Why did it take until the 1920's to allow the vote for women in the US? Are there any other countries in North America where women still cannot vote?
Why did it take until the 1920′s to allow the vote for women in the US? Are there any other countries in North America where women still cannot vote?It took until 1920 for women in the US to get the right to vote nationally. There were a number of states where women were able to vote much sooner. Why it took so long is an interesting and complex question, but it's worth noting other dates around the world:UK women over 30 got the right to vote in 1918, but not until 1928 did they gain the right to vote at the same age as men. That's eight years after women in the US gained the right to vote at the same age as men.Canada--Most women gained the right to vote in 1918, but most First Nations women didn't until 1960.France--1944Japan--1945Denmark--1915Finland--1906Germany--1918Italy--1945Switzerland--1971Norway--1907Lithuania--1921That's obviously only a very partial listing. I skipped over anything that, without further research, looked too much like the point at which they ceased to be a colony of a First World nation, because that doesn't really say anything about that country.For women to get the right to vote nationally, it really helps to have been living in the Frozen North of Europe. The English-speaking world mostly followed suit within a decade. It really hurts overall to have been living in a country that was less developed or under European colonialism, or other issues, such as not being a country where anyone but a small, ruling elite has any say anyway.But those are generalizations, and mostly have exceptions or outliers.The USA wasn't the first by any means to give women the right to vote nationally, but also wasn't particularly slow to do so--at least if you look at it from a worldwide perspective, rather than what it looked and felt like to the women working to get the vote. For them, it was torturously slow.There are no countries left in North America, even by a quite broad definition, where women don't have the right to vote.
Why was slavery allowed in a country that declared that “all men are created equal?”
No one except white men were considered men or even human. My grandpa didn't think black people had souls or could go to heaven. Women weren't even considered important. Perhaps human but a very low form and undeserving of voting or working outside the home. Perhaps an embarrassment to humanity and to be kept home. It was a white man's world and under that definition, "All men" were created equal and if you weren't equal, you just weren't a man. Screwed up thinking, huh???
About the Stolen Generation....Australian Aboriginals?
As you can see by some of the answers you've received so far, racial bigotry is alive and well and living here on YA. As a member of another type of "stolen generation" I was adopted during the baby snatch era of the 60's and 70's........I totally disagree with those idiots Bingalee and Mulga, I would hate to think that their opinions are taken as a general view held by Australians, its not. There never was, and never will be, any justification for stealing children from the parents who gave birth to them. No, I wasn't taught about the stolen generation in school, Im in my 40's, it was all brushed under the carpet. What I know about the subject I have learned by research and in homeschooling my teenage daughter. That anyone could be of the opinion that child stealing is ok amazes me, the colour of your skin or cultural heritage has nothing to do with your ability to love and raise your children. Just because their lifestyle was different to the white way of doing things didnt make them wrong and the crimes committed against the stolen generation, or for that matter those of us affected by the baby snatch era, where young single women were considered to be mentally and morally deficient if they became pregnant, can NEVER be adequately compensated for. Edit: Just wanted to add that alcohol would not have been an issue for the Aboriginal people if us bloody arrogant white people hadnt introduced it to them in the first place!!
When were Canadian aboriginals Tukkolerktuk and Ipilkvik born?
I looked through all the Canadian genealogy records, the LDS Family History site and a number of archival sites. No one gives an age reference to either of them. Just from extrapolating the kind of youth and health it would take to travel to the Arctic, I would make an educated guess that they weren't past 45 yet. So that puts their births somewhere from 1834-1862, based on the 1879 sailing date and the fact that Ipilkvik had previously traveled as a guide, as well.
Do you believe Aboriginals receive more benefits than the rest of Australia?
Whenever you think the indigenous population have it easy thanks to Government handouts, ask yourself this: If you had a business, would YOU personally employ an indigenous person in preference to anyone else? I see and hear a lof of huffing and puffing about this issue and yet the reality is they are on the back foot in their own country when it comes to trying to land a job. . . and yes, no matter how well-dressed, well-educated or well-spoken they are. Walk in their shoes for a day and you'll be falling down on your knees thanking God you weren't born indegenous in Australia.
Why were the New Zealand Maori seemingly far better treated than Australian aboriginals historically?
For 3 main reasons:Maoris are Polynesians so they have a “fairer skin” than Australian Aboriginals who definitely look “Black”. So it’s raw, but White people, at this period, felt Maoris closer to their view of humans than they did with Australian Aboriginals. Another example is the French colonization with Polynesians in French Polynesia and Kanaks (Melanesians so look “Black”) from New Caledonia. Both in the Pacific Ocean. The same issue.The distribution! NZ is a smaller country so Maori tribes counted more people than Australian Aboriginals, which made the things more difficult for White people to steal the natives. And as Maori tribes were closer in term of location, they could communicate more and faster while many Aboriginals didn’t speak the same language and didn’t get information early enough.Maoris were already a bit more “advanced” in term of technology like military rules and weapons. They had far better things to protect them against White people.Nowadays, even though it was a genocide of Australian Aborigines in Australia, they slightly start to take more place in the society. Still very low and close to nothing because the immigration has diluted them year after year. In New Zealand, The Treaty and Maoris aren’t in good situation. They hold all the worst indexes! And it’s getting worse.