History, as humanity knows it, comprises a set of words, and along with these textual artefacts are the ideals, thoughts and morals of a particular society. Culture, shaped by the thoughts of our predecessors and expanders, can be defined by the literary works and texts of history. In terms of social and intellectual growth, a culture is progressing and thriving due to the product of its literary concepts, according to Gloria K. Fiero in The Humanistic Tradition. That said, when a historically misogynistic and satirical jab is aimed at women, to what extent is Roman society considered “culturally thriving?” If a group in society is not pushed to its fullest potential in areas such as politics, education, and human decency, how can historians and civilians consider Roman culture superior to its predecessors? To outline this question, we must consider that Juvenal's Satire VI. “Against Women” is a satirical piece focusing on the corruption of women in the wake of luxury and adultery. The answer historically, socially and culturally can be explored through the historical works of other authors as well as modern interpretations of Juvenal's work. Juvenal's satire, “Against Women,” exudes misogynistic sentiments and, in accordance with the Fall of Rome and comparative works of other centuries, depicts women as sinful monsters driven by lust and luxurious goods. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Juvenal's overall stream of consciousness stems from these ideals, and as an effort to take women's feminine sexuality and exaggerate it, portrays them to such an extent that it leads to vice. His writing style is in line with the typical satirical style and does so to completely ridicule women by exemplifying their actions to take on the role of men in society. Juvenal's text outwardly states that, in keeping with impoverished Rome, "what value is there in the service of a poor man here in Rome?" (Ramsay). Historically, this question can be contemplated based on the time it was written and the fact that women did not hold many more rights than their ancient Greek ancestors. Rome was deteriorating significantly as a society, and with that came the origins of these delineations of women. This "unrefined sensuality" that Juvenal describes in her work replaces the "lack of training" of an Aristotelian saying of women, and since women lack the social and intellectual training necessary to thrive in society, according to Allen Prudence, their sexuality and feminine characteristics are overcompensated to paint an unrealistic and false picture of female nature (Prudence 183). Moving away from representations of intellectual and capable women, Juvenal seeks origins and comfort in Aristotelian thought and, through insatiable representations of female sensuality, compensates for the "lack of training". Given that this is one of Juvenal's many satirical works, it is only understandable and inevitable that his other works in this satirical anthology strengthen his satirical motifs in "Against Women". Although the other satires do not include women, they nevertheless follow the same "continuing thread of themes, tones, and words that evolve and act as a continuous intertextual and intratextual commentary", according to Barbara Gold (qtd. from Gold). The centrality of this satirical program can be seen as fortifying for Satire VI, as its previous satires follow the flows of "anger and its consequences, the family, the city, foreigners and the disenfranchisement of the poor citizens" ( qtd. from Gold ). An example of this canbe deciphered through Juvenal's exaggerated and harmful saying, which questions men's alternatives to marrying a woman. He asks if “he can submit to a tyrant when there is so much rope available, so many dizzying heights of open windows, and when the Emilian bridge offers itself within reach”, in an attempt to show other alternatives (Ramsay). What Juvenal is referring to simply sheds light on the emotional perspective adopted throughout the piece, as the “dizzying heights of the open windows” and the “Emilian bridge” are ways of taking one's life. To compare such means, Juvenal considers it a last and best option, underestimating marriage as harmful to man's existence. As Rome fell and flourished, Juvenal's perspective on women, his earlier satires, while not dealing with the same subject as "Against Women," were in keeping with the social climate of the time. The "arena of satire" that David H. J. Larmour facilitates the emergence of satire in the forms of other literary works of the same satirical merit. In an attempt to delve deeper into the philosophical aspects of Juvenal's satire, Larmour introduces a comparative work by Seneca to exemplify the lack of philosophical embroidery in Juvenal's work. The purpose of this comparison, according to Larmour, is to research how images are represented in search of “stable categories in a world that is out of place” (Larmour 7). Seneca's works and those of Juvenal are practically codependent on each other, since Seneca's moral discourse is rooted in the same ideals as Juvenal's satirical discourse, and with this they share a commonality of "Juvenal" intensity of language and a "grotesque" fascination for the body. Both comparative literary authors use strong and colorful language to discover what they believe to be true in a climate that is not considered culturally thriving from a historical perspective. The notability of satire can be recognized by the fact that Juvenal's work is used both as a comparative and as a supplementary resource for a written work. Ben Jonson, a Renaissance playwright, aimed to write a play that combined strict and relaxed morality. It uses Ovid's work, the Ars Amatoria, and Juvenal's "Against Women" to produce ambiguity in tone, as Ovid's work paints a more habitual and realistic account of the world, while Juvenal spares no light-hearted details and emerges completely directly into the grotesque and satirical views of life (Barish 213). For Barish, author of “Ovid, Juvenal, and the Silent Woman,” it is astonishing how two completely comparative and drastically opposite works can come together to form the commonality that is Jonson's work. Women's manicures and pedicures are facilitated and encouraged to be a means to the betterment of nature, but are quickly juxtaposed with Juvenal's view of nature, and where he sees fit, he sees falsification as a better replacement. Where Ovid would naturally find beauty in the nature of life, Juvenal would see a rejection of the world. This rejection of the world can be seen as a “portico,” with Juvenal wondering how our “porticos show [Postumius] a woman worthy of your vows” (Ramsay). These two extremes, fluctuating between acceptance of the world as it is and rejection of the world's invented beauties, aim to be the main focus of Jonson's work and, in turn, create disagreements that are never fully resolved through the plot and diction (Barish 214). It is as if women's bodies in satirical works are the focus of analysis, to the point of metaphorical concepts that ultimately define a woman's body as overly sexualized and exaggerated. A comparative work thatseems to undermine this specific aspect of satire is John Dryden's translation of Satire VI. In his opening statement, Dryden states that "whatever [Juvenal's] women were, the English are free from all his imputations" (qtd. from Dryden). By completely dissociating himself from his work, he is simply expressing that he does not agree with Juvenal's depictions of women. There is a powerful representation and ongoing conceit of the perception of the feminine through Dryden's modern interpretation of the dressing room. The changing room, illustrated as a military fortification, is depicted as a guarded fortress where women could arm themselves in the throes of lust and inconstancy. What happens in a locker room, according to Dryden, is unknown to the male species, and from this emerges a plethora of uncertainties and controls among men. It is “when all the stage curtains have been put away; when the theaters are closed, and everything is silent except in the courts, and the Megalesian games are far from the plebeian ones” where the woman prepares for the “battle” (Ramsay). However, unrelated, there is a mysterious aura exuding from the locker room. This “fortress” is a private sector in a woman's life where she can shy away from the public eye and detach herself from society. A woman in a locker room is essentially the sexual independence of the woman, and in this a man's entry into that unknown world overturns her independence, further leading her to associate with vice and lust again (Nussbaum 544). The metaphors, specifically aimed at women's bodies as a source of wonder and contemplation, aim to dilute the women of human decency and true respect in these comparative works and poems. Feminism in the modern world is an emerging discussion among today's youth, older generations, and historians. . The pure purpose of studying the role of women throughout history is that of origin, as many of the treatments faced by women and the progress of women in society can be explained by humanity and our social progress as a society. “The House I Live In Is Not My Own” by Barbara K. Gold is a clear and modern interpretation of how women's bodies are the center of condemnation in Juvenal's satire. Much like its historical predecessors, Gold's interpretation follows metaphorical form by portraying women's bodies as mere embodiments formed by Juvenal's judgment. It takes a corporeal and physiological point of view, connecting Juvenal's depictions to the new and evolving vocabulary of "Generation Y." Focusing on bodies in the manner of Juvenal and in the millennial perspective says a lot about how much society has changed since the fall of Rome. To bring out feminism as a result of the condemnation of women in misogynistic works like “Against Women,” today's society has thrived culturally. The performative aspects of gender, which are the foundation of many satirical works of Juvenal's time, are not “static, distinct, limited, certain, or innate” in relation to gender categories (Oro). According to Gold, these gender categories presented in the texts of antiquity do not take a binary form, but rather are formidable in many manifestations and changes. This may be in line with recent terminology and the clear truth that the world depicted by Juvenal is strictly heteronormative, with woman as the instigator of sex and adultery. Female bodies investigated through the context of these ancient texts do not typically comprise the vocabulary prevalent in our socially advanced world, so Gold states that gender, in this case, must be “investigated through cultural assumptions that underlie fears and attitudes of the writer." " (Gold). The parallels thatcan be drawn from these ancient texts and today's perceptions of gender can be explored through the fact that gender roles in history were defined by political, social and economic discourse, meaning that performative roles and gender behaviors were fluid. Overall, the “subversion of gender roles was based on a felt, observed, and legislated environment” that dictated how women were viewed in that time period. The modern correlations are strong and, while not taking a fixed position in terms of fluidity, they find common points in the position that the political and social environment shapes the perception of how gender roles are perceived in society. Juvenal's work also finds comparative tangents throughout the Pastoral Epistles in terms of female being represented as gossips. Plutarch, a Greek and Roman biographer, is known for forming the "nosy" archetype, where nosy means one who gossips and/or meddles. In a biblical context, gossip is despised, so portraying it in any historical context says a lot about how the author feels about such “gossip.” Marianne Kartzow's description of gender and gossip focuses on the characteristics of how Juvenal once again juxtaposes private and public