document_title: Four Weddings and a Funeral

question_text: where was the funeral in four weddings and a funeral filmed

text: Four Weddings and a Funeral

text: Plot[edit]

text: The film follows the adventures of a group of friends through the eyes of Charles, a good-natured but socially awkward man living in London, who becomes smitten with Carrie, an American whom Charles keeps meeting at four weddings and a funeral.

text: The first wedding is in Somerset and is that of Angus and Laura, at which Charles is the best man. Charles and his single friends wonder whether they will ever get married. Charles meets Carrie and spends the night with her. Carrie pretends that, now they have slept together, they will have to get married, to which Charles endeavours to respond before realising she is joking. Carrie observes that they may have missed an opportunity and then returns to America.

text: The second wedding is that of Bernard and Lydia, a couple who became romantically involved at the previous wedding. Charles encounters Carrie again, but she introduces him to her fiancé, Sir Hamish Banks, a wealthy politician. At the reception, Charles finds himself seated with several ex-girlfriends who relate embarrassing stories about his inability to be discreet and afterwards bumps into Henrietta, known among Charles' friends as "Duckface", with whom he had a particularly difficult relationship. Charles retreats to an empty hotel suite, seeing Carrie and Hamish leave in a taxicab, only to be trapped in a cupboard after the newlyweds stumble into the room to have sex. After Charles awkwardly exits the room, Henrietta confronts him about his habit of "serial monogamy", telling him he is afraid of letting anyone get too close to him. Charles then runs into Carrie, and they end up spending another night together.

text: A month later, Charles receives an invitation to Carrie's wedding. While shopping for a present, he coincidentally encounters Carrie and ends up helping her select her wedding dress. Carrie lists her 33 sexual partners. Charles later awkwardly tries confessing his love to her and hinting that he would like to have a relationship with her, to no avail.

text: The third wedding is that of Carrie and Hamish. Charles attends, depressed at the prospect of Carrie marrying Hamish. At the reception, Gareth instructs his friends to seek potential mates; Fiona's brother, Tom, stumbles through an attempt to connect with a woman until she reveals that she is the minister's wife, while Charles's flatmate, Scarlett, strikes up a conversation with an American named Chester. As Charles watches Carrie and Hamish dance, Fiona deduces his feelings about Carrie. When Charles asks why Fiona is not married, she confesses that she has loved Charles since they first met years earlier. Charles is appreciative and empathetic but does not requite her love. During the groom's toast, Gareth dies of a heart attack.

text: At Gareth's funeral, his partner Matthew recites the poem "Funeral Blues" by W. H. Auden, commemorating his relationship with Gareth. Charles and Tom discuss whether hoping to find your "one true love" is just a futile effort and ponder that, while their clique have always viewed themselves as proud to be single, Gareth and Matthew were a "married" couple all the while.

text: The fourth wedding is ten months later. Charles has decided to marry Henrietta. However, shortly before the ceremony, Carrie arrives, revealing to Charles that she and Hamish are separated. Charles has a crisis of confidence, which he reveals to his deaf brother David and Matthew. During the ceremony, when the vicar asks whether anyone knows a reason why the couple should not marry, David, who was reading the vicar's lips, asks Charles to translate for him, and says in sign language that he suspects the groom loves someone else. The vicar asks whether Charles does love someone else, and Charles replies, "I do." Henrietta punches Charles and the wedding is halted.

text: Carrie visits Charles to apologise for attending the wedding. Charles confesses that, while standing at the altar, he realised that for the first time in his life he totally and utterly loved one person, "and it wasn't the person standing next to me in the veil." Charles makes a proposal of lifelong commitment without marriage to Carrie, who accepts.

text: Henrietta marries an officer in the Grenadier Guards; David marries his girlfriend Serena; Scarlett marries Chester; Tom marries his distant cousin Deirdre (whom he met, for the second time in 25 years, at Charles's wedding); Matthew finds a new partner; Fiona marries Prince Charles; and Charles and Carrie have a young son.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Hugh Grant as Charles
Andie MacDowell as Carrie
James Fleet as Tom
Simon Callow as Gareth
John Hannah as Matthew
Kristin Scott Thomas as Fiona
David Bower as David
Charlotte Coleman as Scarlett
Timothy Walker as Angus
Sara Crowe as Laura
Rowan Atkinson as Father Gerald
David Haig as Bernard
Sophie Thompson as Lydia
Corin Redgrave as Sir Hamish Banks
Anna Chancellor as Henrietta

text: Writing[edit]

text: Screenwriter Richard Curtis' own experiences as a wedding attendee inspired the premise for Four Weddings and a Funeral.[5] According to Curtis he began writing the script at age 34, after realizing he had attended 65 different weddings in an 11-year period. At one wedding he was propositioned by a fellow guest, but he turned her down and forever regretted it; accordingly he based the origin of Charles and Carrie's romance on that situation.[5]

text:
It took Curtis 17 drafts to reach the final version. He was focused on achieving reality in the characters, not just humor; according to Mike Newell: "Mike was obsessed with keeping it real. Every character, no matter how small, has a story, not just three funny lines. It's a romantic film about love and friendship that swims in a sea of jokes."
[6] He chose to omit any mention of the character's careers, because he didn't think a group of friends would realistically discuss their jobs while together at a wedding.[5]

text: Casting[edit]

text:
Curtis, Newell and the producers began the casting process for Four Weddings in early 1992, and continued scouting possible actors even after funding fell through in mid-1992. Roughly 70 actors auditioned for the role of Charles before Hugh Grant did.[3]
Hugh Grant was ready to give up acting as a career when he received the script for Four Weddings and a Funeral; he stated in 2016 that: "I wasn't really getting any work at all, and then to my great surprise this script came through the letterbox from my agent, and it was really good. And I rang on and said there must be a mistake, you've sent me a good script."[7] Initially, writer Richard Curtis, who had modelled the character of Charles after himself, was opposed to casting Grant in the role because he thought he was too handsome. According to Curtis: "I thought people would not believe the fact he was in trouble with girls, because he so clearly wouldn't be...He was by far the best person who auditioned but I still voted against him when it came down to the vote between two people."[8] Curtis' favored choice was Alex Jennings, while Alan Rickman was also considered at one point.[9] He was eventually persuaded by Mike Newell and the film's producers to approve of Grant.

text: The original choice for the role of Carrie was Jeanne Tripplehorn, but she had to drop out because of a death in her family.[10] Marisa Tomei and, reportedly, Sarah Jessica Parker, were also considered before Andie MacDowell was cast.[5]

text: Grant's participation hit another stumbling block when his agent requested a ₤5,000 rise over the ₤35,000 salary Grant was offered. The producers initially refused because of the extremely tight budget, but eventually agreed. The supporting cast-members were paid ₤17,500 a piece.[8]

text: Production[edit]

text: Pre-production for the movie was a long process because funding was erratic, falling through in mid-1992 and leading to much uncertainty.[3] Finally in early 1993, Working Title Films stepped in to close the gap. Nonetheless, another $1.2 million was cut just before production began in the summer of 1993, forcing the film to be made in just 36 days with a final budget of ₤2.7 million (appr. $4.4 million in 1994).[3] The budget was so tight that extras had to wear their own wedding clothes, while Rowan Atkinson was retained as the Vicar for two of the weddings so production wouldn't have to pay another actor.[5]

text: Future Home Secretary and MP Amber Rudd was given the credit of "Aristocracy Coordinator" after she arranged for several aristocrats to make uncredited appearances as wedding extras, including the then-Earl of Burlington, Peregrine Cavendish and the Earl of Woolton.[5]

text: To make Grant look more nerdy, the producers styled him with shaggy hair, glasses, and deliberately unflattering, ill-fitting clothes.[11][12] Grant was encouraged by director Mike Newell to mess up and trip over his lines, written in "convoluted syntax" as Grant describes them, in order to give Charles a stammering, nervous quality.[12] Grant, who struggled with hay fever throughout filming, was unsure of Newell's direction and his own performance, which he thought was "atrocious"; on Newell he commented that: "He seemed to be giving direction against what I thought were the natural beats of the comedy. He was making a film with texture, grounding it, playing the truths rather than the gags.”[6]

text: The film was shot mainly in London and the Home Counties, including Hampstead, Islington where the final moments take place on Highbury Terrace, Greenwich Hospital, Betchworth in Surrey, Amersham in Buckinghamshire, St Bartholomew-the-Great (wedding number four) and West Thurrock in Essex.[13] Exterior shots of guests arriving for the funeral were filmed in Thurrock, Essex overlooking the River Thames with the backdrop of the Dartford River Crossing and at stately homes in Bedfordshire (Luton Hoo for wedding two's reception) and Hampshire.[14]

text: According to Hugh Grant, the initial screening of a rough-cut of Four Weddings went very badly.

