What's with the women?


I don't know if this was already discussed, but don't you think this whole piece portrays women as one-dimensional characters whose only goal in life is to get married. I understand that it was written in such a time when this was considered normal, but while I was watching the film, the whole time I wanted to punch all of the women in the face. Kate Winslet's character kept weeping for a man she'd only been with for a very short period of time. Geez, she almost died for him. For god sakes, did they think about absolutely nothing else in their whole existence? I love romance movies, but I really dislike it when women are portrayed as needy, stupid, and gossipy. The whole movie is about a bunch of women scheming into getting men to marry them. And being so desperate when they don't succeed.

reply

It was basically marry a well to do man or become a maid or worse a prostitute during that time period for women. Their obsession with marriage was because they had limited choices for themselves.

reply

saraleite-1 said: (excerpt)

"but while I was watching the film, the whole time I wanted to punch all of the women in the face."

So, you wanted to "punch all of the women in the face" for living up to the expectations of the society in which they lived? Expectations that prevented them from having any other options?

What is wrong with you? MY guess is that you want to commit violence upon any woman, regardless of what role she is fulfilling.

I wouldn't be surprised to see you on the "Working Girl" movie board, starting a thread about how you'd like to punch Sigourney Weaver and Melanie Griffith.

Face it. You hate women. Full stop.

**Have an A1 day**

reply

being without a man would have been like being unemployed. if you have no job, it is your focus to get one as quickly as you can. and the more money the man has, the less difficulties your family will face.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

I understand that it was written in such a time when this was considered normal, but while I was watching the film, the whole time I wanted to punch all of the women in the face.





Half the posts in this thread are mysteriously deleted, unfortunately.
Maybe everyone was punching everyone in the face, because everyone uses that go-to phrase these days.

~
All of us get lost in the darkness
Dreamers learn to steer by the stars

reply

Even though they are in tight financial straights, I don't think either Marianne or Elenore were scheming to get married, Elenore because she had to much integrity and Marianne because she was too much in love with the idea of love. I have never been found of Marianne because she's too selfish, self-involved and narrow minded. Basically she's unable see anything from anyone else's point of view, but she's also supposed to be a very young woman and so most of that is forgivable, but I still don't like her.

did they think about absolutely nothing else in their whole existence?


For Marianne, I would probably say yes. She thought that love should be larger than life and she wasn't realistic about it at all. But that's only one character in the book/movie.

Elenore wasn't portrayed as needy, stupid or gossipy. The fact is at the time these women lived "small" lives. They could only marry or inherit money and couldn't work. I forget who said it, but at the time women could only be one of two things, a drudge or a doll. These women were dolls and all that entails. The same is true for P&P, Emma etc the fact is that Elizabeth Bennett expected Jane to marry well so she thought she could do what she wanted. It's not like it wasn't an issue it's just it's a problem she solved in her mind.

reply

I haven't read to the end of the comments, so I don't know if your question was addressed thoroughly. Married women and their unmarried daughters in this era were at the mercy of a their male relatives if the husband died. The Dashwood women were thrown on the reluctant charity of the half-brother, John, and his greedy wife for their support. Mrs.Dashwood is a second wife and Eleanor, Marianne, and Margaret are the issue of the second marriage. They were offered the cottage to live in by the Middletons, distant cousins. They live in very straitened circumstances.
Because they are women of their class, being dependent on the reluctant half-brother and his awful wife would be the fate of all four of the Dashwood females if at least one of the daughters does not make an advantageous marriage. Women of the higher classes could not work and remain in those classes; working for a living was frowned on.
The custom of entailment would have affected the Bennet women in "Pride and Prejudice" if Mr. Bennet had died and none of the daughters had made advantageous marriages. Mr.and Mrs. Bennet had no sons. The estate was entailed on Mr. Collins, the cousin of Mr. Bennet, who would have inherited Longbourne and could have put them out of the house or reluctantly supported them.
Everyone was involved in finding suitable husbands for eligible women. Women have come a long way since then, but what you are seeing is pretty true to the time.
A good book to read if anyone is interested (and hasn't already read it) about the customs of this time is "What Jane Austen Ate and Charles Dickens Knew" by Daniel Pool. Every time I go to that book for a reference about something in one of the 19th century novels I read, I end up reading it cover to cover, the customs of those times are so fascinating, and he relates many of the customs to events in the novels.

I could be a morning person if morning happened at noon.

reply

Because they are women of their class, being dependent on the reluctant half-brother and his awful wife would be the fate of all four of the Dashwood females if at least one of the daughters does not make an advantageous marriage. Women of the higher classes could not work and remain in those classes; working for a living was frowned on.


This was not only true of women of the gentry, but the men as well. They were "landed" gentry for a reason--their occupation was owning land and living off other people working it. It was considered low-class to get into "business" too openly and both genders were expected to inherit or marry into their fortunes. The men might go into the military or politics, but those was hardly considered professions in the Regency sense.

Upper class women did have some work options, such as becoming a governess or even writing, but their lives, it's true, were more constrained than those of men and most of the time, they were dependent on the income of the men in their lives, especially since those men usually controlled whatever wealth the family had (though the women were expected to run the household).

You could say that women had to be careful how they married because they were literally marrying into their profession. If you married a king, you became a queen. If you married a ship's captain, you were wedded to a life at sea. If you married a merchant, you got into commerce. Non-noble women did work, but those who married worked for their families and, more specifically, the husband as head-of-household. This is most explicitly shown in "Persuasion," where Anne marries a ship's captain and ends up in a life of travel, adventure and risk pretty much overnight, but it's also true of "Sense and Sensibility," where Elinor becomes part of the Anglican Church by marrying a man who wants to go into the clergy (something that scandalizes his family because Edward's family feels he's too high-born for it. It's a bit like your family wanting a young man to go to Yale when all he wants to do is fix cars).

Innsmouth Free Press http://www.innsmouthfreepress.com

reply

Thats because it really was their only goal in life to avoid starvation. England was a complete sht hole and women were fourth class citizens.Most of the country was rolling around in its own sht coz they were so poor.
They were only given slave labour jobs to get by which were torturous & didnt pay well. So the dream was always to marry someone affluent so they didn't have to work at all. .

reply