The Great Man Theory, to put it simply, is the idea that the most influential men in history were great leaders because of certain personality traits they possessed. The Great Man Theory completely cuts out women, and this Lady Science podcast dives into the problems it presents, specifically in the context of science. So many women have gone unrecognized, and it is because this theory guided the general public in what to value.
The most interesting point that was brought up in this podcast was that even if we looked back through history to find great women, we would be looking for women that held the same characteristics as “Great Men.” This means that only a handful of women would reach this bar, which is obviously an unfair assessment of the contributions of women in history. This is painfully evident in the story Marilyn Ogilvie, the episode’s guest, tells. Two students in one of her classes decided to research women in science, and the only woman they could find enough material on was Marie Curie. Of course, it is assumed that this is because Marie Curie holds many of the qualities of men working in science.
At the same time, if we were to search for more women contributors, we would be looking at the more privileged women. So, in my mind, the question becomes what makes a person great? In this podcast, there doesn’t seem to be a clear answer. It appears that every class, gender, and race has to be assessed with different standards. This would make it easier to compare people within their class, gender, and race, but it would make it nearly impossible to compare people across different classes, genders, or races. Then again, history is not exactly cut and dry. In my opinion, there is not really a right way to gauge the importance of one person over another, but there are certainly wrong ways.
I think that there are many contributing factors when thinking about what makes a person great. To me, the main factor of a “great man or woman” is shown through their ability to influence others with a goal of causing change. On that note, I believe both women and men are equally as capable of being great. Sadly, as the two women brought up in the podcast, the way we narrate history is by choice, and much of the history we study is analyzing only male characters who have caused changed.
I think that your argument that when we look back in time that we see women from a certain lens is extremely true. The idea that women had to meet a certain standard to be recognized was definitely a real thing, and there could be many hidden hero’s we have no idea about.
You make an interesting point at the end of your blog when you talk about how it is difficult to define greatness because it seems that we, as a society, divide people into groups. This made me think about my own biases and how I am not as aware of female scientists compared to their male counterparts, and realized the unfortunate double standards that have been highlighted in our society. While it should be easy to define amazing individuals, our biases make it more difficult than it should be in a perfect world.
I am both interested by and agree with the part of your argument that states that “…even if we looked back through history to find great women, we would be looking for women that held the same characteristics as “Great Men”. This part is so interesting to me because it brings up how we look for leaders. It is, and has been, a preconceived notion that leaders are men, and when we finally do start to include women in this category of ‘leaders’, it is done in a way that compares them to men, diminishing women-agency. This argument suggests that we need to reconstruct how we think leadership in totality.
I really enjoyed your post and also found it very interesting how even if we do look for women throughout history they possess many of the same masculine traits that make up the G.M.T. In addition, when looking at women throughout history it is difficult to find women of different classes and races because the people incorporated in history lived where historical significance occurred and places where historically significant people lived (usually upper class whites)