TO MEN!?
2006-10-04 13:58:18 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
In retrospect, no. At the time it sure felt like the best thing since sliced bread and all the other cliche sayings. Also in retrospect it is clear to me that it had to happen. Following the assasination of JFK America truly lost its innocense, an innocense that dominated the lives of most children and adults in the late 40's and throughout the unrealistic 50s. The 50s were so unrealistic that female and male roles were demanded as we moved into the suburbs and had to fit in with the Joneses. The media and the nations conscieousness conveniently overlooked the poverty and misery of the inner cities in favor of the clean, the comfortable and the beautiful. Following the assasination and the revving up of the Civil Rights struggle, Vietnam, etc, the sexual revolution happened because reality set in and the reality was that men and women and, dare I say it, teenagers had sex. That empowered the woman and Feminism was born. "If it feels good, do it," was a favorite saying.
The fallout is what we see with a 50% divorce rate, overwhelming female led families - the male gone and making babies with many different females to whom they are not married, abortion on demand, thus freeing the father from legal restraints - and the woman from the drugery of a child or another child, anger, depression, discontent, and the list goes on.
I wonder if we hadn't become so "perfect" in the 50s if the revolution would have been so overdone and out of control.
Both men and women lost in the long run.
2006-10-04 23:19:11 · answer #1 · answered by ALWAYS GOTTA KNOW 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
authentic, you could't bypass over some thing you not in any respect had. That stated, i'm distinctly confident i'd nonetheless bypass over air con. in spite of the indisputable fact that. Oil spills: properly, there'd be fewer. Oil easily leaks into the sea by skill of itself besides, only no longer without caution. till some style of seismic pastime shoves a group of the stuff upward in an earthquake/tsunami style of situation, then it really is without caution again, yet there does no longer be the "better" spills. tremendous Carbon Emissions: this can be difficult to have self belief, yet organic elements pour out a lot of carbon emissions. woodland fires, case in factor. Animal manure is a huge one, too. Wars a lot less severe: I take it that you recognize little of pre-commercial warfare. a lot less pollution: authentic... for the most section. Happier: I doubt it, yet it truly is often hypothesis on my section. I see the position you're coming from, although I regretfully could disagree. i'd *like* to choose I lived in early medieval Iceland, yet....
2016-11-26 03:12:51 · answer #2 · answered by citizen 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sure a lot of them are enjoying it. But the best thing would be if there were no longer a need for abortion. It would mean birth control would have to be super dependable, men would no longer rape women, and if an accidental pregnancy occurred, the man would be willing to pay his half of the kid's upbringing.
2006-10-04 14:03:38 · answer #3 · answered by from HJ 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sexual revolution, yes. Abortion on demand, no. Although i'm pro choice, i'm against the use of abortion as a form of contraception
2006-10-04 14:53:24 · answer #4 · answered by fachizzzzle 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
to men yeah prob for women not so sure abortio can be hard on some men if theyre in a relationship or care others just think its like birth control the ******* idoits.
2006-10-04 14:05:57 · answer #5 · answered by kylie m 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Everyone should get saved and stay abstinent until marriage. There would be a lot fewer std's, rapes, and abortions.
2006-10-04 14:07:50 · answer #6 · answered by joel k 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ask an AIDS patient
2006-10-04 14:07:50 · answer #7 · answered by bprice215 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
lol lol lol lol lo lol lol lol lol lol lo lol lol lol lol lol lo lol
THAT WAS GREAT AND THE TRUTH!!
2006-10-04 14:27:02 · answer #8 · answered by nice_boobs 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