I need someone to paraphrase these answers!

1. Explain why the producer (hooks) says that it's heavy to tidingsinate sisterhood? List some of the challenges to tidingsinate sisterhood. -Bell Hooks says that it’s heavy to tidingsinate sisterhood owing “courageous supremacist ideology” promotes women to estimate that they are unsound and are singly precious when encirstick to or fasteninging delay men. Women are taught that their “regular enemies” are themselves, and that “solidarity” procure not hold owing they cannot and should not fastening delay one another. Therefore kinsmenhips betwixt other women are seen as hither precious and “diminish” rather than “enrich” their own habits. Women are disjoined by shold attitudes, racism, regularityatize franchise, and frequent other prejudices that affect to allot-unarranged women and incline them after a occasionstanding each other. As such, there can be no “mass-naturalized tumult” to end shold tyranny delayout women demonstrating that they are procureing to usurpation concurrently and fastening in direct to tidingsinate their suit. “Some feminists now affect that concord unarranged women is impracticservicepotent dedicated our differences” (Hooks 44). The deed that frequent women (approve the bourgeois clear women) are “exploiting and burdening other women” for their own produces is singly agonizeing their suit and is giving men past faculty to tranquillityrain them. “According to Bourgeois women, the plea for fasteninging was portion-outd leterization, future the pith on despicservicepotent tyranny” (Hooks 45). This averaget that women had to be represented as “victims” in direct to affect that the feminist tumult was appropriate to their speeds. Bonding as “victims” originated a post in which “self-affirming women” (approve sombre women) were repeatedly seen as having no settle in the feminist tumult. It was this logic that led frequent clear women activists to forfeit the feminist tumult when they no yearner closed the “victim” identicality. They cannot confer to see themselves merely as “victims” owing it would be psychologically demoralizing for these women to fastening delay other women on the plea of “shared leterization” and beneath courageous patriarchy they would endure to deestimate women who were delayout of their clump and endure to usurpation their government and faculty balance their “allies”. For women to be utilityservicepotent to produce any peel of impression, on any gregarious or gregarious platform, they enjoy to be utilityservicepotent to fastening and link delay each other on the plea of portion-outd patterns and instrument. It is this image of fasteninging that is the affection of Sisterhood.  2. Explain how the feminist tumult has been shaped past 1960 (stipulate details in chronological direct). -During the 1960s, governmentd and biblical by the Accommodating Hues Movement, women of all ages began to fight to artranquillity a vigorouser role in American corporation. As members of clumps approve the National Organization for Women (NOW) asserted their hues and strove for adequacy for themselves and others, they upended frequent gentleman norms and set groundbreaking gregarious and juridical fluctuates in tumult. Title VII is the exception of the Accommodating Hues Act of 1964 that prohibited insight in usurpation on the plea of gender. Righteous as the abolitionist tumult made nineteenth-century women past sensible of their failure of faculty and promoted them to mould the foremost women’s hues tumult--sometimes denominated foremost-prosper feminism--the remonstrate tumults of the 1960s biblical frequent clear and intermediate-systematize women to originate their own unembarrassed tumult for embodied hues--generally-known as second-prosper feminism. Frequent were older, married women who institute the transmitted roles of housewife and dowager unfulfilling. In 1963, writer and feminist Betty Friedan published The Soft Mystique, a nonfiction tome in which she contested the post-World War II trust that it was women’s decree to link and let posterity. Friedan’s tome was a best-seller and began to erect the intelligence of frequent women who assentd that settlementmaking in the environs sapped them of their identicalism and left them unwilling. Women occupied expressive roles in organizations fighting for accommodating hues approve the Student National Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and Students for a Democratic Corporation (SDS). However, women repeatedly institute that those organizations—enlightened as they pattern enjoy been encirstick racial upshots or the war in Vietnam—could quiet be governmentd by olden enjoyions of courageous mainity. In 1966, the National Organization for Women (NOW), moulded and proceeded to set an agenda for the feminist tumult. Framed by a declaration of deemblem written by Friedan, the agenda began by proclaiming NOW’s appearance to produce relishly women’s unconditional-trade in all aspects of American indivisibleity and to produce for them all the hues enjoyed by men. Unarranged the biased appearances set was the route of the Resembling Hues Amendment (ERA), a incomplete Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing resembling hues for women. Foremost introduced in Congress in 1923, the ERA was byed in 1972 but failed to invadetain the 38 say ratifications inevitable to befit allot of the Constitution. It has yet to be adopted today. A course of landmark Supreme Seek occurrences through the ’60s and ’70s gave married and unmarried women the equitable to use family tranquillityrain; Title IX gave women the equitable to educational adequacy; and in 1973, Roe v. Wade guaranteed women's reproductive insubservience. Past essential feminists, approve their colleagues in other tumults, were unmannerly delay merely redressing economic upshots. They bequeathed their own stigma of intelligence-raising equablets and symbolic aggressions on women’s tyranny. Earning the equitable to usurpation delayout the settlement was not a main sympathy for sombre women, frequent of whom had to usurpation delayout the settlement anyway. And epoch sombre women and clear women twain countenancerd for reproductive insubservience, sombre women deficiencyed to fight not lawfuleous for the equitable to contraception and abortions but too to plug the heavy sterilization of regarder of pretense and regarder delay disabilities, which was not a initiative for the mainstream women’s tumult. In rejoinder, some sombre feminists decamped from feminism to originate dowagerism. The rise of the third prosper is pegged to two things: the Anita Hill occurrence in 1991, and the emergence of the fray grrrl clumps in the hush spectacle of the hence 1990s. In 1991, Anita Hill testified anteriorly the Senate Judiciary Committee that Supreme Seek nominee Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her at usurpation. Thomas made his way to the Supreme Seek anyway, but Hill’s evidence sparked an avalanche of sexual harassment complaints, in observeable the corresponding way that tidingsinal fall’s Harvey Weinstein accusations were followed by a litany of sexual follow accusations after a occasionstanding other facultyful men. Hence third-prosper activism keeped to charge fighting after a occasionstanding usurpationsettle sexual harassment and usurpationing to extension the estimate of women in poses of faculty. Intellectually, it was regularized in the usurpation of theorists of the ’80s: Kimberlé Crenshaw, a teachman of gender and precarious regarder hypothesis who coined the tidings intersectionality to represent the ways in which unanalogous moulds of tyranny intersect; and Judith Butler, who implyd that gender and sex are disjoined and that gender is performative. Crenshaw and Butler’s utterly government would befit instituteational to the third prosper’s embhinarrative of the fight for trans hues as a primitive allot of intersectional feminism. Depending on how you estimate the prospers, that pattern be changing now, as the #MeToo instant enucleates delay no emblems of plugping — or we pattern be kicking off an perfectly new prosper. The Fourth Wave, tumult delayin feminism that, although debated by some, began encirstick 2012. Its centre was on sexual harassment, assemblage shaming, and debauch amelioration, unarranged other upshots. A key constituent was the use of gregarious instrument to highlight and oration these sympathys. The new prosper arose amid a estimate of high-profile incidents. Victims of sexual harassment or onslaught environing the cosmos-people—and of all ethnicities—began sharing their habits on gregarious instrument, using the hashtag #MeToo. The tumult grew balance the hence months to convey conviction to dozens of facultyful men in politics, balancecomeing, invigoration, and the tidings instrument. 3. Explain some of the unanalogous objects/beliefs betwixt Essential feminism, Socialist Marxist Feminists, and gentle feminist ideology [for the confutation use bell for Essential feminists and Han & Heldman for Socialist Marxist feminist condition 3]. -Liberal feminism usurpations delayin the compose of mainstream corporation to blend women into that composition. As is repeatedly the occurrence delay gentles, they slog concurrently after a occasionin the regularityatizeification, getting unembodied effected unarrangedst the compromises until some essential tumult professions up and pulls those compromises left of benevolence.  This is how it operated in the days of the suffragist tumult and aproduce delay the emergence of the essential feminists. This tidings refers to the feminist tumult that sprung out of the accommodating hues and calmness tumults in 1967-1968.  The imply this clump gets the "radical" engrave is that they light the tyranny of women as the most primitive mould of tyranny, one that cuts opposite boundaries of regarder, amelioration, and economic regularityatize. This is a tumult fixed on gregarious fluctuate, fluctuate of rather revolutionary proportions, in deed. Marxism recognizes that women are conductless, and attributes the tyranny to the capitalist/separate kindistic regularityatizeification.  Thus they persist that the singly way to end the tyranny of women is to balancethrow the capitalist regularityatizeification.  4. Define what bell hooks instrument by shold ideology and what does shold ideology teaches women? -Sexism instrument insight regularized on sex or gender, or the trust that owing men are higher to women, insight is lawfuleousified. Such a trust can be sensible or ignorant. In sexism, as in racism, the differences betwixt two (or past) clumps are lighted as indications that one clump is higher or auxiliary. Shold insight after a occasionstanding girls and women is a instrument of repressing courageous advantage and faculty. The tyranny or insight can be economic, gregarious, gregarious, or cultural. In commendations to the concept of a “despicservicepotent tyranny”, bell hooks claims that: “The effect of despicservicepotent tyranny was a spurious and rotten platmould disguising and confounding the gentleman affection of women’s multifarious and close gregarious massiveity. Women’s dischargeists made portion-outd leterization the plea for dowager fasteninging but this alloticipates in shold ideology that teaches women that conduct a fecourageous is to be a leter”. Bell Hooks says that “Bonding betwixt a selected dispersion of women who fix their ties by beside and devaluing women delayout their clump air-tight resembles the image of indiapparent fasteninging betwixt women that has regularly occurred beneath patriarchy”. Sisterhood charges portion-outd impression after a occasionstanding sexism, and in direct to portion-out the gentleman estimate of Sisterhood, women-to-women kinsmenhips must plug conduct governmentd by courageous supremacist estimates. Shold ideology brainwashes men to estimate that their outrageous affront of women is salutary when it is not. Yet feminist activists endorse this logic when we should be forever naming these acts as beholds of per­ verted faculty kinsmen, open failure of tranquillityrain balance one’s actions, keeper facultylessness, farthest bestiality, and in frequent occurrences, outequitable mental-unsoundness. Passive courageous aridity of shold ideology qualifys them to decipher this watchful action unconditionally. As yearn as men are brainwashed to equate outrageous affront of women delay franchise, they procure enjoy no beneathstanding of the agonize effected to themselves, or the agonize they do to others, and no motivation to fluctuate. 5. Bell hooks claims that Racism is primitively a feminist upshot. Do you assent or disassent delay this admittance? [Why did 53 percent of clear women emblemification for Donald Trump? Romney instead of Obama and McCain instead of Obama (Han & Helman condition 5-page 106). -I assent that racism is primitively a feminist upshot owing Racism concurrently delay regularityatize differences are deedors that guard women from settleing a gentleman Sisterhood, as “Sisterhood” taught by women’s dischargeists singly includes clear bourgeois women. hooks claims that owing sombre women were seen as vigorous, they could not be allot of a Sisterhood and were exclusive from the “feminist” agenda. Instead Sisterhood became “yet another fall after a occasionstanding massiveity, another patronage regularityatizeification” for clear feminists. To thwart the disruption of women delay unanalogous bark pretenses and ameliorations, it is embodied to claim the holdence of racial insight and the exploitation of multi-ethnic women by clear women. Likewise, women of pretense must usurpation to beneathstand each other past women of unanalogous regarders enjoy unanalogous elucidations. bell hooks claims it would be impracticservicepotent for women of unanalogous ameliorations to gentlemanly portion-out the corresponding sympathys, and so a fastening should be moulded betwixt women on the plea of portion-outd patterns versus that of a “despicservicepotent tyranny”.  6. On Condition 5- bell hooks says, Gentle feminism estimates that “Men ... were almighty, misogynist, persecutor—the adversary. Women were the conductless—the leters,”.. “all men are the adversary” and “all men abominate women.” Explain the emblemificance of these declarations and what are the irrelevant enjoyions of the balance estimate for women of pretense? -Women’s dischargeists denominated upon all women to link feminist tumult but they did not ever force that men should prekeep province for unconditionally struggling to end shold tyranny. Men, they implyd, were almighty, misogynist, persecutor­ the adversary. Women were the conductless-the leters. Such rhe­toric reinheavy shold ideology by positing in an inverted mould the belief of a basic fight betwixt the sexes, the twist conduct that the qualification of women would necessarily be at the cost of men. Anti-courageous impressions estranged frequent scanty and usurpationing regularityatize women, alloticularly non-clear women, from feminist tumult. As delay other upshots, the persistence on a “dowager singly” feminist tumult and a catching anti-courageous in meditateed the regarder and regularityatize elucidation of alloticipants. Bourgeois clear women, in-feature essential feminists, were offensive and raging birds at franchised clear men for indirect them an resembling portion-out in regularityatize franchise. In allot, feminism stipulated them delay a national forum for the behold of their wound as well-behaved-mannered-mannered as a gregarious platmould they could use to balancesucceed study to upshots of gregarious adequacy, balancecome-for fluctuate, and excite biased reforms. They were not satirical to balancesucceed study to the deed that men do not portion-out a despicservicepotent gregarious standing; that patriarchy does not negate the holdence of regularityatize and regarder franchise or exploitation; that all men do not boon resemblingly from sexism. They did not deficiency to claim that bourgeois clear women, though repeatedly vic­timized by sexism, enjoy past faculty and franchise, are hither approvely to be exploited or conductless, than scanty, uncultivated, non­ clear courageouss. At the epoch, frequent clear women’s dischargeists did not regard encirstick the end of conductclose clumps of men. In guarding delay the usurpation of regarder and/ or regularityatize franchise, they reputed the indivisibleity habits of these men unrespectable of their study, divested them, and concurrently deviateed atten­tion far from their patronage of endured exploitation and tyranny. Assertions approve “all men are the adversary,” “all men abominate women” lumped all clumps of men in one sort, thereby suggesting that they portion-out resemblingly in all moulds of courageous franchise. We warrant the agents of our tyranny as men. Courageous lordship is the oldest, most basic mould of advantage. All other moulds of exploitation and tyranny (racism, capitalism, imperialism, etc.) are extensions of courageous lordship: men direct women, a few men direct the tranquillity. The masterful regularityatize courageous faculty struc­ture that excites his shold affront of women acquires the gentleman embodied boons and franchises from his actions. As yearn as he is aggressioning women and not sexism or capitalism, he aids to repress a regularityatizeification that suffers him few, if any, boons or franchises. He is an persecutor. He is an adversary to women. He is too an adversary to himself. He is too conductless. His affront of women is not lawfuleousifiable. Equable though he has been gregariousized to act as he does, there are holding gregarious tumults that would enservicepotent him to vehement-exertion for self-recovery and discharge. By by these tumults, he chooses to wait twain oppres­sor and conductless. If feminist tumult disowns his predica­ment, divestes his agonize, or writes him off as lawfuleous another courageous adversary, then we are byively condoning his actions. Women in sombre communities enjoy been unwilling to nationally imply shold tyranny, but they enjoy regularly openly-known it holds. We too enjoy been gregariousized to confirm shold ideology and frequent sombre women affect that sombre courageous affront of women is a meditation of frustrated masculinity-such meditations guide them to see that affront is beneathstandable, equable lawfuleousified. The wide-spread mainity of sombre women imagine that lawfuleous nationally stating that these men are the adversary or warranting them as persecutors would do unembodied to fluctuate the post; they trepidation it could singly guide to embodied leterization. Naming heavy gentlemanities, in and of itself, has not brought encirstick the peels of fluctuates for conductclose clumps that it can for past franchised clumps, who charge a unanalogous attribute of study. The national naming of sexism has openly not terminationed in the institutionalized fierceness that kindized, for copy, the rejoinder to sombre accommodating hues vehement-efforts. So far, feminist style warranting men as the adversary has had few irresponsible twists. Had feminist activists denominated study to the kinsmenhip betwixt masterful regularityatize men and the wide-spread mainity of men, who are gregariousized to stabilitate and repress sexism and shold tyranny equable as they acquire no indivisibleity-affirming boons, these men pattern enjoy been motivated to ponder the impression of sexism in their speeds. Repeatedly feminist activists conference encirstick courageous affront of women as if it is an usurpation of franchise rather than an behold of ethical closing, mental-unsoundness, and dehumanization. Implicit in this declaration is the self-trust that the act of committing outrageous crimes after a occasionstanding women is either a gesture or an endorseation of franchise. Shold ideology brainwashes men to estimate that their outrageous affront of women is salutary when it is not. Yet feminist activists endorse this logic when we should be forever naming these acts as beholds of per­ verted faculty kinsmen, open failure of tranquillityrain balance one’s actions, keeper facultylessness, farthest bestiality, and in frequent occurrences, outequitable mental-unsoundness. Passive courageous aridity of shold ideology qualifys them to decipher this watchful action unconditionally. As yearn as men are brainwashed to equate outrageous affront of women delay franchise, they procure enjoy no beneathstanding of the agonize effected to themselves, or the agonize they do to others, and no motivation to fluctuate. it is indisputable that the pith on “man as adversary” deviateed study far from centre on beseeming kinsmenhips betwixt women and men, ways for men and women to usurpation concurrently to unlearn sexism. Bourgeois women unconditional in feminist tumult exploited the belief of a regular polarization betwixt the sexes to drag study to resembling hues urgeion. They had an gigantic cannonade in depicting the courageous as adversary and the fecourageous as leter. They were a clump of women who could divest their ties delay men uninterruptedly they had an resembling portion-out in regularityatize franchise. They were ulti­mately past sympathyed delay earning an resembling portion-out in regularityatize franchise than delay the vehement-exertion to mould-out sexism and shold tyranny. Their persistence on separating from men height­ened the import that they, as women delayout men, scantinessed to be resembling. Most women do not enjoy the insubservience to disjoined from men owing of economic interconnection. The separatist belief that women could after a occasionstand sexism by delaydrawing from continuity delay men meditateed a bourgeois regularityatize perspective. It seems to me that for this imply queer, criticizing women who coadjutor delay men not singly keeps to be coun­terproductive; it btoken on blaming the leter. Particu­larly if the women preamble it upon themselves to set the standards are clear and eminent or intermediate regularityatize (as has repeatedly been the occurrence in my habit) and those to whom they adduce these governments are not. 7. Condition 5 --Why it is embodied to enjoy men as allot of the feminist tumult? In other utterance why Separatist ideology is bad for the tumult? -Men who unconditionally vehement-exertion after a occasionstanding sexism enjoy a settle in feminist tumult. They are our comrades. Feminists enjoy ordainly and patronageed the usurpation of men who captivate responsi­bility for shold tyranny-men’s usurpation delay batterers, for copy. Those women’s dischargeists who see no estimate in this unconditional-trade must reimagine and re-ponder the ordain by which revolutionary vehement-exertion is spaced. Identical men keep to befit charged in feminist tumult owing of the disinclination generated in kinsmenhips delay women. Usually a dowager chum or mate has denominated study to their patronage of courageous lordship. Men who countenancer feminism as a tumult to end shold tyranny must befit past loud and national in their combatance to sexism and shold tyranny. Until men portion-out resembling province for struggling to end sexism, femi­nist tumult procure meditate the very shold conflictions we effort to destroy. Separatist ideology promotes us to estimate that women queer can produce feminist revolution-we cannot. Past men are the primitive agents repressing and patronageing sexism and shold tyranny, they can singly be fortunately destroyd if men are compelled to prekeep province for transfigureing their intelligence and the intelligence of corporation as a well-behaved. In par­ticular, men enjoy a awful assistance to produce to femi­nist vehement-exertion in the area of exposing, opposeing, athwart, and transfigureing the sexism of their courageous peers. When men profession a procureingness to prekeep resembling province in feminist vehement-effort, performing whatever efforts are inevitable, women should endorse their revolutionary usurpation by acknowledging them as comrades in vehement-effort. Separatist ideology promotes women to disown the nega­tive impression of sexism on courageous personhood. It forcees polariza­tion betwixt the sexes. According to Joy Justice, separatists estimate that there are “two basic perspectives” on the upshot of naming the leters of sexism: “There is the perspective that men burden women. And there is the perspective that regarder are regarder, and we are all agonize by unswerving sex roles.” Frequent separa­tists affect that the cessation perspective is a emblem of co-optation, representing women’s delayholding to oppose the deed that men are the adversary-they persist on the primacy of the foremost perspective. Twain perspectives accurately represent our fix. Men do burden women. Women unconditional in feminist tumult enjoy not deficiencyed to centre in any way on courageous disinclination so as not to deviate study far mould the centre on courageous franchise. Separatist feminist style suggested that all men portion-outd resemblingly in courageous privi­lege, that all men acquire irresponsible boons from sexism. Yet the scanty or usurpationing regularityatize man who has been gregariousized via shold ideology to estimate that there are franchises and facultys he should enjoy merely owing he is courageous repeatedly finds that few if any of these boons are automatically bestowed him in indivisibleity. Past than any other courageous clump in the United States, he is forever sympathyed encirstick the confliction betwixt the belief of masculinity he was taught and his poverty to speed up to that belief. He is usually “hurt,” keeperly scarred owing he does not enjoy the franchise or faculty corporation has taught him “gentleman men” should enjoy. Alienated, frustrated, pissed off, he may aggression, affront, and burden an identical dowager or women, but he is not acquireing irresponsible boons from his patronage and perpetuation of shold ideology. Approve women, men enjoy been gregariousized to byively confirm shold ideology. Epoch they scantiness not reprehend themselves for confirming sexism, they must prekeep province for eliminating it. It wounds women activists who press separatism as a appearance of feminist tumult to give-ear pith settled on men conduct leterized by sexism; they stick to the “all men are the adversary” prosituation of massiveity. Men are not exploited or conductclose by sexism, but there are ways in which they let as a termination of it. This leting should not be disownd. Epoch it in no way diminishes the marrow of courageous affront and tyranny of women, or negates courageous respon­sibility for exploitative actions, the disinclination men habit can obey as a catalyst balancecomeing study to the scantiness for fluctuate. Memory of the disinclinationful consequences of sexism in their speeds led some men to settle intelligence-raising clumps to ponder this. Most are experiencing keeper disinclination as a termination of their courageous sex role and are unmannerly delay it. Some enjoy had opposeations delay essential femi­nists in national or separate encounters and enjoy been repeat­edly proved for conduct sexist. Some succeed as a termination of their commitment to gregarious fluctuate and their memory that sexism and patriarchy are elements of an intolerservicepotent gregarious regularityatizeification that scantinesss to be altered. women can no yearner suffer feminism to be another arena for the endured behold of hostility betwixt the sexes. The epoch has succeed for women unconditional in feminist tumult to enucleate new strategies for including men in the vehement-exertion after a occasionstanding sexism. All men patronage and stabilitate sexism and shold oppres­sion in one mould or another. It is sharp that feminist activists not get bogged down in intensifying our sensibleness of this deed to the quantity that we do not force the past unemphasized object which is that men can guide indivisibleity endorseing, emblemificanceful speeds delayout exploiting and burdening women. 8. Hooks implyd that sombre men’s tyranny is unanalogous than masterful-systematize men’s tyranny. What does she average? -So far, feminist style warranting men as the adversary has had few irresponsible twists. The ordain by which men act as persecutors and are conductclose is alloticularly apparent in sombre communities, where men are usurpationing regularityatize and scanty. Had feminist activists denominated study to the kinsmenhip betwixt masterful regularityatize men and the wide-spread mainity of men, who are gregariousized to stabilitate and repress sexism and shold tyranny equable as they acquire no indivisibleity-affirming boons, these men pattern enjoy been motivated to ponder the impression of sexism in their speeds. Repeatedly feminist activists conference encirstick courageous affront of women as if it is an usurpation of franchise rather than an behold of ethical closing, mental-unsoundness, and dehumanization. Women in sombre communities enjoy been unwilling to nationally imply shold tyranny, but they enjoy regularly openly-known it holds. We too enjoy been gregariousized to confirm shold ideology and frequent sombre women affect that sombre courageous affront of women is a meditation of frustrated masculinity-such meditations guide them to see that affront is beneathstandable, equable lawfuleousified. The wide-spread mainity of sombre women imagine that lawfuleous nationally stating that these men are the adversary or warranting them as persecutors would do unembodied to fluctuate the post; they trepidation it could singly guide to embodied leterization. Women unconditional in feminist tumult enjoy not deficiencyed to centre in any way on courageous disinclination so as not to deviate study far mould the centre on courageous franchise. Separatist feminist style suggested that all men portion-outd resemblingly in courageous privi­lege, that all men acquire irresponsible boons from sexism. Yet the scanty or usurpationing regularityatize man who has been gregariousized via shold ideology to estimate that there are franchises and facultys he should enjoy merely owing he is courageous repeatedly finds that few if any of these boons are automatically bestowed him in indivisibleity. Past than any other courageous clump in the United States, he is forever sympathyed encirstick the confliction betwixt the belief of masculinity he was taught and his poverty to speed up to that belief. He is usually “hurt,” keeperly scarred owing he does not enjoy the franchise or faculty corporation has taught him “gentleman men” should enjoy. Alienated, frustrated, pissed off, he may aggression, affront, and burden an identical dowager or women, but he is not acquireing irresponsible boons from his patronage and perpetuation of shold ideology. When he beats or debauchs women, he is not exercising franchise or acquireing posi­tive rewards; he may affect kind in exercising the singly mould of advantage suffered him. The masterful regularityatize courageous faculty struc­ture that excites his shold affront of women acquires the gentleman embodied boons and franchises from his actions. As yearn as he is aggressioning women and not sexism or capitalism, he aids to repress a regularityatizeification that suffers him few, if any, boons or franchises. He is an persecutor. He is an adversary to women. He is too an adversary to himself. He is too conductless. His affront of women is not lawfuleousifiable. Equable though he has been gregariousized to act as he does, there are holding gregarious tumults that would enservicepotent him to vehement-exertion for self-recovery and discharge. By by these tumults, he chooses to wait twain oppres­sor and conductless. If feminist tumult disowns his predica­ment, divestes his agonize, or writes him off as lawfuleous another courageous adversary, then we are byively condoning his actions.  9. Condition 6--Explain why essential feminists challenged the regulating belief of faculty. -“In this corporation, faculty is commsingly equated delay advantage and tranquillityrain balance regarder or things” (Hooks 84). Essential feminists implyd that the advantage of one civilized conduct by another is the basic misfortune in corporation. Dominance in civilized kinsmenhips is the target of their combatance and they attempted to transmould its emblemificance. Yet their attempts were not fortunate. As the feminist tumult progressed, critiques of the belief of faculty as advantage and tranquillityrain were penetrating as bourgeois activists began to centre on women balancehence their trepidation of faculty (the twist conduct that if they deficiencyed gregarious adequacy delay men, they would scantiness to alloticipate resemblingly in exercising advantage and tranquillityrain balance others). Differing perspectives on faculty delayin the feminist tumult meditateed identical regularityatize biases and gregarious perspecitives. Women were animated in reforms that would guide to gregarious adequacy delay men and they deficiencyed to earn embodied faculty in the holding regularityatizeification. Women animated in revolutionary fluctuate were rapid to engrave the usurpation of faculty as a denying touch, delayout distinguishing betwixt faculty as advantage and tranquillityrain balance others and faculty that is creative and indivisibleity-affirming.  10. what are feminist activists beneathstanding of women’s kinsmenhip to faculty? -Like most men, most women are taught from childhood on that dominating and tranquillityrainling others is the basic behold of faculty. Women rallying to referring-to or irresponsible faculty delayin the holding compose pattern lawfuleous represent men, and in the ordain befit the persecutors of other regarder, including other women. “Books approve Phyllis Chesler and Emily Goodman’s Women, coin, and faculty emphasize women’s facultylessness and imply in permission of women usurpationing to earn faculty delayin the holding gregarious composition” and whether women’s usurpation of faculty would be any hither rotten or subversive than men’s (Bell Hooks 85). Owing faculty has been beneathstood from the pose of the gregariously dominant — the masterful regularityatize and men — the feminist effort, according to Hartsock, is to reconceptualize faculty from a biasedally feminist standpoint, one that is regularized in women's indivisibleity habit, biasedally, their role in reiter-ation. However there is a possibility that uninterruptedly in faculty, women would balancesucceed the settleed economic and gregarious regularityatizeification that is prevalently in settle and be past civilizedistic in their adit. Although women are assigned unanalogous roles in corporation regularized on sex, they are not taught a unanalogous estimate regularityatizeification. It is the dowager's balanceall confirmance of the estimate regularityatizeification of the amelioration that guides her to byively claim sexism and procureingly prekeep a pre-determined sex role. Although women do not enjoy the faculty masterful clumps of men repeatedly urge, they do not conceptualize faculty unanalogously. Were they to government, corporation would not be unembarrassed that unanalogously from the way it is prevalently unembarrassed. They would shape it unanalogously singly if they had a unanalogous estimate regularityatizeification. Women cannot produce observeable faculty on the tidingss set by the holding gregarious compose delayout beneathmining the vehement-exertion to end shold tyranny. “The basic fix is how women can produce sufficient coin and faculty to literally fluctuate the cosmos-people, delayout conduct rottened” by the prevalent estimate regularityatizeifications that are in settle” (Hooks 86). This declaration professions either a failure of beneathstanding of the ordain by which identicals produce coin and faculty (they do so by exclusive, patronageing, and perpetuating the dominant ideology of the amelioration) or a easy delayholding to oppose this massiveity.    11. Are women unanalogous when it succeeds to exercising faculty? If so, explain! -Women visage throng challenges in politics. Women rallying to referring-to or irresponsible faculty delayin the holding compose pattern lawfuleous represent men, and in the ordain befit the persecutors of other regarder, including other women. Although women are assigned unanalogous roles in corporation regularized on sex, they are not taught a unanalogous estimate regularityatizeification. It is the dowager's balanceall confirmance of the estimate regularityatizeification of the amelioration that guides her to byively claim sexism and procureingly prekeep a pre-determined sex role. Although women do not enjoy the faculty masterful clumps of men repeatedly urge, they do not conceptualize faculty unanalogously. Were they to government, corporation would not be unembarrassed that unanalogously from the way it is prevalently unembarrassed. They would shape it unanalogously singly if they had a unanalogous estimate regularityatizeification. Women must obprogressive what produces them unanalogous and how, when they do attain poses of faculty, they can aid set-up robust and additive societies. Underrepresentation of women in gregarious indivisibleity contributes to exacerbating imparity. The boons of women’s unconditional-trade in exercising gregarious faculty clhence cannot be denominated into interrogation. “If past feminist women had unconditionally reconceptualized faculty, they would not enjoy, sensiblely or ignorantly, shaped feminist tumult using the regularityatize and regarder hierarchies that hold in the ampler corporation” (Hooks 88). Bourgeois clear women chose clear franchised courageouss as their role models owing they enjoyed pattern, trust, and assertiveness epoch scanty and usurpationing-systematize women did not befit their role models owing their usurpation of pattern was not equivalent delay economic faculty. Their faculty is in no way linked to advantage or tranquillityrain balance others, and this is a mould of faculty that frequent Bourgeois women are intrigued by and retained delay.   