Henri ei tiennyt mitä tuohon vastata. Miten voi pitää kirjoittamisesta – sitä on niin vaikea selittää jollekin joka ei siitä pidä. Osaisiko hän selittää sitä edes itselleen? Hän ei kuvitellut, että häntä luettaisiin ikuisesti, ja kuitenkin hän tunsi kirjoittaessaan sijoittuvansa ikuisuuteen; kaikki se mikä hänen onnistui valaa sanoihin pelastui ehdottomasti, siltä hänestä tuntui. Mutta onkohan siinä mitään perää? Missä määrin sekin on pelkkä harhakuvitelma? … Ainakin oli varmaa, että hän tunsi miltei ahdistuksenomaista sääliä kaikkia niitä ihmisiä kohtaan, jotka eivät edes yrittäneet ilmaista elämäänsä….

Kirjoittamisessa ei ole mitään mieltä, jos ei välitä muista ihmisistä. Mutta jos välittää, on valtavaa saada sanojen avulla puolelleen heidän ystävyytensä, heidän luottamuksensa;on valtavaa kuulostella omien ajatustensa kaikua heissä.

Lähde: de Beauvoir: Mandariinit, osa 1

Poiché non scorgevo in tutta la terra alcun posto che mi convenisse, decisi allegramente che non mi sarei fermata in nessun posto.
Mi votai all'Inquietudine.

Simone De Beauvoir

Hoje para mim foi um dia bastante taciturno e, durante o meu trajeto a pé para casa, uma míriade de pensamentos me trouxeram reflexões profundas acerca do universo, do significado da vida e tudo o mais.

Vou tentar colocar em sequencia os encadeamentos de pensamentos que me fizeram chegar na frente da tela do notebook para postar algo:

Primeiramente eu estava voltando da farmácia após ter comprado meus anticoncepcionais para evitar que um novo ser no mundo venha a existir. Depois disso, ao cortar caminho pelo centro politécnico (a poli da UFPR) para ir para casa, encontrei alguns colegas da geografia. Por estar num momento taciturno, respondi a saudação das pessoas com um aceno e apertando o passo (com o note nas costas). Neste momento, pensei: "como eu gostaria de não existir em momentos como esse." Aí acabei pensando em como seria a vida se possivelmente eu tivesse sido abortada. Tudo isso porque um amigo do meu namorado falou para mim que em até um dado período eu não existia.

(Para os que entraram em choque com o verbete: eu não estou em uma crise de rejeição, minha mãe não tentou me abortar, eu não estou grávida e não quero me suicidar.)

Após pensar nisso, lembrei de algumas máximas do existencialismo, que muito longe de ser uma "vã filosofia", é uma maneira de viver e encarar o mundo com dignidade e com a plenitude de aproveitarmos nossos potenciais enquanto seres humanos livres que somos.  Pensei nas palavras de Sartre quando ele diz que ao escolhermos ao tomarmos consciência de nossa liberdade e de como somos inteiramente responsáveis pelo que fazemos, nasce a grande angústia de lidar com esta liberdade com responsabilidade, pois pelo fato de existirmos, estamos também mudando o mundo ao nosso redor.

Depois de tentar lembrar das máximas do existencialismo, lembrei do livro que estou lendo: A convidada, de Simone de Beauvouir, esposa de Sartre. Neste livro, ela discorre sobre a convivência de um casal (autobiográfico) - Françoise e Pierre - que vive sobre os preceitos existencialistas (minha interpretação) e está lidando com dois novos elementos em suas vidas: uma moça chamada Xavière e a sombra da guerra que está por vir. Diga-se de passagem, a resenha deste livro também está a caminho...

Então, após pensar sobre o casal Simone-Sartre e o livro da Simone, cheguei a conclusão de que é de nosso desejo que existamos uns para os outros. Todo aquele que de alguma forma vive e existe quer existir para o outro. Para isso, a humanidade lança mão de diversos subterfúgios: música, um grito, um suicídio, uma mensagem de celular, um blog, um relógio de R$18 000 (à venda no Shopping Cidade Jardim), som alto com graves estourando, uma sonata, uma tese de doutorado, um caráter impecável, um beijo roubado, uma frase de efeito, um cabelo azul e muito mais!

Partindo desta premissa que eu acredito ser verdadeira - tendo em consideração que um dos maiores medos do homem é morrer, ou seja, deixar de estar no mundo - pensei nas 1001 maneiras que existo na minha vida. Pensando nisto, acabei reestruturando meus significados sobre existir (ou não).

Somente existimos para o outro quando elas atribuem algum significado para nós e pela maneira com a qual nos relacionamos com ele: meu melhor amigo, minha prima, o cara que senta no canto do ônibus, o tiozinho da guarita, minha mãe, o presidente dos Estados Unidos, dentre outros... dei uma exagerada agora, mas agora vou colocar meus argumentos em uma perspectiva mais resalista. (gosto desta palavra... mas não posso ser pretensiosa para afirmar o que é ou não real)

Todo ser humano existe e, de alguma maneira, crava sua existência na grande tábula rasa da vida alheia devido ao simples fato de agir (ou não, o que representa uma atitude passiva). Somos atraídos pelo outro porque, em condições normais de pressão e temperatura, temos este incansável desejo de existir e de nos enxergar através das reações/interações alheias, embora muitos só se relacionem com quem reflete a imagem semelhante à que se quer ver.

Depois de muito pensar nisso, cheguei à conclusão que Howard Shore (autor de House) constantemente presta tributo ao existencialismo através do protagonista. Mas isso merece um post sozinho.

NOTA: Infelizmente o wordpress esqueceu de salvar o resto do meu post. Vai ficar assim, inacabado, como é toda a existência humana. Cabe a nós (e a mim) nos conformarmos com estes reveses que a vida às vezes prega. Se bem que, diante dum post que li sobre inferno astral, estou muito bem debaixo das cobertas, obrigada! =)

Simone de Beauvoir (París, 8 de enero de 1908 - 14 de abril de 1986), novelista francesa, filósofa existencialista y feminista.

Nacida en una familia burguesa, Simone de Beauvoir fue educada según la sólida moral cristiana vigente en la época. Cuenta en sus memorias la fuerte impresión que le causó, en su juventud, descubrir el ocaso de la religión: dejar de creer en Dios era asumirse plenamente responsable de su propias elecciones. En 1929, después de conocer a Jean Paul Sartre en la Sorbona, donde ambos estudiaban filosofía, se unió estrechamente al filósofo y su círculo (entre los que se encontraba Paul Nizan, autor de Aden-Arabia). Con el tiempo, crearon entre ambos una relación que les permitía compatibilizar su libertad individual con la vida en conjunto.

