A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: Chapter 4 Summary & Analysis

Addressing the argument that women don’t seem to want freedom, Wollstonecraft points out that nothing in the usual training of women inclines them to desire it. To desire improvement, they need to be taught to exercise their reason; but they are taught to entrust themselves to the reason of men instead.

Wollstonecraft argues that the educational system in England fails both sexes by being too short-sighted; it looks no farther than one’s livelihood or future prospects and does not address the soul itself. This system has especially curtailed women’s development.

Wollstonecraft sees knowledge as a matter of more than academic study; it demands real-life experiences in order for people to develop their reasoning faculties. For women, a particular obstacle is that pleasure, and pleasing men, has long been considered primary in their lives; so they are shortchanged of opportunities to wrestle with adversity and develop their reason.

Wollstonecraft makes the interesting argument that women have an unearned “privilege” by virtue of being women—one that ultimately harms both them and society. Like those born into wealth, their status is not earned through the exercise of virtues, but granted on an arbitrary basis.

Wollstonecraft, having argued that women have the same faculties as men, now argues that they have no arena in which to exercise and develop those faculties. But just because women have not had the chance to publicly display their abilities, choosing vain pursuits instead, it does not follow that their humanity is unequal to men’s.

Superficial education shapes the kinds of things women take interest in throughout their lives and limits their usefulness to society. Because they’ve primarily trained their senses, not their reason, they occupy themselves with sensational literature and other arts. Wollstonecraft’s concern about “silly” books by and for women is recurrent throughout the work.

Rousseau’s point seems to have been that women will be less desirable to men if they are taught to cultivate so-called “masculine” virtues. Wollstonecraft rejects the premise that educating women makes them “masculine”; instead, education makes them masters of themselves, no threat to anyone else.

Wollstonecraft argues that “sensibility” is a poor substitute for reason. It further oppresses women by giving them little to strive for beyond love. This then threatens marriages as well.

Wollstonecraft points out that family life—the lot of most women—requires hard work and discipline, something that most women are unprepared for. They are accustomed to pointing in whatever direction their emotions move them. This is especially problematic when it comes to teaching children to control their emotions. This reinforces Wollstonecraft’s argument that suppressing women’s abilities doesn’t just harm them; it’s detrimental to society as a whole.

While some of her contemporaries have argued that polygamy proves women’s inferior status, Wollstonecraft suggests that inclination to practice polygamy is due to genetic abnormalities and is unnatural. She also argues that, given women’s weak status in society, accommodations should be made for those who have been “seduced”; they shouldn’t be treated as wives, but they should not be scorned and cast off, either.

Wollstonecraft offers an argument, progressive for her time, that “ruined” women do not deserve the ostracism and disgrace they typically experience; it’s possible that such women, or girls, were incapable of making a morally informed choice in the matter. And since they can’t provide for themselves, it only makes sense that such women will resort to morally degrading means of survival. Overall, it’s a grievous disservice to women when their character is reduced to upholding a single so-called “virtue” (chastity), which they do not always have complete control over anyway.

Wollstonecraft, again showing her bias toward reason, doesn’t see love as enduring, because it arises from the passions instead of from reason. Women must be equipped through education to fall back on lasting friendships with their husbands after initial passion subsides.

Wollstonecraft’s bias toward republican virtues of simplicity comes through here—she idealizes the inherent good sense of poorer women who lack the demoralizing luxuries characteristic of better-off women. In a footnote, she offers a few examples of rare female intellectuals who have risen above societal prejudices, including ancient Greek poet Sappho, medieval thinker Heloise, and Russia’s Catherine the Great.