Response to Comments: Defending and Empowering

So, Dr. Burton made a point to me that my claims were all too broad. I don't know if it was the struggle of trying to fit my ideas into a tweet of different types of claims or if I just didn't understand what I was getting at. I began to talk to my sister-in-law, Julie, and decided I wanted to look at the difference between feminist literature from now compared to the late 1800's and early 1900's. Julie and I discussed how we both see that the original "feminist literature" had merit and purpose and fought for rights that were deserved. Now, we see the feminist literature to unite women together to be trashy and inappropriate and that they fight a battle that is already been won. Though women aren't perfectly "equal" to men, we are given the opportunity to decide for ourselves and to have a voice. My sister-in-law said:

I think it appealed to the emotions of women who felt like their voices weren't being heard. And that eventual anger led further and further away from the basic tenet of equality to the extreme version of feminism we have now where men are denigrated and family values are destroyed

and sent another message saying

I think those with bad intentions used the emotions of the literature to appeal to the general population of women who weren't being heard and it eventually transformed into a group that could be manipulated and exploited with their insecurities.

I responded to her opinion by saying:

  Hmm I agree. I've read literature of this nature from 1800's and early 1900's, and I feel some have some genuine merit, but I feel like after the feminist movement, all the literature and articles written were almost trashy in nature, the way that they attacked instead of defend, if that makes sense. 

I went on Goodreads and pulled up the genre "feminism" and was shocked at what I saw. The titles of the text were shocking and in your face, as if you had to be a feminist or you were a bad person. One title worked off the idea of a certain "lady's part" which left me distraught. As I read the modern writings synopsis, it was about fighting the man and feeling like the woman was higher than the man. It's one thing to defend a person's God given rights and something else to belittle those who aren't a part of your circle.

Charly helped me by mentioning different authors and writings to look deeper into. I want to be able to compare the affects both literature has on those who are reading it. Charly made a comment where she said: 

 Also, I personally believe literature is as much reflective of the society that's already there (written by women, in this case, who live in that society) as a driving force for change. To paraphrase another midcentury figure, Don Draper, "we can't sell people what they don't already want."

I've read literature that would be considered "feminist" but also considered classics. Even though I don't relate myself to feminism, I was able to understand the characters and their motives. I feel like the affect they had on me was beneficial, no matter my stance on a woman's place in the world. Before the 60's, women were searching for a voice, for this literature, stories and articles were a motivation to find that voice. Now that women are able to use their voice to influence the world, they are left to try to gain more power than others around them, and this motivational and empowering text has turned into a power struggle.

I feel like as I delve deeper into my topic, I'll be able to understand it all better, and maybe make a stronger and better argument.