The story is well-known; there’s a good chance that even those who have never read Shakespeare might remember something or have an idea about it. The “proud” girl is taught a lesson, thoroughly humiliated, until she finally accepts her lawful husband as her lord and master. There’s a common interpretation of the play: two tough nuts clash, two strong, independent personalities lock horns, duel, and tease each other until they finally fall into each other’s arms. And that’s how it’s been in many productions of *The Taming of the Shrew*, glossing over the imbalance of power a bit.

But let’s take a closer look: after the marriage, where could Kate say “no”? Where could she resist or fight back with equal force—against her owner? Because sassiness is only tolerated up to a point, as long as it doesn’t hurt male interests, male pride, or simply tradition. Let’s not even mention the other pillars of her independence. For us, it’s mostly fearsome. Female independence is like being on a seesaw: as her weight increases, it lightens the men, they lose their footing, hanging there in the air… And thick bundles of offended hatred toward “women” start to pile up.

This text was written by request. *The Taming of the Shrew*, rethought—does something here really need rethinking? Feminist reading? Yes or no. Look at the *nane.hu* website. Every other day there’s news of domestic or relationship violence as an ending. This is an “incellectual” experiment on Pete’s (Petruchio’s) part to break her.