Category: Gender

Sexuality, gender, and patriarchy are all common themes in many of Shakespeare’s plays. Both gender ambiguity and sexual stereotypes are used as a means of character manipulation and plot development in several of his plays. During the Elizabethan Era, Shakespeare was influenced by social norms regarding gender, sexuality, status, etc. Both men and women accepted their roles according to the society that they lived in; which is why many of Shakespeare’s references to gender and sex were admissible in the 16th century. It is important to understand why Shakespeare took a patriarchal approach to theater and how he displayed it through an all-male cast. Understanding the context of his writing allows for a more accurate interpretation of gender ambiguity and references of sexuality in plays such as Othello, Twelfth Night, and Macbeth.

In Twelfth Night, Shakespeare’s use of gender ambiguity is seen in the character of Viola. Viola’s master plan to ensure her own safety in Illyria is to serve the Duke Orsino. “Conceal me what I am / I’ll serve this duke. / Thou shall present me as a eunuch to him” (1.2.50-53). While Viola does not directly state her desire for a masculine appearance, it can be inferred from the lines “present me as a eunuch to him,” that her intentions were just that. In the Elizabethan era, the roles of women in society were very limited and men were considered to be the ‘leaders’, which explains Viola’s decision to become ‘Cesario’, a servant. In the Elizabethan era, women were forbidden to be casted in plays, which further proliferates the intense ambiguity of Viola’s character. Most if-not-all of Shakespeare’s plays were performed by an all-male cast. However, this arrangement would make a play like Twelfth Night quite confusing. Viola would have been played by a male actor, that looks like a woman, dressed as a man. The gender ambiguity had a greater impact on the live performance much more than script itself. A new school of thought has emerged that evaluates Shakespaere’s approach to gender roles in relation to modern movements and stereotypes.

Many ideas regarding Shakespeare’s use of female characters as propaganda and manipulation have been misinterpreted by modern critics. Shakespeare was not a misogynist for having female roles played by men, nor by conforming to the patriarchy of his time period. In fact, William Shakespeare would be considered a modern Elizabethan feminist. Shakespeare was doing the very thing that feminist today are doing, deconstructing social and gender normalities. By having an all-male cast, the ambiguity of gender forces the audience to deconstruct their own stereotypes about gender to thoroughly understand the play. While this theory does have its flaws, it’s very insightful to view the atmosphere of Shakespeare’s work through a modern lens. Today, many of Shakespeare’s plays could very well be categorized as misogynistic or heavily prejudice by some. An all-male cast four hundred years ago would certainly not have produced the same public response that it would today. Much of society during Shakespeare’s time had revolved around the idea of men being the ‘superiors’; this notion had become second nature in both society and theater.

Shakespeare’s play Macbeth demonstrates how William Shakespeare fused the idea of male superiority and manifested that into the relationship between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. Throughout the play, Shakespeare made it clear that being a woman meant being weak, frail and emotionally unstable. Contrarily, being a man meant being strong, forceful and strict. Macbeth’s lack of ambition and ruthlessness prevents him from fulfilling his plan to kill King Duncan. However, Lady Macbeth, devoted to becoming queen, questions her own sexuality upon hearing of Macbeth’s inability to seize the throne. “Unsex me here, And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full Of direst cruelty!… Come to my woman’s breasts, And take my milk for gall”(1.5.30-38). Lady Macbeth wants to get rid of her womanhood to replace it with steoretypical manlike qualities that would make her powerful enough to commit the murder of King Duncan. In this famous quote, Shakespeare makes reference to Deuteronomy where the term ‘gall’ refers to the venom of a poisonous snake. This biblical allusion indicates not only the desire, but the temptation of Lady Macbeth to be stripped of her woman-like qualities. Shakespeare’s reference to the bible shows just how much both religion and social norms influenced his plays.

Shakespeare’s expressions of gender-ambiguity and sexuality through characters such as Viola and Lady Macbeth both magnify the societal norms during the Elizbethan era. Lady Macbeth’s plea to be stripped of her physical sex is fueled by her obsession with power. Her calls for “direst” cruelty only implies her desire to be cruel enough, or man enough, to conduct the plan. It was often believed that a woman who refused to behave like one was possessed by a demon. This idea of women believing in changing their sex was considered so far beyond rational that they were deemed ‘sick’, which foreshadows the latter events in Macbeth. Thus, after examining both Viola and Lady Macbeth, two characters that demonstrate Shakespeare’s transgender motifs and use of gender ambiguity, it is only fair to analyze a character that suffers from the product of patriarchy itself.

Shakespeare’s Othello was strongly influenced by the patriarchal conditioning and culture of the Elizabethan Era. Othello allowed for a setting that portrayed women as inherently promiscuous, due to the time period that it was set in. Throughout the play, all three women, Desdemona, Emailia, and Bianca, all fall victim to the man they commit themselves to. Desdemona is arguably the character that is most affected by the ‘social conditioning’, that is domestic abuse. Having been told that Desdemona had an affair with Cassio, Othello verbally abuses Desdemona by calling her a whore, a commoner, and a devil. Othello made violent threats to harm and kill Desdemona, which gradually escalated throughout the play until he murders her. When Emilia asks Desdemona after she has been fatally wounded, “Oh, Who hath done this deed?”–she responds “Nobody. I myself. Farewell” (5.2.136-138). Desdemonna herself struggles to identify her abuse out of fear and inferiority. Her response is a measure of how subordinate women had become during this time to their husbands, despite their innocence. Shakespeare’s portrayal of this domestic violence from Othello taps into the dark reality of what some women face today. This enforces the idea that women were constantly targeted and victimized regardless of their innocence.

The way that Shakespeare portrays the typical 16th century woman holds similar truth to what we experience today. Analyzing this particular scene from a modern perspective, the resemblance between a play written nearly four centuries ago to modern reality is uncanny to say the least. Shakespeare’s themes of abuse and objectifying women in Othello is present in our world today. Much like Twelfth Night and Macbeth, the victims of the story are those subject to the products of patriarchy.

In conclusion, Shakespeare viewed the social normalities of sexuality and gender in a new light and sought to deconstruct them in his plays. Shakespeare’s writings were influenced by a patriarchy that controlled the roles in society for both men and women, but rather than accepting those stereotypes he exposes the truth of a culture enveloped in masculine superiority. His method for deconstructing social norms allowed plays like Othello, Macbeth, and Twelfth Night to be light-hearted plots with emotionally captivating characters. Shakespeare will continue to be studied because his plays are constantly reinterpreted from a contemporary perspective as society evolves. Shakespeare’s patriarchal approach to theatre is what allowed him to interpret the society that he lived in, expose its flaws, and remain loved for his gift of storytelling.

Works Cited

1. Dusinberre, Juliet. Shakespeare and the Nature of Women. London:Macmillan Press, Ltd, 1996. Print.
2. Friedman, Sharon. Feminist Theatrical Revisions of Classic Works. Jefferson: McFarland, 2008.Print.
3. Gajowski, Evelyn. Presentism, gender, and sexuality in Shakespeare. Basingstoke England: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Print.
4. Greene, Gayle, Carolyn Ruth Swift Lenz, and Carol Thomas Neely, ed. The Woman’s Part: Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. University of Illinois Press: Urbana and Chicago, 1983. Print.
5. Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. The Merchant of Venice. Harlow, Essex, England :Longman, 1994.
6. Shakespeare, William,, Mowat, Barbara A. Werstine, Paul. The Tragedy Of Macbeth. New York : Washington Square Press, 2004, c1992.
7. Shakespeare, William,, Mowat, Barbara A.Werstine, Paul. The Tragedy Of Othello, The Moor Of Venice. New York, N.Y. : Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2009, c1993. Print.
8. Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works of Shakespeare. 5th ed. Bevington, David, ed. New York: Pearson, 2004. Print.

Introduction

The contemporary gothic form deals with the feminist perspective on sexuality and gender, as well as gender roles in the sense of them being socially and culturally conditioned. Violence and the sublime are translated into the fear of consequences of the choices imposed on the female protagonists by the society and the dominating male-villains. The modern twist on the fear of the consuming male figures is transformed into fear of villain-husbands with a horrid secret threatening to destroy the female, dark erotic desires exploding in violence, rape, torture – both mental and physical – and ultimately death. The basic instinct that along with the survival instinct enables the species to continue is turned into a perversion both of manner of sexual gratification and the inversion of the object of desire, and trained in the fashion of the social and political context, revealing the deeply set fear of the limitless power of the dominating strata – aristocracy – and the inexhaustible power that status in society allows to the point of giving certain members the right to subdue, subjugate and defeat others in the acts of dominance – physical and psychological.

In the subversive revisions of some of the most popular fairytales and their symbolism unmasked, The Bloody Chamber and The Snow Child, Angela Carter deals with the formula of ‘dreadful pleasure’ and gender and culture conditioned sexuality – the taboo of dark erotic desires and the attraction-repulsion relation; and the possibility of altering the paradigms of the society assigned gender roles.

The Taboo and Gender and Culture Conditioned Sexuality

Angela Carter materializes the universal fear of what is anomalous and dark, and personifies the monstrosity that is otherwise unwanted in the open, present yet tabooed and represented only through symbolism.

