What do you think?
Rate this book
Le deuxi猫me sexe #1-2
The Second Sex
Newly translated and unabridged in English for the first time, Simone de Beauvoir鈥檚 masterwork is a powerful analysis of the Western notion of 鈥渨oman,鈥� and a groundbreaking exploration of inequality and otherness. 听This long-awaited new edition reinstates significant portions of the original French text that were cut in the first English translation. Vital and groundbreaking, Beauvoir鈥檚 pioneering and impressive text remains as pertinent today as it was back then, and will continue to provoke and inspire generations of men and women to come.
746 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1949
15k people are currently reading
247k people want to read
About the author
Simone de Beauvoir
364听books10.6k听followersSimone de Beauvoir was a French author and philosopher. She wrote novels, monographs on philosophy, political and social issues, essays, biographies, and an autobiography. She is now best known for her metaphysical novels, including She Came to Stay and The Mandarins, and for her 1949 treatise The Second Sex, a detailed analysis of women's oppression and a foundational tract of contemporary feminism.
----
Simone de Beauvoir est n茅e 脿 Paris le 9 janvier 1908. Elle fit ses 茅tudes jusqu'au baccalaur茅at dans le tr猫s catholique cours D茅sir. Agr茅g茅e de philosophie en 1929, elle enseigna 脿 Marseille, 脿 Rouen et 脿 Paris jusqu'en 1943. C'est L'Invit茅e (1943) qu'on doit consid茅rer comme son v茅ritable d茅but litt茅raire. Viennent ensuite Le sang des autres (1945), Tous les hommes sont mortels (1946), Les Mandarins (prix Goncourt 1954), Les Belles Images (1966) et La Femme rompue (1968).
Simone de Beauvoir a 茅crit des m茅moires o霉 elle nous donne elle-m锚me 脿 conna卯tre sa vie, son 艙uvre. L'ampleur de l'entreprise autobiographique trouve sa justification, son sens, dans une contradiction essentielle 脿 l'茅crivain : choisir lui fut toujours impossible entre le bonheur de vivre et la n茅cessit茅 d'茅crire ; d'une part la splendeur contingente, de l'autre la rigueur salvatrice. Faire de sa propre existence l'objet de son 茅criture, c'茅tait en partie sortir de ce dilemme.
Outre le c茅l猫bre Deuxi猫me sexe (1949) devenu l'ouvrage de r茅f茅rence du mouvement f茅ministe mondial, l'艙uvre th茅orique de Simone de Beauvoir comprend de nombreux essais philosophiques ou pol茅miques.
Apr猫s la mort de Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir a publi茅 La C茅r茅monie des adieux (1981) et les Lettres au Castor (1983) qui rassemblent une partie de l'abondante correspondance qu'elle re莽ut de lui. Jusqu'au jour de sa mort, le 14 avril 1986, elle a collabor茅 activement 脿 la revue fond茅e par Sartre et elle-m锚me, Les Temps Modernes, et manifest茅 sous des formes diverses et innombrables sa solidarit茅 avec le f茅minisme.
----
Simone de Beauvoir est n茅e 脿 Paris le 9 janvier 1908. Elle fit ses 茅tudes jusqu'au baccalaur茅at dans le tr猫s catholique cours D茅sir. Agr茅g茅e de philosophie en 1929, elle enseigna 脿 Marseille, 脿 Rouen et 脿 Paris jusqu'en 1943. C'est L'Invit茅e (1943) qu'on doit consid茅rer comme son v茅ritable d茅but litt茅raire. Viennent ensuite Le sang des autres (1945), Tous les hommes sont mortels (1946), Les Mandarins (prix Goncourt 1954), Les Belles Images (1966) et La Femme rompue (1968).
Simone de Beauvoir a 茅crit des m茅moires o霉 elle nous donne elle-m锚me 脿 conna卯tre sa vie, son 艙uvre. L'ampleur de l'entreprise autobiographique trouve sa justification, son sens, dans une contradiction essentielle 脿 l'茅crivain : choisir lui fut toujours impossible entre le bonheur de vivre et la n茅cessit茅 d'茅crire ; d'une part la splendeur contingente, de l'autre la rigueur salvatrice. Faire de sa propre existence l'objet de son 茅criture, c'茅tait en partie sortir de ce dilemme.
Outre le c茅l猫bre Deuxi猫me sexe (1949) devenu l'ouvrage de r茅f茅rence du mouvement f茅ministe mondial, l'艙uvre th茅orique de Simone de Beauvoir comprend de nombreux essais philosophiques ou pol茅miques.
Apr猫s la mort de Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir a publi茅 La C茅r茅monie des adieux (1981) et les Lettres au Castor (1983) qui rassemblent une partie de l'abondante correspondance qu'elle re莽ut de lui. Jusqu'au jour de sa mort, le 14 avril 1986, elle a collabor茅 activement 脿 la revue fond茅e par Sartre et elle-m锚me, Les Temps Modernes, et manifest茅 sous des formes diverses et innombrables sa solidarit茅 avec le f茅minisme.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,717 reviews
Want to read
July 3, 2023i can't imagine ever being smart enough to read this, but it's nice to pretend
November 17, 2014
Reading De Beauvoir鈥檚 seminal 鈥渇eminist manifesto鈥� has allowed me to compose my genealogical tree, for The Second Sex is a book about my mother and the mother of my mother and the mother of my grandmother and of all my female ancestors in endless regressive progression who rebelled before obeying and who ended up capitulating like slaves shackled to the indomitable future of preordained inferiority.
鈥淭hus humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being.鈥� (16)
Reading De Beauvoir鈥檚 concentric lines of argument framed within the existentialist discourse about the inward and outward implications of being a woman in a world devised by the masculine mind has glued the fragmented selves of my dispersed persona back together. My inner cracks have been filled with irrefutable evidence amalgamated from diverging fields of study infused with patriarchal metanarration such as the scientific, in its medical, biological and psychoanalytical aspects; and the humanistic, taking philosophy, mythology, literature and historical materialism as pinpointing references.
鈥淥ne is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.鈥� (295)
What I inferred to be particular quirks and shortcomings of my own character like the incessant urge to please, the lack of firmness when I voice out my opinions, the sense of displacement in my professional life, the unavowed guilt of my indecision on motherhood and many other details turn out to be the partial result of centuries of alienation from a position of imbued dependence and subservient otherness in relation to man, whose gender inherently assigns the role of 鈥渢he essential鈥� and 鈥渢he independent鈥� to him.
The female, on the other hand, achieves fulfilment finding her reason to be in the free conscience of the masculine figure. Man is the mirror where women seek their reflection.
Reading De Beauvoir鈥檚 subversive account on the status of women in the context of the modernized Western societies has revealed the double trap of the socio-political organizations in developed countries where women have reached equality, economic autonomy and a more relevant presence in the public institutions only in appearance but not in ethos. Women鈥檚 voices must be not only generalized and active but also questioning and disruptive in order to reinvent the endemic hierarchy of a society culturally and traditionally built on the oppression of half of its population. Are my ambitions, dreams and yearnings my own? Or are they the result of subliminally indoctrination passed through generations of tamed female mentality?
Reading De Beauvoir has put me on the ropes, reminding me of my privileged situation compared to the atrocious and reiterative abuse inflicted upon women, victims of dogmatic fundamentalism or totalitarian governments in most countries of the world: cases of ablation, rape, physical and psychological maltreatment saturate the media, tragic facts that back up De Beauvoir鈥檚 theory that femininity is neither essence nor destiny but an artificial construction of the cultural, societal and historical requirements of time and place.
Reading De Beauvoir has sharpened my feminism, rekindled my empathy and opened my eyes to the impending call to redefine the socio-political, economic and cultural frames of a so-called democracy, which is only de jure and not de facto, and to avoid the postmodernist doctrine of the difference feminism that allots innate and intrinsic qualities to the feminine gender, to establish a collective front that will guarantee new models of egalitarian coexistence for women, inside and outside the public and private spheres.
A collective outcry arises from the underground that joins many others, a dull murmur gathering momentum from those living on the fringes of society: women, immigrants, those of another race, the others, the marginalized, whose voices have been chocked by gratuitous despotism for centuries, start intonating a demand in unison. Don鈥檛 you hear it? It鈥檚 the canon of collective indignation roaring to achieve individual emancipation.
鈥淩esignedness is only abdication and flight, there is no other way out for woman than to work for her liberation.鈥� (639)
鈥淭hus humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being.鈥� (16)
Reading De Beauvoir鈥檚 concentric lines of argument framed within the existentialist discourse about the inward and outward implications of being a woman in a world devised by the masculine mind has glued the fragmented selves of my dispersed persona back together. My inner cracks have been filled with irrefutable evidence amalgamated from diverging fields of study infused with patriarchal metanarration such as the scientific, in its medical, biological and psychoanalytical aspects; and the humanistic, taking philosophy, mythology, literature and historical materialism as pinpointing references.
鈥淥ne is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.鈥� (295)
What I inferred to be particular quirks and shortcomings of my own character like the incessant urge to please, the lack of firmness when I voice out my opinions, the sense of displacement in my professional life, the unavowed guilt of my indecision on motherhood and many other details turn out to be the partial result of centuries of alienation from a position of imbued dependence and subservient otherness in relation to man, whose gender inherently assigns the role of 鈥渢he essential鈥� and 鈥渢he independent鈥� to him.
The female, on the other hand, achieves fulfilment finding her reason to be in the free conscience of the masculine figure. Man is the mirror where women seek their reflection.
Reading De Beauvoir鈥檚 subversive account on the status of women in the context of the modernized Western societies has revealed the double trap of the socio-political organizations in developed countries where women have reached equality, economic autonomy and a more relevant presence in the public institutions only in appearance but not in ethos. Women鈥檚 voices must be not only generalized and active but also questioning and disruptive in order to reinvent the endemic hierarchy of a society culturally and traditionally built on the oppression of half of its population. Are my ambitions, dreams and yearnings my own? Or are they the result of subliminally indoctrination passed through generations of tamed female mentality?
Reading De Beauvoir has put me on the ropes, reminding me of my privileged situation compared to the atrocious and reiterative abuse inflicted upon women, victims of dogmatic fundamentalism or totalitarian governments in most countries of the world: cases of ablation, rape, physical and psychological maltreatment saturate the media, tragic facts that back up De Beauvoir鈥檚 theory that femininity is neither essence nor destiny but an artificial construction of the cultural, societal and historical requirements of time and place.
Reading De Beauvoir has sharpened my feminism, rekindled my empathy and opened my eyes to the impending call to redefine the socio-political, economic and cultural frames of a so-called democracy, which is only de jure and not de facto, and to avoid the postmodernist doctrine of the difference feminism that allots innate and intrinsic qualities to the feminine gender, to establish a collective front that will guarantee new models of egalitarian coexistence for women, inside and outside the public and private spheres.
A collective outcry arises from the underground that joins many others, a dull murmur gathering momentum from those living on the fringes of society: women, immigrants, those of another race, the others, the marginalized, whose voices have been chocked by gratuitous despotism for centuries, start intonating a demand in unison. Don鈥檛 you hear it? It鈥檚 the canon of collective indignation roaring to achieve individual emancipation.
鈥淩esignedness is only abdication and flight, there is no other way out for woman than to work for her liberation.鈥� (639)
March 14, 2023
3/14/23 Update - TERFs, SWERFs, and other folks who cherry-pick their feminism: this review is not for you.
Being a woman concerns me. With that, let us begin.
I am a white middle class female undergraduate who has spent all twenty-two years of her life in the United States. I did not read this book for a class. I do not in any way claim that this book speaks on all women鈥檚 issues, or deem women鈥檚 issues more important than those of any other oppressed group, whether via race, sexuality, financial security, et al. I simply don鈥檛 have the firsthand experience with other issues that, I believe, would accredit me to speak on them to such length. Account for the inherent biases as you see fit.
Females are biologically different from males in the interest of propagation of the species, resulting in imposed monthly cycles that involve a whole host of painful and bloody side effects, as well as the inconvenient and sometimes dangerous states of pregnancy and giving birth. Females also have a more difficult time of building up muscle mass and other aspects lending to physical movement, due to the consequences of puberty and resulting chemical development.
Alternative Title: Woman Fucks/Fucking Terrifies Man - A Treatise
The fact that we are human beings is infinitely more important than all the peculiarities that distinguish human beings from one another; it is never the given that confers superiorities: 鈥榲irtue鈥�, as the ancients called it, is defined on the level of 鈥榯hat which depends on us鈥�.My life has led me to develop a love for thought, a love heavily dependent on the context of reality and my personal view of such, a love that has been, is, and will continue to grow through heavy doses of words both spoken and printed. I will admit to being biased towards the printed, as well as to being biased in many things as a result of characteristics both physical and mental; the fault of nature and nurture, neither one of which I can help very much. My method of coping with having a love for thinking, while being aware of the inherent inaccuracies of said thinking, is a rabid interest in argument, debate if you will, on many fronts that concern me.
Being a woman concerns me. With that, let us begin.
I am a white middle class female undergraduate who has spent all twenty-two years of her life in the United States. I did not read this book for a class. I do not in any way claim that this book speaks on all women鈥檚 issues, or deem women鈥檚 issues more important than those of any other oppressed group, whether via race, sexuality, financial security, et al. I simply don鈥檛 have the firsthand experience with other issues that, I believe, would accredit me to speak on them to such length. Account for the inherent biases as you see fit.
Females are biologically different from males in the interest of propagation of the species, resulting in imposed monthly cycles that involve a whole host of painful and bloody side effects, as well as the inconvenient and sometimes dangerous states of pregnancy and giving birth. Females also have a more difficult time of building up muscle mass and other aspects lending to physical movement, due to the consequences of puberty and resulting chemical development.
The bearing of maternity upon the individual life, regulated naturally in animals by the oestrus cycle and the seasons, is not definitely prescribed in woman - society alone is the arbiter. The bondage of woman to the species is more or less rigorous according to the number of births demanded by society and the degree of hygienic care provided for pregnancy and childbirth. Thus, while it is true that in the higher animals the individual existence is asserted more imperiously by the male than by the female, in the human species individual 'possibilities' depend upon the economic and social situation.In the United States, the Nineteenth Amendment to the US Constitution was ratified on August 18, 1920, which declares that: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. This occurred 144 years after the US declared independence, 137 years after the US was recognized as independent, and 132 years after the Constitution itself was ratified.
We are now acquainted with the dramatic conflict that harrows the adolescent girl at puberty: she cannot become 'grown-up' without accepting her femininity; and she knows already that her sex condemns her to a mutilated and fixed existence, which she faces at this time under the form of an impure sickness and a vague sense of guilt. Her inferiority was sensed at first merely as a deprivation; but the lack of a penis has now become defilement and transgression. So she goes onward towards the future, wounded, shameful, culpable.
In masculine hands logic is often a form of violence, a sly kind of tyranny: the husband, if older and better educated than his wife, assumes on the basis of this superiority to give no weight at all to her opinions when he does not share them; he tirelessly proves to her that he is right. For her part, she becomes obstinate and refuses to see anything in her husband's arguments; he simply sticks to his own notions. And so a deep misunderstanding comes between them. He makes no effort to comprehend the feelings and reactions she is not clever enough to justify, though they are deeply rooted in her; she does not grasp what is vital behind the pedantic logic with which her husband overwhelms her.On June 20, 2013, many news organizations issued articles discussing a report released by the World Health Organization titled Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. The results? One in three women has faced intimate partner violence or sexual violence. 40% of women killed worldwide were slain by the partner.
And therein lies the wondrous hope that man has often put in woman: he hopes to fulfill himself as a being by carnally possessing a being, but at the same time confirming his sense of freedom through the docility of a free person. No man would consent to be a woman, but every man wants women to exist.There is currently in the US a widespread political machination in many states aiming towards the eradication of legalized abortion, in essence granting living women less rights to their bodies than dead individuals who in life chose not to donate their bodies to science.
Man has no need of the unconditional devotion he claims, nor of the idolatrous love that flatters his vanity; he accepts them only on condition that he need not satisfy the reciprocal demands these attitudes imply. He preaches to woman that she should give鈥攁nd her gifts bore him to distraction; she is left in embarrassment with her useless offerings, her empty life. On the day when it will be possible for woman to love not in her weakness but in her strength, not to escape herself but to find herself, not to abase herself but to assert herself鈥攐n that day love will become for her, as for man, a source of life and not of mortal danger. In the meantime, love represents in its most touching form the curse that lies heavily upon woman confined in the feminine universe, woman mutilated, insufficient unto herself. The innumerable martyrs to love bear witness against the injustice of a fate that offers a sterile hell as ultimate salvation.
...modern woman is everywhere permitted to regard her body as capital for exploitation.Also current in the US is the discussion of rape culture and slut shaming in light of the events of the Steubenville High School Rape Case, where media outlets offered biased coverage that sympathized with the rapists and rarely focused on the victim.
The fact is that a true human privilege is based upon the anatomical privilege only in virtue of the total situation.
That the child is the supreme aim of woman is a statement having precisely the value of an advertising slogan.
...the distortion begins when the religion of Maternity proclaims that all mothers are saintly. For while maternal devotion may be perfectly genuine, this, in fact, is rarely the case. Maternity is usually a strange mixture of narcissism, altruism, idle day-dreaming, sincerity, bad faith, devotion and cynicism.
As a matter of fact, the privileged position of man comes from the integration of his biologically aggressive role with his social function as leader or master; it is on account of this social function that the physiological differences take on all their significance. Because man is ruler in the world, he holds that the violence of his desires is a sign of his sovereignty; a man of great erotic capacity is said to be strong, potent - epithets that imply activity and transcendence. But, on the other hand, woman being only an object, she will be described as warm or frigid, which is to say that she will never manifest other than passive qualities.In the US, prostitution, the 鈥榖usiness or practice of providing sexual services to another person in return for payment鈥�, is illegal.
It is a mistake to seek in fantasies the key to concrete behaviour; for fantasies are created and cherished as fantasies. The little girl who dreams of violation with mingled horror and acquiescence does not really wish to be violated and if such a thing should happen it would be a hateful calamity.
Masculine desire is as much an offence as it is a compliment; in so far as she feels herself responsible for her charm, or feels she is exerting it of her own accord, she is much pleased with her conquests, but to the extent that her face, her figure, her flesh are facts she must bear with, she wants to hide them from this independent stranger who lusts after them.
Man encourages these allurements by demanding to be lured: afterwards he is annoyed and reproachful. But he feels only indifference and hostility for the artless, guileless young girl...she is obliged to offer man the myth of her submission, because he insists on domination, and her compliance would only be perverted from the start.
The Cinderella myth flourishes especially in prosperous countries like America. How should the men there spend their surplus money if not upon a woman? Orson Welles, among others, has embodied in 'Citizen Kane' that imperial and false generosity: it is to glorify his own power that Kane chooses to shower his gifts upon an obscure singer and to impose her upon the public as a great queen of song. When the hero of another film, 'The Razor's Edge', returns from India equipped with absolute wisdom, the only thing he finds to do with it is to redeem a prostitute.The Equal Pay Act was signed into law in the US in 1963. The male-female income difference in the US was in 2010 at a female-to-male earnings ratio of 0.81, medium income in full-time year-round workers being $42,800 for men compared to $34,700 for women.
One remarkable fact among others is that the married woman had her place in society but enjoyed no rights therein; whereas the unmarried female, honest woman or prostitute, had all the legal capacities of a man, but up to this century was more or less excluded from social life.
Sewers are necessary to guarantee the wholesomeness of palaces, according to the Fathers of the Church. And it has often been remarked that the necessity exists of sacrificing one part of the female sex in order to save the other and prevent worse troubles. One of the arguments in support of slavery, advanced by the American supporters of the institution, was that the Southern whites, being all freed from servile duties, could maintain the most democratic and refined relations among themselves; in the same way, a caste of 'shameless women' allows the 'honest woman' to be treated with the most chivalrous respect. The prostitute is a scapegoat; man vents his turpitude upon her, and he rejects her. Whether she is put legally under police supervision or works illegally in secret, she is in any case treated as a pariah.
When he is in a co-operative and benevolent relation with woman, his theme is the principle of abstract equality, and he does not base his attitude upon such inequality as may exist. But when he is in conflict with her, the situation is reversed: his theme will be the existing inequality, and he will even take it as justification for denying abstract equality.The history of literature is dominated by male writers. Since 1901 when the first annual Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded, out of the 109 individuals that have received it, twelve were female. More women have been awarded the Nobel in this field than any other, save for the Nobel Peace Prize, of which fifteen of the 101 recipients were female.
Woman is shut up in a kitchen or in a boudoir, and astonishment is expressed that her horizon is limited. Her wings are clipped, and it is found deplorable that she cannot fly. Let but the future be opened to her, and she will no longer be compelled to linger in the present.
When he describes woman, each writer discloses his general ethics and the special idea he has of himself; and in her he often betrays also the gap between his world view and his egotistical dreams.Feminism is, well. You tell me. I have to say, though, bra-burning and unshaven legs seem empty condemnations in comparison to rape and domestic abuse.
鈥he categories in which men think of the world are established from their point of view, as absolute: they misconceive reciprocity, here as everywhere. A mystery for man, woman is considered to be mysterious in essence.
And while her lover fondly believes he is pursuing the Ideal, he is actually the plaything of nature, who employs all this mystification for the ends of reproduction.
'Pendants have for two thousand years reiterated the notion that women have a more lively spirit, men more solidity; that women have more delicacy in their ideas and men greater power of attention. A Paris idler who once took a walk in the Versailles Gardens concluded that, judging from all he saw, the trees grow ready trimmed.'
鈥揝迟别苍诲丑补濒
The truth is that just as鈥攂iologically鈥攎ales and females are never victims of one another but both victims of the species, so man and wife together undergo the oppression of an institution they did not create. If it is asserted that men oppress women, the husband is indignant; he feels that he is the one who is oppressed鈥攁nd he is; but the fact is that it is the masculine code, it is the society developed by the males and in their interest, that has established woman鈥檚 situation in a form that is at present a source of torment for both sexes.I thought about keeping a list of how many authors/philosophers/lauded historical people I鈥檇 have to completely boycott due to misogyny. That action makes as much sense as completely boycotting those who favor feminism. Think about it.
It is perfectly natural for the future woman to feel indignant at the limitations posed upon her by her sex. The real question is not why she should reject them: the problem is rather to understand why she accepts them.
Alternative Title: Woman Fucks/Fucking Terrifies Man - A Treatise
August 26, 2021
Le Deuxi猫me Sexe = The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir
The Second Sex is a 1949 book by the French existentialist Simone de Beauvoir, in which the author discusses the treatment of women throughout history.
Beauvoir researched and wrote the book in about 14 months when she was 38 years old.
She published it in two volumes, Facts and Myths and Lived Experience. Some chapters first appeared in Les Temps moderns.
One of Beauvoir's best-known books, The Second Sex is often regarded as a major work of feminist philosophy and the starting point of second-wave feminism.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 爻丕賱 2003賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 噩賳爻 丿賵賲貙 鬲噩乇亘賴 毓蹖賳蹖貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 爻蹖賲賵賳 丿賵亘賵丕乇貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 賯丕爻賲 氐賳毓賵蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 鬲賵爻貙 趩丕倬 倬賳噩賲 1382貨 丿乇 728氐貨 卮丕亘讴 9643155625貨 賲賵囟賵毓: 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 - 爻丿賴 20賲
讴鬲丕亘 噩賳爻 丿賵賲 丿乇 丿賵 噩賱丿 賳诏丕卮鬲賴 卮丿賴貨 噩賱丿 賳禺爻鬲 丿乇 爻賴 賯爻賲鬲 亘丕 賳丕賲賴丕蹖 芦爻乇賳賵卮鬲禄貨 芦鬲丕乇蹖禺禄貨 賵 芦丕爻胤賵乇賴禄貨 賵 噩賱丿 丿賵賲 丿乇 趩賴丕乇 賯爻賲鬲 亘丕 毓賳賵丕賳賴丕蹖: 芦卮讴賱鈥屭屫臂屄回� 芦賲賵賯毓蹖鬲禄貨 芦鬲賵噩蹖賴鈥屬囏回� 賵 芦亘賴 爻賵蹖 乇賴丕蹖蹖禄 賴爻鬲賳丿貨
亘乇 丕蹖賳 亘丕賵乇 丿丕乇賲貙 讴賴 亘丕賳賵 芦爻蹖賲賵賳禄貙 鬲賵丕賳丕卅蹖賴丕蹖 卮诏賮鬲 丕賳诏蹖夭 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丿丕卮鬲賳丿貙 亘乇乇爻蹖賴丕 賵 蹖丕賮鬲賴 賴丕蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳 亘乇丕蹖賲 噩丕賱亘 亘賵丿賳丿貙 倬蹖卮鬲乇 丿乇 噩丕蹖 丿蹖诏乇 丌賳賴丕 乇丕 賳禺賵丕賳丿賴 亘賵丿賲貙 爻鬲賲 丿蹖丿诏丕賳 乇丕 丕夭 蹖丕丿 賳亘乇丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿貙 丕蹖卮丕賳 亘丕賵乇 丿丕乇賳丿貙 讴賴 亘丿亘禺鬲蹖 诏丕賴 賲蹖鬲賵丕賳丿 丕賲乇蹖 胤亘蹖毓蹖 亘丕卮丿貙 诏丕賴 丕夭 丕賲鬲蹖丕夭賴丕蹖 蹖讴爻賵蹖賴 亘乇丕蹖 噩賳爻 丿賵賲貙 趩卮賲 倬賵卮蹖丿賴貙 賵 亘乇丕亘乇蹖 賲乇丿 賵 夭賳 乇丕 亘丕賵乇 讴乇丿賴貙 賵 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 讴賵卮卮 賳賲賵丿賴 丕賳丿 賴賲诏丕賳 乇丕 賵丕丿丕乇賳丿貙 鬲丕 亘乇 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 禺賵蹖卮 倬蹖乇賵夭 卮賵賳丿
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 10/07/1399賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 03/06/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
The Second Sex is a 1949 book by the French existentialist Simone de Beauvoir, in which the author discusses the treatment of women throughout history.
Beauvoir researched and wrote the book in about 14 months when she was 38 years old.
She published it in two volumes, Facts and Myths and Lived Experience. Some chapters first appeared in Les Temps moderns.
One of Beauvoir's best-known books, The Second Sex is often regarded as a major work of feminist philosophy and the starting point of second-wave feminism.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 爻丕賱 2003賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 噩賳爻 丿賵賲貙 鬲噩乇亘賴 毓蹖賳蹖貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 爻蹖賲賵賳 丿賵亘賵丕乇貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 賯丕爻賲 氐賳毓賵蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 鬲賵爻貙 趩丕倬 倬賳噩賲 1382貨 丿乇 728氐貨 卮丕亘讴 9643155625貨 賲賵囟賵毓: 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 - 爻丿賴 20賲
讴鬲丕亘 噩賳爻 丿賵賲 丿乇 丿賵 噩賱丿 賳诏丕卮鬲賴 卮丿賴貨 噩賱丿 賳禺爻鬲 丿乇 爻賴 賯爻賲鬲 亘丕 賳丕賲賴丕蹖 芦爻乇賳賵卮鬲禄貨 芦鬲丕乇蹖禺禄貨 賵 芦丕爻胤賵乇賴禄貨 賵 噩賱丿 丿賵賲 丿乇 趩賴丕乇 賯爻賲鬲 亘丕 毓賳賵丕賳賴丕蹖: 芦卮讴賱鈥屭屫臂屄回� 芦賲賵賯毓蹖鬲禄貨 芦鬲賵噩蹖賴鈥屬囏回� 賵 芦亘賴 爻賵蹖 乇賴丕蹖蹖禄 賴爻鬲賳丿貨
亘乇 丕蹖賳 亘丕賵乇 丿丕乇賲貙 讴賴 亘丕賳賵 芦爻蹖賲賵賳禄貙 鬲賵丕賳丕卅蹖賴丕蹖 卮诏賮鬲 丕賳诏蹖夭 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丿丕卮鬲賳丿貙 亘乇乇爻蹖賴丕 賵 蹖丕賮鬲賴 賴丕蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳 亘乇丕蹖賲 噩丕賱亘 亘賵丿賳丿貙 倬蹖卮鬲乇 丿乇 噩丕蹖 丿蹖诏乇 丌賳賴丕 乇丕 賳禺賵丕賳丿賴 亘賵丿賲貙 爻鬲賲 丿蹖丿诏丕賳 乇丕 丕夭 蹖丕丿 賳亘乇丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿貙 丕蹖卮丕賳 亘丕賵乇 丿丕乇賳丿貙 讴賴 亘丿亘禺鬲蹖 诏丕賴 賲蹖鬲賵丕賳丿 丕賲乇蹖 胤亘蹖毓蹖 亘丕卮丿貙 诏丕賴 丕夭 丕賲鬲蹖丕夭賴丕蹖 蹖讴爻賵蹖賴 亘乇丕蹖 噩賳爻 丿賵賲貙 趩卮賲 倬賵卮蹖丿賴貙 賵 亘乇丕亘乇蹖 賲乇丿 賵 夭賳 乇丕 亘丕賵乇 讴乇丿賴貙 賵 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 讴賵卮卮 賳賲賵丿賴 丕賳丿 賴賲诏丕賳 乇丕 賵丕丿丕乇賳丿貙 鬲丕 亘乇 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 禺賵蹖卮 倬蹖乇賵夭 卮賵賳丿
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 10/07/1399賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 03/06/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
February 19, 2024
"The Second Sex," six decades after its first publication, still stands supreme for its highly comprehensive work on gender. Simone de Beauvoir, though writing keeping her French upbringing in mind, it is surprising to see how much work is globally relevant, even today. She does not limit herself to a particular viewpoint but sincerely tries to dig into the? Why? Of things that are concerned here. Her work is holistic, ranging from perspectives from biology, psychoanalysis, anthropology, sociology, law, psychology, and history, amongst others! Exploring how gender demarcation came into being and the sociology that evolved with it remains her key inquest throughout the book. She initiates the book by explaining how women are not allowed to exist in their genuine sense. What becomes of a woman is a social construct. The woman is what man will enable her to be. How Simone de Beauvoir puts it?
Human Society is an antiphysis - in a sense, it is against nature; it does not passively submit to the presence of life but instead takes over the control of the environment on its behalf. This arrogation is not an inward, subjective operation; it is accomplished objectively in practical action. She tries to explain gender discrimination in the human mind through this viewpoint. Is it in human nature to restrict the world? Us? And the other? From a historical perspective, she explains that as man discovered better control over the quality, his fear and respect for nature decreased. The women who represented nature? A certain mystique is attached to her. What specific examples does Simone de Beauvoir provide to support her arguments about gender demarcation? What are the particular perspectives from each discipline that Simone de Beauvoir explores in her work? Because only she could produce life, now declined as man realized his worth. He studied, discovered, and accomplished new things. His self-esteem rose. With his increasing prosperity, his workload increased. When a man cannot do everything himself, he has no choice but to enslave others. Is women's subjugation a byproduct of this progress? Was she seen as the mystique in nomadic times, and had she noticed as the other? The negative? The impure? In an agricultural society, she needed help to keep up with the workload demanded by heavy agricultural tools, which only men could handle.
In a farming community, what is the concept of holding property? Patriarchy came with it, which worsened women's position to the hilt. But, according to what suited the man, she now had seen it expanding her economic and social ambitions. Recognizing the irony, the author explains that, unlike tools that had restricted women's participation, the industries and machines opened a new era for her. The considerable workforce required propelled her to come out of the home. The woman is subjected to beautification, uncomfortable clothes, and high heels so that she can never match the man's steps; she remains so involved (read lost) in these particulars that it takes up all her time and life's ambitions.
The second part of the book explains women's socialization and development of self through the various stages of life, keeping in context her exceptional circumstances. She maintains that, contrary to Freud's psychoanalytic work, the boy envies the girl because of the extra cajoling that she receives. Penis envy? According to her, it is more of a socially constructed phenomenon than has any biological roots. She explains, in an entirely non-judgmental way, the insecurities and dilemmas that define women - At any stage of their life, starting childhood; what specific examples does Simone de Beauvoir provide to support her argument about gender demarcation? Attaining puberty, being a woman in love, being married, sexual initiation, being a mother, and entering old age. She also explains the situations of prostitutes and lesbians. Does she explain? Are prostitutes human sacrifices on the altar of monogamy? According to her, women's true nature had submitted to meet the demands of men. Also, it explains how, through her children, a mother wants to conquer the world. Through her son, she wants to satisfy her ego. Because he is a male, he will be a conqueror and a leader. She takes pride in creating him. The problem starts when the children start individuating. She considers it an insult. She cannot tolerate the individuation of her double. Also, she cannot handle her little girl being her double to take her position so that the household can function without her, so the father gives the daughter more time. Who is more charming than her? Overall, it is a highly detailed, deeply reflective work of the utmost quality.
Human Society is an antiphysis - in a sense, it is against nature; it does not passively submit to the presence of life but instead takes over the control of the environment on its behalf. This arrogation is not an inward, subjective operation; it is accomplished objectively in practical action. She tries to explain gender discrimination in the human mind through this viewpoint. Is it in human nature to restrict the world? Us? And the other? From a historical perspective, she explains that as man discovered better control over the quality, his fear and respect for nature decreased. The women who represented nature? A certain mystique is attached to her. What specific examples does Simone de Beauvoir provide to support her arguments about gender demarcation? What are the particular perspectives from each discipline that Simone de Beauvoir explores in her work? Because only she could produce life, now declined as man realized his worth. He studied, discovered, and accomplished new things. His self-esteem rose. With his increasing prosperity, his workload increased. When a man cannot do everything himself, he has no choice but to enslave others. Is women's subjugation a byproduct of this progress? Was she seen as the mystique in nomadic times, and had she noticed as the other? The negative? The impure? In an agricultural society, she needed help to keep up with the workload demanded by heavy agricultural tools, which only men could handle.
