$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 133.23

7,795 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
49.1% of Goal | left

Support:

Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
Which women's rights do you mean? The effect of women's rights on women in society has been pretty major. Just compare women's lives 200 years ago to today.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
Dangerous
mb
Clearly haven't helped at all.

I can't even get a good woman to make a sandwich anymore!

Darilian
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
Which women's rights do you mean? The effect of women's rights on women in society has been pretty major. Just compare women's lives 200 years ago to today.

Very well.

Was their life better or worse 200 years ago compared to men of that time? How were they better/worse?



It seems fairly clearly generally better today. There's no way I'd choose to be a woman 200 years ago over being a man 200 years ago. Today it's much more of a toss up.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Belgium
flag msg tools
Meaningless means there's a strong limit to how much I can mess up!
badge
This overtext is not in use.
mbmbmbmbmb
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
Which women's rights do you mean? The effect of women's rights on women in society has been pretty major. Just compare women's lives 200 years ago to today.

Very well.

Was their life better or worse 200 years ago compared to men of that time? How were they better/worse?



It seems fairly clearly generally better today. There's no way I'd choose to be a woman 200 years ago over being a man 200 years ago. Today it's much more of a toss up.


Were gender and societal roles of women 200 years ago frowned upon by women by and large?


About as much as class roles were frowned upon by the lower class and racism was frowned upon by people of other races I guess.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mutton Chops
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
Which women's rights do you mean? The effect of women's rights on women in society has been pretty major. Just compare women's lives 200 years ago to today.

Very well.

Was their life better or worse 200 years ago compared to men of that time? How were they better/worse?



It seems fairly clearly generally better today. There's no way I'd choose to be a woman 200 years ago over being a man 200 years ago. Today it's much more of a toss up.


Were gender and societal roles of women 200 years ago frowned upon by women by and large?


Yes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mutton Chops
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
flamespeak wrote:
mutton_chops wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
Which women's rights do you mean? The effect of women's rights on women in society has been pretty major. Just compare women's lives 200 years ago to today.

Very well.

Was their life better or worse 200 years ago compared to men of that time? How were they better/worse?



It seems fairly clearly generally better today. There's no way I'd choose to be a woman 200 years ago over being a man 200 years ago. Today it's much more of a toss up.


Were gender and societal roles of women 200 years ago frowned upon by women by and large?


Yes.


Why is that?


Because they didn't like them.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Edwards
United Kingdom
London
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Woman's rights have certainly improved things for women and children which are obviously a fairly large chunk of society.

I'd say they are part of a matrix which have improved things for men who are members of minorities ie black, gay etc.

As a white, straight, upper-middle class man I don't see any substantial downside. Others obviously disagree.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Edwards
United Kingdom
London
Unspecified
flag msg tools
flamespeak wrote:
myopia wrote:
Woman's rights have certainly improved things for women and children which are obviously a fairly large chunk of society.

I'd say they are part of a matrix which have improved things for men who are members of minorities ie black, gay etc.

As a white, straight, upper-middle class man I don't see any substantial downside. Others obviously disagree.


And how have they been improved?


A question for you to answer or I suspect this thread is just going to amble around.

Woman can own property, they can vote, work, have their own bank accounts, decide who they want to marry, they can get divorced and have an array of other legal rights etc etc. As the more common primary care-givers of children these rights benefit their children.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Edwards
United Kingdom
London
Unspecified
flag msg tools
flamespeak wrote:
myopia wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
myopia wrote:
Woman's rights have certainly improved things for women and children which are obviously a fairly large chunk of society.

I'd say they are part of a matrix which have improved things for men who are members of minorities ie black, gay etc.

As a white, straight, upper-middle class man I don't see any substantial downside. Others obviously disagree.


And how have they been improved?


A question for you to answer or I suspect this thread is just going to amble around.

Woman can own property, they can vote, work, have their own bank accounts, decide who they want to marry, they can get divorced and have an array of other legal rights etc etc. As the more common primary care-givers of children these rights benefit their children.


Why am I asking these questions? I like to hear opinions of others on random topics. It is healthy to see other view points.

My personal stance on this topic is 'I don't know if women were happier in a time with limited women's rights or not.' One would think looking at the literature of the day, they were not happy, however, looking at the literature of college educated and publishing women Today on similar subjects would lead one to believe there is very little change in terms of equality. So, it makes one wonder if prominent suffragettes were little more than the Laci Green's of their time but since we have information on them still they are held in high regard. Does that mean that people will view our time and the way women are treated now in the same light 200 years from now? Who knows?


Well being beaten, raped, killed etc tends to make people unhappy. These things obviously still happen but at a lesser rate and importantly women have much more control over their greater destinies than they did before. I can't see too many woman wishing they could trade places with their 200 year ago counter-parts which is a pretty good answer in itself.

