Respuesta :
Answer:
D) The counter-argument believes the ERA will force women to be more like men
and thus void current individual gender privileges.
Explanation: Reading through it, the argument against ERA is that is would mean the end separate sex rights, with examples of how if it went into effect, the all male military draft will be deemed unconstitutional, and woman would have to be drafted too. Another example that was given was that protective laws like alimony and sexual assault would be gotten rid of. Another example that she gave was that the tendency of a divorced woman to keep child custody would be gone as well. Also, it was a career woman named Phyllis Schlafly, who even though had a law degree, still gave off the argument on how ERA would be horrible and undesirable. She also glorified the traditional woman role in America, and enjoying 'heckling' feminists.
(Hope this helps)
The statement that summarizes the argument against the ERA, that Steinem addresses at the beginning of the speech is D. The counter-argument believes the ERA will force women to be more like men and thus void current individual gender privileges.
- A counterargument is an argument that's used in opposing a particular opinion.
- It should be noted that ERA would be important in ending separate sex rights. In such a case, women will also be able to do the works that are usually meant for men alone.
- With ERA, the genders will both have an equal opportunity. Despite the arguments, the counter-argument was that ERA will force women to be more like men.
In conclusion, ERA will also and void current individual gender privileges.
Read related link on:
https://brainly.com/question/17402362