|
|
Cato
Oct 20, 2016 1:17:02 GMT
Post by Dominique Martin on Oct 20, 2016 1:17:02 GMT
What I gather from this oration, is that women should be respected but still controlled. He says, if everyone had made it a rule to maintain the prerogative and authority of a husband with respect to his own wife, there would be less trouble with the whole sex. They need to keep a tight leash on their wives because without it they become to outspoken and try to make a difference in society. This shows not only how they viewed women, but also how they feared change. They found it immodest for a women to socialize with a man who was not her brother, husband, or parent. They didn't like that these woman did as they pleased and tried to have opinions. I think that not only is it hard to change your societal views, but also because didn't want to see a change in society where men didn't have all the power.
|
|
|
|
Cato
Oct 20, 2016 15:17:30 GMT
Post by Christopher Martin on Oct 20, 2016 15:17:30 GMT
Good. And further, what, specifically, was Cato so worried about that he felt like it was worth his time and attention to maintain the Oppian Law? Be sure to cite example(s) from the text.
|
|
|
|
Cato
Oct 21, 2016 21:19:21 GMT
Post by Dominique Martin on Oct 21, 2016 21:19:21 GMT
"If the law ceases to limit the expenses of your wife, you yourself will never be able to limit them. Do not suppose that the matter will hereafter be in the same state in which it was before the law was made on the subject." From this I gather that he thinks, if there is no law women can justify their actions. This law is just one way they have complete control. If they go around looking important, they will start to think that they actually are. Thus, conflict between the two sexes, making the men look bad to other countries. If it's a law, the men can't be accused of being controlling, because that is the law.
|
|
artsykat
Junior Member
Hello, I'm Kateri, nice to meet you~!
Posts: 51 
|
Cato
Oct 22, 2016 0:59:46 GMT
Post by artsykat on Oct 22, 2016 0:59:46 GMT
I agree. This also ties in with what we've been learning and now we can see a clearer view of Romans thought of women. But the same goes for other countries around at the time, freedom was restricted to a lot of women, especially in the Middle East. This ties into why Queen Dido from the Aeneid, and the women from Livy were portrayed in such a way. Although in comparison, the way Livy portrayed women came across to me in a much more different light. It could be that Livy thought differently than Cato, or like you said, men respected woman, but made sure they were controlled, and that's how Livy meant to write his female characters.
Also about the law, it was men who came up with the law, so in a round about-ish way, for the men who were being too controlling, accusations could be made against them. But then again, did they even know any better? Growing up and living in that era, this way of thinking was the norm.
|
|
