This essay will argue that In both texts motherhood and marriage is shown to be a hindrance to both women’s careers and their female identity. The theme of marriage in The Bell Jar and Top Girls Is shown to demolish the female identity of the women. In The Bell Jar Plath uses Buddy as a symbolic figure to show how even the “clean” men of that time were only out for one
“Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” Evoked Female Identity During the 1960s in America, where phallocentrism is still ruling society, many social problems caused younger people to be unsatisfied with reality and to become rebellious. In Oates’s story, the character of Connie is affected by patriarchal oppression. Oates gives Connie an independent identity while using her mother and sister as opposite characters to reflect her uniqueness and to let the reader understand the female identity. Connie's mother and sister portray typical females under patriarchal oppression. In the case of Connie’s mother, she rejected Connie’s attitudes because it often went against the patriarchal society's code of conduct.
The Power of Lara Croft: Feminist Figure or Sex Object? “Lara is everything that is bad about representations of women in culture, and everything good…” (182). This is ultimately the response that Maja Mikula gives in her essay Gender and Videogames: the Political Valency of Lara Croft to the question pertaining Lara Croft being either a feminist icon or sexist fantasy in the video game Lara Croft: Tomb Raider. An answer similar to what her creator, Toby Gard, held in his interview with The Face magazine: “Neither and a bit of both.” For the feminists, Lara has potential to project a positive image and a role model aura; yet she is limited to being a sex symbol. It is a question that is often reduced to trying to decide whether she is a positive role model for young girls or just a perfect and artificial embodiment of a male sexual fantasy for the boys.
His coward-like action is similar to hitting someone while he or she is being held. According to “Columbia’s Shakespeare Seminar” (73), “Tybalt’s slaying of Mercutio shows that the violent act encapsulated . . . the villainy that Tybalt exudes.
Do you agree that Shakespeare presents Beatrice and Katherina as “offending against society’s expectations about women”? The idea that both Beatrice and Katherina offend against society’s expectations of women in the plays Much Ado About Nothing and The Taming of the Shrew is open to personal interpretation. We must take into account which society it is we are suggesting they are offending against, if we are judging it on Shakespearean society’s expectations we could, in theory, agree with the statement, due to the fact that at that time, women were largely expected to be submissive, quiet and respectful to the superior sex, males. However, it would not be correct to say that Beatrice and Katherina offend against modern day expectations of women. Further to this, it would also depend on at which point in the play we are making our judgement.
She shows how women can only be categorised as either an angel or a whore. It shows the way that women can only be judged at the time. She also frequently alludes to the “bad” women in literature to show how women could only be categorised in those binary opposites like Lady Macbeth or Eve. She uses rhetorical devices to explain how bad women are needed to disrupt the static order which is Patriarchy. Atwood also shows her opposition to the extreme feminism that existed in her time where feminism was influencing the creation of literature at the time.
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.
However one could also argue that Larkin seems to justify violence against women by suggesting that access to women is something men have been unfairly deprived of. This becomes evident in the first stanza where Larkin presents the girl in ‘white satin’ suggesting her purity and virginity. One could disagree with this statement and interpret the de-feminizing of women differently. It could be suggested that Larkin combines masculinity and femininity together, ‘moustached lips’, to show his view that men and women should be viewed more equally in society. However I disagree with this alternative interpretation as I feel Larkin tries to portray the attacks ‘snaggle-toothed’ and boss-eyed’ are sadistic and grotesque but he does not disagree with
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.