Some Thoughts on the Nature of Power

We hear a good deal, mostly from women writing from a feminist perspective, about male power, the patriarchy, and the male gaze. Much of this, including Dr. Charles’s comments on these subjects, is important and necessary to expose the existence of patriarchal power structures and the many abuses of this power, particularly regarding the mistreatment of women.

What I would like to focus on here is the complementary subject—a man’s perspective on the power of women. In particular, the hidden, secret, and often unacknowledged aspects of this power. The power of which I am speaking is primarily interpersonal. It is most often used in the interaction between two individuals, usually a woman and a man. It is relational power. The currency of this power is love—not hate. The power lies in the actuality or offer to give or the threat to take away or withhold love (often played out in the arena of sex) as opposed to giving material rewards or using/threatening to use force, the usual means by which patriarchal power is deployed.

Another difference between these two kinds of power is on the overt/covert dimension. Force/reward-based power works best when it is out in the open. Relationship power is more potent when it works covertly, when the patriarch can be allowed and encouraged to believe that he is in the dominant position, when this is not the case. Mystification and disguise can enhance the application of relationship power. This is a different perspective on Dr. Charles’s observation that “women’s place has often been that of the more silent shadow that stands to the side and does not speak directly.” The woman is still silent in the shadows, but she may exert a good deal of actual power, the power behind the throne. Like any power, relationship power can be abused. It can be used to coerce, manipulate, or cause pain.

Page 152

The position of the victim—or one who was helpless, weak, or dependent—can be very effective in getting the other to do things that you want them to do. The woman in this situation is in a complicated position rife with ambivalence. Is it worth it to get something you want but at the price of renouncing being an overtly powerful autonomous person? Does Diana choose to remain the fastest runner in the land or does she succumb to the lure of the Golden Apples and pay the price of being somebody’s wife and the second fastest runner?

There can be some advantages to deferring and accommodating to the patriarchy. To be the spouse or under the care and protection of the powerful patriarch can have its rewards. To be a dependent means that one can share in the benefits of the patriarch’s power and wealth—which may well be based on the use of coercive force, violence or threats of such, exploitation of others, or any of a number of other ways that patriarchs use to become rich and powerful. All without having to get one’s hands dirty by directly participating in the exercise of power and the acquisition of wealth.

Mel Brooks says that it’s good to be king. However, it also can be good to be the king’s wife.

Page 153