The natural superiority of women

by Ashley Montagu

Among the central issues of the modern feminist movement, the debate over biology and culture over sex and gender, over genetics and gender roles has certainly been one of the most passionately contested. Making revolutionary arguments upon its first publication in 1953, The Natural Superiority of Women stands as one of the original feminist arguments against biological determinism. An iconoclast, Montagu wielded his encyclopedic knowledge of physical anthropology in critique of the conventional wisdom of women as the 'weaker sex,' showing how women's biological, genetic, and physical makeup made her not only man's equal, but his superior. Also a humanist, Montagu points to the emotional and social qualities typically ascribed to and devalued in women as being key to just social life and relationships. Subsequent editions of this book have provided additional support for Montagu's arguments, examining both biological and social scientific data of the late 20th century. One of the most broadly renowned and read scholars of our century, Montagu brings out this fifth edition with up-to-date statistics and references. A lengthy foreword by Susan Sperling contextualizes the book within the intellectual histories of feminism and anthropology, noting the huge social and intellectual changes that are spanned in Montagu's life and writing. Montagu's foundational book is an important addition to the library of all gender scholars.

Genres: Feminism, Nonfiction, Science, Womens, Psychology, History, Gender

256 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1952

About the author

Books, such as The Natural Superiority of Women (1953), of Ashley Montagu, originally Israel Ehrenberg, a British-American, helped to popularize anthropology.

As a young man, he changed his name to "Montague Francis Ashley-Montagu". After relocating to the United States, he used the name "Ashley Montagu."

This humanist of Jewish ancestry related topics, such as race and gender, to politics and development. He served as the rapporteur or appointed investigator in 1950 for the The Race Question , statement of educational, scientific, and cultural organization of United Nations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_...

Reviews

[Kelly · Rating 5 out of 5]

So I was totally skeptical of this book. I mean the title is pretty in your face and the one I read (which my awesome husband bought me, I think partly as a joke) was super dated (it’s the second edition, so was published in 1953) but I LOVED it! It was really, really interesting and doesn’t argue that women don’t need men or anything extremely radical like that, in fact, it argues against women trying to be like men and notes that the greatest achievement and most creative endeavor is to bear and raise children, the first of which only women can do. It spent a lot of time dispelling common myths regarding feminine and masculine traits/characteristics and if you have ever wondered about differences between the sexes this book is for you. If you’re still not convinced, he starts the book by noting that the truly superior person doesn’t feel the need to lord it over anyone but that this is something only inferior people do in order to feel superior (see page 10). And although it may come off as cheesy and idealistic at the end he says: “The best way of remaking the world is not by changing the world but by changing the people who make the world the kind of place it is, by making human beings out of people” (page 189-190) and how women have constantly been involved in this task. If you've ever suffered from an inferiority complex and are a woman READ THIS BOOK!

[Jenna Bryce · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ashley Montague was a giant in his field. As a teacher, he discovered he could not teach in class what he teaches in this book. Both male and female students would not hear him. The females were made uncomfortable. The males were made angry and derisive. So he wrote the book. It's common knowledge among biologists that mammals are all female, becoming male by some sort of imperative as they develop in the womb. Males are an adaptation of the female. It ought to be common knowledge by simple observation. Why do males have nipples? Cats, dogs, pigs, choose your mammal. It's so obvious it's laughable. Montague argues that the female body is superior to the male's. He does NOT argue that that the female is superior to the male. In class, this went unheard. In the 1950s it became very apparent that Montague was right since there were females being trained for the space program at the same time males were. No publicity was given to the women for the obvious reasons. In every test, a woman's body proved superior to a male's for the task of space travel. Look it up. It's true.

Montague's book is a classic, or should be. It's even-handed, sensible, honest and fair, even bending over backward so that males will not become defensive. Ashley was a male and he knew what he was talking about.

[Maelanie · Rating 5 out of 5]

I strongly urge all women to read this book, and men to. Do not let the title mislead you. It is not at all what you might think. The phrase, ‘do not judge a book by its cover,’ could not be more true here.

I found it very informative, as well as empowering; and it gave me insight/ammunition, to deal with the stresses of life, as a woman in this world. If taken seriously, and with that “beautiful intelligence” of: love and compassion; Montagu’s observations (supported by extensive research), could help men to correct how they see/treat women; which in turn, would go a long way, to saving the people of this world, from themselves.

I am convinced, however, that should things remain as they are (in our so-called “civilized societies”), the people of this world shall never become “human;” and thereby, inevitably, doomed. Undoubtedly, should you read this book with an open mind, you will see for yourself, and you will not be disappointed.

