Macroscopic Oppression

Marilyn Frye uses the birdcage to illustrate how women’s oppression is not obvious to close scrutiny, but rather it requires that you step back and view the larger object as a whole. She explains that whilst women do not appear to be oppressed, if you look at an individual or assess actions upon an individual, they are in fact being oppressed as the whole group, �women’. Frye uses the example of the �door-opening’ to illustrate her point. She concludes that this event marks women as incapable because it is part of a ritualistic pattern instead of being just a singular gallant gesture.

Frye then goes on to define oppression a little more thoroughly. She states that “If an individual is oppressed, it is in virtue of being a member of a group or category of people that is systematically reduced, molded, immobilized.” So a single person would be falling into a group of people that are being oppressed, Black, Chicano, gay. She points out that because women are essentially spread out through society that вЂ?women’ is not a group that is recognized as oppressed. She then furthers her argument by stating that men as a whole are not under any oppressing forces. If you find that a man is being oppressed he will be falling into another group of people and he will not be oppressed just for being a man.

Frye expresses herself clearly and concisely adding value to her points with accurate clarifications. I think that her stand point on this topic was very relevant 40 years and more ago. Now, in western society, I truly do not believe that women are being oppressed any more, at least, not for being just women. There is still the racial and social oppression that could be claimed, but being oppressed for just being a woman? I’m fairly sure that if it hasn’t completely been eradicated on the whole it’s almost gone.