In a farming community, what is the concept of holding property? Patriarchy came with it, which worsened women's position to the hilt. But, according to what suited the man, she now had seen it expanding her economic and social ambitions. Recognizing the irony, the author explains that, unlike tools that had restricted women's participation, the industries and machines opened a new era for her. The considerable workforce required propelled her to come out of the home. The woman is subjected to beautification, uncomfortable clothes, and high heels so that she can never match the man's steps; she remains so involved (read lost) in these particulars that it takes up all her time and life's ambitions.
The second part of the book explains women's socialization and development of self through the various stages of life, keeping in context her exceptional circumstances. She maintains that, contrary to Freud's psychoanalytic work, the boy envies the girl because of the extra cajoling that she receives. Penis envy? According to her, it is more of a socially constructed phenomenon than has any biological roots. She explains, in an entirely non-judgmental way, the insecurities and dilemmas that define women - At any stage of their life, starting childhood; what specific examples does Simone de Beauvoir provide to support her argument about gender demarcation? Attaining puberty, being a woman in love, being married, sexual initiation, being a mother, and entering old age. She also explains the situations of prostitutes and lesbians. Does she explain? Are prostitutes human sacrifices on the altar of monogamy? According to her, women's true nature had submitted to meet the demands of men. Also, it explains how, through her children, a mother wants to conquer the world. Through her son, she wants to satisfy her ego. Because he is a male, he will be a conqueror and a leader. She takes pride in creating him. The problem starts when the children start individuating. She considers it an insult. She cannot tolerate the individuation of her double. Also, she cannot handle her little girl being her double to take her position so that the household can function without her, so the father gives the daughter more time. Who is more charming than her? Overall, it is a highly detailed, deeply reflective work of the utmost quality.
Currently reading
October 6, 2022Update 10/6/22 continued reading, will write a comprehensive review from these notes upon completion
Getting near the end, and I am enjoying to see her arguments starting to come to a head. I've been thinking about 's a lot in these past few chapters as much of Beauvoir's goal is to show how the counter to objectification and subjugation will be found in attaining equal footing in work and financial mobility, basically being able to have space for one's own. A lot of criticisms I've read on second-wave feminism by those who came after make a lot more sense reading these chapters, as there isn't much attention to the idea that there are many intersections of identity (race, sexual orientation, etc) that provide further barriers to equality in work/economic opportunity and there is a lot to be said that this aim just makes one complicit in a system that profits from oppression instead of full liberation for all. So there is that to consider.
'all human existence is transcendence and immanence at the same time'
Anyways, the next few chapters look at social roles of women, particularly as a mother or married woman, and Beauvoir argues how the roles and institutions themselves are constricting in and of themselves. Marriage, for instance, is so socially couched in ideas of being the property of a husband and subservient to care for the household that she calls it being cut off mid-life from the mainstream of life. In society, she says men are seen as the producers and wives are seen as accessories and therefor the role itself becomes demeaning. Similarly in the chapter on mothers, social roles have enforced that in motherhood the 'new existence is going to manifest itself and justify her existence,' as if a woman needs an external justification of her existence at all. Much of society is centered around treating women as if their life's worth hinges on this biological function and distributes shame if they do not 'fulfill' it, teaching her that she is merely the 'plaything of obscure forces' do remove any sense of self-agency. This gets into early conversations about contraceptives and fertility treatments, showing that political legislation over them is entirely for the purpose of bodily control and is another aspect of society that culminates in beating down women into feeling their own bodies are not theirs but the property of men.
Largely, these chapters argue that economic opportunity and accumulation of capital in equal footing with men would have a 'purifying role; it abolishes the war of the sexes.' While this feels admittedly short sighted, it is interesting to consider as a necessary step in order to even be at the table for further discussion on dismantling patriarchal oppression. She also argues that it is necessary to remove the knee-jerk response of men against any statements towards equality or rights for women in that so many arguments are dismissed before they are even heard, so gaining a voice at all is needed.
More to come!
--------------
Update 9/23/22 continued reading, will update as I go and compile into a reworked review when finished.
After the section on myths, which was a great analysis of literary works and how the Othering of women is embedded in cultural narratives and religious stories, de Beauvoir turns her attention to the lived experiences of women in society and how the social norms become oppressive emotionally, psychologically and physically.
There is a sharp analysis on how women are socialized from an early age to become passive, even as simple and early on as the nature of gendered toys. that toys 'for girls' tend to focus on ideas of domesticity, nurturing and physical beauty, whereas toys 'for boys' are more active and focus on physical activity, aggression and labor. If found reading this section I was often reminded of by in which she points out ' baby girls are given less room and more rules and baby boys more room and fewer rules,' as well as that 'Many cultures and religions control women鈥檚 bodies in one way or another...the reason is not about women, but about men,' and that many ideas of 'respectibility 'reduces women to mere props used to manage the appetites of men.'
There is also the aspect that girls are brought into household chores and caretaking responsibility earlier and to higher degrees of labor than boys and socialized into believing caretaking is part of their identity whereas boys enjoy the fruit of the unpaid and under appreciated labor. In Dr. 's collection has a chapter on men's entitlement to domestic labor from women, citing a study that showed '46% of fathers reported being coequal parents,' and of those 'only 32% of mothers concurred with their assessment.' Not only do a majority of fathers not view coequal parenting as part of their duty, but the ones who think they are often are not actually coequal, the message being that women's domestic labor is so engrained as normal in society as much of it becomes invisible. This sort of thing is what Simone is getting at: to be a woman is to be undervalued which further's the Othering.
'woman has a more authentic experience of herself.'
Most interesting here was de Beauvoir's rebuttal on Freud's idea of 'penis envy'. She points out that men are able to focus their sexual ideas into one body organ whereas for a woman their focus of sexuality is on their entire body, which shapes them into seeing themselves entirely as a sexual object that moves through the world. As they are taught at a young age that sex is something a woman should feel shame over (as well as a dirty idea), they are therefor taught to feel shame for their own bodies which becomes psychologically emphasized as they develop in puberty. She argues that man's 'anatomical destiny' is different from women's 'from the biological, social, and psychological points of view,' and sexual initiation is not only received but perceived differently based on gender roles. We have a man being congratulated for being sexually active whereas a woman is shamed, for example. She also points out that for every sexual act there is the fear of pregnancy: sex is understood entirely inside the body whereas for a man it is outside of themselves and something they can walk away from.
With regard to the idea that a woman is socialized into feeling shame for the body as a sexual object where men are not, it is interesting to see the double standards. First there is that women are shamed by society for sexual activity whereas society high-fives men, but with regard to the body society also looks at ideas of self-improvement of one鈥檚 body differently. Take gym culture for example. Men shaping their body into ideas of strength and attraction is coded in language as self-improvement and also used in a hierarchy of masculinity. If used for attracting a woman it is less about themselves and more 鈥渓ook at how much better I am compared to the bodies of other men,鈥� and 鈥渨inning鈥� an attractive woman is centered on having her as an accessory, an object to display like a trophy of ego they can show off to friends as a mark of pride. Interestingly enough it is often with aims for the male gaze (Shoutout to my friend Hope for having an amazing discussion about this with me, their ideas are represented in these paragraphs as we dug into the theories).
It is something they are given space to feel pride in, whereas a woman鈥檚 focus on the body is seen as being full of oneself. And much of gym culture involves what Beauvoir notes is socialized as feminine gender roles, from positioning the whole body as a sexual object to shaving legs, framing clothing that emphasizes the sexual attraction etc. The language around it in marketing products for men is that it is for strength, self-improvement and confidence but for women products are sold as 鈥渂eauty products鈥�. For men it is socialized as a positive and ego-boosting, for women it is seen as something they should improve and 鈥渇ix鈥� about their image: the dichotomy of self-improvement between increasing confidence (for men) versus reducing shame (for women).
The chapter on lesbian activity is quite unfortunate and rather outdated. de Beauvoir makes assumptions that being a lesbian is a choice, one made out of social context instead of 'sexual destiny', which is a bad take that assumes one can simply decide to not be queer. She views heterosexuality and homosexuality as equal, though claims that a woman chooses to become a lesbian out of resentment for the limitations of femininity. Ugh, this chapter is a bit frustrating and was critqued often later on.
More to come as I keep on, next chapter is on Mothers and should be interesting in light of what she wrote about mothers in .
-----------
Endeavouring through Simone de Beauvoir鈥檚 seminal work, The Second Sex, with my bookclub and I鈥檝e decided to review it piece by piece as a place to organize my thoughts and discuss with goodreads friends as we page through the book. This work, with famous lines such as 鈥�one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,鈥� became a cornerstone for feminism when it appeared in 1949, a groundbreaking treatise that would spark and become a major work of 21st century philosophy. What stands out most notably so far is how much this is an extremely intelligent mind at work and how much the framing of the writing is important to its message, with book one covering a lot of territory and establishing a framework for her to make arguments within from a place where reactionary rebuttals have already been preempted and nullified. It鈥檚 important, I feel, to consider the context of when this was written and I鈥檓 attempting to approach it on its terms, though I am interested in reading more modern feminist critiques on the work (particularly with regard to race and queer identities) because nothing fascinates me more than seeing ideas reshaped and building upon each other across time. On that note, this is an important work in terms of academic canonization as, with academia, much work is building upon what came before and women have been largely underrepresented through history. I am enjoying this so far and will be reshaping this review as I progress.
I am reading the unabridged version translated by Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. Interestingly, The Second Sex was very quickly translated into English upon its initial publication, arriving in English just three years later in 1952. The translation was notably poor, with many deletions and mistranslations of key terms, as well as breaking the text up into smaller paragraphs thought to suit a more American reader style. Personally I like seeing it as being confronted by a big wall of text, adding to the overall impression that this is a towering and powerful work that would not be silenced and demanded to be listened to. It is also interesting to consider that the first translation was by zoologist Howard M. Parshley, and that a man was reframing De Beauvoir鈥檚 arguments on gender into English might raise an eyebrow or two.
Book I
鈥�Thus humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being.鈥�
The main argument in The Second Sex is that men fundementally oppress women by relegating them to the status of 鈥淥ther鈥� and defining them in opposition to men. Men, she argues, seek to transcend themselves (鈥�its project is not stagnation: it seeks to surpass itself鈥�) and consider themselves to be the center of Self, with women an outside player. 鈥�The world has always belonged to males,鈥� she states, 鈥�and none of the reasons given for this have ever seemed sufficient.鈥� In order to define how this came to be, De Beauvoir looks at biology, psychoanalysis and historical materialism to establish a framework to understand how women came to be Othered and how the 鈥�eternal feminine鈥� has been reinforced by constructs. A major function of the opening few chapters is to impress upon the reader that much of social norms and operations are constructs and detangling how they came to be helps to understand how oppression and 鈥極thering鈥� of women is for the purpose of dominance over them and not any factual reality.
鈥�What is a woman鈥� De Beauvoir asks in the introduction and reminds us that binaries of man/woman only exist as a linguistic construct. She argues that man considers themselves the Subject and women as a reproductive body. In the first chapter, De Beauvoir asks 鈥�what does the female represent in the animal kingdom? And what unique kind of female is realized in woman?鈥� and examines how a woman鈥檚 鈥�body is not enough to define her鈥iology alone cannot provide an answer to the question鈥�.why is woman the Other?鈥� She shows countless examples of how division into binary sexes is not universal. She also examines how menstruation and pregnancy is when a woman 鈥�feels most acutely that her body is an alienated opaque thing,鈥� something she argues is not present in any other mammal to the level of subjugation and alienation felt by human women. She argues it is social constructs aligning to make women feel their body is 鈥�something other than her.鈥�
In the chapter on psychoanalysis, De Beauvoir refutes Freud鈥檚 notion that women consider themselves merely 鈥�damaged men鈥� and posits that his assumption of women is based entirely on 鈥�masculine destiny鈥� with women outside it. She rejects sexuality as the entire basis for personality. Similarly, in the chapter on historic materialism, she rejects the idea that oppression of women and them being 鈥淥thered鈥� is entirely economical struggles, though her she does say it is one part of the reasoning.
De Beauvoir looks at the historical context of how this came to be. Examining social roles of women as opposed to men, arguing that men doing the warring and physical defense while women maintained daily life chores brought about an impression of women as something lesser and an object to protect instead of an equal. This was furthered, she says, when men began obtaining property, considering women as just another aspect of property. She argues that women such as sex workers are more free than married women, though acknowledges there is a trade-off of financial independence and security and social independence.
The aspects that have most grabbed me are the aspects on how storytelling reinforces constructs and systemic oppression. Myths become a way to deliver social values, as well as religion and De Beauvoir looks at how much religion has been used to enforce the binary and Othering of women (milage may vary based on religion, she shows). This is interesting to consider in modern context when we talk about who is being centered and what stories are being given space, much in the way wrote about how storytelling can be an agent of colonialism. The reflections on religious stories being used to subjugate women (ie De Beauvoir discusses Genesis as placing woman as coming from man and also initiating eating of the forbidden fruit) have enforced a patriarchial church structure rampant with misogyny: think how witch hunts historically were violent reactions against behavior such as women owning property, not having children or any other activity that could be said to be 'immoral'.
More to come as I read on! If anyone has some great article, I would LOVE to read them and share with my book club!
Getting near the end, and I am enjoying to see her arguments starting to come to a head. I've been thinking about 's a lot in these past few chapters as much of Beauvoir's goal is to show how the counter to objectification and subjugation will be found in attaining equal footing in work and financial mobility, basically being able to have space for one's own. A lot of criticisms I've read on second-wave feminism by those who came after make a lot more sense reading these chapters, as there isn't much attention to the idea that there are many intersections of identity (race, sexual orientation, etc) that provide further barriers to equality in work/economic opportunity and there is a lot to be said that this aim just makes one complicit in a system that profits from oppression instead of full liberation for all. So there is that to consider.
'all human existence is transcendence and immanence at the same time'
Anyways, the next few chapters look at social roles of women, particularly as a mother or married woman, and Beauvoir argues how the roles and institutions themselves are constricting in and of themselves. Marriage, for instance, is so socially couched in ideas of being the property of a husband and subservient to care for the household that she calls it being cut off mid-life from the mainstream of life. In society, she says men are seen as the producers and wives are seen as accessories and therefor the role itself becomes demeaning. Similarly in the chapter on mothers, social roles have enforced that in motherhood the 'new existence is going to manifest itself and justify her existence,' as if a woman needs an external justification of her existence at all. Much of society is centered around treating women as if their life's worth hinges on this biological function and distributes shame if they do not 'fulfill' it, teaching her that she is merely the 'plaything of obscure forces' do remove any sense of self-agency. This gets into early conversations about contraceptives and fertility treatments, showing that political legislation over them is entirely for the purpose of bodily control and is another aspect of society that culminates in beating down women into feeling their own bodies are not theirs but the property of men.
Largely, these chapters argue that economic opportunity and accumulation of capital in equal footing with men would have a 'purifying role; it abolishes the war of the sexes.' While this feels admittedly short sighted, it is interesting to consider as a necessary step in order to even be at the table for further discussion on dismantling patriarchal oppression. She also argues that it is necessary to remove the knee-jerk response of men against any statements towards equality or rights for women in that so many arguments are dismissed before they are even heard, so gaining a voice at all is needed.
More to come!
--------------
Update 9/23/22 continued reading, will update as I go and compile into a reworked review when finished.
After the section on myths, which was a great analysis of literary works and how the Othering of women is embedded in cultural narratives and religious stories, de Beauvoir turns her attention to the lived experiences of women in society and how the social norms become oppressive emotionally, psychologically and physically.
There is a sharp analysis on how women are socialized from an early age to become passive, even as simple and early on as the nature of gendered toys. that toys 'for girls' tend to focus on ideas of domesticity, nurturing and physical beauty, whereas toys 'for boys' are more active and focus on physical activity, aggression and labor. If found reading this section I was often reminded of by in which she points out ' baby girls are given less room and more rules and baby boys more room and fewer rules,' as well as that 'Many cultures and religions control women鈥檚 bodies in one way or another...the reason is not about women, but about men,' and that many ideas of 'respectibility 'reduces women to mere props used to manage the appetites of men.'
There is also the aspect that girls are brought into household chores and caretaking responsibility earlier and to higher degrees of labor than boys and socialized into believing caretaking is part of their identity whereas boys enjoy the fruit of the unpaid and under appreciated labor. In Dr. 's collection has a chapter on men's entitlement to domestic labor from women, citing a study that showed '46% of fathers reported being coequal parents,' and of those 'only 32% of mothers concurred with their assessment.' Not only do a majority of fathers not view coequal parenting as part of their duty, but the ones who think they are often are not actually coequal, the message being that women's domestic labor is so engrained as normal in society as much of it becomes invisible. This sort of thing is what Simone is getting at: to be a woman is to be undervalued which further's the Othering.
'woman has a more authentic experience of herself.'
Most interesting here was de Beauvoir's rebuttal on Freud's idea of 'penis envy'. She points out that men are able to focus their sexual ideas into one body organ whereas for a woman their focus of sexuality is on their entire body, which shapes them into seeing themselves entirely as a sexual object that moves through the world. As they are taught at a young age that sex is something a woman should feel shame over (as well as a dirty idea), they are therefor taught to feel shame for their own bodies which becomes psychologically emphasized as they develop in puberty. She argues that man's 'anatomical destiny' is different from women's 'from the biological, social, and psychological points of view,' and sexual initiation is not only received but perceived differently based on gender roles. We have a man being congratulated for being sexually active whereas a woman is shamed, for example. She also points out that for every sexual act there is the fear of pregnancy: sex is understood entirely inside the body whereas for a man it is outside of themselves and something they can walk away from.
With regard to the idea that a woman is socialized into feeling shame for the body as a sexual object where men are not, it is interesting to see the double standards. First there is that women are shamed by society for sexual activity whereas society high-fives men, but with regard to the body society also looks at ideas of self-improvement of one鈥檚 body differently. Take gym culture for example. Men shaping their body into ideas of strength and attraction is coded in language as self-improvement and also used in a hierarchy of masculinity. If used for attracting a woman it is less about themselves and more 鈥渓ook at how much better I am compared to the bodies of other men,鈥� and 鈥渨inning鈥� an attractive woman is centered on having her as an accessory, an object to display like a trophy of ego they can show off to friends as a mark of pride. Interestingly enough it is often with aims for the male gaze (Shoutout to my friend Hope for having an amazing discussion about this with me, their ideas are represented in these paragraphs as we dug into the theories).
It is something they are given space to feel pride in, whereas a woman鈥檚 focus on the body is seen as being full of oneself. And much of gym culture involves what Beauvoir notes is socialized as feminine gender roles, from positioning the whole body as a sexual object to shaving legs, framing clothing that emphasizes the sexual attraction etc. The language around it in marketing products for men is that it is for strength, self-improvement and confidence but for women products are sold as 鈥渂eauty products鈥�. For men it is socialized as a positive and ego-boosting, for women it is seen as something they should improve and 鈥渇ix鈥� about their image: the dichotomy of self-improvement between increasing confidence (for men) versus reducing shame (for women).
The chapter on lesbian activity is quite unfortunate and rather outdated. de Beauvoir makes assumptions that being a lesbian is a choice, one made out of social context instead of 'sexual destiny', which is a bad take that assumes one can simply decide to not be queer. She views heterosexuality and homosexuality as equal, though claims that a woman chooses to become a lesbian out of resentment for the limitations of femininity. Ugh, this chapter is a bit frustrating and was critqued often later on.
More to come as I keep on, next chapter is on Mothers and should be interesting in light of what she wrote about mothers in .
-----------
Endeavouring through Simone de Beauvoir鈥檚 seminal work, The Second Sex, with my bookclub and I鈥檝e decided to review it piece by piece as a place to organize my thoughts and discuss with goodreads friends as we page through the book. This work, with famous lines such as 鈥�one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,鈥� became a cornerstone for feminism when it appeared in 1949, a groundbreaking treatise that would spark and become a major work of 21st century philosophy. What stands out most notably so far is how much this is an extremely intelligent mind at work and how much the framing of the writing is important to its message, with book one covering a lot of territory and establishing a framework for her to make arguments within from a place where reactionary rebuttals have already been preempted and nullified. It鈥檚 important, I feel, to consider the context of when this was written and I鈥檓 attempting to approach it on its terms, though I am interested in reading more modern feminist critiques on the work (particularly with regard to race and queer identities) because nothing fascinates me more than seeing ideas reshaped and building upon each other across time. On that note, this is an important work in terms of academic canonization as, with academia, much work is building upon what came before and women have been largely underrepresented through history. I am enjoying this so far and will be reshaping this review as I progress.
I am reading the unabridged version translated by Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. Interestingly, The Second Sex was very quickly translated into English upon its initial publication, arriving in English just three years later in 1952. The translation was notably poor, with many deletions and mistranslations of key terms, as well as breaking the text up into smaller paragraphs thought to suit a more American reader style. Personally I like seeing it as being confronted by a big wall of text, adding to the overall impression that this is a towering and powerful work that would not be silenced and demanded to be listened to. It is also interesting to consider that the first translation was by zoologist Howard M. Parshley, and that a man was reframing De Beauvoir鈥檚 arguments on gender into English might raise an eyebrow or two.
Book I
鈥�Thus humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being.鈥�
The main argument in The Second Sex is that men fundementally oppress women by relegating them to the status of 鈥淥ther鈥� and defining them in opposition to men. Men, she argues, seek to transcend themselves (鈥�its project is not stagnation: it seeks to surpass itself鈥�) and consider themselves to be the center of Self, with women an outside player. 鈥�The world has always belonged to males,鈥� she states, 鈥�and none of the reasons given for this have ever seemed sufficient.鈥� In order to define how this came to be, De Beauvoir looks at biology, psychoanalysis and historical materialism to establish a framework to understand how women came to be Othered and how the 鈥�eternal feminine鈥� has been reinforced by constructs. A major function of the opening few chapters is to impress upon the reader that much of social norms and operations are constructs and detangling how they came to be helps to understand how oppression and 鈥極thering鈥� of women is for the purpose of dominance over them and not any factual reality.
鈥�What is a woman鈥� De Beauvoir asks in the introduction and reminds us that binaries of man/woman only exist as a linguistic construct. She argues that man considers themselves the Subject and women as a reproductive body. In the first chapter, De Beauvoir asks 鈥�what does the female represent in the animal kingdom? And what unique kind of female is realized in woman?鈥� and examines how a woman鈥檚 鈥�body is not enough to define her鈥iology alone cannot provide an answer to the question鈥�.why is woman the Other?鈥� She shows countless examples of how division into binary sexes is not universal. She also examines how menstruation and pregnancy is when a woman 鈥�feels most acutely that her body is an alienated opaque thing,鈥� something she argues is not present in any other mammal to the level of subjugation and alienation felt by human women. She argues it is social constructs aligning to make women feel their body is 鈥�something other than her.鈥�
In the chapter on psychoanalysis, De Beauvoir refutes Freud鈥檚 notion that women consider themselves merely 鈥�damaged men鈥� and posits that his assumption of women is based entirely on 鈥�masculine destiny鈥� with women outside it. She rejects sexuality as the entire basis for personality. Similarly, in the chapter on historic materialism, she rejects the idea that oppression of women and them being 鈥淥thered鈥� is entirely economical struggles, though her she does say it is one part of the reasoning.
De Beauvoir looks at the historical context of how this came to be. Examining social roles of women as opposed to men, arguing that men doing the warring and physical defense while women maintained daily life chores brought about an impression of women as something lesser and an object to protect instead of an equal. This was furthered, she says, when men began obtaining property, considering women as just another aspect of property. She argues that women such as sex workers are more free than married women, though acknowledges there is a trade-off of financial independence and security and social independence.
The aspects that have most grabbed me are the aspects on how storytelling reinforces constructs and systemic oppression. Myths become a way to deliver social values, as well as religion and De Beauvoir looks at how much religion has been used to enforce the binary and Othering of women (milage may vary based on religion, she shows). This is interesting to consider in modern context when we talk about who is being centered and what stories are being given space, much in the way wrote about how storytelling can be an agent of colonialism. The reflections on religious stories being used to subjugate women (ie De Beauvoir discusses Genesis as placing woman as coming from man and also initiating eating of the forbidden fruit) have enforced a patriarchial church structure rampant with misogyny: think how witch hunts historically were violent reactions against behavior such as women owning property, not having children or any other activity that could be said to be 'immoral'.
More to come as I read on! If anyone has some great article, I would LOVE to read them and share with my book club!
October 1, 2021
蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賲賴賲鬲乇蹖賳 丿賱丕蹖賱蹖 讴賴 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屫й� 賲乇丿爻丕賱丕乇 乇賵 亘賴 賲賯丕亘賱賴 亘丕 丕爻鬲賯賱丕賱 賵 亘乇丕亘乇蹖 禺賵丕賴蹖 夭賳丕賳 亘乇賲蹖鈥屫з嗂屫操囏� 賴乇丕爻賽 丕夭 丿爻鬲 乇賮鬲賳 夭賳丕賳诏蹖貙 賲賱丕丨鬲 賵 噩丕匕亘賴 噩賳爻蹖 夭賳 賴爻鬲卮. 丕賵賳賴丕 丕夭 卮亘蹖賴 卮丿賳 夭賳賴丕 賵 賲乇丿賴丕 亘賴 賴賲 賵丨卮鬲 丿丕乇賳 賵 丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 亘乇丕亘乇蹖 禺賵丕賴蹖 乇賵 賲毓丕丿賱 卮亘蹖賴鈥屫簇� 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖丿賳. 賲乇丿賴丕 賲蹖鬲乇爻賳 夭賳賴丕 亘賴 丕爻鬲賯賱丕賱 噩賳爻蹖 賵 賲丕賱讴蹖鬲 鬲賳 丿爻鬲 倬蹖丿丕 讴賳賳貙 趩賵賳 鬲氐賵乇 賲蹖讴賳賳 丿乇 丕蹖賳 氐賵乇鬲 毓卮乇鬲卮賵賳 讴賲 賵 丿爻鬲鈥屰屫жㄛ� 亘賴 賱匕鬲 丿卮賵丕乇 賲蹖卮賴. 丕賵賳賴丕 賲蹖鬲乇爻賳 丿乇 丕蹖賳 毓乇氐賴 丕夭 毓乇卮 丨丕讴賲蹖鬲 讴賳鬲乇賱 鬲賳 賵 賲蹖賱 噩賳爻蹖 夭賳賴丕 倬丕蹖蹖賳 亘蹖丕賳 趩賵賳 賲蹖禺賵丕賳 讴賳鬲乇賱 賴賲賴 噩丕賳亘賴 乇丕亘胤賴 噩賳爻蹖 亘丕 禺賵丿卮賵賳 亘丕卮賴 . 賴乇诏賵賳賴 丕禺鬲蹖丕乇 賵 丌夭丕丿蹖 夭賳賴丕 丕賵賳賴丕 乇賵 亘賴 賴乇丕爻 賲蹖賳丿丕夭賴貙 亘胤賵乇蹖讴賴 丕睾賱亘 讴賱 丕蹖賳 賲蹖賱 賵 诏乇丕蹖卮賴丕 乇賵 丿乇 夭賳 丕賳讴丕乇 賲蹖讴賳賳.
........
丿乇 亘丨孬蹖 讴賴 亘丕" 賮 "丿乇亘丕乇賴 乇賵卮賴丕蹖 噩賱賵诏蹖乇蹖 丕夭 亘丕乇丿丕乇蹖 丿丕卮鬲蹖賲貙 氐丨亘鬲 亘賴 賯乇氐賴丕蹖 囟丿 亘丕乇丿丕乇蹖 賲乇丿丕賳賴 賵 毓丿賲 丕爻鬲賯亘丕賱卮 丕夭 胤乇賮 噩丕賲毓賴 讴卮蹖丿. 賵 丿蹖丿蹖賲 丨鬲蹖 鬲賵蹖 賵蹖讴蹖 倬丿蹖丕 賴賲 丿乇亘丕乇賴 賲賴賲鬲乇蹖賳 賳诏乇丕賳蹖 賲氐乇賮 丕蹖賳 賯乇氐賴丕 亘賴 毓賵丕乇囟蹖 賳馗蹖乇 讴賲 卮丿賳 賲蹖賱 噩賳爻蹖 丕賯丕蹖賵賳 丕卮丕乇賴 卮丿賴 . 丿乇 丨丕賱蹖讴賴 丕賳賵丕毓 賯乇氐賴丕貙 丌賲倬賵賱賴丕 賵 丕亘夭丕乇 禺丕乇噩蹖 賲賵乇丿 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 禺丕賳賲賴丕 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖诏蹖乇賴 賵 讴賲鬲乇蹖賳 賳诏乇丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇賲賵乇丿卮 氐丨亘鬲 賲蹖卮賴 賴賲蹖賳 鬲丕孬蹖乇卮 亘乇 乇賵蹖 賲蹖夭丕賳 賲蹖賱 噩賳爻蹖 賴爻鬲卮. 鬲丕 丕蹖賳 丨丿 蹖毓賳蹖 ://
.......
丿乇亘丕乇賴 讴鬲丕亘:
亘丕蹖丿 亘诏賲 讴鬲丕亘 噩丕賱亘蹖賴 丕賲丕 賲胤賱亘 噩丿蹖丿蹖 亘乇丕蹖 賲賳 賳丿丕卮鬲 . 亘丕 鬲賵噩賴 亘賴 丨噩賲 丕胤賱丕毓丕鬲 賵 爻乇毓鬲 亘丕賱丕 乇賮鬲賳 丌诏丕賴蹖 丿乇 夭賲蹖賳賴 賲爻丕卅賱 夭賳丕賳 丿乇 爻丕賱賴丕蹖 丕禺蹖乇貙 賮讴乇 賲蹖讴賳賲 賲鬲賳 讴鬲丕亘 賯丿蹖賲蹖 卮丿賴 亘丕卮賴. 賯胤毓丕 丿乇 诏匕卮鬲賴 讴鬲丕亘 亘爻蹖丕乇 丌诏丕賴蹖 亘禺卮蹖 亘賵丿賴 貙 亘毓囟蹖 賲胤丕賱亘 賴賳賵夭賲 噩匕丕亘賳貙 賵賱蹖 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賲胤丕賱亘 乇賵 賲蹖丿賵賳爻鬲賲 賵 丕夭 胤乇蹖賯 倬蹖噩 賴丕蹖 丕蹖賳爻鬲丕诏乇丕賲 賵 氐賮丨丕鬲 賮賲賳蹖爻鬲蹖 亘丕賴丕卮賵賳 丕卮賳丕 卮丿賴 亘賵丿賲 .
丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 卮禺氐蹖 丕賮乇丕丿 賵 鬲毓乇蹖賮 讴乇丿賳 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 賴賲 亘乇丕賲 讴爻賱 讴賳賳丿賴 亘賵丿賳 丨賯蹖賯鬲卮 賵 丿賵爻鬲卮賵賳 賳丿丕卮鬲賲.
趩蹖夭蹖 賴賲 讴賴 乇賵蹖 丕毓氐丕亘賲 亘賵丿 貙丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 賵丕跇賴 "賴賲噩賳爻亘丕夭" 亘賴 噩丕蹖 "賴賲噩賳爻诏乇丕" 亘賵丿.
鬲氐賲蹖賲 丿丕乇賲 丿賳亘丕賱 讴鬲丕亘賴丕蹖 噩丿蹖丿鬲乇 丿乇亘丕乇賴 夭賳丕賳 賵 賮賲賳蹖爻賲 亘丕卮賲 賵 丕胤賱丕毓丕鬲 亘賴 乇賵夭 亘丿爻鬲 亘蹖丕乇賲 丨鬲賲賳 :)
........
丕蹖賳 乇蹖賵蹖賵賵 乇賵 丿賵亘丕乇賴 禺賵賳丿賲 賵 丨爻乇鬲 乇賵夭賴丕蹖蹖 乇賵 禺賵乇丿賲 讴賴 亘丨孬賴丕蹖 禺賵亘蹖 亘丕 賴賲 賲蹖讴乇丿蹖賲 賵 趩賯丿乇 丕夭 賴賲 蹖丕丿賲蹖诏乇賮鬲蹖賲
........
丿乇 亘丨孬蹖 讴賴 亘丕" 賮 "丿乇亘丕乇賴 乇賵卮賴丕蹖 噩賱賵诏蹖乇蹖 丕夭 亘丕乇丿丕乇蹖 丿丕卮鬲蹖賲貙 氐丨亘鬲 亘賴 賯乇氐賴丕蹖 囟丿 亘丕乇丿丕乇蹖 賲乇丿丕賳賴 賵 毓丿賲 丕爻鬲賯亘丕賱卮 丕夭 胤乇賮 噩丕賲毓賴 讴卮蹖丿. 賵 丿蹖丿蹖賲 丨鬲蹖 鬲賵蹖 賵蹖讴蹖 倬丿蹖丕 賴賲 丿乇亘丕乇賴 賲賴賲鬲乇蹖賳 賳诏乇丕賳蹖 賲氐乇賮 丕蹖賳 賯乇氐賴丕 亘賴 毓賵丕乇囟蹖 賳馗蹖乇 讴賲 卮丿賳 賲蹖賱 噩賳爻蹖 丕賯丕蹖賵賳 丕卮丕乇賴 卮丿賴 . 丿乇 丨丕賱蹖讴賴 丕賳賵丕毓 賯乇氐賴丕貙 丌賲倬賵賱賴丕 賵 丕亘夭丕乇 禺丕乇噩蹖 賲賵乇丿 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 禺丕賳賲賴丕 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖诏蹖乇賴 賵 讴賲鬲乇蹖賳 賳诏乇丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇賲賵乇丿卮 氐丨亘鬲 賲蹖卮賴 賴賲蹖賳 鬲丕孬蹖乇卮 亘乇 乇賵蹖 賲蹖夭丕賳 賲蹖賱 噩賳爻蹖 賴爻鬲卮. 鬲丕 丕蹖賳 丨丿 蹖毓賳蹖 ://
.......
