Gender roles in 18th century British society were seemingly set in stone. Men, who were presumed to be the superior sexes, were expected to hold all power, both political and domestic, and were expected to exist, to some extent, in the public sphere. Women were expected to take inferior positions in society and at home, and it was acceptable for them to exist only in the private sphere. There were further divisions between the sexes regarding emotional capacity, physical strength, and mental capacity, and men were always considered the more virtuous of the sexes. As is known, this subjugation of the female sex has affected women's ability to acquire formal education, seek a career, or gain recognition as something other than daughters, sisters, wives, or mothers. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Based on this understanding of the strictly divided gender politics that was prevalent during this time period, it is not surprising that Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman was perceived as a radical and progressive manifestation of feminism when it was written. Published in 1792, Wollstonecraft's work evaluates the nature of gender roles and the impact these divisional roles have on a society, and this criticism, especially coming from a woman, was unconventional. However, for the modern feminist, Wollstonecraft's argument is flawed. Throughout the work, Wollstonecraft perpetuates the concept of an inherent division between the two sexes and continually undermines the competencies of her companions and, in doing so, reinforces the ideals established by the patriarchy. Despite her advocacy of women's rights, the nature of Wollstonecraft's argument in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman can be seen as an example of the underlying misogynistic ideology that pervaded 18th-century Britain. Scholars have labeled Wollstonecraft a feminist based on her advocacy for women's education and her analysis of the gender politics of 18th-century Britain in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. While Wollstonecraft's writing may have seemed progressive for the male-dominated time period, there are flaws in Wollstonecraft's feminism. Wollstonecraft promotes equal education, but her argument rests on patriarchally constructed gender concepts that insist that women are inherently inferior to men. Karen M. Offen, author of European Feminisms, 1700-1950: A Political History, assesses Wollstonecraft's position as a feminist: Although Wollstonecraft may not deserve her reputation as the “first” English feminist, she became the best remembered – and retrospectively the most defamed: supporter of women's emancipation in her time. Her language and arguments, however eloquent they may seem in her opening barrage against male tyranny, are remarkably mild compared to those of her French colleagues. The body of her work instead addressed the reform of women's behavior, friendship between the sexes, notions of taste, dignified domesticity, responsible motherhood, and sexual self-control. (73) Despite her advocacy for equal educational opportunity, Wollstonecraft does not desire gender equality. Rather, Wollstonecraft perpetuates concepts of male superiority and suggests that women should seek education only so that they can improve their lives within the confines of prescribed gender roles. His goal is not to liberate women; instead wants to help themimprove their social and domestic duties through education. In contrast to contemporary French feminists and modern feminists, Wollstonecraft does not advocate the social and domestic advancement of women. In her assessment of gender politics, Wollstonecraft openly accepts the idea of ​​male superiority. Wollstonecraft believes that men are inherently stronger than women, and asserts that this makes men physically superior. Wollstonecraft writes: “In the government of the physical world it is observable that the female in strength is, in general, inferior to the male. This is the law of nature; and it does not appear to be suspended or repealed in favor of women. A certain degree of physical superiority cannot therefore be denied – and it is a noble prerogative!” (214). It can be argued that Wollstonecraft denies women a sense of physical strength by accepting and supporting the concept of male superiority. Feminists may view her stance on strength as a threat to the physical capacity of the female body. While his argument focuses on physical strength, it does not take into consideration childbirth, an incredibly physically taxing activity. By denying women a sense of strength, Wollstonecraft effectively renders them powerless against male domination. In addition to denying women a sense of strength, Wollstonecraft denies women a sense of agency. Wollstonecraft argues that women, being poorly educated, are blissfully unaware of their helpless position in society and are content to be treated as toys and sexualized commodities. She writes: “women, intoxicated by the adoration which men, under the influence of their senses, pay them, do not seek to gain a lasting interest in their hearts, nor to become friends of their fellow men who find enjoyment in their society. ” (Wollstonecraft 214). This presentation of women can be considered problematic because it misogynistically portrays them as narrow-minded and easily flattered. Wollstonecraft seems to doubt women's self-awareness and suggests that they are superficially satisfied with their submissive positions because they simply do not possess the ability to recognize one's inferiority nor the will to advance one's positions. Wollstonecraft's willingness to devalue her fellow women is not a conventional feminist trait. Rather, her presentation of female agency, or lack thereof, is demeaning and downplays the significance of oppression suffered by women. Philip Hicks, author of the article “Women Worthies and Feminist Argument in Eighteenth-Century Britain,” notes Wollstonecraft's willingness to reject her female companions in favor of male superiority. He writes: “Many Feminist writers, perhaps starting with Mary Wollstonecraft, have rejected or neglected these catalogs of great women. Some critics have argued that such lists ignore the lives of ordinary women and focus on women's “manly” qualities” (Hicks 175). Indeed, Wollstonecraft seems to ignore the value of feminine qualities and insists on the superiority of masculine characteristics. Wollstonecraft, asserting the pre-eminence of masculinity, writes: but if it is against the imitation of manly virtues, or, more properly speaking, the attainment of those talents and virtues, the exercise of which ennobles the human character, and which raises women into the ladder of animal being, when humanity is comprehensively defined; - all those who consider them with a philosophical eye must, I think, wish with me that they can become more and more masculine every day. (215) Wollstonecraft states that masculinity is the most valuable trait and advises women to seek more masculine traits in favor of their soft, feminine ways. Again, Wollstonecraft's arguments do,. 212-239.