Misogyny through the Ages

Margaret of Anjou to Hillary Rodham Clinton and Kamala Harris

I recently saw a male historian post about the dangers of layering modern thought onto historical experiences in regard to feminism and the female experience of medieval England versus modern day paradigms.

And sure, anachronism is a thing, but there is more than enough evidence that the women of the middle ages possessed a sense of agency and knew their own self-worth, recognizing that the treatment they received at men’s hands was a testament to the character of men, and not their own. Even in a time when every part of a woman’s life was dictated and shaped by the men around them, stripping them of autonomy and communal dignity, individual women fought against the patriarchal role expectations that were staunchly enforced, both legally and socially.

In 1405, Christine de Pizan, the first feminist novelist, sat questioning the impact of the popular writings of the time and the philosophies she was reading, and how every single male author or poet wrote about those sinful, undignified women-folk (my words, not hers.) She wondered what sort of impact that would have on women at large, when the reflection of womanhood in the arts around them were characterized by their worst possible human traits and overall worthlessness. In 2023, as a woman constantly bombarded by loud misogynists on social media, improbable beauty standards, the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and the orgasm and wage gap… I can relate.

“I began to examine myself and my own behaviour as an example of womankind in order to judge in all fairness and without prejudice whether what so many famous men have said about us is true, I also thought about other women I know, the many princesses and countless ladies of all different social ranks who have shared their personal and private thoughts with me. No matter which way I looked at it and no matter how much I turned the question over in my mind, I could find no evidence from my own experience to bear out such a negative view of female nature and habits.” – Christine de Pizan, The Book of the City of the Ladies, 1405¹

Much like in 1405, men in 2023 project their insecurities onto women and call it masculinity. See: Andrew T*te, Ben Sh*piro, and Tucker C*rlson (and on and on and on...)²

One subset of society benefits particularly well when we say we can’t layer any modern paradigms onto medieval experience: men. Specifically imperialist white men.

Farida D.

Even in the 1400s, women knew the patriarchy was binding them to roles that were impossible to fulfill and harmful to maintain.

Which brings us to Margaret of Anjou, the queen of England from 1445-1461. And then again from, 1470-1471.

Margaret’s husband, King Henry VI, ascended to the throne as an infant and grew into a docile, conflict-avoidant, pious man. A stark difference from his warrior father, Henry V. Margaret came from a line of strong, powerful women, and was raised in an entirely different culture than the misogynist backdrop of medieval England. Her mother ruled a duchy in her own right, fought wars on behalf of her husband and her grandmother ruled as a regent to a duchy on behalf of her son. The women that raised Margaret knew their power. These women represented the idea of womanhood Christine de Pizan experienced. They were strong, competent, and autonomous.

Margaret’s marriage to Henry was yet another attempt between England and France to make peace during the 100 years’ war, a time of heavy conflict and trauma between these warring countries. Ultimately, it was a failed attempt.

Patriarchal England was not pleased with Henry’s performance, mostly due to his inability to experience any discomfort around conflict and easily folding to the will of those around him which led to civil war, the crown going bankrupt, and the threat of foreign invasion. Margaret was now bound to this incompetent man. Purposefully picked due to the blood that ran through her veins, but it would be that very blood that xenophobic England would condemn continually throughout her queenship. To make matters categorically worse, Henry fell into a catatonic state in 1453. Margaret, with her long-awaited newly birthed baby boy, suddenly found herself caring for two deeply dependent males, a shell of a man with a heavy crown on his head and an infant. Her family was quickly losing control and soon a protectorate took over, ruling in her husband’s mental absence.

Margaret now found herself in a position that was foreign to her: without power.

Understanding the inherent power women possessed, Margaret, upon her husband’s second descent into catatonia, did all she could to insert her authority for the sake of her young son, rightful heir to the kingdom of England. It’s important to keep in mind that inheritance was a pillar of the medieval English nobility paradigm. It was the catalyst of most wars, familial squabbles, and civil disturbances. Losing inheritance was losing one’s livelihood, and oftentimes was a death sentence, albeit a drawn out one.

