Summary: Women & Power by Professor Mary Beard

This sum­ma­ry cen­ters on pow­er: the allo­ca­tion of author­i­ty, our actions regard­ing it, and how we can empow­er our­selves and oth­ers. A sum­ma­ry of the book “Women & Pow­er” by Mary Beard. In an aca­d­e­m­ic style that is still engag­ing and approach­able, Beard elu­ci­dates how soci­ety struc­tured pow­er to mar­gin­al­ize women and encour­ages read­ers to envi­sion what pow­er could encom­pass in the present era.

Author­i­ty on clas­si­cal stud­ies and Cam­bridge lec­tur­er Mary Beard elu­ci­dates that today’s misog­y­ny towards women – rang­ing from anony­mous online threats of harm to sub­tle acts of omis­sion from author­i­ta­tive sys­tems – has roots in clas­si­cal antiq­ui­ty. In an aca­d­e­m­ic yet engag­ing man­ner, she delin­eates how pow­er was con­struct­ed by soci­ety to exclude women. Beard’s inspir­ing his­tor­i­cal analy­sis prompts read­ers to reimag­ine the nature of pow­er in the con­tem­po­rary context.

Key Points

• His­tor­i­cal instances of men silenc­ing women res­onate with present-day occurrences.
• In ancient Greece, women speak­ing pub­licly were viewed as androg­y­nous and monstrous.
• Fem­i­nine-sound­ing voic­es are often not per­ceived as authoritative.
• Con­tem­po­rary women con­front threats when express­ing them­selves, par­al­lel­ing ancient challenges.
• Soci­etal reper­cus­sions for mis­takes are harsh­er on women com­pared to men.
• West­ern soci­ety seg­re­gates pow­er from femininity.
• As part of the #MeToo move­ment, women opposed men’s pow­er abuses.
• Social move­ments high­light the impor­tance of reimag­in­ing pow­er dynamics.

 

Historical instances of men silencing women resonate with contemporary events

One of the ear­li­est accounts of a man sti­fling a wom­an’s voice dates back 3,000 years, close to the incep­tion of doc­u­ment­ed West­ern civ­i­liza­tion. In Home­r’s Odyssey, Queen Pene­lope requests a bard, nar­rat­ing the tribu­la­tions pre­vent­ing Greek heroes’ return after the Tro­jan War, to sing a more uplift­ing tune; her spouse, Odysseus, is among these absent heroes.

Her son Telemachus inter­rupts her, instruct­ing her to, “Retire to your cham­bers, and resume your own tasks, the loom and the spindle…Speech is men’s affair, with­out excep­tion, and most­ly mine, as I wield the pow­er with­in this domain.” Past nar­ra­tives unveil numer­ous instances of men silenc­ing women. These sce­nar­ios echo con­tem­po­rary episodes of male sidelin­ing of women from pub­lic dis­course. The anec­dotes also sig­ni­fy that mod­ern forms of intim­i­da­tion – like issu­ing threats on social media – and the per­se­cu­tion of women who dis­sent from male author­i­ty or estab­lished pow­er struc­tures are not recent occurrences.

“I am intrigued by the con­nec­tion between the clas­sic episode in Homer of silenc­ing a woman and the con­tem­po­rary con­texts where wom­en’s voic­es are side­lined in our cul­ture and pol­i­tics, from promi­nent posi­tions to every­day scenarios.”

When British pol­i­cy­mak­ers draft­ed the par­lia­men­tary reg­u­la­tions for the House of Com­mons in the 19th cen­tu­ry, they drew inspi­ra­tion from ancient cus­toms. Reports sug­gest that even Barack Oba­ma’s speech­writ­ers drew insights from ancient states­men and ora­tors like Cicero. The lega­cy of ancient pub­lic speak­ing molds mod­ern per­cep­tions of accept­able or unac­cept­able pub­lic speech forms. The exclu­sion of women from pub­lic dia­logue, com­men­tary, and debates has a con­vo­lut­ed his­to­ry, and sev­er­al clas­si­cal notions on gen­dered advo­ca­cy approach­es influ­ence cur­rent conversations.

