This study attempts to shed light on the psychological mindsets of two minor femalecharacters in two fictional stories, Lady Capulet, the mother in Romeo and Juliet (1597), and Mrs Bennet, the mother in Pride and Prejudice (1813). The stories are set centuries apart by two different English authors. Romeo and Juliet was written by William Shakespeare and was published in 1597, whilst Pride and Prejudice was written by Jane Austen and was published in 1813. This essay will examine why the authors show the mothers with characteristic attitudes and habitual behaviours that inherently portray them as women affected by patriarchy. Lady Capulet is revealed as a mother who supports her husband in the arrangement of her daughter’s marriage, but as a mother who punishes her daughter for refusing to marry a man arranged by the father. Mrs Bennet is portrayed as a mother driven by materialistic gains, whose ultimate obsession is to find men to marry her daughters, a mother who also punishes her daughter for refusing to marry a man picked out by her. The authors are well renowned, and both tales are amongst the greatest romantic love stories of all times. Nevertheless, these stories do not support the feminist cause for equality of the sexes but instead create a reality of a society that was essentially patriarchal. Psychoanalytical feminist literary criticism reveals that the authors were deeply influenced by a patriarchal culture, which they have reflected and created in the mother characterisations of their stories.

In me tota ruens Venus Vênus derrubando-se inteira sobre mim, esse verso de Horácio representa claramente a posição dos personagens de Fedra e Hipólito na tragédia Hipólito de Eurípides. Em linhas gerais, Fedra, enfeitiçada por Afrodite, sofre de amor pelo seu enteado Hipólito, que a rejeita veementemente. Enfurecida pelo tratamento dispensado por Hipólito não só a ela, mas às mulheres em geral, Fedra acusa Hipólito de estupro, através de um bilhete e suicida-se logo em seguida. Teseu, pai de Hipólito, ao encontrar a esposa morta, exila o filho e providencia que ele seja morto. As tensões criadas pelos discursos de Fedra e Hipólito têm sido material de inúmeros debates críticos. A análise da fortuna crítica levanta mais perguntas que fornece respostas. De todas as linhas críticas, duas linhas antagônicas merecem ser ressaltadas. A leitura crítica do discurso misógino que irá defender que Eurípides não pregava a misoginia através dos seus textos, mas, muito pelo contrário, a combatia ao fazer mudanças no mito dando voz a personagens femininas tão fortes quanto Fedra. E a leitura do discurso feminista que irá defender que há um discurso misógino presente no texto de Eurípides, fruto de uma imposição ideológica vigente na Grécia do século V a.C.. O presente trabalho irá discutir ambos discursos e demonstrar, que a sua maneira, Eurípides não era misógino / In me tota ruens Venus Venus falling all over me, this verse of Horace clearly represents the position Phaedras and Hippolytus characters have in Euripides tragedy Hippolytus. In general lines, Phaedra, enchanted by Aphrodite, suffers because she loves her stepson Hippolytus, who rejects her strongly. Enraged for his treatment not only toward her, but to all women, Phaedra accuses Hippolytus, through a plate, of raping her and suicides right after. Theseus, Hippolytus father, while finding his dead wife, exiles his son and makes arrangements for his death. The tensions created by Phaedras and Hippolytus discourses have been used in countless debates by the critical scholarship. Analyzing Euripides critics raises more questions that enlighten answers. Of all critical postures, two opposed lines deserve to have a closer look. The readings of the misogynistic discourse, that will defend that Euripides did not preach the misogyny through his texts, but, on the contrary, stroke it while doing changes on the myths to give voice to female characters as strong as Phaedra. On the other hand, the readings of the feminist discourse that will defend that there is a misogynistic discourse in Euripides texts, product of an ideological imposition present in Ancient Greece. The present work will discuss both discourses and demonstrate that, in his own maner, Euripides was not a misogynist

In me tota ruens Venus Vênus derrubando-se inteira sobre mim, esse verso de Horácio representa claramente a posição dos personagens de Fedra e Hipólito na tragédia Hipólito de Eurípides. Em linhas gerais, Fedra, enfeitiçada por Afrodite, sofre de amor pelo seu enteado Hipólito, que a rejeita veementemente. Enfurecida pelo tratamento dispensado por Hipólito não só a ela, mas às mulheres em geral, Fedra acusa Hipólito de estupro, através de um bilhete e suicida-se logo em seguida. Teseu, pai de Hipólito, ao encontrar a esposa morta, exila o filho e providencia que ele seja morto. As tensões criadas pelos discursos de Fedra e Hipólito têm sido material de inúmeros debates críticos. A análise da fortuna crítica levanta mais perguntas que fornece respostas. De todas as linhas críticas, duas linhas antagônicas merecem ser ressaltadas. A leitura crítica do discurso misógino que irá defender que Eurípides não pregava a misoginia através dos seus textos, mas, muito pelo contrário, a combatia ao fazer mudanças no mito dando voz a personagens femininas tão fortes quanto Fedra. E a leitura do discurso feminista que irá defender que há um discurso misógino presente no texto de Eurípides, fruto de uma imposição ideológica vigente na Grécia do século V a.C.. O presente trabalho irá discutir ambos discursos e demonstrar, que a sua maneira, Eurípides não era misógino / In me tota ruens Venus Venus falling all over me, this verse of Horace clearly represents the position Phaedras and Hippolytus characters have in Euripides tragedy Hippolytus. In general lines, Phaedra, enchanted by Aphrodite, suffers because she loves her stepson Hippolytus, who rejects her strongly. Enraged for his treatment not only toward her, but to all women, Phaedra accuses Hippolytus, through a plate, of raping her and suicides right after. Theseus, Hippolytus father, while finding his dead wife, exiles his son and makes arrangements for his death. The tensions created by Phaedras and Hippolytus discourses have been used in countless debates by the critical scholarship. Analyzing Euripides critics raises more questions that enlighten answers. Of all critical postures, two opposed lines deserve to have a closer look. The readings of the misogynistic discourse, that will defend that Euripides did not preach the misogyny through his texts, but, on the contrary, stroke it while doing changes on the myths to give voice to female characters as strong as Phaedra. On the other hand, the readings of the feminist discourse that will defend that there is a misogynistic discourse in Euripides texts, product of an ideological imposition present in Ancient Greece. The present work will discuss both discourses and demonstrate that, in his own maner, Euripides was not a misogynist