丿乇亘丕乇賴 讴鬲丕亘:
亘丕蹖丿 亘诏賲 讴鬲丕亘 噩丕賱亘蹖賴 丕賲丕 賲胤賱亘 噩丿蹖丿蹖 亘乇丕蹖 賲賳 賳丿丕卮鬲 . 亘丕 鬲賵噩賴 亘賴 丨噩賲 丕胤賱丕毓丕鬲 賵 爻乇毓鬲 亘丕賱丕 乇賮鬲賳 丌诏丕賴蹖 丿乇 夭賲蹖賳賴 賲爻丕卅賱 夭賳丕賳 丿乇 爻丕賱賴丕蹖 丕禺蹖乇貙 賮讴乇 賲蹖讴賳賲 賲鬲賳 讴鬲丕亘 賯丿蹖賲蹖 卮丿賴 亘丕卮賴. 賯胤毓丕 丿乇 诏匕卮鬲賴 讴鬲丕亘 亘爻蹖丕乇 丌诏丕賴蹖 亘禺卮蹖 亘賵丿賴 貙 亘毓囟蹖 賲胤丕賱亘 賴賳賵夭賲 噩匕丕亘賳貙 賵賱蹖 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賲胤丕賱亘 乇賵 賲蹖丿賵賳爻鬲賲 賵 丕夭 胤乇蹖賯 倬蹖噩 賴丕蹖 丕蹖賳爻鬲丕诏乇丕賲 賵 氐賮丨丕鬲 賮賲賳蹖爻鬲蹖 亘丕賴丕卮賵賳 丕卮賳丕 卮丿賴 亘賵丿賲 .
丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 卮禺氐蹖 丕賮乇丕丿 賵 鬲毓乇蹖賮 讴乇丿賳 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 賴賲 亘乇丕賲 讴爻賱 讴賳賳丿賴 亘賵丿賳 丨賯蹖賯鬲卮 賵 丿賵爻鬲卮賵賳 賳丿丕卮鬲賲.
趩蹖夭蹖 賴賲 讴賴 乇賵蹖 丕毓氐丕亘賲 亘賵丿 貙丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 賵丕跇賴 "賴賲噩賳爻亘丕夭" 亘賴 噩丕蹖 "賴賲噩賳爻诏乇丕" 亘賵丿.
鬲氐賲蹖賲 丿丕乇賲 丿賳亘丕賱 讴鬲丕亘賴丕蹖 噩丿蹖丿鬲乇 丿乇亘丕乇賴 夭賳丕賳 賵 賮賲賳蹖爻賲 亘丕卮賲 賵 丕胤賱丕毓丕鬲 亘賴 乇賵夭 亘丿爻鬲 亘蹖丕乇賲 丨鬲賲賳 :)
........
丕蹖賳 乇蹖賵蹖賵賵 乇賵 丿賵亘丕乇賴 禺賵賳丿賲 賵 丨爻乇鬲 乇賵夭賴丕蹖蹖 乇賵 禺賵乇丿賲 讴賴 亘丨孬賴丕蹖 禺賵亘蹖 亘丕 賴賲 賲蹖讴乇丿蹖賲 賵 趩賯丿乇 丕夭 賴賲 蹖丕丿賲蹖诏乇賮鬲蹖賲
March 9, 2017
To seem, rather than to see, to appear, rather than to be: this, in a nutshell, has been woman's existential project thus far, according to de Beauvoir. Woman's historic destiny has prohibited her from developing into a self, understood as an autonomous ontic unit and agent. Instead, hers has been a merely instrumental existence defined entirely by her social roles. Never a maker of meaning, her success in life was defined to the extent that she was a suitable canvas for receiving others' meanings. This philosophical document is first of all, whatever else it might be, a sustained exploration of what it means to know, to be, to make, and ultimately to become a self. De Beauvoir starts from the perplexing situation in which she encounters her selfhood as somehow incomplete, and deeply problematic to herself. From this starting point, she can ask the million-dollar question of philosophy anew (and for our benefit): and namely, What does it really take to know a self, our self?
The first thing one should note about this book is that it was not originally intended as a political treatise; it wasn't made with the intention of shouting shrill slogans over a megaphone. Its aim is philosophical understanding of the human condition, not political expediency. As such, it eschews neat and tidy ideological divisions in its essence, and prefers to obliquely cast a searching light on the rich ambiguity of this queer dual nature we experience as sexual beings, and the implications this has for our sense of identity and our experience of meaning. De Beauvoir's work finds insight not in ideological formulations, but in the poignant and possibly unanswerable questions brought up by the tensions and dualities that seem intrinsic to the human condition, and that, perhaps, the ideologue in his/her search for the perfectly defined political dogma will always and of necessity gloss over. Her highest strength as a thinker attempting to venture in this gender minefield is that she guides herself therein less by a pursuit of ideological neatness, and more by an effort to attain a philosophical consciousness that can comprehend a perhaps intractable ambiguity.
The impulse to 鈥淜now thyself鈥� is shown here to cut across all artificial barriers of specialization: de Beauvoir comes to herself through biological and historical research (hormones and hearth, glands and cosmetics), literary and mythological critique, with all of this capped by philosophical reflection. She shows how, in the effort to know our condition, philosophy can contain, inform and direct all partial disciplinary inquiries and perspectives (a modern and biographical take on the more traditional ideal of philosophy as a 鈥渜ueen of the sciences鈥�).
When most people think of self-knowledge, they tend to conceive this process in purely subjectivist terms, in short, in terms of looking into material accessible only to the individual consciousness. Somewhere in the swarmy mess of impulses, affects, personal memories, belief commitments and gut feelings, you are told, you shall find Your Self. In contrast, I suspect she would sympathize with Mann's insight in The Magic Mountain: 鈥淎 man lives not only his personal life, as an individual, but also, consciously or unconsciously, the life of his epoch and his contemporaries.鈥� As such, the work goes far beyond our culture's subjectivist approach to self-knowledge, in order to illuminate us to ourselves in our guise as participants in the unfolding of larger historical patterns.
Our lives are shaped by the accreted sediment of decisions made by past generations; within the domain circumscribed by those decisions, we exist. And some of the most fundamental decisions we make and inherit are decisions regarding meaning, or about how to shape our human experience. The semantic tools available for the shaping of self are our most critical inheritance from the past. Self-knowledge thus implies far more than insight into personal experience; it necessitates developing a historical consciousness of the inherited patterns of meaning-making that we have available for shaping our individual consciousness of self as it emerges at this given moment in time. So, to understand the female self as it has been historically constrained to develop, she targets her philosophical analysis to the representational tools - and their limits - that she has had available for her self-construction.
The problem of incompletely formulated selfhood that she starts from, de Beauvoir takes great pains to suggest, is not merely a piece of her idiosyncratic subjective biographical trajectory, but is, in a sense, our problem as well, to the extent that we are inheritors of a cultural heritage that does not afford us with the semantic tools that we need in order to lay claim to our experience through its shaping. It is in this effort of shaping that autonomy is slowly consolidated and that we become a genuine acting unity, or a full-fledged individual. A guiding thematic thread in her work is the exploration of how various cultural myths restrict woman to the contrary of autonomy, which she calls a state of 鈥渋mmanence.鈥� This state of immanence is, for her, a stultifying state for a human existent to occupy, whose inward striving relentlessly impels her to a 鈥渢ranscendence鈥� through autonomy.
The inherited semantic tools, far from helping woman shape her experience so as to converge on an autonomous perspective, instead restrict her to an "immanent" identity wholly defined by her contingent web of relations. She must ever define herself as daughter, as mother, as wife, as friend, as helper, as nurturer, as muse, as treacherous slut. The one position that is off-limits is her own, that is, her knowing of herself as irreducible existent and autonomous center of meaning. Her knowing of the one thing that no one can give to her, nor take away from her, is unavailable to her as so long as she operates through the inherited, self-alienating semantic paradigm. This centrifugal, purely contingent existence, de Beauvoir persuasively argues, is a humanly incomplete mode of being. As long as we only know to look outside ourselves for our psychological substance, we are lost to ourselves. We never fully come to be, as a self.
The trouble is that, for a woman coming to consciousness, the collective heritage she finds is invariably an inheritance of scars, caricatures, and symbolic deformations. A young woman, growing to consciousness of self, must find herself in relation to an inheritance of meanings predominantly shaped by her male Other, for whom she can only figure as an object that exists solely in relation to his aspirations and needs. Her fulfilment as an existent 鈥� as well as her fitness in the world - are both defined in instrumental terms, in relation to her capacity to fulfil his need for meaning. The pressing existential issue becomes, for her, to mould herself so as to become meaningful to him, whatever meaning he might need for her to embody.
It is a queer sort of destiny, to exist only insofar as one is an object for the perception and appreciation of another. De Beauvoir lingers on this strange self-alienation, say, in a woman's use of self-ornamentation, in which she reflexively comes to see herself from the outside in. The reductive mirror image becomes internalized, creating a profound sense of dissociation from herself. 鈥淭he lived body,鈥� as Merleau-Ponty calls it, becomes merely an object to contour just-so, for another's gaze. She can seldom ever just be; she must ever seem, through some kind of relentless necessity, even as in so doing she merely starves herself of her true sustenance. Such can only be provided by a richer relationship with her world, established intrinsically, through the taproot of her autonomy.
鈥淭he eyes of others our prisons; their thoughts our cages,鈥� Woolf aptly put it, and de Beauvoir concurs: others' gazes determine to a very profound extent the shape of our destinies as women. There are so many painfully surgical descriptions here of the growing woman's developmental history as she finds herself sliced up, bit by bit, by others' glances, and hedged into what becomes 鈥渉er place鈥�: 鈥淭he young girl feels that her body is getting away from her. (...) On the street men follow her with their eyes and comment on her anatomy. She would like to be invisible; it frightens her to become flesh and to show flesh.鈥� Thus, a growing woman learns that she, as an embodied being, is not just a locus for meaning-making, but, even more urgently for her survival and flourishing in the world, is an object-for-others. She must continually extrude herself from Herself, and shape herself as an object of perception and evaluation for the Other.
The goal of life is for her not learning to see, but managing how others see her; it is not coming to realization, but being instrumental to others'. As she matures, woman is progressively constrained to inhabit her subject-stance only partially, to the extent that meanings gleaned from the Other's, often alienating perspective afford her indirect access to her self. She must ever seek herself through his eyes. As such, she is doomed to encounter herself only as image. In phenomenological parlance, her stance is self-objectifying, never fully subjective.
De Beauvoir's extensive analysis here of how background mythical constructs of Nature regulate the alternative ways women are perceived is brilliant. Through the identification of woman as an instrument of nature, she acquires the characteristics 鈥� positive or negative 鈥� ascribed to Nature itself. This makes some psychological sense. Aside from our own bodies, nature comes closest to our minds in our confrontation with the other sex. The other sex is nature to us, nature come terrifyingly/ecstatically close... and yet, nature that remains ungraspably other and alien to our consciousness. The problem here, is of course, that it is only the male that is the center of perspective; the female is the 鈥渁bsolute other,鈥� and is thus -identified- with pure (inhuman) nature. She is either the nurturant mother 鈥渘ature,鈥� the all-encompassing nurturant principle of sympathy, or else, nature as the beast that ensnares merely to devour.
She thus finds herself in a rather impossible position, internalizing a tradition of self-alienating representations made of her, which supposedly exhaust her nature, while nonetheless being radically alien to this tradition in the innermost truth of her experience, for which she has inherited few clear words that she can make entirely her own, few artistically embodied meanings, and almost no usable philosophical formulations. What self can she scrounge up out of such scattered fragments?
This dissociation from lived experience and personal meaning-making is a big price to pay for social survival. And if Mary Pipher is correct in Reviving Ophelia, this same fate of premature developmental arrest due to internalizing a self-alienating perspective still awaits young girls today. The choice is grim: a girl must choose between love and belonging, on the one hand, and full self-development, on the other. The situation's rigged such that she often cannot have both. As Pipher ruefully notes, when questioned, people define 鈥渇eminine development鈥� and full 鈥渁dult development鈥� in antithetical terms. Thus, to be a properly 鈥渇eminine鈥� woman, as per our cultural norms, is to be a psychologically disabled adult, incapable of agency or of self-directed logical judgment. In short, she must choose between the demands of her relational self and those of her autonomous self, between alienation and amputation.
The tension created by attempting to inhabit a subject stance only through self-alienating representational tools is only part of the conflict de Beauvoir finds in a woman's coming-to-consciousness. A further tension is added by the very duality of human, sexual nature, which introduces an additional, and deeply ambiguous constraint through the relational mutuality of the sexes.
De Beauvoir finds, 鈥渨ith a kind of surprise鈥� - and it seems to me also (understandable) dismay - that she is first and foremost a woman. Yet am I first a woman when I close my eyes and think? Is our sexuality really the primal reality of our conscious experience?
When I sit down and reflect, and there's nobody in the room, I seem to myself to be just a good ole thinking... thing... A light flickering in the darkness. I seem to myself indivisible, the center of my phenomenal experience, a sort of singularity. Wittgenstein seems to have got it better than de Beauvoir: 鈥淭he philosophical I is not the man, not the human body or the human soul of which psychology treats, but the metaphysical subject, the limit - not a part of the world.鈥� I become a aware of my sexuality only when confronted by another, and shoved back into being just a partial being, one item of the duality of human nature 鈥� a woman. Does Simone de Beauvoir really mean to say that walking in the forest, alone, with only the trees for her companions, she really feels the word 鈥渨oman鈥� has any meaning when applied to her conscious experience?
Well, no, as she describes those rare moments in nature when one fully inhabits oneself as a center of meaning-making consciousness, uncircumscribed by any Other's gaze. From her text I glean that sexuality is a kind of polarization we undergo when mingled with others; it is the form of our being-in-relation. We get pushed into one pole to complement the encountered other and to balance out the interaction. There is the same sort of difference here as between the dark expansiveness that Woolf's Mrs Ramsay (鈥淭o the Lighthouse鈥�) encounters in herself when she rests contained in her unreachable solitude, on the one hand, and her gushy all-nurturing effusiveness when circumscribed within her role as mother/wife/society pillar, on the other.
This implies a strange double meaning for her foundational self-recognition as a woman: she is, simultaneously, one part of the sexually dual form human nature manifests, and an autonomous, irreducible unity in her own right. She is fundamentally free, yet also fundamentally a self emerging and constructing itself in relation to an other. This brings me to the central difficulty I have with her argument. The former is in keeping with her Existentialist commitments: absolutely autonomous, free choice is the stuff of human life.The latter suggests a teleological ordering of the sexes into a structure of essential relatedness and interdependence. The former divides the world into sovereign individuals, each initiating contractual relations through the sheer force of personal choice unmotivated by any natural impulse to relate; the latter makes of us community animals, as both sexes are partial beings, each requiring union with the other for its completion.
The whole drama of this conflict comes out in sharp relief in her description of the queer metamorphosis of selfhood that is motherhood. "Pregnancy is above all a drama that is acted out within the woman herself. She feels it as at once an enrichment and an injury; the fetus is part of her body, and it is a parasite that feeds on it; she possesses it, and she is possessed by it; it represents the future and, carrying it she feels herself vast as the world; but this very opulence annihilates her, she feels that she herself is no longer anything. (...) Ensnared by nature, the pregnant woman is plant and animal, a stock-pile of colloids, an incubator, an egg; she scares children proud of their young, straight bodies and makes young people titter contemptuously because she is a human being, a conscious and free individual, who has become life's passive instrument." Motherhood is just such a time when one's usual notion of autonomous, individual selfhood is terrifyingly overthrown. At such a time, a woman becomes swamped by immanence, she feels herself to be a mere "passive instrument" of life. She is completely absorbed into the relational function of her subjectivity.
Here, in motherhood, de Beauvoir comes in headlong collision with the critical problematic of female identity, and its seemingly intractable struggle to preserve a sense of independent self that survives the pressures of impinging relationships, for motherhood is the ultimate of all impingements. Your sense of self before and after cannot remain the same. The birth of my two children, at least, was experienced as a crisis moment in which I myself was tasked to a rebirth, a movement from independent to interdependent selfhood.
How DO you reconcile these two? Well, she doesn't. It seems to me that she gives perfect expression to the whole problem of our dual nature (both uncompromisingly autonomous and intrinsically relational), without truly recognizing it as a problem, never mind venturing a solution. Learning to simultaneously honour the self in its autonomy and in its full capacity for self-giving relationship, or to reconcile, in short, the seemingly conflicting demands of self-actualization and relational self-transcendence, would bring greater harmony to a society deeply divided between these two currently conflicting trajectories.
A lot of the meaning of "woman" and "man," she says, was written over and distorted by a great deal of symbolic mechanisms gone wrong and taking on a life of their own, thereby blocking the spontaneous expression of our true sexual nature. "When we abolish the slavery of half of humanity, together with the whole system of hypocrisy it implies, then the "division" of humanity will reveal its genuine significance and the human couple will find its true form." Just so, the full realization of one element of the duality empowers the other to find his true form, in a relation that now manifests its true form for the first time.
What if we have never really spoken truly about ourselves, about our experience, and about the true nature of our relations? This thought haunts much of her work, and I respect that. Thus, she very profoundly partakes of the modern project to re-define the fundamentals of the human condition, or, at least, to re-explore, once more, what seemed to be a foreclosed issue. Her philosophical work is a clearing ground for accreted symbolic clutter that lives on only by a kind of inertia and distorts all that is seen and felt, thereby blocking out deeper reserves of meaning.
It is for us to ponder the means to a larger perspective that can contain the intractable ambiguities that she has so faithfully recorded for us here. Her work provides a map that lays out what it takes to genuinely know 鈥� and fully become - our own selves. Her unique historico-philosophical approach to self-knowledge encourages us to know our lives by placing our most intimate personal experience in the context of the broadest perspective attainable at our historic moment. Like all great thinkers who had anything of value to teach about self-knowledge, de Beauvoir holds before us the image of a great tree. In order to understand our particular twig, we must recover a map of the larger tree that holds us in place. The meanings that shape us and limit us can be seen truly only in this perspective of historical depth. This map is the surest ground on which we can lay out our personal stories.
The first thing one should note about this book is that it was not originally intended as a political treatise; it wasn't made with the intention of shouting shrill slogans over a megaphone. Its aim is philosophical understanding of the human condition, not political expediency. As such, it eschews neat and tidy ideological divisions in its essence, and prefers to obliquely cast a searching light on the rich ambiguity of this queer dual nature we experience as sexual beings, and the implications this has for our sense of identity and our experience of meaning. De Beauvoir's work finds insight not in ideological formulations, but in the poignant and possibly unanswerable questions brought up by the tensions and dualities that seem intrinsic to the human condition, and that, perhaps, the ideologue in his/her search for the perfectly defined political dogma will always and of necessity gloss over. Her highest strength as a thinker attempting to venture in this gender minefield is that she guides herself therein less by a pursuit of ideological neatness, and more by an effort to attain a philosophical consciousness that can comprehend a perhaps intractable ambiguity.
The impulse to 鈥淜now thyself鈥� is shown here to cut across all artificial barriers of specialization: de Beauvoir comes to herself through biological and historical research (hormones and hearth, glands and cosmetics), literary and mythological critique, with all of this capped by philosophical reflection. She shows how, in the effort to know our condition, philosophy can contain, inform and direct all partial disciplinary inquiries and perspectives (a modern and biographical take on the more traditional ideal of philosophy as a 鈥渜ueen of the sciences鈥�).
When most people think of self-knowledge, they tend to conceive this process in purely subjectivist terms, in short, in terms of looking into material accessible only to the individual consciousness. Somewhere in the swarmy mess of impulses, affects, personal memories, belief commitments and gut feelings, you are told, you shall find Your Self. In contrast, I suspect she would sympathize with Mann's insight in The Magic Mountain: 鈥淎 man lives not only his personal life, as an individual, but also, consciously or unconsciously, the life of his epoch and his contemporaries.鈥� As such, the work goes far beyond our culture's subjectivist approach to self-knowledge, in order to illuminate us to ourselves in our guise as participants in the unfolding of larger historical patterns.
Our lives are shaped by the accreted sediment of decisions made by past generations; within the domain circumscribed by those decisions, we exist. And some of the most fundamental decisions we make and inherit are decisions regarding meaning, or about how to shape our human experience. The semantic tools available for the shaping of self are our most critical inheritance from the past. Self-knowledge thus implies far more than insight into personal experience; it necessitates developing a historical consciousness of the inherited patterns of meaning-making that we have available for shaping our individual consciousness of self as it emerges at this given moment in time. So, to understand the female self as it has been historically constrained to develop, she targets her philosophical analysis to the representational tools - and their limits - that she has had available for her self-construction.
The problem of incompletely formulated selfhood that she starts from, de Beauvoir takes great pains to suggest, is not merely a piece of her idiosyncratic subjective biographical trajectory, but is, in a sense, our problem as well, to the extent that we are inheritors of a cultural heritage that does not afford us with the semantic tools that we need in order to lay claim to our experience through its shaping. It is in this effort of shaping that autonomy is slowly consolidated and that we become a genuine acting unity, or a full-fledged individual. A guiding thematic thread in her work is the exploration of how various cultural myths restrict woman to the contrary of autonomy, which she calls a state of 鈥渋mmanence.鈥� This state of immanence is, for her, a stultifying state for a human existent to occupy, whose inward striving relentlessly impels her to a 鈥渢ranscendence鈥� through autonomy.
The inherited semantic tools, far from helping woman shape her experience so as to converge on an autonomous perspective, instead restrict her to an "immanent" identity wholly defined by her contingent web of relations. She must ever define herself as daughter, as mother, as wife, as friend, as helper, as nurturer, as muse, as treacherous slut. The one position that is off-limits is her own, that is, her knowing of herself as irreducible existent and autonomous center of meaning. Her knowing of the one thing that no one can give to her, nor take away from her, is unavailable to her as so long as she operates through the inherited, self-alienating semantic paradigm. This centrifugal, purely contingent existence, de Beauvoir persuasively argues, is a humanly incomplete mode of being. As long as we only know to look outside ourselves for our psychological substance, we are lost to ourselves. We never fully come to be, as a self.
The trouble is that, for a woman coming to consciousness, the collective heritage she finds is invariably an inheritance of scars, caricatures, and symbolic deformations. A young woman, growing to consciousness of self, must find herself in relation to an inheritance of meanings predominantly shaped by her male Other, for whom she can only figure as an object that exists solely in relation to his aspirations and needs. Her fulfilment as an existent 鈥� as well as her fitness in the world - are both defined in instrumental terms, in relation to her capacity to fulfil his need for meaning. The pressing existential issue becomes, for her, to mould herself so as to become meaningful to him, whatever meaning he might need for her to embody.
It is a queer sort of destiny, to exist only insofar as one is an object for the perception and appreciation of another. De Beauvoir lingers on this strange self-alienation, say, in a woman's use of self-ornamentation, in which she reflexively comes to see herself from the outside in. The reductive mirror image becomes internalized, creating a profound sense of dissociation from herself. 鈥淭he lived body,鈥� as Merleau-Ponty calls it, becomes merely an object to contour just-so, for another's gaze. She can seldom ever just be; she must ever seem, through some kind of relentless necessity, even as in so doing she merely starves herself of her true sustenance. Such can only be provided by a richer relationship with her world, established intrinsically, through the taproot of her autonomy.
鈥淭he eyes of others our prisons; their thoughts our cages,鈥� Woolf aptly put it, and de Beauvoir concurs: others' gazes determine to a very profound extent the shape of our destinies as women. There are so many painfully surgical descriptions here of the growing woman's developmental history as she finds herself sliced up, bit by bit, by others' glances, and hedged into what becomes 鈥渉er place鈥�: 鈥淭he young girl feels that her body is getting away from her. (...) On the street men follow her with their eyes and comment on her anatomy. She would like to be invisible; it frightens her to become flesh and to show flesh.鈥� Thus, a growing woman learns that she, as an embodied being, is not just a locus for meaning-making, but, even more urgently for her survival and flourishing in the world, is an object-for-others. She must continually extrude herself from Herself, and shape herself as an object of perception and evaluation for the Other.
The goal of life is for her not learning to see, but managing how others see her; it is not coming to realization, but being instrumental to others'. As she matures, woman is progressively constrained to inhabit her subject-stance only partially, to the extent that meanings gleaned from the Other's, often alienating perspective afford her indirect access to her self. She must ever seek herself through his eyes. As such, she is doomed to encounter herself only as image. In phenomenological parlance, her stance is self-objectifying, never fully subjective.
De Beauvoir's extensive analysis here of how background mythical constructs of Nature regulate the alternative ways women are perceived is brilliant. Through the identification of woman as an instrument of nature, she acquires the characteristics 鈥� positive or negative 鈥� ascribed to Nature itself. This makes some psychological sense. Aside from our own bodies, nature comes closest to our minds in our confrontation with the other sex. The other sex is nature to us, nature come terrifyingly/ecstatically close... and yet, nature that remains ungraspably other and alien to our consciousness. The problem here, is of course, that it is only the male that is the center of perspective; the female is the 鈥渁bsolute other,鈥� and is thus -identified- with pure (inhuman) nature. She is either the nurturant mother 鈥渘ature,鈥� the all-encompassing nurturant principle of sympathy, or else, nature as the beast that ensnares merely to devour.
She thus finds herself in a rather impossible position, internalizing a tradition of self-alienating representations made of her, which supposedly exhaust her nature, while nonetheless being radically alien to this tradition in the innermost truth of her experience, for which she has inherited few clear words that she can make entirely her own, few artistically embodied meanings, and almost no usable philosophical formulations. What self can she scrounge up out of such scattered fragments?
This dissociation from lived experience and personal meaning-making is a big price to pay for social survival. And if Mary Pipher is correct in Reviving Ophelia, this same fate of premature developmental arrest due to internalizing a self-alienating perspective still awaits young girls today. The choice is grim: a girl must choose between love and belonging, on the one hand, and full self-development, on the other. The situation's rigged such that she often cannot have both. As Pipher ruefully notes, when questioned, people define 鈥渇eminine development鈥� and full 鈥渁dult development鈥� in antithetical terms. Thus, to be a properly 鈥渇eminine鈥� woman, as per our cultural norms, is to be a psychologically disabled adult, incapable of agency or of self-directed logical judgment. In short, she must choose between the demands of her relational self and those of her autonomous self, between alienation and amputation.
The tension created by attempting to inhabit a subject stance only through self-alienating representational tools is only part of the conflict de Beauvoir finds in a woman's coming-to-consciousness. A further tension is added by the very duality of human, sexual nature, which introduces an additional, and deeply ambiguous constraint through the relational mutuality of the sexes.
De Beauvoir finds, 鈥渨ith a kind of surprise鈥� - and it seems to me also (understandable) dismay - that she is first and foremost a woman. Yet am I first a woman when I close my eyes and think? Is our sexuality really the primal reality of our conscious experience?
When I sit down and reflect, and there's nobody in the room, I seem to myself to be just a good ole thinking... thing... A light flickering in the darkness. I seem to myself indivisible, the center of my phenomenal experience, a sort of singularity. Wittgenstein seems to have got it better than de Beauvoir: 鈥淭he philosophical I is not the man, not the human body or the human soul of which psychology treats, but the metaphysical subject, the limit - not a part of the world.鈥� I become a aware of my sexuality only when confronted by another, and shoved back into being just a partial being, one item of the duality of human nature 鈥� a woman. Does Simone de Beauvoir really mean to say that walking in the forest, alone, with only the trees for her companions, she really feels the word 鈥渨oman鈥� has any meaning when applied to her conscious experience?
Well, no, as she describes those rare moments in nature when one fully inhabits oneself as a center of meaning-making consciousness, uncircumscribed by any Other's gaze. From her text I glean that sexuality is a kind of polarization we undergo when mingled with others; it is the form of our being-in-relation. We get pushed into one pole to complement the encountered other and to balance out the interaction. There is the same sort of difference here as between the dark expansiveness that Woolf's Mrs Ramsay (鈥淭o the Lighthouse鈥�) encounters in herself when she rests contained in her unreachable solitude, on the one hand, and her gushy all-nurturing effusiveness when circumscribed within her role as mother/wife/society pillar, on the other.
This implies a strange double meaning for her foundational self-recognition as a woman: she is, simultaneously, one part of the sexually dual form human nature manifests, and an autonomous, irreducible unity in her own right. She is fundamentally free, yet also fundamentally a self emerging and constructing itself in relation to an other. This brings me to the central difficulty I have with her argument. The former is in keeping with her Existentialist commitments: absolutely autonomous, free choice is the stuff of human life.The latter suggests a teleological ordering of the sexes into a structure of essential relatedness and interdependence. The former divides the world into sovereign individuals, each initiating contractual relations through the sheer force of personal choice unmotivated by any natural impulse to relate; the latter makes of us community animals, as both sexes are partial beings, each requiring union with the other for its completion.
The whole drama of this conflict comes out in sharp relief in her description of the queer metamorphosis of selfhood that is motherhood. "Pregnancy is above all a drama that is acted out within the woman herself. She feels it as at once an enrichment and an injury; the fetus is part of her body, and it is a parasite that feeds on it; she possesses it, and she is possessed by it; it represents the future and, carrying it she feels herself vast as the world; but this very opulence annihilates her, she feels that she herself is no longer anything. (...) Ensnared by nature, the pregnant woman is plant and animal, a stock-pile of colloids, an incubator, an egg; she scares children proud of their young, straight bodies and makes young people titter contemptuously because she is a human being, a conscious and free individual, who has become life's passive instrument." Motherhood is just such a time when one's usual notion of autonomous, individual selfhood is terrifyingly overthrown. At such a time, a woman becomes swamped by immanence, she feels herself to be a mere "passive instrument" of life. She is completely absorbed into the relational function of her subjectivity.
Here, in motherhood, de Beauvoir comes in headlong collision with the critical problematic of female identity, and its seemingly intractable struggle to preserve a sense of independent self that survives the pressures of impinging relationships, for motherhood is the ultimate of all impingements. Your sense of self before and after cannot remain the same. The birth of my two children, at least, was experienced as a crisis moment in which I myself was tasked to a rebirth, a movement from independent to interdependent selfhood.
How DO you reconcile these two? Well, she doesn't. It seems to me that she gives perfect expression to the whole problem of our dual nature (both uncompromisingly autonomous and intrinsically relational), without truly recognizing it as a problem, never mind venturing a solution. Learning to simultaneously honour the self in its autonomy and in its full capacity for self-giving relationship, or to reconcile, in short, the seemingly conflicting demands of self-actualization and relational self-transcendence, would bring greater harmony to a society deeply divided between these two currently conflicting trajectories.
A lot of the meaning of "woman" and "man," she says, was written over and distorted by a great deal of symbolic mechanisms gone wrong and taking on a life of their own, thereby blocking the spontaneous expression of our true sexual nature. "When we abolish the slavery of half of humanity, together with the whole system of hypocrisy it implies, then the "division" of humanity will reveal its genuine significance and the human couple will find its true form." Just so, the full realization of one element of the duality empowers the other to find his true form, in a relation that now manifests its true form for the first time.
What if we have never really spoken truly about ourselves, about our experience, and about the true nature of our relations? This thought haunts much of her work, and I respect that. Thus, she very profoundly partakes of the modern project to re-define the fundamentals of the human condition, or, at least, to re-explore, once more, what seemed to be a foreclosed issue. Her philosophical work is a clearing ground for accreted symbolic clutter that lives on only by a kind of inertia and distorts all that is seen and felt, thereby blocking out deeper reserves of meaning.
It is for us to ponder the means to a larger perspective that can contain the intractable ambiguities that she has so faithfully recorded for us here. Her work provides a map that lays out what it takes to genuinely know 鈥� and fully become - our own selves. Her unique historico-philosophical approach to self-knowledge encourages us to know our lives by placing our most intimate personal experience in the context of the broadest perspective attainable at our historic moment. Like all great thinkers who had anything of value to teach about self-knowledge, de Beauvoir holds before us the image of a great tree. In order to understand our particular twig, we must recover a map of the larger tree that holds us in place. The meanings that shape us and limit us can be seen truly only in this perspective of historical depth. This map is the surest ground on which we can lay out our personal stories.
February 23, 2015
The part of this book that has affected me the most in the ten years since I've read it is most certainly the introduction, where de Beauvoir says that in order to define herself to herself she must start with, "I am a woman". This surprised her then as it surprises me now when I realize that that is how I must start, too. Although I grew up in a post-feminist "you can have it all" type of environment, it was eye-opening and disconcerting to learn that women are considered "the other" as opposed to the default, regardless of how I choose to see myself.
The book is divided into philosophical, literary, and biological reflections of the feminine. While the biology hasn't necessarily stood the scientific test of time (an inevitable danger when you combine science and philosophy), de Beauvoir still brings up interesting points. Similarly, although I hadn't read- nor have I bothered to read since- many of the authors that she delves into in the literary section, the book has had the effect of making a sort of gender studies media critic out of me, always asking how and why women are represented in the larger culture. For me, the most solid part of the book was the philosophy section (which one might expect from a philosopher). The ideas that de Beauvoir has put forth about what it means to be a woman, not in a trite "Mars and Venus" kind of way, but at a fundamental level and seen through the lens of society, have encouraged me to look at the world and my place in it in a more thoughtful and rigorous manner.
The book is divided into philosophical, literary, and biological reflections of the feminine. While the biology hasn't necessarily stood the scientific test of time (an inevitable danger when you combine science and philosophy), de Beauvoir still brings up interesting points. Similarly, although I hadn't read- nor have I bothered to read since- many of the authors that she delves into in the literary section, the book has had the effect of making a sort of gender studies media critic out of me, always asking how and why women are represented in the larger culture. For me, the most solid part of the book was the philosophy section (which one might expect from a philosopher). The ideas that de Beauvoir has put forth about what it means to be a woman, not in a trite "Mars and Venus" kind of way, but at a fundamental level and seen through the lens of society, have encouraged me to look at the world and my place in it in a more thoughtful and rigorous manner.