text: "I thought we'd screwed it up. When we went to watch a rough cut, all of us, me, Richard Curtis, Mike Newell, the producers, all thought this was the worst film that's ever been perpetrated. We're gonna go and emigrate to Peru when it comes out so no one can actually find us. And then they had a, a few cuts later they took it to Santa Monica for a test screening and everyone loved it. And it was a great surprise."[7]

text: Throughout production, Gramercy Pictures, the U.S. distributor for the film, sent frequent transatlantic faxes objecting to the explicit language and sexual content, fearing the final product would not be suitable for American distribution or television airings.[3] They particularly objected to the opening scene of the movie, in which Charles and Scarlett say the word "Fuck" over and over, after an initial screening of the movie in Salt Lake City led members of the conservative Mormon city council to walk out.[5] Accordingly, Mike Newell and the actors agreed to reshoot the scene with the British swear word "Bugger" to be used in the American version.[8] The executives also objected to the title, believing Four Weddings and a Funeral would turn off male viewers from the film. In its place they suggested such titles as True Love and Near Misses, Loitering in Sacred Places, Skulking Around, and Rolling in the Aisles, none of which were accepted.[3]

text: Music[edit]

text: The original score was composed by British composer Richard Rodney Bennett. The movie also featured a soundtrack of popular songs, including a cover version of The Troggs' "Love Is All Around" performed by Wet Wet Wet that remained at number 1 on the UK Singles Chart for fifteen weeks and was then the ninth (now twelfth) biggest selling single of all time in Britain. This song would later be adapted into "Christmas Is All Around" and sung by the character of Billy Mack in Richard Curtis' 2003 film Love Actually, in which Grant also stars.

text: Release[edit]

text: Publicity[edit]

text: The box office receipts from the first five days of the film's general release in North America averaged $27,697 per screen, which so impressed the movie's distributor that it decided to spend lavishly on promotion, buying full-page newspaper ads and tv-spots totaling some $11 million, against a budget that had only amounted to $4.4 million.[3]

text: The movie also benefited from much free publicity because of Grant's reception in the United States, where he became an instant sex symbol and undertook a successful media tour promoting the film. Producer Duncan Kenworthy stated that "It was the most amazing luck that when Hugh went on the publicity trail he turned out to be incredibly funny, and very like the character of Charles. That doesn't ever happen." [3] Hugh Grant's then-girlfriend Elizabeth Hurley also garnered much publicity for the film when she wore a black Versace safety-pin dress to the premiere in Leicester Square which became a sensation in the press.[3]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: The film was very well received with critics, currently holding a 95% "Certified Fresh" approval on reviews aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, with the site's consensus stating, "While frothy to a fault, Four Weddings and a Funeral features irresistibly breezy humor, and winsome performances from Hugh Grant and Andie MacDowell."[15]  Film critic Roger Ebert gave the film three-and-a-half stars out of four, calling it "delightful and sly", and directed with "light-hearted enchantment" by Newell. He praised Grant's performance, describing it as a kind of "endearing awkwardness".[16]

text: Producer Duncan Kenworthy attributes much of the stimulus for Four Weddings' box office success to its first glowing review by Todd McCarthy in Variety, who called it a "truly beguiling romantic comedy" which was "frequently hilarious without being sappily sentimental or tiresomely retrograde."[3][17]

text: The film had its detractors. Writing for the Chicago Reader, Jonathan Rosenbaum called the film "generic" and "standard issue", stating that the audience shouldn't "expect to remember it ten minutes later".[18] Time magazine writer Richard Corliss was less scathing, but agreed that it was forgettable, saying that people would "forget all about [the movie] by the time they leave the multiplex," even joking at the end of his review that he had forgotten the film's name.[19] The character of Carrie was voted one of the most annoying film characters of all time in a British online poll.[20]

text: Box office[edit]

text: The movie made its world premiere in February 1994 at the Sundance Film Festival in Salt Lake City, Utah.[3]

text: The film earned £27.8 million in the United Kingdom.[21] Upon its North American limited release on 11 March 1994, Four Weddings and a Funeral opened with $138,486 in five theatres.[22] But upon its wide release on 15 April 1994, the film topped the box office with $4,162,489.[23] The film would continue to gross $52.7 million in North America with an additional $193 million internationally, earning $245.7 million worldwide.[1]

text: Accolades[edit]

text: Wins[edit]

text:
Best Film
Best Direction (Mike Newell)
Best Actor (Hugh Grant)
Best Supporting Actress (Kristin Scott Thomas)

text: Best Foreign Film

text: Best Comedy Film

text: César Award for Best Foreign Film

text: Most Promising Actor (Hugh Grant)

text:
Best Actress (Kristin Scott Thomas)
Best Screenplay (Richard Curtis)

text: Best Actor in a Musical or Comedy (Hugh Grant)

text:
British Film of the Year
British Director of the Year (Mike Newell)
British Producer of the Year (Duncan Kenworthy)
British Screenwriter of the Year (Richard Curtis)

text: Best Original Screenplay (Richard Curtis)

text: Film – Screenplay (Richard Curtis)

text: Nominations[edit]

text:
Best Picture (lost to Forrest Gump)
Best Original Screenplay – Richard Curtis (lost to Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary for Pulp Fiction)

text:
Best Film Music – Richard Rodney Bennett (lost to Backbeat)
Best Original Screenplay – Richard Curtis (lost to Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary for Pulp Fiction)
Best Supporting Actor – Simon Callow (lost to Samuel L. Jackson for Pulp Fiction)
Best Supporting Actor – John Hannah (lost to Samuel L. Jackson for Pulp Fiction)
Best Supporting Actress – Charlotte Coleman (lost to Kristin Scott Thomas for this film)

text: Outstanding Directoring – Feature Film – Mike Newell (lost to Robert Zemeckis for Forrest Gump)

text:
Best Musical or Comedy (lost to The Lion King)
Best Screenplay – Richard Curtis (lost to Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary for Pulp Fiction)
Best Actress in a Musical or Comedy – Andie MacDowell (lost to Jamie Lee Curtis for True Lies)

text: Recognition[edit]

text: The film was voted the 27th greatest comedy film of all time by readers of Total Film in 2000. In 2004, the same magazine named it the 34th greatest British film of all time. It is number 96 on Bravo's "100 Funniest Movies".

text: The Guardian, in a 20th anniversary retrospective of Four Weddings, stated that "Its influence on the British film industry, on romantic-comedy writing, on the pop charts, on funeral readings, on haircuts, was enormous."[3]

text: Hugh Grant commented of the experience of the film's phenomenal success and its effect on his career in 2016: "I was making An Awfully Big Adventure at the time that Four Weddings came out, with Mike Newell again, same director, even tinier budget, in Dublin. And we'd get back from brutal days on the set, very long and no money, and the fax machines...were coming out saying that now your film Four Weddings is #5 in America, now it's #3, now it's #1 and here's an offer Hugh, for Captain Blood and they'll pay you $1 million. It was completely surreal."[7]

text: Television series[edit]

text: It was reported in November 2017 that writer/director Richard Curtis was developing an anthology television series based upon the film with producers including Mindy Kaling and Matt Warburton for streaming service Hulu.[24]


document_title: Sociobiology

question_text: who is credited with coining the term sociobiology

root

text: Sociobiology

text: Definition[edit]

text: E. O. Wilson defined sociobiology as "the extension of population biology and evolutionary theory to social organization".[1]

tag: p

text: Sociobiology is based on the premise that some behaviors (social and individual) are at least partly inherited and can be affected by natural selection. It begins with the idea that behaviors have evolved over time, similar to the way that physical traits are thought to have evolved. It predicts that animals will act in ways that have proven to be evolutionarily successful over time. This can, among other things, result in the formation of complex social processes conducive to evolutionary fitness.

