I found Trifles to be a very interesting play. The discrimination against women was very clear in it, and also made sense with the time period. Trifles are small unimportant matters or details. But in this play I think that matters such as the fact that she had owned a bird, that seemed like trifles were actually important details to solving the case for motive. I think the eye for detail that the men considered insignificant links back to our discussion of gendered language. When we were discussing with Mr. Robertson we talked about the tendency of females to notice smaller details such as the name of certain colors like fuchsia that males would refer to as pink or red without specification. This attention to detail, which is often looked over as trivial, and especially was in the time period that the play took place in, is what allows people to solve mysteries and keep a certain organization about their business.
I thought the fact that this very clear commentary on the discrimination against women came out when it did was amazing. Although the suffrage movement was in full swing at the time of this play's release I don't think feminists were quite at the point of totally equating themselves with men on all fronts. And I don't think many would have spoken out abut the blatant discrimination that occurred in what seems to be every household. I think that women who went to see it probably felt its message truly, but like the women in the pay, would never speak out about it. Radical suffragettes probably would speak out about the discrimination and hardships of women but at the time, being so radical was taboo. I think it is impressive that she wrote such a moving piece at a time where this commentary would not necessarily be socially accepted by the majority. I think it is important for strong artistic leaps like his play to be taken for any progress to be made.