In the past, students of Renaissance women's education extolled the unprecedented intellectual liberty and equality available to these women, but recently scholars have presented a different view of Renaissance education and opportunity for women. Joan Gibson argues that despite more widespread education for privileged classes of women, Renaissance educational reforms also increased still less appropriate for women, who were not supposed to need such preparation for public life.
Thus, humanist education for women encompassed literary grammatical studies in both classical and vernacular languages, while dialectic and rhetoric, the disciplines required for philosophy, politics, and the professions, were prohibited to women. Even princesses lacked instruction in political philosophy or the exercise of such public virtues as philanthropy. The prevailing attitude was an audience, not seek one; for them, instruction in speaking was confined to books of courtesy.
The coupling of expanded linguistic and literary education for women with the lack of available social roles for educated women led to uneasy resolutions: exceptionally learned women were labeled as preternatural or essentially masculine, or were praised as virtuous only if they were too modest to make their accomplishments public. Some Italian literary achievements, particularly translations, poetry and tales in the vernacular or correspondence and orations in Latin.
What this question is testing
Your task
Capture the passage's overall primary point — the claim everything else supports.
Common trap
Answers that are true but too narrow (a single paragraph) or too broad (beyond the passage's scope).
Winning move
Summarize the whole passage in one sentence first, then match it to a choice.
Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.