Simone de Beauvoir fue profesora de filosofía hasta 1943 en escuelas de diferentes lugares de Francia, como Ruán y Marsella, hasta que la ocupación alemana en París, a causa de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, la alejó para siempre de la enseñanza. Durante ese periodo vivió en la ciudad tomada, e integró el movimiento de la Resistencia Francesa. En su primera novela, La invitada(1943), exploró los dilemas existencialistas de la libertad, la acción y la responsabilidad individual, temas que aborda igualmente en novelas posteriores como La sangre de los otros (1944) y Los mandarines (1954), novela por la que recibió el Premio Goncourty que se considera la más importante de todas sus obras.

Las tesis existencialistas, según las cuales cada uno es responsable de sí mismo, se introducen también en una serie de obras autobiográficas, cuatro en total, entre las que destacanMemorias de una joven de buena familia (también conocida como Memorias de una joven formal) (1958) y Final de cuentas (1972). Sus obras ofrecen una visión sumamente reveladora de su vida y su tiempo. Entre sus ensayos escritos cabe destacar El segundo sexo (1949), un profundo análisis sobre el papel de las mujeres en la sociedad y la construcción del rol y la figura de la mujer; La vejez (1970), centrada en la situación de la ancianidad en el imaginario occidental y en donde critica apasionadamente la marginación y el ocultamiento, y La ceremonia del adiós (1981), polémica obra que evoca la figura de su compañero de vida, Jean Paul Sartre.

I am also busy doing research (I said last time that the summer is no quiet academic time!). These days, I have been working a lot on Simone de Beauvoir's phenomenology. The Second Sex presents a rich phenomenological understanding of the body, sex and gender. You will tackle these questions in your Women's Studies courses and I am sure you will cross path with this key 20th century work.

If you feel inclined toward Beauvoir, we should certainly have a chat!
- Christine Daigle, Director

La mujer rota. Simone de Beauvoir.

Helena Miguélez Carballeira publica en Protexta unha crítica da tradución galega, preparada por Marga Rodríguez Marcuño, do primeiro tomo d' O segundo sexo de Simone de Beauvoir.

The process is hard in respects; there is that part of our community forever left behind on August 29, 2005. There is also the post Katrina experiences that we will someday need to put in the past to further the healing process such as being flooded with well intentioned volunteers and their creations like the New Waveland Cafe. I too count eating with the hippies as one of my post Katrina experiences. Nowdy those were the days.....

The fact remains we must move on in order to fully recover and I was reminded of that when I surfed the news this morning and found 4 stories that fit that broad theme. The stories involving WQRZ and Katrina Relief have under currents that I won't go into great detail about here on slabbed. I do hope WQRZ finds a way to stay on the air but I don't think it appropriate the county subsidize the station with tax dollars. I hope Brice Phillips is able to change his business model to keep up with the new realities of our post Katrina world. It is with WQRZ and the Sun Herald that we begin our quick tour of the Mississippi GO Zone:

A tiny radio station that helped save lives before and after Hurricane Katrina may not survive without public assistance, a resident told Hancock County supervisors Monday.

Businesswoman Cherie Armstrong said WQRZ Radio will go under soon if its principal, Brice Phillips, doesn't get financial help. Armstrong said that since the low power, not-for-profit station played a heroic role in the hurricane, supervisors owe it to Phillips to provide financial help.

Phillips has funding until August, she said. "Once that's gone, he's gone."

WQRZ, at 103.5 on the FM dial, is owned by the Hancock County Amateur Radio Association. In the 2005 hurricane, Phillips stayed on the air, sometimes using car batteries for power, to provide emergency information, evacuation directions and updates on where to obtain food, water, ice and medical aid.

In March, Phillips approached supervisors to say the station was in a fiscal crisis. He asked for $25,000 in county funding, which was not forthcoming.

On Monday, county officials denied Armstrong's contention that they had offered financial help for the radio station but failed to deliver. However, they said the county had provided space and utilities for the station to be located in the county's Emergency Operations Center, where Phillips is also volunteer public information director.

"He did a great job after the hurricane, no question," said County Attorney Ronnie Artigues. However, Artigues said, he can find no legal justification for the county to support a radio station.

Next up is today's good news in the reopening of Beauvoir. We also find out from Kat Bergeron there will be a special birthday party complete with special free booze for the happy party goers:

As Beauvoir celebrates the opening today of the restored 1852 National Historic Landmark, demolition of the Jefferson Davis Presidential Library continues, a sad reminder of what could not be saved from Hurricane Katrina.

But today all eyes are on the amazing rejuvenation of the antebellum home that, before the storm, received more visitors than any other heritage house in Mississippi. The $3.9 million restoration has returned its appearance to the days when the U.S. statesman and Confederate president retired there.

Today is the 200th anniversary of Davis' birth, and birthday cake will be served. So will libations that survived Katrina.

"We'll serve the champagne and wine until it runs out," said Rick Forte Sr., acting director and chairman of Beauvoir's combined boards. "It was in the Presidential Library, and we've been saving it for this special occasion. In addition to the open invitation to the public, we've sent out 1,000 invitations, but we can't predict how many people will come."

The story reminds me of when my best friend salvaged an un opened bottle of Grey Goose vodka from the mud at his slab in early September 2005. Coupled with a salvaged bottle of vermouth it made the best martinis I've ever had the pleasure of drinking.

Next up is a rare slabbed post on a non insurance state political issue but one very worthy of inclusion here as it helps move along the construction of new water and sewer systems to serve the population migration away from the immediate shoreline. It was introduced in the special session as HB 6 by our friend J.P. Compretta. While we are very sensitive to the issues surrounding the use of imminent domain having new water and sewer constructed is vital to our recovery which is why Governor Barbour included it in his call. Michael Newsom filed the Sun Herald report:

In hopes of speeding up the work, the governing board of a massive post-Katrina water and sewer project wants legal authority to require South Mississippi property owners to turn over rights of way.

But House Bill 6, sponsored by House Speaker Pro Tem J.P. Compretta, D-Bay St. Louis, which would give the board that power, is stalled in a House committee.