Though The Bloody Chamber begins as a story of marriage between an unnamed 17-year- old, a virgin piano player, a culture’s child, and a much older aristocrat who seduces her, cunningly exploiting her gullible character and lack of experience by literally buying her into marriage, it is the use of fairytale-typical symbolism and motifs that Carter employs subversively for the purpose of unmasking the true nature of their desires and the ties that bind the two into a relationship of attraction and repulsion, and it is even more apparent in The Snow Child story. The heroine of the story, not unlike the Countess from The Snow Child, is drawn to a mysterious dark figure of a man who represents a potential passage not only to adulthood but also social recognition. Her desires seemingly innocent are soon revealed as based on inexperience both of the world and the sexual nature of marriage. That is, unaware of her own sexuality other than the generalized conceptions of what she is supposed to endure, on the one hand, and on the other provide for her husband and likewise receive, she becomes psychologically and emotionally disheveled – after she has had the taste of her new-husbands bed-manners, the heroine admits to desiring him as much as she is repulsed.

Similarly, the Countess in the story of The Snow Child seemingly relinquishes her freedom and innocence in order to gain status and wealth and both of them are bought either by marrons glacés, flowers, jewelry and the like. As the former marries the mysterious aristocrat whom she does not even know how to love because she is merely a child, she accepts the passivity which is both imposed by default and implied by the arrangement, and indulges her husband’s sexually charged whims: she is first stripped naked by him in a room filled with ominous death-white lilies, surrounded by mirrors in which she obviously cannot recognize her own reflection – that of flesh – observed in a manner in which goods are assessed upon purchase, then asked to wear a painful ruby choker around her neck on her first wedding night as well as every other time the two are to be intimate – a symbol both of her entrapment and her unpromising life in marriage. Similarly, the Count in The Snow Child will encounter the child-girl he desires completely naked in the snow and simply take her. Upon her arrival at the castle where she will uncover the truth about the man to whom she loses her virginity and freedom in order to gain financial security and social status, she discovers gruesome evidence of his fascination with violent pornography and his sadistic propensity. Obviously, the manner in which she is tempted to see the true face of her husband is another fairytale parallel, but this young bride is doomed to fail from the moment of her arrival – being given a test in which she is not to enter just the room in the castle which he calls his den and naturally, considering that her fear of him is greater than affection, she contradicts his wish and finds an underground chamber in which the bodies of his former wives are exhibited as trophies or even spoils, amongst rich tapestries and invaluable art pieces with images of sacrifice, sex and immolation. The discovery encourages introspection and she admits to her own mistake. In the story of The Snow Child, interestingly, it is the Countess that tricks the girl, herself, into picking the rose flower and it may also be considered an unconscious recognition of her own erroneous judgment in youth. The manner in which the sadist Marquis kills his wives: asphyxiation, beheading and multiple stabbing, speaks volumes of his own sexuality – distorted and oriented towards the satisfaction of violent urges rather than sexual contact in itself, while their torturing brings only a portion of the taste of complete victory. In The Bloody Chamber Carter gives a brief account of the Marquis’ family history through the mouth of Jean-Yves, a blind piano-tuner who is characterized almost as a female because of his being as powerless as a woman, in the forms of terrifying legends that shed light on why and how a Marquis would develop a sadistic taste for women and desire their literal sacrifice in marriage. The Count in The Snow Child violates the fallen girl until nothing is left in snow but a mark.

Altering the Paradigms of the Assigned Gender Roles

Examining the dark side of sexuality and the taboo of revealing it in its naked form in a society that accepts it only when it is convention-bound and condemning its otherwise repressed forms that stray from it, the female body as objectified by the male normative and perpetually exploited is uncovered and Carter exposes civilized monsters and delves into the mechanisms of repression, the collective denial of the socially approved violence and distortion of morality – the morality that at the same time regulates the constructs of the accepted forms of sexuality and gender constructs to which they are assigned. Defined as the capacity to experience erotic desires and provide an adequate response of sexual nature, sexuality is conditioned firstly by one’s physical and emotional development. In addition to that, sexuality is conditioned by culture as well as social and other factors that inspire interpersonal communication on this level and, perhaps more importantly, the nature of the sexual communication. At the same time, sexuality is disciplined by culturally constructed ideas about sexes, which is manifested in the assignment of typical gender roles and the limitations they encounter society-wise.

That is, according to Judith Butler1, gender is a produced construct that differs in different historical and social contexts, but ‘If one is a woman, that is surely not all one is; the term fails to be exhaustive, not because a pre-gendered ‘person’ transcends the specific paraphernalia of its gender, but because gender is not always constituted coherently in different historical contexts, and because gender intersects is merely a modality and cannot be considered outside of the socio-political context of the time. Furthermore, it is these assigned roles, the prearranged positions and modes of behavior, the logic and the irrationality, the determination for self-actualization and the coping mechanisms that gothic literature deals with, in different degrees, by means of analysis of the psychological processes behind the pathology expressed in its typical themes. On the level of the two stories, the fairytale type that conceals the horrifying notion that a woman must be subjected to a great loss in order to ritually become recognized by society, by patriarchy, as a woman is unmasked – the loss of virginity and innocence, emotional and physical scarring and ultimately a life in the role of a passive being, an objectified entity that is purchased, acquired and possessed by the active male who ultimately has her life in his hands, both on the figurative and the literal level.

The young Marquise feels obligated to marry a figure seemingly appropriate for her status advancement, all the while being much aware that her choice of husband is made not on the basis of love, but opportunity and utility though not openly – her attempts on rationalizing the lack of genuine emotion cease the moment she begins to fear death. The nature, though, of the narrative reveals a significant shift from the typical fairytale narration for it is in the first person and the unnamed heroine in fact reveals her journey – both physical and psychological – and shares her experience with the reader from a perspective of a woman who has discovered that her role may not be exclusively passive or that she need not acquiesce to being a victim. Moreover, she does not refer to herself as a Marquise. At the same time, the female protagonists in The Bloody Chamber, initially radically different – the mother described in a manner in which a man would be described, riding through the castle gates on a horse, her skirt revealing her thighs and waving an old revolver at the villain son-in-law as if she were a cowboy from an American Western saving a damsel in distress – merge into a singular proactive and assertive energy uncharacteristic of the female gender construct, which is exactly what is subversive about The Bloody Chamber and its female protagonists.

What is implicit in the characterization of a woman by her supposedly natural sex and (culturally conditioned) gender, becomes explicit at the very peak of the storyline – the complete loss of control, the realization of the loss of power and the literal threat of imminent death by the sadistic husband, and is therefore brought to surface to be examined, along with the underlying principles responsible for the creation of the construct that with racial, class, ethnic, sexual and regional modalities of discursively constituted identities. As a result, it becomes impossible to separate out ‘gender’ from the political and cultural intersections in which it is invariably produced and maintained.’ (Gender Trouble) deprives the female of any power. The mother of the unfortunate bride and wife is the one that is described as an exception to the gender by the very narrator only to be, in fact, the symbol of the possibility of another paradigm – a gender that is neither imbued with stereotypical or demeaning values attributed, nor downtrodden by the nature or features of the body. Other female characters, interestingly, such as the maids in the castle, are man’s women – speakers of their language, their allies and cogs in the wheels of their culture and show no genuine compassion for the members of their own sex. This further implies that they too are lured into the trap of constant perpetuation of a culture that bogs down on the basis of natural sex, which culturally modified, is still nothing but a construct pertaining to the untouchable male norm, or in this case the aristocratic one. In The Bloody Chamber Carter purposefully chooses the setting of isolation with implications of its relation to the civilized world – as the Marquis mentions to his wife when explaining how his curious staff would be content to see blood on his sheets – a context in-between in which she is able to explicate how both male and female codes of behavior have to be learned through rituals and ideology and how fear, submissiveness and pre-conceptions perpetuate such a mechanism.

However, in The Snow Child, a short story that differs from fairytales only by its morbid and disturbing twist in the plot, the origin of sadistic tendencies is merely in the background and the sudden unmasking unexpected and shocking whereas the focus is on the inability to alter the mind-frame of the female character even upon the realization of her ultimate loss – not merely virginity, but freedom and innocence – in marriage. The Countess, initially jealous of the naked child her husband craves, however ambiguously one may initially understand his fairytale phrasing2, is ultimately bitten by the realization of what the rose flower signifies and her realization is endlessly painful because of her inability to imagine an alternative. Namely, when the child is finally fallen (dead) and raped by her husband, the child being herself of course, she receives her fur-coat back and strokes it. Her desire to attain and retain her status is more powerful and unlike the heroine in The Bloody Chamber, this Countess is not willing to part with her illusion. Furthermore, the naked child is portrayed as if she were an instrument or an object, not a human being with a mind of her own. Her role, just like the role of her corrupt older self, is entirely submissive. Foucault3 places emphasis on sexuality as a social apparatus for control of individuals and in that sense, if women are perceived as passive receivers who accept the

The History of Sexuality

sexuality ascribed to them, it becomes a tool for the control of the individual because it implies a position in society in broader sense, but more importantly, it defines the role and boundaries within the society’s nucleus – the family.

Conclusion

In The Bloody Chamber and The Snow Child Carter depicts the same problematic notions of conventionalized sexual violence and sexual exploitation allowed by the social apparatus that both defines and restricts sexuality and gender as constructs all the while blurring the ethical and moral boundaries by forcing the oppressed to be a part of the mechanism that perpetuates their own destruction in the sense of rendering them displaced and dissatisfied, unaware of their identity and of the limitations imposed.

