“For a young woman of this period, marriage was the surest route to independence and freedom.” Agree? Disagree? Explain…
Be sure to sign your name!
11 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I agree and disagree: it was a way out of a controlling family, and usually an opportunity to run their own household, however it did not give them what we would concider independence and freedom. Marriages needed to be approved by both families and the husbands were the dominant figures in the relationship. Married women's freedom was limited to what their husband permited.
In many ways i agree with this quote. During the time period the book is set, women were expected to get married. A women had very limited abbilities within society unless she had a man that could represent her. When a women was not married then she was always being watched and being pushed to get married, so this quote makes sense because after the women got married the eyes of society were lifted because she was filling her role, which enabled her to live more freely and independantly.
For this time period, yes, marriage was a sure route to independence and freedom. If a girl chose the right husband she could do whatever she wanted. Others found marriage stifling though, and if you wanted independence without marriage, you had to work extremely hard to get it. Men didn't respect women by themselves either, they thought they were inferior. I agree for the most part that marriage was the surest route to independence.
I have to agree with this quote. During the time period of which the book is set women didn't have the same status in society as men did. However, this is a generalization, and we cannot say that all women of this time period gained freedom through marriage, in fact I'm sure quite a few lost their freedom by marrying a man she did not like.
In the scene of the book i think that women didn't have uch objection to getting married. Most of the girls were exstatic to find love and get married, especially Lydia. At this time period i do not think that women felt that marraige was a strip of the few freedoms that they already had. From the book many of the women were content throwing parties and going into town.
I agree. During this time period, women had virtually no freedom to speak of, no matter their marital status, but it was definetly much less controlling being a wife than a daughter. Parents have utmost control over their children, especially their female children at this time. When a girl became a wife, though her husband still stifled her ability to choose for herself most of the time, she still got to run the house hold, and she had a place in society, especially if she was rich, so she got to do some more lesiurely activities. Plus, she would then be a mother who had control over her children at the very least.
Marriage during that time period was a way for young women to gain freedom. Like Ambika said, when women were finally married they had the opportunity of running their houses. This meant that they usually decided what company to invite over, what leisure to pursue for the day, and even what trips to take. However, husbands usually exercised some form of control over their wives, which meant that marriage didn't guarantee absolute freedom. However, control of their own household meant that women achieved much more freedom with marriage than when they were living with their families.
i woul dhave to agree with everyone who agreed with this quote. like many befor eme have stated, this time period was very rough on women. women were seen as people who had ot be babied, hands held all their life until they were married off. it was like getting married defined them as an independent woman and an adult able to make her own decisions. howeveri think its unfortunate that the only way a woman can define her independence is through marriage, and that th eonyl way they can become more free, is by becoming more tied down. maybe in reality its like a safety net for the families, maybe they feel comforted knowing their daughter wont run rampid all over the place because now their daughter is starting her own family and has responsibility. but who knows, just a thought...
I disagree; a woman would spend her entire life waiting and searching for a husband, but as soon as she was married, she was expected to be the perfect wife and basically start the entire cycle all over again by having kids and then, if any were girls, encouraging them on their way to find husbands. This does not seem like independence or freedom at all; it seems more like being completely trapped in a vicious cycle that is not only layed out for the women by their parents, but also continuted without a second thought by their new husbands.
I disagree mostly. Can you call being latched to one's husband for social status, safety, and money "independence"? And can you call being forced to act how your husband wanted you to act "freedom"? The societal schemas for women in a married household at the time were also very limiting on freedom (not just the husband himself). However, to some extent, being married provided women with a relatively secure income in which they could exercise some extent of freedom -- as compared to being unmarried and tied to one's shrinking pocketbook.
11 comments:
I agree and disagree: it was a way out of a controlling family, and usually an opportunity to run their own household, however it did not give them what we would concider independence and freedom. Marriages needed to be approved by both families and the husbands were the dominant figures in the relationship. Married women's freedom was limited to what their husband permited.
In many ways i agree with this quote. During the time period the book is set, women were expected to get married. A women had very limited abbilities within society unless she had a man that could represent her. When a women was not married then she was always being watched and being pushed to get married, so this quote makes sense because after the women got married the eyes of society were lifted because she was filling her role, which enabled her to live more freely and independantly.
-Matthew Fitch
For this time period, yes, marriage was a sure route to independence and freedom. If a girl chose the right husband she could do whatever she wanted. Others found marriage stifling though, and if you wanted independence without marriage, you had to work extremely hard to get it. Men didn't respect women by themselves either, they thought they were inferior. I agree for the most part that marriage was the surest route to independence.
that ones mine
kori
I have to agree with this quote. During the time period of which the book is set women didn't have the same status in society as men did. However, this is a generalization, and we cannot say that all women of this time period gained freedom through marriage, in fact I'm sure quite a few lost their freedom by marrying a man she did not like.
Drew McGlincy
In the scene of the book i think that women didn't have uch objection to getting married. Most of the girls were exstatic to find love and get married, especially Lydia. At this time period i do not think that women felt that marraige was a strip of the few freedoms that they already had. From the book many of the women were content throwing parties and going into town.
I agree. During this time period, women had virtually no freedom to speak of, no matter their marital status, but it was definetly much less controlling being a wife than a daughter. Parents have utmost control over their children, especially their female children at this time. When a girl became a wife, though her husband still stifled her ability to choose for herself most of the time, she still got to run the house hold, and she had a place in society, especially if she was rich, so she got to do some more lesiurely activities. Plus, she would then be a mother who had control over her children at the very least.
~Alyssa
Marriage during that time period was a way for young women to gain freedom. Like Ambika said, when women were finally married they had the opportunity of running their houses. This meant that they usually decided what company to invite over, what leisure to pursue for the day, and even what trips to take. However, husbands usually exercised some form of control over their wives, which meant that marriage didn't guarantee absolute freedom. However, control of their own household meant that women achieved much more freedom with marriage than when they were living with their families.
-Victoria M
i woul dhave to agree with everyone who agreed with this quote. like many befor eme have stated, this time period was very rough on women. women were seen as people who had ot be babied, hands held all their life until they were married off. it was like getting married defined them as an independent woman and an adult able to make her own decisions. howeveri think its unfortunate that the only way a woman can define her independence is through marriage, and that th eonyl way they can become more free, is by becoming more tied down. maybe in reality its like a safety net for the families, maybe they feel comforted knowing their daughter wont run rampid all over the place because now their daughter is starting her own family and has responsibility. but who knows, just a thought...
I disagree; a woman would spend her entire life waiting and searching for a husband, but as soon as she was married, she was expected to be the perfect wife and basically start the entire cycle all over again by having kids and then, if any were girls, encouraging them on their way to find husbands. This does not seem like independence or freedom at all; it seems more like being completely trapped in a vicious cycle that is not only layed out for the women by their parents, but also continuted without a second thought by their new husbands.
-Kayleigh
I disagree mostly. Can you call being latched to one's husband for social status, safety, and money "independence"? And can you call being forced to act how your husband wanted you to act "freedom"? The societal schemas for women in a married household at the time were also very limiting on freedom (not just the husband himself).
However, to some extent, being married provided women with a relatively secure income in which they could exercise some extent of freedom -- as compared to being unmarried and tied to one's shrinking pocketbook.
-Sarah
Post a Comment