Class Plays

I truly liked all the plays. I never thought of how much I would enjoy doing this project but it was writing my own play as well as watching/acting out other’s plays. Everyone was creative in their own way. I enjoyed writing my play because I wanted two problems women go through into one play. I also wanted to incorporate it within a rich and poor society. My message was that, it’s not just the poor that go through treatment or abuse; it can be anyone, so money isn’t everything.
The three favorite plays that I enjoyed watching were Max’s play, Jessica’s play, and Sarah’s play. I liked Max’s play because it shows the racial barriers that still exist today. Even though Blacks and Whites have the same rights, some still look down upon each other and label each other. Max’s play shows that even the elderly still have the same attitude they had back in the day when they were younger when blacks were discriminated against. However, people say “oh their old, they don’t know what they’re saying” I still haven’t made up my mind of whether or not that should be a good excuse to still have the same beliefs even though times have drastically changed. I guess they’re still living in the same era these events took place.
I liked Jessica’s play as well because I found it really interesting how back then, mothers and other family members were afraid to talk to their children about sex. I feel like it’s a really dumb thing to do to let your child date but not be aware about sex or how one gets pregnant. Jessica’s character felt guilty to abort the child but she was also kind of ashamed to have it as well because at those times, not many teenagers get pregnant without getting married first. She was forced to marry the father even though he turned out to be not so faithful to her. I do feel that she was a very strong character to put up with her pregnancy and to leave her supporter and raise the child on her own.
Finally I liked Sarah’s play because it reminded me of mine, except mine was a little more dramatic. Sarah’s play was good because her character (the mother) was also very strong, although she seemed to be forgiving unlike mine. The message I got from her play was to not judge a book by its cover because the family seemed to be perfect, but the husband was cheating on her that whole time. However since hers had a good ending and he came back for her and supposedly “changed his ways” I guess you can say there’s still hope.

Wicked !

Wicked was definitely an interesting version of The Wizard of Oz, but for a musical it was pretty good. Elphaba was definitely a strong character, I think. She despite everyone looking down on her because she’s not pretty enough, she’s still not let down. For someone that has to put up with all that hatred, she’s still willing to help people. It’s really ironic though, that the more she tries to help, the more hatred she’s gaining from everybody. She’s never appreciated, but still she stands strong and seems to not care of what anyone thinks, and sticks to being a good person.
I kind of had mixed feelings about Galinda. It took me a while to really know whether or not she actually liked Elphaba. She’s the one who gave her that witch’s hat in the first place, but then again, when she shows up at the party and everyone is staring at her, she goes up to her and starts dancing with her so everyone else can accept her. I guess deep down, she’s a good person, but she lets her popularity get in the way of her friendship, which shows she isn’t a strong character at all because unlike Elphaba who doesn’t care what people think, Galinda certainly does. I did like the fact that Fiyero, who happened to be the handsome guy, fell for Elphaba than Galinda, who was pretty and popular. I guess this was a message that beauty is only skin deep.
I also had mixed feelings about Elphaba’s sister, Nessarose. At first I felt bad for her for being in a wheel chair and not being able to walk. And I especially felt bad that she actually thought Boq liked her, when he only hung around her to impress Galinda. However, when Nessarose becomes governess, she starts taking advantage of her power by making Boq her servant. I still don’t understand why she would do that, if she liked him. He would obviously hate her even more. If she wanted him to stick around, she could have gave him a different less demeaning job.
The Wizard was also portrayed differently in this play than how we knew of him in the traditional Wizard of Oz play. In this play, he seems like he’s just there. He has no power what so ever, and he chooses to act through someone with powers. This obviously doesn’t make him a strong character at all.

