(no subject)

[be_themoon]

Things wot I am reading:

Liberty: The Lives and Times of Six Women in Revolutionary France by Lucy Moore. What I find really fascinating is that this really brilliant woman, Germaine de Stael, clever, witty, talented, was also against women's rights. And she wasn't the only one of these women to be against women's rights! it's a really odd dichotomy. apparently it's partly because of Rousseau, who was popular? and part of the argument against the old Regime was that it had let women gain positions of power (even though this wasn't really true - women gained an illusion of power, but they had almost no real control, and to gain it they had to sacrifice their reputations). so yeah, I find that strange.

Comments

[lassiterfics.livejournal.com]

No, that makes sense. If you slap a label like "women's rights" over things that purport to further women's causes but in its turn it has to dismantle the only system they know in which women CAN get power, then I can understand the apprehension. It was a man's world and it was hard enough for a woman to make it, and if we dismantle this world then it's going to be twice as hard for the women as for the men to climb up, because it was always twice as hard for the women. It seems like de Stael was just trying to protect women, or at least women of certain means, even if her attempts were misguided.

What was her beef with Rousseau? What did he do?

[rodwen-fefalas.livejournal.com]

I have a friend who is JUST LIKE THAT. I'm not kidding - brilliant, could go on to do *extraordinary* things, but she's a mysoginist. Total mysoginist. Wants a controlling, arrogant, demeaning, gorgeous, chiseled man.
I don't understand this lack-of-logic.

Oh, and she's a huge fan of Rousseau, so I guess that says something?

[fadedelegance.livejournal.com]

Yeah, female misogynists never fail to baffle me. -___-