute number of matriarchal societies). Then add to that religion...

Interesting topic that I will come back to when I have a bit more time....

_

redrock wrote:

Interesting topic that I will come back to when I have a bit more time....

Me too. Thanks for posting, OP! :thumbup:

brianlux

:thumbup: Excellent site- thanks!

SweetChildofMine wrote:

http://www.womenforwomen.org/assets/files/invest-in-women.pdf

Because its against the machine thats why!


I thought maybe some people would like to join in start a thread why societies keep women suppressed and the ramifications of failure within societies that continually do so. Maybe place articles of concern here.

BinauralJam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_e9sookQYY

This sums up alot

MayDay Malone

If we suppress, then who will make the sandwiches?




I kid, I kid.

inlet13

Not to derail the discussion, but something that often think about is this:

Are women really more liberated now (on average) in the US or other industrialized economies then they were 50 some years ago? In other words, is working 50 hours a week in jobs ranging from minimum wage to CEO-status, then coming home to pick up your kid from day care and spending all night trying to care for them, really permitting the gender more liberation? Afterall, a lot of women now have to work in order to care for their child. This wasn't the case 50 years ago. One could easily argue that women are more "oppressed" in this form now then they were. There's only 24 hours in a day. On average, I bet the average woman did less work 50 years ago in that 24 hours. So, is more work really liberation? Clearly, choice involves liberation, but does more work... and moreover, is there really a choice anymore?

This is obviously a generalization. For example, there certainly are stay at home Moms in 2012, but the point is there are much less.

_

inlet13 wrote:

Not to derail the discussion, but something that often think about is this:

Are women really more liberated now (on average) in the US or other industrialized economies then they were 50 some years ago? In other words, is working 50 hours a week in jobs ranging from minimum wage to CEO-status, then coming home to pick up your kid from day care and spending all night trying to care for them, really permitting the gender more liberation? Afterall, a lot of women now have to work in order to care for their child. This wasn't the case 50 years ago. One could easily argue that women are more "oppressed" in this form now then they were. There's only 24 hours in a day. On average, I bet the average woman did less work 50 years ago in that 24 hours. So, is more work really liberation? Clearly, choice involves liberation, but does more work... and moreover, is there really a choice anymore?

This is obviously a generalization. For example, there certainly are stay at home Moms in 2012, but the point is there are much less.

One school of feminist thought would point out that many/most women already did have to work a lot 50 years ago too, but this just wasn't recognized in the predominantly white feminist movement of that day. Regardless, it's an important question/point.

SweetChildofMine

BinauralJam wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_e9sookQYY

This sums up alot

I didnt listen to the whole thing, however he is correct at the point always the mental game or psychology of shame/guilt involved with suppressing women.