10/20/17 Blog no. 8

From John Ruskin’s essay encompasses how rights for woman are not naturally obtained, but a privilege that can only be handed out by men, for the benefit of men.
Ruskin says “we cannot determine what the queenly power of woman should be, until we are agreed what their ordinary power should be. We cannot consider how education may fit them for any widely extending duty, until we are agreed what is their true constant duty” (5).

The premise for this idea is already establishing that ‘we’ means that men must agree to the terms of whatever rights women should/want to get. By using the term ‘should’ rather than ‘ought’ which is critical in understanding that his views towards women who ‘should’ have rights is a subjective opinion versus the term ‘ought’ which is an objective truth, and call for action. With the entire statement above, it does not mention any equality, just mentions some arbitrary power a woman has. By referring to the position of a ‘queen’ he also keeps women with in that context solely to gender and place under a ‘king’, this being an extended metaphor to males. He demotes women from the pedestal of a queen to ‘ordinary power’, not only is this a continuation of undermining women, it is furthering this categorization of women being placed underneath men. Separate to power, he combines woman’s right of education for the purpose of duty. He is saying only when men define what roles women should fulfil, is when they may have an education that fulfils that role. Again, by setting the statements with ‘we’ the duty that Ruskin is proposing is one that is defined by men. Therefore, women who have roles that are subservient to men, will get an education that will help them better be subservient to men.  

Comments

  1. Gina EnyartOctober 29, 2017 at 7:09 PM

    I agree with this entire blog post, in most cultures it is common for men to hand out women's rights as if they were something that weren't a necessity. Then if these rights "threaten" men's, then they in no way can they be granted to women. As open minded as Ruskin wants to think he is, he is just enforcing gendered stereotypes.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What We Hunger For: Deep Thoughts

"Just because you survive something does not mean you are strong." To be completely honest, this story was one that I could almost watch in my head. Perhaps part of that was because it was written vividly with strong imagery and diction; perhaps because I could see a reflection of myself in Gay's story. This year has been a transformative one for me, as I have learned to become more self-aware and acknowledging that there is immense power in naming our struggles. I am consistently told by my friends how "strong, courageous, and unfuckwithable" I am... which, I think, genuinely stems from my inability to be comfortable. I've survived too much. I've been exposed to and made it through too much... and apparently, the fact that I managed to make it "out" of those immediate situations is seen as strong. However, I am very thankful that Gay made the comment above. To me, I've always seen strength as how people cope with the long-term effects o...
Read more

A word is a word is a word

In "Bad Feminist: Take One," Gay opens up about her inner quarrels regarding her identification as a feminist. This is something I, too struggled with. At the time, the term was gaining a less than popular connotation, with a minority of the movement taking it upon themselves to spread their isolated belief that women rise above the equilibrium of society; they are superior to men and all men are inherently awful. It is easy to understand, then, why a young girl that does not share these extreme views and stereotypes may not want to be a placed beneath a spot light during such a tense situation, and would subsequently ditch the term. Ditching the term, for me at least, did not mean that I lost my way and would slowly evolve into the submissive, modest, and good woman deemed to be the ideal. Although, ditching the term is controversial and some may see it as a betrayal to the movement executed by a ‘ bad ’ woman. If the individuals remains true to their beliefs and conti...
Read more

Fifty Shades of Fantasy

I've never been too intrigued by all the 50 Shades of Grey concept. As a social work major, reading the first book in the series and watching the first movie with my aunt (yes- my AUNT...), all I could think of when I was exposed to that plot was the lack of focus on Christian's real need and outcry for help. The novel flips the 'usual' narrative of the woman being the victim and her inability to retain a healthy relationship, and shows us a man who seeks domination and control, which- some argue- is what women *really* want. I will not be the first to argue that point. In "The Trouble With Prince Charming," Gay references 50 Shades and how the author uses a disgusting sense of erotica that we can't help but be turned on by, to romanticise the idea of pure abuse, submission, and toxicity in the text. I will commend the story on one thing: Christian is adamant about consent. Mostly because it could result in a MAJOR lawsuit against him if ever interprete...
Read more