“The Second Sex” by Simone Beauvoir
For
300+ years, the feminist movement has been fighting for equal rights between
the sexes, a “good cause” agreed on by most Americans. But women remain the
minority statistic in elected officials and CEOs. Why have they failed to
accomplish total equality? Beauvoir explores this in her work “The Second Sex”. She blames the failure
of the feminist movement on two things; the prehistoric oppression of women and
a lack of a unified front.
Women and men have never existed as equals. There is no
start date of the inferior view of women; “The division of the sexes is a
biological fact not an event in history” (Furman 56). And with division comes inequality. Since
biblical times, women have been portrayed as nothing more than a product of men
to serve men; Eve was, literally, created from Adam’s rib, and their
descendents based their entire lives around the prejudice against women set up
by their ancestors. Around 350 BCE Aristotle suggested that “we should regard the
female nature as afflicted with a natural defectiveness.” Beauvoir, in the
mid-1900s, illustrates the relationship between genders using the terms “the
One”, representing the male, and “the Other”, representing the female. The
“One” represents the original and superior being, the “Other” represents a
derivative from the original. But it is not the “Other” that defines itself as
so, it is the “One” who defines itself as the “One” that, in turn, defines the
“Other” as the “Other”. In summary,
females are inferior because men deemed themselves superior. Sadly enough,
women then and women now buy into it.
Why is it harder
to achieve equal rights for women than it is for African-Americans? Beauvoir
attempts to answer this question in her philosophical work “The Second Sex”. What differences exist between the civil rights
movement and the feminist movement that could account for the difficulty of the
feminist movement? The answer is simple; gender, alone, cannot unite a
movement. Females come from all different cultures, backgrounds and locations.
Therefore they are unable to unite under a common subject of “we”. We cannot
claim that “we” do not have opportunities in the workplace, because some of us
do. We cannot complain that “we” do not have access to education, because some
of us do. Not only can women not unite under a common term, but women cannot eradicate
their oppressors because they are integrated among them. It is not moral or
practical to kill of all men to redeem the status of woman. The feminist
movement is not so much in the hands of the females, but the males: ““They have
gained only what men have been willing to grant; they have taken nothing, they
have only received” (56). In closing, Beauvoir asks us to consider “how can
independence be recovered in a state of dependency?” (61). The answer remains
unknown.
In
our discussion of Beauvoir’s “The Second Sex”, we covered a variety of issues
facing women in the modern day. Women are incessantly reminded of their
inferior status in every facet of society; language, music, media, cultural
norms and traditions. Commonly used words in the English language, such as
woMAN, perSON, feMALE, and freshMAN casually remind women that they are nothing
but an “Other” to a the “One”. The rap industry practically revolves around the
objectification of women by both male and female artists. Advertising agencies
use the motto “sex sells” as a default to sell items such as microwaves and
hamburgers. High heels and form fitting clothing remind women that their
greatest assets are their bodies. Common and respected traditions, such as
giving a bride away or changing her last name to that of her husband, emphasize
the lack of freedom and value of women in our society. Each of these common
occurrences are forms of microagressions and when added up become simply a
large aggression that women are not valued for anything but their ability to
produce and nurture life.
Personally,
I was disgusted by the conclusions drawn from the discussion. Most of the
issues we covered did not even register as issues to me. I was participating
and perpetuating the microagressions that limit my own freedom as a human being
and I did not even realize. All my life I thought I was aspiring to marriage
and motherhood, wearing makeup and tight pants because I thought I wanted to.
Now I realize it is because I have been told that is what I should want to do:
I was internally oppressed. Immediately after class I began to examine myself
and my actions under a new lens. It is tedious work to question oneself and
ambitions with such scrutiny, but it had to be done. I cannot knowingly
participate in actions that contribute to the inferiority of my gender.
Recently
at the VMAs, Beyonce brought major national attention to feminism. Her surprise
album featured many empowering songs regarding female expectations with music
videos featuring overly sexualized choreography. As modern day philosophers, I
challenge you to ask yourself “Is Beyonce really a feminist?” The article below
bounces between YES and NO answers to that question.
All Hail the Queen?
No comments:
Post a Comment