Analysis Of 'A Muzzle For Melastomus'

Joseph Swetnam and Rachel Speght were both writers who had a thing in common: they both wrote about women. Swetnam wrote “The Arraignment of Lewd, idle frorward, and unconstant women or the vanity of them, choose you whether, With a Commendation of wise, virtuous, and honest Women, Pleasant for married Men, profitable for young Men, and hurtful to none.” In which he bashed women for being evil and just not of good nature. Speght wrote, “A Muzzle for Melastomus” in which she argues against the claims Swetnam makes in his commentary. For both, the writers make different point about women being either evil, or good.

In Swetnam’s commentary against women he makes the primary claim that all women are bad. Throughout his writing he makes certain

points trying to validate his argument that all women are wicked. One of the points he makes is that women consume or destroy everything a man is or has. On chapter one, Swetnam informs the reader of what Moses said about women, stating that “Moses describeth a woman thus: At the first beginning, said he, a woman was made to be a helper unto man.” Now one might think Swetnam is being nice to women but right after this he bashes them. He states that women “are indeed [helpers,] for she helpeth to spend and consume that which man painfully getteth.” Another example he uses to demonstrate that women just consume everything is by saying that “[men’s] purse must always be open to feed their fancy, and so thy expenses will be great and yet perhaps thy getting small” (4).
The second argument Swetnam makes is that women are crooked by nature and they are deceitful. His argument for women being crooked by nature is that since they were made from a rib and that a “rib is a crooked thing good for nothing else… women are crooked by nature” (2). His argument for women being deceitful is that they can act to get what they want from men. He states that a woman “with high words can get nothing at the hands of her husband; never by forward means, but by gentle and fair means she might get his heart blood to do her good” (3). Here, Swetnam is saying that if women deceive men by acting submissive towards them, they can get men to do things for them. This leads us to the third argument in Swetnam’s commentary. He claims that women are manipulative. On page 4 he says, “For women do teach their eyes to weep… [and that] she will straightaway put [her] finger in the eye and cry; then presently many foolish man will flatter her and entreat her to be quiet.” He clearly says that women are manipulative and by faking to cry they can get things he wants or get the man she wants.
His fourth argument against women is that women are ungrateful. In the thirds page of his commentary he states that, “at a word, a woman will never forget an injury nor give thanks for a good turn.” He is saying that if you do something to a woman she will never forget it; she will resent you for a long time.
Last but not least, Swetnam’s fifth argument is that women are ungrateful. He states that women are ungrateful because they want things, yet they are never satisfied. He declares that “[the] house must be stored with costly stuff,[that] her hat must continually be of the new fashion and her gown of finer wool than the sheep beareth any…[she will keep asking for things but will never be satisfied and she will give nothing good in return, she will be] costly and no good housewife” (4). These are some of the arguments Swetnam has against women, but on the other side we have Rachel Speght, in which she argues against Swetnam’s claims.
Rachel Speght’s main argument in “A Muzle for Melastomus” is that women were created to be equal partners to men.

Speght gives the reader different arguments against the commentary of Swetnam. Her first point is that women are good because God created her, and all of God’s creations are good, making women good. She uses the bible to support her claim. On page 114 she starts by saying, “the work of creation being finished, this approbation thereof was given by God himself , that All was very good [(Gen. 1.31)]; if all, then Woman, who excepting man, is the most excellent creature under the canopy of heaven.” Also she says that the work of God is good because “for he being a glorious Creator, [he] must need [to make] a worthy creature”

(117).
Her second point is that women were created to be equal to men.

She states that ”woman was made of a part of man…she [was]not produced from Adam’s foot, to be his too low inferior; nor from his head o be his superior, but from his side, near his heart, to be his equal” (117). Also she states that “woman was made…to glorify God, and to be a collateral companion for man to glorify God” (117). She is essentially saying that women were created to be the same as men.

The third point is that women were created to counsel and advice men. Speght asserts that women’s “tongue [was not created] to utter words of strife, but to give good counsel unto her husband, the which he must not despise” (117). Then Speght gives us example of a few women who counseled their husband in certain occasions, like Pilate whose wife advised him to not “have any hand in the condemning of CHRIST,” (117) Abrahams wife Sarah, and Leah and Rachel who counseled Jacob to listened to the words of the

Lord.
Speght’s fourth argument is that women were meant to be companions and helpers for men. She states that even though they are supposed to be equal men think that they are superior to women, and that men “lay the whole burden of domestical affairs and maintenance on the shoulder of their wives” (118). Right away she states that, that is not fair towards women and compares men and women to oxen. She says, “ if two oxen be put in a yoke, the one being bigger than the other, the grater bears most weight; so the husband being the stronger vessel is to bear a greater burden than his wife” (118). Women are seen as less than men but Speght, plainly argues the opposite. She believes men are just the same as women.
Rachel Speght’s final argument is that in the eyes of God, women and men are the same. Speght states that “if God’s love even from the beginning had not been as great toward woman as to man, then would he not have preserved from the deluge of the old world as many women as men, nor would Christ after his resurrection have appeared unto a woman first of all the other…” (119-120). She also claimed that God died “for the one sex as well as the other” (120).
Out of the two writers, the one that is more proficient in arguing their claims is Rachel Speght. Unlike Swetnam, Speght’s “A Muzzle for Melastomus” is written more clearly. Speght is more organized throughout her writing. Speght gives the reader the claims and objections she is going to make, in order. Also every time she makes a statement, she has evidence to support her claim. Either she has evidence from the bible or a very thorough argument. She explains everything clearly, always supporting her claims. In contrast, Swetnam’s commentary against women is nothing like Speghts. Swetnam doesn’t have structure, he just makes statements everywhere and sometimes he goes back to old statements, and it’s much disorganized. Also he never has evidence to support his arguments. Whenever he makes an argument against women, it’s just his opinion or he uses another text or reference but takes it out of context. Generally he is just making claim without credible proof.