Ancient Greeks interpreted women who spoke publicly as androgynous and monstrous

In ancient times, pub­lic speak­ing was deemed inher­ent­ly and dis­tinc­tive­ly mas­cu­line. Ora­to­ry was inter­twined with the soci­etal con­struc­tion of mas­culin­i­ty, not fem­i­nin­i­ty. In first-cen­tu­ry Rome, when women deliv­ered pub­lic speech­es, they were referred to as “women who, despite their nat­ur­al dis­po­si­tion, dared not remain voice­less in the pub­lic square.” When a woman named Mae­sia effec­tive­ly defend­ed her­self in Roman courts, this feat was ascribed to her pos­sess­ing “man­nish traits,” being androgynous.

“A female speak­ing in pub­lic was, in most cir­cum­stances, fun­da­men­tal­ly untraditional.

Ancient Greek fables about women chal­leng­ing men, like Medea, Antigone, and Clytemnes­tra, depict them as “aber­rant hybrids” deserv­ing soci­etal ret­ri­bu­tion for cling­ing to pow­er “unnat­u­ral­ly.” In Aeschy­lus’s play Agamem­non, for exam­ple, Queen Clytemnes­tra holds domin­ion over her city in King Agamem­non’s absence dur­ing the Tro­jan War. Aeschy­lus char­ac­ter­izes her as pos­sess­ing “mas­cu­line resolve,” and then por­trays her endeav­or to retain pow­er unlaw­ful­ly through her hus­band’s slay­ing upon his return. Her prog­e­ny rein­states the patri­ar­chal sta­tus quo by unit­ing to exe­cute her.

Many disregard feminine-sounding voices as authoritative

In Home­r­ic Greek, the term mythos delin­eates author­i­ta­tive dis­course, con­trast­ing with wom­en’s pri­vate, domes­tic con­ver­sa­tions. This notion con­tin­ues to affect con­tem­po­rary per­cep­tions of what an informed speak­er should sound like. Present­ly, West­ern female politi­cians are deemed lack­ing in author­i­ty or sagac­i­ty if they do not mim­ic a deep, mas­cu­line timbre.

Sim­i­lar to the ancient West­ern world, mod­ern women in pol­i­tics feel com­pelled to embody more androg­y­nous traits – such as imi­tat­ing male vocal char­ac­ter­is­tics – to com­mand respect. For instance, Mar­garet Thatch­er under­went vocal coach­ing to mod­u­late her high-pitched fem­i­nine voice into a deep­er, more mas­cu­line into­na­tion, believed by her coun­selors to exude greater authority.

“A revival is nec­es­sary to rede­fine the con­cept of ‘author­i­ta­tive voice’ and to ana­lyze the ori­gins of such a construct.”

Romans dis­parag­ing­ly described women who voiced their opin­ions in pub­lic forums, equat­ing their speech to “yelp­ing” and “bark­ing.” Today, misog­y­nists label opin­ion­at­ed women as “com­plain­ers” or “nags.” Giv­en the under­rep­re­sen­ta­tion of women in influ­en­tial polit­i­cal roles, it is imper­a­tive to reflect on the gen­der bias­es dic­tat­ing which voic­es are per­ceived as author­i­ta­tive and which are asso­ci­at­ed with imper­ti­nence or lack of dignity.

