Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Contemporary feminism essay
Modern feminism and its effect on society
Feminism and modern society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Contemporary feminism essay
Thomas Jefferson once wisely said that “in matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.” In Thomas Jefferson’s “Declaration of Independence” he broaches serious matters of principles and stood “like a rock” against King George III’s inadequate and cruel autocracy. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson explicitly states twenty-seven situations when the King misused his power and violated the colonists’ “inalienable rights” of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, therefore, impelling the colonist's separation from their mother country. In Ariel Levy’s “Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture” she also addresses certain matters of principle-such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. …show more content…
Levy wrote about how she was a feminist all her life who attended a feminist college that can kick her out if she used "girl"(38) to belittle other women. However, she disclosed that this mainstream culture affected how she talked. Levy stated how she started using "chick"(38), which she mentioned was only because of the culture around her and this was important because “girl” and “chick” were used by men who refer to the type of women they meet at a bar-women who were very vulgar and “raunchy”(39). This was significant because if she was a feminist who was affected by this culture, then to what extent will the next generation of women go to in order to feel empowered? Like how Levy used an example to strengthen her argument of credibility, Jefferson wrote not one but twenty-seven struggles that displayed when the British “Prince”(33) misused his power. The reasons written by Jefferson belittled the British King’s authority, but they also uncovered the struggle that the colonists’ went through before they had enough. These reasons indicate how much these people have endured through the cruel government of a “Prince”(33) before they decided as a unified group to declare the separation from their mother country. As a result, both Levy and Jefferson use of examples …show more content…
To show relatable struggles, Jefferson writes to King George III out of respect the twenty-seven situations when the King misused his power. Some of Jefferson’s examples included the King establishing arbitrary government, disregarding petitions, and by destroying the lives of the colonists-in order to make the connection between Jefferson’s message and his empathy for his fellow-colonists who paid the price for the King’s cruelty. Jefferson argued that the matters of principle that he stood for were deprived by King George III’s cruel government that destroyed the colonists’ lives. Similarly, Levy also addressed her matters of principle, however, she focused the effect of modern pop culture on recent generation of women when it came to feeling liberated because of the way these women acted. Levy used her mother’s generation, pop culture influences, and how even she fell into the bacchanal behaviours women tried to embody. Both Jefferson and Levy strongly believed in the matters of principle-such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Jefferson believed that all men were created equal; if a government was abusing its power to take away any of these human rights, then he believed it was the citizen's duty to overthrow that government. Like Jefferson, Levy stood for
However, the author 's interpretations of Jefferson 's decisions and their connection to modern politics are intriguing, to say the least. In 1774, Jefferson penned A Summary View of the Rights of British America and, later, in 1775, drafted the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (Ellis 32-44). According to Ellis, the documents act as proof that Jefferson was insensitive to the constitutional complexities a Revolution held as his interpretation of otherwise important matters revolved around his “pattern of juvenile romanticism” (38). Evidently, the American colonies’ desire for independence from the mother country was a momentous decision that affected all thirteen colonies. However, in Ellis’ arguments, Thomas Jefferson’s writing at the time showed either his failure to acknowledge the severity of the situation or his disregard of the same. Accordingly, as written in the American Sphinx, Jefferson’s mannerisms in the first Continental Congress and Virginia evokes the picture of an adolescent instead of the thirty-year-old man he was at the time (Ellis 38). It is no wonder Ellis observes Thomas Jefferson as a founding father who was not only “wildly idealistic” but also possessed “extraordinary naivete” while advocating the notions of a Jeffersonian utopia that unrestrained
In his essay “The American Revolution as a Response to British Corruption”, historian Bernard Bailyn makes the argument that the American Revolution was inherently conservative because its main goal was to preserve what Americans believed to be their traditional rights as English citizens. He argues that the minor infringements on traditional liberties, like the Stamp Act and the royal ban on lifetime tenure of colonial judges (even though Parliament ruled that judges in England should exercise this right), made the Americans fear that they would set a precedent for future greater infringements on their English liberties. To prove this argument, Baliyan quotes famous primary sources, like John Dickinson, Sam Adams, and various colonial rulings.
When it comes to the topic of the American Revolution, most of us will readily agree that it influenced essentially every code of ethics in today’s society. Patrick Henry and Thomas Paine address an identical topic. That is, they both provided inspiration to the American Revolution cause. Patrick henry on one point of view, speaks of the harshness of the British rule over the American colonies. In his statement, Patrick Henry addresses the oppressive British rule and emphasis grounds to maintain basic human rights. “Common Sense”, on the other hand stresses on the trials and tribulations of the American colonies under the British rule. With the use of persuasion in their writings, both Henry and Paine support the war against the Great Britain.
