Meanwhile wages, even at full-time are lower (9% less according to the Observatory of inequalities) for women - and although required by law, the principle of "equal pay for equal work" is not respected in the private sector: a discrepancy of 27% to the disadvantage of women, I have read. Furthermore it is on women that unemployment, and especially involuntary part-time (with no decision on the schedule) falls most heavily, the collective unconscious always considering the woman's income as "supplementary income". And I have heard the bourgeois claim that "feminists were stupid to claim the right to work, whereas before they were kept without having to do anything." Whew! This is not the image that the rustic that I was, had of farmers wives. How many of the rest, in agriculture and elsewhere - though it was certainly before I was born - must have temporarily or permanently replaced men during and after the First World War, that butchery that reaped over a million (official figure: 1 397,400) lives, often young, listen to the song of Craonne. An outdoor photo exhibition held in Sainte-Geneviève des Bois for the hundredth "anniversary" of 1914 showed that despite their touching fragility women worked at that time in explosives factories and replaced fire-fighters (while pumps were not as manoeuvrable as today, far from it). Many were the war widows to raise their children alone, and I do not remember that any young and less young idiots, from Versailles and others, of the Demonstration for all [collective of opponents to same-sex marriage] were at all moved by the fact that all these orphans have not benefited from a father ...But as noted by the sociologist Andrée Michel; in all societies, women perform the tasks the men do not want - which may vary, elsewhere, according to civilizations and eras.