As part of the $640 million federally funded plan, about 600 miles of new water and sewer lines are to be installed. Two years into the project, not a single water or sewer line has been laid and almost none of the more than 65 projects planned are under construction.

Gov. Haley Barbour recently told the utility authorities that the work, which has been contracted to numerous firms, should be moving faster. The governor chose to include the bill in the special session.

"This will be the fastest and most fair way to get these projects moving quickly," said Pete Smith, Barbour's press secretary.

The work, which will be done in Harrison, Hancock, Jackson, Pearl River and Stone counties, is aimed at bringing water and sewer infrastructure to places that were using septic tanks before Katrina. Elected officials hope to make the areas better able to handle the post-storm population shift to north of Interstate 10.

Finally is the hard decisions that must be made to move the slabbed community along in the post Katrina healing process I spoke of earlier. Katrina Relief has helped numerous coast families into new homes but at times has been engaged in controversy, especially in the battles between it's director Kathleen Johnson and  Waveland Mayor Tommy Longo. The animus between the volunteer organization and the city is head scratching in respects and we will keep slabbed steered clear of that brier patch except to remind Ms Johnson that our southern coastal culture is not the problem.  Too many other volunteer organizations have managed to deliver services to the needy without constant public displays of displeasure with city leaders.

In this latest installment as reported by Al Showers of WLOX, neighbors of the relief group want to experience some post Katrina new normality.  Doing that means the eyesore need to go (h/t to Kathleen Johnson and her C-L blog for the link):

It's not likely to win yard of the month. But the people who run Katrina Relief never set out win any beauty awards.

Property owner John Mailhes said, "Katrina Relief has been here a year and a half and has done nothing but help people."

Mailhes has allowed the relief group to operate from his house on Tabor Street, free of charge. Until recently he's had no complaints.

"Two months ago, I received a letter that they were in violation of what they were using the house for. That two of the aldermen had constituents that complained," Mailhes said. "There's nothing between my house and Dick Street. And I have two clip boards of petitions from Edna Street that people are not complaining."

But Judy Roth, who owns property on Tabor Street, is complaining.

"The condition of that property was appalling, especially being in a neighborhood," Roth said.

She calls the Katrina Relief operation an eyesore, and made her feelings clear to the Waveland Zoning Commission.

"This group has been down here helping probably a lot of these people in this room, and all of a sudden we're jumping on them. I'd like to know why?" Zoning Commission Chairman Gary Catalano asked.

"I think it's having your neighborhood get back, some timeline of how long all of this stuff is going to be in the yard. And I think that's a lot of the issue, the quote un-quote eyesore," Zoning Commissioner Mary-Beth Benning said.

"There's a lot of stuff right around the corner, and nobody's saying anything about that," Catalano replied.

Zoning Commissioner Steve Hand said, "We appreciate what you were doing, the city did. And they are basically saying, 'Enough already.' When is there an endgame, an end plan for this amount of activity on that site?"

Kathleen Johnson is the director of Katrina Relief. She promised change, but also asked for a little understanding.

"It took us a long time to put it up. It's going to take a long time to move, and we are going to get it done," Johnson said.

Zoning commissioners gave Katrina Relief two months to clean up the property and remove the stuff from the front yard. They voted to give the operation 18 more months in that location before it must leave for good.

Johnson said most of her operation is in the process of being moved to Pass Christian. But she'd like to keep the case management part of her operation on Tabor Street.

The Board of Aldermen will have the final say on the compromise zoning commissioners reached with Johnson.

A symbol of our continued recovery is repaired and ready again for tourist. It has also attracted the interests of the national media. Kat Bergeron has the Sun Herald story.

In the history of Hurricane Katrina recovery, Beauvoir is a Humpty Dumpty "back together again" story getting national attention.

The restored 1852 National Historic Landmark reopens Tuesday with a public celebration and tours for the first time since the 2005 storm destroyed all but the house on the beachfront estate where Jefferson Davis spent his retirement.

Lovers of architecture and history, Mississippi Coast residents appreciating a positive sign of storm recovery, tourists, Davis family members and Coast and state VIPs will attend the morning celebration, timed to coincide with the 200th anniversary of Davis' birth.

Music, food, re-enactors in period clothing and speeches from people involved in the monumental restoration await those who attend. After Tuesday the house will be open for paid tours and fundraising begins in earnest to bring back other historical components of the Beauvoir estate vital to the Coast's heritage tourism.

Before Katrina, Beauvoir attracted more visitors to Mississippi than any other house museum, said Ken P'Pool of the Mississippi Department of Archives & History.

"In the days right after Katrina, literally hundreds of calls and e-mails came to us from across Mississippi and the nation seeking information about Beauvoir's condition, with the same sense of urgency in which they sought information about the safety of friends and loved ones," said P'Pool.

"To many Gulf Coast residents, the Beauvoir house and museum represent a rich cultural heritage being slowly erased with each hurricane. Economically, properties like Beauvoir are also very important. Despite the recreational opportunities offered to tourists, surveys demonstrate that it is still our history and culture that attracts more visitors to Mississippi than anything else."

Beauvoir is owned by the Mississippi Sons of Confederate Veterans, which bought the house from the Davis family in 1902. First it was a home for Confederate veterans, and then a museum to the life and times of Davis, a respected U.S. statesman who became Confederate president.

"Heritage tourism is growing and heritage travelers tend to stay longer and spend more money," said Richard Forester, executive director of the Mississippi Coast Convention & Visitors Center.

"So the fact we are able to reopen this very historic place, especially as we approach the sesquicentennial of the War Between the States, means Beauvoir will play a key role in marketing the historic legacy of our community."

Preservationists say Beauvoir is the most heavily damaged national landmark by Katrina, here or elsewhere. Beauvoir is also a Mississippi Landmark, and both designations made it eligible for historic-preservation money totaling $3.9 million.

"With that horrendous hurricane image of Beauvoir, you couldn't help but wonder if it would ever look the same," said Richard Forte Sr., who chairs Beauvoir's boards of trustees and directors. "I thought I knew I a lot about Beauvoir, being on the board 28 years, but I now have a Ph.D. in restoration. The public will be amazed on Tuesday."

Among national media that have interviewed the Beauvoir staff are PBS, Southern Living, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today and The Associated Press, said Forte, and some will be there for the reopening.

