11. 07. 20// The Origins of Hear Her Speak.
Editor’s Note:
For our first weekly pick, and to celebrate the launch of our brand new site (!!), we thought that it was appropriate to highlight the founding ‘story’ of Hear Her Speak, written by our founder, Sabrina. Everyone who contributes to and supports HHS is helping to further our mission to break down the barriers that womxn face in the public and private sphere when speaking out.
In this article, Sabrina illuminates the historical and cultural legacies that are still at work today actively silencing and discouraging womxn. Enjoy!
By Sabrina Simpson
27 June 2020
I had been crystallising and pondering the initial idea for Hear Her Speak for about six months when I first read Mary Beard’s lecture on ‘The Public Voice of Women’. It was a eureka moment. I remember turning to my partner, who was in fact the one who gave me the book that contained the transcript of the lecture, and saying, “this piece articulates exactly why I want to establish Hear Her Speak”. Womxn in today’s society are still living and internalising the historical precedents and cultural norms that have silenced womxn for millennia.
Being a scholar of ancient civilisations, Mary uses historical and ancient literary examples to demonstrate how the silencing of womxn has been entrenched within the norms of society as far back as the Romans and the Greeks. Take Ovid’s Metamorphoses, for example. Throughout the poem we are told of womxn who are silenced as a result of their transformation; one such example is Echo, the talkative nymph who is deprived of her voice and finds herself condemned to only be able to mimic others. Similarly, according to Mary, The Odyssey, aside from being one of the most influential pieces of Western literature, has a ‘claim to fame’ for being the first documented example of a womxn being (effectively) told to “shut up”. The figure Telemachus, when challenged by his mother, responds that she should pipe down because “speech will be the business of men”.
These examples highlight that, traditionally, the public sphere was a male space and the act of speaking publicly was considered to be a male gendered characteristic. In classical ancient times, the art of public speaking was “a- if not the- defining attribute of maleness”. Therefore, as Mary argues, we are the “heirs to gendered speaking”. As astonishing as I found these examples, reflecting upon it from my privileged position as an educated and empowered womxn in the 21st Century, I found that I was left with an uncomfortable feeling that perhaps not all that much has changed…
If we examine the conventions and norms that govern parliamentary debate in the British Parliament, it is undeniable that the classical oratory form still exerts an influence and womxn are, consequently, at a disadvantage. When reading news reports on parliamentary debate, it is hard not to notice the frequent denigration of womxn’s voices as “whiny”, “yappy” or “shrill”. Additionally, the yah-boo heckling, jeering and shouting of Prime Ministers Questions serves to diminish and silence the female voice either through intimidation or sheer volume. Who can forget the infamous case of male MP Nicholas Soames “barking” and “woofing” at female MP Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh in the House of Commons?
Unlike men, when womxn articulate an opinion that is counter to the mainstream, it is frequently not recognised as being valid in its opposition. Rather, it is often used as a means by which that womxn’s intellect can be challenged and her opinion is consequently dismissed on the grounds that she “just doesn’t understand”. Dismissing womxn’s speech in this way serves to “remove the authority, the force, even the humour from what women have to say”. Therefore, by trivialising womxn’s opinions they are effectively silenced.
As a result, if the female voice is sanctioned, it is usually as an advocate for “women’s issues” or a ‘soft’ topic. Womxn are repeatedly pigeonholed and unable to compete against the ‘big boys’. Why do you think that womxn MPs are so often provided the ‘softer’ cabinet positions and we have never had a female Chancellor of the Exchequer? Womxn are not thought to be able to contribute when it comes to the ‘tricky stuff’ and the female voice is not thought to hold the weight or gravitas of its male counterpart. Nothing highlights this so brilliantly as the infamous Punch cartoon by Riana Duncan: it depicts a lone womxn in a boardroom meeting being told by her male colleague, “that’s an excellent suggestion Miss Triggs, perhaps one of the men would like to make it?”. The implication is, of course, that a suggestion from a womxn, no matter how brilliant, is always more inspired and more palatable when coming from a man.
Unfortunately, the legacy of this intolerance towards womxn’s voices has manifested itself in the torrent of abuse womxn receive when they do dare to speak up. In the era of Twitter, every womxn with an opinion finds herself open to attack from trolls and keyboard warriors. Mary highlights in her lecture some of the personal attacks she has received over the years when taking a stance in the public sphere and, disturbingly, the more heinous messages focus on removing her ability to speak by, for example, cutting out her tongue. In her words, “women pay a very high price for being heard”. These blatant efforts to silence womxn and scare them into submission when they raise their voice and express an opinion are exactly why it is so important that womxn continue to speak out and be heard.
Therefore, in establishing Hear Her Speak as a platform, I am aiming to counter the discriminatory tropes that are embedded in our culture, history and language. If womxn are going to be successful, we need to be aware of the “processes and prejudices that make us not listen to ‘her’”. As a womxn wanting to speak out, it is not enough to have voice, you have to be heard.