in a way that we see it transforming into an axis that American
diplomacy relies on and fights for? Undoubtedly, this transformation did not
come out of the thin air, and it naturally does not become worthless, just
like any social phenomenon that Western civilization worked to produce, or
reproduce, from what it existed on a limited basis in previous eras.
In view of this reality, we are concerned with studying this phenomenon
on two levels:
First: studying the phenomenon itself with regard to the nature of the
foundations on which it is based, and the nature of the outcomes that lead
to it.
Second: studying the basic factors due to which the social phenomenon
arises in Western civilization fields.
If we think about the feminist scene before World War I, as an example
of that, and if we assume that that war would not invade the European
entity, and therefore hunger will not prevail, and millions will not be killed,
especially men, and life in the field of social security will not be exposed to
homelessness and anxiety about fate, and so on, the rest of what this war
produced. Then, will we see a widespread phenomenon of women leaving
their homes and families to become workers in the war fields, and servants in
the logistical situation of war, after losing the breadwinner - father, husband,
or brother- as a result of what the war took from men?
اضافةتعليق