Women. Religion’s longest running victims.

Possibly...

Women have showed more backbone only as a consequence of enlightening views and changng situations that strengthened their position- like the need to hire women, en masse, during the war. Before that, they were just as inclined to remain submissive because women who agitated for rights underwent a variety of punishments- even hanging.

For the Gays, it's hard to say because there is so many more women than Gay people. However, proportionately, I'd say the treatment of Gay's was far worse on many levels. Women advocating for equal rights was just seen as foolishness or a lack of discipline, generally. However, Gay's have been and are still viewed by some people as abominations, moral corruptions, and the like. Culturally, a man could beat down a Gay person for looking at them weird and receive nods of approval.

Today, the change in attitude of Gay's is relatively swift. Couldn't have been more than 20 years ago that they were still in that dark area and now, they're everywhere on the media and such and represented in a good light. Women's sufferage, in relation, was much longer...but also more public. We just aren't very aware of the things homosexuals went through as well as we are with women so that's my reasoning behind saying Gay's probably have it worse.

 

No pride parades but plenty of "rights" parades, 1913, the 60's, 1971, 2004 just to date a few...if you ignore what women have done of course you'd think they have less backbone....if you have no knowledge of history you may think women showed less backbone.

 

No, before the war women fought tough fights for equality...the women who fought for the vote faced beatings, jail, divorce, humiliation, rejection by their families....they were not submissive. Women who fought to be educated as doctors, scientists , and engineers were not submissive.

 

You may be right. I see the women's struggle as largely public in a time where they could be public. They faced these abuses, surely, but even as they faced that sort of discrimination and prejudice, themselves, it's very likely that they, as well, would have considered homosexuality immoral or an abomination of nature or something of the sort back then.

For a homosexual in that time period, to parade in mass or gather en masse is to probably destroy your life utterly just by being identified as homosexual. This is one of the reasons why I believe they probably had it worse. But it could be that they didn't suffer so much...or they were able to remain lowkey for a long time.

 

Good points.

It is quite hard to quantify level of harm and indeed, individually, it is quite possible that gays have had a harder time. That may be why society recognized their plight and were quicker to move to the left than they have with women.

Let's hope that women are next on our equality moving agendas.

Regards
DL

 

I know enough of history and current conditions to know that women are not making enough noise.

I also know that men do not seem to seek justice for women and I have to wonder why we do not think of our daughters, grand daughters, wives and mothers whom we force to be second class citizens.

Men cannot truly be free while denying half the worlds population equality.

Regards
DL

 

"""""Men cannot truly be free while denying half the worlds population equality""""

No, but some of them feel safer that way....

 

Yes. Those with (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) envy.

Real men will not fear giving women equality.

Regards
DL

 

Buddhism seems to be the most peaceful religion and it also seems to be the most female friendly.