text: The discipline seeks to explain behavior as a product of natural selection. Behavior is therefore seen as an effort to preserve one's genes in the population. Inherent in sociobiological reasoning is the idea that certain genes or gene combinations that influence particular behavioral traits can be inherited from generation to generation[2]

text: For example, newly dominant male lions often kill cubs in the pride that they did not sire. This behavior is adaptive because killing the cubs eliminates competition for their own offspring and causes the nursing females to come into heat faster, thus allowing more of his genes to enter into the population. Sociobiologists would view this instinctual cub-killing behavior as being inherited through the genes of successfully reproducing male lions, whereas non-killing behavior may have died out as those lions were less successful in reproducing.[3]

text: History[edit]

text: The ethologist John Paul Scott coined the word sociobiology at a 1948 conference on genetics and social behaviour,[4] and it became widely used after it was popularized by Edward O. Wilson in his 1975 book, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. However, the influence of evolution on behavior has been of interest to biologists and philosophers since soon after the discovery of evolution itself. Peter Kropotkin's Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, written in the early 1890s, is a popular example. Antecedents of modern sociobiological thinking can be traced to the 1960s and the work of such biologists as Richard D. Alexander, Robert Trivers and William D. Hamilton. The idea of the inheritance of behaviour arose from J. B. S. Haldane's idea about how "altruistic behaviour" (see Altruism) could be passed from generation to generation.[5] Wilson's book pioneered and popularized the attempt to explain the evolutionary mechanics behind social behaviors such as altruism, aggression, and nurturance, primarily in ants (Wilson's own research specialty) and other Hymenoptera, but also in other animals.[6] The final chapter of the book is devoted to sociobiological explanations of human behavior, and Wilson later wrote a Pulitzer Prize winning book, On Human Nature, that addressed human behavior specifically.[7]

text: Edward H. Hagen writes in The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology that sociobiology is, despite the public controversy regarding the applications to humans, "one of the scientific triumphs of the twentieth century." "Sociobiology is now part of the core research and curriculum of virtually all biology departments, and it is a foundation of the work of almost all field biologists" Sociobiological research on nonhuman organisms has increased dramatically and continuously in the world's top scientific journals such as Nature and Science. The more general term behavioral ecology is commonly substituted for the term sociobiology in order to avoid the public controversy.[8]

text: Theory[edit]

text: Sociobiologists believe that human behavior, as well as nonhuman animal behavior, can be partly explained as the outcome of natural selection. They contend that in order to fully understand behavior, it must be analyzed in terms of evolutionary considerations.

text: Natural selection is fundamental to evolutionary theory. Variants of hereditary traits which increase an organism's ability to survive and reproduce will be more greatly represented in subsequent generations, i.e., they will be "selected for". Thus, inherited behavioral mechanisms that allowed an organism a greater chance of surviving and/or reproducing in the past are more likely to survive in present organisms. That inherited adaptive behaviors are present in nonhuman animal species has been multiply demonstrated by biologists, and it has become a foundation of evolutionary biology. However, there is continued resistance by some researchers over the application of evolutionary models to humans, particularly from within the social sciences, where culture has long been assumed to be the predominant driver of behavior.

text: Sociobiology is based upon two fundamental premises:

text:
Certain behavioral traits are inherited,
Inherited behavioral traits have been honed by natural selection. Therefore, these traits were probably "adaptive" in the environment in which the species evolved.

tag: ul

text: Sociobiology uses Nikolaas Tinbergen's four categories of questions and explanations of animal behavior. Two categories are at the species level; two, at the individual level. The species-level categories (often called "ultimate explanations") are

text:
the function (i.e., adaptation) that a behavior serves and
the evolutionary process (i.e., phylogeny) that resulted in this functionality.

text: The individual-level categories (often called "proximate explanations") are

text:
the development of the individual (i.e., ontogeny) and
the proximate mechanism (e.g., brain anatomy and hormones).

text: Sociobiologists are interested in how behavior can be explained logically as a result of selective pressures in the history of a species. Thus, they are often interested in instinctive, or intuitive behavior, and in explaining the similarities, rather than the differences, between cultures. For example, mothers within many species of mammals – including humans – are very protective of their offspring. Sociobiologists reason that this protective behavior likely evolved over time because it helped the offspring of the individuals which had the characteristic to survive. This parental protection would increase in frequency in the population. The social behavior is believed to have evolved in a fashion similar to other types of nonbehavioral adaptations, such as a coat of fur, or the sense of smell.

text: Individual genetic advantage fails to explain certain social behaviors as a result of gene-centred selection. E.O. Wilson argued that evolution may also act upon groups.[9] The mechanisms responsible for group selection employ paradigms and population statistics borrowed from evolutionary game theory. Altruism is defined as "a concern for the welfare of others". If altruism is genetically determined, then altruistic individuals must reproduce their own altruistic genetic traits for altruism to survive, but when altruists lavish their resources on non-altruists at the expense of their own kind, the altruists tend to die out and the others tend to increase. An extreme example is a soldier losing his life trying to help a fellow soldier. This example raises the question of how altruistic genes can be passed on if this soldier dies without having any children.[10]

text: Within sociobiology, a social behavior is first explained as a sociobiological hypothesis by finding an evolutionarily stable strategy that matches the observed behavior. Stability of a strategy can be difficult to prove, but usually, it will predict gene frequencies. The hypothesis can be supported by establishing a correlation between the gene frequencies predicted by the strategy, and those expressed in a population.

text: Altruism between social insects and littermates has been explained in such a way. Altruistic behavior, behavior that increases the reproductive fitness of others at the apparent expense of the altruist,[11] in some animals has been correlated to the degree of genome shared between altruistic individuals. A quantitative description of infanticide by male harem-mating animals when the alpha male is displaced as well as rodent female infanticide and fetal resorption are active areas of study. In general, females with more bearing opportunities may value offspring less, and may also arrange bearing opportunities to maximize the food and protection from mates.

text: An important concept in sociobiology is that temperament traits exist in an ecological balance. Just as an expansion of a sheep population might encourage the expansion of a wolf population, an expansion of altruistic traits within a gene pool may also encourage increasing numbers of individuals with dependent traits.

text: Studies of human behavior genetics have generally found behavioral traits such as creativity, extroversion, aggressiveness, and IQ have high heritability. The researchers who carry out those studies are careful to point out that heritability does not constrain the influence that environmental or cultural factors may have on those traits.[12][13]

text: Criminality is actively under study, but extremely controversial. There are arguments that in some environments criminal behavior might be adaptive.[14] The novelist Elias Canetti also has noted applications of sociobiological theory to cultural practices such as slavery and autocracy.[15]

text: Support for premise[edit]

text: Genetic mouse mutants illustrate the power that genes exert on behaviour. For example, the transcription factor FEV (aka Pet1), through its role in maintaining the serotonergic system in the brain, is required for normal aggressive and anxiety-like behavior.[16] Thus, when FEV is genetically deleted from the mouse genome, male mice will instantly attack other males, whereas their wild-type counterparts take significantly longer to initiate violent behaviour. In addition, FEV has been shown to be required for correct maternal behaviour in mice, such that offspring of mothers without the FEV factor do not survive unless cross-fostered to other wild-type female mice.[17]

text: A genetic basis for instinctive behavioural traits among non-human species, such as in the above example, is commonly accepted among many biologists; however, attempting to use a genetic basis to explain complex behaviours in human societies has remained extremely controversial.[18][19]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Steven Pinker argues that critics have been overly swayed by politics and a fear of biological determinism,[a] accusing among others Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin of being "radical scientists", whose stance on human nature is influenced by politics rather than science,[21] while Lewontin, Steven Rose and Leon Kamin who drew a distinction between the politics and history of an idea and its scientific validity[22] argue that sociobiology fails on scientific grounds. Gould grouped sociobiology with eugenics, criticizing both in his book The Mismeasure of Man.[23]

text: Noam Chomsky has expressed views on sociobiology on several occasions. During a 1976 meeting of the Sociobiology Study Group, as reported by Ullica Segerstråle, Chomsky argued for the importance of a sociobiologically informed notion of human nature.[24] Chomsky argued that human beings are biological organisms and ought to be studied as such, with his criticism of the "blank slate" doctrine in the social sciences (which would inspire a great deal of Steven Pinker's and others' work in evolutionary psychology), in his 1975 Reflections on Language.[25] Chomsky further hinted at the possible reconciliation of his anarchist political views and sociobiology in a discussion of Peter Kropotkin's Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, which focused more on altruism than aggression, suggesting that anarchist societies were feasible because of an innate human tendency to cooperate.[26]

text: Wilson has claimed that he had never meant to imply what ought to be, only what is the case. However, some critics have argued that the language of sociobiology readily slips from "is" to "ought",[22] an instance of the naturalistic fallacy. Pinker has argued that opposition to stances considered anti-social, such as ethnic nepotism, is based on moral assumptions, meaning that such opposition is not falsifiable by scientific advances.[27] The history of this debate, and others related to it, are covered in detail by Cronin (1993), Segerstråle (2000), and Alcock (2001).


