The Surprising Road to Women's Suffrage
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 06. 2024
- (Visit: www.uctv.tv/)
0:59 - Main Presentation
50:55 - Audience Questions
Women who fought for the right to vote were struggling for nothing less than access to full citizenship. Ellen DuBois, UCLA professor of history and gender studies, emphasized the larger vision women held in the struggle for women's suffrage. Recorded on 02/13/2018. Series: "UCLA Faculty Research Lectures" [4/2018] [Show ID: 33134]
Very grateful for this lecture! Thank you!
Nice lecture.
Excellent presentation
Thanks for sharing your lovely presentation...
Lord God,
I must repent my sins, I was blind. please help me
I enjoyed this presentation, in particular, for the strategies employed by Frances Willard that cleverly rebranded the suffragist movement to build traction.
Also check out valethia watkins alongside Tommy curry as their africana thought has gone far to debunk the erasure imposed by feminist discourse
collision warning
Guardian UK:
Rohingya girls under 10 raped while fleeing Myanmar, charity says
Médecins Sans Frontières says more than half the girls it has treated after sexual assaults are under 18
Rohingya children, some of them under 10 years old, are receiving treatment for rape in camps on the Bangladesh border, according to medics who say that young refugees account for half of those sexually assaulted while fleeing violence in Myanmar.
Médecins Sans Frontières says dozens of Rohingya girls have been given medical and psychological support at its Kutupalong health facility’s sexual and reproductive health unit - a specialist clinic for survivors of sexual assault based in the largest refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar.
Of those fleeing Rakhine state who come to the clinic for treatment relating to rape, “about 50% are aged 18 or under, including one girl who was nine years old and several others under the age of 10”, an MSF spokesperson said.
The organisation stressed this was just a fraction of those believed to have been sexually assaulted and raped since military operations began on 25 August, as most survivors faced practical and cultural barriers to accessing treatment.
www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/25/rohingya-children-fled-myanmar-violence-charity
Ok so what are we to do with this information
Love Jihad & Women's Rights
Are people who are fighting against Love Jihaad advocating only a certain people should marry only certain people? No.
Any person is free to marry whoever HE/SHE is willing to marry. It's a free World.
But the problem here is, A Muslim girl marrying a Hindu boy, or a Muslim boy marrying a Hindu girl - The law system in India is such that Muslims are given an exception to enjoy the personal laws & these personal laws are in so many respects are Anti Hindu, they have not had the kind of reforms took place in so far as that of Hindu laws are concerned.
This puts all the Non - Muslim women who choose to marry a Muslim - boy at a disadvantage. So Non Muslim girl if chooses to marry whether out of intention/fraudulence, A Muslim boy, she will loose the right to, (i) Property, the way she would had enjoyed if she were not married a Muslim boy, (ii) She will loose right to divorce, (iii) She will loose right to Inheritance, Succession etc. in ways she would enjoy if she has not married a Muslim boy.....-
Thank you for this presentation! I'm in the process of learning how we've reached amendments so far. I will say though, your passing comment at the very end about the "Constitutional convention" being able to "take everything away from us" is not accurate, and is actually a much propagated myth. A right wing convention that you would fear, whether on the balanced budget or otherwise, would not be ratified by 38 states as there are not enough red states. Any amendment proposed now, whether by Congress or by Article V convention, would have to be cross partisan enough to make that 3/4 threshold.
You had me until the stupid comment about our current president who (although I personally don't like him) is in no way anything like Wilson.
1962 the contraceptive pill comes on the market, 1970: the disease with a small name is spreading more and more but nobody is really worried about it, 1980: aids is a seriously matter: 1990 the career woman appears on the scene, 2000: the labor market suddenly got twice as much labor force, 2010: now a family of two is going to work for its existence and new words appear as 'incel' involuntary celebation, MGTOW ( men going their own way)...
Though MGTOW has got nothing to do with incel. It's just a tactic shaming of feminists to marginalize them. MGTOW came into existence because of the sexism against men in the divorce courts. In fact around half the participants currently in MGTOW have been married at least once, and lost all their life savings, property to their ex wives; not only that but haven't been able to see their own children for years even after court order because women can just go and make up lies in the court to avoid that. So yeah, MGTOW is very very important. The Men's Rights Movement has existed for a long time but thanks to extremist and sexist media and politicians it got nowhere, that's why Men's Rights Activists formed MGTOW, because as it seems for now - the only way to win the game is not to play the game.
@@SuperRohit9 youre absolutly right.
