"Some scholars claim that the communist experiment was nothing more than an instance of “forced emancipation” and that women’s incorporation into public life was “insincere” because it was motivated by economical interests
What kind of crap is that?
The 1zl they got paid was worth the same as 1zl men got paid.
And now look at you, trunmeting about women making less money (which are economical interests), but at the same time quoting an article stating that emancipation was insincere because it was motivated by economical interests?
Although different laws contained an explicit provision prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender, at the same time there were legislative provisions that aimed to protect motherhood (e.g. shorter working hours, longer maternity leaves, restriction on work at nights and performing jobs involving hard manual labour).
And what's wrong with that?
Are you dying to try some work with a jack hammer breaking up concrete when to fix a road? Try it, come back and tell us how you like the job. It pays well.
While such legislation was intended as a privilege and reward for bearing children, it ensured women’s rights only through the virtue of motherhood and ended up being discriminatory.
Because it was recognized that women deserved a reward for the burden of 9 months of pregnancy and another 12 of breast feeding? Would you prefer a policy exercised in one of the Amazon tribes whereby a woman go to work almost immediately after child birth while a man would lay down on the birth bed to attract the post natal pains onto himself?
In addition, under communism, the gender-neutral stipulations in different laws (e.g. family laws) were completely absent. Fathers, for example, were not encouraged to share responsibilities for raising children and there was no official notion of the paternity leave (Paci 2002).
Another wrong point. There was much gender equality than the US has ever known. For example, after a divorce the father would certainly have to pay alimony to help finance the child(ren) but the woman had to rely on her newly found feminist freedoms, i.e. get to work, just like the man.
oh, you mean separate but equal? yeah, we tried that before...
When did you finally do some research on the biological and psychological difference between genders. WE ARE DIFFERENT. With all the equality of right, a construction contractor would be insane to hire a woman to fill, say, a mason's helper position. An average woman is simply physically weaker by 40 to 50%. Her body is not as adapted to physical effort as man's body is. Male body is usually cooler, which helps with maintaining the right body temperature in situations of physical effort. Men's pelvis allows them to walk and run faster. They were hunters. Women stayed behind. Female pelvis id much wider to allow for child birth and should it become any wider a woman would be simply unable to walk. We could go on and on.
it's like trying to explain the difference between green and red to someone who's colorblind
Based on your one sided, closed minded and militant approach to the topic at hand, I'm surprised that you acknowledge that colors even exist.