document_title: Electron shell

question_text: the maximum number of electrons that can be held in the k and l energy levels are

text: Electron shell

text: History

text: The shell terminology comes from Arnold Sommerfeld's modification of the Bohr model. Sommerfeld retained Bohr's planetary model, but added mildly elliptical orbits (characterized by additional quantum numbers ℓ and m) to explain the fine spectroscopic structure of some elements.[3] The multiple electrons with the same principal quantum number (n) had close orbits that formed a "shell" of positive thickness instead of the infinitely thin circular orbit of Bohr's model.

text: The existence of electron shells was first observed experimentally in Charles Barkla's and Henry Moseley's X-ray absorption studies. Barkla labeled them with the letters K, L, M, N, O, P, and Q.[4] The origin of this terminology was alphabetic. A "J" series was also suspected, though later experiments indicated that the K absorption lines are produced by the innermost electrons. These letters were later found to correspond to the n values 1, 2, 3, etc. They are used in the spectroscopic Siegbahn notation.

text: The physical chemist Gilbert Lewis was responsible for much of the early development of the theory of the participation of valence shell electrons in chemical bonding. Linus Pauling later generalized and extended the theory while applying insights from quantum mechanics.

text: Shells

text: The electron shells are labeled K, L, M, N, O, P, and Q; or 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7; going from innermost shell outwards. Electrons in outer shells have higher average energy and travel farther from the nucleus than those in inner shells. This makes them more important in determining how the atom reacts chemically and behaves as a conductor, because the pull of the atom's nucleus upon them is weaker and more easily broken. In this way, a given element's reactivity is highly dependent upon its electronic configuration.

text: Subshells

text: Each shell is composed of one or more subshells, which are themselves composed of atomic orbitals. For example, the first (K) shell has one subshell, called 1s; the second (L) shell has two subshells, called 2s and 2p; the third shell has 3s, 3p, and 3d; the fourth shell has 4s, 4p, 4d and 4f; the fifth shell has 5s, 5p, 5d, and 5f and can theoretically hold more but the 5f subshell, although partially occupied in actinides, is not filled in any element occurring naturally.[2] The various possible subshells are shown in the following table:

text:
Subshell label
ℓ
Max electrons
Shells containing it
Historical name

s
0
2
Every shell
 sharp

p
1
6
2nd shell and higher
 principal

d
2
10
3rd shell and higher
 diffuse

f
3
14
4th shell and higher
 fundamental

g
4
18
5th shell and higher (theoretically)
(next in alphabet after f)[5]

tag: table

text:
The first column is the "subshell label", a lowercase-letter label for the type of subshell. For example, the "4s subshell" is a subshell of the fourth (N) shell, with the type (s) described in the first row.
The second column is the azimuthal quantum number (ℓ) of the subshell. The precise definition involves quantum mechanics, but it is a number that characterizes the subshell.
The third column is the maximum number of electrons that can be put into a subshell of that type. For example, the top row says that each s-type subshell (1s, 2s, etc.) can have at most two electrons in it. In each case the figure is 4 greater than the one above it.
The fourth column says which shells have a subshell of that type. For example, looking at the top two rows, every shell has an s subshell, while only the second shell and higher have a p subshell (i.e., there is no "1p" subshell).
The final column gives the historical origin of the labels s, p, d, and f. They come from early studies of atomic spectral lines. The other labels, namely g, h and i, are an alphabetic continuation following the last historically originated label of f.

text: Although it is commonly stated that all the electrons in a shell have the same energy, this is an approximation. However, the electrons in one subshell do have exactly the same level of energy,[6] with later subshells having more energy per electron than earlier ones. This effect is great enough that the energy ranges associated with shells can overlap (see valence shells and Aufbau principle).

text: Number of electrons in each shell

text:
Shell
name
Subshell
name
Subshell
max
electrons
Shell
max
electrons

K
1s
2
2

L
2s
2
2 + 6 = 8

2p
6

M
3s
2
2 + 6 + 10
= 18

3p
6

3d
10

N
4s
2
2 + 6 +
10 + 14
= 32

4p
6

4d
10

4f
14

O
5s
2
2 + 6 +
10 + 14 +
18 = 50

5p
6

5d
10

5f
14

5g
18

text: Each subshell is constrained to hold 4ℓ + 2 electrons at most, namely:

text:
Each s subshell holds at most 2 electrons
Each p subshell holds at most 6 electrons
Each d subshell holds at most 10 electrons
Each f subshell holds at most 14 electrons
Each g subshell holds at most 18 electrons

text: Therefore, the K shell, which contains only an s subshell, can hold up to 2 electrons; the L shell, which contains an s and a p, can hold up to 2 + 6 = 8 electrons, and so forth; in general, the nth shell can hold up to 2n2 electrons.[1]

text: Although that formula gives the maximum in principle, in fact that maximum is only achieved (by known elements) for the first four shells (K, L, M, N). No known element has more than 32 electrons in any one shell.[7][8] This is because the subshells are filled according to the Aufbau principle. The first elements to have more than 32 electrons in one shell would belong to the g-block of period 8 of the periodic table. These elements would have some electrons in their 5g subshell and thus have more than 32 electrons in the O shell (fifth principal shell).

text: Valence shell

text: The valence shell is the outermost shell of an atom. Valence electrons in non-transition metal elements reside in this shell. Such elements with complete valence shells (noble gases) are the most chemically non-reactive, while those with only one electron in their valence shells (alkali metals) or just missing one electron from having a complete shell (halogens) are the most reactive.[9]

text: However, this terminology is somewhat misleading in the case of transition metals. In these elements, a valence electron can also be in an inner shell. Thus, the electrons that determine how an atom reacts chemically are those that travel farthest from the nucleus, that is, those with the highest energy, and not necessarily in the valence shell.

text: List of elements with electrons per shell

text: The list below gives the elements arranged by increasing atomic number and shows the number of electrons per shell. At a glance, one can see that subsets of the list show obvious patterns. In particular, the seven elements (in   electric blue) before a noble gas (group 18, in   yellow) higher than helium have the number of electrons in the valence shell in arithmetic progression. (However, this pattern may break down in the seventh period due to relativistic effects.)

text: Sorting the table by chemical group shows additional patterns, especially with respect to the last two outermost shells. (Elements 57 to 71 belong to the lanthanides, while 89 to 103 are the actinides.)

text: The list below is primarily consistent with the Aufbau principle. However, there are a number of exceptions to the rule; for example palladium (atomic number 46) has no electrons in the fifth shell, unlike other atoms with lower atomic number. Some entries in the table are uncertain, when experimental data is unavailable. (For example, the elements past 108 have such short half-lives that their electron configurations have not yet been measured.)

