The Female Of A Female President

This left women with a clear disadvantage. The system worked well in happy marriages, but if a situation such as a husband's death, desertion from his family, or divorce were to arise, it was usually the woman who suffered as a result. According to the Code, a contract was necessary for marriage. Also, when a man and woman were getting married, the most important item to be negotiated was the bride price. This, again, shows that men were superior to women when it came to the ownership of property. Regardless of the amount of this bride price, it was managed by the husband and it was used to support the wife and her children: "If a woman who lived in a man's house made an agreement with her husband, that no creditor can arrest her, and has given a document therefore; if that man, before he married that woman, had a debt, the creditor can not hold the woman for it" (Pritchard 155). The bride's father had the right to change his mind about the marriage, in which case he would have been required to refund the purchase price in full showing again how women were nothing more than a piece of property: "If a man bring chattels into the house of his father-in-law and pay the price; if then the father of the girl say "I will not give you my daughter," he shall give back all that he brought with him" (Pritchard 156). Another horrific example of how women were regarded as nothing more than mere possessions was that if a wife died before giving birth to

Stephanie Coontz started off her article about the 50th anniversary of the publication of Betty Friedan’s international best seller, “The Feminine Mystique”, which was written about the women’s movement of the 1960s. What Coontz is trying to explain is that gender equality is not stalled, but “It has hit a wall”. Her title is the opposite of what she is trying to write about in the article. At first she talked about women’s rights back when the book was written. Instead of blaming the beliefs of gender roles from individuals, she points the finger at the economy and the work-family policies as the major problems to gender equality. She explains the gender equality stalled during 1990s and the first few years of the 2000s. She brought into text the usual statics, “the percentage of Americans preferring the male breadwinner/female homemaker family model actually rose to 40 percent from 34 percent. Between 1997 and 2007, the number of full-time working mothers who said they would prefer to work part time increased to 60 percent from 48 percent. In 1997, a quarter of stay-at-home mothers said full-time work would be ideal. By 2007, only 16 percent of stay-at-home mothers wanted to work full time.”(Coontz) She also talked about how 70 percent of men and women want an egalitarian relationship and how the demand of work has intensified.

In “The State of Marriage of the 90s” the author, Sally Macdonald states that marriage has majorly changed from the sixties    . The stereotypical gender roles in marriage have been blurred and instead of the the man being the “breadwinner”, women are also becoming the breadwinner to make this a team effort.  This article connects to Jhumpa Lahiri’s “A Temporary Matter” because Shoba is a business woman and is just as much the breadwinner as Shukumar is. This author writes about how marriage has changed so much and some people get married for forever or just for a temporary time, Shoba and Shukumar are the ones that were married for a temporary time and fell apart over something they could’ve worked through. Divorce rates ranged from six to

Women for years have been automatically given the role of the domestic housewife, where their only job is to cook, clean, and take care of the children. Men have usually taken the primary responsibility for economic support and contact with the rest of society, while women have traditionally taken the role of providing love, nurturing, emotional support, and maintenance of the home. However, in today’s society women over the age of sixteen work outside of the home, and there are more single parent households that are headed by women than at any other time in the history of the United States (Thompson 301.)

The first section of the WSCADV (n.d.) training discussed the background and history of the DV movement. This section began with an audio interview (Bell & Coontz, n.d.) with Stephanie Coontz, a professor of history at Evergreen State College. Coontz discussed the effect that women entering the workforce over the past century has had on the stability of marriages and families. In the fifties, the middle-class family in the United States was structured around women’s economic dependence on men. Women’s entrance into the workforce destabilized marriage for a time, but in the 1980’s, increasing divorce rates leveled off and began to decrease, and women in the workforce became (and continue to be) a marriage stabilizer. This finding, however, does not necessarily apply to low-income couples who experience more

Women were not role players in the national government until 1917, but over nearly the past century, the impact women have had on Washington’s politics has begun to unfold into the current role women play in the US government today. Before 1917, no woman had ever been elected to serve and represent their state in Washington, D.C., although many had tried. In 1917, we saw our first congresswoman on the national stage, and throughout the year’s woman have played many roles in government. These roles include service in the House of Representatives, the Senate, many presidents’ cabinets, and other vital roles in our government. Many women have tried and some have come close, but, no woman has ever been able to grab the most illustrious role, the President of the United States. For that matter, no woman has been elected Vice President of the United States. Women will continue to try until they prevail and are chosen to serve as the President of the United States.

With that being said this means that the women that were married didn’t own

They were maids to the man and had no

This shows their obvious belief in the importance of men above women, but they still had utmost respect for women as child bearers and givers of life.

Then in society, men were portrayed as “dominant figures” and women were the “nurturers”. Men not only filled the fatherly role but they also usually earned the “breadwinning”, went to work all day, and financially provided for the wives and

In Who Wears the Pants in This Economy? Author Hanna Rosin discusses how the American government has shifted. Historically, the economy has been dependent on men. Before recent shifts within the system men have always made up a large portion of main household incomes. High income jobs are occupied predominantly by males, until recent years.

Not only are woman subjected to society norms based on their personality characteristics, but also on their life choices and “domestic responsibilities” questions arise for woman like “who will care for you children and husband”. Montague Kern and Paige P. Edley state that women will continue to be “criticized for abandoning their traditional family roles” (1). This topic is not something that is brought up to their male counterparts. I don’t believe I have ever heard a man be questioned on who was going to assume the responsibility of raising their children. So until society genuinely accepts that raising children and other domestic issues are shared endeavors, then women will continue to face this barrier. (Robson, 208)

Conventionally, females played a very insignificant role in the paid work force of a society as many times they were expected to be home taking care of their family. Their roles at home can often include grocery shopping, meeting all the needs of her children and husband. As time moved on, our society became more accepted of sharing housework between the couples, but even so, the traditionally more feminine housework such as cooking, caring for sick children, and shopping for the entire family are mostly done by the females of the house. It is argued in a research journal Work and Occupations (Witkowski & Leicht, 1995) that in an average North American family, females take on roughly three-quarters of the housework. Even though we are in a democratic society, parenting roles in the household are assigned based on gender rather than in a democratic fashion (Winslow-Bowe, 2009). Because of the many responsibilities and obligations that are associated with the female gender, their career paths are eventually affected for the worse. According to Statistics Canada (2001), for every dollar a man earns, a single woman earns 93 cents and a married woman earns 69 cents. These statistics

If one were to look in to the trend of working women in America, it would be flabbergasting to see how far they have come since the 19th century. Working women have become a dominant force in the workplace. According to recent analysts, women now control 50 percent of the paid workforce (Pollitt). It is no surprise then that divorce rates have been steadily increasing directly proportional to the divorce rate. There is a clear relationship between the success of women in America and their ability to live independently. Due to this newfound independence, many women no longer feel trapped in marriages that they are not happy in or that they are being either physically or verbally abused. With nearly “80 percent [of women] contributing a major chunk of family income” (Pollitt), it is clear that women have now set the benchmark in equality. They are no longer

One of the main causes that marriages are not lasting is the change in the roles of woman today. Prior to the 1980’s it was the man’s responsibility to earn money and financially provide for his family, whereas the