Female Education: Yay or Nay? Beyond the Binary Chapters 9-12

In her book Beyond the Binary, Shannon Dea has yet again shocked me beyond belief. This time, by discussing the Rousseau's thoughts on female education, Dea was able to stir up many different thoughts and emotions within me. These emotions ranged from anger to confusion and eventually to understanding. Essentially, in the 1700s, Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued that "women ought to be subordinate to men" (149). Interestingly, Rousseau also argued that in order for females to achieve the best life possible, they should educate themselves. This was because, according to Rousseau, female education, especially at a young age, was a way for girls to understand their roles in society. These roles were "to charm men, to persuade others of their fidelity, and to manage the household" (152). Therefore, by being educated, females would be able to understand how to conduct themselves in society. 

I originally found myself quite taken aback by Rousseau's argument. To think that someone would say that the purpose of a female is to serve males infuriated me. In addition, the fact that I believe that Rousseau truly believed in his argument angered me even further. When I first read his argument, a couple passionate questions came to mind immediately. I thought, "What right does a male have to define what it should mean to be female? In fact, what right does anyone have to tell another person what they should or should not choose to do with their life?" After taking some time to process Rousseau's argument, however, I slowly began to understand why Rousseau may have believed so heartily in his argument. Therefore, I now believe that Rousseau's ideas on female education were in the genuine good interest of females during the 1700s. Let me explain why: 

While it can be difficult to understand in modern society, a female's role in the 1700s was to be the most attractive person she could be in order to find a husband. By finding a husband, females were able to support their family and hopefully live a good life. Therefore, I believe that it is understandable why Rousseau would want females to be educated. By educating themselves, some women would have the ability to converse with men and allow themselves to stand out among the other women who did not educate themselves. In addition, education could provide females with the tools they needed to help their children with their education. During the 1700s, males and females truly had quite different roles in society and so to directly compare males and females was similar to comparing dogs to horses. The way Dea put this idea in her book stood out quite nicely to me. She stated that Rousseau's view allowed "women to become better women, or men better men" (154). Thus, I do believe that Rousseau's true intentions were to best help women in the 1700s. 

While I do understand Rousseau's argument, I did also want to state that his thoughts would not be taken well in the twenty-first century. This is because I believe that as a society, we have begun to accept that women are not inferior to men. In modern times, women have begun to challenge traditional gender roles and I find that quite inspiring. Women are no longer educating themselves for the interest of finding a husband; they are educating themselves for themselves. For example, I have chosen to go to college for my own benefit so that I can hopefully go to medical school one day. I am not going to college to merely find a husband. I hope that many other females are choosing or will also choose to educate themselves for themselves, in order to be the best person they can be for themselves alone. 

Source: Woman Education VectorStock Image