While
all three of the works were extremely powerful and positive on the rights of
women, I found the introductions of Wollstonecraft’s “Vindication of the Rights
of Women” and Aikin’s “Epistles on Women” the most interesting and similar. The
thing that most surprised me was both women included within the first few
paragraphs, a kind of disclaimer saying that of course women and men could
never actually be entirely equal, because of obvious discrepancies in physical
strength and ability. Aikin says, “Let me in the first place disclaim entirely
the absurd idea that the two sexes ever can be, or ever ought to be, placed in
all respects on a footing of equality (816),” while Wollstonecraft says, “In the
government of the physical world it is observable that the female in point of
strength is, in general, inferior to the male. This is the law of nature… (373).”
Both go on to imply that because of this
men are more fit for the public sphere and certain professions, and women
should be more domestic. This relates to a peace written by John Ruskin during
the Victorian Era, “Of Queen’s Gardens.” While he attempts to empower women as
well by saying they have many important abilities such as “the power to rule” and
the “great function of Praise,” he still limits women and men to what he
defines as “separate spheres.” Women get the private sphere, which is home and
domestic life, and men get the public sphere, which is business and basically
anything outside the home. As a man, I assumed he would be less open minded,
but it really struck me when both Wollstonecraft and Aikin said the same thing.
Their ideas of women’s equality are so far and away different than the type women
have worked towards achieving today.
While Wollstonecraft does acknowledge the physical inferiority of women, I don't think she suggests that they should stay at home. I think she instead explains that men exploit this, and use it as a justification for treating women as inferiors, when instead the sexes are equal in mind and virtue.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that Wollstonecraft doesn't directly address a woman's proper place in society but she dismisses the idea of “masculine women” and appears to accept the female domestic role in arguing that female education is advantageous because it will produce better wives and mothers. On page 374 she argues "I have heard exclamations against masculine women; but where are they to be found?" Wollstonecraft completely rejects the idea of women stepping into the masculine sphere and seems to regard such notions as ridiculous. While she supports female self-actualization it appears that she still accepts the confinement of women to the domestic sphere, denouncing men for being "more anxious to make them alluring mistresses than affectionate wives and rational mothers" (373). Whenever she mentions a woman’s role in society it is as a homemaker, for example when she asks “Can they be expected to govern a family with judgment or take care of the poor babes whom they bring into the world?” (375). Wolstonecraft is progressive in supporting female education but still propagates the idea of the private sphere.
ReplyDelete