Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

The Second Sex (Le deuxième sexe #1-2)

by Simone de Beauvoir, H.M. Parshley (Translator & Editor), Deirdre Bair (Introduction)

3.98 of 5 stars 3.98 · rating details · 10,413 ratings · 371 reviews

Newly translated and unabridged in English for the first time, Simone de Beauvoir’s masterwork is a powerful analysis of the Western notion of “woman,” and a groundbreaking exploration of inequality and otherness. This long-awaited new edition reinstates significant portions of the original French text that were cut in the first English translation. Vital and groundbreakin...more

Paperback, 746 pages

Published December 17th 1989 by Vintage (first published 1949)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Best Feminist Books

3rd out of 580 books — 753 voters

Best Books of the 20th Century

301st out of 4,698 books — 31,970 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Dec 09, 2010 notgettingenough rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: sociology

Well, presenting my review of The Second Sex:

Update: Who isn't barracking for Assange? I doubt the idea that the US or any other government, including the Swedish government which is apparently a covert member of NATO, with US intelligence sharing being kept from parliament, is behind the allegations in Sweden.

But it is a case of the ideals of protecting women from violence being well and truly exploited, as far as I can tell. A couple of girls trying it on. Does anybody have information to stan...more

21 likes · like · see review

view all 20 comments

Manasvi mudgal Two of the most discussed issues I have had with my friends. I have supported Assange in his pursuits and I believe there have been people more deserv...more
Jan 22, 2013 03:36am

Paige I wonder, why should we who have always did our best to safeguard women feel bad for what others have done

I personally don't know that you "should" f...more I wonder, why should we who have always did our best to safeguard women feel bad for what others have done

I personally don't know that you "should" feel bad for anything, but what she means is probably that
1) well, personally, I'm a woman and I feel bad about what men to do to women because I have feelings and they are sad when half of the population is oppressed based on their biology. I'm white and I feel bad, guilty, and shameful about what white culture does to minorities, what the United States does to countries in the Middle East. I feel bad because I have such a large amount of sympathy and empathy for people everywhere that when rights are violated, I feel bad. I think this is pretty normal. Perhaps you too feel bad and you think that feeling bad about it negates anything that you personally have to do with it; feeling bad is enough--why should you take any responsibility for what "others" do, for what the prevailing culture says, if you vehemently disagree with it? I was at this point for a long time and I felt defensive when minorities would attack "whites." "But I would never oppress someone or hurt them! That's not fair!!" I would think. I don't feel that way any longer, though. This is because...
2) This stuff (rape, oppression, violence) happens because those in power allow it to happen. Those with privilege in society let it happen. If men policed men and if men who were really on women's "side" spoke up for them against other men, there would be a huge decrease in these kinds of things happening. When a man makes a sexist comment, often other men present will laugh or agree; if they personally disagree with the sentiment, it is not often that they actually voice their opinion by saying, "That is sexist, false, and wrong, and you are hurting your mother, sister, daughter, yourself, and society by spouting that kind of view point." Hardly do they get up and leave. It is HARD. It is hard for me to make waves with my friends if someone makes a racist comment to me. It's hard for me to look someone in the eye who has just made me dinner and say, "That's racist and that's not cool." It's hard to say, "I feel uncomfortable being around you when you say things like that." Hopefully I get to a point where it's not so hard. But I think that's why the author of the article said that men should hang their heads in shame--even if they don't abuse directly, even if they are opposed to it and would never do it themselves, all too often they support a power structure that does allow it, that supports it and teaches it and spreads it and engenders it in everyone.

I hope I haven't come off as brash or short with you. Usually I like to spend a lot more time writing these types of comments because it's often a sensitive issue. Unfortunately I have to work in just a few minutes so I tried to condense my initial response. I love talking about this stuff though, so please feel free to message me here on Goodreads or even email me (paige.awesome [at] gmail) if you are interested in discussing this further. I don't have all the answers but I do enjoy a discourse with someone who cares about these issues and is willing to ask questions and listen to answers. Maybe we can learn from each other :)(less)
Jan 23, 2013 08:11pm

Mar 21, 2010 Natalie rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: i-blame-the-patriarchy, philosophy, favorites, read-in-2010, female-pen

The Second Sex is one of those dense old feminist classics I was embarrassed not to have read. When I finally started it last month, it was almost impossible to put it down (though I did take a break in order to read William Vollmann's new magnum opus.) Simone de Beauvoir theorizes, hypothesizes, and generalizes about every phase of a woman's life, from infancy to old age, and the events marking each phase, such as menarche, sexual initiation, childbirth, and menopause. While Nick's review makes...more

11 likes · like · see review

Oct 11, 2011 Ameera H. Al-mousa rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: favorites

كان هذا العالم دائما عالم الرجال وكل الأسباب المعللة لذلك بدت لنا غير كافية على أننا سنتمكن أن نفهم كيف تشكل التمايز بين الجنسين ,على ضوء الفلسفة الوجودية , ومن ذلك تنطلق الكاتبة النسوية الوجودية سيمون دي فورا بعدد تردد كما ذكرت أن الكتابة عن المرأة أمر مثير ولكن ليس بالشيء الجديد .

إذا كانت الأنوثة وحدها لا تكفي لتعريف المرأة , و ينبغي أن نسلم ولو بصورة مؤقتة أن هناك نساء على الأرض فعلينا حينئذ أن نتساءل ما هي المرأة ؟

ففي عهد القديس توماس كانت المرأة تبدو كجوهر تحدد خصائصه كما تحدد خصائص ومزايا...more

6 likes · like · see review

Dec 05, 2011 Asma rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

كنت اتسائل كثيرًا : مالذي يجعل هموم النساء مشتركة ؟
لِم لم تنعتق المرأة من التبعيّة والإندماجيّة في جميع العصور وعلى مدى الأزمنة ؟

منذ عهد اليونان والفراعنة والصين مرورًا بالمرأة اليهودية وصولًا إلى المسيحية وإنتهاء بالإسلام .. والطبيعة المجتمعيّة التي تُفرض على المرأة واحِدة رغم تدرج الحقوق بين الأزمنة .
كان المضمون واحدًا "المنزل الأمومة الإندماجيّة رفض الإستقلال" والنتيجة وصفت كجنس آخر ليست ذاتًا مستقلّة .

سيمون كطبيعتها تنطلق من فلسفة وجودية ؛ فهي تتوغل في الذات الأنثوية منذ طفولتها وصِباها حيث...more كنت اتسائل كثيرًا : مالذي يجعل هموم النساء مشتركة ؟
لِم لم تنعتق المرأة من التبعيّة والإندماجيّة في جميع العصور وعلى مدى الأزمنة ؟

منذ عهد اليونان والفراعنة والصين مرورًا بالمرأة اليهودية وصولًا إلى المسيحية وإنتهاء بالإسلام .. والطبيعة المجتمعيّة التي تُفرض على المرأة واحِدة رغم تدرج الحقوق بين الأزمنة .
كان المضمون واحدًا "المنزل الأمومة الإندماجيّة رفض الإستقلال" والنتيجة وصفت كجنس آخر ليست ذاتًا مستقلّة .

سيمون كطبيعتها تنطلق من فلسفة وجودية ؛ فهي تتوغل في الذات الأنثوية منذ طفولتها وصِباها حيث تُترك منذ حداثتها لتعيش في جوّ يحفل بالنساء إنتهاء بشيخوختها ..
بدأت تحليلها من وجهة نظر نفسيّة حيث الصراع مابين "آدلر" الذي يرى بأن المرأة محمّلة بمركب نقص مهما كانت مستقلّة .. و "فرويد" الذي يراها تفريغ جنسي .

عرّجت أيضًا على المرأة من وجهة نظر تاريخية : حين كانت كل مرحلة محمّلة بصراع يثبت ماسبق ويُسقط ما استجدّ؛
ففي العصر الحجري جرت العادة على إقتسام العمل بين المرأة والرجل بشكل متساوي
و كانت الأقوام بدائية بشكل يُجهل فيه دور الأب في الإنجاب فالأولاد بالنسبة إليهم ينحدرون من روح الجدود المتقمصّة في جسم المراة .. امّا المرأة فضرورية للإنجاب لذلك أخذت تلعب دورًا اوليًّا .
و في عهد الإقطاع كانت العقدة مُتشابكة؛ فالتداخل بين حق السيادة وحق الملكية قَلب وضع المرأة
و حين اتسع نطاق الإستثمار الزراعي ظهرت الملكية الفردية فصار بإمكان الرجل أن يصبح سيداً للعبيد ومالكاً للمرأة فكان ذاك أشبه بالإنكسار التاريخي الكبير للجنس النسائي

تريد سيمون أن تقعّد رأيها بأنه عند الطبقات الكادحة كان وضع التمييز الأنثوي أفضل لأن الإضطهاد الاقتصادي يلغي التمييز بين الجنسين؛ أما عند النبلاء والبرجوازيين فالمراة مضطهدة كجنس ليس لها الا وجود طفيلي .

"إن نضال المرأة لم يكن قطّ إلا نضالًا رمزيًّا
هي لا تقبل المصير الذي يعدّه لها المجتمع؛ ولكنها لا ترفضه مع ذلك بصورة إيجابية لأنها مزعزعة الثقة في قرارة نفسها بشكل لا تجرأ على الدخول في صراع مع العالم الخارجي فتكتفي بالهروب من الواقع أو الاحتجاج عليه ومعارضته بصورة رمزيّة ".
(less)

8 likes · like · see review

Apr 20, 2013 Yasiru rated it 4 of 5 stars

I always feel somewhat uncomfortable marking as 'read' those books I've come into contact with through readings (however extensive these may have been), but in this case I did at least leaf through the whole work purely out of interest.

The Second Sex may be regarded the most extensive and prototypical application of existential ideas, particularly Sartre's, and in this sense there is a lack of generality which might make the book dissatisfying given previous exposure to its philosophical anteced...more I always feel somewhat uncomfortable marking as 'read' those books I've come into contact with through readings (however extensive these may have been), but in this case I did at least leaf through the whole work purely out of interest.

The Second Sex may be regarded the most extensive and prototypical application of existential ideas, particularly Sartre's, and in this sense there is a lack of generality which might make the book dissatisfying given previous exposure to its philosophical antecedents (this being how I felt on first encountering chapters from de Beauvoir in my readings). However, the work is an important social study combining anthropology and Freudian analysis to great effect in order to facilitate a forward-thinking view of 'femalekind' for both women and men which has had helped transform the way we consider gender today.

