A Man's World

#9/15/11: While reading The Speech of Miss Polly Baker, I found myself struck profoundly not only by the content of the speech, but indeed by the tone with which the entire piece occurs. Polly Baker is pissed. And by that, I mean she is not submitting to the usual gender roles that in many ways governed the role of women in the Enlightenment. In pre-Enlightenment Europe, the idea of feminism had barely been broached, and as such the traditional laws and customs governing sex and gender relationships had remained unchanged for hundreds of years, and although in France during this time, there seems to be the beginnings of a "sexual revolution" in England, no such thing had occurred. In other words, this was a man's world. For Polly Baker to so ruthlessly attack the courts is one thing, but to do so with such a sense of irreverence is, I believe, a trait indicative of the times she lived in. When we observe political literature from a similar time, we are seeing irreverent, even radical ideas being espoused. Thomas Paine was writing books being censored by the Brits as sedition, and all around the European Continent, writers, thinkers, and publishers were pushing the extreme limits of their respective societies, eager to gain a foothold in a political and social climate that, for centuries, had been the exclusive domain of only the most elite. For someone like Polly who, to be frank, doesn't exactly strike me as a classy lady, to so passionately argue the inequality shown to women in matters of sex to a court, and furthermore to sway them so far as to drop her punishment and have one of the Judges marry her the next day (probably not the smartest political move on his part, but hey, times were different) points to a novel freedom never experienced in old world Europe. For the first time, it seems, the Enlightenment is giving not just a voice, but a powerful, influential voice, to the common man, and through the explosion of mediation during this era, Polly's exploits surely made their way beyond the scope of Connecticut, and very well may have encouraged other women to take a stand against the backwards and grossly unfair legislation concerning sexual crimes.

Growth of Feminine Influence

Rousseau’s Duties of Women explores a very traditional view on the basic difference between the roles of men and women in the development of the family, within society, and in relation to one another. While the immediate impression of women as “weak and passive” and entirely dependant upon their masculine counterparts for sustenance and reasoning appears to be rather archaic for the Enlightenment era that challenged such dated views, their abilities are not. Rousseau clearly illustrates their subtle control, stating “the stronger party seems to be master, but is as a matter of fact dependent on the weaker”. It is this hidden side of the gender power struggle that really interested me.

As women have gained the ability to sustain themselves independently within society, gender roles have unquestionably converged drastically. But has it been the empowerment of women that has granted them more influence, or has the path to power within society been altered to better suit women? When I think of the prototypical that made an individual rose to a position of authority in the 18^th century, I picture the aristocratic elite that determined societal affairs. Today’s culture, whether it be in economically, politically or socially driven more by results and performance than ever before, presenting women with the ever growing opportunity to demonstrate their ability. As women have generally become more assertive, Rousseau’s proposition that “The more women are like men, the less influence they will have over men” seems to be both true and false. Essentially women have transitioned from the objects of passion into additional competition, and “when women become strong, men become still stronger” in a natural reaction to the increasing competition.

At the same time, from my experience, women still have a apparent innate ability to leverage their femininity to maneuver male counterparts to their will. Therefore, I believe the notion that a portion of a woman’s “strength is in her charms” still holds. This ability to affect men’s actions, using the desire of men to act ‘chivalrous’ and please the object of their desire - the ‘delicate’ female – has appreciated in value. The ability to feign a subservience or modesty to behoove a woman’s all-important reputation was crucial in Rousseau’s era. Rousseau wrote that the attitude of ““What will people think” is the grave of a man’s virtue and the throne of a woman’s”. The fact that males can certainly no longer be described as caring “very little what people think” confirms the advantage women have come to possess in their ability to maintain a favorable disposition within society. As Rousseau said, “Cunning is a natural gift of women” that has become ever more valuable in conjunction with their expanded opportunities.