REFERENCES

1. Buttler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge, 2006
2. Carter, Angela. The Bloody Chamber and Other Stories. London: 2006
3. Foucault, Michel, The History of Sexuality. London: Penguin, 1990
4. Punter, David. The Literature of Terror: a History of Gothic Fictions from 1765 to the Present Day. 1996

‘Trifles’ is a play written and composed by Glaspell Susan in the year, 1916, and mirrors the writer’s distraction with culture-bound thoughts of sex roles and gender. In accordance with the title of the play, ‘Trifles’ by G. Susan recommends that the worries from the women are always viewed as simple trifles, insignificant issues that bear practically no significance to the genuine work of society, which, obviously, is being done by the male counterpart. Susan questions, and in this manner calls the peruser or viewers to likewise address the general estimation of women’s and men’s viewpoints and work by setting up a drama-filled with tensions that unfurls through the improvement of two particular accounts or narratives, one male and female. As Holstein contends in her paper, be that as it may, the questioning G. Susan incites isn’t really just about roles of women in the society at large but instead how learning and point of view are esteemed or cheapened within explicit settings.

Holstein argues that the two parallel accounts or narratives of Trifles are based upon ‘the distinctions in men’s and women’s recognitions and practices as they are grounded in the home space’ (282). As indicated by Holstein, the men in the play approach the Wright’s residence, where Mr. Wright has been discovered killed, as a scene of crime, while the women who go with them during the examination approach the house as a home. Holstein recognizes that the men and the women have two altogether different explanations behind being there. The men, to satisfy their commitments as law experts, but for the ladies, to set up some personal effects to convey to the detained Mrs. Wright. However, she argues that in Susan Glaspell’s ‘Trifles’ the way that the alterability of their intentions is unbending, on account of the men, and adaptable, with respect to the women, decides how they see the scene. There are two basic results of this positioning with respect to the women. In the first place, Holstein expresses that the women ‘method for knowing leads them not just to learning; it likewise prompts the choice about acceptable behavior on that information’ (282). She portrays along these lines of knowing as the capacity to ‘remember [Mrs. Wright’s] whole hitched life as opposed to just to look into one vicious moment’ (287). Second, because of receiving along these lines of knowing, the women can pick up power ‘in being devalued, for their low status enables them to stay silent at the play’s end’ (285). Since the men don’t anticipate that the women should make a commitment or contribution to the examination or findings, they are unengaged in the women’s sharp impressions and significant discoveries that fathomed the murder case.

Holstein proposes, and I would concur, that customary women’s activist readings of Trifles are as restricting as the socially built classes of gender orientation may be. More than addressing gender orientation roles, Glaspell is by all narratives welcoming the readers or peruser to scrutinize or examine a build that is considerably progressively intricate, and that is the means by which individuals comprehend, and how they accept they comprehend each other and their narratives. As Holstein signals, it isn’t really obvious that the women’s methodology and extreme choice to ensure Mrs. Wright ‘just get from sharing gender’ (288). The most dominant bit of proof in such manner is that Mrs. Peters at first argues that the law is the law (Glaspell 1902); she doesn’t really feel compassion toward Mrs. Wright, as Mrs. Hale does, as a result of their mutual gender or the common social position to which gender has consigned them. Or maybe, it is definitely on the grounds that the women go to the Wright’s home without the rationale of finding something that they stay liberal, that they discover profitable proof, and, maybe in particular, that they build a conceivable story out of that proof. At that point, since they can feel for Mrs. Wright’s agony, they choose, rapidly and without broad discussion, that they should disguise her crime; in actuality, they feel her activities were supported. Unmistakably, the County Attorney and the Sheriff would translate the law and their place inside it in an unexpected way; once more, this isn’t really a result of their gender, but because of their expert positions and their acclimated methods for seeing and knowing.

At the early stage of her essay, Holstein composes that Glaspell’s play ‘Trifles’ is misleading in that it appears ‘basic, practically unimportant’ (282). Superficially, it appears that ‘Trifles’ is extremely just about the contending roles and points of view of women and men. This is unquestionably one section, and a significant one, of the play. It would be truly erroneous and unreliable to propose that Glaspell did not mean to compose a play about social divisions made by exacting gender roles, explicitly, that women were restricted to the home and that their commitments went unnoticed and underestimated. In any case, burrowing further, as Holstein does, one sees that Trifles is about an idea that is significantly progressively significant, and that is the means by which we seek after reality, how we come to translate and clarify it, and how we esteem it. Regularly, that procedure becomes as isolated and as disruptive as gender itself; nonetheless, one ought to not naturally expect that people stick to the overwhelming convictions of their gender. Doing as such gives a false representation of the multifaceted nature of truth, just as of human relations.

Since gender and sexuality are interpreted as a construct of society and since literature is a method of cultural representation, works of literature can both emphasize gender norms and construct newer, less restricting portrayals of gender and sexuality. This fluctuating state of gender identity based on current societal values is conveyed in works ranging from Renaissance Shakespeare to Romantic Mary Shelley and Victorian Robert Louis Stevenson. While Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew demonstrates a female response against societal norms and both Shelley’s Frankenstein and Stevenson’s Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde demonstrate a suppression of, and consequent outlet for, a self-identity unaccepted by society, all three works demonstrate how society has affected both the state and expression of individuals’ gender identities and sexualities.

The late sixteenth century England experienced a trend of stories on the shrew-taming theme, tales that primarily outline the conversion of an unruly wife to one obedient to her husband, often by bodily harm. Shakespeare, however, cushions the theme in The Taming of the Shrew by preventing the tamer, Petruchio, from using physical violence to subdue the shrew, Katherina. The three primary interpretations of the ending relationship between Petruchio and Katherina are: (1) true love, (2) Petruchio’s success in the taming of Katherina, and (3) an ironical analysis of Katherina’s final speech. Because Shakespeare provides minimal clues that point toward true love and refrains from fully embodying the format of the shrew-taming tales, the third interpretation of his work through a feminist lens appears the most plausible.

From the onset of Shakespeare’s work, Katherina and her younger sister Bianca are described and spoken for by the males. As early on as the first scene of act one, one of Bianca’s suitors, Gremio, alludes to Katherina in a negative and degrading light when the sisters’ father, Baptista, states that no one can marry Bianca before Katherina is courted and married (I.I.55). Katherina says nothing about herself in the first act except to respond or to defend herself against what others have said. Despite being perceived as the talkative shrew, Katherina speaks only 207 lines, less than half of Petruchio’s 564 lines. This disparity between the severity and characteristic of Kate’s ‘shrewish’ behavior and the male characters’ perceptions of it is again demonstrated by her obstinacy towards marrying either Gremio or Hortensio. When the monetary situations regarding the weddings are discussed, it is revealed that Katherina’s dowry is “one half of [her father’s] land” and “in possession twenty thousand crowns” (II.I.122). When Lucentio and Gremio vie for Bianca’s hand in marriage, Gremio’s entire estate is portrayed as less than two thousand ducats in total. Because a ducat is equal to approximately two crowns, Katherina’s dowry in immediate money alone surpasses his entire estate by five times, which in effect might be an adequate cause for her to recognize him as beneath her social and financial position. In this case, Katherina’s opinions against the men are ridiculed not because of hurt feelings on her part but because of hurt feelings on their parts. Katherina’s behavior here aptly sums up the difference between her own pragmatism and the men’s arrogance. She thus establishes to the audience her goals and motivations even prior to meeting her future husband Petruchio.

When wealthy Petruchio arrives at Padua to find a wife, Katherina is trapped in a scenario fostered by the fabricated gender role of her time and sex, obligated by her father’s approval of the wedding, into a marriage where she is vulnerable to Petruchio’s wants and needs. Thus began Petruchio’s quest to tame Katherina not through physical means but by manipulating her protests into submittal and to deny her every basic need under the guise that it is for her own benefit. When courting Katherina, Petruchio declares, “Say that she rail, why then I’ll tell her plain [s]he sings as sweetly as a nightingale” and “if she deny to wed, I’ll crave the day [w]hen I shall ask the banns, and when be married” (II.I.170-171, 179-180). He creates a twisted aspect of reality, using clever language to portray insults or scorn creating a difference between the expected versus actual events. On her way back from Petruchio’s estate to her sister’s wedding at Padua, Katherina goes against her initial standpoint and cedes to Petruchio’s claim that he has the right of naming and renaming the world as he so chooses (IV.5). When he first gushes “how bright and goodly shines the moon” midday, Katherina begins to protest (IV.5.2-5). However, at a warning by Petruchio, she changes instantaneously, and having learned her lesson, affirms, “Forward, I pray, since we have come so far, And be it the moon, or sun, or what you please” (IV.5.12-13). However, by continuously changing the meaning of his words and language, he removes the level ground that serves as his ruling advantage. By granting himself the right to name and rename the world, Petruchio unintentionally admits that there exists no natural law that defines our perception of the world. The link between the items he names and what he chooses to name them is completely arbitrary. The outlandishness of Petruchio’s strategy allows Katherina to take advantage of the situation. Admittedly she concedes to every claim made by Petruchio, but her unwavering agreeability detracts from the value and meaning of whatever statement she is conceding to. The predicted female course of action, stretched to the point of absurdity, becomes a means of evaluating itself.

