Ginger Ulate A35302, Estefany Ramírez A95058, and Gerson Umaña A86484
M. Ed. Tamatha Rabb Andrews
IO-5520 Comparative Literature
November 21, 2012

Lysistrata and Medea:
Power and the War of the Genders

John Gray―“If I seek to fulfill my own needs at the expense of my partner, we are sure to experience unhappiness, resentment, and conflict. The secret of forming a successful relationship is for both partners to win”.[1] When the writer reflected upon fruitful co-existence, he was claiming that men and women are from different planets―Mars and Venus, but they should have the same chances to develop integrally. Otherwise, destructive side-effects would consequently arise. As a matter of fact, for thousands of years Venusians (women) have been advocating for their rights impelled by a movement called feminism. It raises awareness of women’s silencing and marginalization in a patriarchal society that is manipulated by and in favor of men. Additionally, the feminist thought tries to change the social order into one akin to accept all possible human realities, ideals of equality, and rights. As a response, Martians (men) created their own field of study as they could no longer be defined as the center due to the Feminist movement. In fact, the idea in which men are the opposite of women as a mirror image was rejected and the defining of manhood became blurred. Thus, the task to discover what it is to be a man is the burden of Men’s Studies. Nevertheless, both approaches assert that womanhood and manhood are not fixed constructions; they rather vary in every culture and historical period. To illustrate, in ancient Greek society, women had very little influence or power. All girls were taught to do household chores, and at the age of 15, girls from wealthy families were expected to marry the man their father had chosen for them. Since men spent most of their time at war, women ruled their household. When men were at home, they were treated with great respect. Boys were considered to be more important than girls and were sent to school at the age of 6. Nowadays, Greek plays function as lenses that clarify the Greek’s lifestyle and understanding of gender. In the comedy, Aristophanes remarked the foolishness of the Peloponnesian War between Spartans and Athens by choosing women to be the ones that invade and capture the Acropolis, since women were considered a foolish creature at that time. However, in this literary work, he suggests that women’s rights should be listened to given that they are intelligent human beings. Similarly, the tragedy of Euripides, challenges the Athenian moral society and traditional religion as a means to awaken consciousness about oppressed groups, especially women and slaves. Hence, Medea and Lysistrata similarly describe gender oppression and damaged family relationships; however Medea portrays a double-voiced speech while Lysistrata presents an empowered voice.
Medea and Lysistrata are correlative when it comes to gender oppression in that the will of the marginalized groups are subjugated to the group in power ---the hegemony--- based upon social constructs within a given culture. Typically, this hegemonic group corresponds to men, specifically those who are fostered by or in agreement with patriarchal misogynist principles. Hence, the main group in the margin is women of all ages and cultures. One way in which patriarchy has forced their will is violence, which commonly happens within the domestic sphere either physically or verbally and at times ---both. Lysistrata depicts this brutal oppression from lines 447-468 when the leader of the women approaches the leader of the men to notify that they are not afraid of them. The Leader of the Men, then proposes to take their sticks and break them over their backs. Yet, he wonders, ‘“if someone gave them two or three smacks on the jaw . . . they wouldn’t talk so much”’ (453-455), and he even threatens her by saying ---”’Silence! or I’ll knock out your--- senility”’ (458-459). Then, the leader of men quotes Euripides: ---”’There is no beast so shameless as a woman”’ (467-468) --- comparing a woman to something worse than a beast. This only highlights that the misogynist oppression at the time was irrefutable. However, this typical pattern of submission could switch if the power at the public sphere were taken by “the other”. The public sphere is seen as the political and economic pedestal institution where men dominate in a governing position within culture. Lysistrata, the protagonist, knows that occupying this sphere is crucial for her plan for peace to have any success over the “One” and thus she leads the women to take control over the treasure of the Acropolis and to keep it from the men. Talking to the magistrate in lines 634-638, Lysistrata warns that ‘“they’ll never again make off with any of this money”’ (634-635) and as such they will administer it themselves. This event accounts for what happens in lines 546-589 where Lysistrata and several other women make four policemen run in terror after several threats were made: ‘“if you but touch her with your hand, I’ll kick the stuffings out of you”’ (558-559) and ‘“if you lay the tip of your finger on her, you’ll soon need a doctor”’ (563-565). In the end, the women beat off the policemen. So far, a principle is drawn: men could oppress women and women could oppress men. It all comes down to who has the public authority. These instances have shown opposite-sex oppression; however, hegemonic patriarchy has sought for subduing minority men as well. That is the case of Jason in Medea. Creon, the king of Corinth, mistrusts Medea and his power enables him to send her into exile. In line 174, Creon mentions that his decision is fixed like ‘“the firm rocks of Acrocorinth, which neither earthquake can move nor a flood of tears melt”’. Because of his lower position, Jason cannot change Creon’s mind. This lack of power leaves him muted and at Creon’s