I just read 2 interesting (and contradicting) articles. They are from online.wjs.com and titled ‘Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women? Yes’ and ‘Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women? No’. Both were written by different women. The Yes one was from Ann Patchett and the No one was from Mary Eberstadt. I think both have some points that we should consider and some other that I don’t really agree with. Let’s take a look one by one.
Myth No. 1: The “war on women” consists of tyrannical men arrayed against oppressed but pluckily united women.
In the first place, womankind, bless her fickle heart, is not exactly united on…anything.
Public opinion polls show women to be roughly evenly divided on the question of abortion. This same diversity of opinion was also manifest in the arguments over the proposed new federal mandate forcing employers to pay for birth control, including abortifacients.
Women never united in anything? Well, damn true and not news. We already saw this kind of tendency even from the first time we enter school. Elementary? Junior High School? High School? College? Work? We just never become truly one. Even in the case that women become the victim. I guess that’s just part of our nature. Hahaha. However, we also has another nature, which is empathy & loyalty (sometimes in our own way).
Let us so empower the young women in our communities with the excellent education that is available to them, the love and support of their families, and the abundance of positive role models, that they are strong enough within themselves to wait until they feel fully ready to have sex with a person they trust, a person who values them. And let the young men of our communities benefit from that same education, that same love. To make things easier, let’s remove several million degrading images of women that can give a boy the wrong ideas about the value of other people.
Education is always a good thing in this sexual revolution. Some might say that high educated with high income become choosy in partner and thus end up not marriage. Well, towards the decline of the Qing Dynasty at the end of the 19th century, Chinese women were considered a negative influence on their own children because they were uneducated and superstitious. In an attempt to strengthen the nation, Chinese intellectuals during the first half of the 20th century championed the idea that a stable home space meant a stable nation, and began a movement to train women for their jobs and responsibilities as household managers. The home came to be seen as a small-scale model of the imperial order of society, and its management became central to national concern. (http://www.salon.com/2012/03/12/all_the_shengnu_ladies/singleton/) So, no matter what, education will still be a positive thing. If then we have, what some may call, too high standard, well… it will not be far different from men’s standard since the ancient time.
In severing sex from procreation, humankind set into motion forces that have by now shaped and reshaped almost every aspect of life in the Western world. Families are smaller, birthrates have dropped, divorce and out-of-wedlock births have soared. Demography has now even started to work against the modern welfare state, which has become harder to sustain as fewer children have been produced to replace aging parents.
I think it’s true that birth control is one of the things that become a great factor in the sexual revolution. And it does has good and bad effect. One of them is by having smaller family, dropping number of people, and so on, women got more attention. People started to see how we actually can do what men can do and the industry started to think how to use this opportunity. I’m not saying that sexual revolution is completely a product of industry, but we can’t deny it certainly has a great deal of influence. Then the company and university also allowed us to join because they need us. After that came also many other changes.
In the end my conclusion is the same with this article title, Not Sure. However I still think the revolution is needed. We, as a human being has a nature to change. We always evolve in physical, mind, and moral state. Evolve here, I think is not always become better. Human changes to adapt with the environment. And as the globalization emerges to almost everywhere, we have to change. That is what I think of revolution. Industrial Revolution did not make everything better, same with revolution from Orde Lama to Orde Baru, and now until Orde Revormasi. However it’s true that from time to time, there’s some which is better and some which is not and then we have to deal with all of them. In the end, human always have to accept the change and live with it (like what Ann Patchett said, by choosing which is good enough to be kept and which is not to be put some distant). We all, after all, have the ability to choose between good and bad, at least for ourselves.
Oh, here’s the articles:
‘Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women? No’ :
‘Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women? Yes’ :