1733275

Question #1

November 14, 2017

Comparative Analysis of Elizabeth Gossmans Hildegard of Bingen, Sarah Grimkes Letters on

the Equality of Sexes and the Condition of Woman, and Mary Wollstonecrafts A Vindication of
Womens Rights

Some would argue that the term feminist has an all-encompassing meaning that implies

all feminists see eye to eye on discrete issues concerning women and that vindicating their

freedom of choice would necessitate a surge of progressivism equivalent in effort as to that of

moving mountains. Still, to this day where gradual progress for woman positivity is being made

at only a slightly higher rate than that of its relapse, whether we see it or not, women are seen as

a stumbling block to mans progress insomuch they are subdued in their homes, in public, within

their own families and their own values, physically and mentally, unable to emanate their own

light because they are considered as an exploiter rather than an asset of society. This school of

thought has persisted for thousands of years, but with the proactive help of gifted and

conscientious women throughout history, society has and continues to fragment the outdated

concept of woman entangled by negative connotations. Of course, it didnt take just one voice to

revolutionize womankind, and women indisputably did not harmonize in their philosophies

regarding the positivity of woman. This is transparent because if history took only one stance

on womens progress, there wouldnt be much of it. Mary Wollstonecraft, Sarah Grimke, and

Hildegard of Bingen, feminists from different time periods, exemplify this diversity in thought

when they shed their radical lights on how women should be seen, typically in direct response to

their witnessing of unfair disparities between men and womens images, with great influence
from the conditions they were brought up in. All three believed that women are no lesser than

men, though Hildegard takes more of a religious standpoint to justify this, whereas Grimke uses

discrete language to illustrate how women are oppressed and victimized by men who keep them

in the dark, and Wollstonecraft incites a fiery passion from within to confound the absurd

ideologies clever men have employed to perpetuate the allegedly inherent social inferiority of

women to men.

A recurrent theme throughout Hildegards teachings as recounted by Elizabeth

Gossmans in Hildegard of Bingen, Grimkes Letters on the Equality of the Sexes and the

Condition of Woman, and Wollstonecrafts A Vindication of Womens Rights is that women and

men were created equal. To emphasize, not only are all men created equal, but all women as well

by the same calibers of men. The bible is often cited to verify that women are inferior to men in

nature, but in that same vein, one could also resort to the bible to dismantle the idea that women

were created in the image of men, and men, God. This is precisely what Hildegard,

Wollstonecraft, and Grimke did (though Grimke opinionates that too often does the bible

contradict itself, which invalidates its sanctity). Citing the bible, Grimke points out that God

made Eve and Adam in equal status and gave them equal power and dominion over all lower

order creatures. God only prophesized and not unequivocally judged that Adam would gain

authority over Eve. To some extent, Grimkes proposal of Gods prediction holds true; evidently,

Adam and Eves descendants have usurped a male dominated government where women are

largely excluded from engagement. One of the main reasons why humankind has evolved this

way, according to Hildegard, is that women are built physically weaker as a result of the

manifestation of Eves conviction of Adams downfall. However, this does not mean in any way

that woman is the inferior sex. Hildegard affirms that not only was Eve made for Adam but
Adam was also made for Eve. She does not distinguish man from woman when they were

created in Gods image; the only thing that matters is we are all Gods children, those who

receive him, and because of this, we cannot forget that God did not create us out of iniquity, so in

turn, we hold moral responsibility to treat one another fairly as wed want others to treat us.

Unlike Grimke, who discredited the idea of one sex using the other to their own advantage,

Hildegard legitimizes the inverse. Within the logic that woman was Gods creation, Grimke

reminds her audience that to disrespect women is to disrespect God, and that women and men are

to obey God and God only, not each other. Wollstonecraft, on the other hand, also believes that

women and men were born equal in that both were born without any knowledge or virtue, but

absorbs them through the passage of time. But because girls and boys were taught at infancy that

women should take on a frivolous, beautiful, and passive manner whilst men, forceful, brawny,

and manipulative, no one has ever thought to question this assignment of mannerisms to genders

well-accepted as common sense. She then goes on to make an analogy between the lives of

soldiers and women, both living their lives through a narrow lens and under the control of a

higher authority as they learn through casual observation of the world with their senses, but

only know a fraction of what it truly is.

This rift from classical philosophy maintaining that humans were born with some sense

of morality puts under the spotlight the double standard men and women must behave and act

accordingly to their genders. Because women and men were created equal, what determines the

delineation of virtue for men versus women? Wollstonecraft argues that if both men and women

have the same aim, their virtues should also be the same. After all, Hildegard mentions that

humankinds end goal is salvation. Right off the bat, Wollstonecraft makes a disclaimer about

the origin of mans transcendence above all others; she showcases these largely received
principles (founded by many male philosophers): reason fosters mans preeminence, virtue is the

standard by which all creatures are ranked in significance, and knowledge is the final pursuit

only men can acquire. Of course, to be inclusive of women in the slightest as not to be blatantly

sexist but rather build off of reason (though Wollstonecraft knows very well most men dont

believe women deserve to be virtuous and if they did, theyd give virtue a bad name), women,

too, can obtain virtue, but their virtues differ widely from mens. In what ways do they differ?

Simply put, virtuous women live to gratify men, and virtuous men maintain their position in

power as head of household to establish order. As a result of this, woman relies wholly on man,

whether it is her father, brother, or husband, therefore everything woman does is incomplete.

