I binged on the 1995 version of "Pride and Prejudice" with Heather this weekend, which is one of my favorite movies/books, not least because it's immensely enjoyable and fun (as opposed to my usual leanings towards doom and gloom fiction). But one thing that leaves me really uncomfortable with the ending is Lydia being married to Wickham. She's
(
Read more... )
I think for me, the difference is primarily that women were raised (and still are in many cultures) to marry up and well, but they're looked down on for actually actively looking for a guy who is a provider/protector. Whereas, I don't think there's a cultural metanarrative in place for men that encourages them to do so? So a woman who is a gold-digger is very much a product of patriarchy, trying her best to survive in it in a time when she's not allowed a career. As opposed to a man, who doesn't have that conditioning and a lot more options available to him. So given that gender gap, I think gold-digging as a career is a lot more justifiable for one gender than another.
Reply
Yes, indeed. As much of a flat character and easily ridiculed caricature Mrs Bennet is, her eagerness to marry off her five daughters to wealthy providers is actually rather sensible, from a certain point of view. (Although I equally understand Lizzie's horror at the prospect of that provider being a Mr Collins, but that's another can of worms.)
And, completely OT: Happy birthday! (Slightly late, though.)
Reply
And thank you! :)
Reply
Leave a comment