What do you think?
Rate this book
The Rights and wrongs of women
... Elinizdeki kitapta yer alan tarihsel ve sosyolojik incelemeler, aradan gecen onca yilda, Bati dunyasinin kaydettigi tum ilerlemelere ragmen, erkekler karsisinda kadinlarin goreli durumunda koklu bir degisiklik olmadigini gosteriyor. Liberal demokrasi, kadinlar uzerindeki baskiyi olsun, bu baskiya karsi tepkileri olsun, inceltmis ve daha karmasik hale getirmistir. Dolayisiyla kadin hareketinin asil buyuk mucadeleleri, henuz onunde uzaniyor.
- GenresFeminism
438 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1976
About the author
Juliet Mitchell
36 books57 followersJuliet Mitchell, FBA (born 1940) is a British psychoanalyst and socialist feminist.
Mitchell was born in New Zealand in 1940, and moved to England in 1944. She attended St Anne's College, Oxford, where she received a degree in English, as well as doing postgraduate work. She taught English literature from 1962 to 1970 at Leeds University and Reading University. Throughout the 1960s, Mitchell was active in leftist politics, and was on the editorial committee of the journal, New Left Review.
She was a fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge and Professor of Psychoanalysis and Gender Studies at Cambridge University, before in 2010 being appointed to be the Director of the Expanded Doctoral School in Psychoanalytic Studies at Psychoanalysis Unit of University College London (UCL).
She is a retired registrant of the British Psychoanalytic Council.
(from Wikipedia)
Mitchell was born in New Zealand in 1940, and moved to England in 1944. She attended St Anne's College, Oxford, where she received a degree in English, as well as doing postgraduate work. She taught English literature from 1962 to 1970 at Leeds University and Reading University. Throughout the 1960s, Mitchell was active in leftist politics, and was on the editorial committee of the journal, New Left Review.
She was a fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge and Professor of Psychoanalysis and Gender Studies at Cambridge University, before in 2010 being appointed to be the Director of the Expanded Doctoral School in Psychoanalytic Studies at Psychoanalysis Unit of University College London (UCL).
She is a retired registrant of the British Psychoanalytic Council.
(from Wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 5, 2023
After the two great world wars, humanity has experienced more flexible and changeable political processes under the name of democracy*, giving different voices and opinions the opportunity to find a discourse space for themselves in particular, and in today's postmodenist era, under the prevailing ideology, the age of non-ideology has passed.
Capitalism, which does not want to lose customers by dissolving its ideological approach within the framework of Sunday logic, keeps itself at the dominant power point by going down the path of rasping these ideological approaches in the political field with the concept of democracy.
Democracy, on the other hand, manifests its existence with the claim that people are equal. However, equality between men and women has not been achieved in any political process and social structure, and it has not been desired to achieve it. Although there is a demonstrative equality situation only within the scope of the right to vote, it is not possible to come across any signs of equality in a social sense.
It is not absurd at all to say that liberal democracy has a male-dominated, even white male-dominated identity in this sense.
At this point, the book shows that the phenomenon of equality is at every point of social life, especially in democracy, law, political fields
it reveals unequal equality by determining that it exists only on paper and in languages. The prevailing ideology (liberalism), which is quite distant from the issue of gender equality, and the fact that it does not keep the issue of gender in the political sphere is an indicator of how democratic* we live in an order.
There are also parts of the book that I think are wrong. Especially when criticizing the system, it is quite contradictory that he wishes women to be more active in the hierarchical political and legal layers within the current system. So there is a family in the middle, and the head of this family should be a woman, in a way, he says. But the essence of the problem is already the concept of family. Apart from that, I saw a rather erroneous attitude in the biological approach. The acceptance that biological differences are at the root of inequality is processed between the lines. Dec. Let me answer briefly; "There is no such thing.''
The book is a kind of "positive discrimination" book. Intra-system, intra-family, intra-hierarchy... But one of the books that should be read within the scope of system criticisms.
Capitalism, which does not want to lose customers by dissolving its ideological approach within the framework of Sunday logic, keeps itself at the dominant power point by going down the path of rasping these ideological approaches in the political field with the concept of democracy.
Democracy, on the other hand, manifests its existence with the claim that people are equal. However, equality between men and women has not been achieved in any political process and social structure, and it has not been desired to achieve it. Although there is a demonstrative equality situation only within the scope of the right to vote, it is not possible to come across any signs of equality in a social sense.
It is not absurd at all to say that liberal democracy has a male-dominated, even white male-dominated identity in this sense.
At this point, the book shows that the phenomenon of equality is at every point of social life, especially in democracy, law, political fields
it reveals unequal equality by determining that it exists only on paper and in languages. The prevailing ideology (liberalism), which is quite distant from the issue of gender equality, and the fact that it does not keep the issue of gender in the political sphere is an indicator of how democratic* we live in an order.
There are also parts of the book that I think are wrong. Especially when criticizing the system, it is quite contradictory that he wishes women to be more active in the hierarchical political and legal layers within the current system. So there is a family in the middle, and the head of this family should be a woman, in a way, he says. But the essence of the problem is already the concept of family. Apart from that, I saw a rather erroneous attitude in the biological approach. The acceptance that biological differences are at the root of inequality is processed between the lines. Dec. Let me answer briefly; "There is no such thing.''
The book is a kind of "positive discrimination" book. Intra-system, intra-family, intra-hierarchy... But one of the books that should be read within the scope of system criticisms.
February 3, 2023
not planning on burning my bra post reading it, but informative and i can’t wait to get in an debate to flex all my new knowledge 😊👏
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews