>>24649693
>>But, frankly, all of this is beside the point; what matters fundamentally is that Euripidies *in his own time* was sufficiently widely understood as a woman-hater or at least insulting to women's reputation that the premise and the jokes of the play could land. In other words, the idea that a key part of the oeuvre of Euripides is to redeem or nuance women portrayed as evil is an ex post facto (and probably modern, if I had to guess) idea which the Athenians in their time had no notion of.

You’re completely misinterpreting Aristophanes himself in posting this. I searched analysis of this play and the humor actually relies in the women seeing Medea and these other characters as wicked while not actually looking at the other aspects of the play. “Euripides is misogynist because he writes about Medea but not about Penelope” is a pretty mediocre criticism, even in his own time.

Women characters calling Euripides misogynist in a SATIRE= /= Euripides was widely seen that way OR that even if people saw him that way they were analyzing his plays correctly

Medea for instance is pretty wicked in killing her children but the play is far more multifaceted than “women bad” if you actually read it.