What happened to the ERA? The EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT? It was a big deal back in the 70’s. The US Congress passed the proposed amendment, to the United States Constitution, on March 22, 1972. It was then sent out to the States to be ratified. 38 States needed to approve it. 35 States did pass it. Not enough. What was the big deal I always wondered?
It was simplest set of words put together that didn’t say much more than folks should not be treated differently due gender. That’s pretty much all it said. In fact here is EXACTLY what the proposed amendment to the US Constitution said:
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
source: http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/states.htm
Pretty simple…right? I have been thinking about this lately due to all the Women’s marches and protests, and honestly I can’t figure out what they are even saying. Their message sure isn’t clear to me and many of them can’t be taken seriously as what the heck is with the VAGINA HATS? That is just plain weird…I don’t care who you are…it’s crass and ugly and just plain weird. I mean, what would everyone think if guys started wearing penis hats?! Oh my, I can’t stop laughing just thinking about that!
If these women want rights…(as I said, I don’t know what they want) then why not get back on the bandwagon with the ERA? It’s a simple solution. Already passed by 35 States and I would think in this day and age…which State WOULDN’T pass it? Just keep it simple…as it was passed in 1972.
There were some serious opponents that claimed all kinds of erroneous things, like “if it passes men and women will have to share bathrooms”….no, as you see in the words, there is nothing about bathrooms. Phyllis Schlafly was a strong opponent and you can see her arguments in this link:
http://eagleforum.org/psr/1986/sept86/psrsep86.html ….but again I repeat there is a lot of arguing about the Amendment about things that are NOT IN THE AMENDMENT. It’s simple. Keep it simple.
Personally I think these women complaining may have more issues than they admit to. I deal with men on a personal and work basis all the time and sure some can be idiots, as to what I am capable of…but that is the minority and I don’t pay any attention to them. I prefer to work with and talk with the men who already treat me as an equal without having a law. Sometimes people just complain too much and maybe there’s another reason that men don’t treat them as an equal…they are not acting like an equal….they are wearing vagina hats for Pete’s sake!
(image credit: mine and I must admit so is the broken ERA bracelet! :) )
Well written! I like your perspectives!
and being a male, its difficult to comment..lol I will just say.. Best wishes
Thanks....when I saw a reply I cringed...hoping folks (read: women) stay open minded! ;)
If they don't, then oh well. Your beliefs and feelings are just as valid as theirs! You have a good point and all should be open to listening, communicating and respectfully disagreeing. :-)
Thank you!
I am always leery of demands for legislation to enforce what is already becoming a social norm. You can't legislate morality, but you can use legislation a a bludgeon against people who haven't actually done anything wrong.
Any good economist can show that once corrections for tenure and hours worked are applied, the wage gap essentially vanishes. Where there is an actual disparity in wages, we need a decentralized dispute resolution mechanism, not more governmental power that will inevitably be corrupted by political cronyism.