text:
Z
Element
No. of electrons/shell
Group

1
Hydrogen
1
1

2
Helium
2
18

3
Lithium
2, 1
1

4
Beryllium
2, 2
2

5
Boron
2, 3
13

6
Carbon
2, 4
14

7
Nitrogen
2, 5
15

8
Oxygen
2, 6
16

9
Fluorine
2, 7
17

10
Neon
2, 8
18

11
Sodium
2, 8, 1
1

12
Magnesium
2, 8, 2
2

13
Aluminium
2, 8, 3
13

14
Silicon
2, 8, 4
14

15
Phosphorus
2, 8, 5
15

16
Sulfur
2, 8, 6
16

17
Chlorine
2, 8, 7
17

18
Argon
2, 8, 8
18

19
Potassium
2, 8, 8, 1
1

20
Calcium
2, 8, 8, 2
2

21
Scandium
2, 8, 9, 2
3

22
Titanium
2, 8, 10, 2
4

23
Vanadium
2, 8, 11, 2
5

24
Chromium
2, 8, 13, 1
6

25
Manganese
2, 8, 13, 2
7

26
Iron
2, 8, 14, 2
8

27
Cobalt
2, 8, 15, 2
9

28
Nickel
2, 8, 16, 2
10

29
Copper
2, 8, 18, 1
11

30
Zinc
2, 8, 18, 2
12

31
Gallium
2, 8, 18, 3
13

32
Germanium
2, 8, 18, 4
14

33
Arsenic
2, 8, 18, 5
15

34
Selenium
2, 8, 18, 6
16

35
Bromine
2, 8, 18, 7
17

36
Krypton
2, 8, 18, 8
18

37
Rubidium
2, 8, 18, 8, 1
1

38
Strontium
2, 8, 18, 8, 2
2

39
Yttrium
2, 8, 18, 9, 2
3

40
Zirconium
2, 8, 18, 10, 2
4

41
Niobium
2, 8, 18, 12, 1
5

42
Molybdenum
2, 8, 18, 13, 1
6

43
Technetium
2, 8, 18, 13, 2
7

44
Ruthenium
2, 8, 18, 15, 1
8

45
Rhodium
2, 8, 18, 16, 1
9

46
Palladium
2, 8, 18, 18
10

47
Silver
2, 8, 18, 18, 1
11

48
Cadmium
2, 8, 18, 18, 2
12

49
Indium
2, 8, 18, 18, 3
13

50
Tin
2, 8, 18, 18, 4
14

51
Antimony
2, 8, 18, 18, 5
15

52
Tellurium
2, 8, 18, 18, 6
16

53
Iodine
2, 8, 18, 18, 7
17

54
Xenon
2, 8, 18, 18, 8
18

55
Caesium
2, 8, 18, 18, 8, 1
1

56
Barium
2, 8, 18, 18, 8, 2
2

57
Lanthanum
2, 8, 18, 18, 9, 2
3

58
Cerium
2, 8, 18, 19, 9, 2

59
Praseodymium
2, 8, 18, 21, 8, 2

60
Neodymium
2, 8, 18, 22, 8, 2

61
Promethium
2, 8, 18, 23, 8, 2

62
Samarium
2, 8, 18, 24, 8, 2

63
Europium
2, 8, 18, 25, 8, 2

64
Gadolinium
2, 8, 18, 25, 9, 2

65
Terbium
2, 8, 18, 27, 8, 2

66
Dysprosium
2, 8, 18, 28, 8, 2

67
Holmium
2, 8, 18, 29, 8, 2

68
Erbium
2, 8, 18, 30, 8, 2

69
Thulium
2, 8, 18, 31, 8, 2

70
Ytterbium
2, 8, 18, 32, 8, 2

71
Lutetium
2, 8, 18, 32, 9, 2

72
Hafnium
2, 8, 18, 32, 10, 2
4

73
Tantalum
2, 8, 18, 32, 11, 2
5

74
Tungsten
2, 8, 18, 32, 12, 2
6

75
Rhenium
2, 8, 18, 32, 13, 2
7

76
Osmium
2, 8, 18, 32, 14, 2
8

77
Iridium
2, 8, 18, 32, 15, 2
9

78
Platinum
2, 8, 18, 32, 17, 1
10

79
Gold
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 1
11

80
Mercury
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 2
12

81
Thallium
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 3
13

82
Lead
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 4
14

83
Bismuth
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 5
15

84
Polonium
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 6
16

85
Astatine
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 7
17

86
Radon
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 8
18

87
Francium
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 8, 1
1

88
Radium
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 8, 2
2

89
Actinium
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 9, 2
3

90
Thorium
2, 8, 18, 32, 18, 10, 2

91
Protactinium
2, 8, 18, 32, 20, 9, 2

92
Uranium
2, 8, 18, 32, 21, 9, 2

93
Neptunium
2, 8, 18, 32, 22, 9, 2

94
Plutonium
2, 8, 18, 32, 24, 8, 2

95
Americium
2, 8, 18, 32, 25, 8, 2

96
Curium
2, 8, 18, 32, 25, 9, 2

97
Berkelium
2, 8, 18, 32, 27, 8, 2

98
Californium
2, 8, 18, 32, 28, 8, 2

99
Einsteinium
2, 8, 18, 32, 29, 8, 2

100
Fermium
2, 8, 18, 32, 30, 8, 2

101
Mendelevium
2, 8, 18, 32, 31, 8, 2

102
Nobelium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 8, 2

103
Lawrencium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 8, 3

104
Rutherfordium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 10, 2
4

105
Dubnium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 11, 2
5

106
Seaborgium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 12, 2
6

107
Bohrium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 13, 2
7

108
Hassium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 14, 2
8

109
Meitnerium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 15, 2 (?)
9

110
Darmstadtium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 16, 2 (?)
10

111
Roentgenium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 17, 2 (?)
11

112
Copernicium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 2 (?)
12

113
Nihonium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 3 (?)
13

114
Flerovium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 4 (?)
14

115
Moscovium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 5 (?)
15

116
Livermorium
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 6 (?)
16

117
Tennessine
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 7 (?)
17

118
Oganesson
2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 18, 8 (?)
18


document_title: List of FIFA World Cup finals

question_text: who won the world cup in the last 4 years

text: List of FIFA World Cup finals

text: List of finals[edit]

text:
Key to the list of finals

Match was won during extra time

Match was won on a penalty shoot-out

text: The "Year" column refers to the year the World Cup was held, and wikilinks to the article about that tournament. The wikilinks in the "Final score" column point to the article about that tournament's final game. Links in the "Winners" and "Runners-up" columns point to the articles for the national football teams of the countries, not the articles for the countries.

text:
List of finals matches, their venues and locations, the finalists, and final scores

Year

Winners

Final score[2]

Runners-up

Venue

Location

Attendance

References

1930

Uruguay

4–2

 Argentina

Estadio Centenario

Montevideo, Uruguay

80,000

[7][8]

1934

Italy

  2–1[n 3]

 Czechoslovakia

Stadio Nazionale PNF

Rome, Italy

50,000

[9][10]

1938

Italy

4–2

 Hungary

Stade Olympique de Colombes

Paris, France

45,000

[11][12]

1950[n 4]

Uruguay

2–1[n 5]

 Brazil

Estádio do Maracanã

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

199,854[13]

[14][15]

1954

West Germany

3–2

 Hungary

Wankdorf Stadium

Bern, Switzerland

60,000

[16][17]

1958

Brazil

5–2

 Sweden

Råsunda Stadium

Solna, Sweden

51,800

[18][19]

1962

Brazil

3–1

 Czechoslovakia

Estadio Nacional

Santiago, Chile

69,000

[20][21]

1966

England

  4–2[n 6]

 West Germany

Wembley Stadium

London, England

93,000

[22][23]

1970

Brazil

4–1

 Italy

Estadio Azteca

Mexico City, Mexico

107,412

[24][25]

1974

West Germany

2–1

 Netherlands

Olympiastadion

Munich, West Germany

75,200

[26][27]

1978

Argentina

  3–1[n 7]

 Netherlands

Estadio Monumental

Buenos Aires, Argentina

71,483

[28][29]

1982

Italy

3–1

 West Germany

Santiago Bernabéu

Madrid, Spain

90,000

[30][31]

1986

Argentina

3–2

 West Germany

Estadio Azteca

Mexico City, Mexico

114,600

[32][33]

1990

West Germany

1–0

 Argentina

Stadio Olimpico

Rome, Italy

73,603

[34][35]

1994

Brazil

  0–0[n 8]

 Italy

Rose Bowl

Pasadena, United States

94,194

[36][37]

1998

France

3–0

 Brazil

Stade de France

Saint-Denis, France

80,000

[38][39]

2002

Brazil

2–0

 Germany

International Stadium

Yokohama, Japan

69,029

[40][41]

2006

Italy

  1–1[n 9]

 France

Olympiastadion

Berlin, Germany

69,000

[42][43]

2010

Spain

  1–0[n 10]

 Netherlands

Soccer City

Johannesburg, South Africa

84,490

[44][45]

2014

Germany

  1–0[n 11]

 Argentina

Estádio do Maracanã

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

74,738

[46][47]

2018

France

4–2

 Croatia

Luzhniki Stadium

Moscow, Russia

78,011

Upcoming finals

Year

Team 1

v

Team 2

Venue

Location

Attendance

References

2022

Lusail Iconic Stadium

Lusail, Qatar

2026

TBD

United States

text: Results[edit]

text:
Results by nation

National team

Wins

Runners-up

Total finals

Years won

Years runners-up

 Brazil

5

2

7

1958, 1962, 1970, 1994, 2002

1950, 1998

 Germany

4

4

8

1954, 1974, 1990, 2014

1966, 1982, 1986, 2002

 Italy

4

2

6

1934, 1938, 1982, 2006

1970, 1994

 Argentina

2

3

5

1978, 1986

1930, 1990, 2014

 France

2

1

3

1998, 2018

2006

 Uruguay

2

0

2

1930, 1950

–

 England

1

0

1

1966

–

 Spain

1

0

1

2010

–

 Netherlands

0

3

3

–

1974, 1978, 2010

 Czechoslovakia

0

2

2

–

1934, 1962

 Hungary

0

2

2

–

1938, 1954

 Sweden

0

1

1

–

1958

 Croatia

0

1

1

–

2018

text:
Results by confederation

Confederation

Appearances

Winners

Runners-up

UEFA

28

12

16

CONMEBOL

14

9

5

text: Footnotes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ This follows FIFA's consideration that the national teams of West Germany/Germany, Czechoslovakia/Czech Republic, Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro/Serbia, and USSR/Russia are combined respectively for record-keeping.[3]

Jump up ^ Technically the 1958 final was also between two first timers, but Brazil's 1950 group game defeat is generally counted as a previous "final" appearance for the team.

