There is no debating that feminism was necessary back then. Socially and legally women were at a severe disadvantage and something had to be done. Of course it’s a never-ending process as injustice will exist as long as humans exist, but the levels are very different nowadays in western countries compared to developing and exploited countries (no they aren’t “developing” they are being held back, but that’s a different topic).

At the same time, there was a lot of movement for social awareness and things like free love, queer acceptance, bodily autonomy, anti-racism movements, and a lot more were happening world-wide. France had massive left-wing protests and so did Germany. Many know of the movements in the US Black Panthers, MLK, Woodstock, Free Love, Flower Power, and turmoil that took place after Kennedy was shot in 1963. In Congo Patrice Lumumba was assassinated for his role in the independence of the country (leading to the Congo Crisis), Nigeria had its very own Nnamdi Azikiwe promoting an African Union (which came to be for a short while), and a lot more was happening.

One would have thought the world was going to radically change forever in the 60s, but then, very quickly, the biggest topic became feminism. It was on TVs, talkshows, streets, and much more. While other civil rights movements were being brutally stamped out, somehow feminism got bigger and had major support in the US by the Johnson administration (after Kennedy was shot) and (suprisingly) even the following president: Nixon (although he was still a fucking sleeze).

And thought by the 70s the social movements in the US were declining and still strong in Europe, feminism gained force.

Things have now changed significantly as feminism is now “evil” to right-wingers and religious types (with a return to rhetoric from their antagonists in the 60s) and still serves as a major distraction, but mostly because it is seen as a danger to the elite themselves. For a while, it served its purpose of distracting and also bringing more people into the workforce while successfully forcing the pay of single bread-winner to be insufficient and requiring two. The economical output doubled while remuneration halved (with inflation considered).

The bigger distraction now is “immigration”. The elite and uberrich have now successfully shifted the focus away from themselves. Again.

  • atro_city@fedia.ioOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m not sure why you’re saying “no”. It doesn’t seem like you’re contradicting at all. The 60s were second wave feminism.

    • Meron35@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Eh, perhaps semantics due to not enough context in the original post. “Co-opted” suggests that the original goals of feminism were changed to favour those in power, when in reality it was more of an “always has been” situation.

      • atro_city@fedia.ioOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I see what you mean after looking up co-opted. I was looking for a term that indicates joined by to influence and amplify for your own goals. Yes, feminism has brought about good and real tangible change, but it was also used as a major distraction (my original claim).

        As you said, the first wave was indeed racist and many parts of feminism are still targeted at the white, middle class woman. The outrage for the sexual assault on a white woman is magnitudes larger than that of a colored woman. Colored women are also taken less seriously by medical professionals as well as the judiciary. There was a documentary in Germany about how non-white women are treated by doctors and it was disgusting to see how they were brushed off as “it’s in their culture to exaggerate”. The same happens in France to Muslim women.