How the forgotten wings of the peacock shaped rhetoric and the theory of public participation and engagement in the civic world. It is no secret that when the ancient Greeks developed the resources of communication necessary for democracy, they denied women the right to speak in public. Let’s call it Aristotle’s theory of selection because he chose who could speak in the civic realm and participate in the governance and decision-making of the people. 

Leaping from people to birds, let’s go to the peacock fragment. Rhetoric, Aristotle writes, consists of three “proofs”—logos, pathos, and ethos or reason, emotion, and character. The proof of emotion worries Aristotle. People could fly off the handle. Emotion, like a flying peacock, can be unpredictable, irrational, and dynamic. A peacock with unclipped wings seemed a bit dangerous to the idea of making well-ordered arguments for the benefit of all. It seems Aristotle opted for a bird with clipped wings. That would keep emotions in check.

But there is a tad more to the problem of the emotions running amok. Emotion is attributed to women (their bodies). As proof by emotion is “controlled” in the public realm so to women and, by extension, their bodies call for control. Clipping wings, curtailing emotion, keeping out women… all that talk occurred a long time ago. 2000 years ago, to be exact.

Even so, vestiges of the peacock fragment—the control of emotion—lived in many discussions and debates about women having the right to vote in questions such as What in the world would women do as voters? 

BELOW: Screenshots of peacocks that appear throughout Wonder Woman ('2017)