July 6, 2021
丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 賭 爻賷賲賵賳 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇
賲賳 禺賱丕賱 賲丕 爻胤乇鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 兀爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 兀噩夭賲 兀賳賴丕 毓丕賳鬲 賮賷 胤賮賵賱鬲賴丕 亘賱 賮賷 噩賲賷毓 賲乇丕丨賱 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賲賳 丕囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱乇噩賱 賱賴丕貙 賱匕賱賰 爻毓鬲 廿賱賶 賳卮乇 丕賱丨乇賰丞 丕賱賳爻賵賷丞 囟丿賾 丕賱乇噩丕賱.
賮賱賵 禺購賱賯鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 賮賷 亘賷卅丞 睾賷乇 丕賱亘賷卅丞 丕賱鬲賷 賳卮兀鬲 賮賷賴丕 賱賻乇購亘賻賾賲賻丕 兀丨亘賾鬲 丕賱乇噩賱 賭 匕丕賰 丕賱匕賷 賴丕噩賲鬲賴購 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 亘卮丿賾丞 賮賷 賰鬲丕亘賴丕 賵兀賳夭賱鬲 毓賱賷賴 賰賱賾 丕賱賲丌爻賷 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賵丕噩賴賴丕 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 噩賲賷毓 賲乇丕丨賱 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賲賳匕 賵賱丕丿鬲賴丕 丨鬲賶 賲賲丕鬲賴丕. 賵賰兀賳賾 丕賱乇噩賱 賴賵 賲賳 禺賱賯賴丕 賵賰賵賾賳賴丕 亘賴匕賴 丕賱氐賵乇丞 賵賴匕賴 丕賱賳卮兀丞. 賵賰兀賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賴賵 丕賱賲爻丐賵賱 丕賱兀賵丨丿 賮賷 賰賱賾 賲丕 鬲賲乇 亘賴 丕賱兀賳孬賶 賲賳 鬲睾賷乇丕鬲 賮賷夭賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 賵亘賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 賵賳賮爻賷丞 賲毓賯丿丞 禺賱丕賱 賲乇丕丨賱 賵爻賳賷賳 丨賷丕鬲賴丕.
鬲賯賵賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞: 鈥溫ベ� 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱毓丕丿賷丞 匕丕鬲 丕賱賲賷賵賱 丕賱丨賷賵丕賳賷丞 賱丕 鬲卮毓乇 亘丕賱廿賴丕賳丞 賲賳 噩乇丕亍 丕賱噩賲丕毓貙 毓賱賶 毓賰爻 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱賲孬賯賮丞 丕賱賲賮賰乇丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲丨鬲噩 毓賱賷賴貙 賱兀賳賴丕 賵丕孬賯丞 賲賳 賳賮爻賴丕 賵匕丕鬲 胤亘毓 賳囟丕賱賷鈥�.
賴賱 兀氐亘丨 丕賱噩賲丕毓 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞 卮賷亍 賲購賴賷賳 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賵丨賷賵丕賳賷貙 亘賷賳賲丕 丕賱爻賽賾丨賻丕賯 丕賱匕賷 鬲丐賷丿賴 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 亘卮丿賾丞 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 鬲毓鬲亘乇賴 卮賷亍 胤亘賷毓賷責! 丨賷孬購 鬲賯賵賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 鈥溫ベ� 丕賱乇噩賱 賷毓賷卮 賮賷 毓丕賱賲 賲賱賷亍 亘丕賱賳毓賵賲丞 賵丕賱乇賯丞 賮賷 毓丕賱賲 丕賱賲乇兀丞貙 亘賷賳賲丕 鬲鬲賷賴 丕賱賲乇兀丞 毓賱賶 睾賷乇 賴丿賶 賮賷 毓丕賱賲 丕賱匕賰賵乇 丕賱禺卮賳 丕賱賯丕爻賷. 廿賳 賷丿賷賴丕 賱鬲丨賳賾 廿賱賶 囟賲 丕賱噩爻丿 丕賱賳丕毓賲 賵丕賱賱丨賲 丕賱睾囟鈥�.!
亘乇兀賷 賲丕 賴賵 卮丕匕 賵禺丕乇噩 毓賳 丕賱賮胤乇丞 賴賵 丕賳噩匕丕亘 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賳丨賵 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵賰匕賱賰 丕賳噩匕丕亘 丕賱乇噩賱 賳丨賵 丕賱乇噩賱 賮賴匕丕 賲丕 賷丿毓賵 賱賱鬲賮賰乇 賵賲丕 賷丿毓賵 賱賱睾賵氐 賮賷 賲毓乇賮丞 爻亘亘 賴匕丕 丕賱丕賳噩匕丕亘 丕賱睾賷乇 賮胤乇賷!
廿匕丕 賱賲 鬲購賯賳賾賳 丕賱丨購乇賷丞 鬲丨鬲 囟賵丕亘胤 賵賯賵丕賳賷賳 賵卮乇毓 賱兀氐亘丨 亘賳賷 丕賱亘卮乇 賲孬賱 丕賱丨賷賵丕賳丕鬲貙 賱丕貨 亘賱 丕賱丨賷賵丕賳 賷賯鬲乇賮 兀賳 賷賲丕乇爻 丕賱鬲夭丕賵噩 賲毓 亘賳賷 噩賳爻賴賽 兀賷 丕賱匕賰乇 賲毓 丕賱匕賰乇 賵丕賱兀賳孬賶 賲毓 丕賱兀賳孬賶 賲毓 毓丿丕 丕賱賯乇丿丞.!
兀賳丕氐乇 亘卮丿賾丞 賲丕 乇賲鬲 廿賱賷賴 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 賮賷 鬲賵毓賷丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵鬲毓賱賷賲賴丕貙 賵亘兀賳賾 毓賱賷賴丕 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇賾乇 賲賳 鬲亘毓賷丞 丕賱乇噩賱 賵鬲爻賱賾胤賴貙 賵賴匕丕 賱賳 賷丨氐賱 廿賱丕 廿匕丕 丕乇鬲賯鬲 亘丕賱毓賱賲 賵丕賱賮賰乇 賵賳賮鬲 毓賳賴丕 丕賱噩賴賱. 亘賱 兀囟賷賮 兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱賵 丕賰鬲賮鬲 亘丨馗賾賴丕 丕賱賲丕丿賷 賲賳 丕賱丨賷丕丞貙 賱賰丕賳鬲 兀爻毓丿 賲禺賱賵賯丞. 賵賱賰賳 亘賲丕 兀賳賴丕 鬲爻毓賶 丿丕卅賲賸丕 賵乇丕亍 賲賳 賷賱亘賷 乇睾亘丕鬲賴丕 賵賷購卮亘毓 賳夭賵丕鬲賴丕 賲丕丿賷賸丕貙 賮賴賷 爻鬲馗賱 兀賻賲賻丞 賱賽卮賻乇賾 賳賮爻賴丕 孬賲 賱賽卮賻乇賾 賲賳 賷賲賵賾賱賴丕 亘丕賱賲丕丿丞.
兀丐賷丿 亘毓囟 賲丕 噩丕亍 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵賱丕 兀丐賷丿 兀卮賷丕亍 兀禺乇賶 賵乇丿鬲 賮賷賴貙 賲孬賱 丕爻鬲卮賴丕丿賴丕 亘賯賵賱 賲丕乇賵: 鈥溫ベ� 丕賱賮乇賯 亘賷賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 丕賱丿毓丕乇丞 賵丕賱亘睾丕亍貙 賵亘賷賳 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 亘賵丕爻胤丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩貙 賷賳丨氐乇 賮賷 孬賲賳 賵賲丿丞 毓賯丿 丕賱亘賷毓鈥�.! 賲賯丕乇賳丞 毓賯賷賲丞 賵賮賷 睾賷乇 賲丨賱賴丕 廿匕 賴賳丕賰 賮乇賯 賰亘賷乇 亘賷賳 丕賱夭賵丕噩 丕賱卮乇毓賷 賵亘賷賳 丕賱亘睾丕亍.
賲賳 賳丕丨賷丞 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賮賷 丕賱兀噩賵乇貙 賮賯丿 兀氐丕亘鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞貙 賮丕賱賲乇兀丞 廿賱賶 賷賵賲賳丕 賴匕丕 賱賲 鬲賳丕賱 丨賯賾賴丕 丕賱賵丕賮賷 賲賳 丕賱兀噩乇 賲賯丕乇賳丞賸 亘丕賱乇噩賱. 賮丨賯賾賴丕 賲賴囟賵賲 賲賳 賯亘賱 賲賳 卮乇賾毓 丕賱賯賵丕賳賷賳 賵爻賳賾賴丕. 賮丕賱鬲賲賷賷夭 賲丕夭丕賱 賲賵噩賵丿丕賸 亘丨賰賲 賴賷賲賳丞 賲賳 亘賷丿賴 丕賱兀賲乇 賵丕賱賳賴賷 丕賱乇噩賱. 賵賱賰賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賯丿 爻賱亘 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 兀賷囟賸丕 賲賳 兀禺賷賴 丕賱乇噩賱 毓賳丿賲丕 毓賳丿賲丕 丕丨鬲賱賾 賵爻噩賳 賵毓匕賾亘 賵賯鬲賱 賵卮乇賾丿 賰賱 賲賳丕賵卅 賱賴. 毓賳丿賲丕 兀卮毓賱 丕賱賮鬲賳 賵丕賱丨乇賵亘 賵毓賳丿賲丕 噩賷賾卮 丕賱噩賷賵卮 賱賱賯鬲丕賱 賵丕丨鬲賱丕賱 丿賵賱 兀禺乇賶 賮兀賴賱賰 丕賱丨乇孬 賵丕賱賳爻賱. 賵毓賳丿賲丕 丨賯賾乇 丕賱毓丕賲賱 丕賱亘爻賷胤 賵爻賱亘賴購 賯賵鬲 賷賵賲賴賽 賵毓賳丿賲丕 賱賲 賷賳氐賮 匕賵賷 丕賱賲賴丕乇丕鬲 賵丕賱毓賯賵賱 賮賷 賲賳丨賴賲 賮乇氐 賱賱賳亘賵睾 賵丕賱鬲賲賷賾夭 睾賷乇丞賸 賵丨爻丿賸丕.
鬲賯賵賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞:鈥� 廿賳 囟毓賮 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱丕 賷毓賵丿 廿賱賶 兀爻亘丕亘 賮胤乇賷丞 賮賷 胤亘賷毓鬲賴丕貙 賵廿賳賲丕 廿賱賶 丨丕賱鬲賴丕 丕賱毓丕賲丞 丕賱鬲賷 賷賮乇囟賴丕 毓賱賷賴丕 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 賲賳匕 丨丿丕孬鬲賴丕 丨鬲賶 兀賵丕禺乇 兀賷丕賲賴丕鈥�.
賰賱賳丕 賷毓賱賲 亘兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 鬲鬲丨賲賱 兀毓亘丕亍 丕賱丨賷丕丞 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱乇噩賱貙 賮亘丕爻鬲胤丕毓鬲賴丕 兀賳 鬲賳噩亘貙 賵兀賳 鬲毓賵賱 兀爻乇丞 丿賵賳 乇噩賱貙 賵兀賳 鬲賴鬲賲 亘丿乇丕爻丞 兀賵賱丕丿賴丕 賵鬲乇毓賶 卮丐賵賳 亘賷鬲賴丕 丕賱賲賳夭賱賷丞 賮賷 丌賳賺 賵丕丨丿. 賵賱賰賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 鬲賲丕乇爻 亘毓囟 丕賱兀毓賲丕賱 丕賱卮丕賯丞 賰丕賱乇噩丕賱貙 賲孬賱 丨賲賱 丕賱兀卮賷丕亍 丕賱孬賯賷賱丞貙 賲賲丕乇爻丞 丕賱亘賳丕亍 賵賳賯賱 丕賱兀丨噩丕乇貙 賲賲丕乇爻丞 丕賻賱賳賽賾噩賻丕乇賻丞 賵賻丕賱爻賽賾亘賻丕賰賻丞貙 丕賱鬲毓賱賯 毓賱賶 丕賱丿乇噩 賱賮鬲乇丞 胤賵賷賱丞 賱賲賲丕乇爻丞 丕賱賳賯卮 賵丕賱丿賴丕賳 賮賷 丕賱亘賷賵鬲 賵丕賱毓賲丕乇丕鬲貙 鬲氐賮賷丞 丕賱夭噩丕噩 賮賷 丕賱毓賲丕乇丕鬲 丕賱卮丕賴賯丞貙 賯賷丕丿丞 丕賱賲乇賰亘丕鬲 丕賱孬賯賷賱丞 賲孬賱 賳賯賱 丕賱亘囟丕卅毓 賵丕賱賲賵丕丿 丕賱禺丕賲 賲賳 丿賵賱丞 賱兀禺乇賶 廿賱禺 廿賱禺.. 賵賴賳丕賰 兀毓賲丕賱 賱丕 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱乇噩賱 賲賲丕乇爻鬲賴丕 賲孬賱 丕賱丨賲賱 賵丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賵丕賱廿乇囟丕毓貙 禺賱丕氐丞 丕賱賯賵賱 廿賳 賰購賱賾 賲購賷爻賾乇 賱賲丕 禺購賱賯貙 賮賱丿賶 丕賱乇噩賱 賯丿乇丕鬲 賱丕 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱兀賳孬賶 兀賳 鬲賵丕夭賷賴貙 賵賰匕賱賰 賱賱兀賳孬賶 賯丿乇丕鬲 賱丕 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱乇噩賱 兀賳 賷亘丕乇賷賴丕 賮賷賴.
廿賳 賯賱亘 賲毓丕丿賱丞 丕賱禺丕賱賯 賮賷 禺賱賯賴賽 賵丕賱賯賵賱 亘兀賳賾 丕賱乇噩賱 賷乇賷丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賯胤 賱賱賲鬲毓丞 賵丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賱賷爻 氐丨賷丨賸丕. 賮丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲購禺賱賯 賵賮賷 賰賷丕賳賴丕 兀賳孬賶 乇賯賷賯丞 鬲鬲賵賯 賱賱丨購亘 賵丕賱兀賲賵賲丞. 賵賲丕 丕賳噩匕丕亘賴丕 賳丨賵 丕賱乇噩賱 廿賱賾丕 卮賷亍 賮胤乇賷 賵賱賷爻 亘爻亘亘 丕賱鬲乇亘賷丞. 賰賲丕 賴賵 兀賷囟賸丕 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賱乇噩賱 賲丕 丕賳噩匕丕亘賴 賳丨賵 丕賱兀賳孬賶 廿賱賾丕 亘丕賱賮胤乇丞 賵賱賷爻 亘爻亘亘 丕賱鬲乇亘賷丞.
賲丨丕賵賱丞 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賱賶 丕賱爻丐丕賱:鈥� 賱賲丕匕丕 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇責鈥� 賴賱 丕爻鬲胤丕毓鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 兀賳 鬲賮賳賾丿 丕賱噩賵丕亘 亘卮賰賱 丨賷丕丿賷 賵毓賯賱丕賳賷 賵賲賳胤賯賷責
賲賳 禺賱丕賱 賲丕 爻胤乇鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 兀爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 兀噩夭賲 兀賳賴丕 毓丕賳鬲 賮賷 胤賮賵賱鬲賴丕 亘賱 賮賷 噩賲賷毓 賲乇丕丨賱 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賲賳 丕囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱乇噩賱 賱賴丕貙 賱匕賱賰 爻毓鬲 廿賱賶 賳卮乇 丕賱丨乇賰丞 丕賱賳爻賵賷丞 囟丿賾 丕賱乇噩丕賱.
賮賱賵 禺購賱賯鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 賮賷 亘賷卅丞 睾賷乇 丕賱亘賷卅丞 丕賱鬲賷 賳卮兀鬲 賮賷賴丕 賱賻乇購亘賻賾賲賻丕 兀丨亘賾鬲 丕賱乇噩賱 賭 匕丕賰 丕賱匕賷 賴丕噩賲鬲賴購 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 亘卮丿賾丞 賮賷 賰鬲丕亘賴丕 賵兀賳夭賱鬲 毓賱賷賴 賰賱賾 丕賱賲丌爻賷 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賵丕噩賴賴丕 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 噩賲賷毓 賲乇丕丨賱 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賲賳匕 賵賱丕丿鬲賴丕 丨鬲賶 賲賲丕鬲賴丕. 賵賰兀賳賾 丕賱乇噩賱 賴賵 賲賳 禺賱賯賴丕 賵賰賵賾賳賴丕 亘賴匕賴 丕賱氐賵乇丞 賵賴匕賴 丕賱賳卮兀丞. 賵賰兀賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賴賵 丕賱賲爻丐賵賱 丕賱兀賵丨丿 賮賷 賰賱賾 賲丕 鬲賲乇 亘賴 丕賱兀賳孬賶 賲賳 鬲睾賷乇丕鬲 賮賷夭賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 賵亘賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 賵賳賮爻賷丞 賲毓賯丿丞 禺賱丕賱 賲乇丕丨賱 賵爻賳賷賳 丨賷丕鬲賴丕.
鬲賯賵賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞: 鈥溫ベ� 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱毓丕丿賷丞 匕丕鬲 丕賱賲賷賵賱 丕賱丨賷賵丕賳賷丞 賱丕 鬲卮毓乇 亘丕賱廿賴丕賳丞 賲賳 噩乇丕亍 丕賱噩賲丕毓貙 毓賱賶 毓賰爻 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱賲孬賯賮丞 丕賱賲賮賰乇丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲丨鬲噩 毓賱賷賴貙 賱兀賳賴丕 賵丕孬賯丞 賲賳 賳賮爻賴丕 賵匕丕鬲 胤亘毓 賳囟丕賱賷鈥�.
賴賱 兀氐亘丨 丕賱噩賲丕毓 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞 卮賷亍 賲購賴賷賳 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賵丨賷賵丕賳賷貙 亘賷賳賲丕 丕賱爻賽賾丨賻丕賯 丕賱匕賷 鬲丐賷丿賴 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 亘卮丿賾丞 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 鬲毓鬲亘乇賴 卮賷亍 胤亘賷毓賷責! 丨賷孬購 鬲賯賵賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 鈥溫ベ� 丕賱乇噩賱 賷毓賷卮 賮賷 毓丕賱賲 賲賱賷亍 亘丕賱賳毓賵賲丞 賵丕賱乇賯丞 賮賷 毓丕賱賲 丕賱賲乇兀丞貙 亘賷賳賲丕 鬲鬲賷賴 丕賱賲乇兀丞 毓賱賶 睾賷乇 賴丿賶 賮賷 毓丕賱賲 丕賱匕賰賵乇 丕賱禺卮賳 丕賱賯丕爻賷. 廿賳 賷丿賷賴丕 賱鬲丨賳賾 廿賱賶 囟賲 丕賱噩爻丿 丕賱賳丕毓賲 賵丕賱賱丨賲 丕賱睾囟鈥�.!
亘乇兀賷 賲丕 賴賵 卮丕匕 賵禺丕乇噩 毓賳 丕賱賮胤乇丞 賴賵 丕賳噩匕丕亘 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賳丨賵 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵賰匕賱賰 丕賳噩匕丕亘 丕賱乇噩賱 賳丨賵 丕賱乇噩賱 賮賴匕丕 賲丕 賷丿毓賵 賱賱鬲賮賰乇 賵賲丕 賷丿毓賵 賱賱睾賵氐 賮賷 賲毓乇賮丞 爻亘亘 賴匕丕 丕賱丕賳噩匕丕亘 丕賱睾賷乇 賮胤乇賷!
廿匕丕 賱賲 鬲購賯賳賾賳 丕賱丨購乇賷丞 鬲丨鬲 囟賵丕亘胤 賵賯賵丕賳賷賳 賵卮乇毓 賱兀氐亘丨 亘賳賷 丕賱亘卮乇 賲孬賱 丕賱丨賷賵丕賳丕鬲貙 賱丕貨 亘賱 丕賱丨賷賵丕賳 賷賯鬲乇賮 兀賳 賷賲丕乇爻 丕賱鬲夭丕賵噩 賲毓 亘賳賷 噩賳爻賴賽 兀賷 丕賱匕賰乇 賲毓 丕賱匕賰乇 賵丕賱兀賳孬賶 賲毓 丕賱兀賳孬賶 賲毓 毓丿丕 丕賱賯乇丿丞.!
兀賳丕氐乇 亘卮丿賾丞 賲丕 乇賲鬲 廿賱賷賴 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 賮賷 鬲賵毓賷丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵鬲毓賱賷賲賴丕貙 賵亘兀賳賾 毓賱賷賴丕 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇賾乇 賲賳 鬲亘毓賷丞 丕賱乇噩賱 賵鬲爻賱賾胤賴貙 賵賴匕丕 賱賳 賷丨氐賱 廿賱丕 廿匕丕 丕乇鬲賯鬲 亘丕賱毓賱賲 賵丕賱賮賰乇 賵賳賮鬲 毓賳賴丕 丕賱噩賴賱. 亘賱 兀囟賷賮 兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱賵 丕賰鬲賮鬲 亘丨馗賾賴丕 丕賱賲丕丿賷 賲賳 丕賱丨賷丕丞貙 賱賰丕賳鬲 兀爻毓丿 賲禺賱賵賯丞. 賵賱賰賳 亘賲丕 兀賳賴丕 鬲爻毓賶 丿丕卅賲賸丕 賵乇丕亍 賲賳 賷賱亘賷 乇睾亘丕鬲賴丕 賵賷購卮亘毓 賳夭賵丕鬲賴丕 賲丕丿賷賸丕貙 賮賴賷 爻鬲馗賱 兀賻賲賻丞 賱賽卮賻乇賾 賳賮爻賴丕 孬賲 賱賽卮賻乇賾 賲賳 賷賲賵賾賱賴丕 亘丕賱賲丕丿丞.
兀丐賷丿 亘毓囟 賲丕 噩丕亍 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵賱丕 兀丐賷丿 兀卮賷丕亍 兀禺乇賶 賵乇丿鬲 賮賷賴貙 賲孬賱 丕爻鬲卮賴丕丿賴丕 亘賯賵賱 賲丕乇賵: 鈥溫ベ� 丕賱賮乇賯 亘賷賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 丕賱丿毓丕乇丞 賵丕賱亘睾丕亍貙 賵亘賷賳 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 亘賵丕爻胤丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩貙 賷賳丨氐乇 賮賷 孬賲賳 賵賲丿丞 毓賯丿 丕賱亘賷毓鈥�.! 賲賯丕乇賳丞 毓賯賷賲丞 賵賮賷 睾賷乇 賲丨賱賴丕 廿匕 賴賳丕賰 賮乇賯 賰亘賷乇 亘賷賳 丕賱夭賵丕噩 丕賱卮乇毓賷 賵亘賷賳 丕賱亘睾丕亍.
賲賳 賳丕丨賷丞 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賮賷 丕賱兀噩賵乇貙 賮賯丿 兀氐丕亘鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞貙 賮丕賱賲乇兀丞 廿賱賶 賷賵賲賳丕 賴匕丕 賱賲 鬲賳丕賱 丨賯賾賴丕 丕賱賵丕賮賷 賲賳 丕賱兀噩乇 賲賯丕乇賳丞賸 亘丕賱乇噩賱. 賮丨賯賾賴丕 賲賴囟賵賲 賲賳 賯亘賱 賲賳 卮乇賾毓 丕賱賯賵丕賳賷賳 賵爻賳賾賴丕. 賮丕賱鬲賲賷賷夭 賲丕夭丕賱 賲賵噩賵丿丕賸 亘丨賰賲 賴賷賲賳丞 賲賳 亘賷丿賴 丕賱兀賲乇 賵丕賱賳賴賷 丕賱乇噩賱. 賵賱賰賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賯丿 爻賱亘 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 兀賷囟賸丕 賲賳 兀禺賷賴 丕賱乇噩賱 毓賳丿賲丕 毓賳丿賲丕 丕丨鬲賱賾 賵爻噩賳 賵毓匕賾亘 賵賯鬲賱 賵卮乇賾丿 賰賱 賲賳丕賵卅 賱賴. 毓賳丿賲丕 兀卮毓賱 丕賱賮鬲賳 賵丕賱丨乇賵亘 賵毓賳丿賲丕 噩賷賾卮 丕賱噩賷賵卮 賱賱賯鬲丕賱 賵丕丨鬲賱丕賱 丿賵賱 兀禺乇賶 賮兀賴賱賰 丕賱丨乇孬 賵丕賱賳爻賱. 賵毓賳丿賲丕 丨賯賾乇 丕賱毓丕賲賱 丕賱亘爻賷胤 賵爻賱亘賴購 賯賵鬲 賷賵賲賴賽 賵毓賳丿賲丕 賱賲 賷賳氐賮 匕賵賷 丕賱賲賴丕乇丕鬲 賵丕賱毓賯賵賱 賮賷 賲賳丨賴賲 賮乇氐 賱賱賳亘賵睾 賵丕賱鬲賲賷賾夭 睾賷乇丞賸 賵丨爻丿賸丕.
鬲賯賵賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞:鈥� 廿賳 囟毓賮 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱丕 賷毓賵丿 廿賱賶 兀爻亘丕亘 賮胤乇賷丞 賮賷 胤亘賷毓鬲賴丕貙 賵廿賳賲丕 廿賱賶 丨丕賱鬲賴丕 丕賱毓丕賲丞 丕賱鬲賷 賷賮乇囟賴丕 毓賱賷賴丕 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 賲賳匕 丨丿丕孬鬲賴丕 丨鬲賶 兀賵丕禺乇 兀賷丕賲賴丕鈥�.
賰賱賳丕 賷毓賱賲 亘兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 鬲鬲丨賲賱 兀毓亘丕亍 丕賱丨賷丕丞 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱乇噩賱貙 賮亘丕爻鬲胤丕毓鬲賴丕 兀賳 鬲賳噩亘貙 賵兀賳 鬲毓賵賱 兀爻乇丞 丿賵賳 乇噩賱貙 賵兀賳 鬲賴鬲賲 亘丿乇丕爻丞 兀賵賱丕丿賴丕 賵鬲乇毓賶 卮丐賵賳 亘賷鬲賴丕 丕賱賲賳夭賱賷丞 賮賷 丌賳賺 賵丕丨丿. 賵賱賰賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 鬲賲丕乇爻 亘毓囟 丕賱兀毓賲丕賱 丕賱卮丕賯丞 賰丕賱乇噩丕賱貙 賲孬賱 丨賲賱 丕賱兀卮賷丕亍 丕賱孬賯賷賱丞貙 賲賲丕乇爻丞 丕賱亘賳丕亍 賵賳賯賱 丕賱兀丨噩丕乇貙 賲賲丕乇爻丞 丕賻賱賳賽賾噩賻丕乇賻丞 賵賻丕賱爻賽賾亘賻丕賰賻丞貙 丕賱鬲毓賱賯 毓賱賶 丕賱丿乇噩 賱賮鬲乇丞 胤賵賷賱丞 賱賲賲丕乇爻丞 丕賱賳賯卮 賵丕賱丿賴丕賳 賮賷 丕賱亘賷賵鬲 賵丕賱毓賲丕乇丕鬲貙 鬲氐賮賷丞 丕賱夭噩丕噩 賮賷 丕賱毓賲丕乇丕鬲 丕賱卮丕賴賯丞貙 賯賷丕丿丞 丕賱賲乇賰亘丕鬲 丕賱孬賯賷賱丞 賲孬賱 賳賯賱 丕賱亘囟丕卅毓 賵丕賱賲賵丕丿 丕賱禺丕賲 賲賳 丿賵賱丞 賱兀禺乇賶 廿賱禺 廿賱禺.. 賵賴賳丕賰 兀毓賲丕賱 賱丕 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱乇噩賱 賲賲丕乇爻鬲賴丕 賲孬賱 丕賱丨賲賱 賵丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賵丕賱廿乇囟丕毓貙 禺賱丕氐丞 丕賱賯賵賱 廿賳 賰購賱賾 賲購賷爻賾乇 賱賲丕 禺購賱賯貙 賮賱丿賶 丕賱乇噩賱 賯丿乇丕鬲 賱丕 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱兀賳孬賶 兀賳 鬲賵丕夭賷賴貙 賵賰匕賱賰 賱賱兀賳孬賶 賯丿乇丕鬲 賱丕 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱乇噩賱 兀賳 賷亘丕乇賷賴丕 賮賷賴.
廿賳 賯賱亘 賲毓丕丿賱丞 丕賱禺丕賱賯 賮賷 禺賱賯賴賽 賵丕賱賯賵賱 亘兀賳賾 丕賱乇噩賱 賷乇賷丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賯胤 賱賱賲鬲毓丞 賵丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賱賷爻 氐丨賷丨賸丕. 賮丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲購禺賱賯 賵賮賷 賰賷丕賳賴丕 兀賳孬賶 乇賯賷賯丞 鬲鬲賵賯 賱賱丨購亘 賵丕賱兀賲賵賲丞. 賵賲丕 丕賳噩匕丕亘賴丕 賳丨賵 丕賱乇噩賱 廿賱賾丕 卮賷亍 賮胤乇賷 賵賱賷爻 亘爻亘亘 丕賱鬲乇亘賷丞. 賰賲丕 賴賵 兀賷囟賸丕 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賱乇噩賱 賲丕 丕賳噩匕丕亘賴 賳丨賵 丕賱兀賳孬賶 廿賱賾丕 亘丕賱賮胤乇丞 賵賱賷爻 亘爻亘亘 丕賱鬲乇亘賷丞.
賲丨丕賵賱丞 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賱賶 丕賱爻丐丕賱:鈥� 賱賲丕匕丕 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇責鈥� 賴賱 丕爻鬲胤丕毓鬲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 兀賳 鬲賮賳賾丿 丕賱噩賵丕亘 亘卮賰賱 丨賷丕丿賷 賵毓賯賱丕賳賷 賵賲賳胤賯賷責
December 5, 2011
賰賳鬲 丕鬲爻丕卅賱 賰孬賷乇賸丕 : 賲丕賱匕賷 賷噩毓賱 賴賲賵賲 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賲卮鬲乇賰丞 責
賱賽賲 賱賲 鬲賳毓鬲賯 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲亘毓賷賾丞 賵丕賱廿賳丿賲丕噩賷賾丞 賮賷 噩賲賷毓 丕賱毓氐賵乇 賵毓賱賶 賲丿賶 丕賱兀夭賲賳丞 責
賲賳匕 毓賴丿 丕賱賷賵賳丕賳 賵丕賱賮乇丕毓賳丞 賵丕賱氐賷賳 賲乇賵乇賸丕 亘丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱賷賴賵丿賷丞 賵氐賵賱賸丕 廿賱賶 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷丞 賵廿賳鬲賴丕亍 亘丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 .. 賵丕賱胤亘賷毓丞 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓賷賾丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲購賮乇囟 毓賱賶 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕丨賽丿丞 乇睾賲 鬲丿乇噩 丕賱丨賯賵賯 亘賷賳 丕賱兀夭賲賳丞 .
賰丕賳 丕賱賲囟賲賵賳 賵丕丨丿賸丕 "丕賱賲賳夭賱 丕賱兀賲賵賲丞 丕賱廿賳丿賲丕噩賷賾丞 乇賮囟 丕賱廿爻鬲賯賱丕賱" 賵丕賱賳鬲賷噩丞 賵氐賮鬲 賰噩賳爻 丌禺乇 賱賷爻鬲 匕丕鬲賸丕 賲爻鬲賯賱賾丞 .
爻賷賲賵賳 賰胤亘賷毓鬲賴丕 鬲賳胤賱賯 賲賳 賮賱爻賮丞 賵噩賵丿賷丞 貨 賮賴賷 鬲鬲賵睾賱 賮賷 丕賱匕丕鬲 丕賱兀賳孬賵賷丞 賲賳匕 胤賮賵賱鬲賴丕 賵氐賽亘丕賴丕 丨賷孬 鬲購鬲乇賰 賲賳匕 丨丿丕孬鬲賴丕 賱鬲毓賷卮 賮賷 噩賵賾 賷丨賮賱 亘丕賱賳爻丕亍 廿賳鬲賴丕亍 亘卮賷禺賵禺鬲賴丕 ..
亘丿兀鬲 鬲丨賱賷賱賴丕 賲賳 賵噩賴丞 賳馗乇 賳賮爻賷賾丞 丨賷孬 丕賱氐乇丕毓 賲丕亘賷賳 "丌丿賱乇" 丕賱匕賷 賷乇賶 亘兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲丨賲賾賱丞 亘賲乇賰亘 賳賯氐 賲賴賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 賲爻鬲賯賱賾丞 .. 賵 "賮乇賵賷丿" 丕賱匕賷 賷乇丕賴丕 鬲賮乇賷睾 噩賳爻賷 .
毓乇賾噩鬲 兀賷囟賸丕 毓賱賶 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 賵噩賴丞 賳馗乇 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 : 丨賷賳 賰丕賳鬲 賰賱 賲乇丨賱丞 賲丨賲賾賱丞 亘氐乇丕毓 賷孬亘鬲 賲丕爻亘賯 賵賷購爻賯胤 賲丕 丕爻鬲噩丿賾貨
賮賮賷 丕賱毓氐乇 丕賱丨噩乇賷 噩乇鬲 丕賱毓丕丿丞 毓賱賶 廿賯鬲爻丕賲 丕賱毓賲賱 亘賷賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱乇噩賱 亘卮賰賱 賲鬲爻丕賵賷
賵 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱兀賯賵丕賲 亘丿丕卅賷丞 亘卮賰賱 賷購噩賴賱 賮賷賴 丿賵乇 丕賱兀亘 賮賷 丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賮丕賱兀賵賱丕丿 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷賴賲 賷賳丨丿乇賵賳 賲賳 乇賵丨 丕賱噩丿賵丿 丕賱賲鬲賯賲氐賾丞 賮賷 噩爻賲 丕賱賲乇丕丞 .. 丕賲賾丕 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮囟乇賵乇賷丞 賱賱廿賳噩丕亘 賱匕賱賰 兀禺匕鬲 鬲賱毓亘 丿賵乇賸丕 丕賵賱賷賸賾丕 .