Evita

Evita is a play by Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber, based on the life story of Evita Peron. This play/musical was ok to read. It is interesting that it is actually based on a real person. This story is very fascinating that I find it almost fictitious. It was interesting to know that Evita actually got to the top by sleeping around. Although she has accomplished a lot during the years, this gets me thinking if she actually really is a strong character. I don’t think she would be strong by getting to the top the easy way. I realize that it’s hard for a woman to get to the top on her own without doing “favors”, but personally I still don’t think that’s right.
I do think that her message is powerful to the people by representing herself as more of a regular person than one in her position. This message shows strength in itself because it shows that even though she had risen in society from coming from a middle class family, rather than showing herself as just rich and powerful, her appearance was still sending out a message that she is a woman, and she made it to the top and if she can do it, they can do it. Evita did do a lot of good to society as well. She helped people get jobs and homes, which was very beneficial at the time, although in the end, she robbed the government of their money by spending all of it, and of course, a lot of it was for her own benefit. I guess she could have helped people and not spend all of the money at the same time by focusing on a big issue rather than trying to help with everything at the same time. It won’t work out. In the play Che was right when he basically stated that Evita focuses on what happens today rather than also thinking about how this will affect the future. I don’t think that was very responsible.
Finally, I would like to state that since we read a lot of plays where men and their wives did not get along, it is good to know that Evita and Peron worked like a team and supported each other the whole time they were in politics. He liked her for herself rather than just using her to help him get to the top and that was a very powerful point in this play.

Barriers

“Barriers” was an interesting play to read. I always knew that Muslims would get stereotyped since the September 11th attack, but I never knew that people would go so far as to beat them up or discriminate them everywhere they go. It’s crazy what people have to go through to be accepted or just to make a living in peace without getting harassed. I think this play was yet again one that would be understood better if watched since their were different scenes going on at the same time. Overall it was pretty good.
To me the strongest character in the play would be Naima. She’s strong because even though she’s going through all this harassment at home and whenever she goes out, she still does what she needs to do without being so afraid from the harassment she will put up with. An example of this was when Chris and Jeff offered to walk her to the store and she refused. Another example is that she wasn’t afraid to put on the hijab, which everyone knows is a Muslim symbol. She cared more about pleasing her husband and family than thinking about the consequences that she will go through as a result of wearing it. Although we do see some paranoia in her character with her husband Khalil, she’s still a strong character with putting up with him. I do believe he cheated because he “claims” that the lady he talked to was only a “friend”. Unlike his wife, I feel that he is not a strong character at all. He seems selfish to want Sunima to stay home from college and not care about her love for Roger. I understand that the death of his son Nabhil caused him a lot of pain, but he seems like he doesn’t know how to deal with it. He starts talking to other women, he goes to the bar and gets drunk, and kind of gets away from his religion. He also becomes very selfish with his daughter. Not only that but I kind of feel like he didn’t treat his wife very good. He always seemed to have an attitude with her.
I am kind of surprised as to why Sunima was taking a whole different attitude about the discrimination that goes on with her culture, and her brother’s death. Her character seemed kind of shady and also selfish because she only goes to visit her family just to tell them that she’s going to get married. She was never really there for them. I guess maybe she doesn’t really realize the type of discrimination her family is going through since at school she seems to be in a whole different environment but on the other hand, she too needed to deal with the loss of her brother. It’s a little weird that she was taking it so lightly, like she was in her own little world where telling her family about Roger was her only goal.
Overall, the play had a good ending. I feel by erasing Nabhil’s message, they kind of let all the grief go and go on with there lives. Especially, when Khalil started praying on his mat again. Naima also got home safely despite the harassment she had encountered and made peace with her husband.

And the Soul Shall Dance

And the Soul Shall Dance was a very interesting play to read. Not only was it about immigrants who are struggling to make a better life for themselves but its about Japanese immigrants. Until reading this play, I had never really realized the troubles Japanese immigrants encountered when coming to America. How they were forced to live in these small deserted camps, and couldn’t own properties of their own and moving every couple of years. I could really imagine how hard that had to be for them to make a stable living.