@@SuperRohit9 your comment has nothing to do with hundreds of years of discrimination against women. yes you have a beef about current laws for divorced men but not about women's political right to vote. Patriarchy is your problem--that forces both men & women into 'roles' that are detrimental. fight against that & the religions that push it
@Benjamin i believe your nonsense is trolling but will reply anyway. Have you seen the men lately in congress testifying? They have been crying, throwing temper tantrlum, being out of control emotionally so don't tell me WOMEN having emotions is disqualifying from politics. We've had centuries of violence from over testosteroned men and I'm sick of it. It's time for people who care about humanity's future to take control--women are NEEDED to stop these excesses of men
@Carl Marks hundreds of years of wars, violence, dictators, religious violence led by MEN show your 'thoughts' to be lies and based on prejudices that are knowledge and fact free. Your justification that half of humanity must me dominated by the other half is absolute nonsense.
Your support of old angry warmongering men, who cling to bigotry, misogyny, phony patriotism, cafeteria christianity, religious hate, and homophobia has to end.
With all of Trump's multi-million dollar estates, and he's living rent free in this lady's head.
16:00 is she talking about Frederick Douglas?
This cat’s speaking facts..
You sound like a misogynist . How dare you. You are officially cancelled !
So men got the right to vote by fighting in the Revolutionary War, the war that made the U.S. a democracy (before that we were a monarchy), and sacrificed blood and lives for that right; women got the right to vote by nagging men until men gave them the right to vote. Men don't hate Brits, why do women seem to hate men when they did not have to suffer as men did for that right?
EDIT: I admit saying "women hate men" isn't accurate, it's women's rights activists who hate men."
edited on August 23rd, 2020
A man should not comment on something he knows nothing about because he does not know what it's like to be a women and treated like a 2nd class citizen. What an ignorant remark.
@@lynnevergalitto4152 You have it upside down. Women were first class citizens until suffragettes cajoled weak men into dragging them into second class citizenship through the vote (and other delusional egalitarian impositions). Most women spent their days more or less freely engaging in the two activities they loved and always will love the most, inbetween perfectly free and loving fulfillment of their duties to their families: spending time with each other and with children. Their husbands were the second class citizens. They worked jobs that often led to an early grave, almost always had no connection to their personal values or interests, and that had to be performed and completed on a rigid time schedule. They fought and died in wars to protect them and engaged in inherently combative, anxiety inducing activities (e.g. politics, economic warfare) for their sake.
Women were served up *the* dream job *by nature* and ended up begging to have it taken away from them so that they could join the cold, merciless and hostile worlds of men. But it isn't fair to blame all women for bringing down upon their heads the hellish misery that would follow their enfranchisement: declining female happiness (stupidly referred to by liberal ideologues who've lost even the last shred of contact with reality as: the "paradox" of declining female happiness), plummetting mental health, and skyrocketing anti-depressant usage, self-medication, overdoses and self harm. It was the work of an unholy alliance between weak, selfrighteous men who had replaced a clear sense of male duties with a pathetic desire for public recognition of unearned virtue and a small group of permanently inconsolable women whose resentment and jealousy of happily married women drove them to make war upon motherhood, men and God.
I tell you this as someone who is genuinely concerned about female happiness and wellbeing. Far from being motivated by an ignorant misogynistic prejudice, I hate feminism becasue most of my family members are women and I've seen all of the ways which it has made them utterly miserable: by embittering their hearts with misandric fables, pressuring them with expectations they can never live up to and shaming them for their feminine impulses and their perfectly natural desire to find a man who is confident of his superiority to them in strength, rationality and leadership. Misery loves company.
@@Jy3pr6 So, would you trade places with a 19th century woman?
@@kekort2 Hi, kekort2. I wouldn't trade places with anyone of either gender for any reason so I wouldn't fail to do so on the basis of a secret belief that women were in fact the more unfortunate sex in the past. Now, I also have a question for you. Assuming you're a woman, while you're at work, would you trade places with a woman who is talking with her friends and playing with children? Or, while you're playing with children and talking with your friends, do you yearn to be at work?
If you sincerely answered no to the first question and yes to the second, perhaps on the basis that you prefer your job to cleaning and cooking and changing diapers, I'd simply encourage enough candor towards yourself to admit that the majority of women would at best find both jobs equally tedious but most likely would find more fulfillment in employment that is immediately meaningful and important, has no rigid time schedule, often allows for the satisfaction of personal interests and involves activities that women are inclined to enjoy anyways.
@@Jy3pr6 tl:dr your really terrible and wrong idea about history of women does not add anything to the discussion about facts of history--i stopped reading because it was such nonsense. Feminism has fought for women to get fair pay, fair treatment in financial situations, and over their children. get some REAL EDUCATION instead of bs beliefs
speakers who say uh uh uh or um um all the time are very distracting which is what you often do. Please take some training on how to speak without using these fillers that make you sound ineffective or unknowledgeable---you aren't either of those things but your speaking pattern makes you seem that way