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
Sara found out that Hitch was a “date doctor” Sara then blame Hitch for being the reason her friend is dumped. When Sara finds out what Hitch does for a living they go out on a date and Sara explains that she knows what he does for a living now. At this point she does not give Hitch the time to explain himself. When Hitch shows up at a speed dating event they briefly exchange words but again they don’t really communicate and work things out. Later Sara goes to Hitch’s house to say she is sorry but he just blows her off.
It becomes obvious that Ted hardly does such mannerisms towards his wife when she responds negatively and un-calm to his approach. Her words “I bet you’re wondering what I’m going to do with the money” informs audiences that she herself sees her husband as greedy or often misguided by the wanting of money. His dull reaction to her announcing her permanent departure in order to pursue her ‘Last Hope’ hints he was already aware of his wife being unhappy with her life and it’s current circumstances. The Lottery is timeless for themes but the interpretation of the text has changed. The story takes place just a few decades after women had received their right to vote but the society of the time still held harsh
The town’s people think she is going to kill herself because Homer had put an end to their relationship. Surprisingly, she is also seen buying men’s items that would be suitable for a wedding. Homer eventually leaves town along with Emily’s cousins. However, Homer soon returns and is last seen entering Emily’s house. Emily rarely leaves after that;
When Clarisse asked Montag this question he thought it was a foolish question to ask, of course he was happy. Later that evening when he enters his house, he ponders the question some more. He quickly discovers that his wife Mildred had tried to commit suicide, and is unaware of doing so. After his discovery, Clarisse’s question suddenly became less foolish to him. “’That's sad,’ said Montag, quietly, ‘because all we put into it is hunting and finding and killing.
She wrote that letter as soon as he left, it's quite unfair and she even realizes it yet still writes it to satisfy herself. Even when he enlisted, she knew that he was not for him but for her. Editha noticed he became a different person after enlisting, " he made her feel as if she had lost her old lover and found a stranger in his place," if she had truly loved him she would not have felt giddy at the thought of kissing a stranger after losing her true love. Now Howell uses George's view on war, his family history and even his death to symbolize realism. From the beginning George sees war as a negative thing
(http://www.zelo.com/firstnames/) It's a bit ironic compared to the Alison in the story, considering she has been having an affair with a man that her husband is renting a room to. The name Alison being given to this character is a cover up of who she truly is; just as she is tricking her husband, she is also tricking readers into thinking she is an honest, noble person. Her name goes to better exemplify how everything about Alison is not what it appears to be. Alison’s relationships with others are very complex. Alison and her husband do not have the typical loving marriage; he is many years her senior and she is basically a trophy wife to him.
The All of It opens with Father Declan who has decided to go out fishing for the day on a river beat that seems all too impossible to catch anything. As the day persists, Father Declan reflects upon his clashing ideas concerning of the story told to him by Enda Dennehy, a recent widow of Kevin Dennehy. Kevin and Enda are believed to be married by everyone they know until Enda reveals to Father Declan that Kevin and her are actually brother and sister. Her story exposes that Kevin and her had slept together once but not out of sexual ideas, but out of creation and survival. Enda explains that her father, a mindless drunk, would lock his two children up in a freezing room until on one final occasion he did not come home for almost two days.
For many, his material is judged as what some feminists would define as a “form of violence against women”, whose representations “eroticize male domination”, (Robin Ann Sheets, “Pornography, Fairytales and Feminism” 635), but for many readers of Sade’s work, once they see through the ‘smut’ and the erotica, there is often found by the reader an underlying message which is sometimes seen as radical, or one which was not elaborated further until many years later. These messages within his literature raise the question as to whether or not Sade was a “moral pornographer”, (Angela Carter, The Sadeian Woman 19). In her book, Angela Carter defines a moral pornographer as one who “uses pornographic material as part of the acceptance of the logic of a world of absolute sexual licence for all genders, and projects a model of the way such a world might work”, (19). When one reads Philosophy in the Boudoir, and applies this definition it can be seen that Sade as a moral pornographer campaigns for “absolute sexual licence” for all genders and it is in the illuminating of this campaign that Sade further argues for the interrelationship between sexual and political freedom. In turn this argument is seen to validate Sade’s call for a Utopian type republic where all men and women are free both sexually and socially.
Over drinks, Frances confronts him about his wandering eyes and questions his love for her. Michael’s way of looking on women as mere bodies could suggest a kind of degradation, which is to define a woman only as an erotic or sexual figure. Michael reveals that he loves the way women look and when Frances asserts that one-day he will be unfaithful, Michael agrees with her. Frances feels that the day is now ruined and resorts to calling the Stevensons. The universal truth behind this story is that the innate differences between men and women coupled with lack of communication will cause a marriage to stagnate and become an uneasy compromise.