Some of de Beauvoir's social arguments can sometimes be rather obscure or reaching, but the notion of 'feminism' expounded here, for not resorting to rhetorical crutches (like political correctness and identity politics) with demands for overt likeness among the championed demographic as is fatally the case with modern feminism and its influences, retains the true spirit of existentialism (which, like science is not a 'masculine invention', whatever certain of today's feminists have to say; though the way supposed progressives within rational movements are on an insidious campaign to stifle expression by conjuring up bogeymen perhaps come of irrational personal insecurities is alarming) as something which foremost empowers the individual (who happens, for the purview of this account, to be female). Feminism stands today ostensibly for equity (though if feminists are so concerned with names and such auxiliaries as the above suggests, a name change may be in order), especially in matters such as equal pay- social goals (some of which are simply humanist), and cares little for the individual, man or woman.

One cannot help but think that de Beauvoir's memorable stirring call:
"One is not born, but rather becomes, woman,"
would have no place in modern feminist ideology, especially in English-speaking countries.
It may be illuminating to read on what I call 'reified feminism', the following-
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/14/art...

Back to the book, it's certainly more than a historical curiosity and should be read as an enriching psychological portrait of both women and men and of society as a whole which is still important today, where we only ever seem to champion individuality in mobs, and have a tendency to pale and retreat into group identities when confronted by personal responsibility. You may need some patience with the account, but skipping over parts as I did won't hinder your understanding or appreciation of it I feel.(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Nov 06, 2009 Ahmad rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: feminism, non-fiction, articles

هرچه مردان در باره ی زنان نوشته اند، باید نا مطمئن باشد، زیرا مردان در آن واحد هم داورند و هم طرف دعوا. پولن دو لا بار

4 likes · like · see review

May 29, 2008 Jojo Richardson rated it 5 of 5 stars

The part of this book that has affected me the most in the ten years since I've read it is most certainly the introduction, where de Beauvoir says that in order to define herself to herself she must start with, "I am a woman". This surprised her then as it surprises me now when I realize that that is how I must start, too. Although I grew up in a post-feminist "you can have it all" type of environment, it was eye-opening and disconcerting to learn that women are considered "the other" as opposed...more

25 likes · like · see review

Dec 15, 2012 Giorgi rated it 3 of 5 stars

sure the metaphysic of woman or what is to be a woman is a very important philosopical inquiry by Simone de Beauvoir but i just can keep reading she's hysterical discussion(we womans... for us womans...from our point of view...) of womans historical evolution and self cognition .also i felt that it is a bad translation or Beauvoir's terrible stile

2 likes · like · see review

Jun 30, 2009 Helynne rated it 5 of 5 stars

This extensive, scholarly study, written in 1946 by French existentialist novelist and feminist Simone de Beauvoir is a seminal text for 20th-century feminism. The lengthy study contains numerous chapters, beginning with the history of women in societies throughout the world. Beauvoir's first basic observation is that the world has always been dominated by men--hence, her title that names women as "the second sex" or le deuxième sexe." Her premise that runs through the book is that there is no...more This extensive, scholarly study, written in 1946 by French existentialist novelist and feminist Simone de Beauvoir is a seminal text for 20th-century feminism. The lengthy study contains numerous chapters, beginning with the history of women in societies throughout the world. Beauvoir's first basic observation is that the world has always been dominated by men--hence, her title that names women as "the second sex" or le deuxième sexe." Her premise that runs through the book is that there is no valid reason for the age-old phenomenon of a male-dominated world. "But what privilege has permitted [men:] to dominate women?" she asks.
She notes that it was men who created values, mores, and religions. Therefore, male prejudices rather than any inborn defects in women, have resulted in the debased position of females in society. Beauvoir is equally adamant about the need for women to rise above the traditionally inferior education with which men have limited their influence.
Beauvoir also criticizes the fact that married women under French law were treated for centuries as minors; that is more as daughters of their husbands than as spouses. The law that allowed such subjugation—and even demanded that a wife obey her husband— continued in France until 1942, just six years before the publication of Le Deuxième Sexe.
And here is a fact that I complain about to my French students all the time: American women did not receive the right to vote until 1920, which is bad enough, but French women did not get to vote until 1946 (coincidentally, the same year The Second Sex was published)!
But lest I am giving the impression that Beauvoir is a man-hater, I hasten to add that she is not. She is simply urging equality of the sexes and the chance (and desire) for women everywhere to reach a higher potential and to function mentally, emotionally, and creatively on the same level that formerly has been reserved just for men. Also, although Beauvoir opted not to marry or have children (in fact, she was one of the first women to request and receive a tubal ligation), she had a long live-in relationship with fellow existential writer Jean-Paul Sartre. Theirs was a true meeting of the minds.
There are many, many more interesting points Beauvoir makes about feminism as she urges women of her time and in the future to rise to their full intellectual and creative potential.
This is a fairly long and dense read, so plunge in, take it slowly, mark up the text, and take a billion notes. I plugged away gamely at the French version for a while, then relented and read the rest of the work in English with my French version nearby for highlighting and note-taking. It was well worth the time in both languages!

(less)

12 likes · like · see review

Nov 14, 2007 Namrirru rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: *EVERYONE !!*

Shelves: womens, les-grenouilles, anthropology-sociology, lit-crit

So after mulling over the book for a few days, I came to the realization that de Beauvoir tends to harp on the negative in this text. How lack of purpose makes women neurotic and affects their relationships with people, or the various ways men are/were outrageously mysogyinistic, etc, etc. But given the time period, a little bit of firebrand preaching is acceptable.

She does lend some words for more commonplace issues, but then the text is subdued and explanatory so that a reader's eyes will dia...more

7 likes · like · see review

Aug 27, 2007 David Haley rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Due to length, only those who have a real desire to investigate feminism, gender, etc.

