"The Great Lawsuit" and "If Men Could Menstruate"

As a feminist, I have a huge soft-spot for social justice and, obviously, women's rights. Needless to say I was pretty enthused to have these excerpts as part of our summer assignment! Many people believe that oppression against women is a thing of the past and that women suffragists fixed everything, which is far from the truth. Wage gaps, systematic patriarchy, and rape culture are just a glimpse of current persecutions undergone by women in the United States. Both articles, from 1843 and 1986, come to show that sex-based oppression, though in different ways, still holds great relevance.

Admittedly, I struggled reading "The Great Lawsuit" by Margaret Fuller due mostly to the older style of writing, but I found portions that are still heavily relatable now in the 21st century. One that particularly struck me was when she mentioned the "frequent remark that 'You can not reason with a woman.'" This is an excuse people still use to this very day to avoid placement of a woman in authority. Absurd claims that she is "irrational" and "stubborn" while on her period, etc. Fuller also makes a point by identifying that having the same rights as men is NOT equivalent to justice. This is true regarding women and Black-Americans (as she also points out) and is still very relevant today. Yes, women can vote, but that is far from saying we live at the same standards of men.

I absolutely adored our next reading, "If Men Could Menstruate" by Gloria Steinem, for its hilarious accuracy. Steinem made ludicrous examples of how men would use menstruation to their advantage, but use women's menstruation to their deficit. In one paragraph I found utterly eloquent and perfect, she points out that "logic has nothing to do with oppression" and provides examples of "superior" groups will use anything to justify their "superiority." Like Fuller, Steinem made terrific connections between the oppression against women to the oppression against Black-Americans.

Steinem also made some very valid points on penis envy. Penis envy is not so much about wanting to "be a man" and "have a penis" as it is to enjoy the same rights and privileges as men. She also points out the illogicality of penis envy over "womb envy." Think about it-- vaginas are marked with the stigma of being weak (despite being able to birth an infant), and male genitalia is honored as how "strong" or "tough" a man is. When in reality male genitalia can endure far, far less pain than the vagina... Ironic, huh? This is a totally modern example of how logic has nothing to do with oppression; it is literally a (made up) idea to establish dominance and inferiority within the sexes.