I found this article to be at times intriguing and at other times I wanted to laugh at how stupid some of the information and reasoning was behind the viewpoints of the author.
I feel as though the general point of this article was to set up the understanding for the history of women in not only the United States, but the entire world from the beginning of history. More specifically, DeBeauvior tries to make excuses as to why women are subordinate to men in today’s world, and if there is some pinpoint reasoning as to why women are subordinate and how exactly they got that way. He discusses the history of women from the era of the cavemen up to women in today’s world and the issue of why women receive less pay on average than men for the same work.
TWhile in the first few parts of the article I feel DeBeauvior has validity in saying that men became superior in the days of the cavemen and the hunting and gathering tribes since men were much more apt to put themselves at risk in front of a wooly-mammoth and women obviously were unable due to the fact they were often times pregnant. Although on the other hand, part of me finds this to be an incredibly ignorant statement. Women cannot be pregnant their ENTIRE life, that’s just ridiculous. Let’s be honest, the article talks about infanticide as a common practice, so why wouldn’t the women just kill their baby and get on to providing for the tribe. So I am at a crossroad as to agree or disagree if this was a major turning point in the power struggle between men and women.
DeBeauvior goes on to talk about how the men must provide for the women in order for the women to reproduce. This is where the wording became jibberish to me and all I could take from the next few passages was that men chose to engage in the dominate activities such as hunting so as their status in their tribe would increase whereas women were bound to their bodies and childbirth and could not increase their status by giving birth and thus they were stuck in their current sucky position in society.
Going on, I found some interesting connections between DeBeauvior’s talk of feminism and the last class discussion from DuBois and slavery. I find that when DeBeauvior talks about women’s futures being “man-made” I feel as though it was true for the slaves. While women had a lot of the same privileges of men, they were unable to do anything with those privileges to be taken seriously. When the feminist movement for the right to vote came about, it was the women who started the rally, but the signature of a man who finally made it possible.
One point of this article that really irked me was the fact that the author continually was usuing names of women who I’m guessing are old as dirt since I had never heard of any of them, therefore, the article did little to tie together the ideas he was conveying to me. A name from the 20th century probably would’ve been helpful.
Another point DeBeauvior made that made me want to slap him was the point that he stated that women are good at “culture”. In my opinion, this was his sugar-coated way of saying that women are good at “pretty things” and just fabulous at making their homes pretty and that is what the men would turn to the women for. That was bullshit.
Finally, DeBeauvior finally makes a final good issue of comparing the men and women and putting them into the two castes that society has made for them. Women are still observed today as “spinsters” if they’re not married by a certain age or “questionable” if you’re a single mother. This is something that really irritates me and I was glad to see was still an issue to DeBeauvior. The constant stigma that is attached to single mothers is one that should be changed so that those women who made the choice to give another person a chance at life are venerated rather than shunned in society.
In conclusion, the article seemed a bit stiff, but made some valid points if you dug deep enough. Women do need to make a change for themselves especially in the area of receiving equal salary rather than simply becoming complacent with the inequality in society.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree parts of this blog about BeBeauvoir's opinion on the second sex. However, one thing mentioned in this blog about men providing for tribes in the hunting and gathering era, I would like to touch on. Not all cultures have men providing and doing the hunting. In some tribes, such as those in Africa or the Philippenes, women do just as much of the hunting and gathering; maybe even more. In most cases, women are only seen as the child bearers but I wanted to show that is not always the case. I do not think that the hunting/gathering and caveman era was the turning point in the power struggle between men and women.
ReplyDeleteI do not think there is any one spot in which we can pin-point the power struggle between men and women either. Women have been struggling for a very long time to reach equality and still have quite a ways to go. Men have established their roles as the bread-winner but women are biologically stuck to their roles as the child bearer and natual care taker. Yes, women are entering into the work force and a rapid rate and yes, the percent of women graduating from college has increased but there is always going to be that inequality. I am not quite sure if I believe DeBeauvoir has nailed the reasoning.
Women are suborinate to men because that is how things started off; men are biologically stonger which gives them an advantage. Men used to beat their wives but I bet if their wives were just as stong, they would have kicked their husbands butt. In a sense, women are good at "culture" but that is because women are the nutures and have been cultured by society to be that way. If women want things changed and the way they are viewed by society then they need to work on changing that themselves and not rely on man to do it for them.
Well, I figure I should put my 2 cents in. First, I would like to say that, in my humble opinion, you are correct Kyle. Women cannot be pregnant their entire life, and if they could and women were, that life might just suck. Anyways, I want to make the statement that we, as sociologists, must always be aware of. Men are naturally and biologically superior to women in some ways. In the same way, women are superior over men in certain attributes. Having said that, my main concern in this article and to one of the points made was the point of the single mother.
ReplyDeleteI agree, there is nothing more noble than a woman who takes the "hard road" and owns her actions and gives life to a child that they may not have been ready for. However, society does not shun them. There are so many benefits that come from the state for that single mother. Also, in the same light, if a man does not want that baby, the state does not side with the man usually at all. The man is responsible for paying money to help. I am not saying this is a bad thing, raising a child costs money, my only point is that single mothers are not shunned in society, only judged. I'll agree, the judging and stimitatin needs to end.