Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
33 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Would the men of the US be willing to fight and die for the rights of women and girls of the US? (Original Post) Raven Aug 2021 OP
You mean those who themselves are not guilty of assaulting women? nt joetheman Aug 2021 #1
+ Infinity North Shore Chicago Aug 2021 #2
Picking fights on a nice weekend morning? marble falls Aug 2021 #3
Well, it was nice until I turned on the news. Raven Aug 2021 #4
In the end we all tend to pull together. We have enough disappointments without looking ... marble falls Aug 2021 #12
I'd say a little more than half would Bettie Aug 2021 #5
Men's League for Woman Suffrage ... Donkees Aug 2021 #6
iow- not all men? mopinko Aug 2021 #8
I believe that would depend UnderThisLaw Aug 2021 #7
The Greatest Generation is nearly a forgotten memory in this country. NoMoreRepugs Aug 2021 #9
Would the women of the US be willing to fight and die for the rights of women and girls of the US? Klaralven Aug 2021 #10
It is not a resounding yes. haele Aug 2021 #31
Your question is misogynistic. Mosby Aug 2021 #11
The OP question in a way basically acknowledges a gender gap. Throck Aug 2021 #18
Didn't they just do that for 20 years? pwb Aug 2021 #13
I'll say it: a resounding no. ananda Aug 2021 #14
Considering there are so many men and women fighting to restrict the rights that we fight so hard fo Walleye Aug 2021 #23
I'm going with yes bluedevil4 Aug 2021 #15
No. Lease of all Republicans and most Democratic men would not either. CousinIT Aug 2021 #16
Which men? MineralMan Aug 2021 #17
It is a fair question and if that were the primary reason for a fight, I agree, I don't think there ShazamIam Aug 2021 #19
I'd say about 65-70% of women would. About 35-45% of men. Scrivener7 Aug 2021 #20
This retired Marine would in a heartbeat. MarineCombatEngineer Aug 2021 #21
👏🇺🇸 Walleye Aug 2021 #24
Semper Fi! SWMO_8541 Aug 2021 #26
Of Afghanistan, people ask "how can...?" sanatanadharma Aug 2021 #22
I think you're onto something there Walleye Aug 2021 #25
A number of the women wouldn't either treestar Aug 2021 #27
Will they make me a sandwich? snort Aug 2021 #28
Any man who had a mother should be willing to fight for women's rights. Chainfire Aug 2021 #29
This message was self-deleted by its author tenderfoot Aug 2021 #30
Yes n/t Devil Child Aug 2021 #32
Fight and kill, you mean. Fight and kill other Americans in the streets of your city or town. Iggo Aug 2021 #33

marble falls

(57,333 posts)
12. In the end we all tend to pull together. We have enough disappointments without looking ...
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:21 AM
Aug 2021

... for more. Would RW women fight for LW men's rights? Your question begs some nuance.

Were the mostly male armed forces that were in Afghanistan fighting for Afghan women's rights?

The correct question we need to ask ourselves is: would I fight for anyone else's rights?

Bettie

(16,130 posts)
5. I'd say a little more than half would
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:04 AM
Aug 2021

but the others?

The right wingers?

Never.

They would fight tooth and nail to make our country more like fictional Gilead though.

Donkees

(31,474 posts)
6. Men's League for Woman Suffrage ...
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:04 AM
Aug 2021

Excerpt:

American men as individuals had publicly supported the rights of women as far back as 1775, when Thomas Paine published his essay “An Occasional Letter on the Female Sex.” After the Seneca Falls Convention to support women’s rights in 1848, other men wrote more specifically in support of women’s enfranchisement, notably William Lloyd Garrison, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Frederick Douglass. In England, John Stuart Mill’s “The Subjection of Women,” published in 1869, echoed many of the arguments that his wife, Harriet Taylor Mill, had presented in “The Enfranchisement of Women,” 18 years earlier. And briefly, between 1874 and 1875, a Young Men’s Woman Suffrage League met in New York City, fielding pro-suffrage speakers from its membership — physicians, attorneys, and professors among them — at some 80 meetings in the Plimpton Building, at 30 Stuyvesant Street in what is now the East Village.

In time, male suffragists would become commonplace — and then all but forgotten as an orchestrated movement force. This is not so surprising. The story of the triumph of the suffrage cause has long belonged to the women, and rightly so. In the century since New York State granted women the vote, in November 1917, strikingly few details about the men’s efforts have thus emerged.

... The men’s important contributions were especially apparent during the New York legislative and voter victories of 1917. Who else but the prominent men among the movement’s declared backers had such ready personal access to the — also male — state and federal legislators and government leaders, to publishers, or to the editorial elite? It worked to the movement’s extreme advantage that so many League members and leaders were themselves publishers and the editorial elite. Twice, Eastman sparred publicly with Theodore Roosevelt. At various points, Peabody, Villard, Wise, Creel, Harvey, Hapgood, Malone, and Eastman all had Woodrow Wilson’s ear. Most of them were among Wilson’s earliest political backers; Eastman had his respect. Creel, in the critical period when Wilson at long last came out in favor of the federal suffrage amendment, was on “terms of intimacy” with the president, meeting with him almost daily in his capacity as chair of the Committee on Public Information after the United States entered World War I in 1917.

