In the mid to late 1700s, Maria Theresa, Queen of Hungary, often sowed and cemented the seeds of her influence through marriage diplomatic of his several children, sending them to serve as his political pawns. Such a conception, although dehumanizing and objectifying, was rather banal, because it assured royal and common families a kind of stability, whether this solidity was social or financial. Even after the death of the Queen of Hungary in 1780, the idea that she had embodied in the idea of ​​marriage for profit, of marriage as a business, did not disappear; the strategy continued long into the future, even managing to contaminate the supposedly feminist text of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. So while some choose to see the novel as the story of a woman escaping the double standards of her society and finding happiness with a man she truly loves, the very glaring fact that these romance-blind readers tend to to neglect is that the story of Elizabeth. marriage to Darcy also brings her family lots of money and status, which, through the lens of feminist theory, only perpetuates the notion that marriage is some kind of business. Rather than providing a covertly feminist chronicle of the England of her time, Austen's novel is a resounding reminder that in the 19th century, marriage was a matter of double standards, while anti-feminist sentiments tinged even its supposedly most feminist characters. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essay Although most tend to view Elizabeth as a feminist character, some of her feelings towards the relationship of a woman in marriage as opposed to that of a man reveal her unavoidable susceptibility to fueling double standards. First, as part of her society's double standards, lower-class women had to perform difficult tasks to survive and were often victims of abuse because society viewed them as not worthy of protection. Rather unfairly, “a woman whose racial or economic situation required her to perform physical labor and made her the victim of sexual predators was considered unworthy of a woman and therefore unworthy of protection against those who exploited her” (Tyson 89). In other words, those who had no choice but to go against the grain to survive are most often the ones society punishes. Elizabeth serves as an example of this notion, for example, when Wickham turns his heart away from her and pursues Miss King for her connections to her wealthy family; despite what he has done, Elizabeth believes him to be righteous in his actions. Elizabeth says of Wickham's pseudo-betrayal: "I should presently hate his very name and wish him all manner of harm." But my feelings are cordial toward him” (Austen 147). On the contrary, Charlotte does exactly the same thing by marrying Mr. Collins, but Elizabeth feels dissatisfied with her decision, even though it is the exact same decision that Wickham makes. The relationship between the two girls began to deteriorate, "there was a restraint which kept them mutually silent on the subject; and Elizabeth felt certain that no real trust could ever subsist between them again." In both cases of Wickham and Charlotte, one person makes a sudden decision to focus their affection on a potential partner of financial value, thus participating in the affairs of marriage. The only difference between the two scenarios is that Wickham is a man and Charlotte a woman. Even if thisspeaks volumes about the double standards of the time, when Wickham displays his capricious attitude towards love for profit, Elizabeth still manages to feel "cordial towards him", while when Charlotte does the same, the relationship between the two men for a long time. -Time Friends falls apart quickly. Elizabeth upholds the double standard that it is acceptable for men to act fickle in matters of the heart, but not for women. reveals that even in a character Austen had written to be feminist, the stench of expectations societal issues of the time manage to infiltrate the fabric of the tale. Additionally, Darcy, the culmination of Elizabeth's feminist efforts to challenge social norms, further depicts the pervasiveness of double standards within the institution of marriage through his disdain toward Elizabeth and her inferior status. When Darcy initially proposes to Elizabeth, he speaks of "his feeling of inferiority, which he regards as a degradation of the family obstacles which judgment had always opposed to inclination." To reiterate, he views Elizabeth as something of a burden, expressing his hesitance to follow his feelings for her due to her low social status. However, at the same time, women cannot, in the majority of cases, inherit their own property. According to the law of primogeniture, “all land assets always belong, according to common law, to the oldest male descendant of the eldest line.” So when Darcy reveals his contempt, he also reveals his respect for the double standard; women could not inherit property and therefore were entirely dependent on their husbands to be able to live a stable and secure life. If a woman wanted to live comfortably, she had to marry, find a man of status because the law left her in need of the means to live comfortably alone. Yet, despite this lack of choice that society offers women, Darcy – like most people of the time – views women of lower status as burdens on their husbands; it fuels the double standard by meekly agreeing to see women in a negative light that they never had the option of not being cast into. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Overall, whatever Austen's intentions for the novel, the influences of her society still managed to seep into her work, serving as a reminder of the inevitable double standard involving marriage as a company in its time. Even Elizabeth, a supposedly feminist character, cannot escape societal norms, as she views Charlotte's temperamental behavior with far more disparagement than Wickhams, only because society expects only women to act not in this way. Furthermore, Darcy respects the double standard he believes towards Elizabeth, despite her role as the happy outcome of his feminist efforts. Overall, what readers should take away from this article becomes dark when we consider the fact that Darcy, Elizabeth, and Austen herself are all supposed to be feminists, but still fall into the trap of double standards because it is simply like a contagion hidden under the floor. We can mask the smell all we want with Febreze and open the windows, but only when we confront the discomfort at its source will the stench of double standards truly dissipate.ReferencesWeinsheimer, J. (1972). Luck and the hierarchy of marriages in pride and prejudice. ELH, 39(3), 404-419. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2872192)Seeber, B.K. (2007). A Bennet utopia: adapting the father in Pride and Prejudice. Persuasions: The online journal of)