mercy. Line 264-266 show Jason’s concern about Medea’s exile. He recognizes that Medea insulted the head of Corinth and that otherwise she “. . . might have lived . . . happily, secured and honored. He adds―’I hope you would . . . To me matters little what you say about me, but rulers are sensitive’”―. Indeed, Jason goes to Medea to help and save her if possible, although he knew that his will was not going to happen, it was the king’s instead. This hegemonic imposition is also evidenced in the way Medea is gazed by the Greek system. In lines 310-314 Jason argues that by taking Medea from her barbarian homeland ---Colchis--- to the magnificent Greece she will have the opportunity to improve by being involved with the music, temples and knowledge of the rational land, Greece. The oppression Greek women face by being silent and considered inferior by men is what make people think that Medea does not fit in the system. The First woman of the Corinthian chorus remarks that Medea’s thoughts and ideas are “dangerous” for ‘“they can work into life”’ and, of course, that was expected from a decent Greek woman. Nonetheless, as Medea considers her race as rash and intemperate, she does not know how Greek women endure such lifestyle (117-124). Her way is regarded dangerous by Creon, based on what other men say and not what he has observed, “for [her] occult knowledge: sorcery, poisons, magic” (150), something that was considered natural in Medea’s homeland. Therefore, it is demonstrated in both plays how gender oppression is the result of a vile seeking for supremacy that affects the marginalized groups in a given culture.

Medea and Lysistrata similarly portray damaged relationships as a result of the abuse of power that the “dominant” figure inflicts over the “Other”, thus aggravating situations where the interaction is the one among husband and wife. Many couples on their wedding day take a vow, most of the times established by a hegemonic institution ---the Church---, promising to be true to their couple in good and in bad times, in sickness and in health; hoping to love and honor each other all the days of their life. However, when it comes to power this vow is left behind and marriage stop relying on love and it becomes a matter of authority. Lysistrata illustrates how a typical marriage ---the one of Myrrhine and Cinesias--- is perturbed by the fight for gender supremacy. Lysistrata herself started a discussion between the couple, addressing first to Cinesias. She tells him that Myrrhine always talks about him as she honors his name among women and recognizes that all other men are rubbish compared with Cinesias (1120-1122;1128,1129). Indeed, Myrrhine declares publicly that she does love her husband but she is under an oath of not expressing affection to her man (1141, 1190). Cinesias manifests his need for Myrrhine arguing that he has no joy of life since Myrrhine left their home, and with those arguments lets her known his honest feelings for his wife (1137, 1138). In lines 1150-1151 the marriage shows its anguish; “You do not want me” says Myrrhine and Cinesias with his true desire for his wife responds —“Don’t want you? I am in agony”. Yet, their intimacy is disturbed, Myrrhine starts provoking Cinesias to make him vote against war out of his burning necessity for her, but she just skins him and runs away. This situation shows how both parties suffered just because of the hegemony’s will ---Lysistrata. On the other hand, in Medea, it is possible to see the consequences of ignoring the “Other” to acquire hegemonic power. It is captured in the broken love between Medea and Jason. At the very beginning, the Nurse acknowledges that Medea’s relationship with Jason was good, he loved her, and they were faithful to each other until Jason turned from her to gain “fine friends and a high place in Corinth” (8-12). From that moment on, Medea lives “broken with pain and rage”, the perfect ingredients of a murderous cocktail. Their relationship becomes so insane that Jason sees Medea as a mere instrument that helped him undertake his “heroic” journey, and Jason is seen as a miserable dog or an enemy by Medea. When she complains about Jason’s actions, Medea’s broken heart is moved to accept that she loved him once and how Jason has pulled her down to a “hell of vile thoughts” and loathing at the same time she wishes she could peel off her flesh that reminds her all what she did in favor of Jason (283, 284; 332, 333). The mere fact that Medea wants to annihilate her past evidences that, the person who impelled her to betray her own family out of pure love, is no more someone to cherish but to perish instead. Jason replies to Medea’s claims explaining the reason why he married Creusa. In stanzas 316-318, Jason reveal an interesting fact shaped as question —“Do you think I [marry Creusa] like a boy…, out of blind passion?”—, he continues —“I did it to achieve power here; and I’d have used that power to protect You and our sons, but your jealous madness has muddled everything”. His words are clear, he does not love his actual wife and from her he is not expecting love, he is expecting heritable power. Additionally, the fact that he wants to protect Medea and his sons suggests that he sympathizes with her grief, but it is not clear in the play whether that feeling is love or not. He cares for her anyway and Medea’s hatred makes it turbid to value his genuine feelings. In the end, Medea shows that she is got the power by killing Jason’s sons, and this harm even to dead Jason, as seen in the last stage direction that signals Jason to stumble up to follow Medea and his dead children and fall on the spot. This couple is an example of the destructiveness embedded in the fight to show who the authority is in a marriage. Hence, the abuse of power of the dominant “One” has an emotional and even physical impact on the “Other” especially if the subjects implicated are husband and wife.