The character I found most interesting in the play would have to be Masako. Although she is only 11 years old, it was really hard for her to fit in either the American culture, or her family’s culture. She’s in the middle between both. I can imagine her struggling with her family at home, who probably wish she had a little more Japanese culture, and with any American she comes across, who is bound to treat her like she is different already. I liked her character because I can really relate to it, since I too had to go through the adaptation of both cultures (Egyptian and American) at the same time, when I was younger.  It was understandable though, how Masako and Emiko related to one another. They both had that lost feeling that they don’t belong where they are. Each one feels like her life can get better and seeks for a change. I felt really sympathetic for Emiko. Just thinking about her life, makes me a little upset. Not only was she forced by her parents to marry someone that she doesn’t love, but after saving up enough money to go back to Japan, Oka takes it from her to help his daughter come to America. That’s like the last bit of hope taken away from Emiko especially because of how abusive and disrespectful Oka treats her. Emiko is also portrayed as having an outgoing, younger personality than Hana. She likes to sing and dance, and sounds like in Japan, she was a free spirited character.  That is probably another reason why she and Masako get along so much.

Another character who I found interesting is Kiyoko. I kind of felt bad for her also.  She obviously did not have such a great time at Japan; living with her grandparents who reminded her of how unloved she was since her mom died. Even though she came to America to live with her dad, she had high hopes of living a better life, but when she encounters how her dad and stepmom go through with each other, she realizes that this isn’t better at all. I guess this is what helped her and Masako get along and actually find something to talk about or relate too: their lives in America despite if the fact that Masako is a Nisei and Kiyoko is an Issei. They are both encountering struggles, which is very significant to this play.

Mulatto

Color Struck wasn’t exactly the best play I ever read. I did like reading it because of its interesting dialogue that conveys that the characters are African Americans from the south. Overall, the play wasn’t that bad. It’s interesting because it depicts the same problems we have today. I did have an issue with both of the main characters, Emma and John, however.

Let’s start with Emma. I understand that she had self esteem issues about her skin tone because lighter skin girls got more attention from society, but sometimes she got so paranoid, that she was almost obnoxious. John may have sent some flirtatious messages to Effie, but it got to the point where Emma didn’t even want him looking at her or anyone else that was female. I think that could get a little annoying if you are in a relationship with someone because not only does he know that she has low self esteem which would not be attractive to most guys, but she was too paranoid. When I was reading the play, there were some parts of it, where I just wanted to tell her to shut up. For example, the fact that she didn’t want to go on stage with John, seemed so stubborn. It was pointless for her to not have gone since John would have danced with only her anyway. This jealousy and paranoia may have been the cause of her daughter’s death and I think that is very selfish of her. I know that she was stunned to see john, but she cared more about him liking her “mulatto” daughter, than actually getting her sick daughter help immediately. I think her jealousy was one of the reasons why she had a bad life. Maybe it was because in a way she pushed everybody out of it unknowingly due to her self esteem. Not just john, because he himself wasn’t exactly a great person, but if she was like that with John, then she may have been like that with any guy that she dated.

Also John’s character was kind of selfish in a way. As much as Emma told him how she felt about him flirting with lighter skinned women, he did it anyway. He didn’t seem to have any respect for her or for the way she feels. I thought it was really disrespectful when he came back to her 20 years later when his wife died, just because he wanted to get married. Emma was like his backup plan. To be honest, if I was Emma, I would have married John just to use him since she was so poor and still had feelings for him anyway. However, I did feel John was right when he told Emma that “she despises her own skin, that she can’t believe anyone else would love it.”

            I thought the article “She’s Pretty for a Dark-Skinned Girl…”was very interesting because the author was right when she said that lighter skin girls are always more adored than the darker skin ones. Many models today are light skin, in hip-hop music videos, most of the girls are either light skin or not even black. I just can’t understand why African American’s themselves think darker skin girls are less attractive. It’s crazy how they still have this depiction till today. This article is very relevant to my personal experiences, because when I was in high school, I would always notice that the light skin girls do get a lot more attention from guys than the darker skin girls. I think all types of race, and culture is beautiful. It’s sad that this has been a stereotype now, that lighter is more beautiful.

