By Jessica Kelso ’26

*Editor Contribution

Contributor Biography: Jessica (she/her) is a senior English major with minors in JEP (journalism, editing, and publishing). She was Associate Editor during the 2024 academic year and the Managing Editor in the Fall 2025 semester. Jessica is highly involved in the theatre department, and she works in the Literary House, as a peer writing tutor in the Writing Center, and as a Peer Mentor for incoming students.

Brief Description: This essay explores how the unconscious bias of a patriarchal society contradicts Wollstonecraft’s feminist agenda of urging women to seek autonomy and individuality through ideas of strength and power

The following was written for ENG 394 10: Jane Austen Influences

Excerpt: “I earnestly wish to point out in what true dignity and human happiness consists—I wish to persuade women to endeavour to acquire strength, both of mind and body, and to convince them that the soft phrases, susceptibility of heart, delicacy of sentiment, and refinement of taste, are almost synonymous with epithets of weakness, and that those beings who are only the objects of pity and that kind of love, which has been termed its sister, will soon become objects of contempt.” 

Modern women lack the privilege to abandon advocating for women’s rights and equality. Since the establishment of a patriarchal society, women have continually strived to dismantle systemic prejudices created by men to disempower women. However, due to the inherent biases that come from a generationally compounded misogynistic society, feminists may also fall victim to the enforced ideals of men. Mary Wollstonecraft, in her call to action for women’s rights, unconsciously enforces the masculine binary of strength and happiness; therefore constructing an argument that roots itself in male stereotypes. As such, while her ideals are actively feminist, they lack the accepting perspective of valuing feminine qualities to truly assert female independence from the male gaze due to the influence of a patriarchal society, making her ability to truly encourage female autonomy limited. 

Wollstonecraft begins, “I earnestly wish to point out in what true dignity and human happiness consists—” In this, she establishes her goal to educate her audience on “true dignity and human happiness” rather than perceived dignity and happiness. The word “earnestly” implies her passion for the feminist movement; and combined with the term “wish,” Wollstonecraft emphasizes her desire towards this agenda and the futuristic sense of her writing. Rather than simply stating, “I point out in what true dignity…” she makes clear that this education has not yet occurred. Additionally, the phrase “point out” implies that while society acknowledges the definitions of dignity and happiness, they do not abide by Wollstonecraft’s specific ideas of the two qualities. Wollstonecraft distinguishes her ideas of “true dignity” and “dignity,” therefore arguing that society maintains a lesser form of dignity. “Dignity,” in this sense, also connotes the idea of autonomous social respectability—something women of the time lack. Similarly, “human happiness” differs from “happiness” because of the patriarchal perspective that does not view women as “human” in comparison to men. In this, Wollstonecraft creates a personal binary of dignity and happiness, leaving no room for other ideals. She perceives herself as correct and pushes her agenda to the degree that negatively critiques those that do not align themselves with her beliefs, driving the narrative that they lack the clarity to recognize both society’s bias and their own lack of happiness. 

She continues, “I wish to persuade women,” further indicating her desire to influence her intended female audience. She uses the word “persuade” to emphasize the idea that society needs convincing of her argument. By stating that she wishes to “persuade women,” Wollstonecraft acknowledges the potential bias that women of the time may hold toward their own sex, further supporting the idea that women can perpetuate misogynistic stereotypes. Fully, Wollstonecraft asserts: “I wish to persuade women to endeavour to acquire strength, both of mind and body, and to convince them that the soft phrases, susceptibility of heart, delicacy of sentiment, and refinement of taste, are almost synonymous with epithets of weakness.” Through this, she encourages women to “acquire strength,” implying that women lack strength and therefore exist in an inherently weak state. She further emphasizes this idea when she claims traditionally feminine traits to be “synonymous with epithets of weakness.” By claiming that the feminine traits of “soft phrases, susceptibility of heart, delicacy of sentiment, and refinement of taste” convey “weakness” as opposed to masculine traits associated with strength, Wollstonecraft pits women of different characters against each other and establishes a binary of what society considers to be “strong,” and subsequently worthy of agency. Her internalized misogyny serves to enforce gender roles and hinders the progression of equality due to the singular subversion of male and female characteristics rather than the deconstruction of gendered traits. 

Wollstonecraft concludes that women will inevitably become resented by male society because of the lack of strength that she unconsciously, and society consciously, perpetuates. She writes: “those beings who are only the objects of pity and that kind of love, which has been termed its sister, will soon become objects of contempt.” By referring to women as “those beings,” rather than their social title, Wollstonecraft both emulates the male agenda of objectifying women and distinguishes her idea of a weak woman from a strong woman. Her othering of women who portray characteristics she deems as “weak” creates a social divide and setback for the advocation of women’s rights. This therefore eliminates the potential for women to view “soft phrases, susceptibility of heart, delicacy of sentiment, and refinement of taste” as a variant way of acting “strong” in society and forces the binary of physical strength and mental intellect onto women who seek individuality. 

Additionally, Wollstonecraft’s phrase, “only the objects of pity,” reduces women to the identity placed upon them by others; “objects” in the perspective of men and “pitied” in the eyes of other women. By characterizing women who embrace feminine traits as victims to “that kind of love,” Wollstonecraft also plays into the idea that men only love women due to superficial traits. Her additional claim of “pity and that kind of love, which has been termed its sister” associates the idea that women receive love rooted in pity from men, and therefore men’s love of servitude from women acts synonymously with the pity women receive from society as a whole. As such, Wollstonecraft asserts that men solely love women due to their feminine qualities; therefore subjecting them to social resentment for their “weakness.” She writes, “those beings who are only the objects of pity and that kind of love, which has been termed its sister, will soon become objects of contempt,” meaning that women will never satisfy the male gaze and therefore men must resent them for not fulfilling manufactured ideals of a patriarchal wife. 

Despite Wollstonecraft’s efforts to advocate for women’s rights in the eighteenth century, she is also a victim of a patriarchal society. As such, she not only pushes her ideals of equality onto her female audience, but also unconsciously mirrors the male gaze in portraying women as weak and perpetrates the social roles and binaries assigned to men and women. 

Wollstonecraft, Mary. “A Vindication of the Rights of Women.” 1792.