Opression and Freedom of Women in Literatu

For the longest time, women’s role in society was very narrow and set in stone. Women weren’t given the chance to decide life for their own, and there was a very sharp distinction of gender roles. Women were viewed as inferior, weak, and dependant. They were expected to be responsible for the family and maintainance of the house. But as the 19th century began, so did a drastic change in society. Women started voicing their opinions and seeking change. Trying to break away from this ideology called “cult of domesticity” was a lengthy, burdensome, and demanding struggle.

She has been trained to trust in her husband blindly and sees no other way. He calls her “little girl” (352) and “little goose” (349) and states “She will be as sick as she pleases!” (352) whenever she tries to express her issues. Instead of fighting for what she thinks will make her better she accepts it and keeps pushing her feelings aside, while he treats her like a child. We get an instant feel for her problem in the first page when she says, “John laughs at me, of course, but one expects that” (pg 346). A woman shouldn’t expect her husband to laugh at her concerns. Even after briefly writing about her condition she remembers her husband telling her the very worst thing she can do is think about it and follows his instructions. This is when she begins to focus on the house instead of her problems and the obsession with the wallpaper starts. She has nothing else to think about alone in the home; they don’t even allow her to write, which she has to do in secret.

     Relationships seem to be the favorite subject of Kate Chopin’s stories. As Margaret Bauer suggests that Chopin is concerned with exploring the “dynamic interrelation between women and men, women and patriarchy, even women and women” (Bauer 146). In “The Story of an Hour” Chopin deals with the subject of marriage. She illustrates the influence of family alliance on individual freedom. According to Wohlpart,“The Story of an Hour” describes the journey of Mrs. Mallard against the Cult of True Womanhood as she slowly becomes aware of her own desires and thus of a feminine self that has long been suppressed”(Wohlpart 2). The Cult of True Womanhood in the XIX century included “purity” and “domesticity”. The former suggested that women must maintain their virtue. The latter – denied them their intellectual and professional capabilities (Papke 12). Being the victim of this Cult, Louise Mallard was a good example of a wife without “her own desires and feminine self”.

Often John would treat her like a child, in more ways than one. Whenever she would express her troubles or concerns, he would dismiss them, seeing them to be too emotional or irrational. He did what he believed to be in her best interest; however, he only put his own opinion into account. He would speak to her in condescending tones whenever she was discontent, calling her diminutive names such as “blessed little goose” and “little girl”. He would not allow her to do anything that would make her condition worse, depriving her from social contact or any form of entertainment. John’s treatment of the narrator was a contributing factor to her downfall, for he refused to see past his own judgment and conform to her situation. His treatment of his wife was Gilman’s attempt at reflecting her society’s view on women. Women were seen as melodramatic and incapable of making decisions for themselves, which is how John treated the narrator. Without the ability to make her own decisions on her behalf, she had nothing, and thus fell into

An example of the way John treated his wife is, “And after John gathered me up in his arms, and just carried me upstairs and laid me on the bed, and sat by me and read to me till it tired my head.” (Gilman, )

An average, women during the 1960’s were held accountable for many responsibilities. Women led very different lives during this time period. Punctual, responsible, and reliable were just some of the many standards that were expected from society. At the age of twenty women were expected to be married; soon after they would become pregnant. Raising a family and devoting their lives to be the best housewives possible. Legally women made no earnings or any income for that matter. Child care and in vigorous chores were a part of their daily routine. Women had no say financially. Women had one duty, and that was to be a housewife. Men had all the control in marriages; after all they were the bread winners. Women were stuck in a vicious cycle of controlling and power hungry men. Comparing women from the 10960’s to the women in today’s generation is quite astonishing. The women’s rights movement fought for women to be free. Women no longer need to be chained to such degrading and depressing circumstances. Raising a family and having a husband is a beautiful goal most women dream of. However, we should also have the right to decide when we want to marry and to whom we believe is the right candidate. “Why I Want a Wife” written by Judy Brady raises a powerful message on women in the 1960’s. Judy touches upon the idea that women had constantly been expected to be in confined and submissive relationships. Brady perfectly depicts the

Throughout the 1920s, marriage was thought of to be a symbol of love and happiness between a married couple. Along with that came the expectation of starting a family and a new chapter in the couple’s lives. Most marriages that took place were based on romance instead of just marrying just to get money, which was rarely seen. Gender roles had an impact when getting married and starting a family. Living in the 1920’s brought more positive, as well as negative, impacts when it came to restarting the economy. Gender roles in marriage decided who stayed at home to take care of the children along with house duties and who went to work to provide for the family. Throughout these times, gender roles either imposed by society or created within the home, have altered dynamics within the home and society.

