Discrimination In The Bros Club

Both Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Mary Wollstonecraft agree that in society women and men are not equals. Rousseau’s idea that socialization brings inequality in his Discourse On the Origin of Inequality is manipulated by Wollstonecraft in her A Vindication of the Rights of Women. She uses his arguments to prove that the inequality between men and women is not natural, but it comes from Rousseau’s idea of socialized inequality. The inequality experienced by women is a product of society, which Wollstonecraft tries to prove by uses Rousseau’s arguments about language and dependency.

Jean Jacques Rousseau was a French philosopher in 1712-1778. He believed that all humans are born innocent and what corrupt them and makes evil is society. He believes that if there was no society it would not make human beings feel so judged, shy or depended on others. Without society people would feel more equal they would not want to compare themselves Humans would feel freer. Rousseau thought that society weakens humans that if someone were to grow up in a natural place and place far from society they would be stronger. Compared o the people that grow up in a society they weaken.

Wollstonecraft transcended the notion that she is simply expressing grievances over the unjust treatment of women establishing herself as an articulate, intellectual thinker with innovative ideas and solutions for progressing society. Through voicing her opinions, Wollstonecraft created a small revolution for women’s rights that would encourage others to begin seeking equal treatment from the men of society.

In addition to education, Wollstonecraft brings the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau to the reader’s attention because he claims that women should not feel independent, and they should be a man’s companion. “…In 1792 the British writer Mary Wollstonecraft directly confronts Rousseau’s views of women and their education…” This “initiated a debate that echoed throughout the centuries followed.” Even today, this debate is still prevalent among both young and old people.

Wollstonecraft doesn’t only attack Rousseau, however. She goes as far to say "that all the writers who have written on the subject of female education and manners-have contributed to render women more artificial, weak characters, than they would otherwise have been; and, consequently, more useless members of society" (21). Although she appears to disagree strongly with Rousseau, I don’t believe that this is always the case. In her writing, Wollstonecraft is not necessarily breaking with Rousseau's central moral position; she is simply demanding that it be extended to women.

Rousseau wanted the state to be a legitimate democracy, a society that united together the people in freedom, equality and civic devotion. Rousseau believed that an individual fulfils his moral potential not in isolation but as part of a community where all members are committed to helping each other. This belief led Rousseau to ancient Greek society for which he felt a great admiration. He believed the Greeks lived in 'organic communities', cities where the citizens set aside personal interests in order to attain the common good. Rousseau's ideal state was one of a smaller size but one where the citizens were welded together in the spirit of 'fraternity'. People would therefore have the opportunity to get know each other, resulting in an enthusiastic contribution to all public affairs. Such a political environment produces free and committed citizens. In contrast, the large modern day states are ruled by an absolute monarch, creating 'servile subjects', which Rousseau despised.8

states, “I may be accused of arrogance; still I must declare firmly what I believe that all the writers who have written on the subject of female education and manners from Rousseau to Dr.Gregory have contributed to render women more artificial, weak characters than they would have other wise been; and consequently more useless members of society” (22). Wollstonecraft believed that men who advocated for the trivial education that women received, if they received any education at all, did not even adequately prepare them for the one role that they were allowed, that of a wife.

When writing “A Vindication of the Rights of Men”, Wollstonecraft was a woman in a “man’s world”. Her voice was a lone female amongst the opinions and politics of men and she “went up against two of the

Everyone should be treated as equals. However, in Mary Wollstonecraft’s era, women did not have the same equal rights as men. It was a time period of sexism and double standards. In her work Vindication of the Rights of Women, she argues and defends for the equality of women. Wollstonecraft believed that everyone has the ability to reason and learn; therefore women should be able to receive the same amount of necessities involving proper education, support, attitude, respect, etc., that are needed in order to accomplish goals as any other person, in this case, men. As of today in the 21st century, Wollstonecraft would be disappointed due to the amount of disrespect society contributes on women, as well as some women who have no respect for their own self-worth. In order to improve, changes must start from within.

