Foucault: Free Speech for Everyone?

In his speech, Foucault describes how parrhesia demands courage to speak up in the face of danger. It also serves as critique to keep rulers in check and is regarded as a duty. But a question I wondered is who is entitled to use parrhesia? Foucault seems to imply that as long as these criteria are met, it is parrhesia.

Although Foucault focused his discussion on parrhesia and how it is a duty for everyone, he seems to imply that not everyone can actually partake if they wish. Meaning that slaves seem no have virtually no chance to get out of the subservient role because they are not given the opportunity to be heard. His examples seem to disregard his point. In The Phoenician Women, Polyneices is unable to use parrhesia because she has been exiled and has no way to exercise power. This makes her “in the same situation as a slave.” Then in Hippolytus, Foucault claims that “Parrhesia require both moral and social qualifications which come from a noble birth and a respectful reputation.” Therefore, slaves have no chance to speak up and if they cannot speak up, they will never be free. It seems that Locke is right in a sense because it seems that slaves can’t fight for their freedom (since they can’t be heard) and if they don’t fight, they are not human. Therefore they cannot exercise their duty as human beings to use parrhesia. Many slaves attempted to fight back and used courage but it ultimately failed simply because they had no power (or often education). How then can slaves ever be free? If they cannot use parrhesia, what other means can they use? Is it truly free speech if not everyone can participate? Like all the other philosophers we have discussed, it seems like Foucault only applies to the educated land-owning males. Thoughts?