Scenario:

The year is 1800. The location is Britain/Europe. Women's lib (in a modern sense) has barely begun.

If you were in sole command of where history went from this point, what would YOU direct to happen?

Would feminism's start be permitted (with the vote for ALL women)? Would the radicalism of the 60s be prevented - or allowed? What about recent 80s/90s developments re: women's status at work?
Would a social change in the status of women/gender roles be avoided at all costs?
Would some other, alternate feminism be actioned - for example, with an Equality Movement or some such?
What would be allowed in the future?

* Inspired by FredX's invitation to post another thread (maybe this one will be slightly more cohesive/focused than the last one ) -- sorry if this sounds like a Command & Conquer scenario, maybe I've been playing God games too much...

An interesting topic area AF, and one that consists of many variables

Broadly speaking, I shall give my take on the areas of interest you raise

In regards to the vote for example, I would NOT have permitted men to vote AFTER they had to sacrifice their lives during World War 1

In fact- I wouldn't expect anyone to have to die for their country just to be able to vote

I would let those who are over 18 vote- men and women alike- and expect both parties to undertake roles according to themselves- and not let the government choose

So I would let everyone vote, and I would also let men and women decide WHO works to earn the money and WHO stays at home

I would say it is up to men and women, not the government, to make such decisions, and, if men and women are deemed fit for the job by perspective employers- then they should get it

I would also narrow down the government's power over our everyday lives in all aspects

I would reject their female only dv shelters and female only health spenditure

And I would only allow such factors to progress if the SAME attention was given to men

Because, when it's all said and done, these rotten promotions that favour women over men are paid, by and large, by men!!

Yet it is women who benefit

And that has to be stopped

And if I ran the country back in 1800, or rather, at any time period, I would expect equal rights and considerations for both men and women

Why, if I ran the country right now, I would expect the government to

a) not impinge on a citizen's right to live to live a law-abiding life (i.e. stop these ridiculous rape-shield laws and giving the accuser anonyomity, which impinges on the accused's right to a fair trial- or stop male-only conscription into the army, which is another gross violation of a man's right to a fair choice)

b) if there are victims of sexual assault or violence, to allow neutral, non-biased researchers to present their findings to the public at large on the TRUTH- because, as it stands now- feminists or 'women's campaigns' carry out their own 'research' and it gets treated as absolute truth by society and politicians

c) spend equal amounts on male and female illnesses- i.e. bestow equal amounts of tax payers money to illnesses according to their incidence/numbers, and not marginalise one gender over another

There are other factors to consider- but, for time-space here, these are some areas I think would need to be considered

Above all, I think that it is fairness, of proper equality and equal chances, that will prevail

In fact- if we weren't fed so much femprop and lies- we would be far better off !!

As would we be if we paid attention to men when it comes to domestic violence or sexual assault, whose victims go unnoticed in our current, feminist-led government and media

The thing is- I wouldn't enforce male domination at female expense

And I wouldn't enforce female domination at male expense (as is the case now)

It is proper equality- and that means equal rights and considerations- which need to be focused on

You might have seen on my blog, that I entered a definition for the word Antifeminist as one did not exist- and I stated that an Antifeminist believes in equality of the sexes (it's on the Urban Dictionary site)

Now- because of feminist propaganda and influence- an Antifeminist is commonly viewed as an opponent to equal rights

And it is lunacy !!

No- I am for equal rights- but, as society stands now- the emphasis has to be put on men to get our voices heard

When balance is restored, I would do away with feminism or any other hate movement

They just don't aid society (as a whole) for the better you see

But going back to the point- I would, if I ran the country, stress the importance of human rights- not man or woman- but everyone

Instead of just ONE (which again, is what happens currently)

And I wouldn't impinge on everyone's lives, as is the case at the moment, where we are constantly told what to say and what not to say by the system- as well as being told misleading messages about men and their 'innate oppressive tendancies' through sheer corruption

No- men have historically suferred at the hands of other men (and some women) through the years

And it was women who were protected

And now, we have more emphasis than ever for discriminating against men, and it is because of feminism

The world has NEVER been friendly to regular men- the ones who have made up 99% of the population over the years

Only the small minority of wealthy men that have been able to skirt the coalmines, mills and trenches have been saved over the years

Whereas the rest of us, and our ancestors, were treated like dirt

The system has never been fair to men- and feminism has taken it even further with anti-male legislation and biased bile

Trust me- if we had proper equality- I would not have started my blog- this forum wouldn't exist and there would be no need for the men's movement

If it were in my hands, I'd abolish all "gender rights" movements. Ensuring that men and women alike are treated as fairly is possible.
I would do my best to ensure rapists were caught, but equally I'd do my best to ensure false accusers were treated to the same extent that the man they've ruined would have been. If that meant having one pot of money for 'rape laws' and had to split it down the middle to ensure research was done on both sides, so be it.
I think I'd likely exile feminists to a tiny island where they can dwell in the victim mentality many seem to insist on experiencing. Similarly to FredX, I wouldn't expect men to have died by the thousands in order to have acquired the vote. If I had to endow the vote upon the masses, it would be done so to all freely & fairly. Also I would insist that if men were to be conscripted into war, so too would women, and bad as this may sound, I'd certainly ensure feminists were at the front of the conscription queue. Not because I'd like to see them shot to death, but to see how much 'equality' they really desire.

Just to add...

I would also get rid of get-out-clauses that exist for women only (i.e. battered wives syndrome)

And, I would also push for harsh penalties for women (or men) who attack a man's privates

At the moment this is not only a neglected area of abuse, but it is encouraged

And it is potentially dangerous in regards to infertility

And, just like Karl has noted- I would be more than happy to put women into front line battle if men were being ordered to do so

And yes- feminists would be my choice of cannon-fodder lol

In any case- this is quite a broad area- and there are many possibilities here

Oh, in regards to b) in my previous post- and just to be clear here, I would want neutral researchers to carry out their studies on dv and rape- just so we can see that men too, can be victims

But I would do this to expose the lies we have been led to believe all these years

But that's hindsight

If I could change history- I would never allow issues to do with gender creep into government

But as it stands now, gender is a big issue that has infested the system

So it is here that men should start thinking about gender politics

AF- what are your thoughts here?