Susan Glaspell's A jury of her peers and Trifles compared

¶ … Jury of Her Peers and "Trifles" by Susan Glaspell. Specifically, it will discuss how the men would interpret the evidence the women found. These two stories are really the same story, one told in a short story, and the other told in a play. The women are much more observant and astute than the men in this story, and they find evidence that shows Mrs. Wright had a real reason to hate her husband. He drove her to murder because of his cruelty and disregard, but the men ignore the obvious signs, and simply laugh off the women's findings. If the women had presented the rest of the evidence they found, they would have laughed that off as well, because they do not respect their wives or give them any credit for coherent, rational thought.

The men in this story are full of their own importance, and the evidence the women discover is not important to them. They continually belittle the women and make light of what they do. It begins when the sheriff ignores the items in the kitchen. Glaspell writes, "Nothing here but kitchen things,' he said, with a little laugh for the insignificance of kitchen things" (Glaspell). Right away, it is easy to see how he and the other men feel about women and their work. They and their work are insignificant, and so, they could not possibly have the common sense to stumble across important evidence and interpret it correctly. That is left unsaid throughout the story, but it is clear the men have no respect for their wives or their intelligence.

Later, another of the men says, "Oh, well,' said Mrs. Hale's husband, with good-natured superiority, 'women are used to worrying over trifles'" (Glaspell). That is exactly what they would think of the dead bird and the other clues the women discover as they talk. Mr. Wright was a cruel man, and he drove his wife over the edge of sanity by taking away the only thing she had to love and comfort. The men could never understand that, and so, the women rightfully keep the evidence to themselves. To the men, the bird would be nothing more than a "trifle," and they certainly would not understand how its murder could create such hatred and bitterness inside Mrs. Wright.

It is also quite clear the men do not think the women are intelligent enough to know a clue if they saw it. Glaspell writes, "But would the women know a clue if they did come upon it?' he said; and, having delivered himself of this, he followed the others through the stair door" (Glaspell). Clearly, if they did share the evidence they find with the men, they would simply laugh it off and discount it. They do not respect the women or their intuition, and so, they would simply ignore or discount the evidence if the women gave it to them. The men think they are superior to the women, but in this story, the women prove they have much more common sense and intuitiveness than the men do. They understand the inner workings of the female mind, and what would drive a woman to murder her husband. The men, while they think they know everything, are really quite clueless. They do not have open minds, and they do not understand what they are really looking for.