The main female characters in Lysistrata and Medea differ in the kind of voice used to express selfhood, so that Medea unlike Lysistrata uses a double-voice full of lies and tricks to achieve her agency while Lysistrata accomplishes it by a straightforward use of her voice and actions. When a character speaks simultaneously using double-voicing, it is considered that the first voice is the patriarchy and the second one is the counterpart that subverts. Therefore, this second voice carries the desires that the subject longs for secretly. In Medea, Medea tricks Jason with a manipulative use of her voice when she asks him to forgive her just as she did him. She distorts her speech by making a victim of her and making Jason feel guilt and concern about their sons (Act II, lines 44-45). It is also shown in the end of act one how she manipulates the nurse by making her believe that she ---Medea--- is looking for reconciliation when claiming —“I wish for peace. I wish to send precious gifts to that pale girl with the yellow hair whom he has married: tell him to come and take them . . . and to kiss his boys” (500). Medea see in her boys the perfect instrument to send the evil gifts she had prepared for Creusa and thus no one will suspect of the innocence of a couple of tender and helpless kids. It is until the second act when the real intentions of the main character are evidenced. The golden gifts she sent to make her “sick peace” with Greek nobility were in fact a pagan fire that burns “the flesh from the living bones [and]…blood” of Creusa and Creon (Act II, line 231). Nobody saw it coming for Medea speaks just what the patriarchal system wanted to hear, namely that she had behaved inappropriately with Creon and that she should have accepted Jason’s younger wife from the beginning as a normal Greek woman. However, the situation worsens later for her will was not fulfilled until Jason had paid for all her suffering. To do so, she takes her children and ask to the chorus —“Would you say that th[ese] child[ren] ha[ve] Jason’s eyes?”—the chorus is scared of what Medea is accounted to do out of her repudiation of her children that for her resembles Jason, her enemy and her Greek oppressor (Act II, lines 274-276). Thus, it is clear that Medea never reveal to her oppressors her plans, her will; she hides them as much as she could until they become explicitly evident to public eye. Conversely, the way in which Lysistrata leads women’s rebellion in the Acropolis shows a direct or frank speech that scarce any regret or fear. As a matter of fact she avoids beating around the bushes since the very beginning of her plan. She warns men about her idea to bring peace to Athens and the method women will use to make it possible. In fact, when men ask her about her purpose to keep them barred from the Acropolis, she simply responds that it is ‘“to keep the treasure safe so [men] won’t make war on account of it . . . [Women] will administer it [them]selves”’ (623-638). She speaks directly to hegemonic figures of authority like the Magistrate or a soldier like Cinesias. She even concerted the peace between Spartans and Athenians. Finally, in lines 791-797, Lysistrata explains to the magistrate why women are in rebellion as follows —“we bear more than twice as much as you. First, we bear children and send off our sons as soldiers . . . Then . . . we sleep alone because of expeditions abroad”. Her words are precise and try to have men understand what women feel, completely different to Medea’s sweet but poisoned speech. This kind of voicing makes Lysistrata a good example of an autonomous person that is capable to express her selfhood by acting freely and releasing herself from the conception of object that Greek society had about women. Thus, selfhood can be expressed by either a double-voice or an empowered voice, having that a straightforward voice proves to be more fruitful than a double-voice which brings a lot of despair.