life, further exemplifying female domination of the private sector of life. In this private sector, the poet Ramsay says that “Juvenal holds up a mirror to every part of the private life of the Rome of his day, and with the most caustic and cutting invective seeks to make her ashamed of her vices. ” (qtd. from Ramsay 89). Juvenal tries to reveal this “private life” because it is there that women's immodesty resides. This “gossip” and adulterous archetype is presented and incorporated into his protocol on the vices of women. He does this through extended and excessive descriptions of women who “attend men's meetings and speak with inflexible faces” (Juvenal). In GG Ramsay's translation, he outlines these “lusts” that push women to the brink of gossip, describing these lusts as “not the matron of the family, nor the unmarried daughter, not the yet beardless future son-in-law, not even the unbearable son still polluted” (Ramsay). For example, Eppia, a woman presented in the satire, “[puts on] a nightgown and, attended by a single maid, goes out; then, after hiding her raven curls under a light peruque, she takes up residence in a brothel that smells of long-used blankets", thus establishing a lying and gossiping woman (Ramsay). Crossing the apparently private life of women with the public sector of life that is seemingly dominated by men, Juvenal portrays women as intrusive into areas of life where women are not typically accommodated for growth. One of the women featured in her satire is thought to have mixed local scandals with natural disasters, creating therefore a conglomerate of reality and falsehood, based simply on the fact that her information transgresses the private sector (Kartzow 92) If anything goes beyond her “limited” knowledge, according to Juvenal's delineations, the woman is committing the sin of gossiping. The "intrusive" nature that the woman exhibits goes beyond cultural and political means and, in line with the cultural and biblical contexts, seems to act beyond herself. With such an extreme and oppressive piece of history completely and utterly attacking an entire group, how can society respond? “Juvenal On Women In General” takes a male perspective on Juvenal's work. The statements in this work ask many questions about specific plot points and comparisons in Juvenal's satire, in an attempt to uncover the real issue at hand. In essence, once again delving into thetransitional grace period between the private and public parts of life, the author directs attention to the higher divine powers rather than the decidedly “minuscule” matters of domestic life. Looking at what “Emperor Claudius” had to endure would really put women's problems to shame, according to the writer (“Juvenal on Women”). Any chances of domestic harmony between the woman and her chastity are slim to none when put into perspective of the "bigger issues" described at hand. By bringing together two drastically different situations and juxtaposing them, women's problems are considered insubordinate to a highly divine power. There is a distinct perspective on feminism in ancient Rome that illustrates the ancient thoughts of feminism as one of the clear reasons for the fall of Rome. Due to the inability of the Roman Empire to expand, the influx of gold was limited and, as a result, the male was not encouraged to marry. “Bachelor taxes” were applied to married men who had at least 3 children, while simultaneously punishing unmarried men and shaming them in light of a slowly deteriorating society. With this many questions emerge. Was feminism a catalyst for the further fall of Rome? Was action taken after the fall of Rome? Historically and socially speaking there is a correlation with the social status of men in this socially deprived society and the views of Juvenal in his satire. The video “Feminism in Ancient Rome” explores how if a man married, he would lose his sexual freedom (Sandman). Many gender role perceptions arise from men's social status. The portrayal of men in this time period is what drove Juvenal to portray women in such an ungodly manner: as participants in society who abuse men's deteriorating social status to take over the political and marital sectors. Eppia, a woman described in the translation of Juvenal's satire is known to have “ran away with a gladiator to Pharos and the Nile, and to the interspersed city of Lagos, Canopus” (Ramsay). With that example of a woman leaving to pursue her sexual activities, is this fed into historical depictions of women leaving for a more masculine, god-like being, or are they simply exaggerations of nothing? The extent to which feminism comes into play in this historical context can simply be answered by the fact that Juvenal's works are naturally satirical in nature and that feminism is taken with a grain of salt. With the decay of feminine virtue comes a growing need for feminism and efforts to strengthen the feminine to a level of pure human decency. This degraded state of female morality as portrayed as uncontrollable in the presence of a multitude of men, as gossips and as unvirtuous wives, forces a judgment as to whether feminism caused the fall of Rome, or whether historical events accommodated this. discussion debate. It can be understood that the descriptions of women in Juvenal's satire are amplified by the literary techniques typical of a satirical writing style, as well as by the pure text that constitutes the women's bodies and their emphasized sexuality. Juvenal essentially uses a set of words to dictate women's bodies, evident in the "use of inversion...meant to invite political criticism without attracting the wrong kind of autocratic attention" (Gould 74). According to Gould, there are central motifs of authority, family, and the nuclear family that must be understood within a historical framework. Gould believes that to understand Juvenal's true message here, one must look not at the blows aimed at women, but rather at the representations of Roman society. To understand it and immerse yourself.