It was brought up today for our journal whether the women would have given in had the men not given in first, and I think that its worth posting my thoughts here as well. And it takes up one more of my posts...
I think that had the men not given in first, the the women would most certainly have given in. I also think that would have given in sooner rather than later, and I think that there is a substantial amount of evidence in the text that supports this as well. In the beginning of the paly, when Lysistrata has gathered all the women together and first told them about her plan, Kleonike says, "Afraid I can't make it. Sorry. On with the war!" This shows that the boycot from sex was extremely difficult for the women as well. What I thought was intersting though was not that the boycot was difficult for the women as well, but why they were able to silence their feelings longer than the men. This ability is accounted for by the fact that the men had nothing to gain from the abstinence, whereas the women were fighting for the end of the war.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think the essential difference was that the women started the boycott. They found the abstinence very difficult, but I'm not sure the men knew that. The men weren't sure when the women would give in; they probably thought the women were stronger than they actually were.
the boycott certainly was difficult for the women and they almost lost their movement because of their weak-mindedness. im not sure what would have happened if a stalemate would have occurred. but i think it certainly seems like the men would have won. it may have been more interesting had the men won. im not sure.
Idk guys... i think that the woen would have not given in so easily because if you think about it they have worked to hard just in order to get all of the women to participate in staying abstinent.
Post a Comment