providers, however, men are made to feel by their role like the arm that supports the property, not the owner of it. In many ways men are subservient to property. A large portion of the labor performed by men, not to mention war, requires that men disassociate themselves from their feelings in order to be an adequate provider. They are taught not to complain, to sacrifice, not to be sensitive, and to protect. These characteristics are practical in the work force and are attributes that make a good provider, but when it comes to inner fulfillment, the male role is an impediment because it leads to repression. Likewise women who are taught to be nothing more than the bearer of children find it difficult to achieve fulfillment in their role as well. However, the women of privilege living in Woolf?s time and the originators of the feminist movement found that they could find fulfillment by bearing children while at the same time participating in activities that traditionally go with the male role, if only men would allow them. So why would men want to deny women fulfillment? Because they feel it is unfair to allow women to redefine their roles so that they can have the best of both worlds, while men remain chained to their survival role. Why should men have only the option to provide and protect while women are given multiple options? Women can work, be politically active, raise a family, get an education, read and write, or become an artist, and all without an obligation to go to war. Men, on the other hand, are at the disposal of the family and the state should a war arise. A man?s life was seen as useless if he could not support a family, just as a women?s life was considered useless if she could not bear children. And a man?s life is quite literally useless if he cannot survive war. Men resent women fighting to be more than property, while they remain the disposable servant to the property they are obligated to provide their family. F...
