English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i know about the The Violence Against WOMEN Act (VAWA) that was lobbied hard for by feminist organizations (e.g. NOW).

but what about other acts ot laws that benefits specificaly women that men would be looked down upon for having?


If feminists were truly for equal treatment, they would not propose and fight for such gender-specific legislation.

2007-03-16 09:54:16 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Gender Studies

8 answers

Title IX.

Thousands of girls and women have benefitted from Title IX, which is a good thing.

However, most US states do not allow Title IX to benefit boys equally to girls.

For example, in all states girls can play on boy's teams where that no such team exists for girls. They are even, in some cases, allowed to play where a team does exist.

By contrast, most states prohibit boys from playing on girl's teams where there is no such boy's team.

(Whether and why a boy would want to play with girls is immaterial)

The fact is, Title IX's objective was/is to enable girls to participate in more sports activities.

Boys are expressly denied the protections of Title IX, but not a single complaint from the feminist community that claims to "only want equality."

2007-03-16 12:49:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Well, I am convinced that most States are biased toward women when it comes to matters of child custody and wealth distribution from divorce.

I think your question is not clear and I do not really know how to answer it for you. The Violence Against Women law was put into place to try to stop domestic violence and violence perpetrated against women. Although, it appears to be gender specific I think males could benefit from the same law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAWA

2007-03-16 17:09:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Right of the top of my head, Vawa. Basically if a man defends himself or calls a cop on an abusive wife gf he is still threated as the agressor. In most countries divorce laws are formulated genderspecific at the benefit of women too.

2007-03-16 18:12:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Unfortunatley I'm not familiar with a lot of womens acts but I do know that alot of the things that feminists are trying to get through gender-specific legislation is because men already have it or don't need it.

2007-03-16 17:06:05 · answer #4 · answered by Okaydokay21 4 · 4 2

One major benefit which women have always had is that they've never been drafted into the military. I dreaded having to register for the draft. Fortunately, the law requiring males to register was rescinded 2 MONTHS before I would have had to do so. WHEW!!!

2007-03-16 18:16:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I'm campaigning for the "5012 Bill" in Congress allowing all women to have "Social Shoes" to be imported from Italy. Yes women ... vote for Free Shoes now!!!

Taxes will be collected only from the males paychecks along with FICA. Good deal for all sister hood.

2007-03-16 17:09:09 · answer #6 · answered by Giggly Giraffe 7 · 2 3

well being a real man i know WOMEN RULE so dont think your getting it for nothing how about honey i ned 20 for gas honey i have to get my hair done honey i need money for.... oln and on,...

2007-03-16 23:04:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Law is not universal. The field of law not only appears to be different but is different when approached by the situations of different participants. Law, or the juridical field, is generated from the intersecting activities of legal actors and legal institutions. Legal actors include not only judges and lawyers, but police, administrators, legislators, and litigants. Legal institutions are not only courts and legislatures, but also social movements and organizations.
Law exists in a multiplicity of forums and norms. Regulation is not a monopoly of the state but takes place in other arenas as well.
Official institutions of state law do not operate in a uniform or monolithic manner but are themselves the scene of persisting and pervasive local variations. Law is delivered by actors with limited resources and interests of their own in settings where they have discretion in relation to choices of goals, resolving conflicts in policy and operational decisions.
Formal adjudication through litigation is an atypical way of resolving disputes. Our society deals with conflict in many ways. Avoidance and evasion are important responses to legal conflicts. A simple ends/means view of law should be suspect.
Bargaining in the shadow of the law is central and pervasive in the legal world. Accordingly, one cannot understand legal action without understanding the collaborating and rival institutions in society; equally, one cannot understand legal institutions without seeing the entire social environment.
Lawyers have many roles other than as adversary in the courtroom. They mediate, bargain, work the system, imposed solutions based on their assessment of the best long term outcome, manage public relations and offer deals, more than they fight for the vindication of their client’s rights. To the extent that such activities are inconsistent with “official” procedures, they can undermine such procedures and their own “official” function in society.
Law is not something which is removed from social life, occasionally operating upon and struggling to regulate and shape social forms. Rather, it is fused with, and is thus inseparable from all of the activities of living and knowing.
Law is symbolic in that it works not so much by the exercise of force as by information transfer and the communication of what is expected, forbidden, allowable, and the consequences of certain actions. Legal socialization is achieved by the flow of information. The influence of law tends to be indirect, subtle and ambiguous.
People know different things about law and much of this knowledge is distorted. As such, it cannot be assumed that law affects attitudes or actions in a uniform way.
People, acting alone and in groups, cope with law and cannot be expected to comply passively. The role of law is something that must be established in every situation and cannot simply be assumed.
The pronouncement and implementation of legal norms are invariably attended by indirect and unanticipated consequences. Whether law is supposed to solve social problems must be established rather than something that can be assumed.
Females are more likely to be discriminated against due to the interpretation of a Constitution that only recognizes the male. Women are invisible when it comes to original laws.

2007-03-16 19:10:44 · answer #8 · answered by Deirdre O 7 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers