AHC: Earliest possible feminist movement

I'd note that from medieval point of view marriage for life was something that benefited women. Women were dependent on men economically, so If a man get bored with his old wife and could take a younger one his firts wife woud be left begging and starving.

Generally true, but, OTOH, women had usually little choice in who they married.
 
There was some early Feminist discourse in Revolutionary France, but, as far as I know, it was mostly among the otherwise moderate Girondins, not the Jacobins. And it was mostly of the elite kind (again, class matters). Under the Terror, the most prominent (and quite radical) French Feminist theorist, Olympe de Gouges was guillotined, just to show how enlightened Robespierre's guys were on the point. It's also worth noting that the Code Napoléon (clearly not a Jacobin thing) had a very dim view of women's rights, marking regressions on the matter in some places where it became the model of legal wisdom (things like married women losing exclusive property rights they had enjoyed under customary law).
my original take on that point was more of the utilitarian one of the revolutionary wars going really badly for France for longer and there being effectively a need for extensive female participation in the war effort, in a sense it is the final extension of the concept of mass mobilisation. Whilst not guaranteed to lead to a feminist movement( it has not always followed through in other nations) power structures can re-assert themselves, just ask female freedom fighters in various African independence struggles recently, it can lead to change not always as intended.
 
my original take on that point was more of the utilitarian one of the revolutionary wars going really badly for France for longer and there being effectively a need for extensive female participation in the war effort, in a sense it is the final extension of the concept of mass mobilisation. Whilst not guaranteed to lead to a feminist movement( it has not always followed through in other nations) power structures can re-assert themselves, just ask female freedom fighters in various African independence struggles recently, it can lead to change not always as intended.
France was most populous European country, enough men to mobilise.
OTOH Paraguay suffered horrible loses in male population during War of Triple Alliance and did not changed into feminist paradise as result.
 
Later the French Revolution could have remained in its radical phase longer and resulted in a feminist movement gaining more traction, especially if the republic was so hard pressed that women had to become involved in the war effort to any great degree,
It seems a bit unlikely given that France had the biggest population and thus manpower at the time the Revolution happened. Plus, warfare never really got to the point that you had to mobilise absolutely every man available until WW1.
Well, if the Terror (under Robespierre) continues (but only against monarchists and other true enemies of the Revolution, so people accept it).
There was some early Feminist discourse in Revolutionary France, but, as far as I know, it was mostly among the otherwise moderate Girondins, not the Jacobins. And it was mostly of the elite kind (again, class matters). Under the Terror, the most prominent (and quite radical) French Feminist theorist, Olympe de Gouges was guillotined, just to show how enlightened Robespierre's guys were on the point.
As Falecius points out, the Terror is probably not the best part to see a form of Feminism rising up. Especially given that the Revolutionnaries became increasingly paranoid during this time and kinda guillotinned anyone they felt was a threat to the Revolution, whether it made sense or not. You had Revolutionnaries that were eliminated because they were considered too soft (Danton) or too harsh (Hebert).

The case of Olympes de Gouges is relevant here because she was a feminist figure that got guillotined. Though, in fairness, she got guillotined less for her feminist ideals (not saying they didn't play a part: I don't know enough about it to judge) and more for the fact she attacked the Montagnard government by saying its rule was dictatorial.
It's also worth noting that the Code Napoléon (clearly not a Jacobin thing) had a very dim view of women's rights, marking regressions on the matter in some places where it became the model of legal wisdom (things like married women losing exclusive property rights they had enjoyed under customary law).
It should also be noted that the Code was elaborated with the help of many famous jurdical experts of the time: so the time period was probably a lot more conservative than what is often assumed.
I'd note that from medieval point of view marriage for life was something that benefited women. Women were dependent on men economically, so If a man get bored with his old wife and could take a younger one his firts wife woud be left begging and starving.
Generally true, but, OTOH, women had usually little choice in who they married.
Depends on a case by case basis. It's a common thing to placate the attitudes of the elites on what was going on with the common folk. Arranged marriages were probably not as common in the lower classes of society.

Plus, there are things that were vast improvements over what had come previously: the Church for example pushed for mutual consent of the spouse. Sure, in practice, it didn't guarantee women wouldn't be coerced into marrying... But it still acknowledge that they had the right to voice their opinion about their suitor and to reject him if they didn't want him.
 

Artaxerxes

Banned
Improve infant mortality, improve contraception, also some movements towards making every day life simpler (less intensive house and clothing maintenance raising up from a subsistence existence where both sexes are working hard just to stay alive) and you'll get a move towards women having more rights and ability to say what they want.
 
It seems a bit unlikely given that France had the biggest population and thus manpower at the time the Revolution happened. Plus, warfare never really got to the point that you had to mobilise absolutely every man available until WW1.

umm following that logic levy en masse should not have been invented (or needed) but it was. I am not in any sense arguing that it was an inevitable or even likely consequence I AM saying it is possible in certain circumstances.
 
umm following that logic levy en masse should not have been invented (or needed) but it was. I am not in any sense arguing that it was an inevitable or even likely consequence I AM saying it is possible in certain circumstances.
I'm not arguig that levée en masse wasn't invented nor needed during the French Revolution... In fact, you could make the argument that France had the highest manpower precisely thanks to that. But that basically means France had no shortage of men to spare to fight... Not to mention that in practice, the levée also had rules about examptions. Also, it wasn't an automatic draft: you were drafted thanks to drawing lots, which in practice means that you weren't conscripting all men available during the Revolutionnary and Napoleonic Wars. The true "draft all men" kind of levée en masse wasn't seen until 1914 basically.

In other words, to force France to require the possibility of drafting women during the Revolution, you'd need an incredible number of huge military disasters and thus a more than desperate situation for France. In my eyes, that's nearly impossible during the French Revolutionnary and Napoleonic Wars: this would have more chance of causing the Revolution to fail.
 
An earlier discovery of antisepsis would lead to childbirth being far less dangerous. When? It's quite hard to know, since it's one of those ideas that don't seem to require much in terms of material or technological development, but still took a long time to develop. But adding that aspect to a society would certainly cause some upheavals (not to mention massivt amounts of butterflies as more women start surviving childbirth).

I also think there's an important distinction to be made between feminist movements and having women in positions of power. Historically, there is very little correlation between female rulers and advances in status for women in general.
 
A good time for a feminist movement to appear would have been right after the Black Death. The one social upheaval going on at the time and some women had actually achieved power and success. It wouldn't have taken much to start a push for women's equality.
After the Black Death there were, in Europe, some egalitarian movements like the Lollards which, while by no means Feminist in the modern sense, actually had some relatively open views on these matters. And there was Christine de Pisan, who probably gets as close to to modern Feminism as you can ask to a Medieval writer and then some.
 
Top