George Orwell’s dystopian novel is definitely something to question from a feminism perspective. Nineteen Eighty-Four is set in a totaltarian state where the working class dress and live the same and where most beings are set to be equal, unless you’re a prole or in the inner party. However, even though most things seem to be equal for everyone, there is still the constant underlying hint of sexism throughout the text. Majority of females in the novel are shown to be only three things: a wife, sexual being or a mother. By demonstrating the prejudice against women, specifically Mrs Parsons, Julia and the prole woman, Orwell presents an unintentional warning to the readers about the future and how the inequality needs to be changed. By comparing the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four to todays society, we can see the correlation of his warning to the present.

When looking through a feminism lense when reading the text, there are multiple instances where it is appropriate to cringe and shake your head in disbelief. This can be experienced when one of the few women in the text is introduced. When Winston hears a knocking on his door he says “it was Mrs Parsons, the wife of a neighbour on the same floor”. The way that Mrs Parsons is presented completely diminishes her value and worth. She is stripped of her name and her own identity and the only important thing is the man she is with. You could say that this is just a silly coincidence that doesn’t mean anything but her husband is given a first name the instant he is mentioned. When Mrs Parsons complains about her blocked kitchen sink she says “of course it’s only because Tom isn’t home”. Of course the amazing husband Tom, who has his own name and identity, must be of so much more importance because he’s the man of the family and is the one who can fix the kitchen sink. Mrs Parsons existence in the novel completely revolves around her marriage and her family and needing assistance from another man because she is so helpless when her husband Tom isn’t there. The manner in which she is presented is extremely patronising and hard to dismiss.

Further through the novel, leading lady Julia is introduced and further presented in a way that should again be questioned. Mrs Parsons was represented as the wife in the novel, but Julia takes the fulfilling role as representing the ‘sexual being’. When Julia is first described, it is said that she wears “a narrow scarlet sash, emblem of the Junior Anti-Sex League” and that it was “wound several times round the waist of her overalls, just tightly enough to bring out the shapeliness of her hips”. Ironically she is wearing the Anti-Sex League sash but she is only described by mentioning about her body, especially the shape of her hips. Even though she is a worker wearing the same clothes like everybody else, her body was still able to be sexualised. After the description of her physical features, it continues to say that “Winston had disliked her from the very first moment of seeing her” and that “he disliked nearly all women, and especially the young and pretty ones”. Winston didn’t even know her name but somehow knew that he didn’t like her however I guess this does make sense as he did hate nearly all women. Speaking of that, the fact that he dislikes nearly all women is completely overlooked even thought this has got to be one of the most misogynistic phrases that exists and from a feminism perspective it is extremely degrading. Further in the novel when Winston magically overcomes his hatred towards her and they start their affair, her value to Winston is described as “a physical necessity, something that he not only wanted but felt that he had a right to.” He went from hating the sight of her to believing that he had the right to her body. Once again she is shown to be nothing but a sexual object but this time Winston believes that she is his property. Considering that Julia is the main female character in the novel, it is extremely disappointing that her role meant nothing more then being a sexual desire and object to Winston.

Later in the text another female character is so poorly portayed that anyone looking through a feminist lense, or even just simply reading the novel, must be blind to miss this. The prole women, who doesn’t receive a name, is often described while Winston and Julia are at their secret location where they frequently meet and everytime the women is busy hanging up her laundry while singing one of the party’s songs. On one occassion while Winston is watching her from the window he thinks to himself “the woman down there had no mind, she had only strong arms, a warm heart, and a fertile belly. He wondered how many children she had given birth to. It might easily be fifteen”. Firstly, he says the women has no mind but only strong arms, a warm heart and a fertile belly which implies that her only assets are those that will help her raise children. To continue, Winston assumes that she might have easily given birth to at least fifteen children which is very contradicting with the Party’s rules that state that couples can only have children if it benefits the Party. This shows that even though there were rules around motherhood, sexism and stereotypes still occur in the novel. Following this the women is further said to have “suddenly swollen like a fertilized fruit and grown hard and red and coarse, and then her life had been laundering, scrubbing, darning, cooking, sweeping, polishing, mending, scrubbing, laundering, first for children, then for grandchildren, over thirty unbroken years”. Once again the prole womans role in life is shown to be only a mother. After swelling like a ‘fertilized fruit’ her life is said to be nothing more then doing womanly household chores for her family. Her purpose is to do nothing but birth and raise children.

Throughout the novel Nineteen Eighy-Four there is a constant underlying tone of sexism. When looking from a feminism perspective, the prejudice against women is impossible to turn a blind eye on. Not only are women under-represented in the text but the way they are portrayed is unacceptable. Even though George Orwell might’ve unconsciously did this, it can still be taken as a warning. By comparing his unintentional warning to the present day, we can see the difference between the roles of women in the text and current society. The women in the novel were put into immensly narrow catergories that left no room for any other purpose but the ones they were given by their society. Although in today’s world the stereotypes around women still exist and are still fought against, there have been many steps forward in the right direction. Women in the present have been able to break their way out of the claustrophobic box that oppressed them into only being able to fulfill the roles of a wife, sexual being and a mother. Today there are multiple women in strong positions of power that destroy the old stereotypes. Jacinda Ardern for example shows that there is so much more to being a women. She is a wife, sexual being and a mother but these roles aren’t what define her and instead she is recognised as being a strong leader and hard worker. Even if a women isn’t in a high position of power, they still have freedom, the right to vote and have endless opportunities to succeed in all aspects of life, which is what they didn’t have decades ago. Overall Nineteen Eighty-Four depicts a society that discriminates against women and shows the flaws of gender stereotypes, however todays world has gradually grown out of these stereotypes and provided women with more opportunities. Equality has risen and it will continue to do so.