Zeno

Women were allowed to vote in Belgium in 1948, were granted equal property rights to men in 1972. Women were discriminated in society, but how much?

Have there been more discriminating and less discriminating times for women? More or less discriminating times, perhaps?



You can read about how women's role in society is ascribed to the patriarchal model that came about along with the neolithic agricultural revolution, as heavy ploughwork gave men a greater share in the food production.

Or about how men/women relations were heavily formed by the hunter/gatherer stage of humanity, women gathering and men hunting.

How automatization led to a lesser need for (hu)manpower, in industry and agriculture, but also the househol, thus giving women more time, and work opportunities.

About how during WWII women had to work jobs that were traditionally men's jobs, and after the war was over wanted to continue to do so, or at least have the right to.

You can read about how women were not allowed to do certain things men could, were disadvantaged in society and generally discriminated against, all throughout history, but i wonder: would there not be a lot of "unwritten history", of the "soft power" of women?

Being in a loving relationship with one of these fine creatures of God myself, i can testify that when a woman tries she can make a man do anything.

How did the breadwinners-model come about, where the husband went out working and the wife stayed at home?

How accurate is history about the position of women, considering the lack of sources about common people?

So babes, what's your history?

tizziec

I think too often we compare women of the past to our way of life today. The role of the woman in the household used to be more highly regarded, AND it used to be more work (Before the fifties and all the new fangled gadgets of the technological and nuclear age).

My history, that in today's society, I feel both more burdened than my mother's generation, and left with few options. I cannot choose between homemaker and breadwinner, I have to be BOTH! Equality has gone TOO far and men have become kind of weak in the process (leaving us to be stronger yet).

I do not in any way feel equally valued by my culture and society nor do I feel that in any way, women entering high positions in politics has led to better things for women (HELLLOOOOO!!! Where is the ERA!!!!!)

I think we put ourselves in a position of being measured against a male standard in the second wave feminist movement of the 60's and 70's and only now are even beginning to create a standard of our own, but are still stuck having to prove we can do when a man can do to get respect. DUH!!! Of course I CAN do what a man can, but I certainly don't want to have to in order to be valued equally. What man has to prove his value by proving he can be a Mr Mom?

Ok, yes I am a bit bitter, but no I am NOT an hewoman manhater by any means and am at heart hoping to someday get to be a stay at home wife/mother and will take great pride in a clean home, with a good meal on the table, well behaved children and a happy husband who has my support (and he damn well WILL return that support and respect in and out of the home!!!!) I demand that people around me see me as me, respect me as woman, and not place my value on the fact that I know more about a cars engine and can build a better faster fire (without gasoline) than most men

Ah.... rant over

Zeno

In what ways was it more highly regarded? Do you think the role of women was always confined to the household, how do you think the household politics might have influenced society?

From here i can only wish you and your future Mr. Right & Bright many happy bonfires.

Yeah, we don't want the nuns to come and turn off the light!

tizziec

A homemakers job used to be real work. Hand washing clothing, repairing clothing, cooking from scratch, cleaning without automation, and the fact that there was REAL pride in keeping your house clean and tidy (not being able to afford the best maid service). there was once more stigma attached to the mother whose child was a derelict now its all "well that's just the way kids are".

The woman had her job and it was defined as her job and the man had his. Now there is a role confusion in the home and though the man can still pull his pride and value from his ability to be breadwinner, a woman has to do more and has less definition in her role and therefore less respect, less value and less self efficacy.

Men who lost their jobs to robots on the assembly line ended up in bars drinking away their self esteem. Women who lost their jobs to automation and the modern kitchen of the 50's ended up hooked on valium and bored out of their skulls.

steve53

Yawn.......

Zeno

I know something you can do:

http://www.historum.com/games/22208-...me-please.html

Carlisle Blues

Great topic Zeno>>>>>>>>>>.

Carlisle Blues

I do not know if this is the norm today. Gender roles by necessity have changed over the years. However, women still earn .38 less on the dollar than men as far as I know.

Heidi XX

women from the past and mothers from the past are so much better than modern women! why I say so----

modern women do not care for there young,do not put there kids first,either she will put her carrier first or her husband first or herself first.
she does not even look after her offspring,complete strangers ovr 12 hrs at day care look after her offspring so really letting women into the work force was not really a great idea!



compared to women from the past------
she look after her brood of offspring day in and day out puts her offspring first over any other thing,being a great wife to her husband.


My personal opinions--- life worked better when men worked and women brrood offspring, and that women should had gone back to there originals roles after wwII.

RollingWave

interestingly, despite being well known for things like foot binding, China gave voting rights to women almost instantly when they overthrew the Qing dynasty, and there was never really any serious public debate / rejection to this.

Due to the chaotic warlord situation almost immediately following the collaspe of the dynasty, it wasn't until after WW2 that China regained some semblance of unification (and it was short lived too), in 1948 the first ever full national direct election where held in China by the then ruling Nationalist party.

It was the first time Chinese really went to the polls, and women's voting rights were already the same as men in every sense, in fact women were already guarenteed a minimum of 5% spots (a policy that is still continued in Taiwan. )

Ironically though.. the elections of 1947 - 48 were the first.... and LAST time that there was mass public Election in China.

China's women's rights issue have been very interesting in many sense... historically speaking China was really never particularly chauvinism society. despite developments of foot binding during the Ming / Qing dynasty (which was really always a rather controversial practice even during those periods. the governments repeated issued edicts against the practice, while many prominent scholars were also against it. and there's also the question of how wide spread it really was, since it was well known that women typically worked the field almost as much as men did in China, yet foot binding would drastically limit a girls' ability to help in this matter. and it was said that there were more people binding foots in the country side. which rather contradict against logic.

Historically, women were never banned from learning in China, and while they can't enter public service, a well learned girl was typically highly respected and thought after, most big public officials would boast if they have learned wife and daughters.

Work participation wise there was also never quite as much restriction against women, aside from obvious farm works, women sometimes ran entire commercial operations. While there were generally some distaste against women in politics, the fact was still that almost all dynasty had queens who had significant political influences. and they werne't always viewed in a negative way, for example while the Qing was most well known for Cixi in it's last stages running a crumblinb empire into the ground, most Chinese generally consider the Empress XiaoZhuang the best known women in Qing politics, in a good way.

The Qing's rise was hardly done without struggles of it's own, and XiaoZhuang was instrumental in keeping the Qing together and achieving it's takeover of China during it's rising stages, Xiaozhuang is a legendary women in many ways, She's actually a Mongolian Princess, who married the rising Manchurian Warlod Huang Taichi in a pact that merged the Machurian forces with the Mongolians. But Huang Taichi died right at a very critical moment, the Ming was collapsing due to internal rebellion, but they still had a strong garrison at the Great Wall blocking the Manchurian forces, and what's worse is that their son was just a toddler at that point, while several of Huang Tai Chi's brother were accomplished general still in their youth.

At that point there was a very serious risk that the rising dynasty could simply implode due to succession crisis. but XiaoZhuang managed to somehow convince the greatest of his brother-in-law Dorogan to ally with her and support her son as the legitimate heir, a move that proved successful as the legitimate heir supported by his most powerful uncle proved enough to convince everyone onboard .

XiaoZhuang's relationship with Dorogan though was hardly one that did not have it's danger, and how deep their relationship actually was is the subject of many novels throughout the Qing dynasty and today. But in the end She managed to keep her son on the throne and when her son died in a young age (that or as some rumor has it he simply abandoned his throne due to the death of his love one ). XiaoZhuang again had to oversee a young child onto the throne and all the risk of coup that came with it.