Her claim was to argue the problems of how women are supposed to be seen as thin, long hair, and busty. She dismisses that argument as she focuses on her past problems that end up coming out as anger and just nagging. Also, reveals her own problems with her own race. Her bias is revealed as she called the man a “redneck” and called herself a “nigga,” as she stoops down to her offenders’ level. Her unsupportive argument is not to prove the misconceptions of what makes a woman a woman, really her arguments about her own anger and aggression towards her past.
Imagine a world with no discrimination against women. In this fictitious dimension, there would be no degrading stereotypes or insults pivoting around females. Unfortunately, we live in a misogynistic world filled with hateful comments spewed out carelessly against women. I used to be under the impression that sexism was not as important as other societal issues, such as racism. It was only after analyzing “Antigone”, when I started to understand the gravity of how persistent and awful sexism has been over the years.
Where Marie de France comes from, many people disagree with women having power through literature. They disagree with women having much power at all. Because of this, Marie de France feels the urge to protect herself from those people. She argues that credit and respect should be bestowed upon anyone who earns it, regardless of their gender. Before her story even begins, Marie de France contests the idea of female inferiority.
The reaction of the public, mainly the men is shown in the quotations of Source 2 and 3. When reading them we can see that many people felt intimidated by the women’s campaign which did not help them succeed in winning the vote. Although it should be noted that source 3 was from the Times which was against the votes for women; so it’s probably a bias source of information, due to the Times’ belief in the domestic role of women. But this is not important as it still spoke the truth about the unnecessary need of violence while campaigning for the votes for women which would soon be solved by the effort many put in during the WW1. Unlike Emmeline, I think WW1 helped people see beyond the women’s violent actions, and begin to see that women were ready to have the right to vote and be considered as able as men in many ways.
In the story, the Awakening, Edna also rebelled against society by freely expressing herself. In her era, most people thought women had to be married and have children but she didn’t want that. This is a perfect example of how women can be rebellious against society’s view on
Cher’s deviation from Emma’s character highlights the changing representation of feminism and femininity in the last few decades. Cher is a representation of post-feminism, in that she rejects the 1970’s notion of feminism as opposed to femininity . Rather, Cher embraces femininity while also being a figure of authority amongst her fellow peers i.e. the debate scene highlights Cher’s confidence and in the scene of her attempted courtship of Christian, close ups of Cher’s full, red lips attest to her sexual appeal. Jacinda Read describes this as a form of “popular feminism.” This demonstrates a drastic shift from Austen’s time as women can now seek educational pursuits and financial independence.
She believes that feminists and feminism attacks marriage and women who believe in marriage and simply being a good mother and wife. An example O’Beirne uses to express these attacks is an excerpt from a book call “The Future of Marriage” by Jessie Bernard. In the excerpt Bernard says that marriage simply holds women back: “Being a housewife makes women sick.” “To be happy in a relationship which imposes so many impediments on her, as traditional marriage does, women must be slightly mentally ill.” O’Beirne says that the feminist movement did nothing but confuse gender roles and weaken the family structure that was established. I personally am not quite sure which side to take so I’m sitting on the fence. I believe that feminists and their movement did do a great deal of good for our society as a whole.
All that chaos contributed to the male chauvinism we see in our current society. Women had to handle that change without any moral support. It is also important to remember the important role women took in both world wars. A “Jury of Her Peers”, demonstrates how hard marriage was for all women who did not enjoy their relationships. Women in those types of relationships were treated as objects instead of being valued as women of freedom which represent intelligence, compassion, love and beauty.
Steinem, Jane Fonda, and Robin Morgan, all women activists, were described as, “Rush Limbaugh’s use of the term ‘femi-nazi’ to describe radical feminists…in that they are proposing what Nazis and other totalitarian types like to do—to silence their opposition by government fiat” (Whittington). Through this quote found in a Yahoo article, the audience can see how Rush Limbaugh is against Steinem and the other women mentioned above, Fonda and Morgan. The reason why Rush Limbaugh was against these three women was because he believe they were ‘femi-nazis’ also known as women who are feminists that are hypocritical. Everybody is human and everybody makes mistakes and judges others without thinking about it. According to Limbaugh, Steinem was, “sex(ist)…(when she) once suggested men behave all the time like women who are PMSing” (Whittington).
Too many women have internalized archaic adherence so well that they turn against their own kind. Women, in fact, are far more rigid in compliance with the said social sanctions than men, the actual beneficiaries. This is why female foeticide still makes it in the front pages. That is why mothers feel the greater responsibility in the nurturance of the offspring. “A feminist is most likely to be a lesbian.