As the numerous human rights campaigns of the ‘60s came to an end, the 1970s rushed in an era for a new kind of movement: the rise of the right. However, even in this conservative period, feminists were just beginning to raise their call to freedom. They pushed for new legislation, held marches, and spoke their mind in a way that the country had never experienced before. The Equal Rights Amendment was their culminating ambition, creating equality for all genders under the law. But, of course, opposition arose too. As ERA NOW became the rallying cry for feminists everywhere, the STOP-ERA campaign, led by Phyllis Schlafly, picked up stream as well. Despite it pitfalls, its lack of ratification and the strength of the disputing anti-ERA movement,
…show more content…
For instance, Freeman exposes, “in the modern period… the ERA was the quintessential symbolic issue. It meant what people thought it meant, and projected onto it both their fears and their hopes” (Freeman 149). There are two goals of activism: altering structural government and laws and changing the culture and minds of society. The symbolic ideal of the Equal Rights Amendment speaks to its successes in transforming many communities’ outlook on women and their role in the world. The ERA NOW and STOP ERA mvements allowed the whole country to see women fighting for their passions and controlling their own fate. Additionally, Freeman writes “feminism…raised everyone's consciousness about the importance of family issues, sexuality, and the role of women…Many state equal rights amendments were passed, discriminatory laws were changed, and the Supreme Court reinterpreted the basic premise against which laws affecting women were to be judged” (Freeman 150). Even without its admittance to the constitution, the ERA did affect structural changes as well. In fact, there were huge strides to amend laws, which the amendment wanted to alter in the first place. Thus, the “legislative inertia” that allowed, for example, Arizona law to say that “the governor, secretary of state, and treasurer must be male” was disappearing (Ginsburg). Skeptical of the ERA’s positive consequences, historians must include this because it illustrates that the nation didn’t even need the federal government to require change. Inspired by the feminist campaigns, states and the supreme courts revolutionized on their
For instance, Freeman exposes, “in the modern period… the ERA was the quintessential symbolic issue. It meant what people thought it meant, and projected onto it both their fears and their hopes” (Freeman 149). There are two goals of activism: altering structural government and laws and changing the culture and minds of society. The symbolic ideal of the Equal Rights Amendment speaks to its successes in transforming many communities’ outlook on women and their role in the world. The ERA NOW and STOP ERA mvements allowed the whole country to see women fighting for their passions and controlling their own fate. Additionally, Freeman writes “feminism…raised everyone's consciousness about the importance of family issues, sexuality, and the role of women…Many state equal rights amendments were passed, discriminatory laws were changed, and the Supreme Court reinterpreted the basic premise against which laws affecting women were to be judged” (Freeman 150). Even without its admittance to the constitution, the ERA did affect structural changes as well. In fact, there were huge strides to amend laws, which the amendment wanted to alter in the first place. Thus, the “legislative inertia” that allowed, for example, Arizona law to say that “the governor, secretary of state, and treasurer must be male” was disappearing (Ginsburg). Skeptical of the ERA’s positive consequences, historians must include this because it illustrates that the nation didn’t even need the federal government to require change. Inspired by the feminist campaigns, states and the supreme courts revolutionized on their