Women have been forced to conform to social and gender stereotypes for centuries. In part of that, they some times re-enforce those stereotypes by being the personification of those stereotypes. Saying that women belong in the kitchen or that they are less intellectual than males creates an inappropriate expectation towards women. These stereotypes cause women to be the stepping stools for men making women seems inferior when they are compared to males. This affects women by being unable to reach the higher standards that men possess. In “Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture” written by Ariel Levy, she speaks of women who have become aware of these higher standards; thus, conform to male stereotypes. This causes them to become female chauvinist pigs. Contrasting Levy would be Jayme Poisson and her article “Parents Keep Child’s Gender Secret”. In her article she details a baby named Storm and his/hers parents push to create a genderless baby. Making Storm this way is their desire to have their child be free of social and gender stereotypes. Whether a female is conforming to stereotypes or simply disregarding them, they will
Accessed April 3, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41420902. Rozbicki, Michal Jan. Culture and Liberty in the Age of the American Revolution. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press, 2011. Accessed April 3, 2014.
Society continually places restrictive standards on the female gender not only fifty years ago, but in today’s society as well. While many women have overcome many unfair prejudices and oppressions in the last fifty or so years, late nineteenth and early twentieth century women were forced to deal with a less understanding culture. In its various formulations, patriarchy posits men's traits and/or intentions as the cause of women's oppression. This way of thinking diverts attention from theorizing the social relations that place women in a disadvantageous position in every sphere of life and channels it towards men as the cause of women's oppression (Gimenez). Different people had many ways of voicing their opinions concerning gender inequalities amound women, including expressing their voices and opinions through their literature. By writing stories such as Daisy Miller and The Yellow Wallpaper, Charlotte Perkins Gilman and Henry James let readers understand and develop their own ideas on such a serious topic that took a major toll in American History. In this essay, I am going to compare Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper” to James’ “Daisy Miller” as portraits of American women in peril and also the men that had a great influence.
When Thomas Jefferson wrote the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, it became one of his greatest legacies. In the first line he wrote, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" (U.S. Constitution, paragraph 2). Jefferson wrote these words to give inspiration to future generations in the hopes that they would be able to change what he either would or could not. The word “men” in the Declaration in the early 1700 and 1800’s meant exactly that, but even then it only was true for some men, not all. Women, children, and other segments of the population such as slaves and Native Americans were clearly not included. Jefferson himself was a slave owner and held the belief that women were inferior to men. Though women played no role in the political environment, they were crucial to the development and economic success of the times. The strength, courage and work ethic of pioneer women like Martha Ballard in “A Midwife’s Tale” (Thatcher, 1990) created the very fabric of the community and wove it together so the community could thrive.
In America today, when the name of honor is often adulterated by glaring headlines proclaiming the guilt of an immoral politician or the fall of a disgraced executive, it is easy to forget that the country was founded for the pursuit of truth, for only in truth can people find real happiness. Thomas Jefferson famously included the pursuit happiness as an unalienable right in the Declaration of Independence, but in an intimate letter to William Roscoe, a British historian, Jefferson wrote, “This institution will be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead.” In his flagship novel, All the King’s Men, Robert Penn Warren embraces the Founding Father’s principles with his characterization of both Willie Stark and Jack Burden. Warren’s novel is an American classic because it traces the lives of two lost men as each man follows his personalized compass pointing towards complete understanding. After elevating him to unprecedented heights, Willie’s interpretation of truth returns to drag him down to the Underworld. Only when Jack learns that not even Willie can be omnipotent does he stop trying to understand everything. Willie Stark and Jack Burden embody the essence of Thomas Jefferson’s words because, in a sense, they both attain freedom through their pursuit of truth.
When the King of England began to infringe on the colonists’ liberties, leaders inspired by the enlightenment grouped together to defend the rights of the American colonies. As Thomas Jefferson writes in the Declaration of Independence, “History of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States” (Jefferson 778). The citizens of France, inspired by the enlightenment, desired a government run by the people. Marquis de Lafayette wrote, “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights; social distinctions may be based only upon general usefulness” (de Lafayette 783).