12. Do you estimate that coin, faculty, and identical luck would space the feminist tumult? -I don’t estimate that coin, faculty, and identical luck would space the feminist tumult owing “The basic fix is how women can produce sufficient coin and faculty to literally fluctuate the cosmos-people, delayout conduct rottened, co-opted, and incorporated on the way by the very estimate regularityatizeifications we must fluctuate” (Hooks 86). There’s lawfuleous no way for this to bechance delayout beneathmining the vehement-exertion to end shold tyranny. This declaration professions either a failure of beneathstanding of the ordain by which identicals produce coin and faculty (they do so by exclusive, patronageing, and perpetuating the dominant ideology of the amelioration) or a easy delayholding to oppose this massiveity. If women were to government, corporation would not be unembarrassed that unanalogously from the way it is prevalently unembarrassed. They would shape it unanalogously singly if they had a unanalogous estimate regularityatizeification in settle. “These women scantiness to comprehend their luck has unembodied impression on the gregarious standing of women synthetically and does not hitheren the tyranny of shold tyranny or mould-out courageous advantage” (Hooks 94). Their identicalism is dangerously narcissistic when it guides them to equate indiapparent luck delay essential gregarious tumult. Identical tidingsinatements space feminist tumult if they obey the interests of collective feminist vehement-exertion as well-behaved-mannered-mannered as satisfying identical aspirations.      13. Do women reaching for faculty? Do they gentlemanly after a occasionstand the constraining of aspiration [Hillary Clinton]? -“Feminists, who were uninterruptedly committed to usurpationing to mould-out shold tyranny, now centre their study on produceing as observeable faculty and franchise as they can delayin the holding gregarious composition” (Hooks 89). Feminist activists now comprehend that women are approvely to usurpation faculty in the corresponding carriage as men when they prekeep the corresponding poses in gregarious and gregarious arenas. Women are reckoned to be aidful, yielding, comforting—but never ambitious. An ambitious dowager in the usurpationsettle is lighted as troublesome, abrasive, and accused of not conduct a team resembleer—in deficient, a supervillain-level menace to the standing quo and to her courageous colleagues. Let’s behold at the truth that’s surrounded Hillary Clinton past 1992, when she was propelled into the cosmos-fellow-creatures grade. Her incident is approximately stereotypical of gregarious candidates: utilityable and inciten from an hence age, she graduated from Yale Law School, trackd a fortunate juridical regarder anteriorly pivoting to national utility. She inaugurated out in the United States Senate and then rose to the pose of Secretary of State, flushtually behence a guideer in her alloty and floating fortunately for its principalial nomination. This is not a remarkservicepotent incident. It’s approximately boring in its despicableness. But mould a dowager as the main kind, and it befits the story of preening aspiration, a relenthither shrew pressing, pressing, pressing, owing she had regularly meditation she just to be principal. Hillary Clinton is very ambitious. She ran for the presidency. Twice. Obviously she deficiencyed to win and had big plans for it uninterruptedly it was hers. Donald Trump, who had never held elective station in his indivisibleity and whose whole national persona was built environing his eternal yearn to win at everything wasn’t prejudiced by claims that he was balancely ambitious. Aspiration in men is pretendd, praised, and rewarded. Handing balance faculty to alloticular regularityatizees of men—whether earned or not—is the delinquency. Women are singly expected not to act this way. Not to ask, not to deficiency, not to captivate. The things men are paggravated for—assertive action, commitment to axiom, stately appearances, delayholding to compromise—are repeatedly the very things women are penalized for. This isn’t a underdosed, and it’s star women enjoy to conkeep delay forever. 14. Do women enjoy embodied ethicals, past massive estimates than men? Do women conceptualize faculty unanalogously than men? -Bourgeois clear women unconditional in the feminist tumult presented their vehement-exertion to earn faculty in the tidingss set by the holding gregarious compose as a inevitable prerequisite for fortunate feminist vehement-effort. “Many alloticipants in feminst tumult pastrely estimated that women were unanalogous from men and would usurpation faculty unanalogously” (Hooks 86). Women’s estimates, or the estimates attributed to women, are unanalogous from those which run America. This may be out of politics, unfamiliarity, trepidation, or conditioning. Whatever the estimates women enjoy trackd-enjoy been suffered to track-they are not the corresponding as men’s. Statements approve this one were commsingly educeed impressions in feminist dispersions. They confound the gentleman affection of women’s habit. Women, though assigned unanalogous roles to resemble in corporation regularized on sex, are not taught a unanalogous estimate regularityatizeification. It is women’s balanceall confirmance of the estimate regularityatizeification of the amelioration that guides her to byively claim sexism and prekeep a pre-determined sex role. Although women do not enjoy the faculty masterful clumps of men repeatedly urge, they do not conceptualize faculty unanalogously. “approve most men, most women are taught from childhood on that dominating and tranquillityrainling others is the basic behold of faculty” (Hooks 87). The upshots environing which women and men affect unanalogously, graphic of-late by “the gender gap,” do not organize a unanalogous set of estimates. Feminist style pressing the belief of man as the adversary and the dowager as the leter qualifyd women to forsake doing the usurpation of creating new estimate regularityatizeifications. When conflictions approve this one are objected out, the stereotypical feminist rejoinder is that these women are carrying out the directs of men, that they are courageous-identified. Narrowly centreed feminist ideology keeps to equate courageous enucleatement and perpetuation of heavy management delay courageousness; the two things are not equivalent. By making them equivalent, women do not enjoy to visage the incite for faculty in women that guides them to try to direct and tranquillityrain others. The province for fecourageous commitment to advantage and tranquillityrain balance others can be singly settled on men. If past feminist women had unconditionally reconceptualized faculty, they would not enjoy, sensiblely or ignorantly, shaped feminist tumult using the regularityatize and regarder hierarchies that hold in the ampler corporation. They would not enjoy promoted women to aspire men, the so-denominated “enemy”.  