Were women happier when they were barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, couldn't own property, and couldn't have bank accounts of their own?
id be happy with that
>>35524256i would be.and then i gouge you for your money if you disappoint me :]
>>35524256maybe yes, maybe no, I don't care. fact is, it's a bad idea to give political rights to children.
hmmm today I will give equal legal power to people with none of accountability or risk as the other half of the population.
>>35524256I don't own property. My bank account is pretty much empty.I'm pretty much always barefoot.I wish I could get pregnant.So I don't know about women, but it sounds pretty good to me.
>>35524365are you suggesting women do not face accountability for their actions relative to men?
>>35524256according to my grandma, no
>>35524256if they were happy they wouldnt have done all that protesting
>>35524256I wish a boy would plap a baby into me (anyone offering?)
>>35524692My grandma thinks your grandma is a whore.
>>35524693They didn't. Their ungrateful daughters did before they became negligent mothers.
>>35524719>daughtersif women were happy they wouldnt have protested
>>35524738They didn't. Their ungrateful daughters didBefore they became terrible mothers.The women who did the protesting never lived the life they protested. Retard.
>>35524757are their daughters not women? daughters(women) wouldnt have done that if they werent happy
>>35524766Their daughters weren't living like that, so they were neither happy nor unhappy with it. They we're just rebelling against mum. The women who were living the domestic bliss, didn't protest shit.
>>35524785so what youre saying is, there was a time where women didnt have rights, they somehow magically got them without the need to protest. and then the younger generation started protesting for the equality they already had? lmao thats hilarious
>>35524813NTA holy shit your reading comprehension is beyond saving bestie :(
>>35524840>ermm women didnt protest, their daughters protested rights they already had
>>35524863NTA but anon is right. You're retarded.
>>35524256no. absolutely not, all the women in my family who were alive in that era hated it and all were abused by their shit husbands. one of which, my paternal grandmother, treated me like dogshit over it and i'm glad that pentecostal bitch is out of my life
>>35524891It kinda sounds like her husband was in the right ngl.
people were wealthierbefore the industrial revolution, a few women did work, but it was very rare, the industrial revolution changed that. at first it was very profitable for a woman to work since you could live comfortably back then on a single person's salary, but it quickly became the norm and living prices adjusted accordingly.this is why it's important not to work two jobs nowadays, people think they are getting ahead, and they technically are, but they are screwing over everyone long-term
>>35524690lookism says they do not
>>35524928Additionally, and this was actually a point made by feminists back in the day, the stay at home mums WERE working, they just weren't recieving a salary. They were cooking and cleaning and daycaring and a million other things that we now pay other women to do professionally for other people's kids. If a woman stops being a housewife to do the exact same work, GDP goes up, but the real economy, which is to say the actual total units of cooking, cleaning, and daycaring, stays the same. The same number of meals are being cooked, the same number of houses are being cleaned, and the same number of children are recieving daycare, but now it's all taxable income. Governments love working women. Economists don't.
>>35524928>its important to go along with the status quo and maybe consume less>dont blame the institutions and start violently dismantling them thoughwhat a bootlicking neoliberal faggot
>>35524961trannies are always bootlickers trying to enforce the status quo
>>35524961if you advocate for violent conflict but can't look the clerk in the eyes your opinion is nothing short of worthless
>>35524961t. traitor working two jobs
Who the fuck cares about what bioholes want? They are ontologically evil
>>35525477
>>35525477>bioholes