No doubt an accumulation of other factors, far greater than the Men’s Leagues, led to the ultimate success of the women’s suffrage campaign: seven long decades of effort by passionate women, the changing times and political winds, the burgeoning public support, the growing number of states where women with the vote could influence outcomes, the movingly sacrificial role women played after the United States entered World War I. Still, once the details are known, it is hard to ignore the boost that the men provided. Their involvement amounted to more than an “influential factor” or “invaluable help.” Their commitment showcases the value elite individuals who act with care can bring to marginalized movements, particularly those with social justice aims. The impact of Men’s League actions a century ago speaks loudly to the strategic importance of cultivating people with influence and magnetic media appeal, those who can attract positive public attention, open access to those in positions of power, and alter public perception.

https://timeline.com/the-men-who-supported-suffragettes-c8d1b921d71f




UnderThisLaw

(318 posts)
7. I believe that would depend
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:12 AM
Aug 2021

on whether the man in question is genuinely concerned with the rights of women or whether he views this concept as something to be weaponized in furtherance of fascism

NoMoreRepugs

(9,475 posts)
9. The Greatest Generation is nearly a forgotten memory in this country.
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:15 AM
Aug 2021

I truly appreciate the incredible young people making a difference today but on balance these last few generations can’t stand in the shadow of those before them.

 

Klaralven

(7,510 posts)
10. Would the women of the US be willing to fight and die for the rights of women and girls of the US?
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:18 AM
Aug 2021

I'm not sure if the answer to that question is a resounding yes.

haele

(12,682 posts)
31. It is not a resounding yes.
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 01:01 PM
Aug 2021

There are quite a few women who love/accept their position in life and don't care very much about anything other than their own position and comfort level. Some of them use their sexual contract with men to support the male power in exchange for their power.
One cannot depend on women in general to support other women. "I got mine" is not an attitude unique to men.

Haele

Throck

(2,520 posts)
18. The OP question in a way basically acknowledges a gender gap.
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:31 AM
Aug 2021

I'd actually fight for freedom first. Freedom gives the opportunity to pursue rights.

pwb

(11,292 posts)
13. Didn't they just do that for 20 years?
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:24 AM
Aug 2021

You want 20 more? Turn off the cable noise and you will feel better. I did. One hour of real news at night from the Networks and D U freed me from all the opinions and questions disguised as real news. I favor leaving having tried our best.

Walleye

(31,068 posts)
23. Considering there are so many men and women fighting to restrict the rights that we fight so hard fo
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:47 AM
Aug 2021

CousinIT

(9,261 posts)
16. No. Lease of all Republicans and most Democratic men would not either.
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:27 AM
Aug 2021

The Taliban consider women sub-human & treat them as slaves. The American Taliban (Republicans) have the same attitude about girls and women - even while they shriek about "Sharia Law" elsewhere - they demand their own version of it in America: https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/reproductive-rights-and-long-hand-slave-breeding/

And sadly, too many Democratic men have similar attitudes about girls and women and their 'lot in life'. I don't think it's important enough for most of them to die for. I'm not sure it's important enough for even most girls and women in America to fight and die for. Too many of them take bodily autonomy, reproductive choice, and even voting rights for granted.

ShazamIam

(2,576 posts)
19. It is a fair question and if that were the primary reason for a fight, I agree, I don't think there
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:32 AM
Aug 2021

would be a, "resounding yes."

Scrivener7

(51,025 posts)
20. I'd say about 65-70% of women would. About 35-45% of men.
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:39 AM
Aug 2021

Given the possibility of a guaranteed success in returning to subjugating women, it is certain many of our allies would defect.

And given the probability of the loss of their OWN rights rather than some other woman's, some anti-feminists would join us.

sanatanadharma

(3,739 posts)
22. Of Afghanistan, people ask "how can...?"
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 10:43 AM
Aug 2021

Why are not the men and women of the country, village, farm, town, hillside and city willing to die for the right to say, "Fuck you" to the armed bullies?

Imagine yourself, in your place on this world, being bullied by gangs of armed 3% IQ PB's with AK's

I pray no more need anyone face the deadly reality of the consequences and results of the actions, of those whose subjective mindsets are said to be aligned with Divine desires.

The same sickness of the human condition that is manifest in Afghanistan in the Taliban, exists also in the USA in the messed up minds of our families and neighbors.







treestar

(82,383 posts)
27. A number of the women wouldn't either
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 12:12 PM
Aug 2021

Right wing women exist - that's the hardest part about progress for women. You don't see any other group fighting for equality with its own members who don't support it.

Response to Raven (Original post)

Iggo

(47,574 posts)
33. Fight and kill, you mean. Fight and kill other Americans in the streets of your city or town.
Sun Aug 15, 2021, 01:06 PM
Aug 2021

Because you’re talking about civil war. So of course the answer would not be a resounding yes.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Would the men of the US b...