It is an odd but indisputable fact that the seventeenth-century English women who are generally regarded as among the forerunners of modern feminism are almost all identified with the Royalist side in the conflict between Royalists and Parliamentarians known as the English Civil Wars. Since Royalist ideology is often associated with the radical patriarchalism of seventeenth-century political theorist Robert Filmer—a patriarchalism that equates family and kingdom and asserts the divinely ordained absolute power of the king and, by analogy, of the male head of the household—historians have been understandably puzzled by the fact that Royalist women wrote the earliest extended criticisms of the absolute subordination of women in marriage and the earliest systematic assertions of women's rational and moral equality with men. Some historians have questioned the facile equation of Royalist ideology with Filmerian patriarchalism; and indeed, there may have been no consistent differences between Royalists and Parliamentarians on issues of family organization and women's political rights, but in that case one would expect early feminists to be equally divided between the two sides.

Catherine Gallagher argues that Royalism engendered feminism because the ideology of absolute monarchy provided a transition to an ideology of the absolute self. She cites the example of the notoriously eccentric author Margaret Cavendish (1626–1673), duchess of Newcastle. Cavendish claimed to be as ambitious as any woman could be, but knowing that as a woman she was excluded from the pursuit of power in the real world, she resolved to be mistress of her own world, the "immaterial world" that any person can create within her own mind—and, as a writer, on paper. In proclaiming what she called her "singularity," Cavendish insisted that she was a self-sufficient being within her mental empire, the center of her own subjective universe rather than a satellite orbiting a dominant male planet. In justifying this absolute singularity, Cavendish repeatedly invoked the model of the absolute monarch, a figure that became a metaphor for the self-enclosed, autonomous nature of the individual person. Cavendish's successors among early feminists retained her notion of woman's sovereign self, but they also sought to break free from the complete political and social isolation that her absolute singularity entailed.


第1题 第2题 第3题 第4题 第5题 第6题

The passage suggests which of the following about the seventeenth-century English women mentioned in the highlighted text?


Their status as forerunners of modern feminism is not entirely justified.

They did not openly challenge the radical patriarchalism of Royalist Filmerian ideology.

Cavendish was the first among these women to criticize women's subordination in marriage and assert women's equality with men.

Their views on family organization and women's political rights were diametrically opposed to those of both Royalist and Parliamentarian ideology.

Historians would be less puzzled if more of them were identified with the Parliamentarian side in the English Civil Wars.

加入错题本 分享
纠错
考题讲解

题目分析：

文章细节题：文章认为高亮的17世纪英国女性？

选项分析：

A选项：她们作为现代女权先驱的身份没有被完全认证：原文已经表明她们是现代女权的先驱。

B选项：她们没有公开挑战RF激进的父权主义：MC就在书里公开挑战了RF。

C选项：C是她们当中第一个批评女性在婚姻中的附属地位并且提倡男女平权：文章没有提到谁是第一个。

D选项：她们关于家庭&女性政治权利的观点和保皇党议会党的观点完全相反：文章没有提到议会党的观点，所以我们不知道它们有没有相反。

E选项：正确。如果有更多的女性是议会党那边的，历史学就没那么懵逼了：历史学家懵逼的原因是保皇党观念的来源是一个提倡父权的人，而提倡女权的又是保皇党那边的。所以如果这些女权先驱是议会党而不是保皇党的，还比较说得通。

展开显示

登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论

OG2018-RC