Good Manners

[midwestyankee]

Not much to add in the series of responses to RJ's question but I will add this bit of my mother's story. When my parents married in 1950, there was no question whatsoever that she would leave her own faith behind and adopt the church of my father's family. Which was a double problem for her because services at his church were conducted in a language she did not know.

 

[RJMasters]

I'm pretty sure this is the last post I'll make to this thread.

At the end of the day, I have helped to empower women in real life by teaching them skills and a trade in order to secure their own financhial future and to have opportunities and choices they would have otherwise never had. I have done the same for many men too.

The company I am helping to build back east will be responsible for helping hundreds of 1000s of men and women to get jobs so they can support their families, pay their bills and live life. As I have said and maintain, I think money is the biggest problem that everyone faces and is key to understanding unequality of any kind.

Keroin, you asked me a question I gave you an answer to your question. I also made it clear that as an 18 year old, I really didn't have the ability to put what happened into perspective, that doesn't mean I can't do that now. If your flippancy and sarcasm is directed at the 18 year old, then that says a lot about you, if its directed towards me, then its misplaced.

Netz as to why or how you got your pell grants I do not know, I do know that in the late 80's the pell grant system was expanded specifically to help women, specifically single parent families. I also invite you to read http://www.governmentgrantspro.com/grants-for-women.html. If you want to roll your eyes or pretend that women didn't/don't get special benefits from grants for education, then go ahead. As for me, I say good on them I hope they took/take adavantage of whatever help was/is available to them in order to make their life better.

This was a great article about education by Phyllis Rosser. I really enjoyed the part where they were/are considering affirmitive action programs now for men. Of course this was written way back in 2005, but it has some great stuff in it.

Too many women in college?

The only reason I asked about how others viewed the past was because I just wanted to affirm that they saw it as basic slavery. The answers given were good enough to confirm that. Thanks.

 

[intothewoods]

The only reason I asked about how others viewed the past was because I just wanted to affirm that they saw it as basic slavery. The answers given were good enough to confirm that. Thanks.

I didn't get that impression at all.

 

[JMohegan]

I didn't get that impression at all.

Neither did I.

 

[Keroin]

I didn't get that impression at all.

Ditto.

Nor did I consider my response to RJ's post sarcastic or flippant.

 

[YourCaptor]

Real men only existed in the 50s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YhTKiFEMAg

 

[where]

Real men only existed in the 50s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YhTKiFEMAg

*teaspew*

 

[teknight]

*teaspew*

Bad Kybs, making a mess!! Go to my room!!

 

[where]

Bad Kybs, making a mess!! Go to my room!!

Ha! in your dreams!

 

[teknight]

Ha! in your dreams!

How about if I grow a beard?

 

[bhndblueyes88]

Real men only existed in the 50s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YhTKiFEMAg

*giggles* I love that scene

 

[where]

How about if I grow a beard?

and a hairy chest?

 

[Netzach]

Ditto.

Nor did I consider my response to RJ's post sarcastic or flippant.

Neither did I. But my reading comprehension isn't that good since I'm an affirmative action quota.

 

[midwestyankee]

Neither did I. But my reading comprehension isn't that good since I'm an affirmative action quota.

Yeah, I've been wondering that about you since the very first time I read one of your posts. I remember saying to myself, "self, this is one of those affirmative action broads. No point in paying attention to her."

Fortunately, my self is an idiot and didn't listen.

 

[sb2009]

Bullshit on the Marine quota thing. Utter bullshit. If a woman was picked for promotion because she was a woman, it was done quietly by a promotion board and there would be no paper trail.

The rest of your sad sad story? Nothing in it was because you had a penis. It was because you were poor. Which a lot of people are and were and will be. And it sucks. I know. I myself ended my higher education early due to finances (well, and no place to live and it was cold in Massachusetts). But to say it's because you are a man? Give me a fucking break.

 

[midwestyankee]

Bullshit on the Marine quota thing. Utter bullshit. If a woman was picked for promotion because she was a woman, it was done quietly by a promotion board and there would be no paper trail.

The rest of your sad sad story? Nothing in it was because you had a penis. It was because you were poor. Which a lot of people are and were and will be. And it sucks. I know. I myself ended my higher education early due to finances (well, and no place to live and it was cold in Massachusetts). But to say it's because you are a man? Give me a fucking break.

I was hoping that you'd weigh in on this story. Because your service is more recent than RJ's, if this scenario seems outlandish to you, it would be even more so for the armed forces of twenty years ago.

 

[where]

I was hoping that you'd weigh in on this story. Because your service is more recent than RJ's, if this scenario seems outlandish to you, it would be even more so for the armed forces of twenty years ago.

are you implying that the military hierarchy is NOT controlled by affirmative action lesbians?

 

[teknight]

are you implying that the military hierarchy is NOT controlled by affirmative action lesbians?

Wait! I think I've seen that (porn) movie!!

 

[midwestyankee]

are you implying that the military hierarchy is NOT controlled by affirmative action lesbians?

If it were, maybe John McCain wouldn't be such a pain in the ass about DADT.

 

[RJMasters]

Bullshit on the Marine quota thing. Utter bullshit. If a woman was picked for promotion because she was a woman, it was done quietly by a promotion board and there would be no paper trail.

The rest of your sad sad story? Nothing in it was because you had a penis. It was because you were poor. Which a lot of people are and were and will be. And it sucks. I know. I myself ended my higher education early due to finances (well, and no place to live and it was cold in Massachusetts). But to say it's because you are a man? Give me a fucking break.