In addition to an open invitation, Beauvoir has invited groups long involved in its preservation and promotion, such as the United Daughters of the Confederacy. A large stone memorial arch the Daughters of the Confederacy donated in the 1920s was leveled by a casino barge, which some think saved the house from the barge's assault.

Arte Paul Klee

Simone de Beauvoir. Porque el hombre es trascendencia, jamás podrá imaginar un paraíso. El paraíso es el reposo, la trascendencia negada, un estado de cosas ya dado, sin posible superación. Pero en ese caso ¿qué haremos? Para que el aire sea respirable tendrá que dejar paso a las acciones, a los deseos, que a su vez tenemos que superar: tendrá que dejar de ser paraíso. La belleza de la tierra prometida es que ella prometía nuevas promesas. Los paraísos inmóviles no pueden prometer más que un eterno aburrimiento.

André Breton em sua juventude

PARIS (Reuters) - O único original conhecido do "Manifeste du Surréalisme" escrito por André Breton será colocado à venda neste mês, disse a casa de leilões Sotheby's nesta terça-feira (6).O movimento surrealista -- que gerou, por exemplo, os famosos relógios moles de Salvador Dalí -- teve uma profunda influência sobre a arte do século 20, envolvendo artistas como Marcel Duchamp e René Magritte.

O manifesto surrealista foi redigido como prefácio a uma coleção da "escrita automática", uma técnica em que o escritor deveria colocar na página tudo o que lhe vinha à cabeça, sem se importar com a forma ou o sentido. Mas o texto acabou sendo um dos escritores que definiram o movimento que veio a ser conhecido como surrealista.

A Sotheby's disse que se trata "sem contestação do documento mais pródigo" dentro de uma coleção de nove manuscritos de Breton (1896-1966) que serão leiloados. Os escritos faziam parte da coleção de Simone Collinet, primeira esposa do escritor.

A casa pretende vender os textos num só bloco, mas só o manifesto deve valer entre 300 mil e 500 mil euros (US$ 464,6 mil a 774,4 mil).

O leilão também vai oferecer outros manuscritos importantes, como um conjunto de obras inéditas da escritora feminista Simone de Beauvoir -- o que inclui seu primeiro romance, inacabado. O leilão está marcado para o dia 21 de maio, em Paris. (Reportagem de James Mackenzie)

Salvador Dali

 Duchamp

Veja os posts anteriores:

Um pouco mais de Chico. Budapeste

Biblioteca Virtual

Chico Buarque lê ‘Dona Flor e Seus Dois Maridos’

Os livros que não lemos - por Umberto Eco

Simone de Beauvoir i Det andra könet: ”Knappast något arbete är så förknippat med Sisyfos straff som hushållsarbetet”. En realitet i mitt liv. Just i dag. Disktrasan känns tung som ett stenblock.

...............................................................................................................................................................

Es costumbre arraigada en nuestros días conmemorar aniversarios de nacimientos y muertes de personajes ilustres. Se aprovecha la ocasión para revisar su vida y su obra; se publican artículos, ensayos y biografías; se celebran conferencias, mesas redondas y congresos; en fin, se ha desarrollado toda una industria de las conmemoraciones. Sin embargo, en el caso de Simone de Beauvoir (8 de enero de 1908—14 de abril de 1986), la repercusión del centenario de su nacimiento ha sido más bien escasa, aquí y en su país, Francia. Apenas unos artículos y alguna biografía.

Cabría preguntarse el porqué de este olvido de una mujer que con su obra y su vida contribuyó tanto al desarrollo de los derechos de las mujeres y a su emancipación. Optimistas unos y mal intencionados otros, se nos dirá que su pensamiento carece de actualidad, ya que la mujer ha alcanzado la plena equiparación con el hombre y su total autonomía. También hay otros a los que, en concordancia con la ola de integrismo cuyos efectos estamos sufriendo notablemente estos días, les gustaría anotar sus obras en la lista de los libros prohibidos e incluir su nombre en la nómina de los réprobos.

Quizás la mejor manera de comprobar la vigencia de Simone de Beauvoir, sea analizar su pensamiento en relación con algunos de los debates candentes de estos días.

Por ejemplo, el Tribunal Constitucional ha rechazado hace pocas semanas, y de manera contundente, el recurso del Partido Popular contra la Ley de Igualdad, que pretende una representación más equitativa de hombres y mujeres en las altas instituciones y en las distintas esferas de poder. Es cierto que la mujer ha ido conquistado con esfuerzo posiciones cada vez más avanzadas en el mundo del trabajo, pero también lo es que se le vetan los puestos más altos de dirección y representación. Y por lo que se ve, muchos luchan para que esto continúe siendo así.

No está, pues, de más recordar que Simone de Beauvoir dio una importancia primordial al trabajo de la mujer. Y es interesante mencionar que cuando se le preguntaba cuál sería la mejor forma de eliminar la opresión femenina, ella respondía siempre: “Trabajar”. Hoy podríamos añadir: en cualquier lugar, en cualquier puesto y a cualquier nivel.

De Beauvoir vio con claridad de pionera que la raíz de la discriminación de la mujer era su dependencia económica y que sólo con el trabajo remunerado podría llegar a mantener unas relaciones de independencia e igualdad.

En estos días, en que desde los púlpitos y desde multitudinarias manifestaciones se defiende un modelo de matrimonio único, indivisible y sagrado, que se pretende imponer a tirios y troyanos, sería conveniente releer sus opiniones sobre el matrimonio burgués tradicional y su contribución a la subordinación y discriminación de la mujer. Su visión precursora de las relaciones con el “otro”, que sólo debían sostenerse en el respeto y el reconocimiento mutuo, prefiguraban esas relaciones humanas más abiertas que modernamente han dado lugar a distintos modelos de familia, en los que cada uno puede elegir y ninguno debe imponerse so pretexto de una ley natural de origen divino que esté por encima de las leyes y los parlamentos.

Otro tema de plena actualidad es el del aborto. De Beauvoir luchó por su despenalización, por una maternidad responsable e incluso por el derecho a no ser madre. Sobre este tema hemos asistido últimamente a declaraciones de obispos, violaciones de la intimidad de las mujeres, intimidaciones a los profesionales y otras actuaciones, que no por pintorescas, son menos graves. Como la de determinada concejal del Ayuntamiento de Madrid, posible nueva alcaldesa, hablando de “trituradoras”, o el artículo del columnista de Abc Juan Manuel de Prada titulado “Pocas y viejas”, en el que refiriéndose a las manifestaciones por la despenalización del aborto, se atreve a decir: “Uno contempla las fotos de estas concentraciones y es como si lo sumergieran de repente en un tanque de bromuro. No negamos, sin embargo, que tales fotos tengan una innegable fuerza persuasiva: tal vez las manifestantes no logren que nos adhiramos a sus proclamaciones abortistas; pero, desde luego, sus visajes y alaridos constituyen una exhortación eficacísima a la continencia y un anafrodisiaco infalible”. Sería muy fácil contestar con un chascarrillo, pero el tema es serio y creo que es mejor dejarlo así.