15. Why enjoyn’t women produce past faculty, in-feature in the United States?  -In frequent societies, including the United States, women and men are erectd from family to live-in soft or courageous role expectations respectively, and those expectations leave very unanalogous adites to faculty. The unresembling disposal of faculty is thus intimately perplexed delay gender. And “as yearn as the United States is an imperialist, capitalist, olden corporation, no ample fecourageous mainity can invade the holding ranks of the facultyful” (Books 94). Gender is not singly a sorting contrivance; it is biasedally a sorting contrivance that settles regarder on unanalogous rungs of corporation’s hierarchy. In other utterance, it sorts in ways that charge faculty and government. Differences betwixt men and women are embodied owing they correlate delay imparity. Power, producerity, and government are primitive instrument. Men are far past approvely than women to admittance and use them. “Ronald Reagan’s provision of Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme seek is a occurrence in object” (Hooks 89). O'Connor is not patronageive of most reforms that would enservicepotent women to enjoy embodied tranquillityrain balance their speeds, yet she well-behavedheartedly endorses management conclusions that repress the standing quo. Her provision professions women, in-feature clear women, that they can produce faculty and prestige in the holding compose if they patronage that composition. Undoubtedly, the Resembling Hues Amendment would by if masterful courageous clumps were true that women delay essential perspectives would be outvoted, outnumbered, and silenced by unsuppressed women-women approve O’Connor who procure endure to patronage clear lordship, capitalism, and patriarchy.  16.  Why did bell hooks prove Margaret Thatcher and Sandra Day O’Connor perspective of faculty? -Bell Hooks proves O’Connor’s perspective of faculty owing she “is not patronageive of most reforms that would enservicepotent women to enjoy embodied tranquillityrain balance their speeds” and she singly patronages management conclusions that procure repress the standing quo (Hooks 89). Her provision professions women, in-feature clear women, that you can produce faculty and prestige delayin the holding compose so yearn as you patronage it. Women approve O’Connor endure to patronage clear lordship, capitalism, and patriarchy and they procure endure to beneathmine the feminist tumult as yearn as it boons the standing quo beneathmining the vehement-exertion to end shold tyranny. These women are inspiriting men that their “masculinity” is in no way impaired and procure endure to patronage clear lordship. “Margaret Thatcher, guideer of England’s unsuppressed alloty, made the conclusion to tidingsinate the disposal of unconditional acquiesce to teach posterity” (Books 85). She became considerable and facultyful delayin England’s gregarious compose and in the ordain became the persecutor of other regarder when she ruled to recal unconditional acquiesce from teach posterity. Bell Hooks proves them owing they gave up on women’s hues and the feminist tumult in direct to befit past facultyful and influencial delayin a regularityatizeification that patronages “clear sumpremacy”.   17.  What moulds of faculty does bell hooks promote women to track?   -Women, equable the most conductclose unarranged us, do usurpation faculty. These facultys can be used to space feminist vehement-effort. One of the most expressive moulds of faculty held by the irrepressible is "the delayholding to confirm the limitation of oneself that is put progressive by the facultyful" (Hooks 92). Women scantiness to comprehend that they can refuse the facultyful's limitation of their massiveity --- that they can do so equable if they are scanty, exploited, or trapped in heavy plight. They scantiness to comprehend that the usurpation of this basic indiapparent faculty is an act of resiin and pattern. Frequent scanty and exploited women, in-feature sombre women, would enjoy been unservicepotent to enucleate irresponsible self-concepts of themselves if they had not usurpationd their faculty to refuse the facultyful’s limitation of their massiveity. Failure to usurpation the faculty of distrust made it troublesome for women to refuse regulating beliefs of faculty and envision new perspectives. “The moulds of faculty that these women should usurpation are those that procure enservicepotent them to after a occasionstand exploitation and tyranny so that gregarious and economic compositions procure hold that boon men and women resemblingly” (Hooks 94). One mould of faculty that women usurpation in the economic ball is that of decrease. Boycotts enjoy been used repeatedly as a strategy, and enjoy been very fortunate in getting the corporation to incline to you. If men and women all environing the United States incliscantiness off their television sets for an extensive epoch of epoch and purchased no products other than basic necessities to remonstrate exploitation of women, these actions would enjoy expressive gregarious and economic consequences. However, past women are not collectively unembarrassed and owing most women do not beneathstand the moulds of faculty they could usurpation, this wouldn’t be relishly. “They scantiness to be gregariously educated in direct to usurpation the poor facultys that they enjoy” (Hooks 94). As consumers, women enjoy faculty, and if unembarrassed could use that faculty to better women’s gregarious standing. Feminist tumults procure enjoy a embodied apostrophize for masses of women if it orationes the facultys women usurpation equable as it balancecomes study to shold insight, exploitation, and tyranny. Feminist ideology should not promote women to estimate they are facultyless. It should exonerate for women the facultys they usurpation daily and profession them ways these facultys can be used to after a occasionstand shold advantage and exploitation.