The age-old debate about the influence of nature versus nurture is not only an important topic in psychology, but also the historical roots of modern feminism. Mary Wollstonecraft, mother of the famous writer Mary Shelly and wife of the famous anarchist William Godwin, was also the first liberal feminist theorist to propose that women should be considered on an equal footing with men. In A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Wollstonecraft states that if a woman is not prepared by education to become a man's companion or a competent mother, she will hinder the progress of knowledge and virtue in society. This article will first establish the context of Wollstonecraft's nature versus nurture argument and then use a contractarian model of analysis to identify some of the merits and demerits of the old and new social contracts dictating the rights of marriage and family. Arguing that gendered behavior was a learned experience rather than a natural occurrence, she proposes a model of marriage as friendship that maintains certain expectations for both men and women to mitigate arbitrary power dynamics within the domestic sphere and social. Furthermore, these expectations manifest themselves in the form of duties that promote equality in the family and are mutually agreed upon in a reformed social contract. This article will argue, with reference to Mary Wollstonecraft, that while the state of nature sets the stage for gender inequality, it is fueled by an imperfect social contract that perpetuates gender distinctions. Additionally, it will examine Wollstonecraft's recently proposed contract for its beneficial efforts to overcome blind submission, untapped potential, and arbitrary power, as well as its potential limitations in addressing sexual desire and the dilemma of motherhood. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Wollstonecraft claims that the distinction between the sexes is a socially created phenomenon that can be overcome by adopting a new social contract that promotes marriage as friendship. As Wollstonecraft indicates, men and women "must be educated, to a large extent, according to the opinions and customs of the society in which they live".[1] Indeed, the social norm at the time of Wollstonecraft's writings was that women were raised to be married to and economically dependent on men. And after marriage, often relegated to humble household chores. That is, girls are usually assigned the role of “guardians” or “housewives” and men the role of “breadwinner” in society. The division of labor was originally considered efficient, with men best suited to hunting and warfare and women best suited to gathering, cooking and caring for children near the fields. Furthermore, the roots of patriarchy based on physical barriers were further entrenched with the growth of industry and mining under industrial capitalism, with women's weaker structures deemed inadequate for heavy lifting. However, these social roles also depend on social and economic contexts. For example, few denied women's ability to contribute to the war effort in factories during World War I and World War II, but once total war was over women were encouraged to return to their domestic roles so that men could resume their jobs. their “natural” employment models. Thus, while biological factors from “nature” may lay the foundation, social and historical forces subjected to “nurture” often have a greater influence in determiningthe outcome of this inequality. Embedded in Wollstonecraft's new social contract is the idea that women are not mentally inferior to women. men, but they have equal rational potential that has not yet been realized. Wollstonecraft argues that because “the knowledge of both sexes should be the same in nature,” women should not be treated as half beings but instead educated by the same means as men to reach their full potential.[2] As Laura Brace notes, the old social contract under Rousseau offered women protection in exchange for obedience.[3] However, Wollstonecraft opposes Rousseau's idea that men are born with a certain degree of perfection in mind, noting the early debauchery in society as well as the weakness and caprice of men who are inundated with the flattery and service of 'ego often required of women. She observes: "if the blind lead the blind, there is no need for someone to come from heaven to tell us the consequences".[4] That is to say, the tendency for women to degrade themselves and act as if they need protection, all while offering unconditional support and adulation to men, leaves humanity not only in an infantile state, but also a dangerous one. Therefore, similar to the divine right of kings, the “divine right of husbands” should also be challenged to promote a return to equality.[5] Although gender inequality was an adequate solution to problems at the time of its inception in the Bronze Age, it is no longer relevant in our times. However, the gender division of labor persists in modern societies due to the socialization of ideas about certain roles and occupations being more appropriate for men and women. This can be seen through the concentration of women in personal services or "care" industries, with jobs such as nurses, maids, teachers and personal secretaries, while men are more likely to be doctors, managers, professors or senior executives superior. Meanwhile, Wollstonecraft offers a far-sighted solution to overcome structural inequalities through marriage as a model of friendship, which emphasizes equality, free choice, reason, mutual respect, and concern for each other's morality.