賵 賮賷 毓賴丿 丕賱廿賯胤丕毓 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱毓賯丿丞 賲購鬲卮丕亘賰丞貨 賮丕賱鬲丿丕禺賱 亘賷賳 丨賯 丕賱爻賷丕丿丞 賵丨賯 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 賯賻賱亘 賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞
賵 丨賷賳 丕鬲爻毓 賳胤丕賯 丕賱廿爻鬲孬賲丕乇 丕賱夭乇丕毓賷 馗賴乇鬲 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞 賮氐丕乇 亘廿賲賰丕賳 丕賱乇噩賱 兀賳 賷氐亘丨 爻賷丿丕賸 賱賱毓亘賷丿 賵賲丕賱賰丕賸 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賮賰丕賳 匕丕賰 兀卮亘賴 亘丕賱廿賳賰爻丕乇 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷 丕賱賰亘賷乇 賱賱噩賳爻 丕賱賳爻丕卅賷
鬲乇賷丿 爻賷賲賵賳 兀賳 鬲賯毓賾丿 乇兀賷賴丕 亘兀賳賴 毓賳丿 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱賰丕丿丨丞 賰丕賳 賵囟毓 丕賱鬲賲賷賷夭 丕賱兀賳孬賵賷 兀賮囟賱 賱兀賳 丕賱廿囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賷賱睾賷 丕賱鬲賲賷賷夭 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳貨 兀賲丕 毓賳丿 丕賱賳亘賱丕亍 賵丕賱亘乇噩賵丕夭賷賷賳 賮丕賱賲乇丕丞 賲囟胤賴丿丞 賰噩賳爻 賱賷爻 賱賴丕 丕賱丕 賵噩賵丿 胤賮賷賱賷 .
"廿賳 賳囟丕賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱賲 賷賰賳 賯胤賾 廿賱丕 賳囟丕賱賸丕 乇賲夭賷賸賾丕
賴賷 賱丕 鬲賯亘賱 丕賱賲氐賷乇 丕賱匕賷 賷毓丿賾賴 賱賴丕 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓貨 賵賱賰賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲乇賮囟賴 賲毓 匕賱賰 亘氐賵乇丞 廿賷噩丕亘賷丞 賱兀賳賴丕 賲夭毓夭毓丞 丕賱孬賯丞 賮賷 賯乇丕乇丞 賳賮爻賴丕 亘卮賰賱 賱丕 鬲噩乇兀 毓賱賶 丕賱丿禺賵賱 賮賷 氐乇丕毓 賲毓 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丕賱禺丕乇噩賷 賮鬲賰鬲賮賷 亘丕賱賴乇賵亘 賲賳 丕賱賵丕賯毓 兀賵 丕賱丕丨鬲噩丕噩 毓賱賷賴 賵賲毓丕乇囟鬲賴 亘氐賵乇丞 乇賲夭賷賾丞 ".
賱賽賲 賱賲 鬲賳毓鬲賯 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲亘毓賷賾丞 賵丕賱廿賳丿賲丕噩賷賾丞 賮賷 噩賲賷毓 丕賱毓氐賵乇 賵毓賱賶 賲丿賶 丕賱兀夭賲賳丞 責
賲賳匕 毓賴丿 丕賱賷賵賳丕賳 賵丕賱賮乇丕毓賳丞 賵丕賱氐賷賳 賲乇賵乇賸丕 亘丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱賷賴賵丿賷丞 賵氐賵賱賸丕 廿賱賶 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷丞 賵廿賳鬲賴丕亍 亘丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 .. 賵丕賱胤亘賷毓丞 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓賷賾丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲購賮乇囟 毓賱賶 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕丨賽丿丞 乇睾賲 鬲丿乇噩 丕賱丨賯賵賯 亘賷賳 丕賱兀夭賲賳丞 .
賰丕賳 丕賱賲囟賲賵賳 賵丕丨丿賸丕 "丕賱賲賳夭賱 丕賱兀賲賵賲丞 丕賱廿賳丿賲丕噩賷賾丞 乇賮囟 丕賱廿爻鬲賯賱丕賱" 賵丕賱賳鬲賷噩丞 賵氐賮鬲 賰噩賳爻 丌禺乇 賱賷爻鬲 匕丕鬲賸丕 賲爻鬲賯賱賾丞 .
爻賷賲賵賳 賰胤亘賷毓鬲賴丕 鬲賳胤賱賯 賲賳 賮賱爻賮丞 賵噩賵丿賷丞 貨 賮賴賷 鬲鬲賵睾賱 賮賷 丕賱匕丕鬲 丕賱兀賳孬賵賷丞 賲賳匕 胤賮賵賱鬲賴丕 賵氐賽亘丕賴丕 丨賷孬 鬲購鬲乇賰 賲賳匕 丨丿丕孬鬲賴丕 賱鬲毓賷卮 賮賷 噩賵賾 賷丨賮賱 亘丕賱賳爻丕亍 廿賳鬲賴丕亍 亘卮賷禺賵禺鬲賴丕 ..
亘丿兀鬲 鬲丨賱賷賱賴丕 賲賳 賵噩賴丞 賳馗乇 賳賮爻賷賾丞 丨賷孬 丕賱氐乇丕毓 賲丕亘賷賳 "丌丿賱乇" 丕賱匕賷 賷乇賶 亘兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲丨賲賾賱丞 亘賲乇賰亘 賳賯氐 賲賴賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 賲爻鬲賯賱賾丞 .. 賵 "賮乇賵賷丿" 丕賱匕賷 賷乇丕賴丕 鬲賮乇賷睾 噩賳爻賷 .
毓乇賾噩鬲 兀賷囟賸丕 毓賱賶 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 賵噩賴丞 賳馗乇 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 : 丨賷賳 賰丕賳鬲 賰賱 賲乇丨賱丞 賲丨賲賾賱丞 亘氐乇丕毓 賷孬亘鬲 賲丕爻亘賯 賵賷購爻賯胤 賲丕 丕爻鬲噩丿賾貨
賮賮賷 丕賱毓氐乇 丕賱丨噩乇賷 噩乇鬲 丕賱毓丕丿丞 毓賱賶 廿賯鬲爻丕賲 丕賱毓賲賱 亘賷賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱乇噩賱 亘卮賰賱 賲鬲爻丕賵賷
賵 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱兀賯賵丕賲 亘丿丕卅賷丞 亘卮賰賱 賷購噩賴賱 賮賷賴 丿賵乇 丕賱兀亘 賮賷 丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賮丕賱兀賵賱丕丿 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷賴賲 賷賳丨丿乇賵賳 賲賳 乇賵丨 丕賱噩丿賵丿 丕賱賲鬲賯賲氐賾丞 賮賷 噩爻賲 丕賱賲乇丕丞 .. 丕賲賾丕 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮囟乇賵乇賷丞 賱賱廿賳噩丕亘 賱匕賱賰 兀禺匕鬲 鬲賱毓亘 丿賵乇賸丕 丕賵賱賷賸賾丕 .
賵 賮賷 毓賴丿 丕賱廿賯胤丕毓 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱毓賯丿丞 賲購鬲卮丕亘賰丞貨 賮丕賱鬲丿丕禺賱 亘賷賳 丨賯 丕賱爻賷丕丿丞 賵丨賯 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 賯賻賱亘 賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞
賵 丨賷賳 丕鬲爻毓 賳胤丕賯 丕賱廿爻鬲孬賲丕乇 丕賱夭乇丕毓賷 馗賴乇鬲 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞 賮氐丕乇 亘廿賲賰丕賳 丕賱乇噩賱 兀賳 賷氐亘丨 爻賷丿丕賸 賱賱毓亘賷丿 賵賲丕賱賰丕賸 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賮賰丕賳 匕丕賰 兀卮亘賴 亘丕賱廿賳賰爻丕乇 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷 丕賱賰亘賷乇 賱賱噩賳爻 丕賱賳爻丕卅賷
鬲乇賷丿 爻賷賲賵賳 兀賳 鬲賯毓賾丿 乇兀賷賴丕 亘兀賳賴 毓賳丿 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱賰丕丿丨丞 賰丕賳 賵囟毓 丕賱鬲賲賷賷夭 丕賱兀賳孬賵賷 兀賮囟賱 賱兀賳 丕賱廿囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賷賱睾賷 丕賱鬲賲賷賷夭 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳貨 兀賲丕 毓賳丿 丕賱賳亘賱丕亍 賵丕賱亘乇噩賵丕夭賷賷賳 賮丕賱賲乇丕丞 賲囟胤賴丿丞 賰噩賳爻 賱賷爻 賱賴丕 丕賱丕 賵噩賵丿 胤賮賷賱賷 .
"廿賳 賳囟丕賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱賲 賷賰賳 賯胤賾 廿賱丕 賳囟丕賱賸丕 乇賲夭賷賸賾丕
賴賷 賱丕 鬲賯亘賱 丕賱賲氐賷乇 丕賱匕賷 賷毓丿賾賴 賱賴丕 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓貨 賵賱賰賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲乇賮囟賴 賲毓 匕賱賰 亘氐賵乇丞 廿賷噩丕亘賷丞 賱兀賳賴丕 賲夭毓夭毓丞 丕賱孬賯丞 賮賷 賯乇丕乇丞 賳賮爻賴丕 亘卮賰賱 賱丕 鬲噩乇兀 毓賱賶 丕賱丿禺賵賱 賮賷 氐乇丕毓 賲毓 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丕賱禺丕乇噩賷 賮鬲賰鬲賮賷 亘丕賱賴乇賵亘 賲賳 丕賱賵丕賯毓 兀賵 丕賱丕丨鬲噩丕噩 毓賱賷賴 賵賲毓丕乇囟鬲賴 亘氐賵乇丞 乇賲夭賷賾丞 ".
September 15, 2016
As a feminist, it's been recommended to me for years that I read Simone de Beauvoir's 1949 book, The Second Sex. As a regular person, though, I have always felt like it "wasn't the right time" to read it.
What does that even mean?
As someone living as "the second sex" myself, there is no excuse for this. I was lazy, bottom line. It's a big book, and while big books do not normally frighten me, I was worried I wouldn't be smart enough for Simone de Beauvoir. She was, from what I understand, a highly intelligent and talented existentialist writer, and here I am practically picking my nose while I decide what kind of cereal I want to eat for dinner tonight. I mean, I'm not the dimmest light in the pack, but I'm also not the brightest. I'm just regular.
But as I am pushing 40, it's been on my mind that I should really read this book. There's probably never the right time, maybe the time is right now. We read this as a group here on GR, and I'm afraid to say I sort of disappeared during any discussion of it because life got in my way, but I persevered anyway because I was finally ready to commit to Simone.
And what a commitment it was.
I read Betty Friedan's classic a few years back and what was surprising to me about that book was that it read so easily and smoothly. I think for that reason alone Friedan may have reached more of her audience than Beauvoir did, though this does not automatically mean we should be ignoring Beauvoir. Quite the opposite, really.
The book is large, yes. And it is dense, yes. Beauvoir insists her readers give a bit of themselves in order to read this book, I think. She covers a lot of ground in this book, more than Friedan, though the comparison is unfair since they achieved different things with their writing and came at it from slightly different angles.
Beauvoir's approach covers biology, philosophy, religion, history, you name it. There's very few stones that Beauvoir did not turn in the process of writing this book. She begins with the science of gender and sexuality, and then she walks the reader through the entirety of a woman's life, from her young days to maturity to old age. Beauvoir was 41 when this book was published. Just how long did it take her to write this? Because I'm 38 and she was probably writing this at that age (based on the size and the amount of research she did), and this makes me feel like a colossal failure.
The information here may seem dated to a reader today. There's also so much information that it's easy to glaze over at times. Beauvoir was a French writer, and her lack of love for the Americans is evident in several places in sometimes subtle (other times not so subtle) ways. It's amusing to look back at it now, but the point is she wasn't even wrong. She may have written things in a condescending manner, but she still hit the nail on the head.
Much of her information is still relevant today. There was a section I especially recall in which she talks about abortion, a topic discussed openly way less often back in 1949, and she writes about it in a very matter-of-fact manner. The part that I especially love is that she pointed out how so many people want to prevent abortions, and they encourage many to keep their child. And then, once the woman carries the baby for the greater part of a year, and gives birth to this thing, those same people who encouraged her to keep the baby are suddenly nowhere to be found to help ensure that she and the baby receive all the financial and other support that they need. This is a still a topic of debate today, how conservatives want to tell women what to do with their bodies with lots of promises to "help", and then when the time comes they shrug and say "Not my problem."
I'm totally paraphrasing here. Beauvoir was much too classy to write "Not my problem."
I do recommend this book to, well, anyone who can manage to get through it. It's not the easiest book to read because it just seems too boring. Well, I'm sorry that a woman's life is boring to you. Beauvoir's point was (and should still be) that women are here, we are the other part of the population, and we have a history and a voice of our own.
What does that even mean?
As someone living as "the second sex" myself, there is no excuse for this. I was lazy, bottom line. It's a big book, and while big books do not normally frighten me, I was worried I wouldn't be smart enough for Simone de Beauvoir. She was, from what I understand, a highly intelligent and talented existentialist writer, and here I am practically picking my nose while I decide what kind of cereal I want to eat for dinner tonight. I mean, I'm not the dimmest light in the pack, but I'm also not the brightest. I'm just regular.
But as I am pushing 40, it's been on my mind that I should really read this book. There's probably never the right time, maybe the time is right now. We read this as a group here on GR, and I'm afraid to say I sort of disappeared during any discussion of it because life got in my way, but I persevered anyway because I was finally ready to commit to Simone.
And what a commitment it was.
I read Betty Friedan's classic a few years back and what was surprising to me about that book was that it read so easily and smoothly. I think for that reason alone Friedan may have reached more of her audience than Beauvoir did, though this does not automatically mean we should be ignoring Beauvoir. Quite the opposite, really.
The book is large, yes. And it is dense, yes. Beauvoir insists her readers give a bit of themselves in order to read this book, I think. She covers a lot of ground in this book, more than Friedan, though the comparison is unfair since they achieved different things with their writing and came at it from slightly different angles.
Beauvoir's approach covers biology, philosophy, religion, history, you name it. There's very few stones that Beauvoir did not turn in the process of writing this book. She begins with the science of gender and sexuality, and then she walks the reader through the entirety of a woman's life, from her young days to maturity to old age. Beauvoir was 41 when this book was published. Just how long did it take her to write this? Because I'm 38 and she was probably writing this at that age (based on the size and the amount of research she did), and this makes me feel like a colossal failure.
The information here may seem dated to a reader today. There's also so much information that it's easy to glaze over at times. Beauvoir was a French writer, and her lack of love for the Americans is evident in several places in sometimes subtle (other times not so subtle) ways. It's amusing to look back at it now, but the point is she wasn't even wrong. She may have written things in a condescending manner, but she still hit the nail on the head.
Much of her information is still relevant today. There was a section I especially recall in which she talks about abortion, a topic discussed openly way less often back in 1949, and she writes about it in a very matter-of-fact manner. The part that I especially love is that she pointed out how so many people want to prevent abortions, and they encourage many to keep their child. And then, once the woman carries the baby for the greater part of a year, and gives birth to this thing, those same people who encouraged her to keep the baby are suddenly nowhere to be found to help ensure that she and the baby receive all the financial and other support that they need. This is a still a topic of debate today, how conservatives want to tell women what to do with their bodies with lots of promises to "help", and then when the time comes they shrug and say "Not my problem."
I'm totally paraphrasing here. Beauvoir was much too classy to write "Not my problem."
I do recommend this book to, well, anyone who can manage to get through it. It's not the easiest book to read because it just seems too boring. Well, I'm sorry that a woman's life is boring to you. Beauvoir's point was (and should still be) that women are here, we are the other part of the population, and we have a history and a voice of our own.
February 3, 2010
Knocked Up
Preggers
Up the Spout
A Bun in the Oven
* * *
The word 鈥減regnant鈥� is pregnant with connotation. And for women鈥攐ften viewed in more bodily terms than men鈥攏othing foregrounds a woman's body more than pregnancy. It鈥檚 interesting to consider what Simone de Beauvoir, dubbed the "mother" of modern feminism, thought about motherhood itself. Given what she writes in The Second Sex, Beauvoir would probably concur with my friend鈥檚 attitude鈥�
...A number of years ago, a friend of mine spoke to me of her desire to have a baby. She felt鈥攂eing in her early thirties鈥攕he should get on with it but would not consider being pregnant while she was still in graduate school. When I asked her why, she responded that pregnancy made you into such a 鈥渂ody,鈥� and in the environment of graduate school, she would feel like 鈥渁 body among minds.鈥�
Her fear encapsulates a number of assumptions: A mother is a body. A body does not think. Intellectuals鈥攇raduate students, faculty, writers鈥攖hink. Mothers do not think. A woman鈥攁s a graduate student or a professor鈥攚rites, talks, produces, thinks from the position of a daughter, that is, from the position of a female body still unencumbered enough to think.
Pregnancy or maternity, besides being a position traditionally at odds with intellect (consider the old caveat: 鈥渢he baby or the book鈥�), also represents loss of control and a resultant discomfort with the body (somatophobia). Marianne Hirsch, in The Mother/Daughter Plot, isolates both lack of control and somatophobia as two areas 鈥渙f avoidance and discomfort with the maternal鈥� (165) often apparent in feminist rhetoric. In The Women鈥檚 Room, one of Marilyn French鈥檚 characters sums up pregnancy as a time when a woman loses control of her body (and, by extension, her mind) as well as her identity:
With pregnancy, you are 鈥渘o longer a person,鈥� you are no longer 鈥測ou.鈥� Logically, the next question is, 鈥淲ill you still be you when you become a mother?鈥�
For Simone de Beauvoir the answer would be 鈥淣o鈥�: pregnancy and motherhood rob a woman of her identity and her intellect. Over and over again, in her interviews and in her books, Beauvoir refers to mothers as slaves reduced to bodies and cut off from intellectual pursuits. Beauvoir鈥檚 description of pregnancy, from her influential book, The Second Sex (1949), sounds very much like the description quoted above from The Women鈥檚 Room. While French鈥檚 character emphasizes how much pregnancy overtakes a woman鈥檚 identity, Beauvoir goes further and depicts pregnancy more like a disease that ultimately annihilates awoman:
In this theorization, a woman not only loses her former identity in the process of pregnancy, but actually loses her mind, as Beauvoir illustrates when she describes the pregnant woman in less than human terms:
Beauvoir鈥檚 perspective in the above quotation attracts comment. Though The Second Sex ostensibly is presented as an objective critique there is no attempt at objectivity here. In what often amounts to an emotional tirade, Beauvoir relentlessly focuses on the pregnant woman鈥檚 body, equating it with an 鈥渁nimal鈥� or a 鈥渟tockpile of colloids鈥� and then鈥攔ather gratuitously鈥攕tates that a pregnant woman 鈥渟cares children鈥� and makes them 鈥渢itter contemptuously.鈥� Beauvoir鈥檚 descriptions of pregnancy illustrate her attitudes about the pregnant body and the resultant disintegration of the mind and identity she sees occurring with maternity.
Beauvoir鈥檚 attack on motherhood is surprising unless you've read Beauvoir鈥檚 autobiographical works. There, you can see how Beauvoir systematically rejects the body鈥攑articularly a woman鈥檚 body鈥攊n favor of the life of the 鈥渕ind.鈥� And Beauvoir鈥檚 research on motherhood proves less than scientific. While she presents her findings in The Second Sex as though they are objective and backed by evidence from broad samplings, her viewpoints on motherhood rest largely on her observations of a few friends, quotes from novels, and her own personal life. Beauvoir, for instance, posits that the nausea women suffer in pregnancy demonstrates that pregnancy is not a natural state for human women given that nausea is 鈥渦nknown for other mammals鈥� (498). In evidence for this conclusion, Beauvoir preemptively cites herself, referring the reader to an earlier point in her own text!
Whatever groundbreaking work Beauvoir accomplishes in The Second Sex needs to be balanced against Beauvoir鈥檚 privileging of the mind over the body as well as her evident distaste for women鈥檚 bodily processes and pregnancy in particular. Furthermore, Beauvoir鈥檚 desire to erase the body doesn鈥檛 work. Ironically, as Jane Flax points out, the search for truth in the world of pure mind ultimately leads right back to the body:
And, can one really separate the mind from the body? Jean-Fran莽ois Lyotard provocatively explores this question in his essay, 鈥淐an Thought Go On without a Body?鈥� Lyotard considers whether technology could create machines 鈥渢o make thinking materially possible鈥� after our bodies are destroyed (77). Lyotard concludes that not only is thought impossibly entwined with the body but that the body actually creates thought: 鈥淭hinking and suffering overlap鈥� (82). Thought, Lyotard posits, attempts to create endings, to once and for all silence the discomfort of the unthought:
The impasse of artificial intelligence thus hinges on desire: thought without body has no impetus. Indeed, Lyotard questions why machines designed to mimic human minds would ever start thinking without the discomfort of the unthought making 鈥渢heir memory suffer鈥� (85). We need, he continues, 鈥渕achines that suffer from the burden of their memory鈥� (85), i.e., machines with bodies.
But it is precisely this burden, the burden of memory, the burden of the body, Beauvoir hopes to silence as she fashions her life into a trajectory of pure intellect. Increasingly, Beauvoir identifies herself with the life of the mind she associates with the male sphere while simultaneously excising all that connects her to her female body. Though Beauvoir points out many of women鈥檚 inequities in A Second Sex and argues that women have often been viewed as the lesser or 鈥渙ther鈥� sex, ironically, it is a sex that Beauvoir seems to reject as well.
adapted from a prior publication
Preggers
Up the Spout
A Bun in the Oven
* * *
The word 鈥減regnant鈥� is pregnant with connotation. And for women鈥攐ften viewed in more bodily terms than men鈥攏othing foregrounds a woman's body more than pregnancy. It鈥檚 interesting to consider what Simone de Beauvoir, dubbed the "mother" of modern feminism, thought about motherhood itself. Given what she writes in The Second Sex, Beauvoir would probably concur with my friend鈥檚 attitude鈥�
...A number of years ago, a friend of mine spoke to me of her desire to have a baby. She felt鈥攂eing in her early thirties鈥攕he should get on with it but would not consider being pregnant while she was still in graduate school. When I asked her why, she responded that pregnancy made you into such a 鈥渂ody,鈥� and in the environment of graduate school, she would feel like 鈥渁 body among minds.鈥�
Her fear encapsulates a number of assumptions: A mother is a body. A body does not think. Intellectuals鈥攇raduate students, faculty, writers鈥攖hink. Mothers do not think. A woman鈥攁s a graduate student or a professor鈥攚rites, talks, produces, thinks from the position of a daughter, that is, from the position of a female body still unencumbered enough to think.
Pregnancy or maternity, besides being a position traditionally at odds with intellect (consider the old caveat: 鈥渢he baby or the book鈥�), also represents loss of control and a resultant discomfort with the body (somatophobia). Marianne Hirsch, in The Mother/Daughter Plot, isolates both lack of control and somatophobia as two areas 鈥渙f avoidance and discomfort with the maternal鈥� (165) often apparent in feminist rhetoric. In The Women鈥檚 Room, one of Marilyn French鈥檚 characters sums up pregnancy as a time when a woman loses control of her body (and, by extension, her mind) as well as her identity:
Pregnancy is a long waiting in which you learn what it means completely to lose control over your life. There are no coffee breaks; no days off in which you regain your normal shape and self, and can return refreshed to your labors. You can鈥檛 wish away even for an hour the thing that is swelling you up, stretching your stomach until the skin feels as if it will burst, kicking you from the inside until you are black and blue. You can鈥檛 even hit back without hurting yourself. The condition and you are identical: you are no longer a person, but a pregnancy. (69)
With pregnancy, you are 鈥渘o longer a person,鈥� you are no longer 鈥測ou.鈥� Logically, the next question is, 鈥淲ill you still be you when you become a mother?鈥�
For Simone de Beauvoir the answer would be 鈥淣o鈥�: pregnancy and motherhood rob a woman of her identity and her intellect. Over and over again, in her interviews and in her books, Beauvoir refers to mothers as slaves reduced to bodies and cut off from intellectual pursuits. Beauvoir鈥檚 description of pregnancy, from her influential book, The Second Sex (1949), sounds very much like the description quoted above from The Women鈥檚 Room. While French鈥檚 character emphasizes how much pregnancy overtakes a woman鈥檚 identity, Beauvoir goes further and depicts pregnancy more like a disease that ultimately annihilates awoman:
[the fetus is:] an enrichment and an injury; the fetus is a part of her body, and it is a parasite that feeds on it; she possesses it, and she is possessed by it; it represents the future and, carrying it, she feels herself vast as the world; but this very opulence annihilates her, she feels that she herself is no longer anything. (emphasis added, 495)
In this theorization, a woman not only loses her former identity in the process of pregnancy, but actually loses her mind, as Beauvoir illustrates when she describes the pregnant woman in less than human terms:
. . . but in the mother-to-be the antithesis of subject and object ceases to exist; she and the child with which she is swollen make up together an equivocal pair overwhelmed by life. Ensnared by nature, the pregnant woman is plant and animal, a stock-pile of colloids, an incubator, an egg; she scares children proud of their young, straight bodies and makes young people titter contemptuously because she is a human being, a conscious and free individual who has become life鈥檚 passive instrument. (495)
Beauvoir鈥檚 perspective in the above quotation attracts comment. Though The Second Sex ostensibly is presented as an objective critique there is no attempt at objectivity here. In what often amounts to an emotional tirade, Beauvoir relentlessly focuses on the pregnant woman鈥檚 body, equating it with an 鈥渁nimal鈥� or a 鈥渟tockpile of colloids鈥� and then鈥攔ather gratuitously鈥攕tates that a pregnant woman 鈥渟cares children鈥� and makes them 鈥渢itter contemptuously.鈥� Beauvoir鈥檚 descriptions of pregnancy illustrate her attitudes about the pregnant body and the resultant disintegration of the mind and identity she sees occurring with maternity.
Beauvoir鈥檚 attack on motherhood is surprising unless you've read Beauvoir鈥檚 autobiographical works. There, you can see how Beauvoir systematically rejects the body鈥攑articularly a woman鈥檚 body鈥攊n favor of the life of the 鈥渕ind.鈥� And Beauvoir鈥檚 research on motherhood proves less than scientific. While she presents her findings in The Second Sex as though they are objective and backed by evidence from broad samplings, her viewpoints on motherhood rest largely on her observations of a few friends, quotes from novels, and her own personal life. Beauvoir, for instance, posits that the nausea women suffer in pregnancy demonstrates that pregnancy is not a natural state for human women given that nausea is 鈥渦nknown for other mammals鈥� (498). In evidence for this conclusion, Beauvoir preemptively cites herself, referring the reader to an earlier point in her own text!
Whatever groundbreaking work Beauvoir accomplishes in The Second Sex needs to be balanced against Beauvoir鈥檚 privileging of the mind over the body as well as her evident distaste for women鈥檚 bodily processes and pregnancy in particular. Furthermore, Beauvoir鈥檚 desire to erase the body doesn鈥檛 work. Ironically, as Jane Flax points out, the search for truth in the world of pure mind ultimately leads right back to the body:
The self, which is constituted by thought and created by an act of thought, by the separation of mind and body, is driven to master nature, because the self cannot ultimately deny its material character or dependence on nature. Despite Descartes鈥� claim, the body reasserts itself, at least at the moment of death. (28)
And, can one really separate the mind from the body? Jean-Fran莽ois Lyotard provocatively explores this question in his essay, 鈥淐an Thought Go On without a Body?鈥� Lyotard considers whether technology could create machines 鈥渢o make thinking materially possible鈥� after our bodies are destroyed (77). Lyotard concludes that not only is thought impossibly entwined with the body but that the body actually creates thought: 鈥淭hinking and suffering overlap鈥� (82). Thought, Lyotard posits, attempts to create endings, to once and for all silence the discomfort of the unthought:
The unthought hurts. It鈥檚 uncomfortable because we鈥檙e comfortable in what鈥檚 already thought. And thinking, which is accepting this discomfort, is also, to put it bluntly, an attempt to have done with it. That鈥檚 the hope sustaining all writing (painting, etc.): that at the end, things will be better. As there is no end, this hope is illusory. (84)
The impasse of artificial intelligence thus hinges on desire: thought without body has no impetus. Indeed, Lyotard questions why machines designed to mimic human minds would ever start thinking without the discomfort of the unthought making 鈥渢heir memory suffer鈥� (85). We need, he continues, 鈥渕achines that suffer from the burden of their memory鈥� (85), i.e., machines with bodies.
But it is precisely this burden, the burden of memory, the burden of the body, Beauvoir hopes to silence as she fashions her life into a trajectory of pure intellect. Increasingly, Beauvoir identifies herself with the life of the mind she associates with the male sphere while simultaneously excising all that connects her to her female body. Though Beauvoir points out many of women鈥檚 inequities in A Second Sex and argues that women have often been viewed as the lesser or 鈥渙ther鈥� sex, ironically, it is a sex that Beauvoir seems to reject as well.
adapted from a prior publication
October 5, 2020
I have good news! No one ever needs to read this book again.
Simone de Beauvoir鈥檚 thoughts on womanhood have long been considered fundamental to modern feminism. Now that I鈥檝e read them I can happily say that the information here falls into two brackets: wrong or outdated. Therefore, let us all join hands and agree that The Second Sex is a thing of the past and we should stop telling each other to read it.
Reading the Second Sex was like reading a description of women written by an alien race that has never met a woman and had to draw conclusions from a collection of shitty dime novels and Tolstoy. These are the long-winded opinions of a woman who has been groomed by men her whole life. Despite her dismay that woman has been othered she repeatedly does the same, allowing men always to be the standard of humanity. Most of her beliefs about women are derived from male intellectuals 鈥揳nd we all know they鈥檝e never had an agenda. SDB can talk about transcendence and immanence until she鈥檚 blue in the face, but it doesn鈥檛 matter. Her view of women is dim and pessimistic; women are always an other, a 鈥榯hey鈥�, never an 鈥榰s鈥�, which leaves me wondering if she believes these things are true of herself as well. Does she think she鈥檚 a narcissist, as well? An obsessive, controlling, mediocre creator? Or does she rank herself among the men? I don鈥檛 know. But regardless. IF the things SDB says about women were ever accurate, they are no longer. The woman she鈥檚 describing doesn鈥檛 exist today, so no woman need ever read this book again. It is a thing of the past.
Now for my own sake, I鈥檒l be doing a quick bit on each section so that I can remember why I never need to read it again. This isn鈥檛 me summarizing the book; it鈥檚 a collection of my favorite takeaways, the most memorable and occasionally correct of all SDB鈥檚 bizarre sayings.
Volume I: Facts and Myths
Part One: Destiny
Biological Data: SDB opens the section by asking 鈥榳hat is a woman?鈥� and then never answers the question because she got caught up talking about the sex lives of preying mantises and other creatures. Reading this is a waste of time.
The Psychoanalytical Point of View: SDB believes that all men want to sleep with their mothers and all women want to sleep with their fathers AND their mothers. That鈥檚 what the male intellectuals told her, anyway. Too bad I have no faith in any of that.
The Point of View of Historical Materialism: SDB discusses Freud and Engels and then dismisses both of them in 10 pages.
Part 2: History
Chapters 1-5: SDB gives an overview of women鈥檚 history through the ages. While this is one of the more enjoyable bits, and has more basis in fact than the rest of the book, SDB鈥檚 perspective is limited and pessimistic. She speaks of women鈥檚 limited opportunities but doesn鈥檛 really want to talk about their contributions. I firmly believe that all women through history have been oppressed on the basis of sex, but that is not all our history is made of, and to pretend otherwise is the let our oppressors win in othering us. We were never just housewives.
Part 3: Myths
Chapters 1-3: Here we talk more about how men view women. Claudel, Breton, Lawrence, and more: here are men鈥檚 opinions, as if I needed more of that in my life. If SDB had spent less time locked in her ivory tower listening to men talk, she might never have written this book and I鈥檇 get several hours of my life back. Alas.
Volume II: Lived Experience
Part 1: Formative Years
Childhood: I know that some man (probably Freud) is responsible for SDB鈥檚 insistence that girls just want to have penises and sleep with their fathers. And again, this is why we shouldn鈥檛 let men define the limits of our universe and ourselves. SDB put a lot of faith in men of her era, but that was 70 years ago, and most of those men have been debunked, taking her down with them.
The Girl: SDB is correct that girls should be raised not to make boys the center of their lives, but that鈥檚 about it. She frowns disapprovingly at just about everything girls do. Giggling? Bad. Then she moves on to tell stories about how gross girls are. I don鈥檛 know what kind of girls she knows, but neither I nor any of my sisters or girlfriends ever indulged in excessive giggling or eating dirt to cope with our lack of transcendent penis. Where are you getting your intel, Simone? Who have you been talking to?
Sexual Initiation: Some interesting thoughts here about the difficulties of sexuality for women.
The Lesbian: Again, I have no idea where SDB is getting her information. She thinks there are a lot more lesbians than there are. According to her virtually all of us were molested by another girl at some point. This whole chapter is an exercise in cringe.
Part 2: Situation
The Married Woman: Favorite takeaway of this chapter is that women who don鈥檛 clean their houses are that way because they are bitter at society and specifically their husbands, and women who do clean their houses are all sadomasochists. Meanwhile, I haven鈥檛 cleaned my house lately because I was wasting my time reading this fucking book.
The Mother: SDB never had a child, so where she gets her information I don鈥檛 know, but her confidence in stating blatantly wrong information is cute. According to her, morning sickness is acted out by women because they secretly hate the unborn and are trying to reject the pregnancy. Also she thinks that all mothers enjoy playing with and touching their infant son鈥檚 genitalia. I don鈥檛 even know what to say about that.
Social Life: Discussion of dressing and party planning, two topics I鈥檓 not qualified to debate her on. Favorite takeaway is that women always betray their female friends for the male because we鈥檙e all just naturally catty that way.
Prostitutes and Hetaeras: A cursory discussion of how women may get trapped in and suffer under the sex industry. No strong negative takeaways.
