RepudiationThe action and effect of repudiate is known as repudiation. This concept, which comes from the Latin word repudiation, indicates the rejection of something or its non-acceptance. For instance: “Strong repudiation of the words of the British president”, “The leaders of the club called for an act of repudiation of the acts of violence”, “The president was surprised at the people’s rejection”.

The repudiation can be expressed in various ways. A spontaneous act of repudiation It can be a boo, a whistle or a chorus of insults at an action in a field of play or before a public speech. If a soccer player hits an opponent without a ball, it is likely that he will be repudiated by the public, or at least by the sympathizers of the team in which the attacked athlete plays.

Other acts of repudiation are premeditated and require a certain organization. When USA attacked IraqSeveral left-wing political parties called marches of repudiation in front of the US embassies. In this way, they started a campaign to invite the protesters to the protest and then carried out certain actions within the framework of the event (speeches, concerts, etc.).

The repudiation can also be documented and made known through a publication or of a letter. Faced with the anti-Semitic statements of an actor, a non-governmental organization may decide to write a request where it expresses its rejection of the sayings and asks the artist to be punished for his discriminatory comments. This request is sent to the media and published in the Web page of the NGO.

Etymology of the term

RepudiationAs mentioned at the beginning of the article, the Latin origin of the word repudiation is repudiation, whose meaning indicates rejection or act of rejection towards something that produces shame. In turn, this term is rooted in the verb pudet, which means causing embarrassment; by prefixing it re-, its definition acquires a backward movement, a regression to the moment in which there was no such sensation.

In ancient Rome and Greece, to cite two examples, this term represented a right which, to this day, is reprehensible in itself: the exclusive power of the man to reject his wife and send her back home, based on one of several possible reasons, such as that she could not get pregnant and offer him the offspring that he intended, that did not have the behavior considered respectable in his time or that a woman of a richer family or of more political weight would have appeared on the scene.

The reputation of the victims of this unjust can it was stained forever, especially in the case of Greece, since the functions reserved for women were those of mother and wife, and this rejection was based on their supposed inability to carry them out. Therefore, they had to spend the rest of their days in the parental home, dedicating themselves to the tasks of a servant and knowing that they would never have the opportunity to marry again, something that in that context was far from being a punishment.

As incredible as it may seem, in certain countries and cultures in which divorce is not a right, the repudiation of women is still valid. Note that in the action of “sending the woman back to her house” one can appreciate the sense of returning the weather back that provides the prefix re-.

It is curious that such a macho attitude has been supported by a term that, today, is one of the tools to fight against sexism. We repudiate what we want to reverse, that we do not want to exist, either because it represents an injustice or because it seems detrimental to the balance of life.