King, Savio, and Steinem: The Radicals of an Era
The 1950s through the 1970s were a time of activism for many diverse groups who wanted to change the civil, social and stereotypical manners of the United States. Those that were involved in the Civil Rights Movement, Free Speech Movement, and the era of second-wave Feminism, are often referred to as radicals. Radicalism is defined as the extreme advocation for a change in prevailing conditions, views, or affairs. The civil rights activists who peacefully protested for a shift in segregation laws were not as radical as other activism groups. The students from the University of California at Berkeley who pressed for their right to free speech on campus and the women who felt enslaved by their stereotypical role as housewives and mothers, were both extremely radical in the means of exaggeration. The civil rights, free speech, and feminism activists of the 1950s, 60s, and 70s all share a radical point of view; however, not all in the same sense. By observing the tactics used by those involved in the three groups, I argue that civil rights activists were not tremendously radical, yet those involved in the free …show more content…
Steinem looks at a woman’s menstrual cycle from a male perspective. In her critique, Steinem makes a statement about an excuse of why women could not join the military. “Military men, right-wing politicians, and religious fundamentalists would cite menstruation (“men-struation”) as proof that only men could serve in the Army (“you have to give blood to take blood”) …” This radical perspective is a bit far-fetched in the attempt to make an excuse for why women could not join the military. Steinem’s critique focuses heavily on irrelevant ideas that would likely not happen if men did menstruate. She radically proposes ideas in an attempt to make men seem superior in a circumstance that is usually dreaded by
The 1950s through the 1970s were a time of activism for many diverse groups who wanted to change the civil, social and stereotypical manners of the United States. Those that were involved in the Civil Rights Movement, Free Speech Movement, and the era of second-wave Feminism, are often referred to as radicals. Radicalism is defined as the extreme advocation for a change in prevailing conditions, views, or affairs. The civil rights activists who peacefully protested for a shift in segregation laws were not as radical as other activism groups. The students from the University of California at Berkeley who pressed for their right to free speech on campus and the women who felt enslaved by their stereotypical role as housewives and mothers, were both extremely radical in the means of exaggeration. The civil rights, free speech, and feminism activists of the 1950s, 60s, and 70s all share a radical point of view; however, not all in the same sense. By observing the tactics used by those involved in the three groups, I argue that civil rights activists were not tremendously radical, yet those involved in the free …show more content…
Steinem looks at a woman’s menstrual cycle from a male perspective. In her critique, Steinem makes a statement about an excuse of why women could not join the military. “Military men, right-wing politicians, and religious fundamentalists would cite menstruation (“men-struation”) as proof that only men could serve in the Army (“you have to give blood to take blood”) …” This radical perspective is a bit far-fetched in the attempt to make an excuse for why women could not join the military. Steinem’s critique focuses heavily on irrelevant ideas that would likely not happen if men did menstruate. She radically proposes ideas in an attempt to make men seem superior in a circumstance that is usually dreaded by