The Second Sex By Simone De Beauvoir Analysis

In the introduction of her book, The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir attempts to define the concept of “woman”, or “femininity” and arrives to the conclusion that woman has been defined as an “other” in relation to men. In this essay I will attempt to explain what de Beauvoir means by defining woman in terms of “other” and will provide some examples as to how this “otherness” is unique in the case of women. De Beauvoir begins her book by asking “what is a woman?” In page 1 she asserts that there exist some individuals who are biologically female (meaning that they have a uterus) who are not considered to be women. She arrives to the conclusion that being a woman is not necessarily tied to being biologically, or “functionally” female. She attempts
According to de Beauvoir, “anyone can clearly see that humanity is split into two categories of individuals with manifestly different clothes, faces, bodies, smiles, movements, interests and occupations; these differences are perhaps superficial; perhaps they are destined to disappear.” (page 4) It is then that de Beauvoir arrives to the concept of “other”. We must now attempt to find a definition of “woman” to understand this phenomenon. However, the definition is different from how other things are defined in the sense that women are not defined in and of themselves, but in relationship to men. On page 5 she states: “A man never begins by posting himself as an individual of a certain sex: that he is a man is obvious.” The implications of this situation are that women are defined as relative to men. She cites a few examples of prolific writers in history, such as Aristotle, who claims that “female is female by virtue of a lack of certain qualities” and Saint Thomas, who defines a woman as being an “incomplete man”. As such, the man is thought of as being the norm, and the woman is the deviation from the norm. She is defined as
In page 10 she states: “The man who sets the woman up as an Other will thus find her in a deep complicity. Hence woman makes no claim for herself as a subject because she lacks concrete means, because she senses the necessary link connecting her to man without positing its reciprocity, and because she often derives satisfaction in her role as Other.” If a woman were to resist and refuses being labeled and treated as an “other” she would face significant social and economic consequences, such as being shun in society and not having the sufficient means to live, that a husband would provide. As such, women prefer to live as complices in their own “otherness” rather than to challenge