Answer:
Employment, property and family law.
Explanation:
The ERA has to be considered in its historical context. It was first proposed in 1923, at a time where women had little or no rights regarding work and payment and faced discrimination. The ERA proposed a total abolition of law discrimination based on sex, which would have been revolutionary at the time. Later, during the 1960s and 1970s when the ERA was again discussed, some of the problems were solved with other laws, like the Equal Pay Act or the Civil Rights Acts. However, while these acts are a key part of American Legislation, the ERA is a Constitutional Amendment, which would give a completely new level of protection.
There is criticism, mainly because many of the laws and guarantees gained during the past 100 years have been tailored to protect women in their specificity. And many fear that the ERA would negatively override those protections. However, as an Amendment, any discrimination based on sex could be challenged based on unconstitutionality. And as of now, women still suffer discrimination and the acts and laws enacted so far are not sufficient.
Answer:
The answer is non-participant observation method.
Explanation:
In this method, the researcher is not part of the group being studied. The reseracher must decide beforehand if the study is realistic, ethical and relevant for the research. Among the many different ways to carry out this method, it is posible for the researcher to observe a group at different times and locations, for short periods.
It is also important for the researcher to record not only the behaviour observed, but also the type of behaviour that did NOT occur.
Answer:
Nepal is supposed to be a regular plural community including educational heterogeneity of faiths, degrees, communications, and ethnic groups, characterized into various congenital people.
Im pretty sure it is either a or d
