Home | About | Donate

What If We Achieved Real Equality for Women?


What If We Achieved Real Equality for Women?

Amy Traub

This week marks 95 years since the passage of the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, and 44 years since Congress designated its anniversary Women’s Equality Day. This gives us the opportunity to consider how far we’ve come, how far we have to go, and envision what the world would look like if women attained full equality. I will leave a discussion of political equality to my colleagues working tirelessly in that mission, and focus on the economy.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


If the world was perfect:
1. What should happen: women stop using feminist analysis and use their developed minds and hearts and social skills to manage their relationships with their male counterparts;take people one at a time regardless of sex and empathize,value and reciprocate with all humans regardless of sex forever after.
2. What would happen: liberal women continue to use feminist orthodox to inform themselves and believe men to be inferior to themselves and socialize their daughters to do the same.


I use to take care of my son a few nights a week when my wife worked at a friends jewelry store. I can tell you that taking care of small children is THE most difficult job on the planet. As you know it requires constant attention without a moments rest until they fall asleep, but even then you must stay alert to their breathing and safety in the crib. As much as I loved my son, I think working two jobs would have been easier.
All love and appreciation to mothers everywhere.


If republicans were not terrorists, as Clinton implies, women would have a chance at equal pay, and the right to their own bodies.


Wow! an out and out misogynist invasion on Common Dreams as a result of this article. We all just standard members of the current GOP? How can there be that much ignorance about women? I mention the Grand Old Party since all the current candidates attempt to obtain residence in the White House, are also infected and have been
now for at least the last two general elections for the highest elected office in the U.S..

The only comment among the lot worth bothering to attempt correct was this one, based on more misunderstanding than ignorance. "They work either in or out of the home,"
Cookie, the great majority of women work both in AND out of the home. It is clearly evidenced by your rather obvious aversion to child care even though you realize it is an exceptionally difficult job you must live a very shelter existence. Even worse their labor remains devalued in both locations.

Somehow I suspect there will either be multiple responses by the commenting misogynists or none at all. Perhaps some of my fellow "femi-nazis" (Rush' chosen term) will choose to go more deeply into some relevant explanations of feminism and even provide the appropriate definition. Maybe even their significant others also understand that word simply means a belief in the social, economic and political equality of women and men. Not too difficult a concept for most women and a considerable number of men. Even this 80 year old person born sans a penis has understood it since I was old enough to know the difference and the truth.


Wait. So, what is your implication with a wedding ring? No right to say "no?"

Actually, they do. Apparently you don't like that they do, but really, that's none of your business.

Pretty stone-age stuff there, fella.


I wouldn't know unique (though the screen name may have very interesting psychological aspects) whether you fit the full definition of my description of not only you, but the others who had responded at the time I read the article and the responses. However, no a question some of the aspects of the definition you provided are evident in your response.

What you failed to discern is the difference in the PHYSICAL, societal, economic and political factors. Short of giving birth, regardless of your description of the role of the female, even in the most ancient and so-called "primitive" cultures, women's roles have in reality not been as you asserted. Nor are they in our society today, which btw is made up of a variety of cultures professing and expressing many different values and behaviors. However, you appear to be in denial of a number of the other terms expressed in your choice of definitions (they vary in the choice of dictionary). Some are quite applicable and even more obvious in the current election season.

As to your rather obvious attitude related woman's reproductive capability, in particular contraception and abortion, women have practiced both not only currently, but historically and even pre-historically. The primary difference is the availability of methodology that makes both far more effective and safe.

It's rather apparent along your educational road, you've unfortunately not availed yourself of a course in Anthropology (the study of we humans and those other primates we evolved from, biologically, culturally, and historically to include our archaeology) btw, I suspect in using the term evolved (from the term evolution) I may have also touched upon another "bad" word, you or those you may choose ascribe to, also deny exists.

If you're curious? Yes, I am educated as a social scientist with degrees that required a major and two minors, mine being Anthropology, Sociology and History, with additional graduate courses in Psychology with a primary focus on Applied Anthropology. Ignorance can be cured by education or just some relevant reading. Though nothing is more important in creating opinion and attitudes than life experience which for me is now 80 years. Now that wasn't a terrible attack, just some provision of information you appear to be devoid of.


Awfully binary here, dude.

Catch up a little bit, man. I try to avoid generalizations, but you'll like this one: Women have better eye-hand coordination, so they're better shots!

You mean like winning the battle for weekends off work, that kind of stuff?

Actually, there's probably something akin to it behind your assumption that you have standing to define her role.

Probably not. It's too vapid.


Thank you for your honest response Unique. How I wish you were "unique". Ah Utopia! Nothing wrong in any way of hoping for utopia as a part of our mutual future though at age 80, I've put my efforts into influencing my three granddaughters and single grandson who are all proud feminists. In the end as we both dream of utopia, ours will remain far different in the composition.


If ALL of the Women of voting age in this Country, each and every one of them were to go to the polls and be in unison in who they were voting for, then that Candidate of their choice would have to be the next President- Hands down, even though highly unlikely, and without any electronic voting machine shenanigans, but A vast majority WIN, would be A mathematical certainty-