Sara Stickney Ellis
From The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits [The influence of Women].
When I read under Sarah’s biography that she took the perspective that women should accept their inferiority I was eager to read what she could possibly have to say. Being a woman I could NOT imagine putting yourself in a situation where you honestly believe you are less important and a less being than a male. Very bizarre, however I tried to read with an open mind and figure out where she must be coming from. She begins not really by explaining why women are inferior, but she takes the side that men are so strong and go through such grievances in order to protect the woman who stays at home. The example she uses is that the man goes out into the market and gets his integrity shaken and is put under lots of pressure from beggars and what not. She explains the outside world as harsh and cold and a hard place to have to deal with and says that men have to go out into this world, while the woman is sitting in her warn cozy home tending to his needs and not having to face these harsh realities. It would have been true at this time that women did stay at home and did not have to face the harshness of the outside world, however that does not mean that men are superior because of it. In fact, some women probably did prefer it to be this way, and would just assume sit at home and mind to their husbands needs, however this is not the case for all women. And since this is not the case for all women it should not be stated that men are superior to women. Obviously Ellis was one of these women who would just assume to stay at home and take care of her husband’s and families’ needs. Then again maybe she was never given any other choice and therefore just believed this to be true. There is nothing wrong with her belief, but I am baffled that trying to understand where she is coming from. She says on page 558 “Will the common place frivolities of morning calls, or an interminable range of superficial reading, enable them to assist their brothers, their husbands, or their sons in becoming happier and better men? –NO” I underlined this sentence in my book because it made me very angry. I do not consider myself to be a feminist at all, however to say that educating women is not important because it will not cause them to make men happier just really made me mad. First of all, why does this have to be all about the man and him being happy? Do women not deserve the same amount of happiness as men. If a woman reading and broadening her experiences and education makes her a happier person and feel better about herself then who is to say it is wrong? Also, who is to say that she would not make her husband happier by being smarter and being able to relate to the outside world.
Then the next sentence that really hit another nerve with me was this one “Have these been the learned, the accomplished women; the women who could speak many languages, who could solve problems, and elucidate systems of philosophy? –NO.” p. 558. In this sentence she is referring to an earlier statement about women who have been honored and who have been remembered in this world. She is saying that no woman has ever been remembered for being smart, solving problems, or even being accomplished. That is nonsense. Women have the same right to being remembered for being accomplished as men. I almost feel like she could not possibly believe this herself, but that a man figure in her life must be making her think and write this way. This is just nonsense.
She then goes on to say that the woman has many wonderful sides and personalities, but the most important one is when the character she shows and the job she does when she is called in to deal with sickness. Well, there again that’s absurd. I do not believe for one minute that it is a woman or a man’s job to take care of the sick. This going straight to a personality trait. Some people are good at handling and soothing the sick, that is why they are doctors. Then there are people like myself who would be a terrible doctor because I am not really sensitive. This is not to say that I am a bad woman, it just says that I have other strong points in my life. Every person is born with different strong points, and if we are all able to focus on those points then the world will be a better place because we will all do what we are the strongest at.
Then towards the end of the story I was just ready to quit reading and throw the book away. I mean, I know she is speaking from a totally different perspective, but it just seems outrageous to me. I suppose because I was raised believing I could do anything I want, etc. Just like most children are raised today. Another reason I believe this poem really struck me so much is because I am a woman golfer, and being a woman golfer is challenging sometimes. Men are not always happy to see me at the course, and I have even been told that golf is a man’s game. There again that is absurd. However, when she starts saying that conversation is very powerful towards the end I go excited thinking, well she does believe the woman should be educated so she can carry a conversation with her wife. However, then she goes on to say that she should carry on a conversation about his interest. In other words she should find out what he likes to do, such as fox hunting, and then talk to him about that. She says, the evening will pass so pleasantly if the woman carries on such a conversation. Well, there again she completely leaves out the fact that there may be things the wife is interested in that they could talk about. Instead the wife is just an object who is there to serve every need of the husband, and practically be a slave even to the point of carrying on a conversation. I would have a real problem living in society at this time! Possibly if I were raised in it, I would have adapted well, but after seeing where we have evolved to, I am glad the world has changed.