For me, reading Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex left me feeling overwhelmed, and even slightly frustrated--not at the text itself, but the lack of time I had to spend on it. I will definitely be re-reading it in the near future.

De Beauvoir disassembles feminine “inferiority” with rare, methodical tact. It seemed as though every other page summoned a flood of ideas and reappraisals in my mind. For instance, her description of the male/female relationship as “The One” and “The Other”, led me t...more For me, reading Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex left me feeling overwhelmed, and even slightly frustrated--not at the text itself, but the lack of time I had to spend on it. I will definitely be re-reading it in the near future.

De Beauvoir disassembles feminine “inferiority” with rare, methodical tact. It seemed as though every other page summoned a flood of ideas and reappraisals in my mind. For instance, her description of the male/female relationship as “The One” and “The Other”, led me to consider the possible societal effect of a hypothetical “third sex”. How would the preexisting male/female relationships change; how would they vary as the “dominance” of this third sex changed, etc. Then it occurred to me that one might consider homosexuals “The Third Sex”. This would certainly provide interesting insight on our current observations regarding homosexuality. It seems to me that one could argue women have been empowered by this “Third Sex”, as they, by default, no longer reside in the lowest position. Perhaps this has some effect on the femininity of homosexuals.

Another enjoyable facet of The Second Sex was the excellent integration with Flaubert’s Madame Bovary. De Beauvoir’s analysis parallels Flaubert’s in a myriad ways, but none so striking as in the dissection of “female” development. As she describes from her research how “One is not born, but rather becomes a woman”, De Beauvoir explores the maturation process of a female, and the significant, albeit subtle, events and ideas encountered by the developing female--a common theme in Madame Bovary. For me, Book Two, Part IV: XIII, “The Young Girl” stood out as having particular correlation with Flaubert’s text. De Beauvoir states, “But the girl, since childhood [. . .] has looked to the male for fulfillment and escape. She thinks that under his caresses she will feel herself borne along by the vast current of Life, [. . .] she will find again the same security as in her father’s arms: the magic of embraces and glances will petrify her once more into an idol.” Flaubert paints Emma similarly--enraptured by the love stories she has read in novels, and consequently disillusioned with her marriage, but trapped nonetheless.

A few areas of De Beauvoir’s text did in fact vex me. Although there were several, (for instance, the validity of statements like “A man would never get the notion of writing a book on the peculiar situation of the human male”, among others), I will conclude by focusing on the one I felt most troublesome--the foundation of existentialism. It seems to me that the Immanence/Transcendence ideas like at the crux of De Beauvoir’s contention. However, in considering this idea, it seemed to me that if Immanence is “the brutish life of subjection to given conditions”, yet every individual is subjected to an innate desire to transcend, are not the two one and the same? Furthermore, De Beauvoir suggests that part of how we understand “man” is dependent on how we understand “woman”. This duality seems to mirror that of transcendence and immanence. If then all human beings were granted liberty to continually reach for more liberties, effectively doing away with the “life of immanence”, how would we distinguish the two? Likely I am muddling things, but it seems to be a logical impossibility.

(less)

6 likes · like · see review

Jan 27, 2009 Nancy Monson rated it 5 of 5 stars

Fantastic! Should be distributed in 7th grade to all females. It is the handbook we were looking for.

3 likes · like · see review

Dec 15, 2008 Nick Black marked it as gave-up-too-boring

I've a battered mass-market edition, about the most unappetizing way to package ~900 densely-printed pages imaginable. I gave up after maybe 20 turgid pages covered in a hard hour; even affording Mme. De Beauvoir a maintained linear ratio of actionable information to time invested, two full days of my life seemed better spent elsewhere (as reported here, DFW claimed to "receive 500,000 discrete bits of information [per day], of which maybe 25 are important. My job is to make some sense of it.")....more I've a battered mass-market edition, about the most unappetizing way to package ~900 densely-printed pages imaginable. I gave up after maybe 20 turgid pages covered in a hard hour; even affording Mme. De Beauvoir a maintained linear ratio of actionable information to time invested, two full days of my life seemed better spent elsewhere (as reported here, DFW claimed to "receive 500,000 discrete bits of information [per day], of which maybe 25 are important. My job is to make some sense of it."). Admitted, even in those score pages, a number of interesting theses were advanced, but none in the form of a testable hypothesis or valid deduction -- the book looked to be intensely inductive and untestable, which (especially for such a clearly vivacious, profound and far-reaching intellect as Beauvoir's) would have been deeply dissatisfying.

And yeah, make no mistakes, this book is huge. Huge in that "why did they even bother with a mass-market; the cover will inevitably be torn off (inviting hurried assurances that one doesn't purchase pirated massmarkets, which of course everyone with easy access would, and hey isn't it a bit fishy and frankly gross that publishers just require front covers back? When I worked at Media Play, this resulted in several large trash cans per month of pulp-paper Harlequin Romance and other such abominations going directly into our dumpster. I'm hardly Earth's bitch and avoid environmental conversations with anyone lacking at least 6 hours of EAS (Earth and Atmospheric Science) or its equivalent (classes lacking a calculus base need not apply for transfer credits), but it doesn't take an inorganic chemist to find such waste personally offensive and you needn't solve Navier-Stokes to wince at the pipeline of lossy energy conversions, an efficient system for conversion of useful raw commodities to cubic gigameterage of words written by computers for robots and inevitable entropy death), pages will fall out, and the spine will be so mutilated that only color, like dental records, can identify the remains" way.(less)

3 likes · like · see review

May 15, 2013 Izabela marked it as read-in-serbian-language

"Drugi spol"

facebook.com
---
https://www.facebook.com/SimonedeBeau...
https://www.facebook.com/SimonedeBeau...

