Why "In Power" Beats "Empowered" Every Time

Let’s break down the definitions of “power” and “empowered,” shall we?

Power is defined as: “the capacity or ability to direct or influence the behavior of others or the course of events.”

Empowered is to be “given the authority or power to do something.”

And if stating the obvious is necessary, the term “empowerment” is systemically used when speaking about women.

My biggest issue with the notion of empowerment is that it requires waiting for someone *in* power to give it to you. Who decided that power belonged to any one group anyway?

If you own, work for, invest in or care about any sort of business, there is overwhelming evidence that: 

• Women in power and gender equality will boost your bottom line
• Study after study has established that companies with more women at the senior corporate officer level outperform those with fewer women by as much as 36%
• New research from the University of British Columbia shows the cost of a successful acquisition is reduced by 15.4% with each female director added on a board

So, why is society so uncomfortable with women in power? 

Let’s examine. 

In Mary Beard’s book “Women & Power: A Manifesto” she “charts misogyny from ancient Greece and Rome to today, and issues a clarion call that it is not women but power that must change. The countless examples she references, dating back centuries, ‘are the deep strata, the ugly undertow of undying prejudice.' They are telling us just how much – ‘as far back as we can see in western history’ and for all the talk of progress – women are up against.”

There it is. A tale as old as time. But I was told that Time’s Up. What gives? And the "business case" for women in power has been made. Time and time again. 

So, if it isn’t women that need to change, but the notion of power itself, are we ready to accept a changing definition, expression and vision of what we’ve always known power to be (and look like)?

The shift from women being empowered to in power could change everything. We could lead the way we want to; prioritize what we think deserves the most attention; “tell is like it is” versus offering a “tempered” perspective of what the receiver is willing to digest. Being *in* power would allow us to express anger about rage-worthy realities, free from judgement, regardless of our gender.  

Or would it?

So, this begs another question: why is culture so uncomfortable with women’s anger? What if we looked at anger as neither good, nor bad, but just for what it is: "a strong feeling of annoyance, displeasure or hostility?" 

So often, when men are angry, people listen. When women are angry, people judge. And in my experience, the judgers tell you that you shouldn’t be angry *and* offer ways to rid yourself of this feeling.

The last three women who told me I shouldn't be so angry were leaders many levels above me in my place of work, members of my family and a stranger who listened to me ask a question in front of an audience of hundreds at a conference.

In this last example, after I asked a question acknowledging a rage-worthy reality, this woman felt I needed her help. She found me through the crowd and handed me her card. She runs a company that hosts retreats where women release their frustrations and pent-up hostility...through a pole-dancing aerobic workout. Of course. “It will be good for you” she offered. With respectful disagreement, I retreated.

Anger is powerful. And when harnessed correctly, it can fuel action in a way that no other emotion can. 

So, let’s stop empowering women, whatever the good intentions around this effort may be. And instead, let’s get right to it: put them in power. And be open to a new definition, expression and vision for what her power looks like. It may be unfamiliar and uncomfortable at first. But, push onward. After all, the only way to achieve true cultural change is through.