Modern women encounter threats when they speak out, mirroring ancient predicaments

Tales from ancient West­ern his­to­ry fre­quent­ly por­tray women vio­lent­ly stripped of their speak­ing priv­i­leges by men. For instance, in Roman poet Ovid’s Trans­for­ma­tions, Queen Philome­la’s aggres­sor sev­ers her tongue to pre­vent her from dis­cussing his wrong­do­ing. In the Roman fable, the sprite Echo los­es her capac­i­ty to artic­u­late. As penance for exces­sive speech, Echo is lim­it­ed to echo­ing oth­ers’ phras­es — nev­er her own voice — for the rest of her life. These anec­dotes func­tioned as lessons of cau­tion. Should women risk speak­ing too assertive­ly or chal­leng­ing the male-dom­i­nat­ed estab­lish­ment, they would endure bru­tal­i­ty or mockery.

“I’ve lost count of the times I’ve been referred to as an ‘unin­formed idiot’.” ”

Even today, cer­tain men intim­i­date and intim­i­date women who speak out in con­ven­tion­al­ly male-dom­i­nat­ed roles, includ­ing pro­fes­sion­al sports com­men­tary and pol­i­tics. For instance, when Jacqui Oat­ley became the inau­gur­al female in the Unit­ed King­dom to deliv­er sports com­men­tary for the foot­ball show Match of the Day, male com­men­ta­tors crit­i­cized her per­for­mance as “a slight to the con­trolled com­men­taries of men.”

Influ­en­tial women often encounter online threats of vio­lence — encom­pass­ing rape or mur­der. Inter­net trolls flock to Twit­ter, attack­ing women who voice their view­points with threats like a tweet aimed at author Mary Beard that con­veyed, “I am going to sev­er your head and vio­late it.”

Some men bul­ly women in pol­i­tics as they strive to speak pub­licly. For instance, in the British House of Com­mons, male MPs heck­le female col­leagues loud­ly to drown out their voic­es. At the core of this mis­treat­ment is a fear that women might legit­i­mate­ly defy the patri­ar­chal hier­ar­chy. Ovid cap­tures this fear in Trans­for­ma­tions when Philomela nar­rates her tale of sur­vival — despite lack­ing her tongue — by embed­ding her saga into tex­tile art and iden­ti­fy­ing her assailant.

Society harshly penalizes women for their missteps more than it does men

Women con­front an unjust dou­ble stan­dard when speak­ing pub­licly and com­mit­ting errors. Indi­vid­u­als are more will­ing to over­look male politi­cians’ slip-ups — con­sid­er, for instance, Boris John­son’s clue­less-sound­ing remarks dur­ing a 2017 inter­view con­cern­ing the Tory’s stance on com­bat­ing racism with­in the judi­cia­ry or broad­en­ing access to high­er edu­ca­tion. Nev­er­the­less, women endure more severe crit­i­cism for their mistakes.

“It’s not only hard­er for women to excel, they face much harsh­er treat­ment when they slip up. ”

Where­as peo­ple tend­ed to dis­miss John­son’s blun­ders as accept­able forms of “lad­dish way­ward­ness,” they dis­played less lenien­cy when UK MP Dianne Abbott became flus­tered dur­ing the same elec­toral peri­od while dis­cussing fig­ures relat­ed to police recruit­ment. Peo­ple ridiculed her, hurl­ing taunts like “over­weight fool” and “imbe­cil­ic.” Women pos­sess the right to pur­sue suc­cess in con­ven­tion­al­ly male-dom­i­nat­ed roles, as well as the free­dom to err with­out pro­vok­ing fiery rebuke.

Western society frames power as existing beyond the realm of the feminine

Con­ven­tion­al def­i­n­i­tions of pow­er exclude women. His­to­ry does not pro­vide a blue­print for how influ­en­tial women should occu­py tra­di­tion­al­ly male-dom­i­nat­ed roles. Women in such posi­tions fre­quent­ly emu­late mas­cu­line char­ac­ter­is­tics. Female politi­cians such as Hillary Clin­ton and Angela Merkel, for instance, sport pantsuits to con­form to the per­cep­tion of a potent fig­ure, which soci­ety deems as inher­ent­ly masculine.

