In the Politically Incorrect Guide to English and American Literature (a part of the bestselling P.I.G. series), Dr. Elizabeth Kantor writes, "Miss Jane Austen found it quite natural that men and women should occupy roles defined by their sexes. Her religion, which she took very seriously indeed, taught her that wives should obey their husbands. Perhaps even more to the point, it taught her that human misery is caused not by traditional societal structures but by individual sin, and that every member of the human race, male or female, is capable of vice and folly and has a duty to struggle against them. This struggle - not the war between the sexes or a campaign of subversive resistance to the patriarchy - provides the drama in Jane Austen's novels...
Jane Austen's novels show the failure of female self-control, on the one hand, and men's abdication of their proper responsibility, on the other, as among the chief causes of women's unhappiness. Far from being 'subversive' of traditional gender roles, Jane Austen's novels celebrate them.....The feminists and other postmodernist critics have resorted to a variety of subterfuges to convince their readers - and possibly even themselves - that Jane Austen was in some sense in sympathy with their goals...Male human beings seem to have their own characteristic flaws - which definitely aren't the things feminists accuse men of. The feminists' villains insist on dominating women. Jane Austen's villains are more likely to shirk their responsibilities. Women in Jane Austen's novels cause pain by being bossy and interfering. But most of the damage men do is because they don't involve themselves and take charge. There aren't a lot of repressive patriarchs in Jane Austen's novels. What there are a lot of, are men who aren't patriarchal enough.." (pp. 137-138, 145).
And that's why so many feminists attempt either to dismiss Jane Austen altogether or they resort to deception and literary subterfuge. Some truths are, well, just plain inconvenient.
You'll all have to excuse me, I have a sudden need to put on some Hai Karate and celebrate patriarchal values.
2 comments:
The "repressive male" who spends his days dominating his wife or the other women he comes into contact with has always been, by and large, a myth. It is simply an ugly stereotype. Most husbands, loving their wives, will usually let them have their way most the time. I think of all my friends and it's actually the women who dominate most if not all the time. My best friend's husband comes home after a long day's work and often has to cook dinner himself - or at least help out. He helps with the dishes, cleaning the house and running the errands. I think this is shameful. She stays home or spends the day shopping with some of her other girlfriends when she could be doing more to pull her own weight in my opinion. How does this represent "male dominance" or "patriarchy"? I agree with your post. Most men today aren't too domineering. They aren't man enough in my view. I'm not syaing they should be bullies or anything like that. But come on. A little testosterone wouldn't exactly hurt. Too many men have become effeminized because of the environment created and maintained by radical feminism.
As a woman, I'm ashamed at what feminism has become. It is a caricature now. The notion of "patriarchal oppression" is an exhausted project. If feminism is to be taken seriously in the 21st century, we need to dispel this asinine concept along with the equally silly notion that women must be copy-cat men if they are to have value. It's really demeaning to women. It's cheap.
Post a Comment