Kimberly Murray:

6. I’ve read some things before on how lives in the marriages before compassionate marriage came along. I know that the Chinese society still like to abide by this. Fathers choose there daughters husbands for their families personal game. They even used to practice some called bindings. Where they bind a womens’ foot. They Bend the toes under towards the back of the foot and they tape them like this for days. This is a form of power to them men so the women couldn’t “run” from them. They had control over them. This is something that has stopped in their culture but it’s a great point on how the men had control of the women’s lives. The women did not complain because its something everyone had to go through even though it was extremely painful and they pretty much had to re-learn to walk. How did families do this? Did they really love each other? Or anyone is their lives?

Kirsti Linkimer:

6.
Reading about the compassionate marriage compared to the traditional marriage caught my attention in many ways. As a daughter I tried to put myself in the position of the daughters in the seventeenth century and before that. If my father would to make an arranged marriage for me I would wonder the love he had for me. If a father truly loved his daughter, wouldn’t he want her to be happy? This weekend I had watched the movie “Shakespeare in Love” and for anyone who has seen this movie you would know that is much to do with the story of “Romeo and Juliet”. At the end of the movie Shakespeare and this woman did not kill themselves, but the women for forced into a marriage that she did not want to be in even though she loved Shakespeare. This gets me wondering if there were many times where a women or a man loved someone other then they were married to or soon to be married to. Because of this was there adultery? Was there a lot of depression? I truly wonder how these women and men could have lived their life with out true love.

Lindsay Kling:

Lindsey Kling
9/27/05 Responses
1) Summarize the characteristics of the "companionate marriage" and how it differs from the traditional arranged marriage. Discuss some of the legal, political and/or educational changes in the status of women during the 17th and 18th century.
The companionate marriage came about after it had become obvious that affection would just not develop in the normal course of an arranged marriage. A trend toward a companionate marriage (one in which the two getting married choose each other for the reasons of love and companionship rather than having their parents choose for financial or political reasons) happened in the second half of the eighteenth century-especially in the upper and lowest levels of society. More power was given to the two who would be married because a marriage cannot work if there is no friendship, conversation, companionship, sex or relaxation. If two vastly different people are put together in an arranged marriage, it is more likely that they may seek a divorce or separation than if they had been in control of their union and genuinely chosen a person that they had romantic feelings for. During this time, there were even a number of books written for both men and women to help advise them on characteristics that they should look for in a potential spouse.
Reference: Lawrence Stone: The Family, Sex, and Marriage in England, 1500-1800.
2) Describe and discuss the conventional "ideal" of femininity, or, what Wollestonecraft calls "mistaken notions of female excellence." at the end of her introduction to A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.
The conventional ideal of femininity has been that women are not equal to men. This means that women should embody the exact opposite of what we think of as a typical male-woman should be softer, quieter, more agreeable, less intelligent and better at household duties such as cooking, cleaning and childcare. A woman should be beautiful, sexual, graceful and always available for her husband and whatever his needs may be. However, Wollestonecraft says that while equality is a woman’s ultimate goal, most things that women do underscore this goal. When a woman puts her beauty on a pedestal, she undermines the fact that under her beautiful face, there is an intelligent, capable and independent woman. This was seen in the households of the 1950’s and 60’s when it was expected that the woman would stay home and cook and clean all day. When her husband came home, it was her job to make him comfortable and not to burden him with household chores or complaints. By a woman doing these things, she may be making her husband happy and fitting into that “perfect wife mold,” she is not showing that she has equal potential in all areas of life to a man.
Reference: Wollestonecraft: A Vindication of the Rights of Women.
4) Describe the comparison that Wollestonecraft makes between the education and manners of women and those of military officers in Chapter II of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Discuss the rhetorical effect of this comparison.
Mary Wollestonecraft tells us that the education of women and military soldiers are much the same. While we don’t envision many non-military women going through basic training for being a house wife, it is not this kind of physical training that Wollestonecraft is suggesting. Wollestonecraft suggests it is the mental style of training that is similar between military men and the female sex. Men entering the military are “torn-down” mostly mentally so that the military can build them back up again to their liking. Perhaps women are torn-down all of their lives (being told to look nice before they leave the house, boys are smarter in math, girls should play with dolls while boys get to run around outside) so they have been educated to be subordinate to males. Then if these women are never told that they are smart, can go to school, etc, how do we expect women to be self-confident or to stand up for themselves? We see how military men have been trained to obey the orders of their superiors, just as how women have been trained to be subordinate to men.
Reference: Wollestonecraft: A Vindication of the Rights of Women.
5) Discuss the importance of the concept of "Reason" for Wollestonecraft's argument against the subordination of women.
Mary Wollestonecraft believes that women lack reason and therefore the ability to think for themselves. She believes that this stems from the fact that girls were only taught the things that were necessary to running a household. Wollestonecraft states that the reason women are not equal to men is the fact that women lack the ability to reason and thus the ability to think for themselves. This leads women to believe that they need men to think for them. Wollestonecraft believes that men are smarter because they have more knowledge on a variety of topics. Therefore, in order for women to rival men, women need to gain knowledge on things other than their household duties. An example of women not having reason is a woman holding her beauty over intelligence. Although a woman may have been conditioned to think this way, she does not have the reasoning ability change these thoughts and behaviors. If she gains knowledge, this will lead to reason, which will lead to intelligence which can lead to a change in behavior.
Reference: Wollestonecraft: A Vindication of the Rights of Women.
6) Describe and discuss any questions you have in response to these readings that remain unanswered after you have read the texts.
After reading A Vindication of the Rights of Women, it makes me wonder how many of the male views expressed in that article are still present in the male society today. It is obvious that men are still objectifying women-there are many strip clubs where women will get naked for a few dollars from a man. However, I am talking more so about views of women from a man’s standpoint and what they would have if they could have it their way. How many men wish (whether they express it verbally or not) that women were still submissive to them in almost every way, wished that women stayed home and cooked and cleaned for them, wished it was still a time when women had to turn their head to their husband’s transgressions? It is pretty easy to hear things like this whenever a group of males and females are together. I know I have heard things like this quite often. But I wonder how many men sincerely feel like this. And if some of them are joking, what is it that makes them feel like these things are ok to say/express?

