In France in the early 1790s, the French Revolution, which sought to establish universal individual rights in French society, inspired several arguments for women's rights. Two such arguments, articulated by Marquis de Condorcet and Olympe de Gouges, both active supporters of the Revolution, are especially noteworthy because they constitute radically opposed courses wellspring of all injustice experienced by women and should therefore be battled through direct political action.
Condorcet, a mathematician and member of the Academy of Sciences with an interest in social equality, did not separate the question of women's rights from the more general one of equal rights for all members of society, believing that all discrimination was an oversight, the result of not reasoning consistently or not inequality, he argued, this intellectually untenable situation of women's inequality was historically condemned to disappear soon.
Where Condorcet's arguments were purely theoretical and did not include specific legislative proposals to end the exclusion of women from politics, the tone and content of Gouges's proposals reflected her objective that women should become politically mobilized in a war against the injustices that she saw men stubbornly perpetuating. Gouges, a writer experiencing, but unfortunately, even in the atmosphere of the French Revolution, neither's views were widely accepted.
What this question is testing
Your task
Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.
Common trap
Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.
Winning move
Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.
Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.