Summary
In the first chapter of Volume II, Part 1, de Beauvoir analyzes how girls are typically treated throughout their childhood. Her central claim is that girls are not born into womanhood, but rather are raised to identify with certain traits we associate with “femininity” and being a “woman.” This claim distinguishes de Beauvoir’s theories from Freud’s. Whereas Freud believed that women think in certain ways because of their anatomy, de Beauvoir believes they only come to think in these ways over time, based on how they are socialized by adults and peers. So, for example, she explains that girls tend to show the same aptitudes and attitudes as boys until the age of twelve or so. It is only through puberty and the differential treatment of adults that they begin to behave differently and become “women.” The process of being weaned, or separated, from parents is part of what shapes boys and girls differently: whereas girls are treated more gently for a longer time, boys are quickly taught to be independent and more active. Although this is initially more painful for boys, it also shows them that they are more deserving or respect while indicating to girls that they must rely on protection and are considered weaker than boys.
de Beauvoir considers the question of how children’s genital differences shape their identities. She believes that adults value and praise a boy’s sexuality in compensation for his earlier weaning; this teaches him to identify his sexuality with his independence and transcendence. On the other hand, girls’ sexuality is neither praised nor acknowledged, which leaves them more confused and often leads them to wish they were boys. They cannot project themselves into any body part, the way boys fixate on a penis as an external and important organ, so they tend to compensate by playing with dolls. They are also more attention-seeking because they do not have a single body part on which they can focus their attention and pride, so they desire adults’ attention on their bodies as a whole—they make themselves into objects. This analysis differs from Freud’s theory of “penis envy,” which assumes that girls are born feeling like they are missing something because they do not have a penis.
As they enter puberty, de Beauvoir believes girls run up against limitations that do not exist for boys. They are given responsibilities in the house earlier on than boys. However, they learn that women are limited to these kinds of chores. Thus, although they might mature faster, they are also stuck in this state for the rest of their lives, while boys get to explore and grow over time. Although mothers might seem all-powerful to children, girls learn over time that it is actually their fathers who have power over everything. At the same time, they are taught to approach love by submitting to the will of men; stories like those of "Cinderella" and "Sleeping Beauty" teach them to be patient and good in order to wait for a man to reward them with love. In learning of their own limitations as they grow up, they are analogous to black people in the United States, who encounter similar limitations in American society. Moreover, they are taught that sex is mysterious and unclean, which leads them to feel disgust with their own growing bodies. For women, sex and puberty are associated with shame and pain. de Beauvoir concludes by arguing that raising women to accept themselves and their bodies without shame would help to avoid many of these problems.
In the second chapter, de Beauvoir focuses on female adolescence. She characterizes this period as one primarily spent waiting for Man. While women are for men only one factor in a complete life, for women, men and marriage are the only goal they can aspire to. Just as boys start to develop more aggressive games in adolescence, girls are encouraged to become more passive. de Beauvoir claims that their awareness of their physical weakness leads them to lose confidence in everything else about themselves, as well. She explains that it is not because of relative weakness that women cannot work like men, but rather the limitations placed on them that make them weaker. The self-control and passivity expected of girls mean they become lazy, tense, and bored. They also begin to think of themselves as objects and become obsessed with their own appearance, because this is the only thing men care about when they approach women. They grow up to be confused because they are divided between accepting their feminine destiny to be passive, and rebelling against it. In response, they become secretive and tormented.
In the third chapter, de Beauvoir describes how girls react to their sexuality. Overall, she characterizes their sexual awakening as a violent act. While men transition smoothly and remain at the center of their sexuality, women must accept domination. Women are always expected to be passive and submissive, while men are encouraged to be active. Men’s sexuality can often seem threatening to women. Moreover, sex can be complicated by the danger of conceiving a child. This threat leads women to feel alienated from the pleasurable aspects of the experience, as they focus on fearing its potential consequences. According to de Beauvoir, it would be best if girls could slowly get to know their sexual partners, avoid anything that could come across as violent, and not feel any time pressure.
de Beauvoir believes that sex is complicated by the unequally distributed power between men and women. A woman’s pride can be hurt if a man is too violent, but also if he is too detached. Women also approach sex from a more difficult position because they are conflicted about giving in to their desires. Their sexuality is less by physical touch, in the way a man’s is, and more by the situation as a whole. One of the main tensions in a sexual encounter can come from the fact that men approach sex as a battle, making it inherently violent and unequal. Women can also tend to be more masochistic in their approach to sex. de Beauvoir claims that this is because their pleasure and pain are linked, as losing their virginity and giving birth are both painful aspects of an otherwise pleasurable act. Sometimes, girls can feel guilty after giving themselves up to men, and respond by wanting to punish themselves. Often, this punishment takes the form of being “frigid,” or unresponsive during sex. de Beauvoir concludes this chapter by reflecting that women’s sexuality is shaped by their entire social and economic situation.