The ancient Greeks per­ceived the for­mi­da­ble God­dess Athena as more mas­cu­line than fem­i­nine, por­tray­ing her in male war­rior garb and as a vir­gin birth, not from a moth­er but from her father’s head. When indi­vid­u­als con­jure images of author­i­ty, like a pro­fes­sor or politi­cian, these images pre­dom­i­nant­ly fea­ture males. A search for images of car­toon pro­fes­sors using UK Google Images, for instance, yields a vast major­i­ty of male characters.

Although more women present­ly hold pow­er­ful roles than they did five decades ago — now assum­ing posi­tions span­ning from police offi­cers to CEOs — these women con­sti­tute a minor­i­ty in posi­tions of pow­er. Peo­ple fre­quent­ly asso­ciate fem­i­nin­i­ty with fragili­ty and mas­culin­i­ty with author­i­ty. Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump, for exam­ple, vehe­ment­ly crit­i­cized actress Melis­sa McCarthy’s por­tray­al of then-White House press sec­re­tary Sean Spicer on Sat­ur­day Night Live as it ren­dered him appear “fee­ble.”

“The mes­sage is straight­for­ward yet crit­i­cal: As far back as we can trace in West­ern his­to­ry, there exists a pro­found sep­a­ra­tion — con­crete, cul­tur­al, and imag­i­na­tive — between women and power. ”

When the idea of female pow­er does sur­face in his­tor­i­cal lore, it pri­mar­i­ly emerges as some­thing men must sup­press when­ev­er it emerges. The sym­bol­ism of the Medusa’s head, por­trayed in art from the ancient Greeks to mod­ern times, encap­su­lates this per­ceived men­ace to male dominion.

In one ren­di­tion of Medusa’s back­sto­ry, Posei­don assaults Medusa with­in Athena’s tem­ple, and Athena penal­izes his vic­tim — instead of Posei­don — by meta­mor­phos­ing Medusa into a mon­ster with ser­pents for hair. Medusa attains pow­er fol­low­ing this trans­for­ma­tion, and who­ev­er gazes at her turns to stone. A male cham­pi­on, Perseus, beheads her to strip her of this authority.

Modern women have challenged men’s exploitation of authority as part of the #MeToo movement

In clas­si­cal antiq­ui­ty, men allowed women to speak pub­li­cal­ly in two instances: when they were vic­tims detail­ing crimes per­pe­trat­ed against them, and when they were near­ing mar­tyr­dom. Ear­ly Chris­t­ian women in Ancient Rome, for instance, would tes­ti­fy before being devoured by lions.

Media and pub­lic plat­forms cre­at­ed avenues for wom­en’s voic­es as part of the #MeToo move­ment, with women recount­ing their expe­ri­ences as sur­vivors of assaults and rape car­ried out by pow­er­ful men in sec­tors such as film.

“Thank­ful­ly, not every­thing we do or think traces direct­ly or indi­rect­ly to the Greeks and Romans; and I fre­quent­ly find myself empha­siz­ing that there are no sim­ple lessons for us in the his­to­ry of the ancient world…That being said, delv­ing deep­er into Greece and Rome aids us in scru­ti­niz­ing our­selves more close­ly, and in com­pre­hend­ing bet­ter how we have learned to think as we do.”

While women have right­ful­ly felt empow­ered to artic­u­late their nar­ra­tives — a chal­leng­ing endeav­or giv­en that men act­ed as gate­keep­ers to their advance­ment — influ­en­tial male per­pe­tra­tors of these trans­gres­sions will only face reper­cus­sions if soci­ety dis­sects the accused aggres­sors’ nar­ra­tives. What jus­ti­fi­ca­tions are potent men employ­ing to ratio­nal­ize their actions to them­selves and oth­ers, and why do these jus­ti­fi­ca­tions no longer suf­fice? It is insuf­fi­cient for women to divulge their tales of sur­viv­ing harass­ment and assault; soci­ety must now col­lec­tive­ly con­test the nar­ra­tives on which pow­er­ful men rely when they exploit their authority.