Margaret petitioned parliament to allow her to be recognized as regent, since her husband was proving to be quite unable and incapable, and her son was not yet of age. The patriarchal parliament of course denied this, but Margaret of Anjou continued to fight for her and her son’s rightful position. Literally. She mustered troops, stoked a rebellion, and became feared for her tenacity and strength. One contemporary praising ‘her valiant courage and undaunted spirit.’ Margaret knew her worth.

Because history was written by men for men for a millennia, we often think plights such as Margaret’s are so audacious, usually because the story of other audacious women are erased, minimized, or bestialized. And this is where historical misogyny comes into play, for Margaret of Anjou is often remembered as a she-wolf queen. Popularized by Shakespeare and still in use today by 21st century male historians.³

She-wolf of France, but worse than wolves of France,

Whose tongue more poisonous than the adder’s tooth!’

-Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part III, Act I, Scene IV

A she-wolf. A feral animal. Visceral. Less-than-human. It wasn’t used to glorify her strength but to strip her of her humanity while still reminding you of her womanhood; her patriarchal-perceived inferiority.

Kings that did whatever they had to for their positions went down in history as “conqueror,” “good,” “brave,” and “most princely.” But when a woman dared to show up in this same way, she was feral, beastly, and inherently bad.

Unfortunately, this sexist behavior hasn’t stayed in the 15^th century.  Hillary Rodham Clinton and Kamala Harris, previous secretary of state and vice president of the United States, respectively, are continually stripped of their personhood and dignity in the media, especially the far-right media. With conservatives calling them names such as ‘crazy, crooked, heartless Hillary’ and ‘nasty-woman-Kamala.’ This attack on women showing up powerfully and confidentiality in a space that has been historically male isn’t original; it’s tried and true.

“Funny how a competent, successful woman accomplishing something heretofore unprecedented seems to do that to people. If a white man had a backstory like Harris', conservatives would openly consider him a formidable opponent and worthy of at least some respect.” Anthea Butler, 2020

It's interesting how “we can’t layer modern thought onto medieval experiences,” yet for women, our daily interactions with the patriarchy are much the same. Projection, the 19^th century psychological term, is the act of unconsciously taking unwanted emotions or traits you don't like about yourself and attributing them to someone else. As Christine de Pizan said in 1405, “those who criticize the female sex because they are inherently sinful are men who have wasted their youth on dissolute behavior… the only way they can release their frustration is to attack women and to try to stop others from enjoying pleasures that they themselves used to take.” Ultimately, not much has changed. Misogyny is deeply baked into modern life, much like it was during Margaret’s time.

If the patriarchy can make us believe our agency and power as women is new, then they continue to dictate the terms of our existence. So, it feels worth repeating: only one subset of society benefits particularly well when we say we can’t layer any modern paradigms onto medieval experience: men.⁴

1. Highly recommend reading The Book of the City of the Ladies by Christine de Pizan. Published in 1405, Christine was the first female novelist, and the first feminist novelist at that. She was able to fully support herself, a widow, through her writings and there is a lot of evidence that her work was influential to women that have often be cast as ‘trouble’ by contemporary and current male historians alike.

2. Follow Farida D. on Instagram. Buy her books on amazon. Support this incredibly talented woman because her writings found within her ‘The List of Shit that made me a Feminist’ series was paradigm altering for me and I know it will be for you too. https://www.faridad.com/

3. Worth mentioning that Phillipa Gregory’s introduction to the Women of the Cousins War has been so influential upon my perception of historical bias within various writings. Men existing in a patriarchal society, such as the English and American male historians who have led the shaping of history, will always seep their misogyny and bias against women into their writing because their entire existence is within a patriarchal structure.

4. The will to Change by bell hooks will forever be listed within my footnotes as recommended and influential reading. bell’s work has been vital in my understanding of how patriarchy negatively impacts all of us, especially men.