Comments by "gerhard7" (@gerhard7323) on ""Women's Liberation" Has Left Women in a Hell of Their Own Making" video.

To be fair, at its most basic level, feminism was and is broadly about women achieving equality with men not about affording them unique choices. Nobody could ever promise that achieving that equality was necessarily going to be a nirvana for the vast majority of women. Within the existing paradigm it isn't for the vast majority of men so why should it be for the vast majority of women?
8
As with everything in life always be careful what you wish for. Women's equality undoubtedly bought with it great benefits both for women and society at large, but one shouldn't ignore that there were often pretty significant downsides too.
8
 @howardalantreesong2588 Show me someone who claims not to be a magpie and I'll show you a liar.
3
@thehound9638 ...and I would broadly agree with most of that.
2
@macktheripper7454 I don't think you can properly assess the benefits of a more gender equal society without comparing it to a society that is significantly less gender equal society. Generally speaking there are a myriad of factors that contribute to a society's wealth, health, public safety, civility and overall sense of cohesion, but I think it's fair to say that the most successful examples globally tend to be those where gender equality is enshrined in their laws.
2
@yiguanas812 There are pros and cons to both that's for sure, but it's a bit of a red herring to flag up arguable examples of cr@p coalition governments when there are also arguable examples of cr@pp FPTP ones too. The point, as much as anything, is to get as many people as possible feeling enfranchised in ie not disenfranchised from the political system.
2
@yiguanas812 We'll agree to disagree there and no you weren't remotely rude. Especially when compared to some of the fruitier exchanges I've had on here recently.😁🍑🍇🍊🍌 I can see the arguments both for and against but I just think that it would make more people feel more engaged with the process and more inclined to vote and/or less inclined to bitch about what they get afterwards. The old saying that we get the politicians we deserve is far more applicable when it comes to PR than it is when we apply it to FPTP.
2
@thehound9638 Social mobility in the UK is indeed an issue, but I don't personally believe that gender equality is at the heart of it. Middle and upper class women competing for and pushing 'potentially better' working class men out of top jobs because of quotas might be a thing but if it were it'd be a very small thing and I'd seriously struggle to believe that it's endemic without firm evidence.
1
@thehound9638 I don't doubt that class (and wealth) isn't the overriding issue here and nor do I doubt either that an endless supply of cheap labour doesn't have a serious role to play in the UK's social mobility issue, whatever its source, but I do struggle with your assertion that so does the gender equality issue to any great degree. Even if were true and even if you wanted to you couldn't easily row back on the decades of change that have accompanied it in a democratic country without some serious pushback.
1
@yiguanas812 Not dismissing your suggestion out of hand there, but an infrequent democratic vote is the extent of most people's wish to engage directly with democratic politics so the least we can try and do is to make it feels like it counts unlike with FPTP which actively 'encourages' people not to vote in certain constituencies where they know it'll be a wasted vote and not worth the bother. FPTP made much more sense in the 1970s when there was an all but two party system and when the coalitions were essentially internalized within each party, but today there are a plethora of ideas and parties whose views it would be healthier to be seen to be presented and represented. If only for the sake of the democratic process itself if nothing else.
1