Women are often trapped in an essentially idle, domestic role, praised for purity and lack of sexual desire, pampered as ornaments, but given no effective life functions other than demonstrating a few social graces and bearing children, as is established by the Judeo-Christian ethic and is reinforced in the story of Ruth. Though the story of Ruth appears in the Old Testament, its relevance is not limited by its datedness, but serves as a direct parallel to the predicament of the modern woman. Though Christianity no longer dominates so visibly as it did prior to secularization and modernization, its remains a strong undercurrent in that its influence is still felt in contemporary Western society. Likewise, in the story of Ruth, God is not a physical presence but is felt in the affected decisions Ruth makes and in the path her life takes. Ideals still prevalent in society today are drawn from the male-dominated Christian ethic. Thus, God plays a more subdued, but at the same time no less powerful role both in society today and in the story of Ruth.
This is evidenced in Ruth’s decision to stay with her mother-in-law upon the death of her husband. Ruth does this not according to her own desires, of which none are made known to the reader, but rather acts upon the desires of God, man, and society in accordance to what has been deemed “right.” The decision to remain with her mother-in-law, then, is not only a symbol of acting upon the Judeo-Christian ethic, but also of women’s dependence under that ethic. A mother is ultimately the person on whom a child is raised to depend, so it is not insignificant that, when robbed of a man on whom to depend, Ruth turns not only to a mother figure, but to the mother of her husband, a male figure… for wherever you go, I will go wherever you lodge I will lodge…
The Essay on A Comparison Of Stories From Woman Hollering Creek
A Comparison of Stories from "Woman Hollering Creek" I chose to compare the two stories "Woman Hollering Creek" and "Never Marry A Mexican." In "Never Marry A Mexican", the story takes place in modern day Texas, but that does not mean that Texas is the only setting which effects this story, the real context in which this story must be understood is today's Mexican culture as a whole, both in ...
wherever you die, I will die… (Ruth, 1: 16) In this way the story of Ruth reveals that under the Judeo-Christian ethic both ancient and modern women cannot be revolutionary or independent as society has predetermined standards, inflicted by that same Judeo-Christian ethic, which must be adhered to. Both Ruth and modern women are faced with a similar predicament: to resolve the conflict between passion and independence, and responsibility and loyalty as outlined by a Judeo-Christian society. This conflict is resolved for both Ruth and the modern woman by the elimination of awareness of personal desire and the total assimilation into the culture. Whether through nature or nurture, women are able to step outside themselves in an attempt to be objective, objectivity being defined as seeing with the eyes of society which is falsely assumed to be in a natural and unbiased state. Thus, in stepping outside of themselves, women are attempting to see themselves as society sees them.
It is for this reason that Ruth is presented as being without personal desire and is a fairly mundane character. This lack of personal desire enables Ruth, and women in general, to join society, accept its ideals, and view themselves in terms of these ideals. Thus the need for the immediate, physical presence of God in the story of Ruth, as well as in modern society, is eliminated. Womankind has become her own God, her own judge; the Judeo-Christian ethic is so deeply ingrained in her that she follows it automatically and the constraints not only come from without, but also from within. Society does not allow for the realization of choice. Ruth’s worth, and the worth of womankind, is now stripped down to that given to them by a male dominated society under the Judeo-Christian ethic that it adheres to.
The Essay on Christian Ethics in A Complex World
In 2002 the book entitled “Choosing the Good: Christian Ethics in A Complex World” was by Dennis Hollinger was published. It gives an overview of the Christian ethics in today’s complicated world. It is indeed a precious and unique book that assesses the framework and perspective of Christian ethics in relation to social issues. The approach is designed to widen initial ideas about relations among ...
So it is, in the story of Ruth, that Ruth gains merit as a worker and member of society only through the influence of her employer, a man, and finally marries him, effectively, willingly sealing her dependence on man, God, and society for a sense of worth. This action is encouraged and somewhat instructed by Naomi… When he lies down, take note of the place where he does so. Then go, uncover a place at his feet, and lie down. He will tell you what to do.
(Ruth, 3: 4) Boaz, Ruth’s husband, becomes a symbol of these things: man, God, and society. Though considerable progress has been made toward freeing women from the binding state of marriage since the women’s liberation movement took hold, women are still defined, and define themselves, by the values of society. A woman’s sexuality is only acceptable in terms of her male counterpart. Fashion emphasizes the need to appeal to and satisfy the demands and interests of a male-dominated society. Finally, concern with the female figure epitomizes the objectification of women by society and by women, themselves. Within all these concerns that revolve around the Judeo-Christian ethic and culture, is an appearance of freedom of will and decision for the woman, but it is an illusion.
Contemporary society encourages people to be freethinking, to undergo self-discovery, to be innovative, and to make choices that reflect personal beliefs, and yet this can never truly be attained. An inescapable tradition inexorably flips each child into some predestined groove like a penny or a sovereign in a banker’s rack. This groove is established from birth, by one’s sex, and the paths between women and men do not often cross. This destiny is only etched deeper by any attempts to demonstrate the alleged independence. By breaking away from her family and following Naomi to Bethlehem, Ruth digs herself deeper still into the groove that ultimately determines her fate. Thus, Ruth comes to represent a willing acceptance of such a fate.
Ruth’s exemplary adherence to the Judeo-Christian ethic paints her as a martyr. This is furthered by Ruth’s bearing of a son, the grandfather of the great King David. Ruth’s role as a real person is further undermined as she is measured by her ability to bear children, rather than by her personal attributes. Ultimately she is measured by her ability to give her husband and, in turn, the world, a strong son. This is the ultimate act of martyrdom: total sacrifice of the self through devotion to another person. Yet, oblivious to personal desire and the possibility of choice, Ruth can never be a true martyr.
The Homework on Do Women Speak Differently Then Men?
Topic: From the literature on sociolinguistics and from your own observation of speech of men and women (in both same-sex and cross-sex conversations), do you believe women always speak a purer, more refined and more polite language than men? Language is used by both men and women to communicate, but do women talk differently from men? Is language comprehended and used differently by women and ...
It must also be considered that Ruth is never acknowledged as the mother or the creator of David, and therefore how can she look upon herself as such. She has been schooled by society to be both humble, unassuming, and submissive. Although modern woman is no longer measured by her ability to procreate, the choice to not have children is perceived as abnormal or selfish, arising from a lack of responsibility and ability to be devoted to the greater good rather than to personal achievement. Furthermore, the inability to procreate is a taboo topic of discussion. So, the modern woman, aware of personal desire and choice and powerfully drawn to it suffers greatly from the conflict between self and society, passion and responsibility. The story of Ruth becomes a metaphor for the plight of all women who struggle to liberate themselves from the pressures of society.
In addition, it serves to highlight the expectations placed upon women across the ages: to serve the family first, to keep a respectable image in society, and to marry and procreate. Ruth then, ironically, becomes a symbol for women’s oppression where she could easily have been a symbol of liberation. In the context of the Old Testament, the irony is undeniable as Ruth is traditionally known for her loyalty. However, this only furthers her function as a symbol of oppression as her loyalty was to society, not to herself, a situation from which it was impossible to benefit. Moreover, Ruth is a symbol for sacrifice for the wrong reasons. She is caught in a limbo between martyrdom and self-interest, between the beginnings of the Judeo-Christian ethic and its end.
Ruth is the ultimate modern woman; this should be pitied, not celebrated.
