We have made substantial progress in today’s society in including women in most positions in our society. It is unfortunate how late this took our societies to accept then in various positions, which have been mostly dominated by men but also worrying in others societies where acceptance is still low. This would therefore, leads to most of women’s work not known or probably their work taken as achievements of other individuals. Aaron in the evening lecture talked about people who were in the Royal Society meeting in 1666 where Margret Cavendish was the only woman. I really wonder if there were no other women who could have qualified to join that meeting or was it because of exclusion of women in the scientific world.
He talked about the Royal Society being experimental group in science which scholars argue that Cavendish was anti-experimental things. She received a lot of setbacks from the Royal Society members who were experimentally oriented. The following year, she was invited at the Royal Society meeting but was not allow to join because of her stand on scientific study.
This then brings me to the question of how much we have done in our current societies to allow the voice of everyone heard and what is our response to someone different from us? Do we have to only accept people who “sing the same song with us?” Is it because a certain country has different kind of economic policies that we think they are not doing in the “right” way or that they are becoming a threat to us? When I think about the United Nation, I ask myself if it is really for the benefit of whole countries in the world. When a resolution is to be made for the “benefits of all,” who gets the upper hand? It is ironically that it is called “The United Nations,” which one would expect that we get to reach at consensus on the same playing field. However, only five countries can decide for other 188 member states. Is there really importance of being a member when your voice is not heard? I guess it comes to the point of what would happen if you are not on our side then you are probably against us.
It seems that our society is that if you are not part of us you are out and we leave you to pay the cost of not being with us or even get some further sanctions which might force you to change your stand. Accepting to not being yourself in order to survive this kind of societal order can be the only way out.
I therefore, think persistence on what you believe in can involve being an outsider but in the long run, your way might be respected or even accepted as being one of invaluable in various setting. Scholars of women history argue that Cavendish views have real worth and should be taken seriously. Societies normalize things and takes time to change perspectives once people have it as the ‘’normal” way but with constant stand on your belief, your way might win in the end.