In Wollstonecraft’s work, she addresses the differences between men and women as being something that should be considered negligible, but instead is used to practically enslave one half of the population. The work details how women are akin to playthings when they lack an education, and that for her to truly be herself and practice her own free will, she must be knowledgeable. However, there are many different kinds of education, Wollstonecraft points out. Men received a formal education, consisting of a proper teaching of many subjects, while also aiding the young men in personal growth. Women, on the other hand, received a much less formal education. In their day to day lives, women observed, they leeched off

Neither Mary Wollstonecraft nor Karl Marx were content with the society in which they were living in during their time, and they both had different ideas and how to change it. They both agreed that our species is unique in that all humans have the ability and potential to control their lives and make what they want out of it. They have the ability to feel good about themselves and have a sense of self-fulfillment. However, each of these philosophers had a different opinion in mind on which obstacle was preventing humans from making full use of their potential to succeed and be happy. Wollstonecraft, in particular, was referring to how women do not get the same opportunities as men due to the fact that they are not looked at as equal to men. This was due to a few reasons. Men were being biased towards females, they could not get a good education, and most women themselves did not see a need to change. Wollstonecraft felt that the way to combat all this was to start allowing women to get the same education as men do, which would also allow them to be independent. Only then will they realize that women are just as intelligent and rational as men themselves are. Marx, on the other hand,

From obiendience to the father, to not subordinated to the husband, women are constantly chained with oppression. Rousseau stresses that feelings and passions are directed to the women, and that wit and rationale are for the men. Wollstonecraft, on the other hand, tries to bring together passion and rationale, rather than separating them and dividing one for women and one for men. Instead of trying to imply that women deserve the opportunity to take on the “man's roles,” Wollstonecraft tries to prove that by combinding both traits will better society as a whole. She provides a solution for men to, “generously snap our chains, and be content with rational fellowship instead of slavish obedience, they would find us more obervant daughters, more affectionate sisters, more faithful wives, more senseable mothers- in a word, better citizens” (Wollstoncraft, The Enlightenment Reader, Page 628). Wollstoncraft agrees with Rousseau's ideals of women needing to be good mothers and respectable wives, but she adds that men also need to take up more responsibilities in the household. She continues support the notion that men too need to be good fathers and decent husbands that meet an intellectual partnership with their wives; furthermore, both species can discuss rational thoughts as indistinguishable citizens in the household. It is only when there is gender symmetry in the

If one were to look at the argument that Wollstonecraft raises about identity, we will see that she would argue that it is largely formed by social dynamics. (Rights of woman, 57) She would say that a child could be born adventurous and outgoing. However, as they grow, society comes in to teach them through the parents and school. This can, depending on the community which they are raised, could have them to choose an identity to form a placid person. It is after all, society that often determines the roles of certain peoples are able to fill in that community. And how others should react to said role given. What each person’s gender, social level and careers that can be given effect the outcome and education each will receive. This then

On one occasion Rousseau claims that women were only made to please man, and that this is natural law by saying “…woman was specifically made to please man. If man ought to please her in turn, the necessity is less direct. His merit lies in his power; he pleases simply because he is strong. I grant you this is not the law of love; but it is the law of nature, which is older than love itself.” Rousseau is trying to convey that sexual distinction certainly exists and that it was meant to be this way.

From a moral perspective, In the Vindication, Wollstonecraft argues that women are naturally inferior to men. Whereas, individuals like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in addition to most men believed women's virtues were different than men's. I think Wollstonecraft was trying to explain that while men were physically superior to women, their Creator gifted both sexes with souls. Both men and women are capable of logical reason and attempt to achieve a certain level of integrity. Virtue is not relative to sex but to individual differences, which means that everyone's conduct should result from the same moral principles and have the same kind of individual goals.