Lady Windermere's Fan

Out of both the plays we read this week, my favorite would have to be “Lady Windermere’s Fan” only because I got into it the most. I had a much harder time getting into the first play, “A Woman of no importance” although I did enjoy it most towards the end. Both plays however, shared some of the same things. They both criticized the English society, which I guess Oscar Wilde did purposely to show how they are all about higher class and social ranking, and that’s what matters to them. Also, both plays focused on women who was each deceived by a man. In “Lady Windermere’s Fan”, Mrs. Erlynne, betrayed her husband and daughter for another man, but he had also betrayed her, leaving her with nothing. In “A Woman of No Importance”, Lord Illingworth lied to Mrs. Arbuthnot when she got pregnant with his child and promised her he would marry her. Of course, he never did, which made her live a secret and guilty life of sin.

            In “Lady Windermere’s Fan”, the fan played a lot of significance in the play. Although it was just an unimportant object that Lady Windermere received as a birthday gift from her husband, we see it throughout the whole play and it became important to a few characters. For example, from the beginning of the play we see it as being significant because it was a birthday present from Lady Windermere’s husband, who throughout the play was the one who was thought to have been cheating on her that whole time. We then see it as a weapon against Mrs. Erlynne, when Lady Windermere threatened to hit her with it if she had come to her birthday ball. We then see it when it is left in Lord Darlington’s room and Mrs. Erlynne told the men, she thought it was her own fan and grabbed it by mistake. She then wanted to keep it purposely to remember her daughter by. Not only that, but Lord Windermere, wanted to get rid of it even though it was his own gift, because he had thought of it to be in the hands of a sinner, something that shouldn’t be touch by his wife who is known to be pure and of innocence.

            Overall I liked the play. It was kind of interesting reading something from the Victorian period in England, where we can see how the high class interacted with each other. I think Oscar Wilde made a great point in showing how English people care more about their money and their reputation, than someone who is a puritan, who in both plays, were looked down at.

Getting Out

Getting out is a play written by Marsha Norman about a young woman “Arlie” who’s messed up childhood and family led her to becoming a criminal and led her to ending up in jail. She was a prostitute, a murderer, and a thief. Unlike “The Bad Seed”, she wasn’t just naturally bad, but she lived in a bad environment that made her become that way. Her mom was also a prostitute, her siblings all had problems as well and her family was really poor. I guess she wanted to make her life better by earning easy money through prostitution and learned to become defensive towards everyone in her life by acting bad.

What’s interesting about this play is it doesn’t actually take place in her jail cell but takes place in her small broken down apartment when she’s finally out after eight whole years of being in jail. We are now introduced to two different Arlene’s. We get to see Arlene who is the good version of the Arlie from the past who was bad. The whole play basically focuses on the flashbacks Arlene encounters with her enemy, who is herself from the past. We realize that Arlene wants to change but her past memories are still getting in the way. There are other things that get in the way also. One thing is her mom, who we see doesn’t really get along with her and tells her that she’s basically not going to change and she assumes that she slept with the prison guard. Another person we see is Carl who is her ex boyfriend and pimp who visits her a couple times to try to talk her into prostitution again. He tells her that the only way she can really get her life together and earn big money fast is to prostitute. He also tries to lure her back into doing this by mentioning her son, who we see is a really big influence in the play for why Arlene wants to change so much, although he is not physically in the play. Carl tells Arlene that she would be making more money through prostitution and would be able to send Joey, her son gifts and her son would be proud that his mom is rich. However, towards the end we see that Arlene is a stronger character than Arlie and makes the right decision to not go with Carl. Ruby, her neighbor who was also an ex-convict plays another big role in the play by telling her not to give up and things will get better for her. She finally convinces her to not go back to the past because she shares her own story with her, of how she through a jug of milk outside the window and instead of breaking and spilling, it bounced back up meaning her life can do the same.

