Throughout the time in the Utopian Literature class, we have tackled the ideas of utopia from different angles. Starting off with Thomas More’s Utopia, to moving to more modern day takes of utopia, like Margaret Atwood’s Oryx and Crake. One aspect that interested more than any in particular was the role of woman in a utopic society. Woman’s role in such a society is not initially touched upon in some of the first few novels that were read, or if such a subject was brought up, it was but a brief mention. The lack of information, while initially frustrating, also led to intrigue on my end. Why the lack of information in regards to woman in this seemingly idyllic world? Thomas More brought up the idea of gender equality, but why did he not expand …show more content…
Beda also uses More’s Utopia as a springboard to show how at the time, woman’s role in society was different from that of a woman in the 1940s, “In the original Paradise woman was meant to be man’s help-mate” (Herbert 74). This seems to suggest that in biblical times, woman was to be in a more submissive role to man. Even towards the end of the article, this belief is reinforced by Herbert who claims that people who follow a Christian train of thought (Herbert 76). Going back to More’s idea of equality, he shows that woman’s place in his utopia is in more of a subservient role throughout his novel. He portrays the utopian woman, as the ones who prepare the entire family’s meals (More 71). Another example is the concept of marriage within this utopian society. The woman are displayed naked to the men, so they may be judged by this potential suitor, and while the same is done for the woman in regards to the man as well, the objectification that is displayed could be viewed as less than ideal. Much like the outsiders who scoffed at this …show more content…
This shows that woman, as well as other groups, gather around the idea that the utopian ideal must deal with change. This idea of change for a utopia to happen is one that seems to have been an overarching theme throughout the Utopian Literature class. This type of discussion is still playing out in the world today, some such examples being equality of pay for both genders who have the same occupation,
In Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward, the role of woman can be seen more or less as the same as in Utopia, however, we see woman taking a more active role within the story itself, particularly with the character Edith Leete. Although even in this context she takes a more passive role when compared with the protagonist, Julian West. In Looking Backward, Dr. Leete explains that
Women had no choice but to follow whatever society told them to because there was no other option for them. Change was very hard for these women due to unexpected demands required from them. They held back every time change came their way, they had to put up with their oppressors because they didn’t have a mind of their own. Both authors described how their society affected them during this historical period.
That being said, women were extremely limited in their role in society. First of all, women were expected to be homemakers. By homemaker, I mean the women w... ... middle of paper ... ...ay."
...nce our perceptions on reality and the concept of a utopian society. The connection between our own society and elements of the novel enable readers to recognize that although a literal utopian society is not possible, the closest we can come to perfection is to find a balance between what is and what we can imagine.
The novel is described as a feminist novel. Yet, this is not exactly acurate. The absence of men in the utopian society may seem extreme to some, and it is. This is how Gilman makes her point. She does not create a world without men because men are terrible creatures who have corrupted the world. The utopia which lacks men is a clean peaceful place, which surpasses in almost every way the competitive societies that we live in. But, it is neither the absence of men nor the presence of women that makes this to be the case. Gender, in this novel, is symbolic for the most part. Gilman does separate the two genders to destroy stereo types, but also to establish a concrete difference between the two worlds. The male world is not bad, and the female good is not good. The world in which people are defined by others and limited is bad, while the world in which people are free to grow without being defined or compared to others, and are able to see the unity of all people is good. Comparing Herland to the real world, Gilman begins destroying gender based stereotypes. Because there are no distinctions of gender in Herland, nor any superficial characteristics which accompany gender, Herland women take on the roles of all people without considering any limitations. These women are strong, agile, nurturing, intelligent, cooperative, and able to rely on themselves. They are not "typical" females. As Gilman explains through the male character Van, "Those 'feminine charms' we are so fond of are not feminine at all, but mere reflected masculinity developed to please us because they had to please us, and in no way essential to the real fulfillment of their great process" (p59). In the same way, stereotypes about men can be thrown up as well. Gilman shows the reader that if people stop basing their identities on what others want, they will no longer be slaves to limitations. They will be free to discover their true selves and will allow others to do the same. Gilman shows readers that men and women are distinct people, but reminds us that they are people first. This can be seen when one of women of Herland named Somel, questions the men by saying, "But surely there are characteristics enough which belong to People, aren't there?
There are many ways or opinions in which one could interpret the topic of finer womanhood, and indeed the call of womanhood is deep. As females we symbolize suffrage and bravery acknowledging our potentials. All women have a role to fill which varies through the years as culture envolved. Today women are treated and seen with repect and equality. It hasn't always been this way, however, during our nation's early years, a small number of harding working women have competed to obtain women's rights. Because of this cause, every women, regardless of its race, can vote, speak publicly, make self decisions, hold goverment office, and work outside home. Women utilize these rights as a demonstration of power.