From Maturity to Old Age: As with the rest of the book, there is some truth here, but SDB鈥檚 arguments are outdated and silly. Nine out of ten erotomaniacs are women, and most of them are in their forties? If you say so, Simone.
Woman鈥檚 Situation and Character: SDB opens by reminding us that what is said of women鈥檚 character is only true because of her situation, and she鈥檚 right: female socialization is a hell of a drug no matter when and where you鈥檙e raised. But as usual, the author鈥檚 description of woman鈥檚 life is outdated. 70 years on, western women are not living the same lives, so this chapter, though somewhat correct, is unnecessary for an understanding of modern feminism.
Part 3: Justifications
The Narcissist: SDB never says all women, but she almost never says 鈥榮ome women鈥� either, leading me to assume that yes, this is how she views all women, or women in general. She thinks all of us (and perhaps herself as well) are flaming narcissistic monsters, and she uses the flimsiest possible evidence. According to her, playing with dolls and enjoying fiction are both proofs of narcissism. Also, one time she saw a girl kiss her reflection in a mirror, and that means all women are narcissists, you see?
The Woman in Love: I can鈥檛 speak for all womankind any better than the author, but her portrayal of women in relationships as clinging, evil, conniving, controlling, needy psychotics is just gross. I鈥檝e never met a women who acted this way. I鈥檝e read enough feminist lit to know that they exist and some of them like to write books, but I鈥檝e never met one in real life.
The Mystic: SDB opens this section by telling us that there are some men who fall prey to mysticism, but they鈥檙e all very intellectual types. Then she goes on to portray women mystics as nutjobs who just need to get laid. Hooray feminism.
Part 4: Toward Liberation
The Independent Woman: At one point, SDB claims that no woman has ever possessed genius. Because of their circumstances, of course. I disagree, and I disagreed more when I turned the page and saw that SDB was backing her argument up by saying that no woman has ever written anything as profound as Moby Dick or, even better, Ulysses.
I鈥檝e read Ulysses, and I know that true enlightenment is knowing that it鈥檚 a steaming pile of garbage. Moreover, it irks me that SDB wrote 700 pages about how woman is othered by mankind, and then wraps up by othering our achievements because they don鈥檛 match up to men鈥檚 standards. Why do men get to decide what makes profound literature? Why do their experiences and emotions remain the standard? Moby Dick is named a work of genius because it expresses men's feelings, but Jane Eyre, which does the same for women, is dismissed out of hand.
Why did I read this far when I knew I was going to end up here? Probably for the same reason I read Ulysses: so I could say I did, so I could spend a hefty amount of time sorting through nonsense just to walk away with a few tidbits of knowledge and the right to say "I did the thing."
What a ripoff.
Simone de Beauvoir鈥檚 thoughts on womanhood have long been considered fundamental to modern feminism. Now that I鈥檝e read them I can happily say that the information here falls into two brackets: wrong or outdated. Therefore, let us all join hands and agree that The Second Sex is a thing of the past and we should stop telling each other to read it.
Reading the Second Sex was like reading a description of women written by an alien race that has never met a woman and had to draw conclusions from a collection of shitty dime novels and Tolstoy. These are the long-winded opinions of a woman who has been groomed by men her whole life. Despite her dismay that woman has been othered she repeatedly does the same, allowing men always to be the standard of humanity. Most of her beliefs about women are derived from male intellectuals 鈥揳nd we all know they鈥檝e never had an agenda. SDB can talk about transcendence and immanence until she鈥檚 blue in the face, but it doesn鈥檛 matter. Her view of women is dim and pessimistic; women are always an other, a 鈥榯hey鈥�, never an 鈥榰s鈥�, which leaves me wondering if she believes these things are true of herself as well. Does she think she鈥檚 a narcissist, as well? An obsessive, controlling, mediocre creator? Or does she rank herself among the men? I don鈥檛 know. But regardless. IF the things SDB says about women were ever accurate, they are no longer. The woman she鈥檚 describing doesn鈥檛 exist today, so no woman need ever read this book again. It is a thing of the past.
Now for my own sake, I鈥檒l be doing a quick bit on each section so that I can remember why I never need to read it again. This isn鈥檛 me summarizing the book; it鈥檚 a collection of my favorite takeaways, the most memorable and occasionally correct of all SDB鈥檚 bizarre sayings.
Volume I: Facts and Myths
Part One: Destiny
Biological Data: SDB opens the section by asking 鈥榳hat is a woman?鈥� and then never answers the question because she got caught up talking about the sex lives of preying mantises and other creatures. Reading this is a waste of time.
The Psychoanalytical Point of View: SDB believes that all men want to sleep with their mothers and all women want to sleep with their fathers AND their mothers. That鈥檚 what the male intellectuals told her, anyway. Too bad I have no faith in any of that.
The Point of View of Historical Materialism: SDB discusses Freud and Engels and then dismisses both of them in 10 pages.
Part 2: History
Chapters 1-5: SDB gives an overview of women鈥檚 history through the ages. While this is one of the more enjoyable bits, and has more basis in fact than the rest of the book, SDB鈥檚 perspective is limited and pessimistic. She speaks of women鈥檚 limited opportunities but doesn鈥檛 really want to talk about their contributions. I firmly believe that all women through history have been oppressed on the basis of sex, but that is not all our history is made of, and to pretend otherwise is the let our oppressors win in othering us. We were never just housewives.
Part 3: Myths
Chapters 1-3: Here we talk more about how men view women. Claudel, Breton, Lawrence, and more: here are men鈥檚 opinions, as if I needed more of that in my life. If SDB had spent less time locked in her ivory tower listening to men talk, she might never have written this book and I鈥檇 get several hours of my life back. Alas.
Volume II: Lived Experience
Part 1: Formative Years
Childhood: I know that some man (probably Freud) is responsible for SDB鈥檚 insistence that girls just want to have penises and sleep with their fathers. And again, this is why we shouldn鈥檛 let men define the limits of our universe and ourselves. SDB put a lot of faith in men of her era, but that was 70 years ago, and most of those men have been debunked, taking her down with them.
The Girl: SDB is correct that girls should be raised not to make boys the center of their lives, but that鈥檚 about it. She frowns disapprovingly at just about everything girls do. Giggling? Bad. Then she moves on to tell stories about how gross girls are. I don鈥檛 know what kind of girls she knows, but neither I nor any of my sisters or girlfriends ever indulged in excessive giggling or eating dirt to cope with our lack of transcendent penis. Where are you getting your intel, Simone? Who have you been talking to?
Sexual Initiation: Some interesting thoughts here about the difficulties of sexuality for women.
The Lesbian: Again, I have no idea where SDB is getting her information. She thinks there are a lot more lesbians than there are. According to her virtually all of us were molested by another girl at some point. This whole chapter is an exercise in cringe.
Part 2: Situation
The Married Woman: Favorite takeaway of this chapter is that women who don鈥檛 clean their houses are that way because they are bitter at society and specifically their husbands, and women who do clean their houses are all sadomasochists. Meanwhile, I haven鈥檛 cleaned my house lately because I was wasting my time reading this fucking book.
The Mother: SDB never had a child, so where she gets her information I don鈥檛 know, but her confidence in stating blatantly wrong information is cute. According to her, morning sickness is acted out by women because they secretly hate the unborn and are trying to reject the pregnancy. Also she thinks that all mothers enjoy playing with and touching their infant son鈥檚 genitalia. I don鈥檛 even know what to say about that.
Social Life: Discussion of dressing and party planning, two topics I鈥檓 not qualified to debate her on. Favorite takeaway is that women always betray their female friends for the male because we鈥檙e all just naturally catty that way.
Prostitutes and Hetaeras: A cursory discussion of how women may get trapped in and suffer under the sex industry. No strong negative takeaways.
From Maturity to Old Age: As with the rest of the book, there is some truth here, but SDB鈥檚 arguments are outdated and silly. Nine out of ten erotomaniacs are women, and most of them are in their forties? If you say so, Simone.
Woman鈥檚 Situation and Character: SDB opens by reminding us that what is said of women鈥檚 character is only true because of her situation, and she鈥檚 right: female socialization is a hell of a drug no matter when and where you鈥檙e raised. But as usual, the author鈥檚 description of woman鈥檚 life is outdated. 70 years on, western women are not living the same lives, so this chapter, though somewhat correct, is unnecessary for an understanding of modern feminism.
Part 3: Justifications
The Narcissist: SDB never says all women, but she almost never says 鈥榮ome women鈥� either, leading me to assume that yes, this is how she views all women, or women in general. She thinks all of us (and perhaps herself as well) are flaming narcissistic monsters, and she uses the flimsiest possible evidence. According to her, playing with dolls and enjoying fiction are both proofs of narcissism. Also, one time she saw a girl kiss her reflection in a mirror, and that means all women are narcissists, you see?
The Woman in Love: I can鈥檛 speak for all womankind any better than the author, but her portrayal of women in relationships as clinging, evil, conniving, controlling, needy psychotics is just gross. I鈥檝e never met a women who acted this way. I鈥檝e read enough feminist lit to know that they exist and some of them like to write books, but I鈥檝e never met one in real life.
The Mystic: SDB opens this section by telling us that there are some men who fall prey to mysticism, but they鈥檙e all very intellectual types. Then she goes on to portray women mystics as nutjobs who just need to get laid. Hooray feminism.
Part 4: Toward Liberation
The Independent Woman: At one point, SDB claims that no woman has ever possessed genius. Because of their circumstances, of course. I disagree, and I disagreed more when I turned the page and saw that SDB was backing her argument up by saying that no woman has ever written anything as profound as Moby Dick or, even better, Ulysses.
I鈥檝e read Ulysses, and I know that true enlightenment is knowing that it鈥檚 a steaming pile of garbage. Moreover, it irks me that SDB wrote 700 pages about how woman is othered by mankind, and then wraps up by othering our achievements because they don鈥檛 match up to men鈥檚 standards. Why do men get to decide what makes profound literature? Why do their experiences and emotions remain the standard? Moby Dick is named a work of genius because it expresses men's feelings, but Jane Eyre, which does the same for women, is dismissed out of hand.
Why did I read this far when I knew I was going to end up here? Probably for the same reason I read Ulysses: so I could say I did, so I could spend a hefty amount of time sorting through nonsense just to walk away with a few tidbits of knowledge and the right to say "I did the thing."
What a ripoff.
April 30, 2017
it seems it has taken me almost a year to finish this book. in my defense it's 701 pages.
for as long as i can remember, since first i heard her name and after when i knew that there is a book called the second sex written by a French woman (and i admire the french), i have wanted to read it.
the years passed by, i was playing with the idea of learning as much french as i can to read it in the original but alas, so little time, so many books to read. and i also have a fetish for books in paper and i search all over the world before i resign to reading a PDF of a book. well i searched and searched and then searched some more but no signs of this book (and the Persian version doesn't count cause let's face it when things get tough, translations get rough).
anyways, as a student of English Literature and discovering myself through the years, i realized the more i live, the more i see, the more i read, the more i feel that i am a feminist, so i picked up (or got stuck with) my thesis subject: Difference Feminism, and NOW i had to read this book, let's face it. This woman started Feminism. and so it began, my one year journey to reading this masterpiece.
first chapter and i was blown away, even though it's all about biology (the first chapter), she talks about the female of a lot of species but even that is interesting. in the next chapters she looks at women from every single possible view, within, without, social, biological, philosophical, historical, cultural, she probes everywhere, the conscious and the unconscious, she goes deep and then deeper than you knew existed, to explain the why and the how and the when of why women are the way they are, who is doing this to us, why hasn't it changed through the years, who benefits from all this and then after 600 pages of fabulous reading, comes the sweet conclusion of how to fix it, how to change it, how to overcome. and i love how she just like Woolf is not interested in separating men and women, she believes in difference and equality. no one needs to hate, we don't need to fight, we just need to look deep inside and find our answers, because no matter how hard you fight it, the future IS coming, and the future is equal.
for as long as i can remember, since first i heard her name and after when i knew that there is a book called the second sex written by a French woman (and i admire the french), i have wanted to read it.
the years passed by, i was playing with the idea of learning as much french as i can to read it in the original but alas, so little time, so many books to read. and i also have a fetish for books in paper and i search all over the world before i resign to reading a PDF of a book. well i searched and searched and then searched some more but no signs of this book (and the Persian version doesn't count cause let's face it when things get tough, translations get rough).
anyways, as a student of English Literature and discovering myself through the years, i realized the more i live, the more i see, the more i read, the more i feel that i am a feminist, so i picked up (or got stuck with) my thesis subject: Difference Feminism, and NOW i had to read this book, let's face it. This woman started Feminism. and so it began, my one year journey to reading this masterpiece.
first chapter and i was blown away, even though it's all about biology (the first chapter), she talks about the female of a lot of species but even that is interesting. in the next chapters she looks at women from every single possible view, within, without, social, biological, philosophical, historical, cultural, she probes everywhere, the conscious and the unconscious, she goes deep and then deeper than you knew existed, to explain the why and the how and the when of why women are the way they are, who is doing this to us, why hasn't it changed through the years, who benefits from all this and then after 600 pages of fabulous reading, comes the sweet conclusion of how to fix it, how to change it, how to overcome. and i love how she just like Woolf is not interested in separating men and women, she believes in difference and equality. no one needs to hate, we don't need to fight, we just need to look deep inside and find our answers, because no matter how hard you fight it, the future IS coming, and the future is equal.
September 4, 2020
兀賯丕賲鬲 爻賷賲賵賳 丿賵 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賰鬲丕亘賴丕 賴匕丕 毓賱賶 爻丐丕賱:(賰賷賮 兀氐亘丨鬲賿 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賴賷 丕賱丌禺乇責) 兀賵 (賱賲丕匕丕 兀氐亘丨鬲賿 丕賱睾賷乇賷丞 賴賷 丕賱氐賮丞 丕賱賲賲賷夭丞 賱賱賳爻丕亍責).
賵丨丕賵賱鬲賿 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賳 爻丐丕賱賴丕 賴匕丕 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 胤乇丨 丕賱賲賵囟賵毓 賲賳 丕賱賳丕丨賷丞 丕賱亘丕賷賱賵噩賷丞貙 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞貙 丕賱廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞貙 丕賱丿賷賳賷丞 賵丨鬲賶 丕賱兀丿亘賷丞. 賵亘爻亘亘 毓乇囟賴丕 賱賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱噩賵丕賳亘 賷氐亘丨 賲賳 丕賱氐毓賵亘丞 丕賱鬲毓丕賲賱 丕賵 鬲匕賰賾乇 賰賱 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 兀賵乇丿鬲賴丕 賵兀賷囟賸丕 賲賲賰賳 賷賯賱賱 賲賳 丨賲丕爻 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞. 賱賰賳賴丕 禺胤賵丞 賲賴賲丞 亘丕賱鬲兀賰賷丿.
賲賳 賷賯乇兀 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賱丕丨馗 賰乇賴 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 丕賱卮丿賷丿 賱賱兀賲賵賲丞貙 鬲睾賷乇丕鬲 丕賱賳賲賵 賱丿賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵丕賱廿囟胤乇丕亘丕鬲 丕賱卮賴乇賷丞貙 夭丕毓賲丞 兀賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲 賴賷 毓亘賵丿賷丞 賱賱賲乇兀丞貙 賵賱丕 賳賳賰購乇 丕賳 毓賲賱賷丞 丕賱丨賲賱 賵丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賯丿賷賲賸丕 賰丕賳鬲 氐毓亘丞 噩丿賸丕 賵賱丕 賷賲賰賳 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 亘賴丕 賵丕賱爻賷胤乇丞 毓賱賷賴丕貙 賰賵賳 兀賳孬賶 賵匕賰乇 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 睾賷乇 賲賯賷丿賷賳 亘賲賵丕爻賲 賲毓賷賳丞 賱賱鬲賰丕孬乇貙 賵鬲爻鬲賲乇 賮鬲乇丞 丕賱賳囟噩 丕賱噩賳爻賷 賵丕賱賯丕亘賱賷丞 毓賱賶 鬲賰賵賷賳 丕賱賳胤賮 賵丕賱亘賵賷囟丕鬲 賱爻賳賷賳 胤賵賷賱丞.
廿賱丕 丕賳 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 馗賱鬲賿 鬲賰賷賱 亘卮鬲賶 丕賱鬲賴賲 賱賴匕賴 丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 (鬲爻鬲毓亘丿賿 丕賱賲乇兀丞) 賲孬賱 亘毓囟 丕賱賲睾丕賱胤丕鬲 毓賳 爻賳 丕賱賷兀爻 丕賵 丕賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲 鬲爻丕賴賲 亘鬲賯賱賷賱 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱賳爻丕亍 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 丕賱賶 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱乇噩丕賱貙 賵賴匕丕 賲丕 鬲賳賰乇賴 賲賳馗賲丞 丕賱氐丨丞 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞貙 丕匕 鬲丐賰丿 丿丕卅賲賸丕 丕賳 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱賳爻丕亍 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱乇噩丕賱貙 賮賷 賰賱 丕賱兀賵賯丕鬲 賵賲賳 兀賮賯乇 丕賱丿賵賱 丕賱賶 兀睾賳丕賴丕:(Women live longer than men all around the world. The gap in life expectancy between the sexes was 4.3 years in 2000 and had remained almost the same by 2016)
_Global Health Observatory (GHO) data.
亘賱丕 卮賰 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賴賲 噩丿賸丕 賵賷購賳氐賻丨 亘賯乇丕亍鬲賴 賱賰賱 丕賱賲賴鬲賲賷賳 亘賯囟賷丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵賵囟毓賴丕 毓賱賶 賲乇 丕賱毓氐賵乇.
賵丨丕賵賱鬲賿 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賳 爻丐丕賱賴丕 賴匕丕 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 胤乇丨 丕賱賲賵囟賵毓 賲賳 丕賱賳丕丨賷丞 丕賱亘丕賷賱賵噩賷丞貙 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞貙 丕賱廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞貙 丕賱丿賷賳賷丞 賵丨鬲賶 丕賱兀丿亘賷丞. 賵亘爻亘亘 毓乇囟賴丕 賱賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱噩賵丕賳亘 賷氐亘丨 賲賳 丕賱氐毓賵亘丞 丕賱鬲毓丕賲賱 丕賵 鬲匕賰賾乇 賰賱 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 兀賵乇丿鬲賴丕 賵兀賷囟賸丕 賲賲賰賳 賷賯賱賱 賲賳 丨賲丕爻 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞. 賱賰賳賴丕 禺胤賵丞 賲賴賲丞 亘丕賱鬲兀賰賷丿.
賲賳 賷賯乇兀 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賱丕丨馗 賰乇賴 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 丕賱卮丿賷丿 賱賱兀賲賵賲丞貙 鬲睾賷乇丕鬲 丕賱賳賲賵 賱丿賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵丕賱廿囟胤乇丕亘丕鬲 丕賱卮賴乇賷丞貙 夭丕毓賲丞 兀賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲 賴賷 毓亘賵丿賷丞 賱賱賲乇兀丞貙 賵賱丕 賳賳賰購乇 丕賳 毓賲賱賷丞 丕賱丨賲賱 賵丕賱廿賳噩丕亘 賯丿賷賲賸丕 賰丕賳鬲 氐毓亘丞 噩丿賸丕 賵賱丕 賷賲賰賳 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 亘賴丕 賵丕賱爻賷胤乇丞 毓賱賷賴丕貙 賰賵賳 兀賳孬賶 賵匕賰乇 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 睾賷乇 賲賯賷丿賷賳 亘賲賵丕爻賲 賲毓賷賳丞 賱賱鬲賰丕孬乇貙 賵鬲爻鬲賲乇 賮鬲乇丞 丕賱賳囟噩 丕賱噩賳爻賷 賵丕賱賯丕亘賱賷丞 毓賱賶 鬲賰賵賷賳 丕賱賳胤賮 賵丕賱亘賵賷囟丕鬲 賱爻賳賷賳 胤賵賷賱丞.
廿賱丕 丕賳 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 馗賱鬲賿 鬲賰賷賱 亘卮鬲賶 丕賱鬲賴賲 賱賴匕賴 丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 (鬲爻鬲毓亘丿賿 丕賱賲乇兀丞) 賲孬賱 亘毓囟 丕賱賲睾丕賱胤丕鬲 毓賳 爻賳 丕賱賷兀爻 丕賵 丕賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲 鬲爻丕賴賲 亘鬲賯賱賷賱 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱賳爻丕亍 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 丕賱賶 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱乇噩丕賱貙 賵賴匕丕 賲丕 鬲賳賰乇賴 賲賳馗賲丞 丕賱氐丨丞 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞貙 丕匕 鬲丐賰丿 丿丕卅賲賸丕 丕賳 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱賳爻丕亍 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 賲鬲賵爻胤 毓賲乇 丕賱乇噩丕賱貙 賮賷 賰賱 丕賱兀賵賯丕鬲 賵賲賳 兀賮賯乇 丕賱丿賵賱 丕賱賶 兀睾賳丕賴丕:(Women live longer than men all around the world. The gap in life expectancy between the sexes was 4.3 years in 2000 and had remained almost the same by 2016)
_Global Health Observatory (GHO) data.
亘賱丕 卮賰 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賴賲 噩丿賸丕 賵賷購賳氐賻丨 亘賯乇丕亍鬲賴 賱賰賱 丕賱賲賴鬲賲賷賳 亘賯囟賷丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵賵囟毓賴丕 毓賱賶 賲乇 丕賱毓氐賵乇.
July 25, 2023
4.5
Her wings are cut and then she is blamed for not knowing how to fly.
The Second Sex is not a feminist manifesto but a comprehensive study of women鈥檚 position throughout history and the psychological reasons why women were and still are considered weaker than men and unequal to them (sometimes by women themselves, but by men in general).
Every time she acts like a human being, she is said to be imitating the male.
In this well-researched, fact-filled philosophical/historical book we come to know about the evolution of woman鈥檚 status all through the history and in addition, we examine some of the great authors鈥� works and how they have portrayed and perceived their women characters.
When he describes woman, each writer discloses his general ethics and the special idea he has of himself; and in her he often betrays also the gap between his world view and his egotistical dreams.
Her wings are cut and then she is blamed for not knowing how to fly.
The Second Sex is not a feminist manifesto but a comprehensive study of women鈥檚 position throughout history and the psychological reasons why women were and still are considered weaker than men and unequal to them (sometimes by women themselves, but by men in general).
Every time she acts like a human being, she is said to be imitating the male.
In this well-researched, fact-filled philosophical/historical book we come to know about the evolution of woman鈥檚 status all through the history and in addition, we examine some of the great authors鈥� works and how they have portrayed and perceived their women characters.
When he describes woman, each writer discloses his general ethics and the special idea he has of himself; and in her he often betrays also the gap between his world view and his egotistical dreams.
May 10, 2020
孝芯胁邪 械 械写薪邪 芯褌 薪邪泄-胁邪卸薪懈褌械 泻薪懈谐懈, 泻芯懈褌芯 薪褟泻芯谐邪 褖械 锌褉芯褔械褌械褌械.
袞懈胁械械屑 胁 褍褋谢芯胁懈褟褌邪 薪邪 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 屑薪芯谐芯 泻褉懈蟹懈 械写薪芯胁褉械屑械薪薪芯 鈥� 蟹写褉邪胁薪邪, 泻谢懈屑邪褌懈褔薪邪, 懈泻芯薪芯屑懈褔械褋泻邪, 褔械 懈蟹谐谢械卸写邪 褋褟泻邪褕 褌械屑邪褌邪 蟹邪 锌芯谢芯胁芯褌芯 褉邪胁薪芯锌褉邪胁懈械 薪械 械 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 薪邪 写薪械胁械薪 褉械写. 袗 懈 薪褟屑邪 泻邪泻胁芯 写邪 褋械 谢褗卸械屑, 卸械薪懈褌械 写薪械褋 褉邪蟹锌芯谢邪谐邪屑械 褋 斜械蟹锌褉械褑械写械薪褌薪芯 屑薪芯谐芯 褋胁芯斜芯写邪, 锌褉邪胁芯 薪邪 懈蟹斜芯褉 懈 胁褗蟹屑芯卸薪芯褋褌懈. 袦芯卸械屑 写邪 锌褗褌褍胁邪屑械 写芯 写褉褍谐懈褟 泻褉邪泄 薪邪 褋胁械褌邪 褋邪屑懈, 写邪 芯褌谢芯卸懈屑 屑芯屑械薪褌邪, 胁 泻芯泄褌芯 写邪 褋褌邪薪械屑 屑邪泄泻懈 懈谢懈 胁褗芯斜褖械 写邪 薪械 褋褌邪薪械屑, 写邪 卸懈胁械械屑 褋 锌邪褉褌薪褜芯褉 锌褉械写懈 写邪 褋泻谢褞褔懈屑 斜褉邪泻 懈谢懈 胁褗芯斜褖械 写邪 薪械 褋泻谢褞褔懈屑, 写邪 褍褔懈屑 胁 薪邪泄-褉械薪芯屑懈褉邪薪懈褌械 褍薪懈胁械褉褋懈褌械褌懈, 写邪 蟹邪械屑邪屑械 锌褉械褋褌懈卸薪懈 写谢褗卸薪芯褋褌懈, 写邪 懈屑邪屑械 褋胁芯斜芯写邪褌邪, 褋褌邪褌褍褋邪, 锌邪褉懈褌械, 褋 泻芯懈褌芯 写芯褉懈 锌褉械写薪芯褌芯 锌芯泻芯谢械薪懈械 卸械薪懈 薪械 褋邪 褉邪蟹锌芯谢邪谐邪谢懈.
袧芯 薪械褖邪褌邪, 泻芯懈褌芯 写薪械褋 锌褉懈械屑邪屑械 蟹邪 写邪写械薪芯褋褌, 褋邪 懈蟹胁芯褞胁邪薪懈 褋 褌械卸泻懈 斜懈褌泻懈, 褍锌芯褉懈褌懈 锌褉芯褌械褋褌懈, 锌芯褏芯写懈 泻褗屑 锌邪褉谢邪屑械薪褌懈, 屑芯谢斜懈, 锌械褌懈褑懈懈, 写芯褉懈 蟹邪褌胁芯褉. 袙褋械芯斜褖芯褌芯 懈蟹斜懈褉邪褌械谢薪芯 锌褉邪胁芯, 褉邪胁薪懈褟褌 写芯褋褌褗锌 写芯 芯斜褉邪蟹芯胁邪薪懈械 懈 泻邪褉懈械褉邪 褋邪 写芯褋褌邪 薪芯胁懈褔泻懈 写芯褋褌懈卸械薪懈褟. 袧邪褕懈褌械 锌褉邪锌芯褋械褋褌褉懈屑懈 褋邪 卸懈胁械谢懈 锌芯写 薪械褍屑芯谢懈屑邪 斜邪褖懈薪褋泻邪, 邪 锌芯褋谢械 懈 褋褗锌褉褍卸械褋泻邪 胁谢邪褋褌, 薪械 褋邪 屑芯谐谢懈 写邪 薪邪褋谢械写褟胁褟褌, 写邪 懈屑邪褌, 泻邪泻褌芯 泻邪蟹胁邪屑械 写薪械褋, 褋芯斜褋褌胁械薪 鈥溞垦€芯械泻褌鈥�, 薪邪褔懈薪邪薪懈械, 写邪 薪械 谐芯胁芯褉懈屑 蟹邪 锌褉芯褎械褋懈褟. 袛芯褉懈 卸械薪懈褌械 芯褌 锌褉懈胁懈谢械谐懈褉芯胁薪懈褌械 泻谢邪褋懈 褋邪 卸懈胁械械谢懈 胁 褋泻褍泻邪 懈 斜械蟹写械谢懈械, 斜械蟹 写邪 屑芯谐邪褌 写邪 懈蟹褋谢械写胁邪褌 褋屑械谢芯 褋胁械褌邪, 写邪 褉邪蟹褕懈褉褟褌 谢懈褔薪懈褌械 褋懈 懈 褎懈蟹懈褔械褋泻懈 谐褉邪薪懈褑懈, 写邪 褌胁芯褉褟褌 褋褗写斜邪褌邪 褋懈. 袩褉械蟹 锌芯-谐芯谢褟屑邪褌邪 褔邪褋褌 芯褌 褔芯胁械褕泻邪褌邪 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟 卸械薪懈褌械 薪邪 锌褉邪泻褌懈泻邪 褋邪 斜懈谢懈 薪械写械械褋锌芯褋芯斜薪懈. 袪邪蟹胁芯写褗褌 懈谢懈 懈蟹胁褗薪斜褉邪褔薪芯褌芯 写械褌械 蟹邪 屑薪芯谐芯 芯褌 褌褟褏 械 芯蟹薪邪褔邪胁邪谢 泻褉邪褟褌 薪邪 褋胁械褌邪.
鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 褉邪蟹谐谢械卸写邪 锌芯写褉芯斜薪芯 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻懈褌械 械褌邪锌懈, 锌褉械蟹 泻芯懈褌芯 械 锌褉械屑懈薪邪谢邪 械胁芯谢褞褑懈褟褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪, 褋褏胁邪褖邪薪邪 泻邪褌芯 锌芯谢芯卸械薪懈械 胁 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯, 褌邪泻邪 懈 胁 薪械泄薪邪褌邪 褋褌邪褌懈褔薪芯褋褌 鈥� 芯褋芯斜械薪芯褋褌懈褌械 薪邪 薪械泄薪邪褌邪 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褟, 褔械褋褌芯 懈屑邪褖懈 褌褉邪胁屑邪褌懈褔薪芯 懈蟹褉邪卸械薪懈械. 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 械 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎褋泻懈 褌褉邪泻褌邪褌, 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻芯 懈蟹褋谢械写胁邪薪械, 械褋械, 写褗谢褗谐 褉邪蟹泻邪蟹, 芯锌懈褋邪薪懈械 薪邪 锌芯谢芯卸械薪懈械褌芯 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 褌邪泻芯胁邪, 泻邪泻胁芯褌芯 械 芯褌 薪械蟹邪锌芯屑薪械薪懈 胁褉械屑械薪邪 写芯 褋褗胁褉械屑械薪薪芯褋褌褌邪 鈥� 锌芯谢芯卸械薪懈械 褎邪泻褌懈褔械褋泻芯, 褞褉懈写懈褔械褋泻芯, 懈泻芯薪芯屑懈褔械褋泻芯, 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪芯.
袚芯写懈薪邪褌邪 薪邪 懈蟹写邪胁邪薪械 鈥� 1949 谐., 薪械 斜懈胁邪 写邪 芯褌斜谢褗褋泻胁邪 写薪械褕薪懈褟 褔懈褌邪褌械谢, 泻芯泄褌芯 褌褗褉褋懈 薪械褖芯 锌芯-锌芯蟹薪邪褌芯 懈 褋褗胁褉械屑械薪薪芯. 袞懈胁芯褌褗褌, 泻芯泄褌芯 写薪械褋 卸械薪懈褌械 卸懈胁械械屑, 械 褋泻芯褉芯褕薪芯 写芯褋褌芯褟薪懈械, 邪 谐芯 卸懈胁械械屑 褌邪泻邪, 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 褑械谢懈 锌芯泻芯谢械薪懈褟 卸械薪懈 懈 屑褗卸械 褋邪 胁芯写懈谢懈 薪械褉邪胁薪邪 斜芯褉斜邪 褋 芯褋褌邪褉械谢懈 薪褉邪胁懈, 锌褉械写褉邪蟹褋褗写褗褑懈 懈 写芯褉懈 褋 邪薪褌懈褏褍屑邪薪薪懈 锌芯褋褌褍谢邪褌懈. 袗 懈 写芯褋褌邪 写懈谢械屑懈 薪邪 卸械薪懈褌械 芯褌 2020 谐芯写懈薪邪 锌褉芯写褗谢卸邪胁邪褌 薪械 谐褍斜褟褌 邪泻褌褍邪谢薪芯褋褌 鈥� 泻邪褉懈械褉邪 懈谢懈 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯, 斜褉邪泻 懈谢懈 斜械蟹斜褉邪褔懈械, 屑邪泄褔懈薪褋褌胁芯 懈谢懈 薪械. 孝芯胁邪, 褔械 懈屑邪屑械 懈蟹斜芯褉邪 屑械卸写褍 械写薪芯褌芯 懈 写褉褍谐芯褌芯, 薪械 芯褌屑械薪褟 胁褗褌褉械褕薪邪褌邪 写褉邪屑邪.
