The Second Sex

According to Beauvoir, history shows that the treatment of women has been uneven across different times and places. She argues that women have been treated poorly in biblical Hebrew and modern Arabic societies, while women generally fared better in ancient Egypt. Overall, she suggests women’s status was better in societies that were more communal and where the government limited or abolished the independent authority of families. Beauvoir sees this best exemplified by Sparta, where women enjoyed sexual and other personal freedoms and where private property was non-existent (96).

Likewise, ancient Rome saw women gain exceptional freedom among ancient societies. In Roman history, as the great patriarchs of the Roman Republic lost their political power and independence to the state, women gained more rights. However, Beauvoir does not paint too rosy a picture. The state still denied women certain rights; Roman women could gain greater sexual, marital, and inheritance rights, but they were still denied economic independence.

Matters worsened for women with the rise of Christianity. As Beauvoir phrases it, “Christian ideology played no little role in women’s oppression” (104). Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire was also increasingly influenced by Germanic cultures. These societies esteemed women as priestesses but also harshly punished female adultery. In the medieval European societies that emerged, most married women had few rights, but noblewomen had significant property rights. Also, the trend of courtly love in poetry and songs gave married women a kind of release valve, but it did not improve women’s status in society.

Although women gained some rights with the decline of feudalism and the rise of centralized governments, overall women lost certain political and property rights by the 16th century. This is because the laws of the growing states protected the property rights of upper-class and bourgeois men at the expense of the rights and independence of their wives: “From feudality to today, the married woman is deliberately sacrificed to private property” (110).

Also, Beauvoir discusses various ways women asserted their independence. A medieval French writer, Christine de Pizan, defended women from the writings of sexist writers. There were exceptional women like queens and female saints, but, Beauvoir writes, these women were “privileged,” or “a man’s possibilities are granted to her” (118).

In the 17th and 18th centuries, women exercised a growing influence on intellectual and cultural movements. There were also calls for women to have educational equality and some political equality. Still, women’s accomplishments were restricted by society, preventing women with no economic or social privilege from making a name for themselves as writers, artists, or philosophers and posing challenges even for privileged women.

This part of Beauvoir’s historical survey supports two key points. The first is that even though women’s status improves or worsens over time and in different locations, women always remain subordinate to men and with strictly limited opportunities. A second, interlinked point is that women, especially upper-class women, may achieve cultural and intellectual influence and personal freedom. However, they remain disadvantaged by not receiving the same education, opportunities, and encouragement as men and are mostly restricted from true economic freedom and political power. Nevertheless, especially in the era of the French Revolution, calls for women’s emancipation grew.