cote
I’d like to make a few comments on the Cote piece.
First, despite the colonialist/imperialist aspects of the Dutch women’s movement, I found some of the discourse surrounding the working class quite extraordinary. For instance, I was surprised that one of the divisions of the Dutch women’s movement (I’ll use DWM from now on) was pushing for acknowledgement of the needs and rights of the working class…that these women even referenced differences among women seems significant. In addition, near the end of the essay Cote talks about the DWM added attention to the social influences that determine the state of individuals such as prostitutes or single mothers; focus was shifted from believing these people inherently flawed to thinking of them as products of a faulty social system. I wasn’t aware that this type of thought was being used during this time period.
Though I’ve heard it before, I found it humorous that because the men can’t “keep it in their pants,” so to speak, the women must swoop into the colonies and rescue men from their immoral impulses. What is the rational here? Women are inferior to men, but men lack so much self control that they must rely on women to restrain their sexual impulses? Just doesn’t seem logical.
This is just a thought in general, but as I was reading Cote I kept thinking about the strategies the DWM used or did not use in pursuing their cause. Were the arguments they utilized arguments they actually believed in, or the only augments that seemed likely to work with the public? I just wonder if there was ever a conscious move to harness an argument that had previously received response from the public that didn’t necessarily reflect the attitudes of the women deploying them. I’m not sure if this even makes sense, but in my head it seems worth considering
One other little question. I’m curious as to how the church felt about Sor Juana using Greek Mythology. I would imagine they weren’t thrilled.