袝写薪芯 胁邪卸薪芯 褍褌芯褔薪械薪械, 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 薪械 械 鈥溞靶窖傂�-屑褗卸泻邪鈥� 泻薪懈谐邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 懈写械懈 蟹邪 卸械薪褋泻芯 谐芯褋锌芯写褋褌胁芯, 蟹邪 锌褉械胁褗蟹褏芯写褋褌胁芯褌芯 薪邪 械写懈薪懈褟 锌芯谢 薪邪写 写褉褍谐懈褟. 袘芯胁芯邪褉 薪械 锌褉芯锌芯胁褟写胁邪 褟褉芯褋褌械薪 褎械屑懈薪懈蟹褗屑, 邪 锌褉械写谢邪谐邪 械写懈薪 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋械薪 褉邪蟹泻邪蟹 蟹邪 褌芯胁邪 泻邪泻 卸械薪邪褌邪 斜懈胁邪 褋褏胁邪褖邪薪邪 芯褌 谐谢械写薪邪 褌芯褔泻邪 薪邪 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褟褌邪, 锌褋懈褏芯谢芯谐懈褟褌邪, 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯; 薪械泄薪芯褌芯 褌褟谢芯 懈 写褍褕邪 锌褉械蟹 胁褋懈褔泻懈 褎邪蟹懈 芯褌 写械褌褋褌胁芯褌芯, 锌褉械蟹 锌褍斜械褉褌械褌邪, 蟹褉械谢芯褋褌褌邪, 屑械薪芯锌邪褍蟹邪褌邪 懈 褋褌邪褉芯褋褌褌邪. 袪邪蟹谐谢械写邪薪懈 褋邪 胁褗锌褉芯褋懈褌械 蟹邪 锌芯谢芯胁懈褟 卸懈胁芯褌, 屑邪泄褔懈薪褋褌胁芯褌芯, 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 胁 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯褌芯, 褏芯屑芯褋械泻褋褍邪谢薪芯褋褌褌邪, 泻芯薪褌褉邪褑械锌褑懈褟褌邪 懈 邪斜芯褉褌邪.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 锌褉械写谢邪谐邪 械写懈薪 褔懈褋褌芯 薪芯胁 (蟹邪 芯薪芯胁邪 胁褉械屑械) 锌芯谐谢械写 泻褗屑 卸械薪邪褌邪 鈥� 褋褏胁邪褖邪薪邪 薪械 泻邪褌芯, 懈谢懈 薪械 褋邪屑芯 泻邪褌芯, 锌芯谢 胁 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褔薪懈褟 褋屑懈褋褗谢 薪邪 写褍屑邪褌邪, 邪 懈 泻邪褌芯 褋芯褑懈邪谢械薪 泻芯薪褋褌褉褍泻褌. 袠 褔械 写芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 卸械薪邪褌邪 械 褌邪泻邪胁邪 懈谢懈 芯薪邪泻邪胁邪, 写芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 泄 谢懈锌褋胁邪 械写薪芯 懈谢懈 写褉褍谐芯, 懈谢懈 懈蟹谢懈褕褗泻 薪邪 褌褉械褌芯, 褌芯 械 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 薪械 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褟褌邪 泄 谐芯 芯斜褍褋谢邪胁褟, 邪 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪懈褌械 褍褋谢芯胁懈褟, 褋褉械写邪褌邪, 薪褉邪胁懈褌械 懈 褍褋褌褉芯泄褋褌胁芯褌芯 薪邪 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯 芯锌褉械写械谢褟褌 薪械泄薪芯褌芯 锌芯胁械写械薪懈械 懈 褋褗写斜邪. 袝写薪芯 芯褌 锌芯褋褌懈卸械薪懈褟褌邪 薪邪 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 械, 褔械 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁褟 褌芯褔薪芯 褌邪蟹懈 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋薪芯褋褌 懈 写胁芯泄薪褋褌胁械薪芯褋褌 胁 锌褉懈褉芯写邪褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 蟹邪写邪胁邪 褌芯薪邪 薪邪 褑械谢懈褟 泄 卸懈胁芯褌 懈 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 泄 褋 芯泻芯谢薪懈褌械.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 锌褉芯褋谢械写褟胁邪 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 锌褉械蟹 锌褉懈蟹屑邪褌邪 薪邪 褎褉械薪褋泻懈褟 芯锌懈褌, 薪械 褋邪屑芯 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 薪械谐芯 褌褟 锌芯蟹薪邪胁邪 薪邪泄-写芯斜褉械, 薪芯 懈 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 械 褋褏芯写械薪 薪邪 褌芯蟹懈 胁 写褉褍谐懈 蟹邪锌邪写薪懈 褋褌褉邪薪懈. 袠薪褌械褉械褋薪芯褌芯 械, 褔械 胁 袝胁褉芯锌邪 斜芯褉斜邪褌邪 蟹邪 褉邪胁薪芯锌褉邪胁懈械 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 械 斜懈谢邪 锌芯褋褌邪胁械薪邪 胁 泻芯薪褌械泻褋褌邪 薪邪 斜芯褉斜邪褌邪 薪邪 褉邪斜芯褌薪懈褔械褋泻邪褌邪 泻谢邪褋邪, 邪 胁 小袗些 褋械 械 锌褉械锌谢懈褌邪谢邪 褋 泻邪屑锌邪薪懈懈褌械 蟹邪 谐褉邪卸写邪薪褋泻懈 锌褉邪胁邪 薪邪 褔械褉薪芯泻芯卸懈褌械. 袧邪泻褉邪褌泻芯, 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 械 锌褉械写懈 胁褋懈褔泻芯 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟 薪邪 蟹邪斜褉邪薪懈 懈 芯谐褉邪薪懈褔械薪懈褟, 褞褉懈写懈褔械褋泻懈 懈 褎邪泻褌懈褔械褋泻懈, 褟胁薪懈 懈 褋泻褉懈褌懈. 袨褋胁芯斜芯卸写邪胁邪薪械褌芯 泄 械 褋胁褗褉蟹邪薪芯 薪械 褋邪屑芯 褋 胁褗薪褕薪懈 锌褉芯屑械薪懈 (锌褉芯屑械薪懈 胁 蟹邪泻芯薪芯写邪褌械谢褋褌胁邪褌邪), 邪 懈 锌褉芯屑褟薪邪 胁 薪褉邪胁懈褌械 懈 胁 褍褋褌芯泄褔懈胁懈褌械 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁懈 蟹邪 屑褟褋褌芯褌芯 薪邪 写胁邪褌邪 锌芯谢邪 胁 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯 懈 褍 写芯屑邪.
袠 写芯 写薪械褋 胁邪卸懈 懈写械褟褌邪, 褔械 屑邪褌械褉懈邪谢薪邪褌邪 薪械蟹邪胁懈褋懈屑芯褋褌 械 邪斜褋芯谢褞褌薪芯 褍褋谢芯胁懈械 蟹邪 胁褗褌褉械褕薪邪褌邪 褋胁芯斜芯写邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪. 孝芯胁邪 械 械写薪芯 芯褌 锌芯褋谢邪薪懈褟褌邪 懈 薪邪 泻薪懈谐邪褌邪, 懈 屑芯械 褍斜械卸写械薪懈械 褋谢械写 写褗谢谐邪 懈 屑褗褔懈褌械谢薪邪 谢懈褔薪邪 械胁芯谢褞褑懈褟 - 褔械 械写薪邪 卸械薪邪 褌褉褟斜胁邪 褋邪屑邪 写邪 屑芯卸械 写邪 褋懈 芯褋懈谐褍褉懈 锌褉懈谢懈褔械薪 褋褌邪薪写邪褉褌 薪邪 卸懈胁芯褌. 小邪屑芯 褌芯谐邪胁邪 屑芯卸械 写邪 胁谢懈蟹邪 褋胁芯斜芯写薪芯 懈 斜械蟹泻芯褉懈褋褌薪芯 胁褗胁 胁褉褗蟹泻懈, 泻邪泻褌芯 懈 褋褗褖芯 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 褋胁芯斜芯写薪芯 写邪 褋懈 褌褉褗谐胁邪 芯褌 褌褟褏, 泻芯谐邪褌芯 薪械 褟 褍写芯胁谢械褌胁芯褉褟胁邪褌.
袣邪褌芯 褋褌邪薪邪 写褍屑邪 蟹邪 胁褉褗蟹泻懈 懈 斜褉邪泻, 懈 写薪械褋 薪械褖邪褌邪 褋褌芯褟褌 褌邪泻邪, 褔械 写芯褉懈 懈 屑薪芯谐芯 褍褋锌械褕薪懈 卸械薪懈 薪械 褋械 褋褔懈褌邪褌 蟹邪 褌邪泻懈胁邪 (薪懈褌芯 芯褌 褋械斜械 褋懈, 薪懈褌芯 芯褌 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯), 邪泻芯 薪械 褋邪 芯屑褗卸械薪懈 懈 薪褟屑邪褌 写械褑邪. 袧邪谢懈褔懈械褌芯 薪邪 锌邪褉褌薪褜芯褉 懈 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 斜褉邪泻褗褌 写邪胁邪褌 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑邪褌邪 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪邪 谢械谐懈褌懈屑邪褑懈褟, 褋邪屑 锌芯 褋械斜械 褋懈 褌芯泄 械 胁懈写 褋芯褑懈邪谢械薪 褍褋锌械褏, 芯褋芯斜械薪芯 邪泻芯 械 锌褉懈写褉褍卸械薪 懈 褋 屑邪褌械褉懈邪谢薪懈 芯斜谢邪谐懈. 袛懈谢械屑邪褌邪 泻邪褉懈械褉邪-褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯 薪懈泻芯谐邪 薪械 械 斜懈谢邪 锌芯-邪泻褌褍邪谢薪邪 懈, 泻邪泻褌芯 褉邪蟹褋褗卸写胁邪 袘芯胁芯邪褉, 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 泄 械 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑邪 屑薪芯谐芯 薪褉邪胁褋褌胁械薪邪 褋懈谢邪, 蟹邪 写邪 懈蟹斜械谐薪械 泻邪锌邪薪邪 薪邪 鈥溠傃€芯褎械泄薪邪褌邪 褋褗锌褉褍谐邪鈥�, 鈥溞囱娧€卸邪薪泻邪褌邪鈥�, 卸懈胁芯褌褗褌 胁 褋谢邪写泻芯 斜械蟹写械谢懈械.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 芯褌写械谢褟 懈 褋锌械褑懈邪谢薪芯 屑褟褋褌芯 薪邪 写芯屑邪泻懈薪褋泻邪褌邪 褉邪斜芯褌邪, 褍褔邪褋褌, 褌褉褍写薪邪 蟹邪 懈蟹斜褟谐胁邪薪械, 薪械蟹邪胁懈褋懈屑芯 泻芯谢泻芯 蟹邪械褌邪 械 卸械薪邪褌邪 胁 锌褉芯褎械褋懈褟褌邪 褋懈. 袛芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 写薪械褋 褋械 薪邪斜谢褞写邪胁邪 芯斜褉邪褌薪懈褟 褎械薪芯屑械薪 芯斜邪褔械 鈥� 褍屑芯褉邪 芯褌 芯褎懈褋薪懈褟 褌褉褍写 懈 泻芯褉锌芯褉邪褌懈胁薪芯 锌褉械谐邪褉褟薪械, 屑薪芯谐芯 卸械薪懈 (锌褉械)芯褌泻褉懈胁邪褌 褉邪写芯褋褌褌邪 芯褌 写芯屑邪褕薪懈褌械 蟹邪薪懈屑邪薪懈褟, 泻芯懈褌芯 写邪卸械 褋邪 薪邪 屑芯写邪.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 械 褏邪锌谢懈胁邪, 写褍褏芯胁懈褌邪, 锌褉褟屑邪, 褉褟蟹泻邪, 薪械 褋锌械褋褌褟胁邪 薪械锌褉懈褟褌薪懈 蟹邪 锌褉械谐谢褗褖邪薪械 懈褋褌懈薪懈. 袧芯 褌褟 械 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 械泻蟹懈褋褌械薪褑懈邪谢懈褋褌泻邪. 袙 褌邪蟹懈 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎懈褟 懈写械褟褌邪 蟹邪 邪胁褌械薪褌懈褔薪芯褋褌, 懈褋褌懈薪薪芯褋褌 懈 褋胁芯斜芯写邪 褋邪 胁褗褉褏芯胁薪懈褟褌 褔芯胁械褕泻懈 锌褉芯械泻褌. 袝泻蟹懈褋褌械薪褑懈邪谢懈蟹屑褗褌 械 锌褉芯褋屑褍泻邪薪 胁 褌褗泻邪薪褌邪 薪邪 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥�, 薪芯 褌芯泄 薪械 褋邪屑芯 褔械 薪械 锌褉械褔懈, 邪 写芯褉懈 械 胁 褋褗蟹胁褍褔懈械 褋 褌械屑邪褌邪 蟹邪 卸械薪褋泻邪褌邪 褋胁芯斜芯写邪, 泻邪褌芯 褔邪褋褌 芯褌 褋胁芯斜芯写邪褌邪 薪邪 懈薪写懈胁懈写邪 胁褗芯斜褖械.
袙褋械泻懈, 泻芯泄褌芯 锌褉芯褔械褌械 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥�, 褖械 褉邪蟹斜械褉械 蟹邪褖芯 械 锌褉械写懈蟹胁懈泻邪谢邪 褌邪泻懈胁邪 褉械邪泻褑懈懈 懈 械 胁写褗褏薪芯胁懈谢邪 屑薪芯谐芯斜褉芯泄薪懈 褎械屑懈薪懈褋褌泻懈 写胁懈卸械薪懈褟. 袠蟹胁褗薪 泻褉械褋谢懈胁懈褟 褎械屑懈薪懈蟹褗屑, 锌芯锌泻褍谢褌褍褉薪懈褟 锌褉懈蟹懈胁 鈥溞逞娧€谢 锌邪褍褗褉鈥� 懈 鈥渕e too鈥� 写胁懈卸械薪懈械褌芯, 褌褉褍写褗褌 薪邪 小懈屑芯薪 写褜芯 袘芯胁芯邪褉 薪械 褋械 懈蟹褔械褉锌胁邪 褋 薪懈褌芯 械写薪芯 芯褌 褌械蟹懈 褌械褔械薪懈褟, 薪械 屑芯卸械 写邪 褋械 芯锌褉芯褋褌懈 懈 褋胁械写械 写芯 械写薪芯-械写懈薪褋褌胁械薪芯 锌芯褋谢邪薪懈械. 袧懈褌芯 锌褗泻 懈屑邪 芯斜褖芯 褋 锌褋械胁写芯泻薪懈卸泻懈褌械 蟹邪 鈥溠傂靶剐叫秆傂� 薪邪 卸械薪褋泻邪褌邪 褋懈谢邪鈥�, 鈥溞盒靶� 写邪 芯褌泻褉懈械屑 卸械薪邪褌邪 胁 褋械斜械 褋懈鈥�, 鈥溞盒靶� 写邪 谐芯 薪邪锌褉邪胁懈褕 褌胁芯泄鈥�. 孝芯胁邪 械 屑芯薪褍屑械薪褌邪谢薪芯 锌褉芯懈蟹胁械写械薪懈械, 芯斜蟹芯褉薪芯, 懈蟹褔械褉锌邪褌械谢薪芯, 褋械褉懈芯蟹薪芯, 蟹邪写褗谢斜芯褔械薪芯, 懈褉芯薪懈褔薪芯 懈 写褍褏芯胁懈褌芯. 袟邪 褉邪蟹谢懈泻邪 芯褌 屑薪芯谐芯 褋褗胁褉械屑械薪薪懈 屑芯写械褉薪懈 泻薪懈谐懈 蟹邪 褎械屑懈薪懈蟹屑邪, 胁 泻芯懈褌芯 邪胁褌芯褉泻懈褌械 褋械 褋褗褉写褟褌 薪邪 褋胁械褌邪, 屑褉邪蟹褟褌 屑褗卸械褌械, 褌褗褉褋褟褌 褋懈 胁懈薪芯胁薪懈, 袘芯胁芯邪褉 泻芯薪褋褌邪褌懈褉邪, 芯斜褟褋薪褟胁邪, 锌褉邪胁懈 锌邪褉邪谢械谢懈, 锌褉械锌褉邪褖邪 泻褗屑 屑懈褌芯胁械, 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎褋泻懈 褌褉邪泻褌邪褌懈, 薪邪褍褔薪懈 锌芯褋褌褍谢邪褌懈, 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻懈 褎邪泻褌懈, 锌褋懈褏芯谢芯谐懈褔械褋泻懈 懈蟹褋谢械写胁邪薪懈褟. 袛芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 懈屑邪 械褋械懈蟹褗屑, 褌芯泄 薪械 械 锌褉芯懈蟹胁芯谢薪邪 懈蟹屑懈褋谢懈褑邪, 邪 锌谢芯写 薪邪 褉邪蟹褋褗卸写械薪懈褟褌邪 薪邪 泻褉邪褋懈胁 (卸械薪褋泻懈) 褍屑.
袞懈胁械械屑 胁 褍褋谢芯胁懈褟褌邪 薪邪 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 屑薪芯谐芯 泻褉懈蟹懈 械写薪芯胁褉械屑械薪薪芯 鈥� 蟹写褉邪胁薪邪, 泻谢懈屑邪褌懈褔薪邪, 懈泻芯薪芯屑懈褔械褋泻邪, 褔械 懈蟹谐谢械卸写邪 褋褟泻邪褕 褌械屑邪褌邪 蟹邪 锌芯谢芯胁芯褌芯 褉邪胁薪芯锌褉邪胁懈械 薪械 械 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 薪邪 写薪械胁械薪 褉械写. 袗 懈 薪褟屑邪 泻邪泻胁芯 写邪 褋械 谢褗卸械屑, 卸械薪懈褌械 写薪械褋 褉邪蟹锌芯谢邪谐邪屑械 褋 斜械蟹锌褉械褑械写械薪褌薪芯 屑薪芯谐芯 褋胁芯斜芯写邪, 锌褉邪胁芯 薪邪 懈蟹斜芯褉 懈 胁褗蟹屑芯卸薪芯褋褌懈. 袦芯卸械屑 写邪 锌褗褌褍胁邪屑械 写芯 写褉褍谐懈褟 泻褉邪泄 薪邪 褋胁械褌邪 褋邪屑懈, 写邪 芯褌谢芯卸懈屑 屑芯屑械薪褌邪, 胁 泻芯泄褌芯 写邪 褋褌邪薪械屑 屑邪泄泻懈 懈谢懈 胁褗芯斜褖械 写邪 薪械 褋褌邪薪械屑, 写邪 卸懈胁械械屑 褋 锌邪褉褌薪褜芯褉 锌褉械写懈 写邪 褋泻谢褞褔懈屑 斜褉邪泻 懈谢懈 胁褗芯斜褖械 写邪 薪械 褋泻谢褞褔懈屑, 写邪 褍褔懈屑 胁 薪邪泄-褉械薪芯屑懈褉邪薪懈褌械 褍薪懈胁械褉褋懈褌械褌懈, 写邪 蟹邪械屑邪屑械 锌褉械褋褌懈卸薪懈 写谢褗卸薪芯褋褌懈, 写邪 懈屑邪屑械 褋胁芯斜芯写邪褌邪, 褋褌邪褌褍褋邪, 锌邪褉懈褌械, 褋 泻芯懈褌芯 写芯褉懈 锌褉械写薪芯褌芯 锌芯泻芯谢械薪懈械 卸械薪懈 薪械 褋邪 褉邪蟹锌芯谢邪谐邪谢懈.
袧芯 薪械褖邪褌邪, 泻芯懈褌芯 写薪械褋 锌褉懈械屑邪屑械 蟹邪 写邪写械薪芯褋褌, 褋邪 懈蟹胁芯褞胁邪薪懈 褋 褌械卸泻懈 斜懈褌泻懈, 褍锌芯褉懈褌懈 锌褉芯褌械褋褌懈, 锌芯褏芯写懈 泻褗屑 锌邪褉谢邪屑械薪褌懈, 屑芯谢斜懈, 锌械褌懈褑懈懈, 写芯褉懈 蟹邪褌胁芯褉. 袙褋械芯斜褖芯褌芯 懈蟹斜懈褉邪褌械谢薪芯 锌褉邪胁芯, 褉邪胁薪懈褟褌 写芯褋褌褗锌 写芯 芯斜褉邪蟹芯胁邪薪懈械 懈 泻邪褉懈械褉邪 褋邪 写芯褋褌邪 薪芯胁懈褔泻懈 写芯褋褌懈卸械薪懈褟. 袧邪褕懈褌械 锌褉邪锌芯褋械褋褌褉懈屑懈 褋邪 卸懈胁械谢懈 锌芯写 薪械褍屑芯谢懈屑邪 斜邪褖懈薪褋泻邪, 邪 锌芯褋谢械 懈 褋褗锌褉褍卸械褋泻邪 胁谢邪褋褌, 薪械 褋邪 屑芯谐谢懈 写邪 薪邪褋谢械写褟胁褟褌, 写邪 懈屑邪褌, 泻邪泻褌芯 泻邪蟹胁邪屑械 写薪械褋, 褋芯斜褋褌胁械薪 鈥溞垦€芯械泻褌鈥�, 薪邪褔懈薪邪薪懈械, 写邪 薪械 谐芯胁芯褉懈屑 蟹邪 锌褉芯褎械褋懈褟. 袛芯褉懈 卸械薪懈褌械 芯褌 锌褉懈胁懈谢械谐懈褉芯胁薪懈褌械 泻谢邪褋懈 褋邪 卸懈胁械械谢懈 胁 褋泻褍泻邪 懈 斜械蟹写械谢懈械, 斜械蟹 写邪 屑芯谐邪褌 写邪 懈蟹褋谢械写胁邪褌 褋屑械谢芯 褋胁械褌邪, 写邪 褉邪蟹褕懈褉褟褌 谢懈褔薪懈褌械 褋懈 懈 褎懈蟹懈褔械褋泻懈 谐褉邪薪懈褑懈, 写邪 褌胁芯褉褟褌 褋褗写斜邪褌邪 褋懈. 袩褉械蟹 锌芯-谐芯谢褟屑邪褌邪 褔邪褋褌 芯褌 褔芯胁械褕泻邪褌邪 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟 卸械薪懈褌械 薪邪 锌褉邪泻褌懈泻邪 褋邪 斜懈谢懈 薪械写械械褋锌芯褋芯斜薪懈. 袪邪蟹胁芯写褗褌 懈谢懈 懈蟹胁褗薪斜褉邪褔薪芯褌芯 写械褌械 蟹邪 屑薪芯谐芯 芯褌 褌褟褏 械 芯蟹薪邪褔邪胁邪谢 泻褉邪褟褌 薪邪 褋胁械褌邪.
鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 褉邪蟹谐谢械卸写邪 锌芯写褉芯斜薪芯 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻懈褌械 械褌邪锌懈, 锌褉械蟹 泻芯懈褌芯 械 锌褉械屑懈薪邪谢邪 械胁芯谢褞褑懈褟褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪, 褋褏胁邪褖邪薪邪 泻邪褌芯 锌芯谢芯卸械薪懈械 胁 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯, 褌邪泻邪 懈 胁 薪械泄薪邪褌邪 褋褌邪褌懈褔薪芯褋褌 鈥� 芯褋芯斜械薪芯褋褌懈褌械 薪邪 薪械泄薪邪褌邪 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褟, 褔械褋褌芯 懈屑邪褖懈 褌褉邪胁屑邪褌懈褔薪芯 懈蟹褉邪卸械薪懈械. 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 械 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎褋泻懈 褌褉邪泻褌邪褌, 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻芯 懈蟹褋谢械写胁邪薪械, 械褋械, 写褗谢褗谐 褉邪蟹泻邪蟹, 芯锌懈褋邪薪懈械 薪邪 锌芯谢芯卸械薪懈械褌芯 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 褌邪泻芯胁邪, 泻邪泻胁芯褌芯 械 芯褌 薪械蟹邪锌芯屑薪械薪懈 胁褉械屑械薪邪 写芯 褋褗胁褉械屑械薪薪芯褋褌褌邪 鈥� 锌芯谢芯卸械薪懈械 褎邪泻褌懈褔械褋泻芯, 褞褉懈写懈褔械褋泻芯, 懈泻芯薪芯屑懈褔械褋泻芯, 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪芯.
袚芯写懈薪邪褌邪 薪邪 懈蟹写邪胁邪薪械 鈥� 1949 谐., 薪械 斜懈胁邪 写邪 芯褌斜谢褗褋泻胁邪 写薪械褕薪懈褟 褔懈褌邪褌械谢, 泻芯泄褌芯 褌褗褉褋懈 薪械褖芯 锌芯-锌芯蟹薪邪褌芯 懈 褋褗胁褉械屑械薪薪芯. 袞懈胁芯褌褗褌, 泻芯泄褌芯 写薪械褋 卸械薪懈褌械 卸懈胁械械屑, 械 褋泻芯褉芯褕薪芯 写芯褋褌芯褟薪懈械, 邪 谐芯 卸懈胁械械屑 褌邪泻邪, 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 褑械谢懈 锌芯泻芯谢械薪懈褟 卸械薪懈 懈 屑褗卸械 褋邪 胁芯写懈谢懈 薪械褉邪胁薪邪 斜芯褉斜邪 褋 芯褋褌邪褉械谢懈 薪褉邪胁懈, 锌褉械写褉邪蟹褋褗写褗褑懈 懈 写芯褉懈 褋 邪薪褌懈褏褍屑邪薪薪懈 锌芯褋褌褍谢邪褌懈. 袗 懈 写芯褋褌邪 写懈谢械屑懈 薪邪 卸械薪懈褌械 芯褌 2020 谐芯写懈薪邪 锌褉芯写褗谢卸邪胁邪褌 薪械 谐褍斜褟褌 邪泻褌褍邪谢薪芯褋褌 鈥� 泻邪褉懈械褉邪 懈谢懈 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯, 斜褉邪泻 懈谢懈 斜械蟹斜褉邪褔懈械, 屑邪泄褔懈薪褋褌胁芯 懈谢懈 薪械. 孝芯胁邪, 褔械 懈屑邪屑械 懈蟹斜芯褉邪 屑械卸写褍 械写薪芯褌芯 懈 写褉褍谐芯褌芯, 薪械 芯褌屑械薪褟 胁褗褌褉械褕薪邪褌邪 写褉邪屑邪.
袝写薪芯 胁邪卸薪芯 褍褌芯褔薪械薪械, 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 薪械 械 鈥溞靶窖傂�-屑褗卸泻邪鈥� 泻薪懈谐邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 懈写械懈 蟹邪 卸械薪褋泻芯 谐芯褋锌芯写褋褌胁芯, 蟹邪 锌褉械胁褗蟹褏芯写褋褌胁芯褌芯 薪邪 械写懈薪懈褟 锌芯谢 薪邪写 写褉褍谐懈褟. 袘芯胁芯邪褉 薪械 锌褉芯锌芯胁褟写胁邪 褟褉芯褋褌械薪 褎械屑懈薪懈蟹褗屑, 邪 锌褉械写谢邪谐邪 械写懈薪 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋械薪 褉邪蟹泻邪蟹 蟹邪 褌芯胁邪 泻邪泻 卸械薪邪褌邪 斜懈胁邪 褋褏胁邪褖邪薪邪 芯褌 谐谢械写薪邪 褌芯褔泻邪 薪邪 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褟褌邪, 锌褋懈褏芯谢芯谐懈褟褌邪, 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯; 薪械泄薪芯褌芯 褌褟谢芯 懈 写褍褕邪 锌褉械蟹 胁褋懈褔泻懈 褎邪蟹懈 芯褌 写械褌褋褌胁芯褌芯, 锌褉械蟹 锌褍斜械褉褌械褌邪, 蟹褉械谢芯褋褌褌邪, 屑械薪芯锌邪褍蟹邪褌邪 懈 褋褌邪褉芯褋褌褌邪. 袪邪蟹谐谢械写邪薪懈 褋邪 胁褗锌褉芯褋懈褌械 蟹邪 锌芯谢芯胁懈褟 卸懈胁芯褌, 屑邪泄褔懈薪褋褌胁芯褌芯, 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 胁 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯褌芯, 褏芯屑芯褋械泻褋褍邪谢薪芯褋褌褌邪, 泻芯薪褌褉邪褑械锌褑懈褟褌邪 懈 邪斜芯褉褌邪.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 锌褉械写谢邪谐邪 械写懈薪 褔懈褋褌芯 薪芯胁 (蟹邪 芯薪芯胁邪 胁褉械屑械) 锌芯谐谢械写 泻褗屑 卸械薪邪褌邪 鈥� 褋褏胁邪褖邪薪邪 薪械 泻邪褌芯, 懈谢懈 薪械 褋邪屑芯 泻邪褌芯, 锌芯谢 胁 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褔薪懈褟 褋屑懈褋褗谢 薪邪 写褍屑邪褌邪, 邪 懈 泻邪褌芯 褋芯褑懈邪谢械薪 泻芯薪褋褌褉褍泻褌. 袠 褔械 写芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 卸械薪邪褌邪 械 褌邪泻邪胁邪 懈谢懈 芯薪邪泻邪胁邪, 写芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 泄 谢懈锌褋胁邪 械写薪芯 懈谢懈 写褉褍谐芯, 懈谢懈 懈蟹谢懈褕褗泻 薪邪 褌褉械褌芯, 褌芯 械 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 薪械 斜懈芯谢芯谐懈褟褌邪 泄 谐芯 芯斜褍褋谢邪胁褟, 邪 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪懈褌械 褍褋谢芯胁懈褟, 褋褉械写邪褌邪, 薪褉邪胁懈褌械 懈 褍褋褌褉芯泄褋褌胁芯褌芯 薪邪 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯 芯锌褉械写械谢褟褌 薪械泄薪芯褌芯 锌芯胁械写械薪懈械 懈 褋褗写斜邪. 袝写薪芯 芯褌 锌芯褋褌懈卸械薪懈褟褌邪 薪邪 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥� 械, 褔械 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁褟 褌芯褔薪芯 褌邪蟹懈 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋薪芯褋褌 懈 写胁芯泄薪褋褌胁械薪芯褋褌 胁 锌褉懈褉芯写邪褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 蟹邪写邪胁邪 褌芯薪邪 薪邪 褑械谢懈褟 泄 卸懈胁芯褌 懈 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 泄 褋 芯泻芯谢薪懈褌械.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 锌褉芯褋谢械写褟胁邪 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 锌褉械蟹 锌褉懈蟹屑邪褌邪 薪邪 褎褉械薪褋泻懈褟 芯锌懈褌, 薪械 褋邪屑芯 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 薪械谐芯 褌褟 锌芯蟹薪邪胁邪 薪邪泄-写芯斜褉械, 薪芯 懈 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 械 褋褏芯写械薪 薪邪 褌芯蟹懈 胁 写褉褍谐懈 蟹邪锌邪写薪懈 褋褌褉邪薪懈. 袠薪褌械褉械褋薪芯褌芯 械, 褔械 胁 袝胁褉芯锌邪 斜芯褉斜邪褌邪 蟹邪 褉邪胁薪芯锌褉邪胁懈械 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 械 斜懈谢邪 锌芯褋褌邪胁械薪邪 胁 泻芯薪褌械泻褋褌邪 薪邪 斜芯褉斜邪褌邪 薪邪 褉邪斜芯褌薪懈褔械褋泻邪褌邪 泻谢邪褋邪, 邪 胁 小袗些 褋械 械 锌褉械锌谢懈褌邪谢邪 褋 泻邪屑锌邪薪懈懈褌械 蟹邪 谐褉邪卸写邪薪褋泻懈 锌褉邪胁邪 薪邪 褔械褉薪芯泻芯卸懈褌械. 袧邪泻褉邪褌泻芯, 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟褌邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 械 锌褉械写懈 胁褋懈褔泻芯 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟 薪邪 蟹邪斜褉邪薪懈 懈 芯谐褉邪薪懈褔械薪懈褟, 褞褉懈写懈褔械褋泻懈 懈 褎邪泻褌懈褔械褋泻懈, 褟胁薪懈 懈 褋泻褉懈褌懈. 袨褋胁芯斜芯卸写邪胁邪薪械褌芯 泄 械 褋胁褗褉蟹邪薪芯 薪械 褋邪屑芯 褋 胁褗薪褕薪懈 锌褉芯屑械薪懈 (锌褉芯屑械薪懈 胁 蟹邪泻芯薪芯写邪褌械谢褋褌胁邪褌邪), 邪 懈 锌褉芯屑褟薪邪 胁 薪褉邪胁懈褌械 懈 胁 褍褋褌芯泄褔懈胁懈褌械 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁懈 蟹邪 屑褟褋褌芯褌芯 薪邪 写胁邪褌邪 锌芯谢邪 胁 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯 懈 褍 写芯屑邪.
袠 写芯 写薪械褋 胁邪卸懈 懈写械褟褌邪, 褔械 屑邪褌械褉懈邪谢薪邪褌邪 薪械蟹邪胁懈褋懈屑芯褋褌 械 邪斜褋芯谢褞褌薪芯 褍褋谢芯胁懈械 蟹邪 胁褗褌褉械褕薪邪褌邪 褋胁芯斜芯写邪 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪. 孝芯胁邪 械 械写薪芯 芯褌 锌芯褋谢邪薪懈褟褌邪 懈 薪邪 泻薪懈谐邪褌邪, 懈 屑芯械 褍斜械卸写械薪懈械 褋谢械写 写褗谢谐邪 懈 屑褗褔懈褌械谢薪邪 谢懈褔薪邪 械胁芯谢褞褑懈褟 - 褔械 械写薪邪 卸械薪邪 褌褉褟斜胁邪 褋邪屑邪 写邪 屑芯卸械 写邪 褋懈 芯褋懈谐褍褉懈 锌褉懈谢懈褔械薪 褋褌邪薪写邪褉褌 薪邪 卸懈胁芯褌. 小邪屑芯 褌芯谐邪胁邪 屑芯卸械 写邪 胁谢懈蟹邪 褋胁芯斜芯写薪芯 懈 斜械蟹泻芯褉懈褋褌薪芯 胁褗胁 胁褉褗蟹泻懈, 泻邪泻褌芯 懈 褋褗褖芯 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 褋胁芯斜芯写薪芯 写邪 褋懈 褌褉褗谐胁邪 芯褌 褌褟褏, 泻芯谐邪褌芯 薪械 褟 褍写芯胁谢械褌胁芯褉褟胁邪褌.
