I’m bristling and I’ve been bristling for a while now. They labelled Julia Gillard one during the mining tax rallies, and now, on her death, they’re calling Margaret Thatcher the same.
Why are women in positions of power labelled ‘witches’?
These two women are from opposite ends of the political spectrum, from different generations, and governing on opposite sides of the world and in different centuries. What they have in common are their intelligence and their political ambitions, and that they both rose to the top of their respective country’s governments.
Oh, and they’re both ‘witches’.
Why is that? Is it because they’re not at home sweeping with their brooms so they must be using them to fly? Or is it because they survived their attempted drownings? Yes, the witch trial puns are intended as, sadly, I think we’re no further advanced than the Middle Ages when it comes to women in power.
I don’t agree with Margaret Thatcher’s politics in any way, but I can’t abide dancing on someone’s grave either. I also remember when she became Britain’s first ever female Prime Minister, and the awe and respect that I, as a teenage girl, felt for her. She showed a generation of us that we could do and be anything we want, that being a woman would not hold us back, and that we were equal to men in any sphere, on any stage. At the time, I couldn’t wait to suit up and match it with the men.
I’ve since learned it’s not as simple as that, but I still believe it is just as natural for a woman to be intelligent and confident and have ambition as it is a man. We can lead and do it well.
I’m tired of watching the vilification of women who live outside of the sweet or sexy or nice stereotype. I’m sick of offensive comments about their appearance, of the disgusting names they’re called, and of their crude lampooning.
And I really can’t stomach hearing women being labelled ‘witches’.
Across the oceans, a daughter and a son farewell their mother,
while crowds turn on her casket and sing of bells and dead witches.
Across the oceans, baby girls form mounds in cemeteries,
while their brothers live at home with their mothers.
Across the oceans, daughters are sold to entertain snakes,
for the night or for life, so their family can feed.
Across the oceans, an adulterous woman is stoned,
while her partner returns home to his wife.
And here, across oceans of politics, a woman dares fly alone,
while Middle Aged bulls in suits charge,
scorning her empty womb,
and shouting for her to be ditched.
While we, her sisters, watch in silence,
lest the same be said of us.
Beware of political perspectives, they belie what is really there,
If we try to make sense of them, it seems, from two opposites we can make a pair!
Roger, this is a little cryptic. You’ll have to explain it to me…
Hi Louise,
I like the poem you’ve included at the end of your entry. Is it yours?
We’re all familiar with the old tag of redheads being hot-tempered. Now, I’m no anthropologist, but I seem to remember reading that red hair on a female was historically regarded by patriarchy as indicative of an unseemly and even dangerous sexual aggressiveness. Hence the creation of ‘witches’, which were the embodiment of a feminine potency that was reckoned to be malignant. I have a feeling that this cultural alusion (illusion?) lingers on without people being specifically aware of it. And in case anyone misunderstand, this is only my cockeyed attempt to explain the connection between being a woman with red hair and being called a ‘witch’; it’s not an excuse for people doing so. (Did I really read this theory, or am I intuiting/misintuiting it? Sorry if it’s just plain wrong…)
As regards Ms Gillard and Mrs Thatcher, I tend to think it’s a case of ‘any ammunition will do’ amongst people who disagree with their respective government’s policies and are/were disatisfied with that government’s performance in office. In Thatcher’s case, one has to remember that her style of politics was highly inflammatory, and that her time in office coincided with tremendous suffering amongst the British working class. Whether that suffering was justified has been the subject of debate ever since she left office, and will continue to be debated for some time yet, particularly in light of current global economic uncertainties.
I’m not condoning the epithet of ‘witch’, nor would I ever use it myself. I have no particular axe to grind regarding the success or otherwise of Thatcher’s tenure as Prime Minister. I’m ambivalent about the Gillard government. Germaine Greer would probably disagree with me, given her view of the primacy of gender in self-identification, but I think the genuine hatred that Thatcher inspired has long since transcended her gender. It’s used as a rhetorical device against her, but it’s not the primary cause of peoples’ enmity. The man who succeeded her, John Major, probably can’t hold his head up as either a political leader or as a loyal party subject. And yet it was quite revealing when he reminded his interviewer recently that power never gives up power willingly, and that the strength of the vitreole that’s been levelled at Thatcher might be argued to be a measure of her effectiveness. As with most things, that’s not that whole truth, but a version of the truth is a version nonetheless.
Incidentally, I remember seeing a program in which the coach of a rugby team proclaimed “Ding, dong, the witch is dead” when his team won a premiership after a very long period in the doldrums. His meaning, of course, was “the hoodoo is over; we’re winners again, at last.” Expressions from popular culture can be appropriated in lots of ways. But let me finish (at last!) by reiterating that, from a very simple human decency perspective, labelling the aforementioned leaders ‘witches’ is neither decent nor fair.