Jump up ^ Score was 1–1 after 90 minutes.[9][10]

Jump up ^ The 1950 FIFA World Cup did not have a final, rather, the tournament was decided by a 4-team round robin phase.

Jump up ^ Not the final but the decisive match of the final group stage.

Jump up ^ Score was 2–2 after 90 minutes.[22][23]

Jump up ^ Score was 1–1 after 90 minutes.[28][29]

Jump up ^ Score was 0–0 after 120 minutes. Brazil won 3–2 on penalties.[36][37]

Jump up ^ Score was 1–1 after 120 minutes. Italy won 5–3 on penalties.[42][43]

Jump up ^ Score was 0–0 after 90 minutes.[44][45]

Jump up ^ Score was 0–0 after 90 minutes.[46][47]

tag: ol


document_title: Second-wave feminism

question_text: who is credited with starting the second wave of the women's rights movement in the united states

question_tokens: who is credited with starting the second wave of the women 's rights movement in the united states

text: Second-wave feminism

text: Overview in the United States[edit]

text: The second wave of feminism in America came as a delayed reaction against the renewed domesticity of women after World War II: the late 1940s post-war boom, which was an era characterized by an unprecedented economic growth, a baby boom, a move to family-oriented suburbs, and the ideal of companionate marriages. This life was clearly illustrated by the media of the time; for example television shows such as Father Knows Best and Leave It to Beaver idealized domesticity.[4]

text: Some important events laid the groundwork for the second wave. French writer Simone de Beauvoir had in the 1940s examined the notion of women being perceived as "other" in the patriarchal society. She went on to conclude in her 1949 treatise The Second Sex that male-centered ideology was being accepted as a norm and enforced by the ongoing development of myths, and that the fact that women are capable of getting pregnant, lactating, and menstruating is in no way a valid cause or explanation to place them as the "second sex".[5] This book was translated from French to English (with some of its text excised) and published in America in 1953.[6]

text: In 1960 the Food and Drug Administration approved the combined oral contraceptive pill, which was made available in 1961.[7] This made it easier for women to have careers without having to leave due to unexpectedly becoming pregnant.

text:
External video

 Prospects of Mankind with Eleanor Roosevelt; What Status For Women?, 59:07, 1962.
Eleanor Roosevelt, chair of the Presidential Commission on the Status of Women, interviews President John F. Kennedy, Secretary of Labor Arthur Goldberg and others, Open Vault from WGBH[8]

text: The administration of President Kennedy made women's rights a key issue of the New Frontier, and named women (such as Esther Peterson) to many high-ranking posts in his administration.[9] Kennedy also established a Presidential Commission on the Status of Women, chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt and comprising cabinet officials (including Peterson and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy), senators, representatives, businesspeople, psychologists, sociologists, professors, activists, and public servants.[10] There were other actions by women in wider society, presaging their wider engagement in politics which would come with the second wave. In 1961, 50,000 women in 60 cities, mobilized by Women Strike for Peace, protested above ground testing of nuclear bombs and tainted milk.[11][12]

text: In 1963 Betty Friedan, influenced by The Second Sex, wrote the bestselling book The Feminine Mystique. Discussing primarily white women, she explicitly objected to how women were depicted in the mainstream media, and how placing them at home limited their possibilities and wasted potential. She had helped conduct a very important survey using her old classmates from Smith College. This survey revealed that the women who played a role at home and the work force were more satisfied with their life compared to the women who stayed home. The women who stayed home showed feelings of agitation and sadness. She concluded that many of these unhappy women had emerged themselves in the idea that they should not have any ambitions outside their home.[13] Friedan described this as "The Problem That Has No Name".[14] The perfect nuclear family image depicted and strongly marketed at the time, she wrote, did not reflect happiness and was rather degrading for women.[15] This book is widely credited with having begun second-wave feminism in the United States.[16]

text: Though it is widely accepted that the movement lasted from the 1960s into the early 1980s, the exact years of the movement are more difficult to pinpoint and are often disputed. The movement is usually believed to have begun in 1963, when "Mother of the Movement" Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique, and President John F. Kennedy's Presidential Commission on the Status of Women released its report on gender inequality. The report revealed, that there was gender inequality, but also recommended changing it by giving paid maternity leave, greater access to education, and help with child care,[13] along with Friedan's book, which spoke to the discontent of many women (especially housewives), led to the formation of many local, state, and federal government women's groups as well as many independent feminist organizations. Friedan was referencing a "movement" as early as 1964.[17]

text: The movement grew with legal victories such as the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Griswold v. Connecticut Supreme Court ruling of 1965. In 1966 Friedan joined other women and men to found the National Organization for Women (NOW); Friedan would be named as the organization's first president.[18]

text: Despite the early successes NOW achieved under Friedan's leadership, her decision to pressure the Equal Employment Opportunity to use Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to enforce more job opportunities among American women met with fierce opposition within the organization.[18] Siding with arguments among several of the group's African-American members,[18] many of NOW's leaders were convinced that the vast number of male African-Americans who lived below the poverty line were in need of more job opportunities than women within the middle and upper class.[19] Friedan stepped down as president in 1969.[20]

text: In 1963, freelance journalist Gloria Steinem gained widespread popularity among feminists after a diary she authored while working undercover as a Playboy Bunny waitress at the Playboy Club was published as a two-part feature in the May and June issues of Show.[21] In her diary, Steinem alleged the club was mistreating its waitresses in order to gain male customers and exploited the Playboy Bunnies as symbols of male chauvinism, noting that the club's manual instructed the Bunnies that "there are many pleasing ways they can employ to stimulate the club's liquor volume".[21] By 1968, Steinem had become arguably the most influential figure in the movement and support for legalized abortion and federally funded day-cares had become the two leading objectives for feminists.[22]

text: Amongst the most significant legal victories of the movement after the formation of NOW were a 1967 Executive Order extending full affirmative action rights to women, a 1968 EEOC decision ruling illegal sex-segregated help wanted ads, Title IX and the Women's Educational Equity Act (1972 and 1974, respectively, educational equality), Title X (1970, health and family planning), the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (1974), the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, the outlawing of marital rape (although not outlawed in all states until 1993[23]), and the legalization of no-fault divorce (although not legalized in all states until 2010[24]), a 1975 law requiring the U.S. Military Academies to admit women, and many Supreme Court cases such as Reed v. Reed of 1971 and Roe v. Wade of 1973. However, the changing of social attitudes towards women is usually considered the greatest success of the women's movement. In January 2013, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced that the longtime ban on women serving in US military combat roles had been lifted.[25] The US Department of Defense plans to integrate women into all combat positions by 2016.[25]

text: Second-wave feminism also affected other movements, such as the civil rights movement and the student's rights movement, as women sought equality within them. In 1965 Casey Hayden and Mary King published "Sex and Caste: A Kind of Memo"[26] detailing women's inequality within the civil rights organization SNCC.[27]

text: In June 1967 Jo Freeman attended a "free school" course on women at the University of Chicago led by Heather Booth[28] and Naomi Weisstein. She invited them to organize a woman's workshop at the then-forthcoming National Conference of New Politics (NCNP), to be held over Labor Day weekend 1967 in Chicago. At that conference a woman's caucus was formed, and it (led by Freeman and Shulamith Firestone) tried to present its own demands to the plenary session.[29] However, the women were told their resolution was not important enough for a floor discussion, and when through threatening to tie up the convention with procedural motions they succeeded in having their statement tacked to the end of the agenda, it was never discussed.[30] When the National Conference for New Politics Director Willam F. Pepper refused to recognize any of the women waiting to speak and instead called on someone to speak about the American Indian, five women, including Firestone, rushed the podium to demand to know why.[30] But Willam F. Pepper patted Firestone on the head and said, "Move on little girl; we have more important issues to talk about here than women's liberation", or possibly, "Cool down, little girl. We have more important things to talk about than women's problems."[29][30] Freeman and Firestone called a meeting of the women who had been at the "free school" course and the women's workshop at the conference; this became the first Chicago women's liberation group. It was known as the Westside group because it met weekly in Freeman's apartment on Chicago's west side. After a few months Freeman started a newsletter which she called Voice of the women's liberation movement. It circulated all over the country (and in a few foreign countries), giving the new movement of women's liberation its name. Many of the women in the Westside group went on to start other feminist organizations, including the Chicago Women's Liberation Union.

