Fewer women were unemployed in the 1950's than now. So what did feminism really get them other than more work, fewer children, men who don't like them and dissatisfaction? Oh, yes. It got them cats. Cats were the real winners of the feminist movement.
Stupid argument with no source. Sure there were tons of secretaries, nurses, typewriters, retail girls, etc. But women simply were unable to penetrate the “real glass ceiling” without an exhaustive uphill battle that men did not have to contend with. That ceiling disappeared in the 90s imo and if women haven’t been able to progress that’s on them. I am a young female business owner, married to a conservative masculine Texan, don’t want kids, love Trump, and am happy. Stop generalizing and over simplifying women. My point is simply that feminism made it possible for individuals to do exactly as they please. Are there some girls who would legit be happier as housewives who fall prey to the third wave feminism BS and are unhappy in their careers as a result? Yes absolutely. But stop discounting the women who are happy. Just as there are effeminate men there are also masculine women (no trans). This country is about freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the individual and feminism made it possible for women to actually have a real choice.
Everyone had to prove themselves but women had to be twice as good to get the same opportunity as a man at the same job. Obviously this wasn’t the case everywhere and there were exceptions and fair work places but it was the exception not the rule. Now, places where there is legit sexism and harassment and where it is harder for a woman to get a job as a man is the exception and not the rule.
I disagree. Considering my mother was highly skilled and employed throughout the 1950's as were many women. Pre-1920's suffragette movement, yes. But the idea that there were no female professionals or executives by some sort of imaginary decree is nonsense. Women were already free to do what they wanted. My mother's sister never married and had a very successful career and was happy for it. She was born in 1928 and entered the workforce with a college degree just after WW2. 1960's feminism was not necessary and was a cancer. I lived through it and you will never convince me otherwise.
I never said that. I'm saying radical feminism wasn't required for the normalization of women in the workforce because it was ongoing and becoming more commonplace on it's own. Women held prominent positions in the 1930's and were boosted tremendously by the labor shortages caused by WW2. If you think women are somehow better off now than they were in the 1950's you need to really examine what changed starting in the 1960's because the ultimate losers of feminism were women.
Fewer women were unemployed in the 1950's than now. So what did feminism really get them other than more work, fewer children, men who don't like them and dissatisfaction? Oh, yes. It got them cats. Cats were the real winners of the feminist movement.
Stupid argument with no source. Sure there were tons of secretaries, nurses, typewriters, retail girls, etc. But women simply were unable to penetrate the “real glass ceiling” without an exhaustive uphill battle that men did not have to contend with. That ceiling disappeared in the 90s imo and if women haven’t been able to progress that’s on them. I am a young female business owner, married to a conservative masculine Texan, don’t want kids, love Trump, and am happy. Stop generalizing and over simplifying women. My point is simply that feminism made it possible for individuals to do exactly as they please. Are there some girls who would legit be happier as housewives who fall prey to the third wave feminism BS and are unhappy in their careers as a result? Yes absolutely. But stop discounting the women who are happy. Just as there are effeminate men there are also masculine women (no trans). This country is about freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the individual and feminism made it possible for women to actually have a real choice.
Everyone had to prove themselves but women had to be twice as good to get the same opportunity as a man at the same job. Obviously this wasn’t the case everywhere and there were exceptions and fair work places but it was the exception not the rule. Now, places where there is legit sexism and harassment and where it is harder for a woman to get a job as a man is the exception and not the rule.
I’m married derp.
I disagree. Considering my mother was highly skilled and employed throughout the 1950's as were many women. Pre-1920's suffragette movement, yes. But the idea that there were no female professionals or executives by some sort of imaginary decree is nonsense. Women were already free to do what they wanted. My mother's sister never married and had a very successful career and was happy for it. She was born in 1928 and entered the workforce with a college degree just after WW2. 1960's feminism was not necessary and was a cancer. I lived through it and you will never convince me otherwise.
Are you really going to sit here and say it was just as easy to be a female banker or scientist in 1950/60s as it is now lol?
I never said that. I'm saying radical feminism wasn't required for the normalization of women in the workforce because it was ongoing and becoming more commonplace on it's own. Women held prominent positions in the 1930's and were boosted tremendously by the labor shortages caused by WW2. If you think women are somehow better off now than they were in the 1950's you need to really examine what changed starting in the 1960's because the ultimate losers of feminism were women.
Lol maybe you’ll be smart enough for the truth someday.