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 18th 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.
