Vindications and the Limitation of Masculinity

While Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman addresses the need to educate women and encourage their rational development, Wollstonecraft speaks almost exclusively to men, exploiting current masculine philosophy and arguing that under God, all of mankind is virtuous.  I find her style and execution particularly compelling as she often uses ideas already supported by educated society to further her own points.  To express the dire situation of women, she questions masculinity itself, comparing the various positions of men and women to show the danger of subordination in 18th century England.  Ultimately, Wollstonecraft calls for a relaxation of the masculine sphere and for universal reason, virtue, and knowledge.

"The Swing" Jean-Honore Fragonard (1767)

In her Introduction, Wollstonecraft debunks male anxieties about the rise of "masculine women," jokingly stating that should women begin to show "ardour in hunting, shooting, and gaming, [she] shall most cordially join in [their] cry" (110).  While the Vindications can be seen as a somewhat radical piece for the time, Wollstonecraft makes her boundaries quite clear; she never attempts to commandeer the physical duties and activities of masculine life, even going as far as to praise and congratulate men for their superior physical strength.  What Wollstonecraft does not relent on are "manly virtues," attributes which belong to mankind but are excluded from women.  Should these virtues continue to be considered manly, Wollstonecraft hopes that women "may every day grow more and more masculine" (110).  She dismisses the "pretty feminine phrases" that men use to perpetuate women as weak and dependent and hopes that rational men will understand her call for a more masculine woman.  Her closing argument, and the idea I think most pertinent to the rest of her essay, is that "artificial weakness" leads to subordination and tyranny, a fact observable throughout history by both men and women.

Wollstonecraft begins Chapter 1 by arguing that since we are all God's creatures, and since God created us to be above brutes, we must improve ourselves and overcome our passions through rationality.  To deny this to women is to deny them their humanness and their relationship with God.  Cleverly, Wollstonecraft connects the subordination of women to kingship and the various professional outlets which men take part in.  By doing this, she drives home the fact that subordination in all its forms restricts progression and that "the more equality there is established among men, the more virtue and happiness will reign in society" (122).  She attacks the power of kings, stating that "it is madness to make the fate of thousands depend on the caprice of a weak fellow creature," (122) and argues more broadly that "every profession, in which great subordination of rank constitutes its power, is highly injurious of morality" (123).  She calls out standing armies for their fashion and idle gallantry, sailors for their indolence, and clergy men for their conscious subordination in order to rise and gain respect.  These men, through one way or another, are essentially feminized through their profession, and Wollstonecraft notes the dangerous ability of the profession to shape the progression of society.  Ultimately, to separate innocence from ignorance, women must be given the same individual attention and education that men receive, so that by the time their bodies have developed, their minds will be able to "exercise its own reason" (129). 

As I was writing my post I kept thinking about gender construction and how fluid our conception of sex and gender are today.  I remember reading an article a while back about a baby that was being raised genderless by its family.  It was a pretty interesting read, and while this isn't the exact article, it goes to show how differently people treat male and female babies.


Discussion Questions:

To what extent does Wollstonecraft agree with or disagree with her male contemporaries? How does she shape her claims in relation to them?

It sometimes seems as though Wollstonecraft tries to distance herself from other women.  Do you consider her a feminist? In what ways is she radical and in what ways is she conservative?