Difference between revisions of "Week 8 Questions/Comments-327 09"
From McClurken Wiki
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I also had never heard of these "antenuptial contracts." It seemed very fitting thar some women who came into marriage with something of their own would want to keep it, especially some fathers looking after their daughter's interests. However, how common was it that children or wives wouldn't receive their "portions," as in the case Bozoon Allen and how likely would it be for their inheritance to be recovered? - Christine | I also had never heard of these "antenuptial contracts." It seemed very fitting thar some women who came into marriage with something of their own would want to keep it, especially some fathers looking after their daughter's interests. However, how common was it that children or wives wouldn't receive their "portions," as in the case Bozoon Allen and how likely would it be for their inheritance to be recovered? - Christine | ||
| + | |||
| + | The use of antenuptial contracts seems obvious but is actually a huge shift from how property used to be treated in the patriarchal society. I think it is interesting that the men agree to the terms, it shows not only a shift in the female/wife mindset but a shift in the male/husband mindset as well. So what changed to make this happen? --Erin Sanderson | ||
== New England Divorce, CT, 1655-1678; MD, 1680 == | == New England Divorce, CT, 1655-1678; MD, 1680 == | ||
| Line 12: | Line 14: | ||
The fact that Connecticut permitted divorces does extend some legal protection for abandoned married women. However, it is obvious that the Connecticut legislature was more sympathetic to men seeking this divorce-by-neglect rather than women. When Goody Beckwith and Hanna Huit requested a divorce, the legislature required others to testify that the women’s story of their husbands’ desertion was true. However, when Robert Wade=2 0requested a divorce from his runaway wife, the legislature was horrified, obviously sympathetic, and did not bother to double-check his story. A modern observer should not declare the new legal action of divorce a total triumph for the rights of women. -Allison Luthern | The fact that Connecticut permitted divorces does extend some legal protection for abandoned married women. However, it is obvious that the Connecticut legislature was more sympathetic to men seeking this divorce-by-neglect rather than women. When Goody Beckwith and Hanna Huit requested a divorce, the legislature required others to testify that the women’s story of their husbands’ desertion was true. However, when Robert Wade=2 0requested a divorce from his runaway wife, the legislature was horrified, obviously sympathetic, and did not bother to double-check his story. A modern observer should not declare the new legal action of divorce a total triumph for the rights of women. -Allison Luthern | ||
| + | I find the Connecticut divorce cases to be really interesting. By today's standards these all seem like obvious reasons for divorce. Abandonment, for example, would be a justified reason for divorce after 7 years. I can't help but think of all those individuals everywhere else in America who had been abandoned but were still considered married. -Erin Sanderson | ||
| + | In response to Kristina, I agree that men probably thought it was beneath them to ask for divorce. However, I also think that it would be a lot harder for an abandoned women to survive without a husband (she would probably be living in poverty) then it would be for a man to survive without his wife. -- Erin Sanderson | ||
