Education of the Faint

     It was refreshing to read about the development of the feminine role in rhetoric during its Renaissance. Though most of the subjects being discussed originated with their predecessors, these women were beginning to have the ability to put their own spin on covered topics.  Unfortunately the thoughts of these women were being kept at bay.  They had finally been recognized as capable of having ideas, but their beliefs were still deemed irrelevant and excluded by the hierarchy of men that ruled during these times.  Fell and de la Cruz helped to highlight an interesting shift in the history of these rhetoricians.  With the classical assertions of a "good man speaking well" and the medieval emphases of scripture in rhetoric in mind, these authors introduce what seems to be a prominence of situational and textual interpretation.  They decode a number of scriptures, showing their readers how much of the literature can provide diverse representations of meaning.
     Fell discusses a quote she took from an apostle regarding women's physical presentation and their proper learning environment.  Fell explains, "[...] he was exhorting them from broidered hair, gold, and pearls, and costly array; and such are not to usurp authority over the man, but to learn in silence with all subjection, as it becometh women professing godliness with good works" (755).  Essentially, women are neither allowed to take a hands-on approach to learning, nor are they allowed to stand out in any way.  They are to be merely compliments of their husbands and male members of their family and nothing else.  This is the ultimate back hand to the feminism as we know it today.  Throughout history, majority groups have given the others minor advancements in order to distract them from what is really happening.  Bread and circuses, anyone? Women seemed to be given all these new roles within the divinity, but really they were being muffled.  The best way for men to keep women in check was to keep them right by their side.  On the other hand, give them and inch and they'll take a mile.  Women had the mental capacities to know what was going on and would gradually come to their senses.  de la Cruz mentioned the passage 'Let the women learn in silence' is "[...]more in favor of than against women, as it says they should learn, and while they are learning, obviously, they must needs keep quiet" (787).  I have a little trouble believing this is really in favor of women.  I feel like its just a manipulative blinding tool used by the Apostles and men of society who wanted to hold on to their power.  I clearly have some pretty skeptical views in all sets of life, but my paranoia seems especially applicable in this instance.
     Women were not the only subjects of isolation.  Though intellectual inferiority was often paired with the women of society, it also applied elsewhere.  de la Cruz did a nice job interpreting texts for what they actually meant and not for what they were known to have meant.  She explains, "[...] the 'Let [them] keep silence' was meant not only for women, but for all those who are not very competent" (785).  Both women and incompetent men were required to learn quietly as to not tarnish the reputable or impose on others' education.  This is reminiscent of our classical rhetoricians who often required an extensive education as a part of the learning process and eventual regurgitation.  Education is the most necessary tool for interpreting text.