Con sólo una mirada atenta a los periódicos podríamos encontrar más ejemplos de la vigencia del pensamiento de Simone de Beauvoir. Pero sólo me referiré al caso de las sedaciones del hospital Severo Ochoa de Leganés. Parece ser que tendremos que seguir luchando por un último derecho: el derecho a una muerte digna y con el menor dolor, ya que algunos se han tomado al pie de la letra lo del valle de lágrimas y no quieren que al final nos libremos.

Hemos llegado a creer que los derechos duramente conquistados son irreversibles, pero basta volver al cabo de veinte años a los países árabes que conocimos, para saber que no es así. U oír a nuestros obispos, o leer la última encíclica. En definitiva, el mejor homenaje que podemos hacer a nuestra autora es permanecer vigilantes, porque cien años no es nada y todo puede ir a peor.

*Escritora y catedrática de Lengua y Literatura.

Vía: www.elpais.com

“O Segundo Sexo” foi publicado há cinquentae cinco anos. Nesta obra, Simone de Beauvoir fazia uma “chamada às armas” contra a discriminação a que as mulheres continuam a ser sujeitas. Aí escreveu “Ninguém nasce mulher mas sim torna-se mulher.

“O Segundo Sexo” é uma obra seminal que estabeleceu de imediato uma plataforma de discussão acesa sobre a condição feminina e o(s) feminismo(s). Apesar das várias polémicas que sempre suscitou, tem servido de referência para a maior parte dos ensaios, debates e discussões posteriores. Camille Paglia afirmou que ao lê-la, aos dezasseis anos, mudou toda a sua vida: “Teve um grande impacto sobre mim; a minha independência intelectual data dessa momento. O “Segundo Sexo” continua a ser a obra suprema do feminismo moderno”. Quanto a Katte Millett baseou “Sexual Politics” na obra de Simone e a australiana Germaine Greer foi nela que se inspirou, principalmente no tratamento do tema do envelhecimento feminino e suas consequências. É possível encontrar notas sobre de Beauvoir em quase todos os estudos femininos
Quando surgiu, em 1949, “O Segundo Sexo” causou tanta admiração quanto estranheza. Era uma obra vasta, dividida em dois volumes, bem documentada e alicerçada na lógica e no conhecimento e muito pouco “feminina”. (Às mulheres estavam reservado géneros como o romance ou a novela). Tendo como missão pôr a nu a condição feminina, explorava áreas ligadas à situação da mulher no mundo, englobando história, filosofia, economia, biologia, etc., bem como alguns “case studies” e algumas experiências particulares. Simone queria demonstrar que a própria noção de feminilidade era uma ficção inventada pelos homens na qual as mulheres consentiam, fosse por estarem pouco treinadas nos rigores do pensamento lógico ou porque calculavam ganhar algo com a sua passividade, perante as fantasias masculinas. No entanto, ao fazê-lo cairiam na armadilha de se auto limitarem. Os homens chamaram a si os terrores e triunfos da transcendência, oferecendo às mulheres segurança e tentando-as com as teorias da aceitação e da dependência, mentindo-lhes ao dizer que tais são características inatas do seu carácter. Ao fugir a este determinismo, Simone abriu as portas a todas as mulheres no sentido de formarem o seu próprio ser e escolherem o seu próprio destino, libertando-se de todas as ideias pré-concebidas e dos mitos pré-estabelecidos que lhe dão pouca ou nenhuma hipótese de escolha. Assim, a mulher, qualquer mulher, deve criar a sua própria via, mesmo que seja a de cumprir um papel tradicional, se for esse o escolhido por ela e só por ela.
Mas numa sociedade ainda sob o choque das profundas alterações provocadas pela Guerra, a posição das mulheres tinha-se fortalecido pela ausência dos homens, mortos, desaparecidos ou ausentes. Mas Simone lançava um alerta dizendo: “…a Idade de Ouro da mulher não passa de um mito… A sociedade sempre foi masculina e o poder político sempre esteve nas mãos dos homens.”. “A humanidade é masculina” observou ela “…e um homem não teria a ideia de escrever um livro sobre a situação peculiar de ser macho…e nunca se preocupa em afirmar a sua identidade como um ser de um determinado género; o facto de ser um homem é óbvio.” É importante colocar como ponto de partida para o estudo de “O Segundo Sexo” e do resto da obra de Simone de Beauvoir, o fato que ela, apesar de reconhecer que os homens oprimem as mulheres, não deixa de lhes apreciar as capacidades."

Fonte: Simone de Beauvoir.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Simone de Beauvoir : une oeuvre-vie
LE MONDE DES LIVRES | 10.01.08

©

arte bringt am Freitag, 11.1., um 21 Uhr eine Doku-Fiktion zum Liebespaar Beauvoir und Sartre (hier von der FAZ besprochen) und hat ebenfalls ein Dossier aufgelegt.

Im Nachgang hat Jürg Altwegg für die FAZ vom 14.1. den Umgang französischer Zeitschriften mit Simone de Beauvoir begutachtet.

Powered by ScribeFire.

In the “Introduction” to The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir claims that “A man would never get the notion of writing a book on the peculiar situation of the human male” (Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, trans. and ed. H. M. Parshley [New York: Vintage, 1989], xxi). If such a peculiar notion were to pop unexpectedly into some man’s head, though, he would be well served to start his research with Beauvoir’s book. For reasons both rhetorical and conceptual, The Second Sex is full of declarations on the character of men. In fact, large tracts of The Second Sex must be read as scathing critiques of the masculine self-image, critiques that seem to this particular male to hit their target with humiliating accuracy. Nevertheless, Beauvoir seems on a certain level to hold up the masculine as the ideal—man really does have access to universal humanity in a way that woman does not yet. Although these two strains of Beauvoir’s argument appear on the surface to be contradictory, I will attempt to show that they are actually coherent and mutually reinforcing.