[6] This new social contract promotes a certain degree of interdependence that deepens bonds through the appreciation of the character and individuality of others, thus promoting integration and social progress. Both sides will benefit from the new social contract as it promotes a sense of stability while limiting the pursuit of arbitrary power. Wollstonecraft explains that: "Taught from infancy that beauty is the scepter of woman, the mind molds itself to the body, and, wandering in its gilded cage, seeks only to adorn its prison."[7] The education of women included training in the art of pleasing, but with the aim of attracting the attention and admiration of men, they become "seductive lovers" instead of "affectionate wives and rational mothers". and the habit of flirting, but also poor mothers who feel the tendency to compete with their daughters when their beauty gets tired and the sense of insecurity takes over. The rigid gender roles envisaged by the previous social contract did not support the right conditions for women to carry out their duties as educators nor serve in the best interests of their family. As Ruth Abbey summarizes, when denied power in a larger sense, women become tyrants in small matters. roads such as deception and seduction. So when women are taught to value beauty over intelligence, they are unable to pass on rationality to the next generation.Husbands are also disadvantaged in this arrangement as they are unable to find common ground with their spouse widening the gap and increasing the likelihood of an unhappy marriage.[10] However, if men and women married by choice and for companionship, there should be fewer affairs, as husbands are more likely to stay at home and serve as better fathers. to their children. Thus, Wollstonecraft's new social contract emphasizes the importance of women being educated in a way that prepares them to carry out educational duties as parents and allows them to cooperate with men in this role. By changing the definition of good wife, good mother and good daughter, not only the family will prosper but also society at large. Although the liberal notion of equality is promoted within The New Social Contract to allow both men and women to reach their full potential in public and private realms, Wollstonecraft's New Social Contract fails to explain the passion between man relationships -woman and the dilemma of motherhood. While Rousseau believes that love should be the foundation of marriage and family life, Wollstonecraft believes that love is too fleeting and emphasizes the importance of friendship in achieving equality and a mature relationship between spouses.[11 ] However, Wollstonecraft fails to fully address bodily intimacy and sexual desire in her marriage as a friendship solution, this is largely because the superior friendship she envisioned was an image of a relationship “traditionally thought of as existing only among men." [12] That said, he does not completely ignore or avoid the sexual dimension of the personality, but simply advocates moderation to focus on fulfilling family duties. Thus, Wollstonecraft takes priorities in the social contract between men and women by imagining marriage as an agreement that allows love to descend to a warm, healthy temperature. There are therefore some rights that must be given up to promote the common good, namely strong feelings of affection. However, some might argue that the coexistence of friendship and sexual desire is difficult, especially when humans are more driven by desires than rationality in seeking companionship. Furthermore, society has not yet evolved to favor balance and long-term planning over short-term passion and drive. As Abbey rightly observes, had Wollstonecraft not died giving birth to Marry Shelly, her continued marriage to William Godwin might have offered deeper insights and reflections on the place of sexuality in amicable marriages.[13] However, there is still a notable flaw in Wollstonecraft's recently proposed social contract of equality, namely the gap between equality and difference that drives Carole Pateman's description of Wollstonecraft's dilemma.[14] In essence, Wollstonecraft's dilemma is the double-edged argument that women must be granted the rights of humanity in order to then fulfill the traditionally feminine duties of motherhood. However, assuming the biological destiny of women and their natural vocation to motherhood risks confining them to the private sphere. This is an issue not addressed by Wollstonecraft that carries over into modern debates about work-life balance and the timing of marriage and childbirth. Therefore, both physical and psychological barriers exist in trying to bridge feminist rights and motherhood. While society should empower women to fulfill the role of motherhood through equal opportunities, men also have an obligation towards marriage and fatherhood. However, the,” 436.