Nietzsche & Women
[Written by Joe for an undergraduate philosophy essay]
Beyond Good and Evil is Nietzsche’s attempt at breaking down our current understanding of morality and showing why it is fundamentally flawed. He begins by discussing the ‘prejudices’, or things that currently influence our sense of morality, distorting it entirely. The first prejudice that Nietzsche mentions is the will to truth. The will to truth he argues every philosophers desire to discover the objective truth, something un-questioned prior to Nietzsche. He questions what part of us is it that yearns for truth, and why do we not accept a simpler alternative, such as untruth or ignorance?[1] In highlighting prejudices, it is important to note that Nietzsche does not aim to give solutions, but merely provide an awareness of them, arguing that if we can be aware or what is distorting our morality, we can make efforts in the future to advance. The title gives us a clue as to which direction Nietzsche wants us to go with morality. We must leave behind these dominant, ultimate notions of good and evil, as these terms are plagued by history and prejudices. Instead, it is up to the ‘new philosophers’ to decide where we can take morality, what’s important for Nietzsche is that our current understanding of morality is certainly distorted and ultimately in place as a means of control.[2] Criticisms of Christianity are also very prevalent throughout Beyond Good and Evil, describing it as the reason behind the ‘Uglification of Europe’ amongst many other critiques.[3] Throughout the book, Nietzsche highlights certain ideas that appear constantly, ideas that we can identify as Nietzschean themes. One such theme is women. Nietzsche is often seen as a problem for modern feminists, being described as antifeminist and misogynistic.[4] Despite this, I wish to argue that Nietzsche does in fact hold women in a very high regard and is anything but a misogynist, despite how his work can be interpreted at face value. Having read Nietzsche, it is more than obvious that he does not write for the everyday reader, and does not wish to appeal to all, but provoke and intrigue, allowing him to hide real meaning in his somewhat cryptic passages. I will give an interpretation of Nietzsche’s views on women in Beyond Good and Evil, whilst also referring to his other works, as well as secondary accounts. This will ultimately show that Nietzsche is vastly misunderstood, and should not be described as a misogynist.
In section 232, Nietzsche writes; ‘Women have so much reason for shame; there is so much hidden in women that is pedantic, superficial, carping, pettily presumptuous, pettily unbridled and immodest…so much that has been heretofore been most effectively repressed and subdued by their ultimate fear of males.’[5] It is clearly easy to interpret this as blatant misogyny, claiming women have an inherent reason for shame. Having said that, we must remember that Beyond Good and Evil is a criticism of the way things are, not an account that he supports. I argue that in describing women in the ways that he does here, he is simply criticising the ways in which the society of his time saw women. 1886 Europe was hardly a progressive utopia, and Nietzsche made no mistake in criticising it. The way he writes this passage immediately suggests he is against women, but as I mentioned earlier, he writes to provoke. Even by the end of the very same sentence, he makes mention of women’s ultimate fear of males. I argue that he does not do this in a positive way, as ultimate fear of males is not the goal here.
Nietzsche is suggesting that the true inner part of women is being controlled and supressed by men. Understandably, words such as pedantic and immodest have negative connotations and indeed meaning in everyday language, but what if Nietzsche did not mane them in this sense? He argues that males have effectively repressed and subdued the pedantic and superficial inner self of women, amongst other things, but he makes no mention of these things being bad. Society and morality of the time is what makes these things bad, and that is exactly what Nietzsche is criticising. Yes, men suppress presumptuousness effectively, but I argue that here, Nietzsche is criticising men for preventing women being who they really are. What they really are. Whilst it seems to be a list of negative things, is actually just a list of truths that have been distorted by our incorrect sense of morality to seem bad. Therefore, Nietzsche is in fact arguing for women and suggesting that what they really are has been twisted by morality and indeed men to seem like a bad thing, when in reality, it is not bad at all, merely true.
My account of Nietzsche can be backed up by his life outside of his philosophical writings. During his time as a lecturer in philology, he consistently voted and worked in favour of women being accepted into university, in a time where the vast majority of men would have done no such thing.[6] Alongside this, Nietzsche spent time in Italy with prominent feminist Malwida von Meysenbug, who campaigned for the emancipation of women in the 1800’s.[7] These certainly do not sound like the actions of a misogynist.
