Historical Roots of Oppressing Women in Western Civilization
The
suffering of women in Western societies is deeply rooted in the legacy,
thought, and social structure of those societies since ancient times. As Judith
Lorber states, it is embedded in the very structure of life in Western
society—within the family, marriage, work, and the economy—and has been
reflected in politics, religion, arts, and literature. All of this reinforces
the idea of inequality, making the issue one that requires broad social and
societal solutions.
This is
not an individual problem (1) that can be addressed at the level of
isolated personal cases. Rather, it requires an enlightening, structural remedy
that examines the causes behind the growth and intensification of this tendency
in the modern era—while taking into account that it is specific to Western
societies throughout their long history, from Greek civilization, then Roman
civilization, both before the spread of Christianity (the pagan phase) and
after its spread, continuing into the Middle Ages. When the modern era arrived,
Western women rose in rebellion against this polluted historical legacy.
The Low Status of Women in Western History
The
status of women in Western history was extremely low, due to the existence of a
biased historical and epistemological discourse against women. This
discourse—rooted in religious and philosophical premises—placed women in an inferior position compared to men in terms of the body, intellect, knowledge, and
social role.
There are
philosophical roots traceable to ancient Greek society, which severely
restricted women’s freedoms. This was partly due to its weak economic
structure, especially since its democracy was flawed and incomplete. As a
result, women remained dependent on men for livelihood (2) and for
protection—particularly in Greek and Roman cities during the pagan era, amid
political fragmentation and social stratification, where security was scarce.
Women thus needed men—as husbands, fathers, or brothers—to defend them.
Women as the “Weaker Being” Across the Ages
Throughout
history, women were regarded as the weaker being,
whose role was limited to reproduction and serving husbands and children, while
men were seen as the leaders of the family and its representatives outside the
home. (3)
Despite
Greek society’s philosophical sophistication, the Greek woman was confined to
the home, assigned to full domestic service, awaiting the return of her
husband—the one endowed with will and power, exercising dominance over her. He,
meanwhile, had the right to frequent clubs and houses of prostitutes, enjoying
music and dancing. His justification was that society did not permit wives to
leave the home. This reality created deep psychological complexes in women,
instilling the belief that they were incomplete beings.
Philosophical Contempt for Women in Ancient Greece
Greek
philosophers themselves regarded women as incomplete creatures, lacking legal
capacity, fit only for domestic service, and even considered them impure—lower
than animals, which were deemed purer than women.
Philosophers
went so far as to describe women as a filth spawned by Satan. Socrates even
said that the presence of women is the greatest source and origin of crisis in
the world, that woman is like a poisonous tree—beautiful in appearance, but
when birds eat from it, they die immediately.
Greek
customs and laws in general—and those of Athens in particular—deprived women of
inheritance and stripped them of freedom. They had no social value, were denied
the right to divorce, and were required to remain obedient servants to their
husbands, who were also their masters.
Sparta: A Partial Exception and Its Consequences
Conditions
differed slightly in Sparta, where men were frequently engaged in warfare.
Women there entered markets, clubs, and public discussions. However, this led, according
to critics, to the spread of immorality and corruption. Aristotle accused the
Spartans of excessive leniency toward women, whom he saw roaming markets
outside their homes—an indulgence he believed hastened Sparta’s downfall (4)
due to continuous wars and social disintegration.
Aristotle’s
stance is unsurprising, as he represented classical Greek thought. Among his
philosophical interests was the discussion of the roles of men and women in
reproduction. Aristotle believed that the fluids secreted by the female womb
played no role in conception, and that male semen alone was responsible for
forming the fetus. (5) This implied that men held the supreme and
essential role in life itself—even pregnancy was symbolically taken from women
and attributed exclusively to men.
In this
worldview, women were the source of all evil and misery—as Socrates
claimed—while true intellectual and physical perfection was embodied in men!
Social Deviation and the Amazon Myth
This
worldview contributed to what may be described as a societal deviation from
human nature—that is, the emergence of societies that deviated from the natural
coexistence between male and female. The Greek historian Herodotus (5th century
BCE) referred to the existence of a female-only society that fought against
male society. He discussed this in his account of the war between the Greeks
and the Amazon warrior women, whom the Greeks called Oiorpata, meaning “man-slayers.”
Herodotus
recounts that after the Greeks defeated the Amazons near the Thermodon River,
they captured many of them and sailed with them on three ships toward Greece.
