Monday, October 20, 2014

ARCS CH 8, RT 748-760, 698-735

Reading about Margaret Fell was refreshing and interesting in this section. I found it interesting how women were being particularly restricted at this time period (1614-1702) but despite the challenges they faced from the oppression of men many found "courage to express themselves", particularly Margaret Fell. It makes me wonder how in a time where women were experiencing more restrictions that many women felt this ability, why wouldn't the result be the opposite, women voicing less at the risk of prosecution. Margaret's piece titled, "Women's Speaking Justified, Proved, and Allowed by the Scriptures" was interesting for two main reasons. I thought about her title, and decision to use the word "allowed". To me this is an interesting and powerful choice, defining the current state of womens' rights at the time particularly related to speaking, but I found that this word validates the notion at the time that women do not have the allowance to speak credibly or publicly. I do not agree with her decision to use this nomenclature in her title...Secondly, I found it fitting and interesting that she speaks about the right of women to speak and have opinions publicly through examples in scripture that support the notion of equality for women. In the context of her writing and the time it was published, I can see the relevance of her topic, and the credibility that the church held in the time. Now in today's age, I would strive to find a source (similar to the Bible) that everyone may be able to agree is credible, true, fact, etc. But I find that now there are less "commonplaces" such as this. I feel that it was easier for Margaret Fell to accomplish what she wanted to say about the equality of women because she found the way to relater topic to a trustworthy and universally reliable source. People didn't argue with the Bible, especially because of the union between church and state. Now in writing, a rhetor would find it much harder to justify their ideas by citing one universally  uncontested source.

No comments: