Hysteria — a word that connotes insanity, mania, and, historically, female rage. Etymologically, the word was used as a diagnosis for a psychological condition related to a disturbance of the female womb. Historical records date the earliest usage of the word back to the fifth century B.C., as the philosopher Hippocrates used the term as a means of medically classifying instances of “uncommon” and “erratic” female behavior, an undercurrent for the misogynistic attitudes at the time. Interestingly, the usage of the label peaked in the late 1600s, around the same time that the infamous Salem Witch Trials began to occur.
In modern vernacular, the label “hysterical” is still used by some to declare an excess of emotions within women. Being regarded as hysterical, not necessarily deliberately but as a lazy-yet-common use of the term, often serves as a dismissal of one’s opinions and emotions in a given circumstance. It is a reminder of the dismissed views of the convicted during the respective witch trials in colonial Massachusetts and the irreparable casualties which occurred. Hysteria is still used as a derogatory term to ridicule women’s wants and needs in modern-day society, with unfortunate links to the patriarchy of the past. The word hysteria should be removed from our current vocabulary because its usage prolongs the patriarchal ideologies of the past, therefore stunting the development of the future. This is caused by its indirect nuances to past bias found within medical, social and governmental frameworks.
In medical history, hysteria has been used as a derogatory term, often painting a negative portrait of women as “lethargic” and “unreliable,” as told by the physician François Boissier de Sauvages de Lacroix in a critique published in 1770-1773. This opinion was further promoted with the notion that hysteria was “subject to sudden changes with great sensibility of the soul,” upholding a negative stereotype of “excess sensitivity” within women during this time. It is also an inference to the portrayal of “sensitivity” as a negative attribute, a notion that goes against the ideals of our progressive society. Medically, being regarded as “hysterical” serves as a direct criticism of the workings of a woman’s womb; an indirect attack against the female body. This is a prime example of the neglected emotions felt by a woman, and the ability of the label to diminish the role of a woman in society.
Hysteria has also been used historically as a way to dismiss the wants and needs of women. At this time, the criteria for witchcraft were centered upon the detection of “hysterical” behavior exhibited by individuals, especially women. In simple terms, spirituality was unfavorable, and irregular female behavior was considered to be an utmost disgrace on the basis of the Puritan ideals at the time. Collectively, the instances of accusations made were used as outlets for the patriarchal creed, for the psychological and physical genocide that occurred, and for the stunted freedom of expression against women at the time.
Yet, the criteria for witchcraft were not entirely dissimilar to the consistency of “logical” excuses often made by patriarchal figures, whether in politics, medicine or casual social settings today. This is most prevalent in modern American politics, including Donald Trump’s label of “Crazy Megyn” toward opposing journalist Megyn Kelly, and former republican senator Ben Sasse’s response to protests surrounding Roe v. Wade, in which he declared the “hysteria around the Supreme Court” to be caused by a “fundamental misunderstanding,” regarding the unjust policies made during this time. For a parallel to be so easily drawn between the legislation of the witch trials and modernity is concerning — an alarming reminder of the remaining lack of equality and divisive nuances in today’s society, and the ability of the label to reinforce these negative qualities.
This topic is not far removed from us as Andover students. In Andover, three residents were executed for their conviction of witchcraft. The first was Martha Carrier, accused by her neighbor Benjamin Abbot. Abbot was part of the same lineage as Abbot Academy founder Sarah Abbot, an institution founded on the premise of promoting the education of women and seeking development towards an academically inclusive society. Martha Carrier was accused on the basis of her “hysterical dispute” with Benjamin Abbot, in which he claimed her conflict to be an indicator of her engagement in witchcraft. In Abbot’s statement, Carrier had “bewitched” him to fall sick a few days later, a consequence of their previous verbal conflict. Carrier was convicted and hanged in August 1692, a common fate of the accused. Abbot and Carrier’s adjacent houses are still standing today at 9 Andover Street, a physical reminder of the injustice which took place.
Alas, why should the label be excused, whether in political, medical, or social formats? It is evident that the label upholds the ability to infiltrate the ideological format of many fields, as it has continuously done so throughout history and in modernity as well. The term creates a pejorative demographic, reinforcing the past misogynistic perceptions of women, having harmful effects on those who are labeled, whether they may be 17th century townsfolk, 21st century politicians, or simply women, still finding themselves fighting for equality even in the modern world.
