Response to "Pre-reading" #2

After reading this section about men and women's equality (or lack thereof), it is evident that some of the authors had very different ideas on the matter of equal rights.

In some of the segments from articles, the way women are described is almost demeaning. If I were to be referenced to as only being property belonging to my spouse, I would surely be offended. Women are also referred to as having no place in society, in terms of social or economical involvement once married. This sounds like it prevents them from being recognized except through their husband, and that they wouldn't be able to get a job in most cases. If i were a woman at the time when these articles/laws were published, the way these sentences are worded would have made me reconsider ever marrying. However, I also that marrying was the complete norm for any woman at the time, and they would likely have been frowned upon if they never married. So, it was a lose lose situation either way.

I'm sure that the world today is quite different in understanding equal rights. One prime example of this is that I am one of only two guys in my English class, which is comprised of about 20 people. We are all attending the same class and learning from the same teacher. I'm sure if any school like this had ever existed, especially with such a low ratio of men to women, it would not have been highly regarded back then. However, today, I feel blessed to have the chance to have an education, and that everyone is protected equally under the law. I cannot imagine my school, let alone my life, being remotely the same if the world was as it were hundreds of years ago.

The article also mentioned something very interesting with regards to the custody of children. Custody, back then, was normally given preference to the father. I can onyl guess this is because he made the money and could care "financially" for the child. This is extremely different than today's world. Primary custodial consideration is almost always given to the mother of a child, today. This is because she gave birth to the child, and I also think it has something to do with the bond between a mother and a child. Also, the circumstance that juries may favor women over men in a case gives them the advantage in a custodial battle. Once again, I cannot express how interesting it is that things happen to change so quickly in society.

I'm sure that most of the bloggers in my class will be offended by the first part of this reading (referring to women not having "equal rights") , and they have every right to be. I am glad that the laws today protect each American and ensure that justice be brought into the situation if the rights of equality are not upheld.