A Room of One's Own explores the relationship between women and literature and offers advice to aspiring authors. According to Virginia Woolf “a woman must have money and a room of her own if she wants to write fiction” (4). Woolf's opinion stems from the presence of educational, financial and social disadvantages that hinder the success of women aspiring careers throughout their lives and throughout history. Woolf advocates for women to gain their own space and the financial stability necessary for the realization of female literary potential and the transformation of literature into an art form free from the constraints of the gender binary. Woolf believes that the presence of this binary harms the quality of literature as a whole, stating that “it is fatal to anyone who writes to think about his own sex” (104). In A Room of One's Own, Virginia Woolf notes how the gender binary system is the root cause of the lack of female success in literature and believes that erasing this oppressive construct would improve the overall value of literary art by allowing works to be judged based on quality rather than through the lens of genre. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Virginia Woolf considers the presence of the genre construct rather than the lack of skill as the main source of the lack of quality literature by female authors. Men and women have the same potential to create great literary works, but different circumstances and opportunities. Woolf begins this argument by highlighting the inequalities of the education system. According to Woolf, if women were able to earn money to invest in education, then there would be more “scholarships, courses of study, prizes and bursaries set aside for the use of their same sex” (21) . This gender-based discrepancy in educational opportunities causes women to fall short in all areas, including literature. To further illustrate gender-based opportunities as a source of female literary disadvantage, Woolf raises the question of “what would have happened if Shakespeare had had a wonderfully gifted sister, called Judith” (46). Woolf proposes this possibility to illustrate the equal potential of female and male authors. He describes the hypothetical brother as “gifted” and “equally adventurous, imaginative, [and] so excited to see the world as it was” (47). The only difference Woolf presents between the pair lies in gender. Woolf uses this example to focus on the root of the problem of the lack of female authors, based on gender discrimination rather than a simple lack of ability. She later describes the careers of Currer Bell, George Eliot, and George Sand, female authors who published literature under male pseudonyms, describing them as "victims of inner conflict" who "tried in vain to veil themselves by using a man's name." (50). These authors produced highly revered works of literature, proving that women do indeed have the skill needed to write fiction. Woolf's examples of women writing under male pseudonyms demonstrate the lack of innate differences in the quality of male and female writing. If these women had published the same works under their own names, they probably would not have been read. This fact highlights Woolf's realization of the binary gender system as the source of women's lack of literature both during her time period and throughout history. Woolf makes her case for literature more effectivelygenderless highlighting the fact that the best writers don't focus on their own sex and/or gender in their work. He cites Samuel Coleridge's belief that "a great mind is androgynous" (98). Woolf believes that “a purely male mind cannot create, any more than a purely female mind” (98). In other words, a mind focused on meeting gender expectations fails to exploit its full potential. This reality hinders literature because it diminishes the quality of work produced by both men and women. If writers learn to write while ignoring the construct of genre, better work will be produced. Virginia Woolf then points to William Shakespeare, arguably the most well-known and successful writer in history, as an example of adopting this idea by describing his mind as “androgynous” and “man-woman” (99). She attributes her success to her ability to use her entire mind to write rather than choose between the characteristics assigned to males. According to Woolf, the blending of all traits, regardless of where they align along the genre spectrum, allows for overall better writing. He emphasizes that a writer should "use both sides of his mind equally" to produce work of the highest quality (103). Woolf also preaches the benefits of genreless literature by praising William Shakespeare and Jane Austen's ability to separate their personal identities from their writing (68). He states that Austen's ability to produce "writing without hatred, without bitterness, without fear, without protest, [and] without preaching" led to her production of superior work (68). Woolf believes that an author "should write about her characters" rather than personal circumstances such as one's sex and/or gender (70). The ability to write without thinking about your genre produces more complete, high-quality literature. Woolf further pushes for the removal of the binary gender system from the art of literature by discouraging divisive, gender-influenced writing style that reinforces division. She points to male scholars' and authors' descriptions of women by pointing out that they "were written in the red light of emotion and not the white light of truth" (32-33). Woolf believes that the division of the gender binary system hides hostility between the opposing groups it creates and believes that the placement of anger and blame on the opposing group hinders literature by causing it to reflect emotions rather than reflect reality. He states that “it is absurd to blame any class or any sex as a whole” (38). Woolf believes that both sexes are responsible for the hostility present in all literature, but she also believes that it harms both sides. Woolf sees writing in a way that places anger and blame on both sexes as irrational due to the fact that the views that inform this style of writing "are driven by instincts which are not in their control", or in other words, social constructs ( 38). Woolf reinforces this idea by reflecting on why the author, Mary Carmichael, was able to produce literature despite “not being a 'genius'”. She concludes that Carmichael's success comes from the fact that “men are no longer 'the opposing side' to her” (92). Carmichael's freedom from the war between the sexes allowed her to spend less time "ranting at them" and more time focusing her work on literary elements such as plot and characters (92). Woolf uses this example as an advertisement for the possibilities of removing the gendered approach to literature. She presents Carmichael's abandonment of opposition to men as a liberating act that allows for broader subject matter and more engaging work. Here..