Similar to Petruchio, Katherina uses irony to create a discrepancy between the expected and actual events of their relationship. The irony is most obvious when she lectures Bianca and the widow in her final speech. She remarks how the very individuals who had ridiculed for her disobedience were now as unattractive as she was since “to wound thy lord… blots thy beauty as frost do bite the meads” (V.2.137-138) and she continues “[a] woman moved is like a fountain troubled, [m]uddy, ill-seeming, thick, bereft of beauty” (V.2. 141-142). Katherina seems to say to the women in her audience that they are merely conditionally loved, and if they fail to adhere to their husband’s wishes they will be ridiculed and unwanted as she once was. She is not disappointed that her sister is defying her husband, only that her resistance is so obvious. By manipulating the sexist system for her own benefit, Katherina is no longer represented by Petruchio nor is she limited by her word usage. Not only is it the last major speech in Shakespeare’s work, Katherina’s final speech is also the longest. By putting on a façade of female submission and inferiority, she is allowed a larger platform to express her views. Katherina thus stands out against Bianca and the widow in that she is an active subject, who furthers her own interests, as opposed to a passive, obedient object. From this viewpoint, female submission is seen as an unexpectedly powerful response against male supremacy.

While Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew explores the course that an oppressed woman takes to regain stability in her relationship, Shelley and Stevenson both decide to exclude women from normal roles to expose the homosexual undertones present within Frankenstein and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Both authors create textual worlds where masculinity and innovation overpower the importance of women. Instead of confronting the issue of sexuality head-on, repressed emotions are manifested in the protagonists’ “monstrous” invention or alto-egos. However, the common thread from The Taming of the Shrew regarding the discontinuity between societal ideology and behavior – what people are expected to do and what they actually do – persists and is ever-clear among these two works.

According to Mary Wollenstonecraft in A Vindication of the Rights of Women, the ideal union is between two equal partners who base their relationship upon communication and mutual understanding as opposed to sexual passion. Mary Shelley, similar to her mother, conveys the same importance of maintaining a domestic family in Frankenstein, but does not utilize powerful female characters to portray this. Instead, she intentionally diminishes the position of women and communicates with the reader the consequences of usurping the biological function of women in exchange for a predominantly male society. As a result of the sexual segregation set in place by the gendering of public and private spheres as respectively masculine and feminine, the men in Frankenstein are the workers while the women are watchers that are protected by their male counterparts. Shelley’s work is composed of women who suffer compliably and then expire, as seen with Caroline Beaufort, the self-sacrificing mother who dies caring after her adopted daughter and the daughter Elizabeth, who is a “blessing” that exemplifies all the characteristics of ideal womanhood (Shelley 31). In fact, all of the women in Shelley’s work are idealized in a certain aspect, whether it be self-sacrifice, nurturing instincts, morals, beauty, or personality. These women, though, are little more than property, as insinuated by Victor when he confesses that he regarded Elizabeth to be a “possession of my own” (31). These over-simplistic portrayals cast women in a static, unappealing light, but why would Mary Shelley, daughter of one of the major feminists, choose to do this? Shelley specifically conveys her female characters in a way that parallels what English women had become in the society in which they existed. Her statement is clear: she manipulated Victor’s scientific endeavor as a means to eradicate the necessity for women, then goes on to spell destruction upon her characters; she demonstrates the consequences of a societal structure of gender which holds men above women. She thus sacrifices her female characters for the greater endpoint of pointing out the flaws associated with a patriarchal society.

Similar to Shelley, Robert Louis Stevenson focuses on the male experience, reserving little room for female inclusion in his work. In Frankenstein, Victor successfully avoids any sexual connection from women, focusing instead on creating his scientific magnum opus, then consequently spending the rest of his life plagued by its existence. In the same way, Stevenson’s novel revolves around the peculiar dynamic between Dr. Jekyll and his villainous counterpart Mr. Hyde. A surface level observation alone already points out the most important relationships being forced as those between men, as opposed to those between men and women. The women in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are fleeting, possessing no names or memorable backgrounds that make them anything more than accessories. Stevenson’s work pushes forth the glorified image of women as desexualized participants of the nineteenth century, instead using his male characters as the vessels of feminine energy. This feminine angle of Stevenson’s male characters implies a redefining of how sexual identity and gender are sorted. Even though Hyde primarily targets women as his victims, his feminine appearance and dramatic feelings oppose the traditional structure of masculinity. The work seems to convey that sex and sexuality pervade all aspects of society. This instability of gender roles parallels the changing idea of sexual identities in that sexuality conflicts with not only the norms of lower-class morals, but shakes the very foundations of the relationships between genders and class hierarchies of society.

These changing viewpoints towards sexual identity and gender are reflected in both Shelley’s Frankenstein and Stevenson’s Dr. Jekyll and Hyde. It should be noted that in both of the novels, the homosocial interactions, or social bonds between people of the same sex, shape how the protagonists associate with other men. The behavior of the men throughout both of the authors’ novels is insinuative of homosexual desires, but their repressive societies do not allow for an expressive outlet for these underlying passions. Both Frankenstein’s monster and Jekyll’s alternate ego become reflections of the unrepressed homosexual desire, which is represented by multiple literary techniques, such as physical appearance, societal isolation, living arrangements, and connections with their creators. On one hand, Frankenstein’s creature is judged harshly based upon his unappealing appearance, and the totality of his being is hidden away in secrecy. The fact that this creation exists is enough to expose the monstrous aspect of Frankenstein that he desperately tries to avoid. On the other hand, Jekyll goes through both a moral and physical transformation into Edward Hyde, using their closeted affair as an output for his erotic tensions.

The essential central motif of Shelley’s work orbits the obsession with modes of reproduction, implying that the male characters separate themselves from the females in an attempt to sidestep any paternal obligation to procreate or support a family. These reservations about female reproduction are what push Frankenstein to follow his scientific exploration to eliminate the need for females in the process of procreation. Frankenstein steals the root of a woman’s role in society for himself, unknowingly synthesizing a relationship between monster and creator that represents an example of repressed homosexuality. Frankenstein’s construction of his monster alone is portrayed as a secret affair, bringing forth images of masturbation as Shelley depicts how he used his “profane fingers” in a “solitary chamber” that houses his “workshop of filthy creation” (Shelley 53). Frankenstein experiences guilt over these very sexual impulses but his obsession with the creature’s completion prevents him from stopping (Shelley 163). This erotic scene is a suggestion of Frankenstein’s repressed sexuality embodied in the creature. His disgust with the monster’s displeasing appearance further demonstrates his obstinacy towards acknowledging these deeper truths about himself and his stifled passions against a civilized society which shuns the perverse. However, Frankenstein’s unyielding pursuit of the creature lies in his knowledge that the creature is a byproduct of the monstrosity that hides within Frankenstein, therefore allowing the dual search of one another.

Dr. Jekyll’s reasons for synthesizing a “monster” are very comparable to those of Victor Frankenstein. Robert Louis Stevenson implements the dual identities of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde to demonstrate that without any methods of expression for sexual appetites, mankind will fall to destruction and violence. With the arrival of the nineteenth century came the evolution of the homosexual community as its own active subculture. Like any men of his time, Jekyll hides certain aspects of himself that are connected to his sexuality in order to maintain his position in society. Stevenson’s study of duality through the separating of his characters Jekyll and Hyde points towards a side of Jekyll that does not align itself with what society deems worthy, resulting in the existence of Hyde, a physical manifestation of an aspect of Jekyll’s identity. Jekyll’s association with Hyde disturbs his friends, but they are unable to articulate why they do not like him. He appears normal upon first glance, but is set apart by his perverted characteristic. The men regard Hyde’s appearance and nature as unspeakable, but they cannot pinpoint the physical distinctions that make Hyde so unlikable. This inherent disgust and fear associated with Hyde is suggestive of the almost hysterical homophobia of the 1800. Hyde’s condition is akin to a disease in the same way that men who were “afflicted” with homosexuality were perceived as volatile and participants in criminal activities that threatened Britain’s traditional social, economic, and scientific values. As Jekyll’s repressed counterpart, Hyde demonstrates any homosexual tendencies, but is depicted as dangerous and monstrous, insinuating that homosexuality is seen as an attack on the heterosexual agenda of the patriarchal society.

As much as how Shakespeare’s Renaissance take on gender and sexuality likely gave way to further works inspired by society during the Age of Enlightenment, Shelley’s and Stevenson’s take on sexual identity and homosexuality inspired other writers in the 1880’s and 1890’s to write about their fears and desires and transgress the boundaries of masculine and feminine identity set by society. Thus the societies that influenced the protagonists of each novel would in turn be influenced by these very characters. The history of attitudes towards sex and sexuality portrayed throughout these three works is an ongoing cultural process that can be regarded through the literature of a time period, providing readers with a way to visualize the changes occurring in the gender and sex system and realize the continuity of how their own methods of sexuality affect the world they live in today.