I will start with Beauvoir’s contention that men have access to the universally human, which Beauvoir will often term “transcendence,” while women are trapped within “immanence.” Responding to the idea that women should be happy to remain in the place assigned to them, Beauvoir says:

This notion we reject, for our perspective is that of existentialist ethics. Every subject plays his part as such specifically through exploits or projects that serve as a mode of transcendence…. There is no justification for present existence other than its expansion into an indefinitely open future. Every time transcendence falls back into immanence, stagnation, there is a degradation of existence…. This downfall represents a moral fault if the subject consents to it; if it is inflicted upon him, it spells frustration and oppression. In both cases it is an absolute evil. (xxxiv-xxxv)

Simply by virtue of being human, both men and women have the formal potential to achieve transcendence. Men, however, impose a kind of “glass ceiling” on woman’s transcendence, such that she can never pass man’s transcendence—this lack of formal liberty, more than any particular unhappiness, encapsulates women’s oppression. The overcoming of this oppression will mean the overcoming of “femininity” as it has hitherto been known (719), but it will not mean the end of “women”—in this respect, Wittig’s claim to have found in the lesbian a purely human stance beyond gender, though grounded in Beauvoir’s famous claim that “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman” (267), goes against the general tenor of Beauvoir’s thought. Beauvoir hopes for a day when women will be able to participate in transcendence precisely as women.

The emphasis here must fall on the formal potentiality, because actualization of transcendence cannot, by definition, ever be automatic. The very fact that the present situation of women largely blocks that actualization for them is proof enough of that. The question then arises—do men, precisely as men, face any particular obstacles in the actualization of their potential for transcendence? In many places, Beauvoir appears to endorse the masculine claim to have immediate and unfettered access to transcendence, but many of these endorsements are followed closely by sarcastic references to the male self-image. In fact, I argue that in Beauvoir’s scheme, men not only face obstacles qua men in reaching transcendence, but ironically, those obstacles amount to a kind of “fall-out” of their imposition and maintenance of patriarchy.

This irony becomes clear in the third part of The Second Sex, on “Myths.” There Beauvoir begins with an account of men’s “ontological and moral pretensions” (139). In a kind of parody of the opening chapters of Genesis, man initially finds himself alone with nature, which does not provide the kind of “other” he needs to tear him away from immanence and start on the adventure of achieving transcendence—the genuine “other” must be another self-conscious being. Initially, that need is met in competition with other men, which is fraught with conflict and wears the man out. He is caught between two undesirable poles: “quite unable to fulfill himself in solitude, man is incessantly in danger in his relations with his fellows: his life is a difficult enterprise with success never assured” (140). Obviously, the man does not like this situation of continual fear, and so “he dreams of quiet in disquiet and of an opaque plenitude that nevertheless would be endowed with consciousness. This dream incarnated is precisely woman” (140). The intervention of woman offers a kind of release valve, a “best of both worlds”—thus the Genesis story portrays God giving woman as a kind of gift or supplement.

Obviously this story fails to match up with reality on any number of levels. Most glaringly, it does not include any reference to the fact that the man was born and hence was presumably in contact with a woman—indeed dependent on her for survival—before encountering the unresponsive earth or his all-too-responsive fellow men. The root of this absence of birth from the “ontological and moral pretensions” of men is ultimately the same thing that led to the installation of the myth of woman in the first place: namely, fear, most radically the fear of death. Man blames woman for his embodied and death-prone state and transfers his hatred of his own body onto the woman. When combined with the highly idealized image of woman as a refuge from the toils of life, the redirection of his hatred of the flesh and fear of death produces the ambivalent love-hate relationship with women that permeates the male experience. Beauvoir sees this ambivalence as the source of the general revulsion toward pregnant women and menstruation—and also of the desire to think of one’s own mother only as chaste. Going against one of the key tenets of psychoanalysis, she says that this desire for maternal chastity comes about “less because of amorous jealousy than because of his refusal to see her as a body” (147). Yet at the same time, man requires woman to “represent the flesh purely for its own sake” (157)—he needs that target for his own hatred of the flesh, then he hates woman for filling the role he has imposed on her.

Christianity exacerbates this disgust at women’s bodies, but at the same time it moves toward the equality of men and women. This is because Christianity increases the individuality of the subject, and for Beauvoir “The more the male becomes individualizes and lays claim to his individuality, the more certainly will he recognize also in his companion an individual and a free being” (170). The horror of the flesh remains, however, above all in the cult of Mary, whose virginity signifies that she is non-fleshly and has never been possessed as other women have (171). Meanwhile, “a certain masked horror of maternity survives” in the reviled figure of the mother-in-law, which initially arose during the middle ages (174). Finally, in bourgeois society, woman becomes a display piece, a way of showing off excess funds. Still, the most fundamental thing that a man wants out of a woman is someone who would simultaneously be a genuine opponent while always letting him win: “the ideal of the average Western man is a woman who freely accepts his domination, who does not accept his ideas without discussion, but who yields to his arguments, who resists him intelligently and ends by being convinced” (184). In short, woman must be intrinsically “other,” an other who is always automatically able to be overcome.

Here man is far from the existentialist ideal of the adventurous seeker after transcendence, expanding the frontiers of liberty at every turn. In fact, the dominant characteristics of man qua man—that is, man specifically in relation to woman—are fear and self-delusion, with the result that man comes across as frankly pathetic. Certainly fear and self-delusion are not absent from any human being and must be dealt with. The installation of the myth of woman, however, is exactly the wrong path to take—instead of overcoming fear and self-delusion, it actively reinforces them. The alternately wounded and self-aggrandizing patheticness of man as portrayed by Beauvoir is not a brute given, any more than the self-undermining parasitism of woman. Both result from the present situation of patriarchy, which was imposed by men, is presently enforced by men, and is met with a basic complicity among women. Patriarchy thus distorts both men and women, but the underlying asymmetry of power means that the effects of that distortion are sharply unequal: for men, it presents a temptation that may keep them from attaining any form of transcendence, while for women, it has to a great extent been simply debilitating.

Beauvoir’s chapter on “The Myth of Woman in Five Authors” provides some specific insight into how the distortions inherent in actual existing masculinity can play out in practice—and also give some idea of what women can realistically expect of men as they attempt to overcome their present condition. There she chooses authors whose attitudes “have seemed to [her] to be typical”: Montherlant, D. H. Lawrence, Claudel, Breton, and Stendahl. The list seems to be arranged in roughly ascending order of approval, but it is in any case clear that Montherlant represents her worst-case scenario and Stendahl her best—hence I will be focusing on those two.