The very beginning of Beyond Good and Evil is also enlightening as to Nietzsche’s view of women. The preface begins ‘Assuming that truth is a woman-what then? Is there not reason to suspect that all philosophers, in so far as they were dogmatists, have known very little about women?’. Of course, Nietzsche is writing comedically here, using women as a metaphor for truth and suggesting that philosophers are useless with both, perhaps a reference to his time spent with Lou Salome.[8] [9] Despite the classic comedic and sarcastic spin from Nietzsche, I still argue that in comparing women and truth, he is holding both in high regard. Comparing the two seems a fitting compliment, showing that he has the greatest respect for women.
Hatab’s paper on Nietzsche and women is also paramount to understanding Nietzsche’s true intentions. Hatab highlights Nietzsche’s phrase in sections 231 and 232, ‘women as such’ or ‘women per se’ depending on the translation. In highlighting this, Hatab makes it clear that when criticising women from here on after, Nietzsche is referring to the archetype of a woman, or what society has made women to be, not what a woman actually is.[10] Similar to what I argued earlier, the negative points Nietzsche discusses are not points against women, but more so points criticising morality and society based on it.
Continuing, Hatab discusses Nietzsche’s fascination with the Greek spirit and it’s two controlling archetypes in the form of deities, Dionysus and Apollo. At the beginning of The Birth of Tragedy Nietzsche discusses the importance of the Greek God’s and explains what they symbolise.[11] Dionysus represents the feminine whilst Apollo the masculine, and with that, formlessness and form.[12] Dionysus and formlessness are for Nietzsche representations of Greek genius and penetration into the nature of reality. Apollo on the other hand is form, and with form, negativity and chaos. Clearly, Nietzsche favours the feminine Dionysus here. According to Hatab, Nietzsche suggests that there was a rupture in the relationship of Dionysus and Apollo that came along with the ‘scientific spirit’.[13] The once harmonious Dionysus and Apollo began a conflict, in which form took priority over formlessness and therefore masculine became dominant over the feminine. It is important to stress that this is an observation of Nietzsche’s, not a goal!
To illustrate the Greek and Nietzschean account in a simpler way, we can use modern femininity and masculinity. The masculine represents form whereas the feminine formlessness. Form seems to take precedence over formlessness in our society, so in order to be equal, women seek to gain form and therefore gain masculinity. This is exactly what Nietzsche is arguing against. He does not think that women should have to become more like men in order to be equal, but instead embrace the formlessness that was once respected as dominant over form, certainly by Nietzsche himself. Therefore, Nietzsche argues n favour of women here, suggesting that their true nature is good, and they should not allow our distorted morality to twist it.
Thus Spake Zarathustra is the book that is most criticised by feminist writers, usually for one specific phrase, ‘Thou goest to women? Do not forget thy whip!’[14] This of course seems as though whenever spending time with women, one must bring a whip, supposedly to keep women in line. Sue Prideaux however makes it clear that this is a mistranslation and misquotation cited by many.[15] What Nietzsche actually wrote according to Prideaux is ‘Do not forget The whip, importantly not Thy or Your.[16] This distinction suggests that Nietzsche is in fact suggesting that women have the upper hand and hold the whip, so men should be careful when approaching women and look to them with respect. This once again shows that Nietzsche is not a misogynist and in fact quite the opposite.
It would be incredibly easy to describe Nietzsche as a misogynist due to the way we can read his work in the first instance. Having looked at his life outside of writing however, this does not seem to add up. His involvement with feminists and campaigns to get women into university seem like a juxtaposition when compared with how some see his writing. This suggests to me that he is misinterpreted. Misinterpretation is a common theme for Nietzsche in such cases as Hitler and the Nazi’s idolising him, despite having clearly stated his hatred for anti-Semitism.[17] I argue that this is the case for him being misinterpreted as a misogynist too. At face value, Nietzsche seems to describe women in a negative light, using words such as pedantic and immodest. If we look deeper into the text and read the surrounding passages, giving context, it becomes very clear that Nietzsche is criticising the way in which society and morality sees and twists women, arguing that their true nature is in fact good and should be respected. This is also evident in his work on Dionysus and Apollo. He understands that form is now respected above formlessness, hence women’s attempt at gaining from and therefore masculinity, but argues that formlessness should be seen as either equal to or even higher than form and women should not have top be more masculine in order to be equal. Nietzsche, unlike some modern accounts of feminism, accepts that men and women can be equal whilst still being different.[18] Therefore, when reading Nietzsche carefully and referring to his other works, it becomes clear that Nietzsche is not a misogynist.
