Betty Friedan's argument in <em>The feminine mystique</em> (1963) is made from the point of view of psychology and sociology through the analysis of surveys and interviews with women. Friedan was trying to explain why the surveys showed women were unhappy in their domestic lives.
The author found that women being educated to believe that domestic life should be their primary objective made women feel worthless.
This education for a domestic life happened through family, school, college, and media. There weren't many places women could get out of this destiny.
They felt worthless because a domestic life by itself doesn't provide a sense of realization and accomplishment. That's why, according to Friedan, it was so common to see women seeking fulfillment through community projects and the like.
<em>The feminine mystique</em> was a bestseller and one of the starters of the second-wave feminism in the 60s.
<span>1. What did the protest at Alcatraz Island in the late 1960s accomplish?
D. It brought awareness to the unfair treatment of American Indians.
2.Promoting gender equality in employment is one of the goals of
D. the National Organization for Women.
3. One of the leaders of the American Indian Movement was
C.Russell Means.
4. What did Title IX provide funding for? Check all that apply.
women’s sports programs
women’s education programs
5.What did <u>Native American activists</u> hope Alcatraz Island would become?
A.a cultural center and university
<em /><em>Note that I changed the statement to "Native American activists" rather than "AIM." The American Indian Movement was not directly involved in the occupation of Alcatraz. Native Americans in California from the San Francisco Bay area were the ones who were seeking that Alcatraz be redeveloped as a school and museum for Native Americans, and they pursued the protest/occupation at Alcatraz.</em>
</span>
Answer
British East India Company. It turns out, that India was never originally colonized by the British crown, but by a multinational company (MNC). Robert Clive, who won the Battle Of Palashi (‘Plassey’ for ‘Hey bear, ek gin and tonic idaar!’ folks), was an employee (‘Team Leader’ in 21st-century terms) of the world’s first public limited company. (Britons had equity stakes and to make favorable trading deals, the company ended up having an army.)That hired army ended up ousting the weak-by-then Mughals and accidentally ended up with a nation. Ours. Yes, a large company, so influential and powerful, that it made laws of another nation. The modern equivalent would be if, say, Coca-Cola removed the Chinese premier and started running it. It’s unheard of, mad. But that’s what happened, and that is how I am writing this column in English and you’re reading it in English, both parties pretending as we folks have always been English speakers and writers. All because a bunch of company middle management wanted to protect their investments and threaten some nabobs for their tea and silk and spice and opium trade. And the company’s armies also meted out their version of justice. This begs the question: can a company do that? Today, if you visit the dockland area of London from where the East India Company ships once sailed, hundreds a day to rule Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, there’s a wildlife reserve, a jogging track, an indoor concert hall called the O2 Arena, a bunch of suburban high-rises that look a bit like Whitefield in Bengaluru, and an HSBC call center. Zero signs that it was once the epicenter of the imperial world, ruling 3/4th of the planet with trade.
I believe that this is an opinion question that only you can answer
