Separation of Spheres: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Separation of the Spheres | == Separation of the Spheres -Nature and Education == | ||
In the 18th century and afterwards there was one major belief towards a seperation of male and/or female roles (duties) in society. On the one hand there was the "public sphere" which was generally associated with male duties such as war, money, politics and learning, whereas on the other hand the "private sphere" was linked to female duties such as domestic life. The male duties can also be reffered to as ''priviledged duties'' whereas female duties allow a definiton in terms of ''responsibility'' in the domestic field. One could also think of a "system of subordination". | In the 18th century and afterwards there was one major belief towards a seperation of male and/or female roles (duties) in society. On the one hand there was the "public sphere" which was generally associated with male duties such as war, money, politics and learning, whereas on the other hand the "private sphere" was linked to female duties such as domestic life. The male duties can also be reffered to as ''priviledged duties'' whereas female duties allow a definiton in terms of ''responsibility'' in the domestic field. One could also think of a "system of subordination". | ||
By contrasting two literary works. firstly John Ruskin's "''Of Queens Gardens''" and secondly Stuart Mill's ''Subjection of Women'' one is enabled to understand easily the attitudes towards the seperation of male and female spheres. ''Of Queens Gardens'' refers to the maintainance of a "system of subordination" | By contrasting two literary works. firstly John Ruskin's "''Of Queens Gardens''" and secondly Stuart Mill's ''Subjection of Women'' one is enabled to understand easily the attitudes towards the seperation of male and female spheres. ''Of Queens Gardens'' refers to the maintainance of a "system of subordination", the ''Subjection of Women'' however attempts to expose and to break this "system of subordination". | ||
'''Nature''' | '''Nature''' | ||
According to Ruskin, the female role is dependant and also determined by the inherent nature and the abilities of the women themselves and equality is not possible since women are in nothing alike to men at all. This is a rather artificial approach to the seperation of the spheres and contrasts totally Mill's approach saying that the distinctions between gender temperaments and roles are culturally created and thus a result of an artificial cultivation. | |||
'''Education''' | |||
In trying to find an additional way to justify the seperation of the spheres, Ruskin says that women are not supposed to be the object of education (language, literature etc.) for they grow like flowers. Education should be used in order to prepare them for their private duties and responsibilities, for instance being a good wife and mother. On the other Hand there is Mill developing an image of traditional education as being some kind of "mental enslavement" preventing mankinds abilities from doubling the worlds intelectual talents by not teching women. | |||
Revision as of 19:19, 25 January 2010
Separation of the Spheres -Nature and Education
In the 18th century and afterwards there was one major belief towards a seperation of male and/or female roles (duties) in society. On the one hand there was the "public sphere" which was generally associated with male duties such as war, money, politics and learning, whereas on the other hand the "private sphere" was linked to female duties such as domestic life. The male duties can also be reffered to as priviledged duties whereas female duties allow a definiton in terms of responsibility in the domestic field. One could also think of a "system of subordination".
By contrasting two literary works. firstly John Ruskin's "Of Queens Gardens" and secondly Stuart Mill's Subjection of Women one is enabled to understand easily the attitudes towards the seperation of male and female spheres. Of Queens Gardens refers to the maintainance of a "system of subordination", the Subjection of Women however attempts to expose and to break this "system of subordination".
Nature
According to Ruskin, the female role is dependant and also determined by the inherent nature and the abilities of the women themselves and equality is not possible since women are in nothing alike to men at all. This is a rather artificial approach to the seperation of the spheres and contrasts totally Mill's approach saying that the distinctions between gender temperaments and roles are culturally created and thus a result of an artificial cultivation.
Education
In trying to find an additional way to justify the seperation of the spheres, Ruskin says that women are not supposed to be the object of education (language, literature etc.) for they grow like flowers. Education should be used in order to prepare them for their private duties and responsibilities, for instance being a good wife and mother. On the other Hand there is Mill developing an image of traditional education as being some kind of "mental enslavement" preventing mankinds abilities from doubling the worlds intelectual talents by not teching women.