Upon first glance, I believed the article to be an actual documentation of a women’s suffrage meeting in Victorian London and was excited to read an authentic discussion between suffragists in that time.  It didn’t take too long for me to realize though that this was a highly satirical article that really made a mockery of the women fighting so hard to obtain a basic human right that should be bestowed upon every citizen. The first give away that this article is satirical was the name of the chairwoman, “Mrs. Shrieker.”  After that, I realized that the previous paragraph where the author writes

It being thought desirable to secure unnbiassed utterance, none of the male sex were permitted to be present. Husbands were, however, suffered to attend in an antechamber and, with the view to their comfort and consolement, notes of the proceedings were from time to time sent out to them.

the author is completely facetious. To the average Victorian male reader I assume that this would be quite hilarious and I actually found myself disappointed for several reasons. First, I was disappointed that this article was satirical because I had been excited to read a documentation of a women’s suffrage meeting. Second, I was disappointed because I had believed that having a women’s only meeting to discuss the vote was completely valid and justified. Third, I was disappointed because I realized that it is the view of the author that having a women’s only meeting is absolutely absurd.

The author of this article certainly does not take women as individual human beings seriously, particularly on an intellectual level.  This is especially evident in the names he has given the women in this mock account of a suffrage meeting. The women have names such as “Mrs. Snorter,” “Mrs. Scratcher,” “Mrs. Prettywoman,” and of course “Mrs. Shrieker.” The only woman with any semblance of a normal name is “Mrs. Smith” or “Mrs. Smyijthe” whose name the writer wasn’t even sure of.  Of course, satirical articles are meant to make jokes but I think the naming of the women reveals the misogynistic sentiment of the writer. Reducing women to unpleasant sounds like shrieking and snorting is really harsh and in the case of “Mrs. Prettywoman” where she has been reduced to her looks is total objectification.

Much of the article is focused on ridiculing the women’s behavior, for example there are many instances where the writer adds silly remarks of the women in attendence in parenthesis:

(Cries of “Dear no!” and loud cheering.) Englishwomen were alive and awake to what was wanted. Reform was what they wanted, and their husbands might rely on it that they would get no rest until Reform was granted. (Hear!) She (MRS. SNORTER) meant mischief, she could tell them. (Renewed cheering, and screams of “So do we!”) She perhaps was not possessed of so sharp a tongue as some people(Sensation, and cries of “Name: name!”) but MR. SNORTER might depend he’d not have a night’s peace, until she got her Right to Vote safe underneath her pillow!

As opposed to making an ideological argument through satirical means against women having the right to vote, the writer makes fun of the type of woman who demands the right to vote– although I suppose that this in itself shows the ideology of the writer. No argument needs to be made because the writer and presumably the male readers of this article already believe that women are inferior and do not deserve the right to vote.

Bibliography

“Great Reform Meeting.” Punch. 1859. Dictionary of Victorian London. Lee     Jackson. Web. 15 February 2016.

The two articles on old maids agree that there is a multitude of women that are old maids: female bachelors that are destined to remain that way. Carlile states that an old maid is a women past the age of 25 whose comely features deteriorate. Poor features start to rise and rob the woman of her charm and good looks due to her lack of sexual exploration. “[t]hey become pale and languid, that general weakness and irritation, a sort of restlessness, nervous fidgettyness takes possession of them.” (Carlile). While Sala writes about how you can tell which girls based on their personality and demeanor “Among a family of blooming girls one who already wears the stigmata of old maidenhood.” He believes that a woman either blooms into a marriageable woman or a sad old maid.

While men normally do not remain bachelors their whole lives some women (old maids) seem destined to remain single, as he explains “But how many women-young, fair, and accomplished, pure and good and wise-are doomed irrevocably to solitude and celibacy!” They try to join the married but as Sala further explains “It chills the blood to see these hopeless cases, to see the women resign themselves to their fate with a sad meek smile-to come back, year after year, and find them still meek, smiling, but sad, confirmed old maids.” It is not that they are uncomely as Carlile suggests, but they resign to a life of solitude and without marriage. Sala was a journalist writing a book that was meant to be an accurate description of a day in London during the 1850s, so when he mentions the old maids he is only explaining them as they are, not with a trace of irony or misrepresentation from his perspective.

From Carlile’s view, he wanted women to have sexual emancipation and that without this emancipation, women will become old maids. While Carlile believes it is through sexual exploration as he states “Women who had never had sexual commerce begin to droop when about twenty-five years of age, that they become pale and languid.” If a women does not engage themselves, in these experiences, she will begin to suffer the affects of old maidenhood and start to decline as a person.

