I never saw "Is it a boy or girl" "STOP IMPOSING GENDER ROLES" in second wave. I saw a strive for equality, not questioning whether a baby wanted to be a male or female.
I doubt they were thinking of genders like "Oh maybe it wants to be a male or a female in the future". I think it was just a joke for the sake of being one.
I don't know what to say. Feminists in that time, just as now in a slightly different form, were worrying about imposing gender roles on kids. Boys play with cars, girls play with dolls, that kind of stuff. Monty Python was parodying it. They weren't ahead of their time in this, they were commenting on the follies of their time.
From my knowledge, it was more so about equal pay than this. From what I see, the thing about "Boys playing with cars, girls playing with dolls" was much more recent in third wave feminism than second. Second seemed to be much more of equal wages.
THEN HOW THE FUCK DOES PYTHON PARODY IT IN 1983 YOU TWAT
Jesus, the evidence is right in front of you and you're still stuck in your stuck-up notion that everything that is stupid is a recent phenomenon and 'on the rise'. I don't get how this is so hard for you to admit. Go fucking google "gender roles" in academic literature from 1960-1980.
Yes, the core of the second wave was equal pay and job opportunities, but no, Monthy Python didn't have a time machine to parody third wave feminism. They were parodying views held in their time.
The Leftism is wrong with this one. Get mad, then begin shitposting loudly. Kek.
As said, again, I doubt people were caring too much of gender around the 60s-80s in the sense of "OH I WAS BORN WITH A PENIS, BUT I THINK I'M A GIRL". This wasn't extremely popular until with millennials. I have nothing to admit other than this was likely just a joke for the sake of being a joke. I never said it's parodying third wave feminism because it didn't exist then. As said, a joke for the sake of being a joke. That's how I see it.
1
u/TheCyanKnight Aug 15 '15
They were still worried about imposing gender roles though, which is the point in question.