And I'm not sure trying to gauge general happiness is a very good tool. Are people in general more happy today? I dunno, our lives are generally easier but more complicated. We live a lot longer but we can spend quite a few of those years in pain and distress.

I'd say outcomes are a better gauge and outcomes for women are leagues apart.

7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Men no longer have a right to sex with their wives, thus she can so no.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adrian Hague
United Kingdom
Bristol
Bristol
flag msg tools
RAWKET LAWNCHA!!!
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Men no longer have a right to sex with their wives, thus she can so no.
Also, a man can now be charged and be prosecuted for raping his wife (although in the UK this was only introduced relatively recently, around 1990), whereas previously, men could legally rape their wife.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
flamespeak wrote:
mutton_chops wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
mutton_chops wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
Which women's rights do you mean? The effect of women's rights on women in society has been pretty major. Just compare women's lives 200 years ago to today.

Very well.

Was their life better or worse 200 years ago compared to men of that time? How were they better/worse?



It seems fairly clearly generally better today. There's no way I'd choose to be a woman 200 years ago over being a man 200 years ago. Today it's much more of a toss up.


Were gender and societal roles of women 200 years ago frowned upon by women by and large?


Yes.


Why is that?


Because they didn't like them.


And how do we know this? Is there any kind of research that shows the general attitude of the majority of the women at the time or is the evidence presented that supports your conclusion from a small but very vocal minority?



The proof is in the pudding, change happened. If it were really only a vocal minority it wouldn't have caught on. Consider the fact thst it took a vocal minority to get things done to be a sign of how bad things were. It took a vreat deal of bravery to stand uo and be noticed and demand these things.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Schoell
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a question that should be answered by women, if it was asked in good faith at all.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
flamespeak wrote:
Dolphinandrew wrote:
flamespeak wrote:


Were gender and societal roles of women 200 years ago frowned upon by women by and large?


Yes.


Why is that?

Well unmarried women not being to earn enough money to support themselves in a decent style and married woman not being able to own property or earn money at all (except for very socially frowned on occupations) might be a start. I think you are trolling again, or terribly ignorant.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
flamespeak wrote:


And how do we know this? Is there any kind of research that shows the general attitude of the majority of the women at the time or is the evidence presented that supports your conclusion from a small but very vocal minority?


You really are a troll aren't you? Climb back under your rock.
You can read books on gender studies from every period of history.
Of course because women were worse educatedthere is less evidence from poor women, just as there isn't that much direct evidence from black slaves. However there are things like testimony to Parliamentary committees that are quite interesting.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Edwards
United Kingdom
London
Unspecified
flag msg tools
DavidDearlove wrote:
flamespeak wrote:


And how do we know this? Is there any kind of research that shows the general attitude of the majority of the women at the time or is the evidence presented that supports your conclusion from a small but very vocal minority?


You really are a troll aren't you? Climb back under your rock.
You can read books on gender studies from every period of history.
Of course because women were worse educatedthere is less evidence from poor women, just as there isn't that much direct evidence from black slaves. However there are things like testimony to Parliamentary committees that are quite interesting.


I don't think it even needs anyone to open a book. Just try a small portion of empathy.

I wouldn't like being obliged to marry someone my father picked out. To effectively be under the control of that person with no way out if they were cruel. To have no say in how society is run even the aspects which applied only to my gender.

Rocket science it aint.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Fitt
Thailand
Chang Mai
flag msg tools
DavidDearlove wrote:
flamespeak wrote:


And how do we know this? Is there any kind of research that shows the general attitude of the majority of the women at the time or is the evidence presented that supports your conclusion from a small but very vocal minority?


You really are a troll aren't you? Climb back under your rock.
You can read books on gender studies from every period of history.
Of course because women were worse educatedthere is less evidence from poor women, just as there isn't that much direct evidence from black slaves. However there are things like testimony to Parliamentary committees that are quite interesting.

David, I have been told that any source of knowledge about such topics that is not a modern properly done random public opinion poll is "just personal opinions" or anecdotal evidence. Both of which are useless. This seems to be some people's knee jerk stance.

It does have the draw back that with this standard we can't say for sure that a majority of slaves in 1860 wanted to be freed. Etc.

The guy seems like a Troll because he asks a question that can never be answered to his satisfaction because modern polling hadn't been invented then.

The edit was just punctuation and the 2 words "such topics".

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Frazier
United States
West Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
A man learns little by little in battle. Take this battle experience and become a man who can’t be beaten
badge
This flag says we will fight until only our bones are left.
mbmbmbmbmb
So we're clear, this is that one fuckwit who keeps deleting his accounts and or getting banned, right?

