developments she does not have to go through Pain and Suffering when giving birth. This interpretation is a criticism toward believers who argue women are subordinated to men because of her Disobedience that permeates in sexism. It relieves women from the enforcement of a social norm that states they are weaker and must go through Pain and Suffering, for Locke believes women have the power to control their Body.
Locke has controversial views on marriage, which may run over his liberal interpretations for women’s rights and presume anti-feminism. Consequently, his views on marriage must not be taken out of Locke’s context and societal conditions or be relative to feminism. “But there is here no more Law to oblige a Woman to such a Subjection, it the Circumstances either of her Condition of Contact with her Husband should exempt her from it,” pg. 173. Locke dismisses a women’s subjugation to a men, but Husband and Wife have the ability to form a conjugal contract where both husband and wife make sacrifices for the preservation of their marriage. One must not mistaken marriage obligations for a husband’s domination over his wife body, but rather accept that conditions of societal and marriage contracts permit sacrifices.
…show more content…
One of Locke’s understandings of a parent’s obligation to nourish their children derives from a child’s lack of equality at birth. Parents are obligated to a temporary jurisdiction over their children until age and reason lead to their independence. “The bonds of this subjection are like the swadling cloths they are wrapt up in, and supported by, in the weakness of their Infancy,” pg. 304. Adam and Eve were under an obligation to preserve and nourish their children until the Law of Reason and maturity begin to govern them. The “duty which is incumbent on them” and procreation is one reason of paternal