Book One: The Ring Sets Out

[Aravar]

Though I hope you will see that, as a woman, it makes very little difference to me whether women were "there but subordinate" or simply entirely unthought of. Neither seems ideal.

Neither are ideal, but does it not make a difference? Doesn't the former imply a permanent inferiority, when the latter allow for inclusion (albeit at some later time)?

[Primula Baggins]

I'm thinking of the scholars who accepted the situation. Complete exclusion was pretty effective in keeping women out of scholarly life, whereas at American universities it occasionally happened that a woman hired to do menial tasks (reading photographic plates in astronomy, for example) would find an opportunity to make a significant contribution, and even be recognized for it to some degree.

It's the assumption that women exist only to adorn, inspire, and have babies that sticks in my craw—the idea that it is ridiculous or even evil (see the works of Lewis) for women to aspire to scholarship.

[Sassafras]

It's the assumption that women exist only to adorn, inspire, and have babies that sticks in my craw—the idea that it is ridiculous or even evil (see the works of Lewis) for women to aspire to scholarship.

Good thing I haven't read any Lewis except The Chronicles of Narnia, then.

[MithLuin]

If you're referring to that incident with Mark's wife in That Hideous Strength... well, that is far afield from Book I

Orual neither adorns, inspires, nor makes babies . And before you label any of that a flaw - neither did Psyche.