2008 Helengrad cartoon that depicts Helen Clark as an authoritarian and domineering leader. – Hawkey, English language in New Zealand, https://teara.govt.nz
Historically, images of female power and sexual agency were incompatible.
From goddesses to servicewomen, regulation of sexuality counteracted an increase in authority. Dr Zizek’s discussion of the romanticised perception of American Revolutionaries inspired me to examine how the perceptions of powerful women have also been manipulated.
As the powerful Greek goddess of sexual desire, Aphrodite’s functions were continually limited, particularly her militant role. Aphrodite evolved from the Phoenician fertility goddess of war, Astarte.¹ Additionally, in Aphrodite’s Spartan cult, she was bellicose and armed.² As a goddess of sex and warfare, she influenced the entire Greek world. Powerful, aggressive images of the coquettish goddess violated gender roles. This resulted in the limitation of Aphrodite to her role as a fertility goddess. In the Iliad, Aphrodite is withdrawn from battle, encouraged to return to “delightful matrimonial duties”.³ As demonstrated through the restriction of Aphrodite, sexual autonomy and female power were mutually exclusive.
Even Athena, the goddess of war, isn’t an exception. Mary Beard argues that Athena’s virginity invalidated her status as a woman. Reproduction was Greek women’s “raison d’etre”.⁴ Devoid of sexual interest, Athena wasn’t considered a ‘goddess’.
Hundreds of years later, Aphrodite’s Roman equivalent, Venus, occupied a central role in Roman politics. Venus returned to her powerful, warring origins. This political potency was utilised by Julius Caesar to legitimise his increasing power.⁵ Caesar reintroduced Venus as the mother of Rome (Venus Genetrix), claiming descent from the goddess. Once again, Venus was naked and armed. Caesar’s adopted son, Augustus, maintained the cult to Venus but encouraged traditional gender roles. In the Augustan era, Bethany Hughes argues that Venus’ political power and overt sexuality represented “something [that] should … be kept under wraps”. ⁶ Throughout ancient history, depictions of the deity see-sawed – a decrease in sexual authority balanced increase in political power.
Unable to regulate her increasing power, Aphrodite became a hyper-sexualised tease frequently depicted as fully nude and coyly beckoning the viewer. – Britannica, Aphrodite of Cnidas, britannica.com
Roman Sculpture of Venus armed with a sword. – Hughes, Venus and Aphrodite: History of a Goddess, 114.
Sexual agency and female strength were discordant.
In modern history, the sexuality of the 1940’s Women’s Army Corps (WAC) soldiers were also strictly regulated. Grappling with the opposing perceptions of “women” and “the military”, servicewomen were stereotyped as either prostitutes or lesbians. Propaganda highlighted the femininity of WAC soldiers, combating the ‘masculinising’ effect of war. Leisa Meyer states they were characterised as “chaste and asexual”.⁷ A harmful double standard emerged. Heterosexual activity was encouraged amongst male soldiers while, for the same sexual diversions, WAC discharged women. Already transgressing gender boundaries, WAC policy of servicewoman “Victorian … passionlessness”⁸ ensured that women did not gain both military power and sexual independence.
Dainty, feminine 1943 propaganda poster aimed at encouraging women to join WAAC. – Hennepin County Library Digital Collections, WAAC – This Is My War Too!, https://digitalcollections.hclib.org
Has this interpretation of women and power changed?
Throughout her 1978 political campaign, Margaret Thatcher carefully crafted a matronly image and took voice lessons to avoid being called shrill.⁹ Helen Clark was perceived as overly masculine and controlling. Conversly, Jacinda Ardern’s portrayal as ‘the Mother of the Nation’ is vital to her political identity. What do these examples say about our expectations of women in powerful positions? Clearly, any change in cultural perceptions must germinate and do not occur rapidly.