Can you imagine a world where women do not have a say and only men are in charge? Well the book “In the Time of the Butterflies” by Julia Alvarez teaches us that women are capable of more than just cleaning and cooking. Also, that women can be braver than many men. The story of four sisters, Minerva, Patria, Maria Teresa, and Dede shows that in a world where men are considered more dominant, women can become great leaders and free an entire country. The theme of women and feminism, including the significance of gender roles in the 1940’s to the 1960’s compared to today’s society has not changed enough where women are treated equally to men because the role of a woman in the 1940’s to 1960’s compared to the role of a woman in today’s society
Aldous Huxely separated men from women in class by the highest a woman can be decanted as is a beta and the highest a man can is an alpha. That shows that woman can’t be as equal as men. Woman are sterilized and are looked down upon if they get pregnant, but hearing the word father is hilarious. That shows childbearing is disgusting in this society, but a father is just silly. They are conditioned to say yes to the men who want them even though they don't want them. To be a woman in this novel you have to be a sex object that cannot get pregnant and says yes to what men say and want.
Roles for women in society have changed from century to century. There were centuries were women were put on a pedestal and were expected to obey their husband and if not they had to other means to provided for themselves, or more like the present century were women are just as equal as men and are independent as ever. There is a author by the name of Kate Chopin who lived in the times were women were expected to obey their husbands but had the mindset of a time, more like the present, were women could be more independent.
Society looks down on women when they don’t uphold to what they normally do. Furthermore, she talks about how men are not seen equally and there only social role is to work and come home and do nothing. In my opinion I realize that these social roles have changed for the better. Now both men and women are helping out with household work which I think would be less stress and work on women.
so by the end of chapter one she realizes that maybe the effect of society and tradition long before her time had a important impact on the way writers once thought and how her life might of been different if women had more freedom back when they could not have any legal property rights. which then imposes on her that women do not have any accomplishments to compare to that would inspire the next generation to come. she arrives at this conclusion by thinking about the luncheon she was at earlier and comparing it to the one at the all women 's college. how similar and different the two were and why they had these similarities and differences.
. indicates that he thinks individual women have made few, if any substantive contributions to human development” (Horan). Throughout the book, male characters only focused on the physical aspect of women. The “physical appearance determines how female characters are valued by others” (Horan). One of the most criticized characters based on their physical appearance was Linda. The people in the utopian society were referring to her as a fat woman.
From the beginning of this work, the woman is shown to have gone mad. We are given no insight into the past, and we do not know why she has been driven to the brink of insanity. The “beautiful…English place” that the woman sees in her minds eye is the way men have traditionally wanted women to see their role in society. As the woman says, “It is quite alone standing well back from the road…It makes me think of English places…for there are hedges and walls and gates that lock, and lots of separate little houses for the gardeners and people. There is a delicious garden! I never saw such a garden—large and shady, full of box-bordered paths, and lined with long grape-covered arbors with seats under them.” This lovely English countryside picture that this woman paints to the reader is a shallow view at the real likeness of her prison. The reality of things is that this lovely place is her small living space, and in it she is to function as every other good housewife should. The description of her cell, versus the reality of it, is a very good example of the restriction women had in those days. They were free to see things as they wanted, but there was no real chance at a woman changing her roles and place in society. This is mostly attributed to the small amount of freedom women had, and therefore they could not bring about a drastic change, because men were happy with the position women filled.
When breaking into the field of feminist theory, I started to construct my own idea of a perfect world where there was social and political equality for people of all genders, sexualities, classes, and races. This is not an uncommon thing in feminism, as it helps anyone in the field of study understand what they want to accomplish in the field, and what ideas they should be putting firth into the world. When introducing her transnationalist feminist ideas in her novel Feminism Without Boarders, Chandra Talpade Mohanty provides her image of an ideal world which she describes as being full of freedom for both men and women alike to make the choices and lead the likes that they truly want, as well as living in a world with, “Economic stability,
	More's intentions in Utopia, must remain mysterious. A little more difficult to accept is the general implication of the review that the mysteriousness of the author's intent in Utopia is somehow a point in his favor, that the obscurity of his meaning enhances the merit of his work. The one point of unanimous agreement about Utopia is it is a work of social comment. Since Utopia is a work of many ideas, it is impossible of course to expand the book unless one has some notion of the hierarchy of conception in it. A caretul reading of Utopia does seem to me to reveal clearly the hierarchy of it author's ideas at the time he composed the book. Although the interpretation of Utopia which follows has no pretension to substantial novelty, but rather disavows it, my approach to the problem may seem singular and eccentric. The account of such an analysis will necessarily be a little dull, so I shall have to request the forbearance of the reader without being able to promise for his patience any large reward in the shape of a brand new insight.
As women, we have always been taught by society to participate in gender binding roles. Up until recently in history women were always expected to be housewives, stay home, raise children, submit to their husbands and the list goes on. This was especially prominent in the late 1800’s, when women were expected to do more and restricted to less. Women of this era were basically chained to their expected duties and limited to amount of ambition they could have. Literature was a form of communication that enlightened women to open their mind to possibilities never thought of before. Few women tested and pushed the boundaries already set by society, but the ones who dared have shaped and paved the way for the opportunities women