[Dini · Rating 5 out of 5]

Courtesy of the University of Indonesia's Faculty of Humanities' library, this book helped form the foundation of my interest in gender studies. Oh by the way, the writer is a man.

[Cherry · Rating 4 out of 5]

I loved this book, because it said what I really needed to hear at that time and that was that Women are AMAZING just look at what they can do.

[Eliza · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book, which is written by a MAN! And that too Ashley Montagu, who is an anthropologist as well as an expert in other fields (e.g. Psychology). He also wrote the UNESCO statement on Race.
It addresses all the main capabilities of humans and shows a comparison between man and woman. He is not trying to pull down men, but wants them to realize that their insecurities is making them subjugate women. He puts forth, that love, kindness, gentleness, caring are more important than achievement and success to the human race.

[Ki Longfellow · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book, merely on content, deserves 5 stars. But Montagu's fairly constant apology to males got on my nerves. Whilst it's true, the mind of a man can easily be equal to a woman's, his body cannot. This drives men crazy, so much so Montagu couldn't teach the biological truths (known to most leading biologists) of this book in a classroom. Men would boo him silent. So he wrote a damn book. And a damn good and fascinating book it is. But he's obviously still ducking the anger of males who can't accept the design of their bodies is a modification of the primary design - the female body.

[Donna Davis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Three stars is supposed to be "liked it". Actually, it pissed me off, but it is a classical read for students of women's history, and so it still graces my shelves.

Montagu essentially says that women are naturally better than men BECAUSE WE CAN HAVE BABIES. Everything good and decent about us comes from our hormones. It's a whole different way (somewhat) to stereotype women and make it sound like a compliment. He is scholarly in his approach, misusing science to make a case that actually falls apart pretty badly, but for any student of women's rights, it's a big step in the contemporary evolution of women's history, and so it's better to know what the man has to say, even though it tastes of gall.

[Robert Little]

I first read this book in college for a course on the biology and sociology of gender. It had a huge impact on me. Re-reading it nearly twenty years later, I'm even more impressed.

A distinguished anthropologist, Ashley Montagu was interested in examining (and, when necessary, debunking) cultural assumptions. The assumption that comes under scrutiny here is that women are "the weaker vessel", a notion used to justify all kinds of oppression against females. Was there any truth in this notion? Montagu lays out all the scientific and medical evidence in a careful, rigorous manner and comes to precisely the opposite conclusion: in almost every respect (with the exception of sheer muscle mass), women are at an advantage. Women live longer, are most resistant to disease, less prone to birth defects -- the list goes on and on (and on.) Biologically speaking, men are the weaker sex. By far.

When Montagu's study was first published in 1952(!), many people greeted it with disbelief and derision. Re-issued in several revised versions over the decades, with each successive edition it became clear that the evidence was mounting massively in Montagu's favor. He incorporated the new data on each round and 50 years later he has been completely vindicated. Women's innnate biological superiority is not just a settled question from a medical/scientific standpoint, but acknowledgement of this fact is now more socially acceptable than ever. A number of other good books (many, interestingly, written by men) have addressed the topic of male biological fragility (among them "The Redundant Male", "Adam's Curse: A Future without Men", and "Y: The Descent of Men"), but this is the first and best of the bunch.

Montagu does a great job of explaining the science here. Males are basically modified females. In the womb, we all start out as female and if you have two X chromosomes, then you continue to develop as a girl. However, those of us with X and Y chromosomes are in for a rougher ride. A genetic marker on the Y chromosome triggers the production of testosterone, which masculinizes the fetus, altering the originally female genitalia -- ovaries become testes, the clitoris enlarges to form a penis, laba fuse to become scrotum, etc. And not just the genitals, but the brain structure itself is altered in major ways. When you modify something, there is more possibility of something going wrong, which accounts in large part for the greater number of birth defects among boys. Even more importantly, the presence of only a single whole X and a puny Y chromosome renders men disproportionately vulnerable throughout the life cycle to all kinds of conditions and diseases. Women are better protected by their richer genetic endowment of two X chromosomes. Although "lifestyle" choices are a contributing factor, the difference is mostly nature -- the male is simply less durable, less resilient.

Montagu goes on to demonstrate convincingly that women are not just biologically stronger, but emotionally and intellectually superior -- more mature, compassionate, complex, and perceptive. A particular standout is his chapter on the sexual superiority of women, which will provoke awe and envy on the part of any man who reads it. By now, everybody knows that the clitoris is far more sensitive than the penis , but Montagu makes it clear that not only do women have a capacity for sexual enjoyment greater than that of any male (multiple orgasms, anyone?), but that their eroticism is deeper, fuller, more emotionally resonant.

