Medea Misogynist Essay

Euripides’ Medea actively engages with varied notions of gender roles through the construction of Medea as a character. Based in an essentially heteronormative masculinist Greek society, the play is often complemented for empathising with females and their hardships, while censured for its multiple misogynist comments on female nature. Medea as the racial outcast is the wronged woman, grappling with gender boundaries while attempting to seek justice for her husband’s betrayal, which rendered her homeless. Many notions about the play seek to position certain impetuous comments as misogynist diatribes, deliberately deriding women. Though the thin streak of misogyny in the play can perhaps be not denied, it is necessary to analyse those speeches in the context of gender roles (and transformations) and power dynamics in a prevailing masculine ethos, further contrasting them with certain ‘received’ notions. This essay will try to coherently sketch Medea’s transition from being a

Called Thesmophoriazusae, the play focuses on the suppressed position of women in a masculinist society, with reference to two playwrights, Euripides and Agathon. The play lists how Euripides shamelessly vilifies women’s natures, portraying them as ever sexually deprived and naturally murderous. According to the text, he renders women as undependable making life difficult for them even in the domestic sphere. With facetious wit and numerous references to Euripides’ plays, Thesmophoriazusae disparages the misogynist undertones in his works, which render women as irrational and disruptive elements in the society. It is hard to judge whether such criticism is valid, however, this essay will try to focus on these critical issues while analysing the construction of