Week 15: A Cold Shower would have been more appealing

It’s like being at a climax, then pausing to watch Fox News…
My question is how come society in the 17th century allowed women legal protections under the law, yet by the time the 20th century rolled around, they had absolutely none? The opening of Women’s Lives in Colonial Quito by Kimberly Gauderman, gives two examples of two married women, separated and in essence, hiding themselves from their abusive husbands. Both women, Maria and Ventura (dona Ventura de Zarate), asked the local law enforcement to intervene on their behalf regarding the domestic violence imposed on them by their estranged spouses. Maria’s plight went completely ignored, while the police did intervene on Ventura’s behalf. Gauderman never does give an explanation as to what social and legal changes brought about the full usage of the patriarchal imposed limitations of rights, with regards to women and child, and leaves the reader to gather their own assumptions as to the cause(s).
Despite this, Gauderman does extensively explain how she gathered much of her information, and uses it to bring a well rounded glimpse into the lives of women in Ecuador during the colonial period. I also found chapters 1-3 more stimulating than the last two; especially chapter three on the criminal justice system and women. I find it completely interesting that the ecclesiastical court, which granted very few divorces, contradicted the secular courts, yet women bonded to bad marriages, could find relief in the secular realm. In fact, Gauderman’s example of the priest, Maestro Francisco de la Vega, giving his parishioner, Agustina de la Vega (no known relation to priest Vega), sound advice on how to deal with her philandering excuse of a husband; sue him! Again, though Gauderman gives details into the case, I was again left confused; and no it is not because I am a natural blonde… We are told that Augustina sued her husband for what we can assume was abandonment, adultery, and domestic violence. However, the reader is left without knowing if this was part of a divorce suit or what the outcome of the case was; trust me, it has been driving me up a wall because no where have I been able to find the outcome and it is kind of like reading a book, only to find out the last chapter is missing and the book is out of print. This again shows that Gauderman has excellent sources and examples, yet for some unknown reason, wants to torture the reader by never telling the entire story.
I did learn an interesting fact I never knew before I read this book. I never realized that when Queen Isabella died, her daughter would gain the throne, rather than her husband; I am also still confused as to how Ferdinand was able to maintain control of both empire’s despite this legacy. According to Gauderman, the two empires were not unified again until Charles I took over and co-ruled with his mother until her death. Unfortunately, I had to look up online as to exactly how and why this happened. I realize that Gauderman used certain examples, such as the one above, to show that patriarchy was a permeable state of the family gave women power not only within the family structure, but also within her community; and therefore her society during the colonial period in Quito, but most of the book felt like an economic historical archive; like a sex instruction manual using mundane photos to illustrate correct execution of the matter at hand.