Thursday, October 18, 2007

HW:22 Patriarchy My Foot!!!

Patriarchy by definition is a social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line; broadly: control by men of a disproportionately large share of power. (Merriam Webster Dictionary) In chapter 2 it is clear that Woolf believes that anyone who reads the paper in England can clearly tell it is a patriarchy. Woolf supports her idea of patriarchy by making the following statement. While referring to the professor Woolf says, "Nobody in their senses could fail to detect the dominance of the professor. His was the power and the money and the influence. He was the Foreign Secretary and the Judge. He was the cricketer; he owned the racehorses and the yachts. He was the director if the company that pays two hundred per cent to its shareholders." (Woolf 33) It is clear from the selection that in England women are not important in the world. They serve no specific role in the world, have no education and have no say or control over anything. Men are the leaders, control everything and make the money. After reading a couple of articles in online newspapers, it is easy to support the idea that in the United States women are not inferior to men but actually considered equal to them. For instance, Hilary Clinton running for president is a perfect example of the fact that the United States is not a patriarchy. If patriarchy were the case then the men of the U.S. would prevent women from having any control or even gaining any.

1 comment:

Tracy Mendham said...

I think you explain the quote ("Nobody in their senses..") well, but I'd say that women did have a role, just not one of real power in the public sphere.
To compare today's paper to Woolf's and assess the degree to which the US might still be patriarchal, we'd need to look at what roles women play. Did you look to see what gender the heads of state and ambassadors and company owners and athletes mentioned in the New York Times were? Do the representations of men still outnumber those of women in powerful, non-domestic roles? I think this would be the way to make a fair comparison.