In the fourth chapter, de Beauvoir analyzes homosexuality. Overall, she claims that women are not lesbians because of their anatomical “destiny” but because of their social context. She explains that homosexuality should not be judged as better or worse than heterosexuality, but rather as a response to certain social conditions. It is primarily a response to the fact that women are expected to be sexually passive when they are in heterosexual relationships. Women resent that they are limited in their femininity, and can turn to homosexuality in order to feel more equal overall. Moreover, sometimes women might reject femininity if they are unattractive and feel that they would be disdained in heterosexual relationships. Love between women can be more equal, but also more turbulent, because women are open with one another in ways they are not with men, meaning that passionate arguments can arise. de Beauvoir concludes by writing that homosexuality is chosen based on one’s situation.
Analysis
In the first chapter of Volume II Part 1, de Beauvoir makes consistent use of the third person. She writes about a general “she” who is experiencing all of the childhood developments she describes. This use of third person makes sense in context, since de Beauvoir is taking a psychoanalytical approach to her analysis of gender. In such an approach, the psychoanalyst—in this case, de Beauvoir—tries to embody the perspective of the patient—in this case, women in general—in order to understand what they are going through. However, this approach is complicated by the fact that de Beauvoir switches between analyzing particular cases of individual women and analyzing how these cases relate to the situation of women in general. Thus, her use of the third person “she” sometimes refers to a specific patient, and sometimes applies more broadly to the condition of all women.
In the second chapter, on “The Girl,” de Beauvoir mixes her psychoanalysis with literary analysis, as well. She draws on characters from fiction to demonstrate how femininity can manifest differently across different personalities. In the previous section, de Beauvoir close read literary passages in order to make a point about different authors’ intentions and attitudes about women. In this section, however, she does not approach these texts with close readings. Instead, she analyzes the characters they contain in much the same way that a psychoanalyst might analyze a patient. For example, she evaluates the character of Judy from the book Dusty Answer and concludes that she bestows love on others as a gift, and thinks of the Other as something marvelous to embody. In this kind of analysis, de Beauvoir thinks of this fictional character as a personality type, and an example that can shed light on the psychoanalysis of women in general.
In the third chapter, de Beauvoir analyzes sexuality in more sweeping terms. She continues to rely on anecdotes to ground her analysis, occasionally providing an example of a patient or character who experienced her sexuality in a particular way. However, de Beauvoir also refers to secondary sources, mainly from doctors or psychologists, to provide further insights into potential theories. In this chapter, she tends to combine the evidence she makes use of, but begins and ends by providing readers with her broader thoughts on how this evidence fits together. She also ends the chapter by transitioning to the question of homosexuality, demonstrating that the third and fourth chapters are closely connected.
de Beauvoir begins the last chapter of this section by noting certain misconceptions about homosexuality, which she hopes to dispel. In her first line, she notes, “people are always ready to see the lesbian as wearing a felt hat, her hair short, and a necktie.” By illustrating this particular image for her readers, she demonstrates that she is in tune with their thinking and connects with their assumptions. This setup allows her to better disprove the validity of this image as she moves throughout the chapter.
de Beauvoir’s discussion of “the lesbian” contains some ideas about sexuality that can come across as insensitive or inappropriate to modern readers. For example, she considers the possibility of women turning to homosexuality if they are “unattractive and malformed” in order to compensate by being more masculine. She also claims that more dominant women turn toward homosexuality in order to avoid being dominated by men. While these claims may seem absurd to modern readers, it is important to keep in mind the time period in which this text was written. Homosexuality was viewed differently in the 1940s, and, in keeping with de Beauvoir's own argument that views (for example, views about femininity, or about homosexuality) should be understood in relation to social facts, her analysis of homosexuality should be understood as an analysis of its position in relation to norms about gender and sexuality at the time.
