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.
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
Stereotypically, men are the masters and women are housewives. This is discrimination to the other sex because they basically see them as slaves, but with better treatment. Unlimited power is unacceptable for women because the men take advantage of this power and use it in many ways. For example, wars, ruling, and even in the household to their wives. Education is needed weather you’re a male or female because gender doesn’t play the role in the education life.
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
‘Renaissance Italy was a patriarchal society in which women played no significant role’ Many people would say that Renaissance Italy was a world in which was dominated by men, who were dominate in the way Government and Politics operated and which women had subservient roles, and to most extent, this was true. Firstly, women rarely received any education, and those that did were not allowed to attend the men-only universities. At home, young girls were encouraged to learn spinning, sewing and embroidery, as well as how to manage a household. Some girls from wealthy or noble families were taught to read and write by private tutors in their homes. Secondly, most women during this time married young, for example – the average age of a bride was 18, as revealed by The Tuscan Castato of 1427.
In the church women were supposed to be gentile and virtuous. Sexuality and education of women was condemned. The clothing during that time is nothing compared to the clothing of the 20th century. Their skirts were long and ankles were could not be seen. Growing up women were taught that they had to grow up and marry a rich man, staying at home taking care of the kids and following
However, women aren’t innocent in this controversy either. They have some control over the attention they receive based on how they dress and present themselves socially. I know for a fact the reason my friend dresses up and stands out it for the attention. In conclusion I agree with Sheets-Johnstone’s thoughts about women only being seen as body parts and objects. Although some perspectives on the subject claim women live in bad faith and put themselves in situations to be defined as a body part, if there was no routine of male’s looking or the notion to dominate and females attention starvation or feelings to please, there would be no need for a dominant and submissive relationship.
The home and workplace before the industrial revolution had been virtually the same; however, both had begun to separate. Male and female spheres had separated along with the separation of home and workplace as well. While the men were gaining their income from their jobs in the public sphere, women, still viewed as the primary care takers for the children, were primarily put into the private or “domestic” sphere. To explain why the separation of men and women in the work force was necessary, the ideology of separate spheres was created; it had defined innate characteristics of women. Women were deemed incapable to work and function in public because these traits were thought to make women less capable to do work that the men did.
But when it came to women, they believed that being able to teach others was more of a civic duty then anything else. (Dubois & Dumenil, 2005) There were a few limits that were imposed on female education. One of which was that only the wealthy women were allowed formal education. This left women of poor status at a sort of crossroads because they weren’t able to
Hanna Rosin’s article states that she thinks that women are not completely controlled by men in their job choices, but that women are making different choices based on their personal prefrences and economic situations. The counter argument is that men are dominating over women and taking all the jobs. Rosin gives an example from her own experience of how women themselves are in control of their own decisions in the workplace. she stated that shortly after giving birth, that she wanted to go back to work, but that she also wanted to stay home and raise a child. She didnt see staying home with her child as her “duty”, and she didn’t feel pressure from her husband or boss to do one or the other, but that It was her own subconscious, tricking her into beliving that it was more her duty to stay home with their baby than her husbands.