Implications of Gender Roles in Oresteia Essay Example

Implications of Gender Roles in Oresteia Essay Example Implications of Gender Roles in Oresteia Essay Implications of Gender Roles in Oresteia Essay During Greek Rule hundreds of years ago women were put to a standard and expected to maintain it through everything that they do. When any woman did anything out of the norm then they were most likely ridiculed for what they had done. In his play, Oresteia, Aeschylus highlights the implications of gender roles in Greek society with the foiling of Clytemnestra by Electra to illustrate the Greek ideals and views of woman in contrast to their men, the Juxtaposition of Orestes and Clytemnestra as equal in their crime yet differing in Justification and reaction by the horus, and significance of male progression in Justice as carried out through the victory of Apollo over the Euminides despite Justice being carried out by a female goddess, Athena. In every society there are always the people that are classified as being abnormal or opposite of the norm and this is the character Clytemnestra plays in the story Oresteia. When compared to her daughter Electra, Clytemnestra proves to be completely different. Unlike Electra, Clytemnestra was not going to let any man go walking without Justice. When Electras own sister was killed by her father she didnt ee any wrongdoing. The worst part of it is that the person who got sacrificed could have easily been Electra instead. Electra stands by her fathers side, the mans side, the whole time like any woman during those times would. Even after her father is dead Electra says, l call out to my father. Pity me (Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, line 135), showing that Electra, even though she had nothing to do with the death of her father, believes that she needs to beg her father for forgiveness. Electra herself sees the life of a man more important than the life of a woman. In contrast to that thought, Clytemnestra sees woman Just as equal as men, and that is where they differ. Further on into Electras speech to her father she says make me far more self- possessed than mother, make this hand more pure (Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, line 145-146). Electra wants to be more in control and assured of herself than what she believes her mother is, and she looks to her father for this assurance. The events in the book prove that there is a huge Juxtaposition between Electra and Clytemnestras views about the roles of woman in society. There is a parallel when it comes to the killings of Iphigenia, Agamemnon and Clytemnestra. Each person believed that what they were doing was acceptable to do in each of their situations. When Agamemnon sacrificed his daughters life he did it because he believed that that was his only option to make peace with Artemis so that he could help his brother in the Trojan War. So in Agamemnons eyes, the sacrifice of his daughter was an order sent by the Gods. When Clytemnestra killed Agamemnon, she also believed it was acceptable because he was the man that killed her own aughter and his own flesh in blood. The final situation was when Orestes killed his mother Clytemnestra in vengeance of his fathers murder. The main difference between all three murders where the reactions from the chorus and citizens of the kingdoms. When Iphigenia and Clytemnestra were killed the chorus was indifferent and almost happy with what happened but when Agamemnon was killed by Clytemnestra, the chorus was in shock that a woman would do such a thing. The hand (Aeschylus, Agamemnon, line 1571-1572) which is in contrast to when Orestes s told But youVe done well. Dont burden yourself with bad omens, lash yourself with guilt. YouVe set us free, the whole city of Argos (Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, line 1044-1046). These murders were literally done in parallel situations but because Clytemnestra was a woman that killed a man, her offense was found to be a greater crime than Agamemnon and Orestes. In the third book of Oresteia, Orestes is brought to the court of Athena who is the patron of Athens, and tried in front of a Jury for the crime of murdering his mother. Apollo, the God that told Orestes to kill Clytemnestra, fought for Orestes while the Furies fght for Clytemnestra. The furies argued that Orestes killed his own flesh in blood and the woman that bore him. Unfortunately for Clytemnestra though Apollo brings up that Athena was never born by natural birth and never had a mother to raise her. He claims that children dont need mothers, that it is the fathers seed and thats all someone needs. Because of this when it came to a tie vote from the Jury, Athena sided with Apollo and his argument. This shows that even Athena, a woman f great power sees women as useless in a sense. Athena has been solidified to believe that the one thing women were thought to be useful for, in those ages, as not needed. She takes the mans side of things and agrees with Apollo, another man, instead of helping Clytemnestra. Apparently back then; even woman with a high amount of power will hide behind the decisions of powerful men instead of creating their own. Through the differences of Athena and Clytemnestra, the Juxtaposition between the murders of Iphigenia, Agamemnon and Clytemnestra and the decisions made in he Greek court, it is proven that there are significant gender roles and schemas throughout the play Oresteia. There is no question that woman where treated differently and expected to act to a certain way during this time. The play showed a double standard of the expected behaviors between a man and woman and demonstrated all the different ways these standards are ridiculed throughout the society. Of all the things the readers learn one of the biggest things is that it definitely shows the differences in gender roles have drastically changed sense this time.