All this is laid out with clarity, precision, and wit. In addition to being a brave and original thinker, Montagu is a wonderful writer. Few academics have ever produced anything this enjoyable.

For many women, this has been an empowering work as they deal with the misogyny that sadly still permeates our world. As a man, I found this book to be both deeply humbling and enlightening. On my first read, after the initial shock I accepted the book's conclusions rather easily, I'd even say happily, because it confirmed what I had already long suspected at some level. Incidentally, that is an important point for Montagu -- both genders are intuitively aware of the female's innate superiority.

In many men, this subconscious awareness breeds resentment, manifesting in misogyny and abusive behavior. And it's not just a problem of a few sad individuals. Huge portions of traditional belief systems are dedicated to denigrating femaleness. Consider the grotesque metaphor of the first chapters of Genesis, whereas a "biologically correct" telling would have Adam taken from Eve's rib . This sort of thing has gone on for millenia. But, as Montagu shows, misogyny has enormous costs for men as well as women. By living in constant fear and denial of the feminine, men diminish their own humanity and hurt themselves.

A better, healthier response (exemplified by Montagu himself) is for men to graciously accept the primacy of the female principle (which for me as a Goddess-centered pagan, exists on both a spiritual and biological level, though apparently Montagu was an atheist). Rather than engage in frantic, angry denial, the more mature path is to be mindful of your own vulnerabilities. Giving up the constant attempt to be dominant, "strong", and suppress a basic part of yourself is the true liberation. My doctor once discussed this book and she remarked that she wished all of her male patients would read it, then they might take better care of themselves. Certainly knowing that I'm biologically disadvantaged as a male has made me more mindful of the need to take care of myself physically, mentally, and emotionally. Montagu himself lived into his 90s and once remarked "the idea is to die young as late as possible".

But in a broader context than one individual's well-being, the welfare of the entire species (indeed, the planet), makes this book urgently necessary. In my view, a greater respect for the Feminine is key to a more sustainable, just, and peaceful future. Montagu addresses this idea in the closing chapters of his book and ends it on a cheerful, optimistic note.

This is one of the best and most important books of the past century. Read it, whether you're a woman or (especially) a man.

[Sunganani · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book. The title speaks for itself.

[Natalie Kaufman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting read and a quite intriguing argument. I am curious, however, what a book with the same title would look like if it were written by a woman. Some (most) of the argument seemed to lie in the fact that women are superior because they have the capacity to bring life into this world. While I agree that this is an incredible testament to the strength of women, it still seems a little archaic and sexist to place women's power in their ability to have children. Still, need to keep context that this book is quite old, so it is fairly progressive for its time. A little dry in parts and took me awhile to get through, 3/5.

[Adrien · Rating 1 out of 5]

Well, I must say that the knowledge that this book even exists is a bit hilarious. It has a certain outrageous charm to it, given the time it was written in. Montagu does not seem to understand how condescending and childish his theories might sound to a genuine feminist who first and foremost sees women as humans with equal agency and psychological complexity to men. It's a very weird book and not very well-written, to my memory, but it might be entertaining for a while before it becomes offensive and cringe-worthy toward men, women, and anyone outside of the binary.

[Linda Snow · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book “back in the day,” when it was first published. It’s now come back into my attention as being useful to my ongoing focus on the patriarchy, its origins and its maintenance over time. For the origins of my personal interest, see my review of My Dark Vanessa by Kate Elizabeth Russell.

[Bridgid · Rating 2 out of 5]

A rather dry and obviously biased book, but I do love the subject matter.

Some basic ideas include that women recovery from illnesses better and live longer. Women use energy more efficiently, can withstand extreme conditions like cold and heat.

[Pamela · Rating 1 out of 5]

An old, outdated, and very silly book that will likely appeal to many insecure women and man-haters. Montagu's argument, if he's to be taken seriously, is that women are "naturally superior" primarily because they birth babies and live longer. This argument might have served as an interesting type of "playful reversal" back in 1952 when it was first written, but today seems completely tone-deaf and ridiculous. Indeed, it's hard to know how serious the author is because he often makes trite, patronizing remarks and uses tons of old “sitcom style” anecdotes (eg, ‘men are clueless at cleaning the house’) to make his point. Perhaps it is fun to read as a tongue-in-cheek poke at men’s sexism towards women, but what disturbs me is how some women (and men) actually take this book seriously and recommend it favorably as an argument for “natural superiority”. How anyone can seriously believe this author’s arguments baffles me. Not to mention the outright sexism of arguing for one sex to be superior to the other.

