Disenchantments 1-3

I can see how some might call Zayas’ writing feminist. However, I think it really depends on which definition of feminism you are looking at. Although different feminist movements strive for the same goal, lifting women from oppression, attitudes about men are not the same across the board. Some types of feminists are less sympathetic toward men because they claim that men are the perpetuators of a patriarchal system of values, and are to blame for women being denied equal rights. On the other hand, I also know of feminists that consider men to be just as much the victims of a patriarchal society as women are. This approach calls for men to be feminists along with women so both sexes can free themselves of the molds they have been forced into. If you try to judge Zayas’ writing by the form of feminism that views both men and women as victims, then I don’t think it would qualify as feminist. This is because, for the most part, her stories represent men as fickle deceivers and abusers of women. Plus, Zayas uses these texts to raise awareness of inequality, but at the same time, does not seek to redefine her society’s idea of honor, and the women are always punished. But it could seem at least like a step toward the feminism we know today as it calls attention to the fact that the law used to work against women’s rights rather than protect them. And the women argue that women are inherently equal to men by proclaiming things like, “Oh how many good women there would be if only men would let them be good!” (115).

 The code of honor greatly affects how characters act. According to the code, women are expected to guard their honor (chastity) against men, but should they fail, men must punish them. Men see the honor of women as something they are responsible for, so when she loses her honor, it is an insult to any man that is connected to this ruined woman. For example, in the second story, Octavia is afraid of her brother finding out about her affair with Carlos because of his “right” to punish her. This code allows inequality between men and women because it clearly gives men power. The code is also a sort of safe haven for men in the stories to avoid responsibility and blame, something the women cannot escape. For instance, don Manuel knows Isabel will not reveal that he raped her because then she would lose her honor (and her good reputation) if she did. As this code is the standard, women judge women with it too. Overall, the code implies that a woman’s chastity is what makes her worthy to be loved, and that since marriage is the only way to avoid dishonor, women should aspire to it. Men are expected to marry, but the code does not punish them harshly enough to enforce this. 

It was interesting that this story showed a man becoming a monk rather than a woman becoming a nun. Through being faithful to God, don Juan was saved from what Roseleta’s beauty would have “made” him do. I get the impression that desire is supposed to be a maddening condition that robs any originally decent person (like don Juan) of their reason. Desire is emotionally driven. The way Roseleta was eventually punished also reminded me that women were often blamed for causing this desire in men. This makes don Juan seem like a victim that couldn’t help but be tempted to do something dishonorable because of his desire. Since God saved don Juan, but did not save Roseleta (who was innocent), justice does not appear to have any meaning in this story. However, Lisis restores a sense of justice at the end of the story by explaining that God works in mysterious ways and does not punish every sinner in the same way. She also argues that the real justice is that Roseleta is rewarded by going to heaven instantly while don Juan had to “repent and earn his reward” in this life (136).