Oh come on. Are you telling me that it was less acceptable for a man to flirt and womanize women in the office-place (for example) in 1953 vs now?
It was never acceptable. It might have been ignored, especially if it was the boss, but no one would go up to a man who was cheating on his wife and say "You dog you!" A man who was looking for a job would be asked if he was married and preference in hiring and promotion would be given to married men. Married men with children, married men without children would be flatly asked if they intended to start a family. Like it or not, men who were disloyal to their wives were understood to be disloyal, and disloyal to the company too.
Yes, but even you admit that in the 1950's that sort of thing was more likely to be "ignored" and "accepted". Women were treated much differently back in those days. Heck, would have even been considered Taboo to feature a single career female as the star of a TV show (whereas it would be much more acceptable if it were a male).
My point is largely centered around sexism and fairness. We have progressed in these categories since 1950, in my opinion.
Do you agree?
There were very few single career women and women who did have careers were spinsters. Not that even being considered a spinster would help. Women of child bearing age found it difficult if not impossible to even get a job.
Your point is largely centered around sexism and fairness, but that doesn't change anything. In the name of fairness and sexism we are incrementally accepting a little more depravity each time we are "fair".