Social movements underscore the urgency of redefining power

Pow­er should no longer be the exclu­sive and esteemed domain of a select few, inter­twined with lead­er­ship, pres­tige, and celebri­ty. Move­ments such as Black Lives Mat­ter under­score reimag­in­ing pow­er as a col­lab­o­ra­tive enti­ty, unit­ing lead­ers and their fol­low­ers. Few indi­vid­u­als were aware of Ali­cia Garza, Opal Tometi, and Patrisse Cul­lors before they found­ed Black Lives Mat­ter, yet they ini­ti­at­ed one of the most piv­otal social move­ments in recent mem­o­ry. Garza, Tometi, and Cul­lors demon­strate that every­day indi­vid­u­als can chal­lenge the pre­vail­ing order and that women do not need elite sta­tus to wield influence.

About the writer

Mary Beard, the edi­tor of clas­sics at The Times Lit­er­ary Sup­ple­ment, a dis­tin­guished schol­ar at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Cam­bridge, holds posi­tions as a pro­fes­sor of ancient lit­er­a­ture at the Roy­al Acad­e­my of Arts and a fel­low at Newn­ham College.

Analysis

The pub­li­ca­tion com­pris­es a pair of talks giv­en by the author, an esteemed schol­ar of clas­sics and fem­i­nism, in 2014 and 2017. Cen­tral to the book is an explo­ration of the ori­gins of misog­y­ny and the mar­gin­al­iza­tion of women from pub­lic dis­course and influence.

The writer delves into the ancient ori­gins of these issues in Greece and Rome, where women were either silenced or ridiculed for speak­ing up and where the mas­cu­line ora­tor was estab­lished as the stan­dard for polit­i­cal influ­ence. She illus­trates how these endur­ing pat­terns have shaped and impact­ed con­tem­po­rary views and treat­ment of women in fields such as lit­er­a­ture, media, pol­i­tics, and academia.

She also ques­tions preva­lent beliefs and mis­con­cep­tions about women and author­i­ty, chal­leng­ing notions like women hav­ing an innate incli­na­tion towards peace com­pared to men, or the idea that women must adopt mas­cu­line char­ac­ter­is­tics to excel in lead­er­ship roles. She pro­pos­es that rather than con­form­ing to a male-cen­tric sys­tem, women should scru­ti­nize and rede­fine the very notion of author­i­ty itself, fos­ter­ing a more inclu­sive and diverse envi­ron­ment for pub­lic discourse.

The work offers a com­pelling and thought-pro­vok­ing exam­i­na­tion of the endur­ing link between women and author­i­ty, high­light­ing the hur­dles and tri­als encoun­tered in the pur­suit of equal­i­ty and acknowl­edg­ment in the pub­lic are­na. The author blends her vast knowl­edge of clas­si­cal lit­er­a­ture and his­to­ry with her per­son­al encoun­ters as a female aca­d­e­m­ic and tar­get of online harass­ment to sup­port her arguments.

Her writ­ing exhibits pre­ci­sion, humor, and fer­vor, draw­ing on exam­ples rang­ing from Homer to Hillary Clin­ton, from Medusa to Angela Merkel, and from Ovid to Char­lotte Perkins Gilman. She also engages with diverse fem­i­nist ide­olo­gies and view­points, such as Vir­ginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own, Judith But­ler’s Gen­der Trou­ble, and Chi­ma­man­da Ngozi Adichie’s We Should All Be Feminists.

The book is not only edu­ca­tion­al but also moti­va­tion­al and empow­er­ing. It encour­ages read­ers to reassess the essence and exer­cise of author­i­ty, prompt­ing them to chal­lenge the male-dom­i­nat­ed struc­tures and stereo­types that sti­fle wom­en’s voic­es and pos­si­bil­i­ties. The pub­li­ca­tion is essen­tial for those intrigued by fem­i­nism, clas­si­cal stud­ies, or social equity.