Hurry im being timed
read the passage from a doll’s house.
helmer: that's right. well, we will share it, nora, as man and wife should. that is how it shall be. [caressing her.] are you content now? there! there! not these frightened dove's eyes! the whole thing is only the wildest fancy! now, you must go and play through the tarantella and practise with your tambourine. i shall go into the inner office and shut the door, and i shall hear nothing; you can make as much noise as you . [turns back at the door.] and when rank comes, tell him where he will find me. [nods to her, takes his papers and goes into his room, and shuts the door after him.]
read the passage from a room of one’s own.
she picked up a book now and then, one of her brother's perhaps, and read a few pages. but then her parents came in and told her to mend the stockings or mind the stew and not moon about with books and papers. they would have spoken sharply but kindly, for they were substantial people who knew the conditions of life for a woman and loved their daughter—indeed, more likely than not she was the apple of her father's eye.
based on the language in these texts, what viewpoints would both ibsen and woolf most likely agree on? select two options.
norah and judith deserve more credit than they receive.
not all women are able to of provide for their families.
marriage should be an institution that is central to every woman’s life.
people who oppress women are not necessarily motivated by a desire to harm them.
all people have the same reasons for discouraging women’s intellectual contributions.

I believe the two best options are:

A) Norah and Judith deserve more credit than they receive.

D) People who oppress women are not necessarily motivated by a desire to harm them.

Explanation:

From the excerpts, we can conclude that the female characters are treated as if they were inferior. Their position in society is one of submission, be it to their husbands - as in A Doll's House - or to their parents - as in A Room of One's Own. Norah and Judith do not receive the credit they deserve: they are expected to do as they are told even if it is unfair; on the other hand, they are not allowed to do more than what society whishes them do, even culturally.

We can also note from the excerpts that Norah's husband is a cruel tyrant of a husband. However, Judith's parents are not trying to harm their daughter. Their intentions are good, and they love her; they believe they are raising her to fulfill a certain - proper - role in society.

the author develops a cold, and scared tone. making the reader shudder with fear, and suddenly become cold. i'm guessing that he's writing a scary novel, or maybe about a chilly december night.

yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

it is yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

hope this