In my opinion, I didn’t like this play as much as I did the other modern plays that we read, such as “Trifles” and “The Bad Seed”. I didn’t like it because to me, it didn’t really have a plot. We just get to see her bad self and her good self. I guess this play would be better to watch than to read, because it gets a little confusing when Arlie jumps right in the middle of a scene. However, I did like the symbolism of the jug of milk. I did like the fact that Arlie became a strong character to resist some opportunities that came to her to get her to take the easy way out again. I also like how she encounters some bad people and some good people and get to see which side she decides to take which wasn’t really obvious because she lived a life of crime all her life. Bennie seems like a very random character in the play because we don’t really get to know for sure if he’s a good or bad character. He’s seen as being the nice guard while she was in jail and drives across the country to get her settled in, but then he tries to rape her who I found to be odd. He just seemed kind of creepy to me since he was like 50. I would think he would be more like a fatherly figure.

I enjoyed reading the article about women having to keep their babies with them in the prison. Im not really sure if that is a good idea or bad idea. It’s good that the babies are with their mothers and maybe they will be a good influence on the mothers to help them become better people for the sake of their kids however I don’t think that they should be in that type of atmosphere. But the article was quiet interestin

Bad Seed

The Bad Seed is a play based on the novel written by William March in the early 1950’s. It’s about a little girl who is portrayed as the perfect daughter, student, and neighbor. She’s supposedly good at everything, with very good manners and never did anything wrong to receive a spanking. Nobody saw through her fake personality except her own mother, who could tell something was not right about her. In the story we find out that this eight year old girl with the perfect braids is actually a murderer or a psychopath. Not only does she end up killing a classmate just for an award that she felt she deserved, but killed a few other people also. In the end her mother finds out about her ways and finally thinks up a plan to kill her daughter for the sake of society and to kill herself because she felt that it was her fault her daughter turned out like that through heredity of her crazy criminal-minded grandmother.

I like this play the most out of the last few that we read because it’s very suspenseful because the whole time I was reading it, I couldn’t believe that someone at that age would commit so many murders without even getting caught. I’m kind of mad however, that she got away with it and the only person who knew her true colors, was her mother who killed herself. I don’t think her mother should have killed herself because even though it might be heredity that made her daughter the way she is, she can’t help her genetics. I think if anything, she should have focused more on Rhoda. I kind of had mixed feelings about when Christine tried to kill her. Even though I feel that murder is wrong, especially to your own daughter, there was really no other way to help her. If she was taken somewhere like an asylum, she may have hurt other people, especially because she looks like a sweet little girl, she may have talked the staff and into letting her get away from things. The ending was ironic though because she still ended up living and will stay with her father that is still clueless about her true behavior and in the end Monica tells him that he should be thankful that he still has her.

It’s scary to think that a person’s pure evil can pass down from generation to generation….this means that they can’t help their actions. Like Rhoda, she only does it to get what she wants. She sees it as the first resort, like its nothing to end an innocent life. It was kind of disturbing to read that she had killed that young innocent boy that had won the medal because he had earned it.  I really wonder if there are other little kids that do this in real life. If there is, I can’t imagine how they would handle that.

It was interesting to know about what they believed in the 50’s about nature vs. nurture and that they would do whatever it takes to stop a woman from having kids if she carries some type of illness from her genes. Somehow I don’t think that’s very fair, she can’t help where she had come from, and she like others should be able to have babies and start a family. I think this is a very controversial topic because it can either benefit society or benefit a person’s dream of having kids. Overall this story is very mind-blowing indeed.