NSK01
---
http://katalog.nsk.hr/F/EDMN453DIFG9K...

COBISS/OPAC
---
http://www.vbs.rs/scripts/cobiss?ukaz...

Amazon.com
---
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_...

IMDb
---
Filmografija:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0003436/?r...

---
---
"Beavoir, Simone de"

NSK01
---
http://katalog.nsk.hr/F/EDMN453DIFG9K...

COBISS/OPAC
---
http://www.vbs.rs/scripts/cobiss?ukaz..., Simone de"

Amazon.com
---
http://www.amazon.com/s/r ...more

like · see review

Dec 08, 2011 Jee Koh rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Finally finished reading Simone de Beauvoir's "The Second Sex" last Monday. "One is not born, but rather becomes, woman," so translate Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier that resounding challenge. So many terrific things in de Beauvoir's analysis of how one becomes woman. Nietzsche is transmuted into the existentialist project of self-transcendence. Part One rejects the idea of female destiny, as promoted by biological, psychoanalytical or historical materialist views. Part Two recou...more Finally finished reading Simone de Beauvoir's "The Second Sex" last Monday. "One is not born, but rather becomes, woman," so translate Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier that resounding challenge. So many terrific things in de Beauvoir's analysis of how one becomes woman. Nietzsche is transmuted into the existentialist project of self-transcendence. Part One rejects the idea of female destiny, as promoted by biological, psychoanalytical or historical materialist views. Part Two recounts the history of women from the hunters-gatherers to the twentieth century, highlighting the theme of patriarchy and its need for woman to be the Other. Part Three tackles the sexist myths about women, elaborated by Montherlant, D. H. Lawrence, Paul Claudel and Breton, before looking at how Stendhal romances real women. All that in Volume I.

In Volume II Parts One and Two, de Beauvoir describes the lived experience of contemporary Western woman, from her childhood, through sexual initiation and marriage, to old age. The description cites psychiatric studies, literature, gossip and history, and integrates these citations in the heat of imagination. Every man should read at least the three central chapters: "The Married Woman," "The Mother" and "Social Life" to try to grasp the world from women's eyes. de Beauvoir contends that if women can be said to own a Character, that Character is entirely shaped by her historical subordination to men. Part Three examines three justifications that woman has employed to deny her powerlessness. She has been the Narcissist, the Woman in Love and the Mystic. In Part Four, the last part of the volume and book, de Beauvoir reflects on the growing economic independence of women in the twentieth century. She finds that encouraging but insufficient for true independence. The old myths, the old models for womanhood, and the old system have tenacious roots, and will not be removed easily. Contemporary women find themselves trying to be both independent (as defined by herself) and feminine (as defined by men). de Beauvoir's analysis still challenges, I think, women who think that they can be both, and men who think that they can have everything.

Some favorite passages:

Of D. H. Lawrence's belief in monogamous marriage: "There is only a quest for variety if one is interested in the uniqueness of beings: but phallic marriage is founded on generality."

Of Stendhal's love of women: "...while he is walking around Rome, a woman emerges at every turn of the page, by the regrets, desires, sadnesses, and joys women awakened in him, he came to know the nature of his own heart..."

Of the lack of a penis: "It is sure that the absence of a penis will play an important role in the little girl's destiny, even if she does not really envy those who possess one. The great privilege that the boy gets from it is that as he is bestowed with an organ that can be seen and held, he can at least partially alienate himself in it. He projects the mystery of his body and its dangers outside himself, which permits him to keep them at a distance: of course, he feels endangered through his penis, he fears castration, but this fear is easier to dominate than the pervasive overall fear the girl feels concerning her "insides," a fear that will often be perpetuated throughout her whole life as a woman. She has a deep concern about everything happening inside her, from the start, she is far more opaque to herself and more profoundly inhabited by the worrying mystery of life than the male. Because he recognizes himself in an alter ego, the little boy can boldly assume his subjectivity, the very object in which he alienates himself becomes a symbol of autonomy, transcendence, and power: he measures the size of his penis; he compares his urinary stream with that of his friends; later, erection and ejaculation will be sources of satisfaction and challenge. But a little girl cannot incarnate herself in any part of her own body....

Of the need for action: "Violence is the authentic test of every person's attachment to himself, his passions, and his own will; to radically reject it is to reject all objective truth, it is to isolate one's self in an abstract subjectivity; an anger or a revolt that does not exert itself in muscles remains imaginary."

Of the attitude of straights to gays: "The homosexual man inspires hostility from male and female heterosexuals as they both demand that man be a dominating subject; by contrast, both sexes spontaneously view lesbians with indulgence."

Of marriage: "But the principle of marriage is obscene because it transforms an exchange that should be founded on a spontaneous impulse into rights and duties; it gives bodies an instrumental, thus degrading, side by dooming them to grasp themselves in their generality; the husband is often frozen by the idea that he is accomplishing a duty, and the wife is ashamed to feel delivered to someone who exercises a right over her." and "Eroticism is a movement toward the Other, and this is its essential character; but within the couple, spouses become, for each other, the Same; no exchange is possible between them anymore, no giving, no conquest. If they remain lovers, it is often in embarrassment: they fee; the sexual act is no longer an intersubjective experience where each one goes beyond himself, but rather a kind of mutual masturbation."

