A Response to The Prevailing Opinion of a Sexual Character Discussed

I was excited to realize that The Prevailing Opinion of a Sexual Character Discussed was Mary Wollstonecraft’s work; I look up to her greatly, though that did not always make it easier to read. My dictionary and I bonded through several attempts to traverse this article. My note cards were nearly expunged by all the new words, but it was worth it.

Her language was beautiful! I admit it was immensely difficult to comprehend her all the time, but eventually (especially near the end) I got lost in Wollstonecraft’s prose. It was funny though. Wollstonecraft was rallying for equality, claiming that women weren’t getting the education they needed, and she used words like, “punctilious”, “effusions”, and “criterion”. Wonderful. I admire her for her extensive vocabulary.

She also knew how to make a point. Wollstonecraft must have had several hand cramps by the time she finished, but all her words were there with reason. She was also never rude when she stuck up for her beliefs. She just backed them up with English any teacher would be proud of. I’d like to see what the response was to her Vindication of the Rights of Woman.

When she spoke of women and armies, I was struck by the similarities (not to mention her writing). “The consequence is natural; satisfied with common nature, they become prey to prejudices, and taking all their opinions on credit, they blindly submit to authority.” Living with your own reasons and views was something I wholeheartedly agreed on with Wollstonecraft. It’s fine to consult with one another, but experience will be far more beneficial than losing oneself to didactic sermons. After all, if people become educated and gain their own values then “there will be an end to blind obedience” and a drop in dotards. Hopefully.

Wollstonecraft continuously came back to the battle of the sexes. Men would rant on and on how women were inferior, silly little things not fit for education that “should never… feel [themselves] independent”. (Well, of course women of the time appeared “inferior”. How can someone exercise superiority or equality when they’re locked away from a fair education and treated as children?) Dr. Gregory’s idea that a girl should act like a doll, docile and pretty to look at, but without her own movement or thought, was irritating. It was like these men were afraid. If women are forever inferior, why not let them in a classroom?

However, Wollstonecraft was woman enough to point something else out. Some women take advantage of this lack of independence. With beauty and faux-frailty, women sometimes attempt to “reign over” the opposite sex. Neither side is completely fault free.

While I respect and even look up to Wollstonecraft, there was one issue I disagree with in this article—love. It felt like she held it in soft disdain. (Maybe I misunderstood?) Her explaining that lonely mothers make better mothers saddened me. I believe that a happy marriage where husband and wife work together and love each other is more efficient than Wollstonecraft’s idea. Friendship is essential to a long, happy marriage, but that doesn’t mean that love has to be equated out of the mix.

Mary Wollstonecraft is a hero of mine. In history class last year, I read about her in our French Revolution unit. Her Vindication of the Rights of Woman left me wanting to shout and jump up and down. Someone got it. Her egalitarian views and her knowledge that anyone, regardless of gender, can be strong and brilliant and passionate were inspiring. I am growing up in a patriarchal society where I may not earn as much money as some dude doing the same job as I and where some girls may never read or speak for themselves simply for being female. But times are changing. I think Wollstonecraft would smile at all the women working, supporting husbands and children and contributing to the world.