If the concern is that, if given equal forms of education as men, women will not perform their given domestic roles then this fear is easily rebuked. If their true roles are merely domestic, then if given higher education, they will just perform better at what truly interested them naturally. If given the resources to develop her rationality towards pure virtue, she will be virtuous rather than just appearing virtuous. Women are “kept in ignorance under the specious name of innocence” (Wollstonecraft, 51). This shallow form of “innocence” reveals that these women aren 't virtuous at all.
Men were “more anxious to make women alluring mistresses than affectionate wives and rational mothers.” In A Vindication of the Rights of Women, Mary Wollstonecraft calls out for equal rights toward women. She explains that women are treated as minorities because they lack the proper education, they are considered sex symbols and are only meant to pleasure, and they are dependent on men. These three concepts apply to the movie Tom Jones. In the movie, people at the time resembled a sexist society and considered women as lesser individuals. Mary Wollstonecraft’s essay became the most influential feminist writing to exist in that period of time.
There is no upper limit to the risks men are willing to take in order to succeed, and if there is an upper limit for women, they will succeed less.” (Clay Shirky, 202) Shirky, the author of “A Rant about Women” argues that women must become more aggressive and demanding to ultimately achieve their goals. No matter how society reacts, men take on any action, bypassing the “Golden Rule” to achieve their goals and desires. On the other hand, women lack this procedure in their search for self-promotion, as Shirky argues. However, in Chisholm’s speech “Equal Rights for Women”, Chisholm argues that the undeniable reason for gender inequality in the 1970’s, was the lack of opportunities women were given in the workplace. Chisholm’s viewpoint includes the reason women weren’t treated with equal respect as men, was because women weren’t given the chance.
More specifically, the two fail to notice, according to MacKinnon, that the disparities between genders are not a product of their ontological differences, but are rather socially reinforced to appear so by the pervasive dominance of which men hold over society. Liberal feminism’s reliance on the legal system and the state to distribute and open up revenues of equal opportunities for women is ineffectual for MacKinnon, since it is still trying to operate within a framework that is inherently patriarchal. These institutions are incapable of enacting the necessary changes, as they themselves are constructed from a male perspective that perceives the inequality of women as the norm. As MacKinnon summarizes, the apparent absence of explicit laws enforcing gender inequalities is not due to a lack of negligence, but a lack of necessity. An unequal society will undoubtedly have laws that are unequal, even if it is not at first obvious.
It’s no secret that men still dominate society. We cannot escape the patriarchy unless the men are working on equalities behalf. When a man speaks of gender equality, it is taking more seriously than when a female talks about it. Some people see females striving for equality as selfish. They think women only care about getting ahead of the men.
With this argument, Wollstonecraft makes a very strong case in favor of women's rights. Wollstonecraft acknowledges a great inequality in society in which women are valued only as sexual beings and domestic servants. She does not argue with the fact that men have more physically superior over women, rather she argues that men's bodily strength is the "only solid basis on which the superiority over women can be built" (Wollstonecraft, 150). Wollstonecraft makes a logical and reasonable argument that any physical superiority a man demonstrates should not have an effect on the treatment of women. However, an inequality does exist because men use their inherited authority and tradition role to suppress women's rights.
Women were primarily regarded as instruments for men’s pleasure and were denied access to the public sphere. While some philosophers supported the liberation of women, others who defended the principles of equality believed these principles should only be applied to their own gender and race. For example, John Locke gives an important status to women. He argues that women are not property, women have power over their children in the absence of the father and women are allowed to leave their marriage. Although Locke gives women a sense of importance, he still falls short of feminist ideals because of the limitations he sets forth.
The principle of equality for women and men has turned into a fight in which feminists wish to be better than men. Feminism has been twisted and misunderstood so much that it has become a harmful idea. Michael Levin, a professor of philosophy and author of the book Feminism and Freedom, faults feminism for trying to impose an inappropriate equality on men and women that conflicts basic biological differences between the sexes (Levin, Taking Sides, 42). Women are not the same as men, neither physically nor psychologically. In the past, men tended to be the stronger more powerful gender, while women have traditionally been viewed as the weaker, more feeble one.
Today, many feminists go around stating there isn’t a need for men, women can survive on their own, and that women are better than men. As Saira Khan states in her article on Spiked, “modern-day feminists engage in man-bashing rather than dignified demands for equality.” (Khan 1). It just shows how feminists would rather take their anger out on men rather than realize we a... ... middle of paper ... ...oncludes is his article, “That’s how we’ve come to this backwards point where the new feminist activism, for some, is about oppressing those with different views. So much for equality!” (Furey 1). They would rather demand dominance than equality, call for justice for issues that are not really there, claim gender discrimination in the work place, and argue against any who try to oppose them.
Through the perspectives of a radical feminist the issue is we should see individuals, family, society or an organisation with close reference to their sociological, political, economical, race and cultural background and not based on their gender since women are considered as passive in comparison to men. The different interpretations made on the purpose of radical feminism might just be the case of this issue because radical feminist might interpret it as equality in terms of having the same freedom and opportunities as men but men are patriarchal in belief and dominance is inevitable. According to Theorizing Patriarchy (1990), Sylvia Walby suggests that patriarchy is ‘a system of social structures and practices in which men dominate, oppress and exploit women’ (1990:20). The dominance of men over women in many aspect of capi... ... middle of paper ... ... As for me, I am partially against the denial of women empowerment and influence in a society. I am not fully against this denial because I looked at it through the perspective of both men and women.