Henry de Montherlant was a 20th Century essayist, novelist, playwright, and member of the French Academy, and Beauvoir’s attitude toward him is one of unmitigated scorn and disgust. He represents a “long tradition of males” who believe that the true man must “rise in revolt” against woman: “A specialist in heroism, he undertakes to dethrone her” (199). His resentment toward the figure of the mother is explicitly grounded in rather adolescent complaints of the kind that were later echoed in Pink Floyd’s The Wall:

Her crime is to wish to keep her son forever enclosed within the darkness of her body; she mutilates him so she can keep him all to herself and thus fulfill the sterile void in her being; she is the most deplorable of teachers; she clips the child’s wings, she holds him back, far from the summits to which he aspires; she makes him stupid and degrades him. (199-200)

Just as in her general diagnosis, however, Beauvoir believes that the root of his hatred for his mother is his hatred of “the fact of his own birth,” which undermines his self-image as a godlike hero. Casting himself as a completely autonomous agent, unfettered by any connection to the detestable flesh, Montherlant is satisfied that he has triumphed so long as he continues to conquer the women he finds so loathsome. Even in sexual conquest, however, Montherlant is joyless. Disgusted by the bodiliness of a woman and oblivious of his own flesh, he claims to be interested only in giving pleasure to the woman, “for to receive is a form of dependence.” Thus, Beauvoir says that “He seeks cerebral not sensual satisfactions with women” (204). Yet this cerebral satisfaction is incompatible with an encounter with a woman who would be his intellectual equal or his equal in any other way: he likes his women weak.

In terms of Beauvoir’s “existentialist ethics,” it is clear that Montherlant is an abject failure. Montherlant “has never been willing to accept the conditions implied in being human…. [and so] he takes refuge in a procedure that is habitual with him: instead of rising above his origin, he repudiates it” (200). A logical consequence of his self-delusion is a refusal to put himself to the test in a genuinely open relationship. All of his relationships with women are predicated on the woman’s inferiority, and not a single one of his writings is taken up with a relationship between two men. For Beauvoir, true freedom is found only in genuine engagement with the world, choosing a project and putting oneself to the test. Such freedom is incompatible with self-delusion—it requires an overcoming of one’s given situation, which provides the only possible milieu for transcendence. By contrast, Montherlant is satisfied with a purely negative freedom with no determinate goal. Thus his freedom is more of an attitude than a reality. What’s more, Beauvoir believes that his negative notion of freedom is directly tied to a love of sheer destruction, as evidenced by his declarations that the French deserved to be conquered by the Germans in World War II:

Mystical negatives can be expressed only through negations. True transcendence is a positive movement toward the future, man’s future. The false hero, to persuade himself that he has travelled far, that he soars high aloft, looks constantly backwards and downwards; he scorns, he accuses, he oppresses, he persecutes, he tortures, he murders. (214)

Beauvoir cites a particularly evocative passage where Montherlant describes himself “urinating on some caterpillars” and enjoying the power that comes from deciding which caterpillar lives or dies—in one of many brilliant turns of phrase in this section, Beauvoir notes that “before the crawling insects, the man relieving his bladder knows the despotic solitude of God” (209). One cannot help but think that this moment of unmitigated power—which seems rather unbelievable to this reader, unless they were really wimpy caterpillars—is the framework within which Montherlant lives, a framework that is instituted and supported by his hyperbolic belief in the myth of woman. The fear that is at the root of that myth permeates his life; the self-delusion allows him to ignore it, thus cutting off the possibility of genuine self-transcendence.

Stendahl is another story altogether. Beauvoir’s tone throughout the section dedicated to him is overwhelmingly positive, such that he appears to be virtually her ideal man. The key to his achievement is that unlike Montherlant and the other authors under consideration, Stendahl is “a man who lives among women of flesh and blood.” Beauvoir is clear about what underwrites his profound love of women, which suffuses his entire life:

This tender friend of women does not believe in the feminine mystery, precisely because he loves them as they really are; no essence defines woman once for all; to him the idea of “the eternal feminine” seems pedantic and ridiculous. (238)

His diagnosis of the situation of women anticipates in large part contemporary feminism. For instance, he dismisses the charge that there have been few great women throughout history, for the obvious reason that society has purposefully held women back. He hopes for a day when women will be free from the idleness society imposes on them and when intelligent and well-educated women will be the norm. All the present faults of women can be explained by their present situation, rather than some antecedent nature: women “are not angels, nor demons, nor sphinxes: merely human beings reduced to semislavery by the imbecile ways of society” (239). Stendahl evinces a certain preference for women society deems silly or frivolous, but that is because he has such low esteem for social norms. In this regard, women may even be at an advantage for men, because their lack of opportunities allow them to avoid being ensnared in a false seriousness that would undercut “that naturalness, that naïveté, that generosity which Stendahl puts above all merit” (240).

For Stendahl, the love of a woman is the key to happiness. While seduction can be little more than a game for some, a man who truly understands the worth of women will find that “true love really transfigures his life” (246). Thus a genuine relationship with a woman becomes the key to self-actualization:

Test, reward, judge, friend—woman truly is in Stendahl what Hegel was for a moment tempted to make of her: that other consciousness which in reciprocal recognition gives to the other subject the same truth that she receives from him. (247)

For such a mutual recognition to be possible, Beauvoir argues that Stendahl cannot view woman as the absolute Other, but rather as a full-fledged subject. That he regards woman as such becomes clear in his choice to write from a woman’s perspective, something Beauvoir says no previous male author had done. All of this is motivated not by any ideal higher than simple human happiness—love will only be more intense and fulfilling as a result of the emancipation of women. He is not even afraid of the inevitable change in women’s general character as a result of emancipation, but is content to allow each woman to be “simply a human being: nor could any shape of dreams be more enrapturing” (248).

