But their social/ecclesiastic/criminal systems (in that order) were (i) quite attentive to domestic strife, and (ii) operated primarily to end the strife, rather than to punish either partner per se
-
Show this thread
-
I'm not sure something like this could be implemented without that level of social cohesion, sadly And maybe that social cohesion comes at the cost of substantial personal liberty Need to mull this further.
2 replies 1 retweet 25 likesShow this thread -
Example: guy refers to his wife as "[only a] servant" in front of neighbors Everyone is aghast at this verbal abuse He's hauled in front of a court, wife refuses to testify against him They fine him as punishment nevertheless!
1 reply 0 retweets 25 likesShow this thread -
Observations: 1. Very high standards for treatment of a spouse 2. Enforced by neighbors whom I imagine would come off as unbearable busybodies today 3. Courts intervene . . . wisely? Judiciously? Too much? Unsure but hard to imagine today
1 reply 0 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
Anyway the next section describes how they execute a guy with one eye out of nowhere because a sow gave birth to a piglet with one eye and they assumed he fucked the sow so it's not all sunshine in New England
1 reply 1 retweet 59 likesShow this thread -
"A classic example [of Puritan onomastics] was an unfortunate young woman named Fly-fornication Bull . . . who was made pregnant in the shop of a yeoman improbably named Goodman Woodman."
1 reply 3 retweets 42 likesShow this thread -
"[The idea of] the depravity of infants . . . led Puritans to conclude that the first and most urgent purpose of child rearing was what they called 'breaking of the will.'" nevermind i now hate the puritans
7 replies 1 retweet 55 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Frig I need to finish this yes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.