Gloria Steinem’s argument in, “What It Would Be like If Women Win” advocates for a gender role reform. Steinem wants the American woman to become not only equal with men, but also the same. This would involve erasing the gender roles that society and nature has created for men and women. Eliminating these roles placed on men and women would involve changes such as: “Free nurseries, school lunches…more responsibility by the entire community for the children…the church will become an area of equal participation by women…” Women will no longer feel the need to fulfill domestic roles and, therefore, children will be taken care of by the community so the inequality of raising children can be equalized. For Tocqueville, this equalizing of gender roles and creating a role reform conflicts with nature. Steinem desires equal but the same and Tocqueville believes American will always be inclined towards equal but different because it is attached to nature. Different gender roles for men and women attached to nature give them an inequality that man can never rid themselves of. This is where Steinem and Tocqueville differ in their opinions: Steinem is confident men and women can become wholly equal, while Tocqueville believes they will always be inherently different because of nature.
Tocqueville begins his discussion of women by saying: “There have never been free societies without mores, and as I said in the first part of this work, it is woman who makes mores.” Tocqueville believes that the woman brings mores into not only the household, but into society as well. This is critical for the development of democracy as well as sustaining it. Furthermore, this is the basis of his argument that eventually will conflict with Gloria Steinem’s. For the democratic family to have proper function and morality, the woman must be present and in her natural state. Since the woman is responsible for creating and upholding these mores in her family, Tocqueville emphasizes this important trait in women. The natural state within her calls her to continue upholding the mores that are rooted within her. It is she who makes up the family and helps teach them the mores they need to become a decent human being. The woman’s mores come from nature because her education consists of acknowledging the vices and knowing how to combat them: Tocqueville says, "Thus the vices and perils that society presents are not slow to be revealed to her; she sees them clearly, judges them without illusion, and faces them without fear; for she is full of confidence in her strength, and her confidence seems to be shared by all those who surround her."
A woman’s education consists of more than just the basic math or reading. Women understand the deep vices rationally and are able to judge them rationally, not only for themselves, but for others around them as well. These virtues are found rooted in women because they come from nature. It is natural for them to see vices or perils and judge them based off of her naturally ability to exercise the mores from within herself. A woman’s education does not wholly consist of reading or writing, but more importantly, something that is deeper and helps society move toward a more moral way of living. Acknowledging this strength in women, Tocqueville explains that this is an instinct that will never cease to exist. A woman will always exhibit these natural tendencies to exercise the moral compass within her. In democracies, society recognizes these strengths and uses them to build the democratic family in order to benefit society as a whole. Tocqueville stresses the importance of the morality of women and seeks to emphasize the significance they bring to society. While he emphasizes the usefulness of a woman’s mores, Steinem wants to abolish the divide between men and women, eventually making them equal and the same.
Gloria Steinem in, “What Would It Be like If Women Win” calls for the equalization of men and women, but, furthermore, wants gender roles to be reformed or abolished. She says that women do not want to trade places with men, they just want to be able to do everything they do and vice versus: “Men will have to give up ruling-class privileges, but in return they will no longer be the only ones to support the family, get drafted, bear the strain of power and responsibility.” In this example, Steinem is appealing to a man’s tough responsibilities such as the draft or the power they have over their household. She seeks to relieve them of this burden, but also seeks to do the same for women. She desires to eliminate these gender biased roles, creating an equal burden that can be felt by both men and women. By eliminating the women’s obligations in the household and the man’s obligation to rule over the household, circumstances become more equalized. Steinem seeks to erase the stigmas placed on men and women as far down as the particular clothing they wearing: “Dress will be more androgynous…hardhats are just as likely to rough up antiwar girls…and police understand that women are just as likely to be pushers or bombers.” Society will become so integrated with neutral dress or neutral toys and the result will be that women and men will be unrecognizable to one another. This is Steinem’s idea of equality because it places men and women in the same category rather than acknowledging their differences that are instinctively found in nature.
When placed side by side, Tocqueville and Steinem both want equality for men and women. The way they intend to get there is where they diverge paths. It is interesting how Tocqueville acknowledges the special trait women carry: mores, and places an importance on them to help keep society in check. Tocqueville says: “Equality of conditions does not produce regularity of mores by itself alone; but one cannot doubt that it facilitates and adds to it.” This means if Tocqueville considers the woman to be the keeper of the mores, then a large part of upholding democracy is due to women. This is a great compliment to women and something they should be very proud of. Tocqueville sees the importance in acknowledging the natural tendencies of women not only because they are natural, but, more importantly, because they are essential to democracy’s growth and sustainability. The view of women and men as being equal but different is a more philosophical argument. Furthermore, instead of seeing these natural tendencies in women and men as beneficial or good, Steinem adamantly advocates for women and men to be equal but the same.
The problems that arise from Steinem’s argument come from her lack of acknowledging the natural tendencies that exist in men and women. The differences in men and women come from nature meaning they are not created or altered by man. Gender is a natural inequality compared to race or other physical characteristics. These differences are created and acknowledged by men as opposed to gender which is created and acknowledged by not only man, but, more importantly, nature. Gloria Steinem, however, sticks firmly to the belief that men and women are simple human beings. Ignoring their natural tendencies to differ from one another, they can eventually be transparent with one another. At the end of Steinem’s essay, she quotes Prime Minister Olaf Palme saying: “ 'It is human beings we shall emancipate….if a politician should declare that the woman ought to have a different role from man’s, he would be regarded as something from the Stone Age.’ ” The first part of the speech, Prime Minister Olaf Palme says human beings need to be emancipated from their general gender roles. Moreover, the world needs to acknowledge the similarities between men and women, but farther than that, have a tremendous role reform. This role reform would rid human beings of their natural roles and combine them into one, transparent role that fits both women and men.
While Steinem’s argument sounds plausible in theory, ridding men and women of their natural tendencies is less simple. When different gender roles for men and women are attached to nature, it gives them an inequality that man can never rid themselves of. Since their identity is rooted in nature it is hard to comprehend a society where men and women will be entirely equal. Tocqueville places an importance on women creating the mores for society and the family. This is a heavy compliment to women as this places them at the heart of the household and, consequently, the heart of democracy. Steinem does not view this as a compliment, but rather as a problem that needs reformed. Creating a society where men and women are entirely equal so the natural tendencies of women and men can be erased. This is where Steinem and Tocqueville differ in their opinions: Steinem is confident men and women can become wholly equal, while Tocqueville believes they will always be inherently different because of nature.