Despite this overwhelmingly positive assessment, Beauvoir expresses some final reservations about Stendahl in the summary of her findings from the five authors. Though he is, in Beauvoir’s mind, completely free of the destructive effects of the feminine myth—both for the women with whom he comes in contact and for his own character—he nonetheless views woman as irreducibly “other”:

Stendahl wants his mistress intelligent, cultivated, free in spirit and behavior: an equal. But the sole earthly destiny reserved for the equal, the woman-child, the soul-sister, the woman-sex, the woman-animal is always man! Whatever ego may seek himself through her, he can find himself only if she is willing to act as his crucible. She is required in every case to forget self and to love. (251)

One could call this stance a kind of zero-degree sexism—the “glass ceiling” mentioned above is as high as possible, reaching even to perfect equality to men, but woman can never “transcend” her relationship to men. The underlying logic that thus seems to be shared by all men, apparently even the perfect man Stendahl, is perhaps best encapsulated in an aside from Beauvoir’s chapter on psychoanalysis: “When a little girl climbs trees, it is, according to Adler, just to show her equality with boys; it does not occur to him that she likes to climb trees” (51).

The ideal Beauvoir aspires to is not for women to turn the tables on men, but rather for them to be able to undertake projects that have nothing to do with men. In this undertaking, women cannot and should not expect help from even the best-intentioned men—taking advantage of the formal rights that the feminist movement has won them, they must now take action on their own behalf to reach self-actualization. Beauvoir believes that this ideal is simply human and that the toxic effects of the myth of woman often hold men back from reaching it themselves. Yet the zero-degree sexism represented by Stendahl opens up some ambiguity here. Clearly a permanently subordinate position as absolute Other is intolerable, yet Beauvoir seems to aspire to an individualistic ideal where the other qua other is necessary and yet always subordinate to the subject’s self-unfolding. Such an ideal is not “masculine” if we stick with Beauvoir’s own notion of masculinity as based in fear and self-delusion. Indeed, we must say that her ideal is a kind of courage founded in a clear-headed view of one’s situation and its possibilities. And in many ways, I myself find such an ideal appealing, though I have been sufficiently affected by Beauvoir’s critique of masculinity that I am suspicious of myself. Perhaps it’s a bit too convenient that women, once fully free, will aspire to a goal I feel comfortable with—why not expect new and different ideals, ideals that have nothing to do with me at all?

Sara Heinämaa’s project in “Simone de Beauvoir’s Phenomenology of Sexual Difference” is quite straightforward: Heinämaa aims to refute the popularly held understanding of Simone de Beauvoir’s work as non-philosophical in nature. According to Heinämaa’s analysis, Beauvoir’s philosophical notions are from neither Jean-Paul Sartre nor Martin Heidegger. Rather, Beauvoir’s writing reveals strong influence from Husserl and Merleau-Ponty. Furthermore, in The Second Sex, Beauvoir is not interested in simply explaining women’s subordinate position. Her work is instead a phenomenological description that includes a radical problematization of femininity.
The first section of the essay, Phenomenology: A Foundational Science, Heinämaa offers a very basic overview of Husserl and Merleau-Ponty’s description of phenomenology. Heinämaa reminds us that the aim of the phenomenologist is to become aware of the constitution of the meaning of reality and that phenomenology is a foundational science. This section of the essay concludes with a strong stress on the importance of philosophical questioning. As we shall see later, the importance of philosophical questioning is important to Heinämaa’s phenomenological reading of Beauvoir.
The second section of the essay (Beauvoir’s Phenomenological Starting Points) traces Beauvoir’s involvement with the phenomenological movement. Heinämaa relies upon Beauvoir’s autobiography to show Beauvoir’s relationship to Husserl. However, Heinämaa more precisely locates Beauvoir’s engagement with phenomenology in The Second Sex. Specifically, her discussion of sexual difference focuses on the concept of the living body. Husserl first introduced this concept in 1907 and it was later studied by Merleau-Ponty in 1937. The existentialists then developed Husserl’s analysis of the living body. Beauvoir sees the subject-object relation as the basis for ethical commitment. Heinämaa concludes this section by asserting that Beauvoir is committed to phenomenology and The Second Sex functions as a “rich description of the living sexual body, its bodily and spiritual aspects, and its relations to other bodies and to the world as a whole (119).
In The Philosopher and the Writer, Heinämaa attempts to make sense of (and ultimately refute) the context under which Beauvoir’s works are studied. That is to say, Beauvoir is typically read as a novelist or an essayist. Heinämaa believes this to be a mistake because Beauvoir “clarifies her philosophical engagements by rejecting certain approaches and affirming others (119).” In her treatment of Hegel, Beauvoir rejects a notion of philosophy as an act of system-building in favor of pursuing questions of truth and evidence. Furthermore, her attitudes towards Descartes, Søren Kierkegaard, Husserl, Mearleau-Ponty, and Heidegger suggest that she is more interested in philosophy conceived as an effort in radical thinking. For Beauvoir, this is all mediated by language.
In the fourth section, The Question on Woman, Heinämaa focuses on Beauvoir’s defining question at the beginning of The Second Sex: “What is the problem, is there one?” Against the accepted interpretation that Beauvoir is explaining the existence of women, Beauvoir instead poses fundamental questions on woman’s way of being: “How does she exist? Is her being real? and, What is meant by reality when it is stated (122)?” Heinämaa argues that, because these questions are unresolved for Beauvoir, they are questions of fundamental ontology. In this section, Heinämaa also refutes the claim that Beauvoir denies the reality of femininity. Rather, she does not accept it as a static essence. This understanding of woman-as-becoming grants Beauvoir her the phenomenological understanding of the living body. Finally, Heinämaa concludes this section with the claim that Beauvoir does not understand feminine bodies and masculine bodies as two separate entities. They are, instead, two variations of human embodiment.
In the fifth and final section, Otherness and Subordination, Heinämaa attempts to refute the common claim that Beauvoir ultimately affirms the Otherness of women. However, we should instead see that Beauvoir does not affirm the Otherness of women, she radically problemitizes it. In this section, Heinämaa gives an account of Beauvoir’s response to Emmanuel Lévinas’s account of sexual difference. Heinämaa suggests that Beauvoir does not accept Lévinas’s idea of radical sexual difference. With regard to the question of the subordination of women, Beauvoir offers a discussion on “the nature of the phenomenon and clarifies it by pointing out that it is not a result of any social change, nor is it an effect of any historical occurrence or event (événement) (126).” So, for Heinämaa, The Second Sex is phenomenological in its approach because its “main interest and merit is in its uncompromising attempt to question and test all definitions and theories (127).”

Heinamaa, Sara, "Simone de Beauvoir's Phenomenology of Sexual Difference." Hypatia. Vol. 14, Issue 4, 1999. pp 19.