While “Founding Mothers” explored the roles of women in hindsight, “Woman’s Triling Needs” discussed what women should be doing in that moment to free their young nation from Britain 's tyrannical rule, even if it was something as apparently small as boycotting British finery. In comparison, the two pieces also represent something else- the biased lens through which we each of us view our own variation of history. In Roberts’s book, the founding mothers are idolized, placed upon a pedestal. But when examining Mercy’s writing, you can see that she’s not perfect, or anything even approaching that. She’s brash, crude, and altogether not the kindest of individuals- in her harsh satire, she slays the women who refuse to give up their finery to support America. But it was about more than finery or even freedom- at this point in time, only about a third of Americans even supported gaining freedom from Britain. Yes, the king was undoubtedly a tyrant and the British occupation was unfair to say the least, but for many of the colonists, Britain was once their home, and they still wanted to be a part of that in some way. Mercy treated anyone who dared to disagree with her like a fool- in her poem she compared people not wanting to give up the things that reminded them of home to help a war they never asked for to nothing short of murder: “This sweet temptation could not be withstood, though for the purchase she paid with her father’s blood”. When we as a whole look back on history, especially at an era we didn’t have the misfortune of actually having to live through, we don’t always see the truth- instead, we see the version of the truth that we want to believe, because it appeals to us in some way. But history wasn’t always appealing; instead, it was startlingly often
While “Founding Mothers” explored the roles of women in hindsight, “Woman’s Triling Needs” discussed what women should be doing in that moment to free their young nation from Britain 's tyrannical rule, even if it was something as apparently small as boycotting British finery. In comparison, the two pieces also represent something else- the biased lens through which we each of us view our own variation of history. In Roberts’s book, the founding mothers are idolized, placed upon a pedestal. But when examining Mercy’s writing, you can see that she’s not perfect, or anything even approaching that. She’s brash, crude, and altogether not the kindest of individuals- in her harsh satire, she slays the women who refuse to give up their finery to support America. But it was about more than finery or even freedom- at this point in time, only about a third of Americans even supported gaining freedom from Britain. Yes, the king was undoubtedly a tyrant and the British occupation was unfair to say the least, but for many of the colonists, Britain was once their home, and they still wanted to be a part of that in some way. Mercy treated anyone who dared to disagree with her like a fool- in her poem she compared people not wanting to give up the things that reminded them of home to help a war they never asked for to nothing short of murder: “This sweet temptation could not be withstood, though for the purchase she paid with her father’s blood”. When we as a whole look back on history, especially at an era we didn’t have the misfortune of actually having to live through, we don’t always see the truth- instead, we see the version of the truth that we want to believe, because it appeals to us in some way. But history wasn’t always appealing; instead, it was startlingly often