The start of the American Revolution, described by Edmund Morgan as, “the shot heard around the world,” was the “Americans’ search for principles” (Bender 63). Although the world’s colonies did not necessarily seek independence much like the Americans, the world’s colonies were nonetheless tired of the “administrative tyranny” being carried out by their colonizers (Bender 75). The American Revolution set a new standard in the colonies, proclaiming that the “rights of Englishmen” should and must be the “rights of man,” which established a new set foundation for the universal rights of man (Bender 63). This revolution spread new ideas of democracy for the colonized world, reshaping people’s expectations on how they should be governed. Bender emphasizes America as challenging “the old, imperial social forms and cultural values” and embracing modern individualism” (Bender 74). Bender shapes the American Revolution as a turning point for national governments. The American Revolution commenced a new trend of pushing out the old and introducing new self-reliant systems of government for the former
“The story of post-revolutionary America,” writes Rosemarie Zagarri, “is the story of how American women and men sought to define – and ultimately to limit and restrict – the expansive ideals they had so successfully deployed against Britain.” In this excerpt from Revolutionary Backlash, Zagarri depicts the extreme radicalism of the American Revolution, while also suggesting that there were some constraints to its extremism. Unlike the normal way of life in European government and society, Americans desired a nation in which the inherent rights and freedoms of individuals were recognized and respected. While these rights and freedoms were ultimately achieved, many groups of people were still left out. Women of all kinds, people of color, and men of poverty were often unable to enjoy and appreciate America’s newfound rights and freedoms. Despite these limits and restrictions, however, the American Revolution was still extremely radical in the sense that it was able to surpass traditional, European political and social ideology.
In the analysis of the issue in question, I have considered Mary Wollstonecraft’s Text, Vindication of the Rights of Woman. As an equivocal for liberties for humanity, Wollstonecraft was a feminist who championed for women rights of her time. Having witnessed devastating results or men’s improvidence, Wollstonecraft embraced an independent life, educated herself, and ultimately earned a living as a writer, teacher, and governess. In her book, “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman,” she created a scandal perhaps to her unconventional lifestyle. The book is a manifesto of women rights arguing passionately for educating women. Sensualist and tyrants appear right in their endeavor to hold women in darkness to serve as slaves and their plaything. Anyone with a keen interest in women rights movement will surely welcome her inexpensive edition, a landmark documen...
Feminism has come a long way in establishing equal social, political, and economic rights for women. However, the rise of “raunch culture” has defined unrealistic mentalities for women. Some of the women that Ariel Levy, author of the “Female Chauvinist Pigs” article, has interviewed do not want to be compared to other women because they don’t wish to be viewed as overly sensitive, whose desires consist of only caring about their appearance. They want to become exceptions to the stereotype that women are weak by trying to identify with men, since masculinity is perceived as powerful. Women also feel as if it’s their responsibility to please men and make them more comfortable, as it is insinuated by the co-executive producer of The Man Show, Jennifer Heftler. She claims that, “If you can show you’re one of the good guys, it’s good” (“Female Chauvinist Pigs” 276).
Both Thoreau and Emerson argue that asserting one’s opinions is crucial to attaining a better society. Emerson decries the danger of societal conformity and challenges the reader to “speak what you think now in hard words” in order to remedy it (Emerson 367). Likewise, Thoreau speculates that if “every man make known what kind of government would command his respect” it would be “one step toward obtaining it” (Thoreau 381). With these remarkably similar statements, both transcendentalists appeal to the reader’s patriotism by using language evocative of the agitated and outraged colonial Americans who demanded the people’s voice be heard in government. Although published roughly a half century later, “Self-Reliance” and “Civil Disobedience” mirror the sentiments of famous Revolution-era leaders such as Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry.
In Mary Freeman’s “The Revolt of Mother”, Freeman attempts to portray the way that one might force an outcome outside of their gender’s sphere of influence. Sarah has wanted a new house for many decades, however her husband has decided to build a new barn on the land that he promised her a house on. In response, Sarah waits until her husband has left town and simply moves into the new barn. The most threatening thing about this action is the fact that she refuses to listen to the townspeople who attempt to get her to “see reason”. Her husband does not seem threatened by the action in the end, indeed, he seems to finally understand that this was a matter of great import. As he says, “Adoniram was like a fortress whose walls had no active resistance, and went down the instant the right besieging tools were used. ‘Why, mother,’ he said, hoarsely, ‘I hadn’t no idee you was so set on’t as all this comes to.’” Instead the townspeople seem more than threatened, indeed, they seem frightened, thinking Sarah mad. Perhaps this is commentary on the nature of feminism. That though men would be patronizing at first, individuals would rarely be excessively opposed to feminist ideals. Instead, the system is that which will be far more threatened as it disturbs the power of those in power. It rocks the foundation of