In her choice to cite John Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost’, (“Among unequals what society can sort, what harmony or true delight?”), Mary Wollstonecraft not only underlines the workings of the precarious system that sat perched on the backs of its followers, but also highlights the absence of “true delight” in the eyes of those have been coerced into conforming to the norm. Born in the year 1959, Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin authored 17 texts in the span of her short life. Most famously known for penning what many term the first published feminist manifesto- ‘Vindication of The Rights of Woman’ (1972), Wollstonecraft joined forces with English philosopher and novelist, William Godwin and had the good fortune of being represented on paper as who she really was, unlike the fate of her own daughter, Mary Shelley, who’s “hideous progeny” and gothic novel ‘Frankenstein’ was not published under her own name.

As her texts were published, Wollstonecraft’s writing wasn’t received well as she was a woman entering a domain completely dominated by men. Her candour and use of free speech to forward her agenda of educating women was not only scandalous, but threatening to the system of patriarchy and male-inheritance. However, Wollstonecraft was known less for her revolutionary ideas and more for the ‘unconventional’ nature of her personal relationships. In a time when gross superstition surrounded the thought of female-education and liberty, Wollstonecraft was a pioneer of ‘radical’ freethinking and expression. In the editor’s note of a version of ‘Vindication of The Rights of Woman’, Millicent Garrett Fawcett writes,

Mary Wollstonecraft’s great merit, however, lies in this, that with a detachment of mind from the prejudices and errors of her time, in regard to the position of women, that was quite extraordinary, she did not sanction any deprecation of the immense importance of the domestic duties of women. She constantly exalted what was truly feminine as the aim of women’s education and training. (Fawcett, 1891, pp. 22-3).

Having suffered a traumatizing childhood and adolescence, Wollstonecraft strayed far from her protestant values to become a liberal thinker like her minister, Richard Price. Her thoughts on the acknowledgement, validation and normalisation of female sexuality only resulted in ridicule and more hushed snickers at her scandalous relationships and the child she had out of wedlock. Perhaps this is why, one can assume that Wollstonecraft’s internalisation of the insults she bore resulted in the confusing rationalisation she presents in her arguments. She writes, “By individual education…such an attention to a child will slowly sharpen the senses, form the temper, regulate the passions…the important task of learning and reason.” (pp. 59). One can assume that for Wollstonecraft, religion an ideology intersected to help her create a framework which incorporated non-restrictive thoughts on educating women, as well as strictly domestic incentive to do so.

Even though Wollstonecraft wrote against the Proper Lady, she could not escape the identity of being a Proper Lady herself. Wollstonecraft lived in the time of conduct books and literature that was framed by Fordyce’s ‘Sermons to Young Women’ (1767). Conduct and etiquette came packed in the form of magazines like Tatler and Spectator- texts which endorsed chastity and obedience. Wollstonecraft illustrates her rejection of conduct literature and exposes the extent of oppression under the garb of refinement by writing, “Many (men) are the causes that in the present corrupt state of society, contribute to enslave women by cramping their understandings and sharpening their senses…to do everything in an orderly manner, is a most important precept…”(pp. 61).

William Godwin, who Wollstonecraft legally married the year she died, 1697, wrote many texts and pamphlets on property laws and their restrictive and exclusive policies. As a radically liberal couple, both Wollstonecraft and Godwin believed in the equal distribution of property amongst all heirs- including women. In her text termed, ‘Thoughts on The Education of Daughters’ (1787), Wollstonecraft even highlights the capitalist motive behind male-inheritance. Both Godwin and Wollstonecraft criticized the system bitterly about its centuries-old practice of keeping property, agency, resources and thus, independence, out of women’s hands. In ‘The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer’, Mary Poovey writes,

…Eighteenth century witnessed the political and economic triumph of the English middle classes…The duties a woman fulfilled in the home directly supported capitalist values…the sympathetic, non-judgmental affection the ideal wife offered her husband helped offset the frustrations and strains a man suffered in his workplace and thus both contributed to the rewards associated with work and helped a man renew his energies for another day’s labours. (1984, pp. 10).

Mary Wollstonecraft died 11 days after giving birth to her daughter by Godwin. While her life was dedicated to resisting superstition and fighting for equality, her own daughter’s was plagued with superstition surrounding the womb and her inability to birth a healthy baby. Wollstonecraft fought the convention through her texts, but fell prey to it during her last year, when she married Godwin so as to remove the tag of illegitimacy from her unborn child’s name and thus allowed for Mary Shelley’s name to be joined with her father’s and not her mother’s. Wollstonecraft wrote compelling arguments in her texts and yet she had to buckle to the system to prevent herself and her family from being social pariahs.

Battling superstition and stereotype of being a woman writer of the 18th century, Wollstonecraft meets the writing norm halfway by penning the moral standard and norm she was expected to uphold into her texts. For example, she writes, “Teach them (women), in common with man, to submit to necessity, instead of giving, to render them more pleasing, a sex to morals.” (pp. 76). Another approach to reading her texts is also considering the possibility that to appease the orthodox Christian community and the masses, Wollstonecraft was compelled to keep with convention and tradition.

In politics ‘gender’ is both acknowledged and dismissed. The notion of political ambitions and actions has created a divide between policy and gender inclusivity. Throughout history, the political neglect towards women in society has led to the need for an activist response. It is understood that “the market women and the marketplace influenced politics and economics in the capital” (Jarvis) yet women are exponentially undermined in the faculty of politics. The role of gender in modern-day politics and globalization as a whole is exponentially undermined. Society seemingly has come to a consensus that gender either is valid or invalid when analyzing politics. The significance of gender in politics can be viewed through the use of a case study. Through demonstrations of activism, feminism can be noted as a driving force towards the recognition of gender discrimination within society. Although many political leaders still refuse that there is any divide. The terminology used by society when addressing misogyny and discrimination does not only affect women. It is crucial to acknowledge the misuse of policy and political structure when addressing women’s reproductive rights as well as recognizing the structural shit that would occur if Science, Technology, and Innovation were approached in a different light.

Moms or Moneymakers?

The history of gender discrimination has been prevalent for centuries. Women’s roles of being housewives and caring for children were almost definitive. The pressures of income and workforce lay solely on male shoulders. In 21st century society this is the furthest from truth. Heterosexual households are no longer the only model for familial structure. The lack of knowingness when determining the familial demographic has become an unsettling factor for individuals in power. The structural shift and induction of women into the workforce have created new opportunities that had previously been illegitimate. Women in society are significantly more present as workers and contributors. It is acknowledged that in today’s society “the full-time homemaker model has largely been replaced by the dual role of earner and caregiver.” (Glover) This is both revolutionary and restrictive to the development of gender and women’s roles within the state. Pre-dispositions strongly encourage and affect how Westernized society functions. With the previous political structure and ideology still prevalent, it is difficult for change to occur within the structure itself. When politics are analyzed through a gendered lens it becomes apparent that women in society are less valued. The process of immersing women into the workforce although strategic was significantly altered as women brought to light the discrimination and political wrongdoings of the state. Up until this point in history women had been exploited for their labour in the home and society was under the assumption this would continue in the workforce. Women started fighting for their rights to be given the same protection in the workforce as their male counterparts. Women’s workplace rights were one of the first nationwide movements aside from women’s suffrage.

Although prehistoric notions suggest that women are primarily mothers, modern-day examples prove this statement to be outdated. The harsh reality of society and policy in modern Western culture is that it lacks intersectionality. The nation has recognized this through the development and exposure of variety within society. Through the use of social media and other platforms, women are joining forces to empower one another. Violence done unto women coincides with the reproductive rights of women within society. Politically the role of women is to birth the next generation and due to this notion, women find themselves pressured by society to reproduce for the benefit and success of society. The importance of female rights has become significantly more prominent for debate in the 21st century. The realization and explanation of reproductive justice have altered the opinions of many women. With the ability to choose comes the power to decide. In Western society with the rise of feminism, many young women are deciding not to have children. Factors such as lack of government support as well as climate change can be noted as contributing factors. The most prevalent rationale is that single women no longer feel the need to marry.

Reproductive justice also coincides with domestic abuse and fear of being forced into a mainstream love interest. As outlined in The Question of Gender “Gender arrangements are thus, at the same time, sources of pleasure, recognition, and identity, and sources of injustice and harm. This means that gender is inherently political- but it also means the politics can be complicated.” (Connell and Pearse) The modern-day debate on gender is carried out in the form of health, rights, and justice. Women’s reproductive health should primarily be available and funded. The rights of women should be respected especially in deciding to procreate or choosing not to. Justice can be noted as the movement towards liberation regarding both health and choice. The history of women regarding reproductive rights and justice was infringed upon during the colonization of North America and the sterilization of Indigenous women. Although these issues are extremely illegal in today’s society litigation still inhibits women’s lives regarding reproductive rights.

The lack of necessary health care and the lack of funding for women to make decisions regarding their bodies and lives is a very prominent issue. The political influence of these issues has sparked a worldwide debate. “With public and often provocative actions, the New Women’s Movement paved the way for a massive gender-political public awareness.” (Melby) Women’s roles within modern-day society are both influenced by the historical past and are altered by the discourse of necessary change. “With men historically fighting wars and women largely supporting their efforts on the home front (across diverse states and social formations), examining the gender social order is essential.” (Parashar) The political aspect of women’s reproductive rights and role in society is represented through the activism of feminist movements and the undeniable rights entitling women to decide their fate regarding their bodies and potential offspring. Women are noticing their ability to choose within the movement and have created change through the use of activism. Policy although not fully altered has changed to benefit women. Organizations such as Planned Parenthood, UltraViolet, and other activist groups fight for women’s reproductive rights and demand healthcare for all women.