text: In 1968, an SDS organizer at the University of Washington told a meeting about white college men working with poor white men, and "[h]e noted that sometimes after analyzing societal ills, the men shared leisure time by 'balling a chick together.' He pointed out that such activities did much to enhance the political consciousness of poor white youth. A woman in the audience asked, 'And what did it do for the consciousness of the chick?'" (Hole, Judith, and Ellen Levine, Rebirth of Feminism, 1971, pg. 120).[30] After the meeting, a handful of women formed Seattle's first women's liberation group.[30]

text: The second wave of the feminist movement also marks the emergence of women's studies as a legitimate field of study. In 1970 San Diego State University was the first university in the United States to offer a selection of women's studies courses.[31]

text: The 1977 National Women's Conference in Houston, Texas presented an opportunity for women's liberation groups to address a multitude of women's issues. At the conference, delegates from around the country gathered to create a National Plan of Action,[32] which offered 26 planks on matters such as women's health, women's employment, and child care.[33]

text: By the early 1980s, it was largely perceived that women had met their goals and succeeded in changing social attitudes towards gender roles, repealing oppressive laws that were based on sex, integrating the "boys' clubs" such as military academies, the United States armed forces, NASA, single-sex colleges, men's clubs, and the Supreme Court, and illegalizing gender discrimination. However, in 1982 adding the Equal Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution failed, having been ratified by only 35 states, leaving it three states short of ratification.

text: Second-wave feminism was largely successful, with the failure of the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment and Nixon's veto of the Comprehensive Child Development Bill of 1972 (which would have provided a multibillion-dollar national day care system) the only major legislative defeats. Efforts to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment have continued. Ten states have adopted constitutions or constitutional amendments providing that equal rights under the law shall not be denied because of sex, and most of these provisions mirror the broad language of the Equal Rights Amendment. Furthermore, many women's groups are still active and are major political forces. As of 2011[update], more women earn bachelor's degrees than men,[34] half of the Ivy League presidents are women, the numbers of women in government and traditionally male-dominated fields have dramatically increased, and in 2009 the percentage of women in the American workforce temporarily surpassed that of men.[35] The salary of the average American woman has also increased over time, although as of 2008 it is only 77% of the average man's salary, a phenomenon often referred to as the gender pay gap.[36] Whether this is due to discrimination is very hotly disputed, however economists and sociologists have provided evidence to that effect.[37][38][39]

text: Second-wave feminism ended in the early 1980s with the feminist sex wars and was succeeded by third-wave feminism in the early 1990s.

text: Overview outside the United States[edit]

text: In 1967, at the International Alliance of Women Congress held in London, delegates were made aware of an initiative by the UN Commission on the Status of Women to study and evaluate the situation of women in their countries. Many organizations and NGOs like the Association of Business and Professional Women, Soroptimists Clubs, as well as teaching and nursing associations developed committees in response to the initiative to prepare evaluations on the conditions of women and urge their governments to establish National Commissions on the Status of Women.[40]

text: In 1967 "The Discontent of Women", by Joke Kool-Smits, was published;[41] the publication of this essay is often regarded as the start of second-wave feminism in the Netherlands.[42] In this essay, Smit describes the frustration of married women, saying they are fed up being solely mothers and housewives.

text: In Turkey[43] and Israel,[44] second-wave feminism began in the 1980s.

text: Businesses[edit]

text: Feminist activists have established a range of feminist businesses, including women's bookstores, feminist credit unions, feminist presses, feminist mail-order catalogs, feminist restaurants, and feminist record labels. These businesses flourished as part of the second and third waves of feminism in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.[45][46]

text: Music and popular culture[edit]

text: Second-wave feminists viewed popular culture as sexist, and created pop culture of their own to counteract this. "One project of second wave feminism was to create 'positive' images of women, to act as a counterweight to the dominant images circulating in popular culture and to raise women's consciousness of their oppressions."[47]

text: "I Am Woman"[edit]

text: Australian artist Helen Reddy's song "I Am Woman" played a large role in popular culture and became a feminist anthem; Reddy came to be known as a "feminist poster girl" or a "feminist icon".[47] Reddy told interviewers that the song was a "song of pride about being a woman".[48] The song was released in 1972. A few weeks after "I Am Woman" entered the charts, radio stations refused to play it. Some music critics and radio stations believed the song represented "all that is silly in the Women's Lib Movement".[49] Helen Reddy then began performing the song on numerous television variety shows. As the song gained popularity, women began calling radio stations and requesting to hear "I Am Woman" played. The song re-entered the charts and reached number one in December 1972.[50][47][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58] "I Am Woman" also became a protest song that women sang at feminist rallies and protests.[59]

text: Olivia Records[edit]

text: In 1973, a group of five feminists created the first women's owned-and-operated record label, called Olivia Records.[60] They created the record label because they were frustrated that major labels were slow to add female artists to their rosters. One of Olivia's founders, Judy Dlugacz, said that, "It was a chance to create opportunities for women artists within an industry which at that time had few".[61] Initially, they had a budget of $4,000, and relied on donations to keep Olivia Records alive. With these donations, Olivia Records created their first LP, an album of feminist songs entitled I Know You Know.[62] The record label originally relied on volunteers and feminist bookstores to distribute their records, but after a few years their records began to be sold in mainstream record stores.[61]

text: Olivia Records was so successful that the company relocated from Washington D.C. to Los Angeles in 1975.[62] Olivia Records released several records and albums, and their popularity grew.[60] As their popularity grew, an alternative, specialized music industry grew around it. This type of music was initially referred to as "lesbian music" but came to be known as "women's music".[60] However, although Olivia Records was initially meant for women, in the 1980s it tried to move away from that stereotype and encouraged men to listen to their music as well.[61]

text: Women's music[edit]

text: Women's music consisted of female musicians combined music with politics to express feminist ideals.[63] Cities throughout the United States began to hold Women's Music Festivals, all consisting of female artists singing their own songs about personal experiences.[64] The first Women's Music Festival was held in 1974 at the University of Illinois.[64] In 1979, the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival attracted 10,000 women from across America.[64] These festivals encouraged already-famous female singers, such as Laura Nyro and Ellen McIllwaine, to begin writing and producing their own songs instead of going through a major record label.[64] Many women began performing hard rock music, a traditionally male-dominated genre. One of the most successful examples included the sisters Ann and Nancy Wilson, who formed the famous hard rock band Heart.[13]

text: Film[edit]

text: Both the creation and subjects of motion pictures began to reflect second-wave feminist ideals[65], leading to the development of feminist film theory. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, female filmmakers that were involved in part of the new wave of feminist film included Joan Micklin Silver (Between the Lines), Claudia Weill (Girlfriends), Chantal Akerman (Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles), Stephanie Rothman, and Susan Seidelman (Smithereens, Desperately Seeking Susan).[66][67] Other notable films that explored feminist subject matters that were made at this time include the film adaptation of Lois Gould's novel Such Good Friends and Rosemary's Baby.[68]

text: The documentary She's Beautiful When She's Angry was the first documentary film to cover feminism's second wave.[69]

text: Beginning and conscious raising[edit]

text: The beginnings of second-wave feminism can be studied by looking at the two branches that the movement formed in: the liberal feminists and the radical feminists. The liberal feminists, led by figures such as Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem advocated for federal legislation to be passed that would promote and enhance the personal and professional lives of women.[70] On the other hand, radical feminists, such as Sandra "Casey" Hayden and Mary King, adopted the skills and lessons that they had learned from their work with civil rights organizations such as the Students for a Democratic Society and Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and created a platform to speak on the violent and sexist issues women faced while working with the larger Civil Rights Movement.[71]

text: The liberal feminist movement[edit]

text: After being removed from the workforce, by either personal or social pressures, many women in the post-war America returned to the home or were placed into female only jobs in the service sector.[72] After the publication of Friedan's The Feminine Mystique in 1963, many women connected to the feeling of isolation and dissatisfaction that the book detailed. The book itself, however, was not a call to action, but rather a plea for self-realization and conscious raising among middle-class women throughout America.[73] Many of these women organized to form the National Organization for Women in 1966, whose "Statement of Purpose" declared that the right women had to equality was one small part of the nationwide civil rights revolution that was happening during the 1960s.[74]

text: The radical feminist movement[edit]

text: Women who favoured radical feminism collectively spoke of being forced to remain silent and obedient to male leaders in New Left organizations. They spoke out about how they were not only told to do clerical work such as stuffing envelopes and typing speeches, but there was also an expectation for them to sleep with the male activists that they worked with.[75] While these acts of sexual harassment took place, the young women were neglected their right to have their own needs and desires recognized by their male cohorts.[75] Many radical feminists had learned from these organizations how to think radically about their self-worth and importance, and applied these lessons in the relationships they had with each other.[76]

text: Social changes[edit]

text: Use of birth control[edit]