Denise Iwinski:

6) My question came to me as I was looking over the traditional arranged marriage. I think that it of course is not fair to a woman that she would have to quit and give up everything she wants in life just for her to end up with someone who she doesn’t even care about or who could care less about her. You would think a father would want their daughters to be loved and to be with someone who will be faithful and bring her happiness. But kind of going off the father being the one to make the decision for his daughter, I was wondering what the consequence for a daughters rebellion of her fathers decision would be? If she would happen to run away or go off and marry someone else what would happen to her? Also was wondering at about what age a woman would be wed at and what the age difference would be between them?

Amy Mitchell:

6.
Reading these really made me think about arranged marriages. It's hard to believe that anyone could marry someone they didn't love and spend their life living with them. I imagine it was tough to deal with , but I guess they didn't know there was any other way to do it. It was the traditional way to marry, and so they accepted it. I remember back in junior high when my class read Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley. We spent a lot of time discussing Mary's life and background, and we learned about Percy Shelley (Mary's husband). Percy was married when he met Mary, but he did not love Harriet, his wife. Percy then eloped with Mary, and Harriet, who was still in love with Percy, drowned herself in the river. Happiness in marriage is something that cannot be obtained without love. If you are going to be with someone for the rest of your life, it needs to be someone you love and care for and wouldn't mind waking up next to for years and years to come. Did people really know what love was? Or did they think it was just something that happens over time and they could just grow to love their spouse?

Cory Doppelt:

6.
I believe that when it comes to marriage it should be with someone you love and care about. I think that this still goes on in places like India and that area. I don’t know how, living in the 21st century, people could still go through with this. I think it would be horrible. (Might be a little off topic) I remember that NBA great Hakeem Olajuwon was in an arranged marriage, which was set up when he was 8, and after being in the USA so long I couldn’t believe that he would still want to go through with it. I was wondering when it came to breaking off and marrying for love, how did this first start? And did a lot of people end up running away from their families since they probably did not approve of it? I would assume that if Hakeem didn’t go through with it he would have been shunned out of his family.