Marginalization is also extremely prominent, regarding the wage gap present in society. The mistreatment of women and the significant wage gap in America negatively affect all women participating in the workforce. Although society has moved to allow women to participate in the workforce, it is still extremely misogynistic. The post-war gender revolution allowed women to participate on their own and earn wages for the first time. Although women have been implemented into the workforce for decades, gender discrimination is still present. The policy has been challenged as society battles to decide what the role of women truly is.

“We shall, additionally, face very severe labor force shortages or a shortage of births. And, as women now tend to be more educated than men, we shall be wasting human capital.” (Esping-Andersen) Women’s reproductive rights have been honored by the implementation of paid maternity leave. The induction of the concept allowed women to succeed as both mothers and employees. Paid maternity allows women in the workforce to reproduce and raise families without fear of losing their jobs.

“The political context that gave rise to the work–life balance concept in the UK can probably be traced to a wish to devise an approach that does two things: it allows individuals to perform caring activities that are not provided by the state and it allows these same individuals to be economically productive.”( )

The implementation of maternity leave is just one example of where policy has been altered after analyzing society through a gendered lens. Although the introduction of paid maternity leave benefits women, it also benefits the state. The security granted to women in full-time employment allows for women to fall pregnant without fear of losing employment and also contributes to the financial stability of a state. With paid maternity leave women become less reliant on programs such as welfare. This essentially places the economy in a better place financially.

ST&I

Science, Technology, and Innovation are all prominent aspects of society in the 21st century. The lack of gender variety within this sector of policy is prominently affecting its overall development in an extremely critical time. “STI policies and programs will not be effective, equitable, and sustainable unless the gender lens is applied to reflect the aims, concerns, situation, and abilities of both women and men.” (The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development)

Scientific advances previously driven by men have left out the factor of gender. The ability to implement a gendered variety within a variety of perspectives allows for the fields of study to be approached in a variety of ways. Although some individuals argue that “opening up the scope of analysis to new factors, dynamics, and subjects might risk diluting this central objective” (Sikka) it is still daunting. The dynamics of women in the study of science and technology have been previously studied prominently by men. During the second wave of feminism this was challenged when female biologists intended to prove that the “naturalistic reality of the body does not exist.” (Oudshoorn) Intersectionality has become a prevalent topic within society as well as the ideology of intersex individuals within medical science. This concept is still extremely new and has been accepted with further study and knowledge. The previous belief that “social changes demanded by feminists are wishful thinking because biology, rather than society, sets constraints on the behavior and abilities of women” (Oudshoorn) needs to be revised. The exposure of the myth indicating the norm as the ‘natural body’ has been abolished through the study of science predominantly studied by women. “Integrating sex and gender analysis as a resource to create new knowledge and technologies (fixing the knowledge) …require that sex and gender analysis be integrated into the design of research, where relevant.” (Gendered Innovations) The vitality of immersing gender into the study of Science will affect the fate of nations. Women’s rights and contributions to this discipline are extremely crucial to the success of Westernized society.

Regarding Technology, when observing technological advances women seem to be subjects instead of sovereigns. The harsh implications of media on women (body image, stereotyping, beauty standards) are deliberately destructive yet women have turned this into fuel for their activism. The use of media and technology can aid women to collaborate and stand as one. For example, in 2012 the #MeToo movement emphasized the wrongdoings of big names in Hollywood. The #MeToo movement exposed Hollywood director Harvey Weinstein for the sexual harassment and abuse he had subjected several women to. Up until this point, sexual violence in the workplace was always acknowledged but monitored. The #MeToo movement was most famously depicted at the Golden Globes where female actresses dressed in black to acknowledge the sexual violence and wrongdoings of Mr. Weinstein. The collaboration between women created a power and presented the harsh realities faced by women in places of employment. The initial fight for women to be acknowledged as citizens previously was a struggle that was endured up until modernization, yet society still depicts women as weak and vulnerable. The power derived by women in media is somehow still undermined. The women who decided to participate through the use of dress at the Golden Globes all held significant power far beyond their dresses. The Golden Globes were made globally accessible. The availability of streaming platforms allowed said actresses to reach a worldwide audience. With every woman who wore black that particular night, the media produced a message to both women and men. Similarly, #MeToo started trending as the media globally produced the injustice. Generally, in politics, women are often undermined by being labeled as too emotional, vulnerable, or even less knowledgeable. In modern-day society this is false. Women are capable of performing alongside men and should not be undermined for their talents, especially in the workforce. When a gendered perspective is applied to technology women are significantly more powerful than given credit. The use of technology is a critical outlet for feminism and should be recognized as necessary. The negative impact of culture regarding media should be altered and viewed from a political standpoint to promote intersectionality and women’s health, rights, and justice, instead of derogatory content.

When analysing innovation with a gendered lens there is an extremely notable divide. The separation between male and female society is directly stemming from the consumerist economy. Surrounding individuals with a choice between male and female products lacks the intersectional aspect of a functional society. The market profits off these predispositions as the products are marketed to citizens through advertising and media. The lack of acknowledgment regarding individual products and price variances allows the market to profit off of clueless individuals. The hoax of the ‘Pink Tax’ dominates revenue in the economy by taxing women and demanding higher payment for products than men. For example, products such as disposable razors, deodorant, and even shampoo have significant price variances when comparing male to female ‘formulated’ products. Feminine hygiene products also generate extreme revenue for markets by demanding women to pay for their anatomy. When applying a gendered view to this topic it is extremely irrational. Men and women are faced not only with significant social differences but also with expenditures that are non-avoidable. As described by Kathi Weeks “The Not-Yet-Conscious—this capacity for thinking and wanting the future—can be discovered in a wide variety of practices.” (Weeks) Without acknowledging and bringing light to these issues majority of society would not notice. By analyzing these discriminative practices society may feel empowered to demonstrate their beliefs and produce change at a national level.

Conclusions

By analyzing politics with a gendered lens, it becomes prevalent that the success of women has been historically determined by men. The policies outlined in the Human Rights Code and the Constitution have loopholes to undermine women and exploit them. Through the use of activism, feminists promote intersectionality and the need for gender equality within society. As previously observed, a gendered lens has been applied when analyzing the reproductive rights, health, and justice of women with paid maternity leave. Although this has altered the lives of many women, women’s rights to terminate pregnancy are still illegal. Alongside the issue of female reproduction is the need for Science, Technology, and Innovation to be viewed with a gendered lens. “The increasing focus on the concept of intersectionality in feminist research expresses the ambition to create such a dynamic and multiple approach.” (Melby) The role of activism plays a detrimental role in the political changes that have and are still yet to occur. Through the use of research, media, and products women are continuously subject to policies outlined by the government. It is critical to the success of the nation that policy be altered and re-evaluated when regarding women and their experiences. 

When looking at the theory of intersectionality it’s clear that it contributes to our understanding of gender inequality significantly, because of how it expands feminist theory by highlighting the different and unique experiences of women. Intersectionality is an approach that allows us to understand the complexity of human experience by illuminating inequality at the intersection of identities. In other words, it allows us the analytical perspective that society can shape our lives through the different axes of marginalization – some women can have multiple intersectional barriers to equality (Hill Collins and Chepp, 2013). Which therefore contributes to our understanding of gender inequality by illustrating how there is no singular way of being marginalized as a woman, and we need the approach of intersectionality to provide an outlook that addresses all the divisions that work in tandem with gender inequality – for example, race, class, age, sexual orientation, and gender identity, etc. This means intersectionality allows for our understanding surrounding gender inequality to become nuanced and context-specific. Therefore, I will first highlight the historical examples of intersectionality through the notion of black feminist thought, including Crenshaw’s work on discrimination faced by African American women and the Sojourner Truth speech. Then, I will carry my argument further by providing a contemporary example of how an intersectional approach is useful regarding violence against women within government policy, and how this can contribute to our understanding of gender inequality.