Of the link between marriage and colonialism: "Marriage incites man to a capricious imperialism: the temptation to dominate is the most universal and the most irresistible there is; to turn over a child to his mother or to turn over a wife to her husband is to cultivate tyranny in the world; it is often not enough for the husband to be supported and admired, to give counsel and guidance; he gives orders, he plays the sovereign; all the resentments accumulated in his childhood, throughout his life, accumulated daily among other men whose existence vexes and wounds him, he unloads at home by unleashing his authority over his wife..."

Of the lack of genius: "How could women even have had genius when all possibility of accomplishing a work of genius--or just a work--was refused them? Old Europe formerly heaped its contempt on barbarian Americans for possessing neither artists nor writers. "Let us live before asking us to justify our existence," Jefferson wrote, in essence. Blacks give the same answers to racists who reproach them for not having produced a Whitman or Melville. Neither can the French proletariat invoke a name like Racine or Mallarme. The free woman is just being born; when she conquers herself, she will perhaps justify Rimbaud's prophecy: "Poets will be. When woman's infinite servitude is broken, when she lives for herself and by herself, man--abominable until now--giving her her freedom, she too will be a poet! Woman will find the unknown! Will her worlds of ideas differ from ours? She will find strange, unfathomable, repugnant, delicious things, we will take them, we will understand them."(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Mar 02, 2011 Venus rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: literature

در کتاب جنس دوم، سیمون دوبووار استدلال‌های خود را از طریق اگزیستانسیالیسمی فمینیستی بیان می‌کند. بووار به‌عنوان یک اگزیستانسیالیست باور داشت که بودن مقدم بر ماهیت است. وی به‌همین منوال استنباط می‌کند که یک انسان زن زاده نمی‌شود، بلکه تبدیل به زن می‌شود، چرا دختران از اوان کودکی، نقش‏های فرهنگی معینی را می‏پذیرند. تز کلی کتاب، نشان دادن آن است که چگونه زنان به وسیله‏ی تاریخ و افسانه‏هایی تعریف و محدود شده‏اند که آن‏ها را در جایگاهی پایین‏تر قرار می‏دهد. به باور بووار، تاریخ فرهنگی مانع از آن شده‌...more

like · see review

Oct 23, 2010 Aurochz rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, feminism, existentialism-phenomenology, favorites

This book has an already well established reputation, regardless of whether I love or hate it, in the end it is a necessary read in regards to the history of gender studies and or a look at the existentialist stance on women and their views on them. As someone who was interested from it in both regards it didn't disappoint.

Philosophically I am somewhat at odds with this book. I am not a fan of existentialism or the dichotomy between essence and existence she adopted from Sartre. I don't think i...more This book has an already well established reputation, regardless of whether I love or hate it, in the end it is a necessary read in regards to the history of gender studies and or a look at the existentialist stance on women and their views on them. As someone who was interested from it in both regards it didn't disappoint.

Philosophically I am somewhat at odds with this book. I am not a fan of existentialism or the dichotomy between essence and existence she adopted from Sartre. I don't think it stands up to scrutiny. In regards to this book though I'm glad she only used it as starting point and it can be replaced by merely seeing her as emphasizing the importance of environment at the time and to some extent now on shaping womens abilities and overall personality. I also think the trichotomy of the narcissist, the lover and the mystic was kind of a tired existentialist tactic. Kierkegaard Camus and a few others had a similar Trichotomous structure that made as little sense and generalized people too much. Even if we account for the limited opportunities of the time it isn't a very useful structuring. It is also funny considering that idea of essence is supposed to strip us down to our fundamental phenomenological existence and yet they're willing to generalize to make points all the time. My philosophical objections may seem harsh, but I don't see the importance of the Second Sex as being a philosophical tome.

The importance of this book is in describing how hard it is to be a woman especially in regard to child birth and social expectations. Some inequalities have been adequately addressed since this book first came out in America and in France, but these two still leave something to be desired in regards to fair treatment and merit. I think this book did a good job of outlining the overall feeling of inferiority felt by people who live in a society where the other gender is considered the standard by which you're always judged. For this it is still an extremely important work.

I did have some problems with its over reliance on psycho-analysis, which permeated virtually every chapter. I also thought that she was somewhat sexist ironically, she type casted women in ways that even most misogynists wouldn't in this day and age. She considered some things a part of fundamental existence that given her false dichotomy essence could easily account for. I think she may have been helped a lot more by looking into the biology, which is more often than not on the side of equality, with all else being equal. The problem is existentialists have a knee jerk hatred of Science and its measuring of man, that hinders their investigations. She also was economically and politically a Marxist and or an extreme socialist, which I do not think think helped her case much.

Despite some of those misgivings, I liked this book a lot and I think it is still an important read as far as historical and contemporary relevance go. I definitely recommend. (less)

3 likes · like · see review

Feb 11, 2009 Fretty Panggabean rated it 3 of 5 stars

I didn't read this book from cover to cover. See, I had to read this book because I was using feminism theory on my final thesis. But I do agree with Simone de Beauvoir's opinions that in many countries including Indonesia, women are positioned mostly as citizen number two who have less privileges than men do in so many aspects of life. What I dislike most is the double standards applied to women. It's not enough for a woman to be good at one aspect of her life, she has to be good in all aspects...more

5 likes · like · see review

Feb 10, 2012 Amy Hughes rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: gender, philosophy

This is a difficult book and not only for it's length. 60 years later and still so much remains to be thought and worked through existentially, philosophically, socially, theologically, etc on women. I was surprised at her reach, impressed by her candor and thankful for her contribution. It is not an easy read, especially if one is not terribly comfortable thinking about the realities of what women have faced and continue to face (I had to put it down several times in order to release myself fro...more

like · see review

Apr 23, 2008 Louise Colette rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: All Women and Men

Shelves: women-s-studies

This was the first book I read after signing up for a class in French and American women writers. While I found myself overwhelmed with the class, this book totally destroyed my old ideas of men and women and our roles in the world.

