Ok, I have class in 20 min, but using this theory, called transformative power theory, to apply to social movements, I can see why the women's rights movement not only hasn't succeeded, its been rolled back.
With Amy wtf ever her name is on the confirmation seat, this has

been really on my mind. Essentially it comes down to not having enough allies, and not having the ability to politically engage the base.
So- women don't uniformly want rights. That means some percentage right there aren't going to support this. That means we have to build

alliances in order to really make it happen. But women in the women's rights movement haven't done that. We haven't even effectively organized as one unit. We fracture along age, sociodemographics, education, race, religion, ethnicity. So even when we could all agree

on the basics, we haven't because of internal instability in our relationships with each other. This holds true for our collective alliance with men who would support our cause. Because we often treat ourselves and others as means to an end, temporary arrangements, we have

haven't formed a cohesive whole. Resentment towards each other and the men who benefit from this system leaves each faction feeling like they have no real stake in the outcome, because when you tell someone they have no right to speak or expect allyship, they are not investing

in that movement. For instance, unless we are hit with a plague that kills 80% of us, each of the stakeholders in the alliance will still be present at the end of the struggle. They will still need to have some degree of the power distribution. That means everyone has

a stake in the changes. If we want to change things, we must build real alliances and that is going to be really hard, because of the resentment built up over centuries.

I will do the other parts after class

well, Zoom is having its fun....
So, the reason alliances matter is because its one way to count resources available to a movement.

Then you have the question of mobilizing the population to help you. If you cannot effectively message, or motivate, then you cannot create a

change within a closed political system.

When you compare that to the opposition, they are aligned firmly together, the have the resources not only available, but also allocated to different areas. So, the NRA we will say, targets male supremacy under gun rights laws,

while the church does it through "submit to god" bullshvt. And when needed, they can effectively combine and mobilize their groups. This is the difference between a real alliance and political expediency. Each group has their zone, and they overlap as needed. If we want to

advance womens rights, not only do we need to form firm alliances, we need to be able to effectively get people invested and thus mobilized as needed. If we cannot do these things due to various reasons ranging from resentment to social constructs hindering women from mobilizing

we cannot possibly move the dominant power. So, you know, take that with a grain of salt and do what you will with it.

so, I gotta say, my hypothesis is that women's rights will continue to be stable now or removed.