I hate to break it to you, but during the late 80's and early 90, reports came out showing that women in the Marines were not being promoted. The report basicaly said that women were being intentionaly looked over.

I don't know what the practices are now, but during the time I was in, serving in the communication center as well as serving as the company's clerk...I saw the messages to the base commander as well as the reports to the company's CO. It was manditory that if there were 2 positions open for meritorious promotion, they would ensure that an equal number of women were nominated.

They still had to face the promotion board, take the tests and go through inspection.

However it was clear that a certain level needed to be maintained in order to ensure that Marines were in fact compling to pressure from on high to ensure no descriminating against women.

It is probably true today, there is no longer a need to do this though I dunno.

It was passed down from on high that "nominations" would include quotas to ensure that women were given a fair shot at being promoted.

Whatever

 

[RJMasters]

I didn't get that impression at all.

Neither did I.

Kybele
how bad would it be for you to have no choice? No choice of who to marry, possessions from prior to marriage becoming the property of your spouse, having no say in who runs your country. getting paid a fraction of what the opposite sex gets paid for the same work.

Keroin
systematic and social inequality and oppression

Midwestyankee
there was no question whatsoever that she would leave her own faith behind and adopt the church of my father's family.

No rights, systematically oppressed, had to give your religion?

How could you not get that impression or view from the above posts and or terms used to describe it. Even Netz pointed at the middle east culture's, which is routinely seen as women living a life equal to that of slavery.

You talked of men raping their wives JM. Women didn't even have the right over their own bodies.

I donnuo...when I add that all up, it sounds alot like women were treated pretty much like basic slaves.

So that's why I said, after reading all of the responses, its pretty clear to me that the view of how women were treated in the past is somewhere close to the definition of slavery.

 

[intothewoods]

No rights, systematically oppressed, had to give your religion?

How could you not get that impression or view from the above posts and or terms used to describe it. Even Netz pointed at the middle east culture's, which is routinely seen as women living a life equal to that of slavery.

You talked of men raping their wives JM. Women didn't even have the right over their own bodies.

I donnuo...when I add that all up, it sounds alot like women were treated pretty much like basic slaves.

So that's why I said, after reading all of the responses, its pretty clear to me that the view of how women were treated in the past is somewhere close to the definition of slavery.

A slave is denied rights and is oppressed, but unequal rights and oppression do not equal slavery.* For example, blacks in the U.S. post-slavery but prior to desegregation/voting rights/civil rights act/etc. obviously had less legal rights than whites, but they were no longer slaves in the literal sense.

Status, freedoms and available options really varied depending on a lot of factors, the two most obvious of which were race and class. That's the sense I get when I read all of the responses to your post as a whole.



*As a personal aside, I don't like the word oppression. It's just so vague and over-used.

 

[Keroin]

I donnuo...when I add that all up, it sounds alot like women were treated pretty much like basic slaves.

As ITW said, there's a difference between inequality and slavery. Do I think all women were treated as slaves pre-1950? Of course not. Do I think they lacked equal rights to their male counterparts? Yes. Hell yes.

What does this mean for the purposes of this discussion? Simply that those women who didn't want to live within the narrow parameters offered had no choice and no legal rights to do otherwise. The women whose personalities, goals and temperament suited the social construct at that time, were probably very happy, especially if, like your grandmother, they found a caring partner who treated them well.

But RJ, understand that if you phrase a question in such a way as to say, "Oh come on, was it really that bad?", as a woman who would have been absolutely stifled pre-1950's, and as a person who believes in equality for all races and genders, then I am going to show you that, yes, in many ways it was indeed that bad. When our legal system is set up in a way that allows a man to legally rape a woman...that's bad.

But were all women basically slaves? No.

A slave is denied rights and is oppressed, but unequal rights and oppression do not equal slavery.* For example, blacks in the U.S. post-slavery but prior to desegregation/voting rights/civil rights act/etc. obviously had less legal rights than whites, but they were no longer slaves in the literal sense.

Even though I don't believe women in N America had it nearly as bad as blacks did, I think this is an important point.

I would add that just because inequalities are dealt with in the law doesn't mean that they also magically disappear in society. Even after desegregation/voting rights/civil rights act/etc blacks weren't treated as equals and still aren't in some areas. The same can be said for women. Just because we became persons under the law and were granted the right to vote doesn't mean that immediately afterward all men treated us as equals or that we were given the same opportunities as men.

It can take decades for society to catch up with the law and that is what we are seeing now. The changing social code and mores, ("manners") is a reflection of that, which is why I see such change in a positive light.

 

[intothewoods]

Even though I don't believe women in N America had it nearly as bad as blacks did, I think this is an important point.

I hope it didn't sound like I was saying that. I just thought it was a good example of a group of people that were not enslaved but still had a lower equal status.

I would add that just because inequalities are dealt with in the law doesn't mean that they also magically disappear in society. Even after desegregation/voting rights/civil rights act/etc blacks weren't treated as equals and still aren't in some areas. The same can be said for women. Just because we became persons under the law and were granted the right to vote doesn't mean that immediately afterward all men treated us as equals or that we were given the same opportunities as men.

It can take decades for society to catch up with the law and that is what we are seeing now. The changing social code and mores, ("manners") is a reflection of that, which is why I see such change in a positive light.

Absolutely agree. Race, gender, class and how they all intersect -- very complicated, nuanced topics.

 

[Keroin]

I hope it didn't sound like I was saying that. I just thought it was a good example of a group of people that were not enslaved but still had a lower equal status.

No, not at all. I just wanted to make it clear that *I* wasn't making that statement.