| Abstract: | In the beginning of the Victorian era, women’s role in society was still limited to the domestic sphere, with no access to the political sphere or the work place. A change for the better reading said role took place at the end of the 19th century, when a reaction against the conception of the True Womanhood rose, in the shape of the New Woman, who vindicated the right to break free from traditional boundaries. Two aspects of womanhood were specially affected by this active feminist role movement: motherhood and sexuality. Perspective changed so that many women began to oppose the view of motherhood as a duty, even rejecting it altogether to pursue a career in the public sphere. However, this change was contested not only by men but also by many women who still praised the True Womanhood ideal. The New Woman soon became, for the most conservative people, an embodiment of everything a woman should not be: sexually active, seducing, independent, rejecting their socially imposed duties such as motherhood… Another interesting topic brought to light by this struggle to change the terms of gender relations was the challenge that pregnancy and motherhood meant for women. Women who did not reject motherhood did in many cases decide to expose the hardships that conceiving, carrying, birthing and raising a child entailed, and in that way de-glorify motherhood. These women were not positively regarded either, since just like the ones who rejected motherhood entirely, they were undermining the foundations of Victorian society and the True Womanhood concept. Thus, this dissertation aims to analyse from a contrastive point of view the way these revolutionary women were viewed by Victorian society, finding a connection between both versions of the antimaternal and female sexuality through the literary works of Bram Stoker, Dracula (1897) and Charlotte Perkins Gilman “The Yellow Wallpaper” (1899), since such works articulate depictions of these new conceptions of motherhood and sexuality, both from the male and female point of view, yet not devoid of conflict. |