The main aspects of intersectionality are pointed out by Hill Collins and Chepp (2013) who argue an intersectionality is an analytical tool to better understand the experiences and struggles of marginalized people – more specifically, it looks at the multi-dimensionality of human experience. They go on to mention that intersectionality assembles a range of notions such as gender, class, and race and looks at them as interrelated factors of oppression. This departure from the notion of binary thinking surrounding marginalization allows us to reconceptualize oppression and therefore contributes to our understanding of gender inequality by providing a different perspective. Following this idea, it’s important to understand the historical narratives that have contributed to the field of intersectionality and therefore contributed to our understanding of gender inequality. Intersectionality seems to have gained traction from black feminist thought as a response to white mainstream feminism not providing liberation to all women – in particular women of color. This is supported by Breines (1996) who mentions the stories of black women being silenced and marginalized not only in general social movements but in the theoretical perspective of feminism itself. Whelehan (1995) mentions that the notion of sisterhood provided an idea of a universal woman, but it could be argued this approach was problematic due to it limiting female oppression to a middle-class and white gender-related dimension. In reality, as they point out, a collective idea of female oppression is inadequate when addressing marginalization, as a woman can face discrimination beyond the realm of sole gender and therefore this notion perpetuates the exclusion of particular women – usually, the women most marginalized within society like black working-class women. This is supported by Gordon (2016) who mentions how intersectionality came about as second-wave socialist feminism, particularly through leading black feminists, and made its way into academia in the 80’s and 90’s. Furthermore, they mention how this area of feminism leads to the core sentiment of intersectionality being fully realized – systems of oppression are not mutually exclusive but rather intersect and coproduce one another, resulting in unequal realities. A historical narrative that is illustrative of intersectionality and how it contributes to our understanding of gender inequality is work by Crenshaw (1989) – a legal scholar and black feminist who is often credited as coining the term intersectionality. Crenshaw argued the notions of feminism and critical race theory needed to be combined to provide a solution to a legal system that failed to address the unique experiences of marginalization suffered by African American women. African American women were multiply burdened in the US but without remedy due to the civil rights movement and the feminist movement of the ’60s and ’70s only focusing on the more privileged members of those groups. Therefore, in response to these challenges, Crenshaw argued an intersectional approach was needed to address the unique positions of oppression some groups found themselves in, and in particular black working-class women facing discrimination in the workplace. This is supported by Smith (2013) who mentions that due to the political and social developments not taking an intersectional approach, African American women failed. Furthermore, they argue Crenshaw’s work highlights that when intersectionality is not included within analysis it is no longer adequate to provide solutions for black women. Crenshaw’s work illustrates the historical narratives of black feminism that contributed to intersectionality as well as being an example of how intersectionality can contribute to our understanding of gender inequality. As it seems if intersectionality was not included in the theoretical framework of feminism, feminism itself would be much less useful with regards to solving the inequality faced by all different women. However, it’s important to highlight that there have been earlier historical examples that have referenced the need for intersectionality, just without the word being used – most notably ‘Aint I a woman’ by Sojourner Truth in 1851 which is mentioned by Crenshaw (1989). It’s mentioned that Truth’s oratory provided not only a challenge to the sexist imagery used to justify the disenfranchisement of women but also highlighted how feminism is structured around whiteness. Truth argued that overgeneralizations within feminist literature did not address inequality found at the intersection of race and gender – for example, feminist literature regarding societal roles concluded that women are socialized to be passive and therefore will remain subordinate. However, when looking at black feminist literature we know stereotypes surrounding black women such as being angry (which contributes to their subordination) do not align with notions argued by mainstream white feminism (Childs, 2005). This therefore contributes to our understanding of gender inequality by highlighting why intersectionality is essential for social justice with regards to women of colour. This is supported by Brah and Phoenix (2004) who acknowledge Truth’s contribution to intersectionality by mentioning how their speech highlights its importance within feminism due to the necessary perspective it provides.

A more contemporary example is mentioned by Strid et al (2013) who argue an intersectional approach is vital for government policy surrounding violence against women in the UK. This contributes to our understanding of gender inequality by illuminating ‘hidden’ marginalizations at the intersection between gender and other dimensions of identity like class, race, and sexuality. Looking at this more political perspective of intersectionality and our understanding of gender inequality, it’s argued intersectionality warns against policies being created that privilege one inequality over the other and that it allows for visibility and inclusion of minoritized women. This is supported by Lombardo et al (2009) who argue that adopting an intersectional approach in policymaking could promote better policies as well as better outcomes for the target demographic of that policy – women with unique identities. Strid et al (2013) go on to mention that the link between violence, power, and inequality is not always expressed within policy, meaning the intersections of marginalization remain unnoticed and unaddressed. For example, gender violence policy often emphasizes diversity, cultural differences, and the uniqueness of minority struggles rather than structures and practical applications of gender violence policy. Furthermore, it’s argued that the notion of multiple inequalities in policy is under-researched meaning women that are marginalized by more than just their gender are not represented within policy. This is highlighted by Burman et al (2004) who argue ignoring how class and race play a role in gender-based violence leads to minoritized women being excluded from accessing support services. Hearn et al (2016) argue that an intersectional approach is essential to gender violence policy as it’s crucial that the intersections of equality are made visible and that we understand how violence affects women differently depending on their circumstances. This highlights how an intersectional approach would contribute to our understanding of gender inequality as it would allow us to understand how gender-based violence affects specific groups of women differently. For example, Strid et al (2013) mention a particular policy regarding violence against women acknowledging the intersection of gender and class by referring to how unequal economic resources can result in a woman being more likely to suffer gender-based violence. As well as other intersecting inequalities such as disability, religion, nationality, and urban-rural unequal access to services. However, they argue there are different levels of inclusion in the field of intersectionality within British policy on violence against women – with weak inclusion surrounding sexual offenses but moderate inclusion surrounding domestic violence. Also, they point out that visibility does not necessarily equate to minority voices being heard through policy, which is crucial if intersectional approaches are going to contribute to our understanding of gender inequality. Therefore, it’s important to provide an example by Imkaan (2019) who argues an intersectional praxis can help us understand how violence is experienced and allows us to develop policy that provides context-specific responses to violence against women. They also mention that ‘led by and for’ organizations are the most efficient way of addressing the intersectional nature of marginalized women – which are independent and specialist services that are run by the community, for the community. This model allows for policy to be tailored to the different experiences of women which is supported by Hearn et al (2016) who argue the inclusion of multiple inequalities in policy can lead to the strengthening of the gender equality project. Our approach to gender-based violence must be intersectional or our understanding of gender inequality and therefore our policy decisions wouldn’t be representative or understand the context of intersecting identities. Kuperberg (2018) supports my argument by mentioning the intersectional nature of violence against women in politics (VAWIP) by stating that women in politics experience violence due to intersecting elements of their identity – not limited to just gender. They use the example provided by Amnesty International (2017) that analyzed online abuse received by British female MPs and discovered a racial dimension – Black and Asian female MPs were 35% more likely to receive online messages that were deemed abusive. This research highlights how an intersectional approach to analysis surrounding gender inequality can contribute to our understanding of the topic due to the evidence suggesting some intersecting identities result in more violence than others. Furthermore, they go on to say by understanding the different forms of VAWIP we will have a more nuanced idea of its implications and therefore a higher level of knowledge in regards to gender inequality.

When looking at intersectionality and the perspective it provides surrounding the unique identities and experiences of women, it is evident how it significantly contributes to our understanding of gender inequality. I have explained this by highlighting examples of intersectional approaches – first, by bringing attention to the historical narratives surrounding black feminist thought and how intersectional approaches were designed to bring about a different feminist perspective. Then, I have taken my argument further by providing the contemporary example of how an intersectional outlook regarding violence against women and policy surrounding this issue can also enhance our understanding of the notion of inequality. Overall, it seems intersectionality as an approach and as a theoretical standpoint not only aids our understanding of gender inequality but also forms the basis of a nuanced notion of feminism that is essential for the unique and differing experiences of all women.

Traditions for centuries have defined gender roles in societies. Some critics today may declare that gender role does not exist, but others believe that they do exist. In ancient Greece, women suffered many hardships. Greek society considered the role of a woman to be insignificant compared to their men. Greek plays depict a woman as either a villain, a victim, or the heroine. In the play Medea, Medea depicts all these characters. Euripides gives Medea agency by having her take on traditionally masculine roles. He shows the capability of manipulation and even violence (Euripides 532). Medea proves that she can be dangerous and allows her obsession with her reputation to lead her. Maliciousness is also portrayed in her character and she is marked as bloodthirsty. The depiction of Medea in the play is a representative of Roman attitudes toward women. Medea also serves as an insight into women trying to break out of their gender constraints and how they are treated for doing so.

A woman as a Hero

Medea throughout the play compares herself to male heroes with references to male concepts such as fighting in a phalanx or attacking her enemies with a sword. It is clear that women are treated differently and as insignificant in this society, but that does not stop Medea. She admits to her flaws as a woman but is still able to overcome them. Although she cannot slay her enemies using a sword like a man, she uses whatever means she has to be a specific poison. She is aware of the flaw that her gender places on her, but she accommodates them. Once she has laid her plans out well, she goes on to manipulate the necessary characters with a prowess only reserved for men. Medea is a competitive and outspoken woman solely because she is not concerned with or governed by the female roles. Although a tragic hero, Medea, depicts women as courageous, brave, and outspoken even in those ages where women were seen as insignificant (Euripides 534).

Women have also been given an equal opportunity with the men, though, under some conditions. They have been granted the will of possession as long as they are attractive and do not engage in any form of gossip and observe chastity. The men are also tasked with proving themselves worthy of their roles. They must prove themselves capable of engaging in war or rhetoric, among other things. The will of possession is also guided on the parameters of gender. However, Medea feels she is empowered enough and worthy of equality by portraying her various masculine notions and attributes. In regards to lines 379-385, Media stipulates that she can engage in war by not necessarily fighting in how the men did. She suggests the use of poison rather than the sword, a smarter and still efficient way. Using poison puts her at an advantage since she cannot be as strong and powerful as a man.

