Analysis Of The Radical Ideas By Mary Wollstonecraft

Continuing, Wollstonecraft also focuses on the education system of the 18th century as continuing a dilemma, in which women are trained to focus upon their bodies and sexuality. Similar to Rousseau, who divides women into the categories of “good and dissolute, or whores,” Wollstonecraft also categorizes women based on their vanity and their sexuality. Accordingly, Wollstonecraft attempts to base the vindication of a woman’s rights upon her ability to distance herself from her physical appearance or sexuality, by condemning vanity and sexuality as a means for re-classify a woman from her position as a wife to mistress, diminishing the societal worth and self-worth of a female. Consequently, the focus on a woman’s role as a modest wife and mother
is re-affirmed. Typecasting a woman based on her desires to explore her sexuality, and enjoy sexual pleasure appears to fit into the patriarchal system, in which the pleasures of males are celebrated, and the pleasures of women are ostracized. By equating female sexuality with a lack of self respect, Wollstonecraft assumes that the solution to female emancipation is through women being taught to respect themselves in a specified manner that would allow for them to properly attend to their domestic duties, so that their active minds could embrace everything. However, in my perception this appears to be just another means to confine woman to the private sphere as mothers or wives.
Furthermore, even if women were able to attain emancipation through Wollstonecraft’s theories, her solution is only accessible to a narrow audience providing only a certain demographic of women with the opportunity to be liberated.
In order for women to be able to immerse themselves within the working world of the public sphere, Wollstonecraft discusses the necessity of having a “servant maid to take off…the servile part of the household business”. In order to afford such a service, as discussed by Susan Ferguson within The Radical Ideas of Mary Wollstonecraft, a woman must possess some wealth and be within an economic class that would provide her with the convenience of having the opportunity to hire help. Through promoting the idea of a policy that would exclude those with a lower economic status, while continuing to comprehend the idea of “working woman,” it appears that most of Wollstonecraft’s theories regarding women’s rights specifically addresses the rights of middle class women, who have both the luxury to hire help and the necessity to tackle the work
force.
Similarly, the classist elements of Wollstonecraft’s argument continues within her description of an ideal educational system. For example, after age 9, boys and girls destined for domestic or mechanical trades are segregated from other students and forced to attend other schools and receive instruction in those areas of employment. For children of superior ability or fortune, there is another school in which they would be taught the dead languages, advanced politics, history, and so on. The key determinant in deciding whether a woman will be able to interact with the public world, or continue domestic duties for other women is predominately determined by fortune (synonymous with wealth in this context), which can dictate the type of education an individual receives, either limiting or furthering one’s educational opportunities. By limiting the scope of her argument, Wollstonecraft ignores the necessities and barriers women within lower economic classes face, by continuing to condemn their positions within society through a limited access to opportunity.
Additionally, there appears to be a reoccurring theme within Wollstonecraft’s work that attempts to shape women into a singular mold, consequently limiting their autonomy.
The idea of consent is one of the central elements missing from Wollstonecraft’s vindication of women’s rights, as she asserts only her perception of what a woman should be and how every woman should participate within society. As Carole Pateman discusses in Women and Consent if the “freedom and equality [of women] is to be preserved, free and equal individuals must voluntarily commit themselves through consent”. However, through Wollstonecraft’s determination to typecast women, women are forced to assimilate into a specified social role in order to be considered to be a woman worthy of vindication. Wollstonecraft even suggests the political and societal coercion of women by the state towards preserving the natural duties of women. Once again, restraining a woman’s opportunity for choice. Although, Wollstonecraft outlines her intent as being based on the removal of the objectification and hyper-sexualization of women by men, a women’s choice to embrace her body and sexuality should not also be denied. The focus upon marriage and a woman’s role to please her husband, now through her intelligence rather than her body, still emphasizes the patriarchal idea that symbolizes women as property within her marriage. The only difference is Wollstonecraft suggests society fetishize a woman’s ability to hold
conversation with her husband, rather than entice him with her body. And although, this might be a step in the right direction, women are still severely limited within their opportunity to engage within the public sphere, as their primary focus is limited to their home, husband and children.
Wollstonecraft’s disregard for self-ownership and the consent of women is further exemplified when she Wollstonecraft delineates acceptable and not acceptable practices for woman within the middle class. For example, Wollstonecraft describes “gardening, experimental philosophy, and literature” as “appropriate pursuits,” notwithstanding that autonomy for a woman should also take into consideration the ability for a woman to choose her own time passes and hobbies, undictated by societal standards.
Furthermore, the overall tone of Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Woman appears to blame women for their state within society. There is an emphasized focus on what women must do to rectify their positions within society, rather than having a focus on how men could help women achieve their liberation. Women are held solely accountable for their positions for their oppressed roles within society. Wollstonecraft speaks as though women enjoy their lack of rights, and as if they have assumed their roles contentedly, ignoring the stipulations within society that shape her own solutions to female oppression, such as the classism and patriarchy that she also tries to perpetuate.
When addressing the vindication of female rights, Mary Wollstonecraft’s tendency to typecast women into societal roles that are primarily based upon the private sphere, her inclination to shame women who do not fit into her perception of who a woman should be, the limited scope of her arguments contain classist and patriarchal elements, in addition to her lack of regard towards the consent of women does not promote the emancipation of women, but instead perpetuate the oppression of female rights.