At that time, a woman’s life is just like passing from her father’s hand to her husband’s. And the society did not think it was a wrong thing, they still thought women should only pleased their husbands first and they should not to work as men, all their job and duty was to be a good housewife, take care of the whole family. Due to these opinions, most couples in 19th century had no love between each other. Kristina, who married with a rich man to support her mother and two brothers, she had no love to her husband, all she wants was support her poor family. But now, she becomes a widow, her husband and mother died and her brothers were grow up, she does not need to support any one more, she does not need to live for any one more.
Perhaps the women felt envy for the other women, knowing that they were married and had a man in their lives, while the accusers were alone and had no one? This seems to be something that historians should definitely look into, since jealousy can very well be more credible than other things they look
Also Eliza resisted the sexual double-standard which I found really amazing. “Marriage is the tomb of friendship. It appears to me a very selfish state. Why do people, in general, as soon as they are married, centre all their cares, their concerns, and pleasures ion their own families? Former acquaintances are neglected or forgotten.
This shows the rich were proud and even took pleasure in the reputation and status they owned. Bayardo did not woo her directly but in fact he pleased Angela’s family. Angela did not even know Bayardo and felt no love for him but she was forced to marry him as her mother clearly told her ‘Love can be learned too’. This clearly brings out the psychological thinking and mind set of people. Women had no say in important matters and were considered inferior.
According to the book “Women, Art, and Society”, men can achieve nobility because they are good in art, but women can only be allowed to practice act when she was of noble birth. It showed that people in the past believed women’s success in art was base on the nobility in her family; it means women’s success in art was just part of the property of her family, but not because of her. It was hard for women to prove her ability when everyone believed both males’ and females’ success were credited to male. On the other hand, the economic valuing of Western art was also one of the obstacles which females’ artists had to face. In the text book “Women, Art, and Society”, author mention that “Our language and expectations about art have tended to rank that produced by women as below that
Valene Sell ENG 112 Prof Cory Hoover 3 September 2012 Summary Final Draft A Summary of “The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love” by Stephanie Coontz In her essay “The Radical Idea of Marrying for Love,” Stephanie Coontz examines the history of marriage in different cultures around the world. She explains how at first marriage started out as a way to define ones’ social status and financial well-being. Love played little or no part in a marriage and was even discourages at times. Other societies considered it a bonus if love developed after marriage, but it was not the sole basis for marriage. Even today in some cultures monogamy and love are not seen as a necessary part of a marriage, men or woman can seek out other needs and not be ridiculed for it It is believed mostly in Western culture that “married couples should be best friends, sharing their most intimate feelings and secrets.
“Laugh as much as you choose, but you will not laugh me out of my opinion.” Jane ch 17 -Charles Bingley- Easily influenced and a nice man. Darcy’s friend who move to Netherfield, and left Netherfield. “If a women is partial to a man, and does not endevour to conceal it, he must find it out.” Elizabeth ch 6 - Mrs. Bennet- obstructive and foolish. Elizabeth’s mother who is obsessed with husbands for her daughters. Attempting to push Elizabeth into a marriage with Mr. Collins.
Changes in Marriage Marriage is traditionally dominated by the men while the society expects the women to submit in all forms. In the late 1800s, women were not expected to show their displeasure in any way in their marriages. People, indeed, considered marriage as the “happy-ever-after.” Being an independent widow, Kate Chopin decided to voice on behalf of the women of those times by writing stories concerning how women felt confined and suppressed both spiritually and sexually in their marriage. The general society during that period did not give room for women to be open-minded. Major socio-demographic change, however, have taken place over the last two centuries and has significantly brought changes to the institution of marriage.
I don't see why they should have to leave the state that they are in just to go to a different state the recognizes legal marriages between the same sex. They are not hurting anyone by marrying someone of the same sex. They have the right to marry just as a man and woman do. As I stated before god would want us all to be happy and be able to live life. Everyone breaks the laws of the bible at some point you are suppose to love honor and obey the one you marry until death do you part but a lot of people break that rule and get divorced.
Velasco answers, “Feminism strives for the male and female to become friends again, it is its real meaning.” To work together- this is the main thing that this ideology wants to achieve instead of being the man as the general provider and basically whom the society worships. Despite that, however the wife feels safe, because she holds the marriage co tract to this man whom is worshipped. Her passive contribution to society is doing absolutely nothing. Does a man need to prove he’s a man by marrying a woman? In the criteria of our society: a man does not need to marry to become a full pledged man, but a woman needs to marry a man to become a “real” woman.