Independence

The character of Medea is created with an embodiment of high confidence, outspoken attitude, and competitive nature by Euripides. She makes her plans and executes them, refusing to be governed by the female assumed roles. This, however, creates a dividing bridge between the way she perceives herself and how she is perceived by others. She believes that, by doing so, she displays the traits of those that have been described as tragic heroes before her in ancient history. However, this is met with some contradictions, especially being subjected to contemptuous treatment from Jason and Creon. In showing her vigor in independence, Medea refuses to conform to society’s norms and upholds the masculine ideals, creating a conflict with the Roman culture (Euripides 536). Her practice in witchcraft and the infanticide were against any society’s way of living, especially for the women. The decision to follow this unfamiliar path of the way of life shows how independent she was.

Lack of Control for Women

As mentioned earlier, Medea is characterized as being overconfident and outspoken, but she is greatly disobedient. This is because of a lack of male guardianship in her life (euripides536). In ancient Roman society, every woman was subjected to a form of Male guardianship in the form of a father or husband. This was a way of controlling the women, thus prohibiting them from engaging in any form of ‘fun’ like alcohol consumption or even the public display of wealth. However, as seen in the play that Medea cuts every tie with any male counterpart. The union with Jason was based on mutual consent, proving that Medea chooses to be in control of her fate and not be dictated by any norms (Euripides 529).

Conclusion

Medea as a women representative in the play, despite all challenges conquers gender roles. She stands up for herself despite her hurting from the betrayal of the oath they had made with Jason. She stands up and paves way for women not to be limited by the rules that are put there by society to prevent them from standing up for themselves.

Oscar Wilde has a tremendous reputation and impact in a satirical context all around the world. He covers his criticism in the text with humor and wit. The Importance of Being Earnest is one of his well-known plays and in that play, we can seize the criticism of the nature of marriage, the constraints of morality, and the distortion of society. However, there is a hidden narrative about the attitudes of society toward homosexuality and sexual interest, especially in 19th-century England. The name Ernest was a jargon word for the homosexual in the late 19th century. There is a line from a book of gay love poetry titled Love in Earnest:” While Earnest sets my heart flame.” This proves the soundness of the slang and Wilde would have certainly known the indirect meaning of the word.

The main characters are two gentlemen. Jack and Algernon both live double lives and both take up the name Ernest at one point. Jack invented a good brother, Ernest, so he could move away from the country and come to town whenever he wanted. On the contrary, Algernon creates an invalid disabled friend “ Bunbury”, so he can leave the town and go to the country. Bunburying can be seen as the practice of creating a well-thought-out deception that allows one to misbehave while seeming very responsible and having high standards of duty. As an explanatory example, when Algy describes his journey to Jack’s country house, he names this arrival as Bunburying. This can be seen as an attempt at their homosexuality. They both are considered a gentleman and honorable men because of their helpful and responsible behaviors toward their brothers and friends, respectively. There is a sort of casino in town that allows just men to get in and there is a “ cancan” performance men can watch. Some men dancers wear women’s clothes. In the cancan scene, dancers throw roses to the audience at the end of the dance and Jack catches a rose above Algy’s head and gives it to him gently. A woman’s effort to heterosexual flirting is prevented by a homoerotic encounter. In the continued scene, Jack changes the direction of the conversation and confesses that he is in love with Gwendolen. This change made me think that he was trying to cover up his previous gesture and hide the tension. They both are in disguise their visits, some behaviors or thoughts because in the 1800s, confessing and convicting of being homosexual was a crime in England. Men had to remain silent about their sexual interests.

There is an image that Wilde intentionally: cucumber sandwiches. But “why did he choose a cucumber?” The sandwiches are Lady Bracknell’s special request and they are made for her and Gwendolen, but Algernon eats all of them instead of these women. Wilde may try to show that these cucumbers which can be associated with the male reproductive organ because of their phallic shape, are served only by women. Algernon’s desire to eat represents his homosexuality. Lady Bracknell sometimes acts and talks like she knows his nephew’s sexual interests and she talks sarcastically. For instance, when she invites Algy to dinner and wants to introduce him to a lady, Algy sadly refuses her invitation because he has to see his sick friend Bunbury. Aunt’s saying is like a treat for Algy to make his decision about his tendencies: “Mr. Bunbry made up his mind whether he was going to live or die.” Towards the end of the film, Algy and Cecily are engaged to be married and Aunt gives her permission. Algy informs her about the death of Bunbury and says“ Doctors found out Bunbury couldn’t live.” The use of the terms “explosion” and “ couldn’t live” represents Algy’s submission to the social rules and pressures. Death of Bunbury pleased Aunt Augusta and her reply can be considered as an acceptance of Algy’s homosexuality: ”I am glad, however, that he made up his mind at the last to some definite course of action…”.

Many physiatrists and philosophers, especially Freud, argue that jealousy is a form of defense mechanism against homosexual impulses. After Jack is refused by Gwendolen’s mother, he and Algy go to a pub where everywhere is full of men who seem very “close”. When Gwendolen comes and takes away Jack, the look in Algy’s eyes expresses his jealousy. We can observe the same look in Jack’s eyes when Algy tells him that he loves Cecily. They both seem jealous and disappointed because of the fear of losing each other and the fear of solidarity. The feeling of togetherness and having something in common, especially in a very controversial and strictly undesirable ‘peculiarity’ like sexuality. This fear is the background of their very sincere and intensive cuddling and happiness when they learn that they are brothers at the end of the film. That means whatever happens or whoever they get married cannot separate them.

Finally, there are many details in the film that make us feel the tendencies of homosexual orientation. For instance, the female musicians in Cecily’s Dreams are men with wigs like the cancan dancers in the casino. Algy’s taking Jack’s handkerchief on the sly or the instant intimacy between them in their meaningless fight for the muffins are other examples. Also, the sentence Algy uses “ the essence of romance is uncertainty” refers to his relatively different and unusual ( for these days ) sexual preferences.

Anyone can understand the film. However, seeing through the ideas and criticisms requires some effort and research. Oscar Wilde is very accomplished in hiding his slating and strictures. Especially because of Oscar Wilde’s personal life, it is not surprising that there are many references to homosexuality in his play. This shows that Victorian society, with its biases and many rules, used to make non-heterosexual people live a life of pretending to be someone they are not. 

Throughout the years of recorded history, women have continuously been overshadowed by their male counterparts. Even though the roles of women throughout the ages of literature have differed, they still encompass the same ideas. From the beginning, they’ve had many degrading roles: from sexual objects to forbidden fruit, to home-centered. Ralph Ellison’s invisible man is no stranger to these criticisms. Although the story circulates an invisible man, the female characters are also deprived of their visibility. It has been argued that the portrayal of women is an accurate representation of the period, but this is not true. In the novel, there is a direct parallel between the mistreatment of the female characters and the Invisible Man’s journey towards enlightenment. The female characters are deprived of their visibility at the expense of the Invisible Man’s journey. The Invisible Man’s journey toward finding his true identity will be focused on a comparison between his invisibility and the invisibility of the women.

From the start, it’s evident that the theme of invisibility in the novel functions to highlight racism in American society. But it also encompasses the novel’s underlying text of gender erasure. Both black and white females throughout the novel are underdeveloped; they’re practically invisible. Many critics argue that the women in Ellison’s Invisible Man play a vital role because they’re a key ingredient in the development of the male characters. It is undeniable that the women shaped the male characters, especially the narrator himself. Unfortunately, the women themselves were quite underdeveloped, solely serving as a “carver” to the male characters. Although Ellison suggested solutions to racial oppression and displayed sympathy for the female’s situations, he failed to apply those solutions to the female characters in Invisible Man. This weakens his main purpose. Ellison writes, “I felt a wave of irrational guilt and fear. My teeth chattered, my skin turned to goose flesh, and my knees knocked. Yet I was strongly attracted and looked despite myself. (Ellison, 15).” To the narrator, the image of a naked white woman

is quite terrifying, despite being alluring. He begins to feel guilty as he reacts to her sensual dancing, this is because she is forbidden to the black men. The naked woman’s role here is that of a seductress, she is fully aware of her effect on the boys and continues to anguish them by “smiling at their fear (Ellison, 16).” Ellison’s initial purpose here is to highlight how the white men have the upper hand, and the blacks had no choice but to follow their orders. But if Ellison’s overall purpose is to deracinate the invisibility of the black man, the narrator’s blindness to women undermines the effectiveness of his purpose (The Blindness of an Invisible Man: An Exploration of Ellison’s Female Characters, Madison Ellis). The results are more hypocritical than heroic. The blonde stripper is reduced to a sexual object to tempt the boys, further proving that Ellison failed to add any significance to his female characters. The narrator himself tends to degrade humans, continuing to undermine the overall purpose of Ellison’s novel. The narrator states, “I want to feel the soft thighs, to caress her and destroy her, to love her and murder her (Ellison, 16). Even in the narrator’s eyes, the woman is not fully human; she is merely an object of sex. The stripper scene intended to showcase the white man’s reign and the black man’s oppression, but the subtext unraveled the dark truth of gender erasure and Ralph Ellison’s hypocrisy. Overall, the narrator is extending the same discrimination that he encounters himself to the female sex (The Blindness of an Invisible Man: An Exploration of Ellison’s Female Characters, Madison Ellis). The woman is merely a shell or a vessel; she’s anything but human.

While Ellison does convey some form of sympathy for the female characters in his novel, he still manages to remain “unaware” of the humanity of his female characters. Further proving that the representation of his female characters is sacrificed to develop the Invisible Man himself.