De Beauvoir wrote so beautifully of all the things I'd been thinking and couldn't express. Woman as "The Other". . .

I became a feminist with this book. Please read it.

5 likes · like · see review

Jun 20, 2012 Bria rated it 4 of 5 stars

Despite my attempts to play at desexing myself, despite the rising bile in my throat at any thread towards sisterhood, despite my discomfort at assumptions made by other women because I am 'one of them', despite my inability to participate in womanly activities, my complete disinterest in categorizing or defining the sexes at all, just because I am female it seems it must be a different experience for me to read this book than for a man, no matter how enlightened, non-dickish, non-chauvinist he...more Despite my attempts to play at desexing myself, despite the rising bile in my throat at any thread towards sisterhood, despite my discomfort at assumptions made by other women because I am 'one of them', despite my inability to participate in womanly activities, my complete disinterest in categorizing or defining the sexes at all, just because I am female it seems it must be a different experience for me to read this book than for a man, no matter how enlightened, non-dickish, non-chauvinist he is. Of course it's a different experience for everyone and it can't possibly be for me anything like it was for anyone to read it when it came out, since so much of it is by now outdated or old hat (possibly in part due to this very book), but I can't deny a tendency toward identifying with the subject that is stronger and more straightforward than any identification I would feel reading about some other people, some minority or oppressed people, that doesn't include me. It makes me think I should stop reading all these books by white people, and yet, part of the problem I recognize is that it simply wouldn't be as effective.

There's a lot of complaints to be had about this book. I don't really buy her analysis of five authors as somehow representative or typical - it may be true, and they may be quite exemplary of the sorts of trends she's purporting to exist, but I'm not sure that method is really convincing. It's hard to call it anything but cherry-picking. And there's plenty of things that are steeped in the time period - so very much of what de Beauvoir talks about relies on the concept of 'frigidity', but she never defines it. I guess it's just a given and everyone understands it, but today it isn't even acknowledged to exist. Is it just a lack of ability to orgasm? A disinterest in sex? It seems like it's supposed to be a sort of constant condition, or neurosis, but it seems to only happen under certain circumstances. Even though the whole book is rather against the foundational assumptions that make the concept of a frigid woman possible, she still accepts it as a real thing. And various other little bits of generalizing, of course some of her ideas about homosexuality, and so forth, could easily be a turn-off. I particularly don't care for the matter-of-fact way she declares her psychoanalysis of this type of woman or that as though she actually knows, and it's just true. But she's usually relatively careful about making it clear that she's painting an illustrative picture of what she perceives to be common, leaving lots of room for exceptions.

However, de Beauvoir maintains relevancy to this day because she's so reasonable about everything - she doesn't try to assert women's superiority, or deny facts or evidence against them. Although the progress we've made since this book is tremendous, it remains woefully incomplete because in large part so much of her message remains ignored. De Beauvoir wants to dismantle this division of the world into categories, shine light upon the shadows of false mysteries, replace myths with the simple facts of reality. But I get the feeling that many women today feel they have or are in the process of emancipating themselves through proving their superiority. They still maintain the distinct division between the sexes and want merely to reverse the standings. A lot of de Beauvoir's comments on how life was for women in mid 20th century is still true - women still have to be beautiful in addition to now also having the obligation to be fit, athletic, powerful, aggressive, entreprenuerial, high-achieving geniuses, now that the barriers to these accomplishments have been all but abolished.

She talks about the lack of women of interest in history and heroines in myths. I think popular culture, at least, is working on this, which is well and good and necessary. But it does bring up something that I've realized before about myself, which may or may not have relevant implications. I have no recollection of ever noticing or caring about the sex of any hero or role model or protagonist I chose to identify with (I recognize that not recalling it doesn't mean it wasn't the case, but let's consider it to be so). If a man accomplished something that I desired, I could imagine myself as him as well as a woman. So although it does make a difference to have female role models, part of the problem is the assumption that you can only look to your own sex for inspiration. It's this continuation of the distinct division of male and female with no boundary crossings allowed that contributes to the perpetuation of this problem. I don't know how it is for other children, but my impression of children's marketing seems to say, at least, that adults seem to think that girls need to have stories and heroines and role models aimed specifically at them. I read an article somewhere about the lamenting of some of the actual peddlers of things like 'pink science', that they don't care for it either but it sells or it works, but I can't remember if it was concluded or not that it was distinctly the parents that brought this about. Even if not, it's certainly a result of other societal aspects, of peer pressure.

The whole idea that woman are human beings that are female, while men are human beings that are male, and that even that doesn't need to be a strict categorization, we're all human for Chrissake's can we move on now, not only holds this book together no matter what other problems or inaccuracies it may contain, but is what makes it still worth reading today, every day. (less)

1 like · like · see review

Nov 04, 2011 Hypatia rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction, feminism

I have mixed feelings about this book. I can see that, historically, it was ground breaking, and completely revolutionized thinking about feminism. Even today, 60 years later, there were parts of the book that had me thinking, wow, things really haven't changed. Kind of a depressing thought. But the vast majority of the book I found somewhat out-dated and irrelevant, at least to me. First of all, I think much of the biology she discusses is not really correct. Our knowledge in this field has inc...more

4 likes · like · see review

Dec 06, 2008 Ryan rated it 4 of 5 stars

The book is one of the first things I've read that really changes my way of looking at how I go through my day, and the things I say..or don't say. For that it is fantastic. What is written from the perspective of a modern woman (about being 'the other', etc.) is extremely insightful.