Homosexuality in Ancient Rome

Homosexuality in Ancient Rome Although sexual practices are often left out of discussions of history, the fact remains that homosexuality in ancient Rome did exist. However, its not quite as cut and dried as a question of gay versus straight. Instead, its a much more complex cultural perspective, in which the approval- or disapproval- of sexual activity was based upon the social status of the people performing various acts. Did You Know? The ancient Romans didnt have a word for homosexual. Instead, they based their terminology upon the role that the participants played.Because Roman society was so patriarchal, those who took on a submissive role were seen as feminine, and thus looked down upon.Although there is little documentation of female same-sex relationships in Rome, scholars have discovered love spells and letters written from one woman to another. The Roman Patriarchal Society Bettmann Archive / Getty Images The society of ancient Rome was extremely patriarchal. For men, the determination of masculinity was directly tied to how one displayed the Roman concept of virtus. This was one of several ideals that all freeborn Romans tried to follow. Virtus was partly about virtue, but also about self-discipline and the ability to govern oneself and others. To take that a step further, the active role of imperialism and conquest found in ancient Rome was often discussed in terms of sexual metaphor. Because masculinity was predicated on ones ability to conquer, homosexual activity was viewed in terms of domination. A man taking on the perceived dominant, or penetrative, role would fall under far less public scrutiny than a man who was being penetrated, or submissive; to the Romans, the action of being conquered implied that a man was weak and willing to give up his liberty as a free citizen. It also brought into question his sexual integrity as a whole. Elizabeth Cytko writes, Bodily autonomy was one of the regulatory norms of sex which helped define one’s status within society... an elite Roman male demonstrated his status because he was not allowed to be beaten, or penetrated. Interestingly, the Romans didnt have specific words that meant homosexual or heterosexual. It wasnt gender that determined whether a sexual partner was acceptable, but their social status. The Roman censors were a committee of officials who determined where in the social hierarchy someones family belonged, and occasionally removed individuals from the upper ranks of society for sexual misconduct; again, this was based on status rather than gender. In general, same-sex relationships among partners of the appropriate social status were considered normal and acceptable. Freeborn Roman men were permitted, and even expected, to be interested in sex with partners of both genders. Even once married, a Roman man might continue to maintain relationships with partners other than his spouse. However, it was understood that he was only to have sex with prostitutes, slaves, or people who were considered infamia. This was a lower social status assigned by the censors to individuals whose legal and social standing had been formally reduced or removed. This group also included entertainers such as gladiators and actors. An infamis could not provide testimony in legal proceedings, and could be subjected to the same sorts of corporal punishments usually reserved for slaves. Ancient history expert N.S. Gill points out that Instead of todays gender orientation, ancient Roman... sexuality can be dichotomized as passive and active. The socially preferred behavior of a male was active; the passive part aligned with the female. While a free Roman man was permitted to have sex with slaves, prostitutes, and infames, it was only acceptable if he took the dominant, or penetrative role. He was not allowed to have sex with other freeborn Roman men, or the wives or children of other free men. In addition, he couldnt have sex with another mans slave; this is because slaves were property, and sex with someone elses slave required the owners explicit permission. Although not extensively documented, there were homosexual romantic relationships between Roman men. Most scholars agree that same sex relationships between men of the same class existed; however, because there were so many rigid social constructs applied to such relationship, they were kept private. While same-sex marriage was not legally permitted, there are writings that indicate some men did participate in public marriage ceremonies with other men; the emperor Nero did this at least twice, as did the emperor  Elagabalus. In addition, at one point during his ongoing dispute with Mark Antony, Cicero attempted to discredit his opponent by claiming Antony had been given a stola by another man; the stola was the traditional garment worn by married women. Homosexual Relationships in Roman Women UIG via Getty Images / Getty Images There is little information available about same-sex relationships between Roman women. Although they probably happened, the Romans didnt write about it, because to them, sex involved penetration. Its likely that the Romans didnt consider sexual acts between women to actually be sex, unlike the penetrative activities between two men. Interestingly, among Roman women there are a number of sources that indicate not sexual activity but romance. Bernadette Brooten writes in Love Between Women of love spells commissioned by women to attract other women. Scholars agree that these spells provide written evidence that women from the time period were interested in romantic attachments with other women, and that they were comfortable expressing their desires. Brooten says: [The spells] do not reveal the internal dynamics of these womens relationships. Nevertheless, the spells do ... raise intriguing, although ultimately unanswerable, questions about the nature of womens erotic desires. Gender-Bending Deities LordRunar / Getty Images As in other ancient cultures, Roman deities were reflection of the social and cultural mores of the realm of men, and vice versa. Like their neighbors in Greece, Roman mythology does include instances of same-sex relationships between the gods, or between gods and mortal men. The Roman Cupid was often seen as a patron deity of passionate love between two men, and for a long time was associated with male/male lust. The word  erotic  comes from the name of Cupids Greek counterpart, Eros. The goddess Venus was honored by some women as a goddess of female-to-female love. The Greek poet Sappho of Lesbos wrote about her in her guise as Aphrodite. The virgin goddess Diana preferred the company of women, according to legend; she and her companions hunted in the woods, danced with each other, and swore of men completely. In one legend, the god Jupiter presented himself as the princess Callisto, and seduced Diana while in disguise. When King Minos pursued a nymph named Britomaris, she escaped him by jumping into the ocean. Diana rescued Britomaris from the sea, and fell in love with her. Jupiter, much like the Greek Zeus, was the king of all the gods, and regularly had flings with mortals of both genders. He changed his appearance frequently, sometimes appearing male and other times female. In one myth, he fell in love with the beautiful youth Ganymede, and stole him away to Olympus to be his cup-bearer. Sources Brooten, Bernadette J.  Love between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism. University of Chicago Press, 1998.Cytko, Elizabeth.  Of Androgynes and Men: Gender Fluidity in Republican Rome ...University of Alberta, 2017, https://era.library.ualberta.ca/items/71cf0e15-5a9b-4256-a37c-085e1c4b6777/view/7c4fe250-eae8-408d-a8e3-858a6070c194/Cytko_Elizabeth_VJ_201705_MA.pdf.Hubbard, Thomas K.  Homosexuality in Greece and Rome: A Sourcebook of Basic Documents. 1st ed., University of California Press, 2003.  JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1pp7g1.Schrader, Kyle W.  Virtus in the Roman World: Generality, Specificity, and ...The Gettysburg Historical Journal, 2016, cupola.gettysburg.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article1154contextghj.