Thanks for your comments, Glen. Yes, that is my poem. I’m glad you like it. I’m not sure all of the subject matter should be in the same poem, though. I feel that mentioning Maggie and Julia’s treatment alongside infanticide and prostitution might trivialise those crimes, when that’s certainly not the intention. I’m sure there’s a way to put it together in a poem — I’ve just not done it yet. Anyway, it’s a start and I’ll play around with it some more.
Don’t get me started on red-head stereotypes — another topic that makes me bristly (I guess I’m supporting the stereotype by saying that! Although I note that blondes and brunettes are allowed to bristle without being labelled a ‘fiery red-head’.) I can well believe that red hair was thought to be a sign of a witch. I have no knowledge of a link between red hair and sexual aggression (my husband is thinking, if only…), and I’d be interested to read if it has been studied. (You’ve given me an idea for a future blog post.) For myself, I regard my red hair and passionate nature as an asset! I remember watching a skit on the Catherine Tate show where a red-head arrives at a ‘ginger refuge’ where she would be safe from ginger-phobes (Found the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_DVHUEjnuU).
I don’t really want to get into the politics of the Thatcher era as I was a teen at the time and it went over my head, and I’m no political expert. I know Thatcher’s government was divisive (which begs the question, why did they keep voting her back in?) but I can’t help but feel that some of the vitriol and the way she is remembered is solely because she was female and it is acceptable to do that to women. I wonder how much of her ‘inflammatory’ style was because she had to be that way to stand her ground or be heard. People do speak differently to women — men are more likely to respect the opinion of another man. In the US, Reagan, who sold arms to Iran, made racist comments, bombed Libya, and who practised a similar conservative politics during the same period, is now hailed as a softly-spoken man who helped end the Cold War (despite escalating it initially) and unify the US. No talk of throwing eggs at or turning backs on his casket. Maybe, he was able to practice his conservative politics in a softly-spoken manner because he was male and therefore people were already listening and more likely to respect his opinion. Maybe Thatcher had to be more aggressive to be heard… I don’t know…
One of the points I was trying to make was the different way men and women in power are treated. I was highlighting two females, the first female Prime Ministers of their respective countries, and the media and the public seem to find it acceptable to call them witches, abuse them, lampoon them and their sexuality, criticise their nulliparity in the case of Gillard or their maternal qualities in the case of Thatcher (no one questions a male leaders paternal abilities despite their long work hours and absence from home for months at a time), and treat them in all sorts of ways that they wouldn’t treat a male in the same position. Thatcher was no Stalin or Pol Pot, yet from the anger and venom being spat at her at the moment, one would think she’d murdered millions. If people didn’t like her politics, attack her politics, not the woman. And if they didn’t like her, why are they bothering to line her funeral route? Let those who want to mourn her passing do it in peace.
Lastly, as I said, I cannot stand the term ‘witch’. It’s a word associated with ugliness and evil. It is meant to derogate. I’m not sure there’s even a male equivalent — certainly not wizard, which has a ring of dignity about it.
Anyway, thanks for your comments. My apologies for the length of this feisty red-head’s response!
Just saw the Ginger Refuge (Russet Lodge, ha ha.) Mick Hucknall’s convinced that he’s been marginalised on account of his ginger-ness. He’s never needed a refuge, though; he just tells everyone to naff off. (‘Do you know how many records I’ve sold and how much money I’ve got and how many birds I’ve pulled?’)
I don’t remember hearing Reagan described in those terms, but it’s hardly fair and balanced if he was, is it? It amazes me that anyone thought that Nixon’s reputation could be rehabilitated before he died, when the man was a pathological fraud.
And of course, you’re right; Julia’s had a terrible time on account of her being a woman in the ‘top job,’ and a red-haired one to boot. Women in politics aren’t allowed to be women without it somehow being a distraction (or a ‘detraction’) and swamping everything else. So they feel obliged to suppress their ‘female-ness’ instead of allowing it to co-exist with all the other things they are and do and stand for. There was an article in ‘The Monthly’ a couple of months back, specifically about Gillard, Plibersek, Wong, Lundy, Ellis, Collins, and Macklin.
I am rather enjoying all this talk about ‘bristling.’ I’d forgotten what a wonderful word ‘bristle’ is. Unfortunately, I’m not a good ‘bristler’ myself; I tend to seethe, which is far less endearing…
Me, too, Glen. I do enjoy airing my bristles. Give it a go — sure beats seething!
BTW, John Major’s comment about power not being willingly relinquished was in reference to the UK trade unions, not in reference to Mrs Thatcher herself.
There are those who proclaim to be witches with great pride (Wicca) because they believe in Mother Nature as their God and gentleness and kindness as a way of life. If that is the true meaning of witch, I want to be one. So perhaps we all need to let go of the evil definition of a woman flying around on a broomstick with a long pointed hat. (Personally I wish I could fly on a broomstick — there are so many places I would like to go.) On the serious side, I despise denigrating women in this manner when they intend for it to be insulting and evil. I bristle with you.
Maybe that’s what we need to do, Betty: give witches some good PR and turn the term on its head so it’s seen as a compliment!