GoldmanSachs M&A asked:
the man could have *** with anyone, but the women would not be able to have *** with him since she must stay have *** during a marriage.
the man could have *** with anyone, but the women would not be able to have *** with him since she must stay have *** during a marriage.
This does not make any sense!
I am saying if a women could only have *** with her husband, how could a man have *** to a women he is not married to
Related Articles
10 users responded in this post
It makes perfect sense.
Well, of course, it makes sense! This could be arranged. The men would simply have *** with prostitutes, courtesans, and mistresses. And the married women would have *** only with their husbands.
Easy- haven’t you ever heard people refer to prostitution as the “world’s oldest profession?” The dudes went to Renaissance hookers, or sometimes there were just peasant women, widows and such, who didn’t mind tossing a freebie to noble dudes like knights and such.
yeah, the women only had *** with their husbands and the men only had *** with women.
ha ha
Most normal people were to busy trying to survive in these times, let alone have affairs. It was just the upper class who did this sort of thing and well I suppose they still do it today, so nothing has changed.
Perhaps the woman that a husband was having *** with wasn’t married herself.
Put simply, waaaaaaay back all firmly believed women were a walking sin because of Eve. Therefore they were controlled and told they had to repent, while the men just did as they pleased.
Sad but true.
1) Even back in the Renaissance, there were unmarried women.
2) The married women didn’t obey the rules!
Prostitution was one way. There were a lot of courtesans back then, for the upper class guys, and your regular streetwalkers for the lower class ones. If you, a woman, didn’t have a husband or a father, then your employment options were pretty much limited to servant or **********. Also, people don’t always do what they’re supposed to. Some married women would have affairs, and some unmarried women would have *** without getting paid for it. Of course, the women who did have *** outside of marriage were scandalous at best. Courtesans were blamed for plagues, and unmarried nonvirginal women were outcasts. Getting caught or making a living out of it wasn’t exactly fun, but women did do it.
Most of the historical records we have from the Renaissance come from a specific socioeconomic class - the Patricians or quasi-aristocracy. This is where we get our understanding of the social mores of the Renaissance. In the Patrician class women were powerless outside the home, and had severe restrictions imposed on their associations and their movements.
However, the majority of the population, who were at best semi-literate, left few records of their social life. We can assume from tax records of the time that there was a large population that did not operate according to the same social rules of the Patricians. In this class, women worked by neccessity and therefore had to have some freedom. They were not restricted by the constraints on their upperclass counterparts.
As many posters have written, prostitution was widespread during this time and this would have provided men with opportunities to partake in unmarried sex; indeed, in Renaissance Venice brothels were regulated by the government.
With the expenses of marrying off a daughter (the crippling dowry, the ceremony etc) many Patrician fathers who had several daughters chose to send the daughters they could not afford to marry off to the convent to become nuns. Unwilling young girls in such a closed environment were soon exploited and there are many historical accounts of convents being set up as brothels!
Leave A Reply
Please Note: Comment moderation maybe active so there is no need to resubmit your comments