The tip off is that he mentions Laci Green, an annoying Youtube personality. He is obsessed with youtube personalities especially feminist and MRA ones.

I'm not sure I'd call this "trolling" he really is so stupid that he might not know that living in a society in which you have close to equal rights is more pleasant than one in which you do not but either way it's kind of a waste of time to talk to him honestly because he'll just keep asking dopey questions like a 3 year old.

"Are women happier now than they were 200 years ago?"

"Yes, because people like having more rights"

"How do you know that?"

"Well, aren't you happier since you have rights?"

"But how do we know women have similar emotions to me?"

"What kind of emotions do you think they have?"

"I dunno...evil girl emotions? That's why it's OK to trick them into having sex, because MEN MEN MEN MEN MEN MEN MEN what about MEN"
8 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb


You forgot to ask if women's rights have helped women which I would say they have. I am sure women appreciate being able to vote, deciding if they want to work or not, having the choice of what to wear, who to marry, being free to fuck outside of marriage etc.

As for society, yes having 50% of your population able to vote is good for society. They have a voice in how this country is run. Having women in the workforce increases our productivity and improves the overall economy. Having women CEO's/executives/politicians allows for differing ideas and viewpoints.

I don't see any downside of having more rights for women.

Society as a whole has become stronger and better with women having rights. See above.

Now for my question to the Op...what do you think? The way you worded the questions, especially the third, makes it seem like you think women having rights have had no benefit to society.
13 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
myopia wrote:


I don't think it even needs anyone to open a book. Just try a small portion of empathy.
.

I only mentioned books because he wanted evidence and academic women's studies books often collate evidence very well. I once did a course on Victorian Britain and was amazed how much evidence UK parliamentary committees collected.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris
United States
Sandy Springs
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Why do I have the feeling someone is trying to get us to write a paper for him?
6 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Edwards
United Kingdom
London
Unspecified
flag msg tools
rylfrazier wrote:
So we're clear, this is that one fuckwit who keeps deleting his accounts and or getting banned, right?

The tip off is that he mentions Laci Green, an annoying Youtube personality. He is obsessed with youtube personalities especially feminist and MRA ones.

I'm not sure I'd call this "trolling" he really is so stupid that he might not know that living in a society in which you have close to equal rights is more pleasant than one in which you do not but either way it's kind of a waste of time to talk to him honestly because he'll just keep asking dopey questions like a 3 year old.

"Are women happier now than they were 200 years ago?"

"Yes, because people like having more rights"

"How do you know that?"

"Well, aren't you happier since you have rights?"

"But how do we know women have similar emotions to me?"

"What kind of emotions do you think they have?"

"I dunno...evil girl emotions? That's why it's OK to trick them into having sex, because MEN MEN MEN MEN MEN MEN MEN what about MEN"


I'd be incredibly surprised if Flamespeak was Pwned / Hyperbolus / etc.

For one the latter has gone completely off the rails on the anti-Islam / Muslim thing and for another Flamespeak's syntax / grammar is different (and more readable).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
mbmbmbmbmb
It has both helped and hindered. For example, cost of living is now set up based on a double-income family, not a single-income family. They can charge more so they do. This means that more women who don't want to work have to do so in order to meet living expenses.

The ways it has helped has been discussed at length already.

Overall I think it's helped more.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
mbmb
flamespeak wrote:


My personal stance on this topic is 'I don't know if women were happier in a time with limited women's rights or not.' One would think looking at the literature of the day, they were not happy, however, looking at the literature of college educated and publishing women Today on similar subjects would lead one to believe there is very little change in terms of equality.


Happiness seems to be a function of changes to one's state of well being, rather than a function of that state of well being itself, and as such is probably not a good way to measure well being. For example, someone who went from making a million a year (with all the privileges that entails) to $100,000 a year (a drop in status) would probably be much less happy than someone who went from a $22,000 a year income to $80,000 a year (an increase in status). But presumably, the first person is still better off than the second (especially if they still have the trappings of their higher-income lifestyle and the advantages they obtained thereby).

There's been quite a lot of changes in focus in the feminist movement over the last few hundred years. Modern feminists aren't really focused on getting the vote, for example, but are more concerned with systemic biases in society generally (in ways that impact more than just women), which is kind of a different thing. So I think comparing women's rights movements across history is kind of comparing apples and oranges. That being said, I don't think as a general rule academics publishing in areas relevant to women's rights would suggest that there has been very little change in terms of equality.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Keiser

Waunakee
Wisconsin
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm not a woman, nor have I been anything but a detached spectator, so my insights and observations really aren't valid. It would be like me, a non-athlete, even beginning to criticize the play of a real athlete.

Next.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.