Wollstonecraft takes note that womens education in comparison to mens is desultory and

only sufficient enough to subsist in the world, (Wollstonecraft, 133). In fact, according to

Grimke, religion is the root cause women are denied services and opportunities everywhere. So

how can women attain virtue if she cannot think for herself and therefore derive it from her own

reason? Virtue must be exercised in independence; it cannot be imposed on woman by man. She

pushes for womens ability to build their own character because innocence or naivet, to mean

ignorance in this case, is equivalent to weakness. Grown adults resemble children in this way;

helpless and dont know any better. Virtuous guidelines formulated by men is nonsensical, not

because people shouldnt do good and live good lives, but because virtue has been corrupted.

For Grimke, the problem prolonging the social immobility of women is that many women are

blissfully ignorant when men tell them their purpose in life is to gratify men and shouldnt

question that. Hildegard says so herself, virtues are perceived individually only through hearing,

and it is only through the words of virtues that vices do not remain unanswered, (Gossman, 40).
 By this point in her book, Wollstonecraft has lost a lot of hope for mankind; but who

could blame her for growing up with an abusive father and fell in unrequited love with whom she

had an illegitimate child, a scorned misconduct at the time? She did not have a very positive

image of the idealized man. This mindset is somewhat shared with Grimke as well. In fact, both

of these women have voiced their repulsions for men. A major element in their works examines

the strategies men have taken to suppress women. Everywhere woman goes, she is accompanied

by man; every word she utters is censored by man; every decision woman makes, man approves

or disapproves; this collection of observations Grimke has retained shows that the actions of

men, especially husbands, are tyrannical, and that wives lose their legal entities to operate as

appendages of their husbands. For her, its ironic that cocky men who call themselves protectors

use brute force to keep their wives in line. Wollstonecraft acknowledges how men render

women powerless and obedient this way in order to gain control over them, that men have

constructed this power play because they enjoy being gratified by the sweet cunning nature of

women. This behavior is labeled by Wollstonecraft as arrogant and dishonorable. Women are

undeniably oppressed, expected to cater to every need of their husbands and humble themselves

if ever in the wrong. As for Grimke, she wonders how man is superior to woman if man is so

easily appeased by his senses in contrast to the intellectual foothold women have over men. What

is this intellectual power that women have? Since reputation virtually means the blessing or

shame of woman, her charm serves as a gateway to her appraisal and perhaps more admirers. She

has no choice but to use deception to be heard when subjected to her husbands control, says

Grimke. She speculates what would happen if women could speak freely, perhaps their

interchanges would be more sincere and women would have a lot to contribute if men cared to

listen. She wonders how men who call themselves mindful and at the same time level their
wives, who give them children and serve as their helpmeets, to beasts because it is of divine

origin which makes them sound rather like corrupt and fallen creatures, (Grimke, 102).

Wollstonecraft asks if men really value gratification more than sincerity. Ultimately, women are

hard workers and strong individuals as daughters, wives, and mothers; why should they have to

feign a sickly delicacy? (Wollstonecraft, 135). Possibly, men want to feel in control and step in

as guardians when women are in distress.

Societal values suddenly revolve around the gratification of men. Wollstonecraft remarks

that if society stresses more importance on manners than morals, instead of focusing on bettering

oneself, one directs all her attention to pleasing people around her. She rhetorically asks why

women must follow convoluted rules of grace, when all it takes to be a decent person is basic

fundamentals. This leads to her calling out male fragility, because if ones mindset is based on

only prejudices, they are standing on very thin ice if all it takes is progressive thinking to change

norms, which almost sounds like a threat.

In relation to God, as agreed upon by all three philosophers, though humans were created

in the image of God, we cannot assume His power. Hildegard elaborates more on this through

the projections of her visions. She viewed her sex as a weakness but when God spoke to her, she

knew she wouldnt remain weak forever and when she was spiritually illuminated, she became a

vehicle for His message. Hildegards what was once weakness transformed into self-confidence

because she didnt need proper education like her male counterparts to write and teach. Although

she does not favor one sex over the other, her religious take on the creation of man and woman is

predominantly anthropocentric and she certainly distinguishes the inherent characters of men and

women, that God undoubtedly create humans male undoubtedly of a greater bravery, and

female truly of a softer strength, but only to demonstrate what God had planned for the human
race (Gossman, 56). Not even Wollstonecraft is free from internal bias for she believes that

unconventional or non-feminine women have male spirits, though once again, she does not

favor any one sex. Because all three women reveal some kind of personal faith in divine

providence, they believe that only God can ordain certain entitlements, a power inimitable by

man and makes Him inescapable by all.

In my opinion, the bible is open for interpretation as made evident by conflicting views

between Hildegard and more recent philosophers Wollstonecraft and Grimke, as well as their

opposing forces who may or may not misconstrue religious texts to reconcile their own biases

and societal norms. However, one thing almost all of us can agree upon now is all feminists

dont have the same viewpoints on every subject matter. Because of her religious walk of life,

Hildegard fervently values life; she firmly believes men and women were created biologically

and spiritually different. While this attitude towards the holiness of the human body is

considerably orthodox, it does not completely align with the core values of woman positivity and

therefore feminism today. To say that women and men were born differently other than the

distinct corporeal structure and design of reproductive organs, is to absolutely undermine one sex

or the others abilities. This discriminating outlook on sex frequently leads to the contrasting of

the two sexes and even the degrading of one, typically female. However, comparing a

homogenous population of men to a homogenous population of women produces fruitless results

because no one woman or man is the typical representation of their sex in all aspects of life. It is

exclusive of intersex and transsexed persons and not all women are less able than all men to a

measurable degree in all actions. To truly promote woman positivity is to erase all pre-conceived

notions that women are less able.