Sala, George Augustus. Twice Round the Clock, or The Hours of the Day and Night in London. 1859. Print.

Carlile, Richard. Every Woman’s Book . 1838. Print.

Lee Jackson’s Victorian Dictionary contains a multitude of passages that deal strictly with the “proper” diet of a woman living in the Victorian era. In The Lady’s Dressing Room, Baroness Staffe lays out her comprehensive ideas on what exactly a woman of the time should and should not eat. She writes, “In order to avoid growing old (that bankruptcy for the sex!), nourish yourself with food, light, but nutritious and varied, according to the seasons” (Staffe 254). Here Staffe is promising the maintenance of youth, or at least the appearance of youth, by proposing a simple dietary regimen. This promise of youth is problematic because she immediately aligns it with women by saying that aging is the ultimate bane of the sex. She isn’t validating her diet by its health benefits but by how it will keep dieters looking young, and therefore more palatable for a male audience.  She goes on to describe a meal that is so sparse, it should hardly count as a meal at all. She recommends only a glass of milk for the first course of the day, followed by “an egg and a vegetable” (254) for the second breakfast. Finally she proposes to dine at six at night, and to “not have too great a number of dishes”.  With a meal plan like this it’s shocking that any women survived the Victorian era at all. Staffe values fruits and vegetables, which is commendable, but she goes on to so urgently detest other foods on the bases that they will somehow mar the complexion, that her overall premise is laughable.  After discussing a woman who lived almost solely off oranges for forty years she writes, “I cannot say I advise such a diet, but certainly the prettiest women are generally as frugal as camels in their food” (259).

Staffe urges moderation but then goes on to cite and commend various women who eat nearly nothing, in apparent contrast with some of her earlier advice.  She operates under the guise of a helping hand; she offers her ideas as a way of attaining beauty and youth, and while she has a few sound concepts, the rest of her advice is so unhealthy that it taints everything else written. Her ideas are often contradictory, and as a result, the only logical conclusion that can be gleamed from her advice is that while she may view her proposed diet positively, it would be both difficult and unhealthy to implement it in Victorian times. The result is a telling piece of indoctrination that tries to compel its readers through manipulation and fable rather than solid rationale.

Works Cited

Staffe, Baroness. “Feminine Diet: Nourishment.” The Lady’s Dressing Room. Victorian London     Dictionary. Web. 14 February 2016.

http://www.victorianlondon.org/index-2012.htm

I came across an interesting topic in Lee Jacksons “The Dictionary of Victorian London”, which spoke of the opinions on abortions during the Victorian era.  The opening sentence states that there is no greater sin than “the destruction of the child while yet in the womb of the mother” (Jackson). Language, such as the word sin, allows the audience to understand that the article takes a religious stand-point on the topic of abortion, and that murder is one of the worst sins you can commit.  The act of abortion is even called murder and infanticide within the opening paragraphs of the piece—two strong words used to describe abortion; both of these words are sharp and invoke certain feelings and connotations with them.  The article uses many other strong word choices to negatively describe the act of abortion: “new-born are put to death”, “condemned to death”, “self-destruction”, and “moral-degradation”.

The article says that abortions are wrong, as they “avoid the cares, the expense, [and] the duty of nursing and tending a child” (Jackson); the accusatory remark only points fingers and attempts to shame women of this time period by arguing that the only reason they abort their children is to avoid the responsibility of having them.  The speaker continues to list various parts of the world and their common reasons for abortion, most of which include deformities in the child, or their mothers dying.  In contrast, it says that the women of Victorian England only had abortions for selfish reasons, like the ones aforementioned.

The majority of the article touches on cases of abortion where mothers had sick children, deformed children, or severe health risks, mentioning quite a few cases of women in New York.  The article itself was originally written and published in America, but was later republished in London.  The very closing of the article says, “and now I leave it with confidence that He who founded this great nation … will not leave it to self-destruction and moral degradation” (Jackson), meaning that the speaker is confident that God, the founder of the nation / world, will not allow such a sinful act like abortion to continue on in this world.

The article does not take a scientific approach to the topic of abortion, and models the views that would have been accurate for the Victorian time period—especially involving a highly religious view on the matter.  The religious view is not only accurate for this time period, but also stands with a lot of people in the current time period.

“Victorian London – Sex – Abortion – Opinions.” The Conjugal Relationships as Regards Personal Health & Hereditary Well-being. Victorian London Dictionary.  Web. 14 February 2016.

http://www.victorianlondon.org/sex/infanticide.htm