Vive la Difference?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Actually, Duchess, I think you will agree, there are thousands of women over the world who celebrate their period

Because it means that they haven't become pregnant that month. Be it for 'indulging' in unprotected sex or many other reasons.

Agreed?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I was merely pointing out how periodically (no pun intended) women may welcome their monthly period as a signal of 'non-pregnancy'

Not a statement that any groups of women across the globe welcome this(approx) week long condition on a monthly basis

You could just say 'Yes, StDP, you have highlighted a case in which women clearly WOULD 'welcome' their period'. then we can move on.

but it's your thread...

Originally posted by st dominics preview
I was merely pointing out how periodically (no pun intended) women may welcome their monthly period as a signal of 'non-pregnancy'

Not a statement that any groups of women across the globe welcome this(approx) week long condition on a monthly basis

You could just say 'Yes, StDP, you have highlighted a case in which women clearly WOULD 'welcome' their period'. then we can move on.

but it's your thread...

Duchess64 seems to look at almost everything in a negative way. It's a shame.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

He was envious that I would never have to worry about being conscripted.

When the equal right amendment was in play, and at first appeared to be sailing toward adoption, one of the things that slowed it down was women realizing that they might be drafted to military service, and sent to Vietnam.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

my point seems to have been dismissed......

c'est la vie!

The post that was quoted here has been removed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment

In its form in 1972 it passed both Houses of Congress. By 1977 it had 35 of the required 38 State endorsements. Before the 1979 deadline, 5 States rescinded their approval. The draft and the Vietnam War were indeed front and center in people's minds from 1972 to 1979. There were many other areas where women's equal rights would have lost them traditional expectations of women. The longer the amendment lingered the more it lost support among the ladies.

Originally posted by normbenign
[b]He was envious that I would never have to worry about being conscripted.

When the equal right amendment was in play, and at first appeared to be sailing toward adoption, one of the things that slowed it down was women realizing that they might be drafted to military service, and sent to Vietnam.[/b]

Women were still banned from combat roles. In fact, women had to fight the system in order to be allowed to fight in a combat role. This ban was lifted only two years ago.

Originally posted by normbenign
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment

In its form in 1972 it passed both Houses of Congress. By 1977 it had 35 of the required 38 State endorsements. Before the 1979 deadline, 5 States rescinded their approval. The draft and the Vietnam War were indeed front and center in people's minds from 1972 to 1979. There were many other areas whe ...[text shortened]... ectations of women. The longer the amendment lingered the more it lost support among the ladies.

The military draft ended in 1973, so I doubt the reason you gave was the main reason for equal rights failure. But I do remember some women and men voicing their concern about women being drafted into the military. Perhaps that had an effect on ending the draft, but probably not on the equal rights amendment.

The threat of a future draft might have been felt , at any rate it was one of the anti-ERA talking points:

http://blogs.archives.gov/prologue/?p=13789

quote:

After 1973, however, a highly organized opposition to the ERA emerged, suggesting that ratification would prove to be detrimental to women.

Opponents argued that passing the amendment would do away with protective laws like sexual assault and alimony, eliminate the tendency for mothers to receive child custody in a divorce case, and immediately make the all-male military draft unconstitutional.

unquote

One could argue with these points. Unless there is reliable polling information, we can only speculate on the weight these factors (and possibly others not mentioned) had.

At the time, 30 of the 38 required states had ratified the amendment.

Originally posted by JS357
The threat of a future draft might have been felt , at any rate it was one of the anti-ERA talking points:

http://blogs.archives.gov/prologue/?p=13789

quote:

After 1973, however, a highly organized opposition to the ERA emerged, suggesting that ratification would prove to be detrimental to women.

Opponents argued that passing the amendment would do ...[text shortened]... ers not mentioned) had.

At the time, 30 of the 38 required states had ratified the amendment.

That could be it.

Originally posted by vivify
Women were still banned from combat roles. In fact, women had to fight the system in order to be allowed to fight in a combat role. This ban was lifted only two years ago.

I never claimed that was the only rational, but the statement of Duchess64' friend makes my point. The fact is that equality sometimes is a two edged sword.