This forum is based upon the 2016 Oxfam Briefing Paper Summary, WOMEN AND THE 1%. It explains how extreme economic inequality and gender inequality must be tackled together. This publication clearly indicates that because the Woman Rights Movement is not directly confronting economic inequality, it is indirectly and inextricably linked to economic inequality in a negative way. Here is a link to the publication:
https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.o ... m-en_0.pdf
The publication’s salient points are as follows:
“This paper firstly argues that unless the causes of extreme
economic inequality are urgently addressed, the main beneficiaries
of women’s economic empowerment will be the richest, the majority
of whom are men.”
“Secondly, this paper will argue that the two processes that drive extreme concentration of wealth, political capture and market fundamentalism, are also standing in the way of gender equality and women's rights, and particularly those of women in developing countries.”
The First Rate Crowd platform is specifically designed to fight against economic and income inequality. Read WOMEN AND THE 1%, then participate on this forum. Join us in the fight to improve our lives and make the world a just and equal place for everyone. Our hope and dreams can be achieved.
Here is more fuel to add to this unjust fire and another reason why we should stop this now.This paper firstly argues that unless the causes of extreme economic inequality are urgently addressed, the main beneficiaries
of women’s economic empowerment will be the richest, the majority of whom are men.
The Huffington Post 03/11/2018
Trump Is Remaking The Courts In His Image: White, Male and Straight
He’s nominated 87 people to be lifetime federal judges. They’re about as diverse as a casting call for “Mad Men.”
By Jennifer Bendery https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tr ... 47bec6107c
This will obviously maintain the status quo with rich men suppressing women through economic inequality. More needs to be done to address the real issues women face, that is to say, economic inequality.More than a year into his presidency, Donald Trump is making the nation’s courts look a lot more like him: white, male and straight.
To date, Trump has nominated 87 people to be judges with lifetime tenure on U.S. district courts, circuit courts or the Supreme Court. Eighty of them are white, or nearly 92 percent. One is black, one is Latino and five are Asian or Pacific American. He hasn’t nominated any Native American judges.
Put another way:The president also keeps nominating men. Sixty-seven of his court picks are male, compared to 20 who are female.
That translates to about 77 percent being men.
This will obviously maintain the status quo with rich men suppressing women through economic inequality. More needs to be done to address the real issues women face, that is to say, economic inequality.
The bottom line is, women will never have gender equality until there is pay equality and will never have pay equality until something is done about economic inequality. Then the happiness will flow.In places where there is gender equality, men and women are all happier across the board. So it’s in the best interest of men (and society) to treat women fairly in all aspects.
9 Questions for Dan Buettner: Happiness Lessons From the Happiest Places in the World
https://bluezones.com/2017/10/happiness ... the-world/Blue Zones founder Dan Buettner spent the last two years working on The Blue Zones of Happiness. He took a tack similar to previous Blue Zones longevity research: first, he identified the statistically happiest populations; and then, through regression analysis and shoe-leather journalism, he distilled the lessons they have to offer the rest of us.