Show Posts
76
Rants and Stuff / Thomas Aquinas on women
« on: February 12, 2005, 01:49:55 AM »
So I'm researching medieval views on women for background for this paper I'm working on. Now, I'm sure it's no surprise to any of us that they weren't terribly favorable. But it's fascinating reading, stuff that makes me mad at times. This is just a little bit of what I've been reading, one point in the Summa Theologiae.
i.e., women are only good for procreation and nothing else. He goes on to say:
So men are good at everything else, have the active nature. Women are by nature passive and therefore are unable to think. Also supports the Victorian idea that there was only so much blood to support bodily functions, so if you were a woman who got too much education, you were cutting off the blood supply to your womb and were therefore not being a good woman.
The answers to the objections further down are annoying, too, but highly informative of medieval views (Thomas Aquinas was one of the most influential philosophers and theologians of the middle ages.)
Echoes the idea that since men are smarter, they get to rule over women because it's for their own good, just as since nobles are endowed by God with more smarts, they get to rule over the lower classes.
Interesting stuff, especially to balance it against the truth. Nothing we don't already know, but interesting to read a primary source from the 1260s.
Quote
It was necessary for woman to be made, as the Scripture says, as a "helper" to man; not, indeed, as a helpmate in other works, as some say, since man can be more efficiently helped by another man in other works; but as a helper in the work of generation.
i.e., women are only good for procreation and nothing else. He goes on to say:
Quote
Wherefore we observe that in these the active power of generation invariably accompanies the passive power. Among perfect animals the active power of generation belongs to the male sex, and the passive power to the female. And as among animals there is a vital operation nobler than generation, to which their life is principally directed; therefore the male sex is not found in continual union with the female in perfect animals.... But man is yet further ordered to a still nobler vital action, and that is intellectual operation.
So men are good at everything else, have the active nature. Women are by nature passive and therefore are unable to think. Also supports the Victorian idea that there was only so much blood to support bodily functions, so if you were a woman who got too much education, you were cutting off the blood supply to your womb and were therefore not being a good woman.
The answers to the objections further down are annoying, too, but highly informative of medieval views (Thomas Aquinas was one of the most influential philosophers and theologians of the middle ages.)
Quote
As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of woman comes from defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence; such as that of a south wind, which is moist, as the Philosopher observes (De Gener. Animal. iv, 2). On the other hand, as regards human nature in general, woman is not misbegotten, but is included in nature's intention as directed to the work of generation. Now the general intention of nature depends on God, Who is the universal Author of nature. Therefore, in producing nature, God formed not only the male but also the female.
Quote
Subjection is twofold. One is servile, by virtue of which a superior makes use of a subject for his own benefit; and this kind of subjection began after sin. There is another kind of subjection which is called economic or civil, whereby the superior makes use of his subjects for their own benefit and good; and this kind of subjection existed even before sin. For good order would have been wanting in the human family if some were not governed by others wiser than themselves. So by such a kind of subjection woman is naturally subject to man, because in man the discretion of reason predominates. Nor is inequality among men excluded by the state of innocence, as we shall prove (96, 3).
Echoes the idea that since men are smarter, they get to rule over women because it's for their own good, just as since nobles are endowed by God with more smarts, they get to rule over the lower classes.
Interesting stuff, especially to balance it against the truth. Nothing we don't already know, but interesting to read a primary source from the 1260s.
But I must say that Leo did a better job than I expected, so I don't begrudge the Golden Globe he just won. And what's-her-name playing Kate Hepburn--good job, very fun to listen to her.