I Just Did Something No Roman Woman Did...

Today I voted in my local elections. Women in Italy were denied the right to vote until 1925 and that was in various localities, not the whole of Italy. Women weren't entirely shut out of politics, however. There are walls in Pompeii painted with campaign ads from women endorsing candidates:

"Nymphodotus, along with Caprasia, asks you to vote for Marcus Cerrinus Vatia for the aedileship." Another, found on the side of a wine shop reads: "Caprasia along with Nymphius -- her neighbors too -- ask you to vote for Aulus Vettius Firmus for the aedileship; he is worthy of the office."

If you're curious, here's an interesting chart breaking down the positions (and responsibilities) of government in Rome. I've also come across more nifty history. I can't decide if I like this better than the computers we vote on nowadays:

SUFFRA′GIUM: to vote.

It is commonly supposed that at Rome the people were always polled in the comitia by word of mouth, till the passing of the Leges Tabellariae about the middle of the second century BCE [Tabellariae Leges], when the ballot by means of tabellae was introduced.

Popular assemblies voted by ballot, as well as by word of mouth, long before the passing of the Leges Tabellariae, but that instead of using tabellae they employed stones or pebbles and that each voter received two stones, one white and the other black, the former to be used in the approval and the latter in the condemnation of a measure. The voting by word of mouth seems to have been adopted in elections and trials, and the use of pebbles to have been confined to the enactment and repeal of laws.

Exciting, I know! Basically, you had to be an adult male landowner to vote, but that doesn't mean women had no say at all. They caused scandals when need be, including the protesting of the Oppian laws where the women showed up in the Forum and lobbied the men to repeal law that women would not be allowed to spend money. I wonder if it was a Lysistrata type situation... hmmm!

Anyway, not to bore you entirely with the legislative situation in Rome (which is more like our modern American system than anyone really wants to admit, and might have been a better one except for all that land owning patrician sexism).

Tonight is also the opening of the Mundus and The Eastern Orthodox feast of Michael the Archangel. In some traditions the date is dedicated to the "Dark" aspects of Michael, the one who reaps Justice and takes retribution. Call on him only if no one could call for justice or retribution against you. Are you pure enough to cast the first stone, so to speak? Is your heart lighter than a feather? Would Ammit devour you? His sword is double-edged. Be wary of calling upon it.

No comments on my Whipping post? I'm terribly disappointed! Perhaps it's time to post part 2? ;)

A secular moment

I like to occasionally peek in on what the Atheists are up to. Pagans and Atheists share a few common goals, ie: environmental causes, civil liberties, and keeping big religion in check. They even have to deal with much of the same persecution as Pagans do in the way of "coming out" to friends and family, or being preached at and prayed for. Why not work together? If the Atheists can promise to not sneer, the Pagans can promise to... um, wait, we don't judge atheists, do we? Likely not as much as we're judged for believing in the unseen, but that's a whole other topic.

One of the group members posted about the desire to end 501c3 tax exemption for religious institutions. I happen to agree. No religious group should, just because they're a religious group, be exempt from paying their fair share. If a group was created for the sole purpose of sheltering, counseling, getting food and clothes to those in need, I'm fine with that, but it doesn't have to be based around a religion. 

This is the exact copy of the code from the IRS.gov website:

The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.  The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.

Despite being more religious than most people I know, I don't want the gvt promoting the advancement of religion, especially when they get to decide who gets the promotion. The person who proposed the ban stated that the religious exemption meant lost tax revenue and was akin to the government financially supporting religion.

I made the point that for-profit corporations exploit giant tax loopholes and thanks to those and their lawyers, pay almost nothing in taxes compared to their revenue. Many churches are like big corporations: Take away their tax exempt status and they'll just lawyer-up and exploit the loopholes like any other big corporation does. Why not work together across religious lines to right this wrong (the loopholes)? I was getting some static from the original poster about fighting on two fronts, and honestly, after his mini rant, it looks like he wants to take it away just to have it taken away because to him, religion = bad.


What do you think: Should religious groups be tax exempt? Considering all of the secular things included in the 501c3 code, does that make it "fair?" Should I shut up and get back to the Italian stuff? You got it:


Here's something distinctly Italian, not so ancient, but still, a few hundred year old revival o a few thousand year old practice is intriguing! Opera. The first opera, or what we think of today as opera was written in Italy in the late 1500s. It was based on the lore of Apollo and Daphne and called Dafne.


Funny side note: I was being lazy and using google's translate feature. Because the site I was translating used a space between the first letter and the rest of the character's names, Apollo became A pollo. In Italian: A chicken. It took me a minute to realize this. At first, I wondered if this was some new evidence of poultry sacrifice to the Sun God! Then I realized the problem, reverted to the original Italian text and began to work through it!


Apollo and "Cupid" are griping at each other. Apollo isn't giving the later respect ie: mocking his toy bow and arrow. Cupid reminds Apollo he's a God too and put the Love whammy on him, causing him to fall for Daphne, a Nymph and quite possibly a Priestess of his sister, Diana. The Opera was written to, allegedly, attempt to reproduce ancient theatre. There is a chorus and it was believed at the time that everything was set to music, especially the part of the chorus. 


I know this isn't that big of a "wow" post- it seems like more of a "wew-hew" in that sarcasm font, but it has made me open up to something I haven't really been into exploring on this blog: The Renaissance! I've been all about the ancient, but why not the first serious ancient revivial? Perhaps it's because this took place in the rich northern part of Italy while Sicily was being taken over by other countries? There is a big divide between North and South in Italy. Perhaps it goes back to the Latin League and the Etruscan attitude towards Trinacria and its role in Magna Grecia? Ancestral grudge lol


I'm working on a fun garden post for tomorrow and something groovy for the kiddies too! An Italian Fairy Garden!