2018 cartoon portraying Jacinda Ardern as the Virgin Mary. – Murdoch, Sainted Jacinda, https://natlib.govt.nz
References:
¹ Budin, S. “A Reconsideration of the Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism.” Numen 51, no. 2 (2004). p 95
² Budin, S. The Origins of Aphrodite. PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, 2000. p 98
³ Homer. The Iliad. Trans. Butler, S. New York: Barnes & Noble, 2013. p 85
⁴ Beard, M. Women and Power. London: Profile Books Ltd. p 70
⁵ Hughes, B. Venus and Aphrodite: History of a Goddess. London: Weiden and Nicolson. p 113
⁶ Ibid, p 128
⁷ Meyer, L. “Creating G.I. Jane: The Regulation of Sexuality and Sexual Behaviour in the Women’s Army Corps during World War II.” Feminist Studies 18, no. 3 (Autumn, 1992). p 581
⁸ Ibid, p 585
⁹ Rogers, D. Campaigns that shook the world: The evolution of public relations. London, UK: Kogan Page Ltd, 2015. p 17
Hi Guys,
I hope you enjoyed reading my post! If you’re interested in Aphrodite I would really recommend watching this video from my favourite Youtubers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIUq0pfAskU
Unfortunately, due to the word limit and a lack of information, I was only able to address interpretations of powerful women in the west. I would be really interested if you could comment on other depictions of people in power throughout the world and LGBTQI+ community. Let me know what you think 🙂
It’s certainly funny how appearance has always been a crucial part of politics, existing as an impossible line to tread. Stereotypes are expected to be fulfilled, and deviance is therefore punished. On the world stage, femininity from a woman results in depowerment and infantilisation. Suddenly ideas don’t matter as much as her face. On the other hand, exhibiting masculinity isn’t demonstrating power, it’s taking away the fantasy. Many fail to accept women being near positions of power anymore once their reveries are broken. It’s a damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Femme fatales are a fantastic example of a twisted attempt to intertwine of female power and sexuality. A femme fatale can be a dominating figure, but a figure still just demure and appealing enough to not ostracise male audiences. It’s a cruel parody passed off as empowerment for all and sundry. Perhaps in the 1920s when the trope first properly emerged it was more progressive by virtue of giving the women SOME agency. However, it continuously fails to properly give these women the chance to be both feminine and powerful, usually forcing them to sacrifice one or the other.
As you mentioned changes to this issue are clearly slow to occur. Hopefully, through the modern use of media, we can try to speed up the changes and produce better ideals to base female power from.
A really interesting post! My old Latin class once had a whole discussion around Classical women, and came to a lot of the same conclusions that you did. It is interesting to also note that often the surviving stories we have of these characters are the ones created by men. There were so many different interpretations of myths, but unlike female versions, male versions were more likely to end up reflected in art, writings, etc. Would have been interesting to see how these goddesses were viewed by women.
Hi hi hi I LOVED reading this post, and every point you brought up made me think of Cleopatra. I cannot even begin to express how frustrating it is the way historians and pretty much all the media reduce her to be “the most beautiful woman who ever lived.”
Cleopatra was one of the most competent and brutally powerful rulers that the ancient world ever saw. Under her rule, Egypt became not only the wealthiest nation in the Mediterranean, but also the only one that successfully prevented assimilation into the Roman Empire, which was a huge deal. A self-governing queen of a nation independent of the Roman empire was a feat no other empire in the region could boast of at the time. In fact, Cleopatra actually managed to get the Roman Empire to return Egypt all of its lost dominions(!!!). She was also the first of all the Ptolemaic Pharaohs to truly become accepted by the people because she actually bothered to learn to speak Egyptian (among the at least 8 other languages she spoke).
There isn’t even much evidence saying that she was particularly beautiful. It’s just that, like you explained so well Brooke, the Romans were terrified of this woman ruling as well as (maybe better than?) all of their male leaders, and the only way they could accept their empire being brought to its knees by this queen was to depict her as a sex-crazed seductrice, because for them that was the only way a man could be outsmarted by a woman.
Cleopatra was a powerful Pharaoh who succeeded in getting the support of the most powerful empire at the time while still keeping the favor of her own people and restoring the glory of her own nation, and it makes me so mad that she has been reduced both by the ancient Romans and by today’s audiences to a pretty face.
Sorry that was so long, thank you for a great post!! You articulated so many things I agree with in such a good way.
The war changed so much for the expected women’s roles. An awkward rift appeared with old expectations with new demands for women to be out of their aprons and into working uniforms. The idea that women could have agency over their time and their bodies was a lot to handle with the strict patriarchal standards at the time. The stereotypes that you mentioned of lesbian and sex worker became helpful tools to limit and restrict women’s agency. Women were encouraged to ‘out’ women they worked with about suspicions of lesbian behavior or potentially providing sexual favours for servicemen. While some women were lesbians/sex workers, pockets of society within the war time efforts made a space for women to thrive (even covertly so). It’s wonderful that even under difficult circumstances, women often find a way to support and celebrate each other.
Some links to check out if you’d like:https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2012/5/25/1094817/-Remembering-LGBT-History-How-World-War-II-Changed-Gay-and-Lesbian-Life-in-America
#LongLiveLesbians