Trifles

            Susan Glaspell’s Trifles is a play inspired by a true story. Trifles is about a murder that took place in the Wright house. But the suspect was Millie Wright who was thought to have murdered her husband in bed by strangling him with a rope. Out of all the plays, I enjoyed reading this one the most. For one thing I can actually understand it clearly and for another thing, the whole time I was reading it, I could imagine exactly what the scenery would have looked like. I like this play because in the end, it seemed that the women were the ones who found the most evidence and came up with the best conclusion as to why she did it. It was ironic because the whole time, both of the women, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale were getting made fun of by the other men.

            Yes the women did comment on a couple things that were irrelevant to the murder but what did the men want them to do besides gather some of the stuff that was on Mrs. Wright’s list. If they had tried to tell the men about what they had interpreted in the kitchen, the men would not have taken them seriously anyway. This play did a good job in portraying how men viewed women as being useless and good for only one thing, which is being a good house wife and mother. That is why even the men were criticizing how bad of a housewife Mrs. Wright was which was also unimportant to the murder case. However they felt the need to say it because women were expected to be good house wives and that might have gave them an idea that since she was sloppy in the kitchen, she must not have been a good wife to her husband, meaning it was possible that she had done the killing.

            I also loved the symbolism in the play. I liked how the bird represented Millie. Millie was described as being this vibrant and cheerful girl that loved to sing. The bird may have represented her not only because the bird can also sing but because the bird is locked up in a cage (obviously) and Mrs. Wright has been locked up in her stranded house for years with her husband who also use to kill any spark of cheer or happiness in the house, as described by Mrs. Hale, her neighbor. When Mr. Wright killed that bird, it’s liked he killed the last bit of cheer the household holds. To Mrs. Wright, that was the only thing that she looked forward to and loved in that home. So it’s like he killed the last bit of spirit within her. To her, that was the last straw, so she murdered him the same way he intentionally killed her bird.

            To me, I think John Wright deserved what he got. He ruined his wife’s spirit and made her go from the carefree person she used to be, to have her be just an object or property in which he can control. I liked how Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peter’s (who is “married to the law”) stood up to the men for criticizing her.  Although murder isn’t good, they knew there was nothing else Mrs. Wright can do to get away. They knew how she felt because they were women too and they saw things from her perspective other than the fact that she committed a crime. They knew that no woman deserves to be treated like that by her husband.

            The “Sheltering Women and Their Pets Too” article was very relevant to the play because it shows how abused women hold a close relationship to their pets and how much they care about them to the point that if they are in an abusive relationship, they would rather stay home and not leave their pets behind. This is because their pets are their friends especially at a time where they are the only good thing living in an abusive household. This makes it understandable why Mrs. Wright felt so torn up when her husband had killed her bird.

            This play is interesting because it was based on a true murder trial when a woman actually did murder her husband. When they didn’t find any real evidence to support that she had done it, they let her go after the second trial. This was because she portrayed herself as being so upset and innocent to the jury and they thought that why would a woman like her do something like that. If it was a man who had done the killing, I don’t think they would be so easy about it since women are portrayed as weak. She used their own stereotyping against them which actually worked. I thought that was genius.

Murder Was Her Only Way

Euripides Medea is an ancient Greek play written about a furious woman who seeks revenge to her husband who married the king’s daughter without her knowledge. She sets out to kill him, the princess, and the king. However she also kills two innocent young lives- her kids. This reveals to us the type of woman Medea is.

Although Medea seems revengeful and cold hearted, she does show her strength as a woman and since Euripides is known for writing Greek plays defending women, the message in this play tells us that even though Jason turned out to be a back stabber, Medea like most women, did not just sit there and watch. She was furious and took action. Although we know murder is the wrong way to handle things, I’m still glad Medea stepped up and did something. Even today people think of women as weak and won’t take the action that they deserve. That is why I think this play is significant, especially because it was written at a time where women were looked down upon the most.

