Mary Wollstonecraft describes her society as a contributor to the education of men and women. However, her argument does not follow that society is a good educator, as it is often popular opinion that shapes society. Instead, she claims that "till society be differently constituted, much cannot be expected from education" (498). The question I ask, is whether her claims around society, especially their influence on woman's empowerment through physical appearance, are not equally if not more valid today.
Wollstonecraft says that, because women receive such attention based upon beauty (as opposed to intelligence), society must change before they can give up this form of power. As society and its expectations are in large part their educator, the education must change before the habit of beauty over intelligence can. What I find particularly interesting about this, is that in today's society women are so strongly focused on physical appearance. Today, as in Mary Wollstonecraft's time, women believe strongly in "the illegitimate power, which they obtain, by degrading themselves" (498). Looking at the media, at films, at fashion, really at society in general, women are often idolized for their physical appearance. When coupled with intelligence, this is an admirable thing. I don't know that women must be beautiful to be praised, but I definitely think it is a large part of why many women are praised. Mary Wollstonecraft poses the idea that, once "kings and nobles, enlightened by reason, and preferring the real dignity of man to childish state, throw off their gaudy hereditary trappings" women should supposedly be freed from this societal expectation (499). As I've pointed out, I'm not sure that they are. My final question would be, does Wollstonecraft's claim that "if then women do not resign the arbitrary power of beauty--they will prove that they have less mind than man" stand true (499)? Do women have less mind than man because beauty is still a large part of why women are respected and praised? Or are women at a place where, because they have achieved so much through education, the praise of beauty doesn't matter as much?
Nat,
ReplyDeleteI heard an argument a while back that women are in fact more fairly judged, for they are judged based upon heart, mind, and body. I think that is total nonsense, and I think Wollstonecraft would agree with me, but I do agree with you that successful women in our culture are almost always admired for physical attractiveness first, and the other attributes second.
Nat,
ReplyDeleteYour posting makes me wonder why women have such difficulty running for high office or the presidency in the U.S. It has to do w/ how we envision power and how we envision beauty. I bet the first female president will be handsome, but not beautiful.
Nat,
ReplyDeleteYou are so right. For all the Wollstonecraft stood for, women really haven't come very far. Girls are still taught to value themselves for their looks at least as much if not more than anything else. I guess my question back to you is asking whether or not women even feel that "the illegitimate power, which they obtain, by degrading themselves" is illegitimate and degrading(498). I'm sad to say that most girls don't even think it is. While women might complain they are only valued for their looks, I would say very few of them consider it a true insult. An intelligent woman might, perhaps, but even then, the mentality that beautiful is better still remains. We still give a bigger nod to a woman that is beautiful AND smart than we would to a woman who is smart alone. And even just think about the way we are inclined to describe girls: "she's pretty, and she's smart too." Or at least that's what I hear more frequently than "she's smart, and oh yeah, she's also attractive." We still have the mentality that beauty comes first. Women have learned that using their beauty is one source of power, and so they continue to degrade themselves and exploit it. I hate to bring everything back to celebrities, but the examples are so copious I can't resist. Look at people like Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian who have literally built their lives around being beautiful (and rich, but that's beside the point. If they were plain, I am confident that no matter how rich they were, we still wouldn't know their names). I suspect if you talked to one of them and got an honest, not-for-a-publicity-stunt answer, they wouldn't mind too much that women are judged by their beauty because they benefit from it. And until there is no power/fame/money to be had in beauty, I imagine women will continue belittling themselves to dolls in order to achieve these desired ends. And I highly doubt that there will ever be a time when beauty doesn't offer some avenue to fame or money and the like.
Now, obviously, there are some cases in which beauty works against an individual, as Doug was saying about women running for office. In these cases, being beautiful takes credit away from these women. And I honestly don't know why. If being beautiful and intelligent is a double plus, why should beautiful women be taken less seriously? Probably because we assume that beautiful women take themselves less seriously and are used to banking on their looks. Or because there is the stereotype that pretty women are stupider, and we have this image of the brilliant but dowdy girl as the "smarter" one. So I guess over all, it's a "screwed if you do, screwed if you don't" situation. Beautiful women continue to degrade themselves; beautiful and intelligent women have to constantly fight to prove they are worth more than their looks; and intelligent but plain women are given far less credit in our current society. I image that if Wollstonecraft were here to see how far we've come in the education of women and yet how not-so-far we've come in terms of judging women by their looks, she would be quite ashamed of us.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your assessments of our current society, all of you, however I don't completely agree that Wollstonecraft would be so disappointed. While the media and our society still values beauty very highly, other areas of society compete with that, leaving the path of a woman in her hands. They can play dumb, or fail to achieve potential by relying on beauty, but when it comes down to it, society gives us all the tools we need to decide what kind of woman we want to be. Unfortunately society doesn't necessarily interpret us according to our personal bid for identity, but I feel like Wollstonecraft is far more concerned with the contentedness and independence of women than she is with the way that they are received. We are free to discern our notions of virtue and not forced to correct behaviors. We are not designed to please men. Women use that power still, but it is often consciously and not to become a man's plaything. If anything it is to make men their plaything. Sexuality is a new thing from what it was in her time. In our media it is both our degradation and our weapon. A woman can use it or dress it up or down however she likes. I believe we have new problems that she may or may not approve of, but we are not stuck in the cycle where women are only taught that they should be beautiful and everything else is needless, for, at least twenty years of their lives (496). I hate it when men look me up and down, but I am very grateful that I have been taught to "think, and only rely on God" (497).
ReplyDelete