"It is hardly surprising that women concentrate on the way they look instead of what is in their minds since not much has been put in their minds to begin with"
About this Quote
The line lands like a slap dressed up as a shrug: “hardly surprising” pretends to be neutral, then delivers an indictment. On the surface it sounds like a cheap jab at women’s intelligence, but the real target is the culture that engineered the conditions she’s describing. The sting is strategic. By echoing the era’s condescension, Shelley forces readers to confront how easily society turns deprivation into “nature.”
The subtext is about supply chains of thought. If women are trained to treat beauty as their primary currency, it’s not vanity so much as economic realism: appearance becomes the most reliable route to security, attention, and legitimacy. “Not much has been put in their minds” points at institutions that pride themselves on refinement while rationing education, intellectual freedom, and the right to be serious. It’s less a claim that women are empty than that they’ve been deliberately underfilled.
Context matters: this is the long 19th-century argument about “accomplishments” (music, manners, ornament) versus learning (history, philosophy, science). Shelley is writing in the wake of Enlightenment promises that often stopped at the doorstep of gender. The sentence’s rhetorical cruelty mimics the world’s cruelty, weaponizing its own logic: if you insist women are shallow, you will build shallow incentives and then cite the result as proof. That’s the trap she’s exposing, and it still reads uncomfortably current in any culture that rewards women’s presentation more reliably than their ideas.
The subtext is about supply chains of thought. If women are trained to treat beauty as their primary currency, it’s not vanity so much as economic realism: appearance becomes the most reliable route to security, attention, and legitimacy. “Not much has been put in their minds” points at institutions that pride themselves on refinement while rationing education, intellectual freedom, and the right to be serious. It’s less a claim that women are empty than that they’ve been deliberately underfilled.
Context matters: this is the long 19th-century argument about “accomplishments” (music, manners, ornament) versus learning (history, philosophy, science). Shelley is writing in the wake of Enlightenment promises that often stopped at the doorstep of gender. The sentence’s rhetorical cruelty mimics the world’s cruelty, weaponizing its own logic: if you insist women are shallow, you will build shallow incentives and then cite the result as proof. That’s the trap she’s exposing, and it still reads uncomfortably current in any culture that rewards women’s presentation more reliably than their ideas.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Mary
Add to List