However, I do not think it was right at all when she kills her own children. They were her own flesh and blood, but she seemed to think that it was more important to see her husband suffer through his children’s loss, than the actual fact that she had lost her own children forever just to get revenge. This shows the selfish, cold hearted side of her. However, that is what made the play a tragedy. Anyone can understand why she had killed her husband, because he betrayed her, and why she had killed his wife, because she only cared about herself and what she wanted, despite the fact that Jason already had a family.  And finally, we can understand that she killed the king because he not only approved of the marriage, but wanted her to exile knowing she had nowhere to go. But killing innocent lives for her own benefit is what made this play tragic and emotional. I also think that it was crazy how in one part of the play Medea even admitted that her kids have done nothing, and she is taking it out on them, yet she goes out and does it anyway.

I enjoyed reading this play because it was interesting to read Medea’s plan to seek revenge. However, the whole time I was thinking that she is a little crazy for going out and killing all those people, especially in the beginning when the nurse tells us that she had killed her brother and the two king’s daughters to get what she wants. This gets me to believe that it was karma, not only to her husband but to her because she also did wrong doing to get the Golden Fleece for Jason.  It just shows that what comes around goes around. After all she did for Jason, he was still after one thing, which was to get his status up.

No Sex or No War ?

 Aristophanes "Lysistrata" is a play about a woman who unlike the others, wishes for peace and takes action. She thinks up a brilliant plan to stop the war and have all the men come back home to their wives. To do so she gathered up all the women and told them her idea to go on a strike to stop having sex until the men stop the war for good and make peace. Although at first, they did not think it was a good idea, eventually they all vowed to not be sexually active until their husbands give up and end the war. Eventually the men did decide to give up and wanted to resolve the war. But towards the end of this play, it got to be ironic.

Since old Greek plays such as this one viewed women to be lower than men in society, Aristophanes made this particular play about war and the main character in it was indeed a woman. Although this play was actually acted by all men who played as women, Arisophanes message in the play was that war was ridiculous and in order to have peace, one must step up and try to end the war. To do so, he made the hero a woman (Lysistrata) who also symbolized how ridiculous the war was since women themselves were thought to be unimportant to anything, especially wars. I find that kind of interesting and offensive at the same time because of the fact that women were thought out to be ridiculous and that was what helped make the play comedic.

I thought the play was unique because it shows the masculinity of a woman through her actions. While others stayed home, took care of the kids, house work, and pleased their husbands. Lysistrata wanted to take some kind of action by forcing herself and convincing others to stop having sex and be stronger in will than the men, she succeeded by showing herself and the other women as to being stronger and men were weaker. This sends out the message that women are not just sex objects or house wives, but they can be good for something as well as the men. Lysistrata made a commitment and stuck to it.

The play had an ironic ending because during the meeting that the Athenians had with Spartans, The men were all more concerned about the naked woman. They treated her as an object or as property rather than a human, even though Lysistrata proved to them that they are weaker than the women and her genius plan did work, they have changed their views about women, which until today still exist.

Although I did not find most of the scenes to be funny, I am amazed of how the stereotypes about women viewed in this play still reflect some of the stereotypes viewed today. Women are still viewed lower than men, and the man will always be viewed as the bread winner, no matter how successful the woman in the family is. This is because that is how society has always analyzed women to be. For example, in the play, the women were concerned about their appearance and until this day, women are still expected to look good and pay more attention to their appearance than men. Even in popular movies such as “Transformers”, the women who are supposed to look strong also have to look sexy for the camera. This was in the article called “Why Strong Female Characters Are Bad for Women” I found the articles to be quite interesting because they match exactly the stereotypical views of a woman. I also find it interesting how sex strikes are still going on today like in countries like Kenya in the articles “Kenya: Men Start 30 Day Sex strike” or “Kenya: Women Go On Sex Strike.”  I don’t think these stereotypes will not change anytime soon. They lasted since many centuries ago, and will probably continue to go on for the many years to come because it has become as a law of society.