text: Finding a need to talk about the advantage of the Food and Drug Administration passing their approval for the use of birth control in 1960, liberal feminists took action in creating panels and workshops with the goal to promote conscious raising among sexually active women. These workshops also brought attention to issues such as venereal diseases and safe abortion.[77] Radical feminists also joined this push to raise awareness among sexually active women. While supporting the "Free Love Movement" of the late 1960s and early 1970s, young women on college campuses distributed pamphlets on birth control, sexual diseases, abortion, and cohabitation.[78]

text: While white women were concerned with obtaining birth control for all, women of color were at risk of sterilization because of these same medical and social advances: "Native American, African American, and Latina groups documented and publicized sterilization abuses in their communities in the 1960s and 70s, showing that women had been sterilized without their knowledge or consent... In the 1970s, a group of women... founded the Committee to End Sterilization Abuse (CESA) to stop this racist population control policy begun by the federal government in the 1940s – a policy that had resulted in the sterilization of over one-third of all women of child-bearing age in Puerto Rico."[79] The use of forced sterilization disproportionately affected women of color and women from lower socioeconomic statuses. Sterilization was often done under the ideology of eugenics. Thirty states within the United States authorized legal sterilizations under eugenic sciences.[80]

text: Domestic violence and sexual harassment[edit]

text: The second-wave feminist movement also took a strong stance against physical violence and sexual assault in both the home and the workplace. In 1968, NOW successfully lobbied the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to pass an amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prevented discrimination based on sex in the workplace.[81] This attention to women's rights in the workplace also prompted the EEOC to add sexual harassment to its "Guidelines on Discrimination", therefore giving women the right to report their bosses and coworkers for acts of sexual assault.

text: Domestic violence, such as battery and rape, were rampant in post-war America. Women were often abused as a result of daily frustration in their husband's lives, and as late as 1975 domestic battery and rape were both socially acceptable and legal as women were seen to be the possessions of their husbands.[82] Because of activists in the second-wave feminist movement, and the local law enforcement agencies that they worked with, by 1982 three hundred shelters and forty-eight state coalitions had been established to provide protection and services for women who had been abused by male figures in their lives.[83]

text: Education[edit]

text: Title IX[edit]

text: Coeducation[edit]

text: One debate which developed in the United States during this time period revolved around the question of coeducation. Most men's colleges in the United States adopted coeducation, often by merging with women's colleges. In addition, some women's colleges adopted coeducation, while others maintained a single-sex student body.

text: Seven Sisters Colleges[edit]

text: Two of the Seven Sister colleges made transitions during and after the 1960s. The first, Radcliffe College, merged with Harvard University. Beginning in 1963, students at Radcliffe received Harvard diplomas signed by the presidents of Radcliffe and Harvard and joint commencement exercises began in 1970. The same year, several Harvard and Radcliffe dormitories began swapping students experimentally and in 1972 full co-residence was instituted. The departments of athletics of both schools merged shortly thereafter. In 1977, Harvard and Radcliffe signed an agreement which put undergraduate women entirely in Harvard College. In 1999 Radcliffe College was dissolved and Harvard University assumed full responsibility over the affairs of female undergraduates. Radcliffe is now the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study in Women's Studies at Harvard University.

text: The second, Vassar College, declined an offer to merge with Yale University and instead became coeducational in 1969.

text: The remaining Seven Sisters decided against coeducation. Mount Holyoke College engaged in a lengthy debate under the presidency of David Truman over the issue of coeducation. On November 6, 1971, "after reviewing an exhaustive study on coeducation, the board of trustees decided unanimously that Mount Holyoke should remain a women's college, and a group of faculty was charged with recommending curricular changes that would support the decision."[84] Smith College also made a similar decision in 1971.[85]

text: In 1969, Bryn Mawr College and Haverford College (then all male) developed a system of sharing residential colleges. When Haverford became coeducational in 1980, Bryn Mawr discussed the possibly of coeducation as well, but decided against it.[86] In 1983, Columbia University began admitting women after a decade of failed negotiations with Barnard College for a merger along the lines of Harvard and Radcliffe (Barnard has been affiliated with Columbia since 1900, but it continues to be independently governed). Wellesley College also decided against coeducation during this time.

text: Mississippi University for Women[edit]

text: In 1982, in a 5–4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan that the Mississippi University for Women would be in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause if it denied admission to its nursing program on the basis of gender. Mississippi University for Women, the first public or government institution for women in the United States, changed its admissions policies and became coeducational after the ruling.[87]

text: In what was her first opinion written for the Supreme Court, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor stated, "In limited circumstances, a gender-based classification favoring one sex can be justified if it intentionally and directly assists members of the sex that is disproportionately burdened." She went on to point out that there are a disproportionate number of women who are nurses, and that denying admission to men "lends credibility to the old view that women, not men, should become nurses, and makes the assumption that nursing is a field for women a self-fulfilling prophecy".[88]

text: In the dissenting opinions, Justices Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., and William H. Rehnquist suggested that the result of this ruling would be the elimination of publicly supported single-sex educational opportunities. This suggestion has proven to be accurate as there are no public women's colleges in the United States today and, as a result of United States v. Virginia, the last all-male public university in the United States, Virginia Military Institute, was required to admit women. The ruling did not require the university to change its name to reflect its coeducational status and it continues a tradition of academic and leadership development for women by providing liberal arts and professional education to women and men.[89]

text: Mills College[edit]

text: On May 3, 1990, the Trustees of Mills College announced that they had voted to admit male students.[90] This decision led to a two-week student and staff strike, accompanied by numerous displays of nonviolent protests by the students.[91][92] At one point, nearly 300 students blockaded the administrative offices and boycotted classes.[93] On May 18, the Trustees met again to reconsider the decision,[94] leading finally to a reversal of the vote.[95]

text: Other colleges[edit]

text: Sarah Lawrence College declined an offer to merge with Princeton University, becoming coeducational in 1969.[citation needed] Connecticut College also adopted coeducation during the late 1960s. Wells College, previously with a student body of women only, became co-educational in 2005. Douglass College, part of Rutgers University, was the last publicly funded women's only college until 2007 when it became coed.

text: Criticism[edit]

text: Beginning in the late 20th century, numerous feminist scholars[who?] have critiqued the second wave in the United States as reducing feminist activity into a homogenized and whitewashed chronology of feminist history that ignores the voices and contributions of many women of color, working-class women, and LGBT women.[96][97]

text: The historiography of the United States' second-wave feminism has been criticized for failing to acknowledge and analyze the multiple sites of feminist insurgencies of women of color, silencing and ignoring the diverse pre-political and political developments that occurred during this time.[clarification needed][96] It has been suggested that the dominant historical narratives of the feminist movement focuses on white, East Coast, and predominantly middle-class women and women's consciousness-raising groups, disregarding the experiences and contributions of lesbians, women of color, and working-class and lower-class women. Chela Sandoval called the dominant narratives of the women's liberation movement "hegemonic feminism" because it essentializes the feminist historiography to an exclusive population of women, which assumes that all women experience the same oppressions as the white, East Coast, and predominantly middle-class women.[98] This restricting view purportedly ignored the oppressions women face determined by their race, class, and sexuality, and gave rise to women-of-color feminisms that separated from the women's liberation movement, such as Black feminism, Africana womanism, and the Hijas de Cuauhtémoc that emerged at California State University, Long Beach, which was founded by Anna NietoGomez, due to the Chicano Movement's sexism.[citation needed]

text: Many feminist scholars see the generational division of the second wave as problematic.[citation needed] Second wavers are typically essentialized as the Baby Boomer generation, when in actuality many feminist leaders of the second wave were born before World War II ended. This generational essentialism homogenizes the group that belongs to the wave and asserts that every person part of a certain demographic generation shared the same ideologies, because ideological differences were considered to be generational differences.[99]

text: Feminist scholars, particularly those from the late 20th and early 21st centuries to the present day, have revisited diverse writings, oral histories, artwork, and artifacts of women of color, working-class women, and lesbians during the early 1960s to the early 1980s to decenter what they view as the dominant historical narratives of the second wave of the women's liberation movement, allowing the scope of the historical understanding of feminist consciousness to expand and transform. By recovering histories that they believe have been erased and overlooked, these scholars purport to establish what Maylei Blackwell termed "retrofitted memory".[100] Blackwell describes this as a form of "countermemory" that creates a transformative and fluid "alternative archive" and space for women's feminist consciousness within "hegemonic narratives".[100] For Blackwell, looking within the gaps and crevices of the second wave allows fragments of historical knowledge and memory to be discovered, and new historical feminist subjects as well as new perspectives about the past to emerge, forcing existing dominant histories that claim to represent a universal experience to be decentered and refocused.[101]