Let's see, the Middle Ages is a time very long and complex but can be generalized (with many shades and apologizing to specialists).
First, you can not expect much of a time when Christianity (Pauline) becomes universal ideology in the West.
Eva What to expect? "Capable of killing even their own children to marry a widower, condemnation of humanity once again is born and dies and is reborn for the longer original sin and become natural."
Nothing can wait, because its ethos is not the result of a decision but a nature. But not only is the body that must be mastered, but also his thought: the word chatter tireless and insatiable, changing, perverted and perverting the natural and social order.
But after all is not his fault what it is but believe most of what is, or what is the same as not knowing what it is (do you sounds of femicide?) And therefore must be protected himself to not endanger others must be guarded.
And who are the custodians? Shame, submission and fear, or what is the same: the man, the law and God.
not tell me that Christianity did not offer anything good to women
I did not say that, but we can not do is deny the evidence and assume that the Christian myth is beyond all that we have come to investigating this time. What
happening: that human societies disappear, that the political order and family are not required, that desire, the relationship between women and men, education, control of behavior, population problems, economics, etc., stop exist?
prototypical features of women during this period are the same as in the clan: producing goods to supplement household production (in this sense are an aid to the man, who is producing) the upbringing and education to children (religious education, of course, when the West is Christian). And as in the clans, the children are separated from their mothers when they are seven years old while girls stayed until they married.
really, no.
the same needs still exist, are demanding the same functions, continue to manifest the same structures ... Although the stories change.
But something had to change, as with Christianity women reach a point that had not hitherto?
Indeed. You can not delete anything you can do, but if you control it so you do not impossible.
do not understand is the reinterpretation of women to Christianity, responds to a very pragmatic needs for its development as a source of power.
A Empire's end, she walked, or rather it was reinterpreted in its status as a person and not just as a daughter, wife or somebody's mother. In this way, and from a mythological perspective (II), femininity is not only Eva (body and sinful), also is Mary (virgin and mother) and Magdalene (repented and faithful).
And from this condition of mother and wife, can be found in nature as an individual letter in a world that is modeled on the transcendence.
Because she is the vehicle of transmission of Christianity is its instrument of evangelization and thus of power, so it must be protected and encouraged, albeit within certain limits, namely: those that set their own corrupt and corrupting nature.
addition, many of the measures that are supposed to improve the living conditions of women: to sanctify marriage as monogamous, not intended recognition of their independence, but solve political problems, such as setting limits alliances between noble families so they can not organize under a single leadership, which may endanger the stability of the Carolingian Christian state.
And in the urban environment in which women were working outside the home, their status changed something?
Women have always worked within and outside the home, another thing is that it is willing to recognize or not.
About half of the master craftsmen lacked officers, despite legislation obliging them to have them. The work was especially familiar. They worked the teacher and his family.
The more women working in the studio of her husband, unless it was in the house, which was customary for cities to hire a person that would make their domestic work for wages unimportant, though it only responsible , which is in charge of organizing everything related to the household (Does it sound familiar?).
Women therefore worked at home and also outside it, being a force in both areas producing competent and competitive.
Was it legal?
No. Was it public domain? Yes
had no problems until it was transformed into a competitor of man.
When did that happen?
When economic crisis and unemployment was among men. So, did not allow work in the workshops of their husbands and reconducían home. What will happen in our Europe where there is a serious economic crisis ...?
The history of women and work outside the home is a long and costly struggle in which women have suffered, suffered and will suffer more than men, the consequences of economic crisis because in a world complement the resolución de los conflictos siempre beneficiará al que ejerce el dominio.
Y esto es lo mismo que ocurre hoy en día, incluso en los países nórdicos: la mujer sigue siendo la responsable y organizadora de la unidad doméstica y además trabaja fuera del hogar, pero este trabajo no es tanto un trabajo como un complemento, es más una cesión que un derecho. Por eso la temporalidad afecta más a la mujer que al hombre, la mujer cobra menos dinero que el hombre a igualdad de trabajo.
No es de extrañar entonces, que cuando se es madre se tienda a renunciar al trabajo extradoméstico.
Pero no es una cuestión natural, sino de organización política.
¿O sea, que cuando come a time of economic crisis, women may start trembling?
Indeed, but it has always been, is nothing new.
"In the course of the eighteenth century, women were expanding their job opportunities, but more surprising is that as soon as this happened, women seeking employment in the new branch multiplied employment and wages fell. The work was identified as "women's work" and as such are remunerated. In 1762, the Board of Campbell in London assigned to the category of working poor to all activities garment by women, which exposed the affected situations of serious need and provided the base de reclutamiento para la prostitución”.
Por cierto: ¿existía violencia doméstica reconocida como tal?
Que el marido maltratase a la mujer era una conducta normal y socialmente aceptada. De hecho ni en el Derecho Romano ni en el Germano, la mujer podía divorciarse de su marido por el maltrato, sólo lo podía hacer si el hombre era homicida, necromántico o violador de tumbas (Romano); si era pederasta, o si la había obligado a fornicar con otros (Derecho Germano).
Ahora bien, durante los siglos XIV y XV los tribunales atendían numerosos casos de violencia doméstica . No sólo las mujeres sino también sus familias podían poner denuncias y solicitar the dissolution of marriage ("And we believe that our laws are novel?). This implies that the problem existed but, unlike other times, he was recognized as a problem.
But ultimately, taking into account that as a good complementary system of law and society gave the man all his power to dominate women, judges used to remind women that they should obey their husbands.
And nothing has changed, right?
Less than we
At this point it seems strange that women do not agree and end up with us.
bit like the myth of the Ona, but in reverse?
Yes
But is that women want and we do not know why.
A somewhat strange response
is not much, or is it you think that love is not given complementary?
Let's see, how we understand the love between men and women originated in the Middle Ages, an era in which Christian women together develops a complex system of interaction: courtly love, the paradigm may be the stories of Tristan and Isolate and Abelard and Heloise.
What if we interpret from our context?