What I find somewhat ambiguous is the chapters like "early tillers of the soil". de Beauvoir seems to make dangerously large assumptions about the lives of people who lived thousands of years ago... she claims that...more

1 like · like · see review

Jan 26, 2009 Martha rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: f-philosophy, f-history-lesson, l-translated-french, read-2007-08, own

When I bought this book, I hadn't had access to English nonfiction for months, so I tore ravenously into The Second Sex and soon found the lesson I wanted: "'shopgirl morality' is more authentic than fairy tales of emptiness because it has its roots in life and reality, whence the higher aspirations can arise." (213) Beauvoir returns to this argument frequently in different ways, cataloging Man's empty fantasies of Women in Part One, and Woman's empty fantasies of Herself in Part Two. It stung t...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 21, 2010 ONTD Feminism rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: recommendations, essentials

LJ user rhapsodeeinblue:

Essential feminist reading. The concept of the Other is introduced and elucidated with ease and clarity. Women are seen as the object and men the subject, a social and cultural construction that has been internalized over the course of history, and De Beauvoir explains this well. She writes, "For him she is sex--absolute sex, no less. She is defined and differentiated with reference to man and not he with reference to her; she is the incidental, the inessential as opposed...more

1 like · like · see review

Jun 29, 2011 Abrar rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

كتاب ثمين جداً
من الكتب التي لا تندم على قرائتها، كتابٌ من الكتب المعدودة التي لم تشعرني بأنها تحكمت بي بل شعرت بالانتعاش فكرياً و شعرت بأن افكاراً في رأسي اتخذت لغة سيمون ديبوفوار الصادقة و الموفقة.

تذكرت حواري مع قريبتي حينما كتبت لها بعض المقاطع من الكتاب فتستشعر ضاحكة إن كانت سيمون فرنسية أم سعودية؟؟؟

4 likes · like · see review

Jul 11, 2007 Tia rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: feminism

Excellent. Of course it has become a staple of feminism, but people often forget how literary and elegant the writing is. I enjoyed this book not because of its earth-shattering ideas (a lot of the stuff, especially how menstruation affects women, is outdated), but because it was a pleasure to read the words.

2 likes · like · see review

Jan 23, 2009 Beth rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction

Wow is this a tough read. This is an academic tome, not popular literature, and the fact that is was written in French and then translated to English made it that much more work to get through. Having said that, this was well worth my time. As modern philosophy, parts of the message have become somewhat dated, but the arguments are well-drawn, and I had to remind myself that the message was utterly new when this was written. Like most humans, my world is somewhat less black-and-white when it com...more

1 like · like · see review

May 17, 2009 Adrian Colesberry rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I followed up my reading of Sartre's Being and Nothingness with reading de Beauvoir's The Second Sex. It seemed only fair to read a big long book by her after reading one by him. I was disappointed by this book; it was like I'd heard it all before. I don't think that's quite fair of me to be disappointed on that account. She was the first one to say a lot of those things so the popularity of her thought has made the original expression of it seem a bit tired and slow going.

1 like · like · see review

May 12, 2012 Robert Monk rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, psychology

This is outstanding writing, an adult introduction to psychoanalysis, Marxist philosophy, and existentialism, all on the path to a classic statement of feminism.

Coming from the existentialist perspective of constructed social values, the arguments for 'woman' as a situation not a 'natural' fact, can apply to the situation of other oppressed groups, but de Beauvoir carefully notes the special position of woman within a biological species-imperative that complicates questions of cooperation refor...more

2 likes · like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Goodreads Librari...: 9782070323517	4	116	Jan 29, 2013 12:38pm
Lesekreis Simone de Beauvoir - Das andere Geschlecht	6	16	Jan 13, 2013 02:31pm
This is pretty sad...	12	107	May 03, 2012 07:55am
is it possible...	1	43	Jan 13, 2009 02:16pm

combine
Other Editions (65)

More editions...

Genres

Non Fiction

433 users

Feminism

432 users

Philosophy

384 users

Classics

120 users

Gender

85 users

Womens

66 users

Cultural > France

61 users

Sociology

58 users

Gender > Gender Studies

45 users

Philosophy > Theory

41 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Simone de Beauvoir

"Simone de Beauvoir was a French author and philosopher. She wrote novels, monographs on philosophy, politics, and social issues, essays, biographies, and an autobiography. She is now best known for her metaphysical novels, including She Came to Stay and The Mandarins, and for her 1949 treatise The Second Sex, a detailed analysis of women's oppression and a foundational tract of contemporary femin...more

More about Simone de Beauvoir...

Books by Simone de Beauvoir

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About The Second Sex

5 trivia questions

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from The Second Sex

“One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.” — 407 people liked it

“Few tasks are more like the torture of Sisyphus than housework, with its endless repetition: the clean becomes soiled, the soiled is made clean, over and over, day after day.” — 85 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: The Second Sex
avg rating	preview: The Second Sex Goodreads rating: 3.98 (10413 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/457264.The_Second_Sex?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327978178l/457264.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/457264.The_Second_Sex?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir[/url]

The Second Sex (Le deuxième sexe #1-2)

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website