The unequal relationship between the narrator and John is a miniature of the larger gender inequity in society. Gilman makes it clear that much of John’s condescending and paternal behavior toward his wife has little to do with her illness. He dismisses her well-thought-out opinions and her “flights of fancy” with equal disdain, while he demeans her creative impulses. He speaks of her as he would a child, calling her his “little girl” and saying of her, “Bless her little heart.” He overrides her judgments on the best course of treatment for herself as he would on any issue, making her live in a house she does not like, in a room she detests, and in an isolated environment, which makes her unhappy and

In "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin, we are introduced to Mrs. Mallard. She is portrayed an unloving, heartless, woman who is overjoyed by the passing of her husband-— or at least that is the common misconception. Mrs. Mallard although perceived as inhuman, is actually more human than most would like to believe. While her actions may seem questionable or even to be condemned, they are hardly unthinkable in light of the issues involving marriage and the woman's role throughout history. The story itself presents a valid argument in favor of Louise as she is portrayed as the oppressed wife finally set free after her husband's death.

A glance at a few of the conversations between John and the narrator will help clarify the roles of husband and wife as the story represents them. Rather than see the husband and wife as equals, the story clearly places the wife in the role of inferior. Nowhere is this made more explicit than in the use of condescending names when referring to his wife. Early on, when the narrator complains of the unsettling décor in her room, John "called [her] a blessed little goose" (Gilman 2); later, when she cannot sleep, he calls her a "little girl" (Gilman 5). When the narrator protests that she is not improving under her treatment, John patronizingly states: "'Bless her little heart!' said he with a big hug, 'she shall be as sick as she pleases!'" (Gilman 5).  Such language use suggests that the narrator is akin to a child, rather than an adult partner of the speaker. Even the narrator herself, within the confines of her own writing, notes that one of her biggest disappointments is that she is unable to fulfill the obligations that come with marriage and motherhood: "It does weigh on me so not to do my duty in any way! I meant to be such a help to John, such a real rest and comfort, and here I am a comparative burden already!" (Gilman 2).

During the early 1800's women were stuck in the Cult of Domesticity. Women had been issued roles as the moral keepers for societies as well as the nonworking house-wives for families. Also, women were considered unequal to their male companions legally and socially. However, women’s efforts during the 1800’s were effective in challenging traditional intellectual, social, economical, and political attitudes about a women’s place in society.

But what is one to do? I did write for a while inspite of them; but it does exhaust me a good deal – having to be so sly about it, or else meet with heavy opposition”. (Gilman, The Yellow Wallpaper, 1898). Here one can see that the narrator wished to work and have a change in her domestic life, but the struggle to keep it a secret from her husband was too great because she knew he would not approve. Marriage, which is supposed to represent unity, love and the coming together of two equal partners was anything but that for the narrator. In the 19th century women were at the mercy of men, even though they marched forward for equality they were still very much dependent on their male counterparts. They were not allowed to have control over their assets and therefor marriage was the best solution to live a comfortable life seeing as their parents could not provide for their daughters forever. In The Yellow Wallpaper the prisonlike feeling that marriage causes the narrator, eventually leads to her insanity. Which for some was probably an actual occurrence in that era. More

Through the minimal interactions that John has with his wife, John is consistently revealed as a superior and patriarchal figure to the narrator-rather than a romantic partner- which results in her subordination within their marriage. The speaker’s trivialization is demonstrated at the very beginning of the story when she admits that her husband “John laughs at [her]” but tries to vindicate him by saying that “one expects that in marriage” (3). Likewise, the speaker introduces John as someone who is “practical in the extreme..., has no patience with faith...and scoffs openly any talk of things not to be felt and seen and put down in figures”

The death of the main character Louise Mallard is a commonly debated topic when discussing “The Story of an Hour.” In Mark Cunningham’s article “The Autonomous Female Self and the Death of Louise Mallard in Kate Chopin’s ‘Story of an Hour’” he makes arguments for the common interpretations of Mrs. Mallards death. He states that “it is critical commonplace” to assume that the sight of her husband alive kills her (n.p.). Even though the story never directly states that Mrs. Mallard sees her husband, it is easier for ones brain to jump to the conclusion that her

In her novel Woman in the Nineteenth Century (1845), Margaret Fuller discusses the essence of marriage as a union and how the past ties in with dreams of the future. When describing the sacrament of marriage and unity, Fuller expresses that the “highest grade of marriage union… may be expressed as pilgrimage toward a common shrine.” In other words, Fuller’s idea of marriage is built upon the theory that marriage is a two-person ordeal, and both parties involved must strive for and worship the same ideals, both in each other and in the outside world. Furthermore, Fuller, while noting that she wrote the novel at the midpoint of her life, takes another look in the new light of day that age and wisdom have granted her at the symbols and objects which she used to consider important. While doing so, she notices that “some fair effigies that once stood for symbols of human destiny have been broken.” Fuller emphasizes the reality that symbols can change in meaning over time and need to be re-evaluated from time to time instead of being continually adored. Rather than clinging to symbols in the hopes that the dreams they represent can be realized, sometimes those dreams should be acknowledged as impossible to achieve rather than being used as unsteady pieces of flotsam to cling onto an unrealistic shipwreck of a dream. Furthering her argument that things which used to hold hope for the future while in the dawn of life should be acknowledged but not used