What is “superiority,” anyway? Montagu anticipates this question and argues that it’s measured by “survival benefits”. Of course, this is an entirely subjective definition, but he would have you believe it’s some kind of scientific fact. You can argue for superiority of anything if you define it to measure what you want it to. So it goes, he lists a bunch of statistics on differences in mortality rates between the sexes, showing women live longer, goes on some uninformed (and wrong) rants about sex chromosomes and makes absurd claims about men being biologically “incomplete” women, how women are sugar and spice and sweetness embodied, and how men don’t help around the house, etc. I mean, it’s almost nauseating in the platitudes. As a woman it comes off as patronizing and paternalistic.

Other than remarking on how women typically live longer and birth babies, the arguments made here are supported by scant or no evidence. Sometimes it’s not even wrong. For example, he writes “Almost everyone will agree that there have been more geniuses for being human among women than there have been among men." What does that even mean? Another gem is his argument that men will still be dominant in the arts and sciences, but only because they’re so inferior that they need compensate for their inability to give birth. Another is that women may or may not be worse drivers, but if they are it’s because men teach them how to drive (so it’s really a point in women’s favor, you see)! Because men have larger brains, he spends several pages arguing that brain size is unrelated to intelligence, but then explains that if we “really” look at the it (eg, adjusting for body size), women really have relatively larger brains and therefore they must be more intelligent! Montagu is just getting started, though! He spends several words to explain to us that cognitive tests are unreliable and biased, but then proceeds to use the those same tests to show that girls have higher verbal skills, and thus are smarter. The tests are only “unreliable” when boys are ahead, it seems.

That style of argument is the entire book. This biased, disingenuous nature of the presentation is maddening, which is why I can’t believe the author is serious about his argument. Montagu ends by saying a bunch of fluff about love and cooperation and how the worlds needs less war, etc, and how women are the bee’s knees. No evidence here just ranting. He claims he just wants to bring the sexes together and not elevate one above the other (even though he does just that), but how on earth is that accomplished by this screed? Do women really need this kind of junk to feel empowered? As a woman, I don’t need to feel “superior” to men to have self-worth. Men and women have some differences, strengths and weaknesses, but what purpose is served by claiming one as naturally “superior”?? Those making such claims only discredit themselves as serious thinkers.

[Aleyna Dogan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Obviously out of date because it was published 60+ years ago- although I read the 5th edition update. Innovative for its time, the book has ideas on emotionality, intelligence and biology of women that essentially says, in what is important for survival, women are better thus are the superior sex. There’s outdated notions in it for sure. I wish a woman wrote it tho

[Mim]

I read this book in the mid-1950s. My mother gave it to me. She was a woman ahead of her times. I was a young teen at the time. I have no idea how I’d rate it, and I thought the author was a woman. I think I
Need to reread it.

[Cathryn Michon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Look, I bought this book in college just because of the title. I mean, how can you not love it? But it's a classic, and very profound. I only wish this book were more read, and it well deserves to be.

[Emily Georges · Rating 4 out of 5]

At times a little redundant, but otherwise very well written. I fully agree with Montagu’s thorough assessment and I appreciate that he followed up every point with scientific evidence. Very impactful read that I will probably think about for the rest of my life.

[Sean · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is understandably annoying.

I agree with female biological/genetic superiority.

What I find unseemly about it is the assumption of statism. Pick at my use of "unseemly" if you like; how is it any different from Ashley's title? I have had close ties with anarchism for many years now, only recently going slightly away from it. The predominant contention and reason for the provocative title, I imagine, is the historical subjugation of women. The origin of this subjugation is statism; it's partner is patriarchical thinking. Nonetheless, statism is statism, and without taxation there would be no state, male-dominated or not.

[Valerie]

I haven't seen this edition, and would like to, but I have an older edition.

A lot of people don't know that 'Ashley Montagu' was actually his surname. Not sure what the first names were--the initials were M F.

There's a concept of intellectual genaeology. Montagu was taught by people of Franz Boas' generation, and taught many in the generations after. In the acknowledgements to The Mismeasure of Man, Stephen Jay Gould comments that genes may be selfish, but there can be no gene for selfishness, and specifically thanks Ashley Montagu for critiquing and correcting the manuscript.

[Yvette Cole · Rating 4 out of 5]

'Required' reading for feminists of the 70's. Good read from an academic,anthropological viewpoint.
Need to re-read to see if it holds up today. When I would read it on the bus, men would be visibly and verbally shaken and upset......HA,HA,HA,.

[Barry · Rating 3 out of 5]

an old read- early impact on me