Some Questions...
If Philosophers prior to Nietzsche are so greatly influenced by prejudice, how can there be progress for humanity, can we improve, or must we go around in circles?
The answer I got was that there can be progress in a way, but on a more personal level. The types of progress perhaps Nietzsche is striving for are relative and culturally determined meaning that we can have individual improvement but not progress for all as one.
Whilst this answer does follow in a temporary sense, I think Nietzsche was getting at something bigger. He claimed that Philosophers before him were influenced by prejudice’s such as ‘the will to power’ and we must recognise these prejudices and essentially start again with our philosophy and morality. Therefore, we can make progress by moving on from the mistakes of the past.
Does Nietzsche group ethics and morality together in his use of the concepts, or does he view them independently?
The answer given suggested that in the context of Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche does not separate the concepts and simply refers to our current ideas of them as mistakes of the past.
I agree with the answer given and think it helps me in understanding that Nietzsche was not concerned with the minute details of ethics and morals, but instead showing that we have gone wrong on a large scale in the past and must endeavour to improve our ways in order to create a new and better sense of morality.
Why was Nietzsche critical of Hume, Hobbes and Locke, despite their atheistic tendencies?
When Nietzsche criticises the English empiricists, he is not discussing their attitudes to religion, but more so their philosophy. He dislikes empiricism as a whole and attacks the arrogance that it entails, as empiricism claims we can know everything through empirical evidence, something Nietzsche fundamentally disagrees with.
This answer fully explained Nietzsche’s approach and helped me to grasp why he included the empiricists in his critique.
[1] Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Marion Faber. 2008. Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future Oxford University Press Section 1
[2] Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Marion Faber. 2008. Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future Oxford University Press section 56
[3] Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Marion Faber. 2008. Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future Oxford University Press section 62
[4] Gemes, Ken, and John Richardson, eds. 2016. The Oxford Handbook of Nietzsche. First paperback. Oxford Handbooks. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press page 82
[5] Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Marion Faber. 2008. Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future Oxford University Press section 232
[6] https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/oct/06/exploding-nietzsche-myths-need-dynamiting
[7] https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/oct/06/exploding-nietzsche-myths-need-dynamiting
[8] Safranski Rüdiger 2003. Nietzsche: A Philosophical Biography. London: Granta pages 245-250
[9] Nietzsche became infatuated with Salome to the extent that he asked her to marry him twice, to no avail, she was only interested in platonic relationships.
[10] Hatab, Lawrence J. 1981 Nietzsche on Woman Old Dominion University Accessed: https://philarchive.org/archive/HATNOW-2v1
[11] Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Francis Golffing. 1956. The Birth of Tragedy: And, the Genealogy of Morals. New York: Doubleday/Anchor Books pages 19-22
[12] Hatab, Lawrence J. 1981 Nietzsche on Woman Old Dominion University Accessed: https://philarchive.org/archive/HATNOW-2v1
[13] Hatab, Lawrence J. 1981 Nietzsche on Woman Old Dominion University Accessed: https://philarchive.org/archive/HATNOW-2v1
[14] Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. 2006. Thus Spake Zarathustra. New York: Cosimo Classics page 43
[15] https://www.readitforward.com/authors/nietzsche-and-the-early-feminists/
[16] https://www.readitforward.com/authors/nietzsche-and-the-early-feminists/
[17] https://newramblerreview.com/book-reviews/philosophy/nietzsche-s-hatred-of-jew-hatred
[18] Hatab, Lawrence J. 1981 Nietzsche on Woman Old Dominion University Accessed: https://philarchive.org/archive/HATNOW-2v1