Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Feminists

gkhouston

(21,642 posts)

5. Yes, but I'm not sure she would have been any better off with 'enry 'iggins.

Reply to REP (Reply #3)

Sun Feb 19, 2012, 04:09 PM

Feb 2012

IMO, he didn't seem to place much value on her until he'd changed her to conform (outwardly) to his society. Only then, did she seem to become a person to him. I think an argument could be made that the rich de-personify the poor of whatever gender but I'm very sensitive to the "change and you'll be likeable/loveable" message that is so often pushed on women.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Let's get REALLY old school: Anyone else read GB Shaw's Getting Married (1911)? [View all] REP Feb 2012 OP

Wow. On my reading list now. n/t Gormy Cuss Feb 2012 #1

I just downloaded it. I'll read anything by Shaw Catherina Feb 2012 #2

Shaw regarded Eliza's marriage to Freddie as a failure (in the Epilogue) REP Feb 2012 #3

As it was bound to be Catherina Feb 2012 #4

No. It's about religion. REP Feb 2012 #7

Now I'm intrigued. Catherina Feb 2012 #8

Yes, but I'm not sure she would have been any better off with 'enry 'iggins. gkhouston Feb 2012 #5

Henry Higgins is not Shaw; Shaw did not think marrying Higgins was a good solution, either REP Feb 2012 #6