In the Victorian era, women were expected to live by certain rules and virtues and have a rather strict role in society. They were expected to have children, do household chores, and be selfless, submissive, and pure. They were considered the weaker sex and therefore could not work (with some exceptions) or obtain a higher education. (Victorian-era.org) This was more or less the conventional view of women, which many women began to question in one way or another. This can be seen in numerous examples of Victorian literature, some of which I will discuss (victorianweb.org). The subject of this essay will be three different texts: “The Great Social Evil” by ANONYMOUS, extracts from “The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits” by Sarah Stickney Ellis and the Autobiography of Harriet Martineau. I will discuss whether or not these examples of Victorian literature question or sanction this degradation of women in Victorian society. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayIn an era of sexual repression, prostitution has grown rapidly. The church believed that sex was only for procreative purposes and should not be something pleasurable. Women were not supposed to be passionate or have sexual desires because it was considered a sin and a disease. They were to be “The Angel of the House” – the perfect housewife; helpless, completely devoted to her husband and children and, above all, to be "pure", that is, to be someone without lust, someone who would not partake in sexual conduct outside of marriage, since women could not have sex with anyone except the their husband (Victorian-era.org, Victorianweb.org). Hence the social persecution of prostitutes, based on the belief that they were impure. This is strongly opposed by the anonymous woman in “The Great Social Evil,” who argues that women are not as “pure” as society wants them to be. That they are actually also curious and sexual beings (using herself as an example) and that there is nothing inherently wrong with that (Anonymous 1621). As someone who has never been taught moral principles, she is disconcerted by the conventional view of women as herself, and those of a better class (Anonymous 1622). She does more than question it, she doesn't understand it, nor does she understand the idea that one is superior to the other; “[. . . ] if all the circumstances and conditions of our life had been reversed, would the Lady, my Lady, have done better or been better than me? (Anonymous 1622). A rhetorical question meant to convey that if you eliminate everything that causes social distinction between them, they are equal human beings who have been conditioned under different circumstances. That said, she doesn't believe there is sufficient basis to build the prejudice and condescension that people tend to have towards women like her. Know his education; how she joked with kids her age and was inspired by that independent trader she often met (Anonymous 1621), and the general lack of good examples around her, one could say that for her there was never a conventional way to a woman who will be. Ellis's "The Women of England" is not so simple. Although she largely supports the conventional view of women, she is still somewhat progressive in her beliefs. She thinks the influence of women in the world is just as important as that of men in how women influence them. The woman guides the man morally, preserving him from temptation (Ellis 1611,1612), and as she says; [. . . ] but as far as the noble audacity of Great Britain has sent her adventurous sons, and that is to every).