Gender Roles In Lysistrata
Monica Wojciechowski
Dr. Luttrell
Lysistrata Discussion Paper
Feminism in Ancient Greece did not exist. Women were simply seen as dumb and inferior human beings who live to serve the hardworking intelligent men. In Lysistrata, in trying to satirize women fighting for the end of the Peloponnesian War, Aristophanes actually underscores the prevalence of sexism in his society. To the casual reader, Lysistrata is seen as an Ancient Greek feminist manifesto, however in reality it definitely is not. It is blatantly sexist, as seen with all of the stereotypes and ridiculous sex jokes made for comedic effect.
The first reason that Lysistrata can not be taken seriously as a feminist piece of literature is that it is written …show more content…
However, this is not a typical way that women were viewed in Ancient Greece considering that the women usually had no voice, vote, education or power. This is evident throughout the book in the stereotypical and sexist ways that the women and their actions were described. Most of the women were portrayed as lustful, weak, and superficial. For example, Calonice says, “But do without a dick? Be serious! There’s nothing, Lysistrata, like a dick” (Line 135). It is important to remember that the entire premise of the play was not to gain women’s rights or even peace, but to get the women’s sexual partners back from war. The quote just shows how the women were solely driven by lust, desire, and nothing else. Also, the women were described as superficial many times throughout the book. In the beginning they were discussing about beauty and how their “eyebrows look like bows to shoot me dead” (Line 8). Also in their oath to abstinence, the women pledged to “ sacrifice [their] nicest dress to buy some wine (and sacrifice the wine)” (Lines 113-114). These two examples just exemplify the stereotype that women just care about materialistic things, such as beauty and clothes. The oath continued to say that they would “cut [themselves] in two and donate half. A flat slice like a bottom- feeding fish”(Lines 115-116). Obviously they wouldn’t actually slice …show more content…
If they went on their sex-strike to call for rights or suffrage, the argument could be made that Lysistrata is in fact a feminist play. However, that is simply not the case. The sole purpose of the sex-strike was to end the war to get male sexual partners back home. Perhaps some women wanted to gain women more rights, but if so this was definitely a secondary motive. No matter how strategic and diplomatic the women’s plans might have seen, the real issue of the play was not in any way political. Aristophanes simply included women protagonists for comedic purposes, not to argue for feminism and activism.
It is important to note the lack of feminism in Lysistrata because it can alter the entire meaning of the book. Instead of empowering women, Aristophanes probably used women as characters in a degrading way. Lysistrata was written as a satirical response to the war. He obviously opposed it was trying to convince others to also oppose it. He used women protagonists to show that even uneducated inferior people can see that the war needs to be
Dr. Luttrell
Lysistrata Discussion Paper
Feminism in Ancient Greece did not exist. Women were simply seen as dumb and inferior human beings who live to serve the hardworking intelligent men. In Lysistrata, in trying to satirize women fighting for the end of the Peloponnesian War, Aristophanes actually underscores the prevalence of sexism in his society. To the casual reader, Lysistrata is seen as an Ancient Greek feminist manifesto, however in reality it definitely is not. It is blatantly sexist, as seen with all of the stereotypes and ridiculous sex jokes made for comedic effect.
The first reason that Lysistrata can not be taken seriously as a feminist piece of literature is that it is written …show more content…
However, this is not a typical way that women were viewed in Ancient Greece considering that the women usually had no voice, vote, education or power. This is evident throughout the book in the stereotypical and sexist ways that the women and their actions were described. Most of the women were portrayed as lustful, weak, and superficial. For example, Calonice says, “But do without a dick? Be serious! There’s nothing, Lysistrata, like a dick” (Line 135). It is important to remember that the entire premise of the play was not to gain women’s rights or even peace, but to get the women’s sexual partners back from war. The quote just shows how the women were solely driven by lust, desire, and nothing else. Also, the women were described as superficial many times throughout the book. In the beginning they were discussing about beauty and how their “eyebrows look like bows to shoot me dead” (Line 8). Also in their oath to abstinence, the women pledged to “ sacrifice [their] nicest dress to buy some wine (and sacrifice the wine)” (Lines 113-114). These two examples just exemplify the stereotype that women just care about materialistic things, such as beauty and clothes. The oath continued to say that they would “cut [themselves] in two and donate half. A flat slice like a bottom- feeding fish”(Lines 115-116). Obviously they wouldn’t actually slice …show more content…
If they went on their sex-strike to call for rights or suffrage, the argument could be made that Lysistrata is in fact a feminist play. However, that is simply not the case. The sole purpose of the sex-strike was to end the war to get male sexual partners back home. Perhaps some women wanted to gain women more rights, but if so this was definitely a secondary motive. No matter how strategic and diplomatic the women’s plans might have seen, the real issue of the play was not in any way political. Aristophanes simply included women protagonists for comedic purposes, not to argue for feminism and activism.
It is important to note the lack of feminism in Lysistrata because it can alter the entire meaning of the book. Instead of empowering women, Aristophanes probably used women as characters in a degrading way. Lysistrata was written as a satirical response to the war. He obviously opposed it was trying to convince others to also oppose it. He used women protagonists to show that even uneducated inferior people can see that the war needs to be