The unexpected occurred when the Amazons revolted against their Greek captors,
killed them, and took control of the ships.
The
problem, however, was that the Amazons—expert horse riders and warriors—had no
experience with sailing, handling sails, steering rudders, or reading winds.
Thus, they found themselves lost at sea, tossed by violent waves and storms
until their ships were driven to the shores of Lake Maeotis (the Sea of Azov)
in Scythian lands in southeastern Europe.
From
there, the Amazons advanced inland until they reached a region abundant in
horses. Given their prior expertise in horseback riding and mounted combat,
they easily mounted the horses and began a new phase of survival and
subsistence. (6)
Regardless
of whether Herodotus’s account is historically accurate or regarded as a
myth—something questioned by some historians, especially since medieval
historians also described female-only societies in various parts of the ancient
world, such as Central Asia, an island in the Indian Ocean, or near Moscow in
Russia—all of which seem inspired by Herodotus’s narrative (7)—the
story indicates the existence of a counter-reaction to male contempt and harsh
treatment of women. Such oppression led women to rebel by forming exclusively
female societies.
Women Under Roman Law and Social Custom
This
perception continued into the Roman era, though women were permitted to go
shopping without supervision or guards—provided they obtained prior permission
from their husbands or guardians if unmarried. This was undoubtedly a
development compared to Greek norms.
Roman
laws codified social customs surrounding marriage in two forms:
1. Marriage With Authority (Manus)
In this
form, a woman severed ties with her family upon marriage and was considered
legally dead to them. She entered the authority of her husband, adopted his
religion, and submitted to his control—or to whoever held authority over him,
such as his father. The husband could sell her, punish her at will, or divorce
her. All benefits and rights favored the husband.
2. Marriage Without Authority
Here, the
woman shared her husband’s social and professional status and was not required
to join his family. However, she was still obligated to obey him and respect
his wishes. In reality, women were not truly independent before marriage in
terms of rights or property. If a woman committed adultery or serious
wrongdoing, her husband had the right to discipline her—even to the point of
killing her—without objection from her family.
If the
husband died, the woman fell under the guardianship of a male family head
appointed by the husband or selected by the family, under the pretext of her
incompetence or inability to fulfill responsibilities. Roman women continued to
be viewed as concubines or slaves, possessing almost no rights. (8)
Thus, the
Greek and Roman legacy—prior to Christianity—reduced women to property, to be
bought, sold, punished, or killed, with no moral or financial rights. They were
the most socially vulnerable beings, subject to domination by all.
For Further Reading:
- Dark Reality for Working Western Women
- 5 Powerful Roles of Muslim Women in Shaping the Ummah’s Identity
- Book Review: “Woman in Islam” By Aisha Lemu & Fatima Heeren
-------------------------------------------------------------
Resources:
(1) The Variety of
Feminisms and Their Contribution to Gender Equality, Judith Lorber, https://diglib.bis.uni-oldenburg.de/pub/unireden/ur97/kap1.pdf, p. 8.
(2) Feminism Past
and Present: Ideology, Action, and Reform, Camille Paglia,
A lecture delivered on 10 April 2008 as the keynote address of the conference The
Legacy and Future of Feminism, Harvard University, Arion, Vol. 16,
No. 1 (Spring/Summer 2008), pp. 5–6.
(3) Tatawwur Al-Mar'ah `Abr At-Tarikh, Basima Kiyali, Ezzedine Foundation for Printing and Publishing, Beirut, 1st edition, 1981, pp.
7–8.
(4) Ibid., pp. 32–34,
and p. 37.
(5) An-Nasawiyyah: Qira’ah Fi Al-Khalfiyyah Al-Ma`rifiyyah Li-Khiṭab Al-Mar’ah Fil-Gharb,
Dr. Riyadh Al-Qurashi, Dar Hadramout, Yemen, 1st edition, 2008, p. 11.
(6) The Histories
(Inquiry), by the Greek historian Herodotus (484 BCE), Translated by Abdulilah Al-Mallah, Publications of the Cultural Foundation, Abu
Dhabi, 2001, pp. 334–336.
(7) See in detail: Jazirat An-Nisa’: Bayna Al-Jughrafiya Wal-Usturah Wal-Anthrubulujiya, Dr. Hatem At-Tahawi,
available at: https://www.maganin.com/content.asp?contentid=12228
(8) Tatawwur Al-Mar'ah `Abr At-Tarikh, pp. 37–40.