袣邪褌芯 褋褌邪薪邪 写褍屑邪 蟹邪 胁褉褗蟹泻懈 懈 斜褉邪泻, 懈 写薪械褋 薪械褖邪褌邪 褋褌芯褟褌 褌邪泻邪, 褔械 写芯褉懈 懈 屑薪芯谐芯 褍褋锌械褕薪懈 卸械薪懈 薪械 褋械 褋褔懈褌邪褌 蟹邪 褌邪泻懈胁邪 (薪懈褌芯 芯褌 褋械斜械 褋懈, 薪懈褌芯 芯褌 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯), 邪泻芯 薪械 褋邪 芯屑褗卸械薪懈 懈 薪褟屑邪褌 写械褑邪. 袧邪谢懈褔懈械褌芯 薪邪 锌邪褉褌薪褜芯褉 懈 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 斜褉邪泻褗褌 写邪胁邪褌 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑邪褌邪 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪邪 谢械谐懈褌懈屑邪褑懈褟, 褋邪屑 锌芯 褋械斜械 褋懈 褌芯泄 械 胁懈写 褋芯褑懈邪谢械薪 褍褋锌械褏, 芯褋芯斜械薪芯 邪泻芯 械 锌褉懈写褉褍卸械薪 懈 褋 屑邪褌械褉懈邪谢薪懈 芯斜谢邪谐懈. 袛懈谢械屑邪褌邪 泻邪褉懈械褉邪-褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯 薪懈泻芯谐邪 薪械 械 斜懈谢邪 锌芯-邪泻褌褍邪谢薪邪 懈, 泻邪泻褌芯 褉邪蟹褋褗卸写胁邪 袘芯胁芯邪褉, 薪邪 卸械薪邪褌邪 泄 械 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑邪 屑薪芯谐芯 薪褉邪胁褋褌胁械薪邪 褋懈谢邪, 蟹邪 写邪 懈蟹斜械谐薪械 泻邪锌邪薪邪 薪邪 鈥溠傃€芯褎械泄薪邪褌邪 褋褗锌褉褍谐邪鈥�, 鈥溞囱娧€卸邪薪泻邪褌邪鈥�, 卸懈胁芯褌褗褌 胁 褋谢邪写泻芯 斜械蟹写械谢懈械.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 芯褌写械谢褟 懈 褋锌械褑懈邪谢薪芯 屑褟褋褌芯 薪邪 写芯屑邪泻懈薪褋泻邪褌邪 褉邪斜芯褌邪, 褍褔邪褋褌, 褌褉褍写薪邪 蟹邪 懈蟹斜褟谐胁邪薪械, 薪械蟹邪胁懈褋懈屑芯 泻芯谢泻芯 蟹邪械褌邪 械 卸械薪邪褌邪 胁 锌褉芯褎械褋懈褟褌邪 褋懈. 袛芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 写薪械褋 褋械 薪邪斜谢褞写邪胁邪 芯斜褉邪褌薪懈褟 褎械薪芯屑械薪 芯斜邪褔械 鈥� 褍屑芯褉邪 芯褌 芯褎懈褋薪懈褟 褌褉褍写 懈 泻芯褉锌芯褉邪褌懈胁薪芯 锌褉械谐邪褉褟薪械, 屑薪芯谐芯 卸械薪懈 (锌褉械)芯褌泻褉懈胁邪褌 褉邪写芯褋褌褌邪 芯褌 写芯屑邪褕薪懈褌械 蟹邪薪懈屑邪薪懈褟, 泻芯懈褌芯 写邪卸械 褋邪 薪邪 屑芯写邪.
袘芯胁芯邪褉 械 褏邪锌谢懈胁邪, 写褍褏芯胁懈褌邪, 锌褉褟屑邪, 褉褟蟹泻邪, 薪械 褋锌械褋褌褟胁邪 薪械锌褉懈褟褌薪懈 蟹邪 锌褉械谐谢褗褖邪薪械 懈褋褌懈薪懈. 袧芯 褌褟 械 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 械泻蟹懈褋褌械薪褑懈邪谢懈褋褌泻邪. 袙 褌邪蟹懈 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎懈褟 懈写械褟褌邪 蟹邪 邪胁褌械薪褌懈褔薪芯褋褌, 懈褋褌懈薪薪芯褋褌 懈 褋胁芯斜芯写邪 褋邪 胁褗褉褏芯胁薪懈褟褌 褔芯胁械褕泻懈 锌褉芯械泻褌. 袝泻蟹懈褋褌械薪褑懈邪谢懈蟹屑褗褌 械 锌褉芯褋屑褍泻邪薪 胁 褌褗泻邪薪褌邪 薪邪 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥�, 薪芯 褌芯泄 薪械 褋邪屑芯 褔械 薪械 锌褉械褔懈, 邪 写芯褉懈 械 胁 褋褗蟹胁褍褔懈械 褋 褌械屑邪褌邪 蟹邪 卸械薪褋泻邪褌邪 褋胁芯斜芯写邪, 泻邪褌芯 褔邪褋褌 芯褌 褋胁芯斜芯写邪褌邪 薪邪 懈薪写懈胁懈写邪 胁褗芯斜褖械.
袙褋械泻懈, 泻芯泄褌芯 锌褉芯褔械褌械 鈥溞捬傂狙€懈褟褌 锌芯谢鈥�, 褖械 褉邪蟹斜械褉械 蟹邪褖芯 械 锌褉械写懈蟹胁懈泻邪谢邪 褌邪泻懈胁邪 褉械邪泻褑懈懈 懈 械 胁写褗褏薪芯胁懈谢邪 屑薪芯谐芯斜褉芯泄薪懈 褎械屑懈薪懈褋褌泻懈 写胁懈卸械薪懈褟. 袠蟹胁褗薪 泻褉械褋谢懈胁懈褟 褎械屑懈薪懈蟹褗屑, 锌芯锌泻褍谢褌褍褉薪懈褟 锌褉懈蟹懈胁 鈥溞逞娧€谢 锌邪褍褗褉鈥� 懈 鈥渕e too鈥� 写胁懈卸械薪懈械褌芯, 褌褉褍写褗褌 薪邪 小懈屑芯薪 写褜芯 袘芯胁芯邪褉 薪械 褋械 懈蟹褔械褉锌胁邪 褋 薪懈褌芯 械写薪芯 芯褌 褌械蟹懈 褌械褔械薪懈褟, 薪械 屑芯卸械 写邪 褋械 芯锌褉芯褋褌懈 懈 褋胁械写械 写芯 械写薪芯-械写懈薪褋褌胁械薪芯 锌芯褋谢邪薪懈械. 袧懈褌芯 锌褗泻 懈屑邪 芯斜褖芯 褋 锌褋械胁写芯泻薪懈卸泻懈褌械 蟹邪 鈥溠傂靶剐叫秆傂� 薪邪 卸械薪褋泻邪褌邪 褋懈谢邪鈥�, 鈥溞盒靶� 写邪 芯褌泻褉懈械屑 卸械薪邪褌邪 胁 褋械斜械 褋懈鈥�, 鈥溞盒靶� 写邪 谐芯 薪邪锌褉邪胁懈褕 褌胁芯泄鈥�. 孝芯胁邪 械 屑芯薪褍屑械薪褌邪谢薪芯 锌褉芯懈蟹胁械写械薪懈械, 芯斜蟹芯褉薪芯, 懈蟹褔械褉锌邪褌械谢薪芯, 褋械褉懈芯蟹薪芯, 蟹邪写褗谢斜芯褔械薪芯, 懈褉芯薪懈褔薪芯 懈 写褍褏芯胁懈褌芯. 袟邪 褉邪蟹谢懈泻邪 芯褌 屑薪芯谐芯 褋褗胁褉械屑械薪薪懈 屑芯写械褉薪懈 泻薪懈谐懈 蟹邪 褎械屑懈薪懈蟹屑邪, 胁 泻芯懈褌芯 邪胁褌芯褉泻懈褌械 褋械 褋褗褉写褟褌 薪邪 褋胁械褌邪, 屑褉邪蟹褟褌 屑褗卸械褌械, 褌褗褉褋褟褌 褋懈 胁懈薪芯胁薪懈, 袘芯胁芯邪褉 泻芯薪褋褌邪褌懈褉邪, 芯斜褟褋薪褟胁邪, 锌褉邪胁懈 锌邪褉邪谢械谢懈, 锌褉械锌褉邪褖邪 泻褗屑 屑懈褌芯胁械, 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎褋泻懈 褌褉邪泻褌邪褌懈, 薪邪褍褔薪懈 锌芯褋褌褍谢邪褌懈, 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻懈 褎邪泻褌懈, 锌褋懈褏芯谢芯谐懈褔械褋泻懈 懈蟹褋谢械写胁邪薪懈褟. 袛芯泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 懈屑邪 械褋械懈蟹褗屑, 褌芯泄 薪械 械 锌褉芯懈蟹胁芯谢薪邪 懈蟹屑懈褋谢懈褑邪, 邪 锌谢芯写 薪邪 褉邪蟹褋褗卸写械薪懈褟褌邪 薪邪 泻褉邪褋懈胁 (卸械薪褋泻懈) 褍屑.
Read
October 19, 2023Personally, I believe that de Beauvoir has never felt the effect of injustices or gender inequalities.
I think, rather, that it all started when she realized that people considered her inferior to Sartre, her lover - just because she was a woman. I think she was surprised to see that her existence was reduced to an essential fact : " I'm a woman ".
" The Second Sex" - is not only a book about the role of women in history and society, but also about " otherness " - as an archetype and philosophical category, often replaced by the concept of " the other ". These philosophical foundations make the book go beyond the status of a feminist manifesto, becoming a fascinating read.
The book is an attempt to answer the question " what woman is ? " - as an archetype as opossed to woman as individuality. The notion of " otherness " , says de Beauvoir, can be applied to any group in society that is not considered a main group.
Men do not feel the need to justify themselves objectively, but they feel superior because they are not women. )) The result is the clich茅 that a woman has to do twice as many things, in order to be considered equal to a man.
De Beauvoir expresses her astonishment that although men say that women are equal to them, their attitude says the opposite.
What would de Beauvoir say, however, nowadays ? In rich and free countries, many women might think that " The Second Sex " is an outdated study, that equality is for real. A lot of de Beauvoir statements can be contradicted by science, but the truth is that we are not completely undifferentiated in terms of gender, but we are born with a series of behavioral tendencies, whether we are men or women. The conditioning is real, no doubt, but it is not necessarily defining, and we cannot understand the limitations of which women are considered " guilty " , without understanding the biological differences too. The more we know about our bodies and brains, the less ground biology will gain in defining our destiny as human being.
In my humble opinion, the woman is the dream within which all other dreams are contained. Her positive and defining characteristic would be that she always inspired the man to overcome his own limits.
And that is a great thing.
I think, rather, that it all started when she realized that people considered her inferior to Sartre, her lover - just because she was a woman. I think she was surprised to see that her existence was reduced to an essential fact : " I'm a woman ".
" The Second Sex" - is not only a book about the role of women in history and society, but also about " otherness " - as an archetype and philosophical category, often replaced by the concept of " the other ". These philosophical foundations make the book go beyond the status of a feminist manifesto, becoming a fascinating read.
The book is an attempt to answer the question " what woman is ? " - as an archetype as opossed to woman as individuality. The notion of " otherness " , says de Beauvoir, can be applied to any group in society that is not considered a main group.
Men do not feel the need to justify themselves objectively, but they feel superior because they are not women. )) The result is the clich茅 that a woman has to do twice as many things, in order to be considered equal to a man.
De Beauvoir expresses her astonishment that although men say that women are equal to them, their attitude says the opposite.
What would de Beauvoir say, however, nowadays ? In rich and free countries, many women might think that " The Second Sex " is an outdated study, that equality is for real. A lot of de Beauvoir statements can be contradicted by science, but the truth is that we are not completely undifferentiated in terms of gender, but we are born with a series of behavioral tendencies, whether we are men or women. The conditioning is real, no doubt, but it is not necessarily defining, and we cannot understand the limitations of which women are considered " guilty " , without understanding the biological differences too. The more we know about our bodies and brains, the less ground biology will gain in defining our destiny as human being.
In my humble opinion, the woman is the dream within which all other dreams are contained. Her positive and defining characteristic would be that she always inspired the man to overcome his own limits.
And that is a great thing.
January 9, 2021
2020: Hopefully I won't be burnt at the stake for making an unfavourable review about this.
-----2017 Review------
This isn't light reading, and in retrospect, I wouldn't recommend you read it unless your university or lover forces you to do so.
This was a painful and frustrating read for me as reflected in the names I gave it I soldiered through it:
"Being second, sucks"
"Why Kurt Vonnegut hated the semi-colon"
"The most masochistic thing I ever did"
"Comprehensively diabolical"
"Two legs bad, four legs good"
"Acrimonious Marriage Simulator"
"Disempowering pregnancy"
"How Men Disgust Me"
"Having and Eating Your Cake"
This book could be structured as:
Vol.1.Pt.1.: Simone pretends to be an authority on biological psychiatry, psychoanalysis and history.
Vol.1.Pt.2: Simone notes innumerable instances, as if it were not somehow already apparent, that history has always kept woman in a subordinate socioeconomic position within the family.
Vol.1.Pt.3.: Simone uses fiction to support her views on how real women feel in real situations.
Vol.2.Pt.1-3: Simone uses psychiatric case studies and anecdotes to describe the psychological development of girls as they grow up. Best part of the book.
Vol.2.Pt.4: She states that she thinks that a woman's identity should be independent of her relation to man.
In this review I'm going to omit my personal feelings and experiences and try and argue that this book receives more attention than it deserves and is most likely not worth your full attention (you can skim-read it, sure).
a. Genre issues
I believe the book is a polemic. To me this not a work of ethical philosophy, sociocultural theory, psychoanalytic theory or history, because it posed no constructive system of behaviour, no original insight to dystopian or utopian ideals regarding gender, no original explanation of instinctive drives behind behaviours, and no extensively cited or statistically weighted accounts of previous standards of civilization. A strong polemic to me requires a clear goal, structure and discarding of counterarguments, which I think were undeniably absent from Volume One, and anticlimactically emerged at the end of Volume Two.
b. Excessive & Unconstructive Quotations
First, it is no exaggeration that at least a third of the book are direct quotes other books. Even if she wrote the remaining two thirds brilliantly, the majority of it should be based on interpreting the work of others and so this text should be seen as a critique/review/meta-analysis of other feminist works before it. This is the main reason I think this book is highly rated generally: readers appreciate someone bringing citations of works classed as feminist together that they will never have to read so they can sample the best of them and perhaps recognize their names in the future perhaps so as to sound progressive.
Second, school teaches us PQD: make a point, cite evidence perhaps in the form of a quotation, and then develop what this means to the specific question. This book is almost entirely PQPQPQ ad nauseam. Evidence of this comes from the fact that when you ask people to tell you what is exceptional about this book they will blindly repeat "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman". I'd like to tell you that she was the first to insinuate this, or to say that she develops this any further, but I simply can't.
Third, I think her quoted sources provide greater insight and constructive views, I just find that Wollstonecraft's Vindication may be dated but had a clearer goal, Woolf's A Room With A View was more honest and unifying for heterosexuals, and Plath's works have more detailed and realistic representations of heterosexual bitterness and disgust.
c. Playing Teacher
One of the general issues I have with the book is that her haughtiness is more than obnoxious鈥攊t obfuscates deficiencies of evidence. While I surprisingly commend her criticisms of Freud on female psychology (better than some I saw in Horney's work), I think she is being dishonest in trying to make counterarguments in these fields in which she is clearly not specialized. The semi-colons don't come across as logical affirmations, but as passive aggressive backhands. She assumes with the authority of a psychiatrist that the female psychiatric patient anecdotes (which make up most of her evidence) are accurate, and in no way involve misguidedly or disproportionately projecting female suffering onto man. This book demonstrates that citing more sources and adding more pages does not add weight to your argument if you are not using them appropriately, even if you insist this is the case. She rambles for points which add nothing to her argument and weakly dismisses highly relevant counterarguments, such as suicide gender ratios in economically developed countries.
d. Pseudo-separatism
I just don't see how this book can benefit societal relations, when it promotes only resentment, and between socioeconomic/class heterosexual subgroups: careerist women vs. family women, careerist women vs. men, women vs. feminist men. I'm more forgiving and perhaps empathizing of explicitly separatist feminism, because this book seems to be on the fence about what it concretely wants from and to do with men. I'm also a bit disappointed that she seems to try to distance the book from feminist agenda in the introduction, while clearly being 'a greatest hits for first-wave feminism' if there ever was one.
------
No irony intended but I don't think this book was written for me and so my review is probably not all that helpful to those I think it was intended for鈥攈opefully you won't find it as tedious to read as I did.
October 14, 2013
700 pages of magical reality. Beauvoir is one of those handful writers, worth a name. Simone's narrative quality is so much powerful, I've never experienced before. A must read for third world.
I will be revisiting this book very soon.
I will be revisiting this book very soon.
June 28, 2018
丿賵爻鬲 丿丕乇賲 亘诏賵蹖賲, 鬲賲丕賲 夭賳丕賳 賵 賲乇丿丕賳 亘丕蹖丿 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘禺賵丕賳賳丿 丕賲丕, 禺賵丕賳丿賳 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 讴丕乇 丕爻丕賳蹖 賳蹖爻鬲. 噩賳爻 丿賵賲 乇丕 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿 禺賵丕賳丿 賵 亘毓丿 讴賳丕乇 诏匕丕卮鬲. 噩賲賱丕鬲 讴鬲丕亘 倬爻 丕夭 丕鬲賲丕賲 丿乇 賲賵賯毓蹖鬲賴丕蹖 诏賵賳丕诏賵賳 卮賲丕 乇丕 乇賴丕 賳禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿. 賮讴乇 賲蹖讴賳賲 胤賵賱 毓賲乇 丕賳爻丕賳賴丕蹖蹖 賲孬賱 爻蹖賲賵賳 丿賵亘賵賵丕乇 亘丕蹖丿 丿賵 亘乇丕亘乇 賲蹖亘賵丿. 丕蹖賳 丕賳爻丕賳賴丕 丿乇 胤賵賱 夭賳丿诏蹖 倬蹖卮 賲蹖乇賵賳丿 賵 乇卮丿 賲蹖讴賳賳丿 賵 丕夭 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 賲賵丕囟毓 賳賲蹖 鬲乇爻賳丿. 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕卮鬲賲 丿賵亘賵賵丕乇 150 爻丕賱賴 乇丕 賲蹖禺賵丕賳丿賲 賵 讴蹖賮 賲蹖讴乇丿賲. 丕诏乇 賯乇丕乇 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 夭賳 乇丕 亘卮賳丕爻蹖賲 讴賴 賱丕夭賲賴 乇卮丿 賵 鬲乇賯蹖 賲丕 賴賲 賴爻鬲, 亘丕蹖丿 亘丿丕賳蹖賲 趩賴 丿乇 丿乇賵賳 賵 亘蹖乇賵賳 賲丕 賲蹖诏匕乇丿. 賳賯氐 賴丕 賵 賲丨丿賵丿蹖鬲 賴丕 乇丕 亘丕蹖丿 卮賳丕禺鬲, 丕夭 鬲毓丕乇蹖賮 夭賳 賲丕丿乇 夭賲蹖賳 賵 丕賱賴賴 亘丕乇賵乇蹖 亘丕蹖丿 乇丿 卮丿 賵 夭賳 乇丕 亘賴 賵丕賯毓 丿蹖丿. 噩賳爻 丿賵賲 丿乇 丕蹖賳 乇丕賴 亘賴 賲丕 讴賲讴 賲蹖讴賳丿.
September 19, 2016
This unfortunately was the short version of Simone de Beauvoir's 'The Second Sex' as I made a mistake when ordering (because of the price), so this is only extracts from the full version which hopefully will read at another time. As a passionate supporter of feminism, equality and sexual liberation for women this was an interesting and for it's time controversial take on feminist philosophy and would suit anyone who doesn't have the time on their hands to read the longer edition, but I am a little frustrated as it clearly has nowhere near the depth that obviously the full version would have. It did however send me on a trip down memory lane as a few years back with my then partner I participated in a rally/demo for women's lib which lead me to believe the only man present would be me, not true at all, there were men and women of all ages that totally blew me away!, it was a peaceful and worthy way to show my solidarity with the opposite sex. I am sure this book had a massive impact back in the late forties when first released, and opened the eyes of the repressed and those who felt chained to the kitchen sink. Well done Simone.
April 21, 2020
Most people consider The Second Sex to be the Feminist 'Bible'. While Beauvoir's text is certainly a seminal text in feminism 鈥� both in terms of feminist theory and the larger movement for emancipation 鈥� it has some of the same flaws as its theological counterpart(s).
Beauvoir starts her nearly-800-pages-long existential project for the woman's condition with a hugely impressive Introduction highlighting some of the principal arguments of the feminist movement and why it exists. Going forth, she divides The Second Sex into two books, the first of which, entitled 'Facts and Myths', undertakes meticulous research in looking at and seeking to counter male arguments about women through biology; psychology; historical materialism; history; mythology; and literature. Book II, 'Woman's Life Today', traces the various phases and conditions of women throughout their development, debunking the myth of the "eternal feminine" and arguing about the development of this feminine through various factors in lived reality and conditioning that thwart women into alterity instead of transcendence. She looks at the various roles the adult bourgeois woman performs, studies some ways in which they reinforce their own dependency, and looks at the barriers to real equality the independent woman in the 1940s continues to face.
Much of Beauvoir's arguments hold currency today in that they deal with issues that are as yet prevalent. Her ideas about education/upbringing and feminine narcissism as well as those regarding birth control and marriage are those that we still discuss in terms of feminist perspective today. Particularly striking are her statements about some fundamentals of women's oppression 鈥� that as victims of class and other male institutions they are unable to form a coherent group of their very own and representing their own interests, despite comprising roughly half of all human population.
However, just like many revered theological texts such as the Bible, a good chunk of The Second Sex emerges through the test of time as horribly dated; some of it may even be considered sexist when looked at from the lens of our times. One obvious limitation lies in the sources available for the author to refer to and infer from: in the fields of biology and psychology; and especially psychoanalysis; most of the studies Beauvoir interacts with in writing this book have since then been disproven and discarded, and moreover also suffer from the subjective biases of the men who conducted and recorded them. Moreover, while Beauvoir often refutes and counters the affirmations of these studies, she also bases some of her own suppositions on them. Thus, many of her arguments 鈥� particularly those about women's pain and 'imagined' diseases and women's behaviours in marriage and old age 鈥� end up perpetuating the same masculinist assumptions and attitudes they collectively seek to fight against. Similarly, while she lays ground for the performativity of gender that Judith Butler later explores in her own work on queer theory; Beauvoir takes a rather ambiguous stance on homosexuality, asserting lesbianism as a matter of choice but not quite, a confused and confusing conundrum.
In fact, many errenous assertions in The Second Sex, such as its stance on lesbianism, result from the restrictions of her theoretical framework (namely that of Existentialism). Beauvoir is also guilty, as many women of her time, of overlooking intersectionality: her work is modelled on women of her own kind, and yet she generalises these specific behaviours onto all of womankind. While she does include examples from the Orient, she only does so to fit her own thesis and does not situate them in a proper context. Thus, perspectives from women belonging to the working class and women of colour are absent in her work, and the actualities and values of the women she constructs throughout the text difficult to ascribe. It is also true that Beauvoir's writing here is prone to taking to the inaccessible flourishes of the ivory towers of academese, and one often finds her work difficult to engage with and to sustain interest in. I found myself skimming over at least some of her ideas 鈥� perhaps only because my position in time means that I know better, but also out of the sheer tedium of reading through some things. I guess that as a woman writing at her time, Beauvoir had to really justify her assertions, but at some points she seems to have done it at the cost of lucidity.
Nevertheless, The Second Sex raises some of the most important and undeniably cogent points regarding the subjection and emancipation of women, as well as about human nature itself. The book lays essential groundwork for what we learn and build on as feminists today, and even its mistakes allow us the space for greater assertion and amendment. It remains, despite its flaws, an essential read.
Beauvoir starts her nearly-800-pages-long existential project for the woman's condition with a hugely impressive Introduction highlighting some of the principal arguments of the feminist movement and why it exists. Going forth, she divides The Second Sex into two books, the first of which, entitled 'Facts and Myths', undertakes meticulous research in looking at and seeking to counter male arguments about women through biology; psychology; historical materialism; history; mythology; and literature. Book II, 'Woman's Life Today', traces the various phases and conditions of women throughout their development, debunking the myth of the "eternal feminine" and arguing about the development of this feminine through various factors in lived reality and conditioning that thwart women into alterity instead of transcendence. She looks at the various roles the adult bourgeois woman performs, studies some ways in which they reinforce their own dependency, and looks at the barriers to real equality the independent woman in the 1940s continues to face.
Much of Beauvoir's arguments hold currency today in that they deal with issues that are as yet prevalent. Her ideas about education/upbringing and feminine narcissism as well as those regarding birth control and marriage are those that we still discuss in terms of feminist perspective today. Particularly striking are her statements about some fundamentals of women's oppression 鈥� that as victims of class and other male institutions they are unable to form a coherent group of their very own and representing their own interests, despite comprising roughly half of all human population.
However, just like many revered theological texts such as the Bible, a good chunk of The Second Sex emerges through the test of time as horribly dated; some of it may even be considered sexist when looked at from the lens of our times. One obvious limitation lies in the sources available for the author to refer to and infer from: in the fields of biology and psychology; and especially psychoanalysis; most of the studies Beauvoir interacts with in writing this book have since then been disproven and discarded, and moreover also suffer from the subjective biases of the men who conducted and recorded them. Moreover, while Beauvoir often refutes and counters the affirmations of these studies, she also bases some of her own suppositions on them. Thus, many of her arguments 鈥� particularly those about women's pain and 'imagined' diseases and women's behaviours in marriage and old age 鈥� end up perpetuating the same masculinist assumptions and attitudes they collectively seek to fight against. Similarly, while she lays ground for the performativity of gender that Judith Butler later explores in her own work on queer theory; Beauvoir takes a rather ambiguous stance on homosexuality, asserting lesbianism as a matter of choice but not quite, a confused and confusing conundrum.
In fact, many errenous assertions in The Second Sex, such as its stance on lesbianism, result from the restrictions of her theoretical framework (namely that of Existentialism). Beauvoir is also guilty, as many women of her time, of overlooking intersectionality: her work is modelled on women of her own kind, and yet she generalises these specific behaviours onto all of womankind. While she does include examples from the Orient, she only does so to fit her own thesis and does not situate them in a proper context. Thus, perspectives from women belonging to the working class and women of colour are absent in her work, and the actualities and values of the women she constructs throughout the text difficult to ascribe. It is also true that Beauvoir's writing here is prone to taking to the inaccessible flourishes of the ivory towers of academese, and one often finds her work difficult to engage with and to sustain interest in. I found myself skimming over at least some of her ideas 鈥� perhaps only because my position in time means that I know better, but also out of the sheer tedium of reading through some things. I guess that as a woman writing at her time, Beauvoir had to really justify her assertions, but at some points she seems to have done it at the cost of lucidity.
Nevertheless, The Second Sex raises some of the most important and undeniably cogent points regarding the subjection and emancipation of women, as well as about human nature itself. The book lays essential groundwork for what we learn and build on as feminists today, and even its mistakes allow us the space for greater assertion and amendment. It remains, despite its flaws, an essential read.
March 9, 2018
丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 - 爻賷賲賵賳 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇
賴賷 賰丕鬲亘丞 賵賲賮賰乇丞 賮乇賳爻賷丞 卮賴賷乇丞 鬲賳賮賷 毓賳 賳賮爻賴丕 賰賵賳賴丕 賮賷賱爻賵賮丞 乇睾賲 丕賱鬲賱丕賲爻 丕賱氐乇賷丨 賱賰鬲丕亘丕鬲賴丕 賵鬲兀孬乇賴丕 亘丕賱賵噩賵丿賷丞 賵丕賱鬲賷 賱乇亘賲丕 賰丕賳 賱毓賱丕賯鬲賴丕 賲毓 爻丕乇鬲乇 丿賵乇 賰亘賷乇 賮賷 匕賱賰. 毓丕賳鬲 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賲賳 賲卮丕賰賱 乇賵丨丕賳賷丞 毓賳丿賲丕 兀賱丨賯賴丕 賵丕賱丿賴丕 亘丿賷乇 賵鬲丨賵賱鬲 亘毓丿賴丕 賱鬲賰賲賱 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賰賲賱丨丿丞 賵賯丿 賷亘乇乇 賴匕丕 鬲兀賰賷丿丕鬲賴丕 丕賱賲爻鬲賲乇丞 賱賰賵賳 丕賱丿賷賳 賴賵 丕丨丿 兀爻亘丕亘 廿囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞. 毓乇賮鬲 毓賳賴丕 丕賱毓賱丕賯丕鬲 丕賱卮丕匕丞 賲毓 鬲賱賲賷匕丕鬲 賱賴丕 賵賯丿 兀賵賯賮鬲 毓丕賲 1943 毓賳 丕賱毓賲賱 亘爻亘亘 丕鬲賴丕賲 兀丨丿 鬲賱賲賷匕丕鬲賴丕 賱賴丕 亘廿睾賵丕卅賴丕. 賵賰丕賳鬲 丨賷賳卅匕 賲乇鬲亘胤丞 亘爻丕乇鬲乇 亘毓賱丕賯鬲賴丕 丕賱卮賴賷乇丞 賲毓賴.. 丨鬲賶 兀賳 爻丕乇鬲乇 賰丕賳 賯丿 鬲賯丿賲 賱賱夭賵丕噩 賲賳賴丕 廿賱丕 兀賳賴丕 乇賮囟鬲 賱賰賳賴丕 亘賯賷鬲 毓賱賶 毓賱丕賯丞 賲毓賴 賵賱賲 鬲爻賰賳 賲毓賴 賮賷 亘賷鬲 賵丕丨丿 兀亘丿丕賸.. 賰賲丕 兀賳賴丕 賱賲 鬲賳噩亘 毓賱賶 丕賱廿胤賱丕賯 賲賲丕 鬲乇賰 賱賴丕 丕賱賲噩丕賱 賱賱鬲賮賵賯 丕賱兀賰丕丿賷賲賷. 賵賱丕 亘丿 賱賱賲乇亍 兀賳 賷賱丕丨馗 鬲兀孬賷乇 賲爻丕乇 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賴匕丕 毓賱賶 兀賮賰丕乇賴丕 丕賱賲匕賰賵乇丞 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘.
賷賵孬賯 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱賳馗乇丞 丕賱賵噩賵丿賷丞 賱丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賱丨賰丕賷丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲毓 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱亘卮乇賷..賵鬲亘丿兀 亘胤乇丨 鬲毓乇賷賮 賲丕賴賷丞 丕賱兀賳孬賶 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賱廿賳爻丕賳 賵賴賳丕 鬲兀鬲賷 賱賳丕 亘禺賱丕氐丞 亘賰賵賳 丕賱兀賳孬賶 賴賷 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賱匕賰乇 賵匕賱賰 賷鬲囟賲賳 兀賳 賵噩賵丿賴丕 賷乇鬲亘胤 亘匕丕鬲 丕賱匕賰乇 賵賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱賴丕 兀賳 鬲賵噩丿 丿賵賳賴.. 賵賴賷 亘賴匕丕 丕賱鬲毓乇賷賮 鬲賯乇 亘賴匕丕 亘賰賵賳賴 丨賯賷賯丞 賱賰賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲賯亘賱賴丕 賵鬲賯賵賱 亘兀賳賴丕 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱丕 賱賲丕賴賷鬲賴丕 丕賱丨賯賷賯賷丞 毓賱賶 兀賷 丨丕賱.
鬲賳鬲賯賱 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 亘毓丿 匕賱賰 廿賱賶 廿爻鬲毓乇丕囟 鬲丕乇賷禺賷 賯丿 賱丕 賷禺賱賵 賲賳 丕賱賲睾丕賱胤丕鬲.. 廿丨丿丕賴丕 賳賮賷賴丕 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賯丿 噩賱爻鬲 賷賵賲丕賸 毓賱賶 毓乇卮 丕賱爻賱胤丞 丕賱亘卮乇賷丞 乇睾賲 賲丕 鬲丐賰丿賴 丕賱兀亘丨丕孬 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 毓賳 丕賱夭賲賳 丕賱匕賷 賰丕賳鬲 賮賷賴 丕賱丌賱賴丞 "丕賲乇兀丞"賵賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱禺氐賵氐 鬲賯賵賱 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 兀賳賴 氐丨賷丨 兀賳賴丕 賰丕賳鬲 丌賱賴丞 賱賰賳 丕賱爻賱胤丞 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷丞 賰丕賳鬲 丿丕卅賲丕賸 亘賷丿 丕賱乇噩賱. 乇睾賲 鬲兀賰賷丿 丕賱兀亘丨丕孬 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 毓賰爻 匕賱賰. 賵賲賳賴丕 鬲賱賰 丕賱賲匕賰賵乇丞 賮賷 "馗賱 丕賱兀賮毓賶" 賱賷賵爻賮 夭賷丿丕賳.
廿賳 睾丕賷丞 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賲賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賴賵 廿爻鬲毓乇丕囟 賵亘丨孬 兀爻亘丕亘 廿囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丌孬丕乇賴 丕賱賳賮爻賷丞 毓賱賷賴丕.. 賵賷鬲囟賲賳 鬲丨賱賷賱丕賸 賳賮爻賷丕賸 賲賮氐賱丕賸 賱賱賲乇兀丞 囟賲賳 賲爻丕乇 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賰丕賲賱丕賸 賲賳匕 丕賱胤賮賵賱丞 廿賱賶 丕賱賰賴賵賱丞.. 賵鬲賳鬲賴賷 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 廿賱賶 賰賷賮賷丞 丕賱爻亘賷賱 賱鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞.
禺賱丕賱 丕賱鬲丨賱賷賱 丕賱賳賮爻賷 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賰丕賳鬲 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 鬲爻鬲毓乇囟 賰匕賱賰 兀賯賵丕賱 丕賱賰孬賷乇賷賳 賲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵毓賱賲丕亍 丕賱賳賮爻 賵丕賱賲賮賰乇賷賳 賮賷賲丕 賷禺氐 丕賱賲乇兀丞.. 賮賷 亘丨孬 賷丿賱 毓賱賶 賲噩賴賵丿 賰亘賷乇 亘丨賯.
賱丕 亘丿 賱賱賲乇亍 丕賱賯丕乇賷亍 賱賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 兀賳 賷鬲賮賴賲 爻亘亘 賳賮賵乇 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賲賳 賲丐爻爻爻丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩 亘丕毓鬲亘丕乇賴丕 賱丕 鬲卮賰賱 爻賵賶 賵噩賴丕賸 丌禺乇 賱賱丿毓丕乇丞 丕賱卮乇毓賷丞 廿賳 兀賲賰賳 賱賴丕 賯賵賱 匕賱賰 賵鬲爻鬲卮賴丿 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱禺氐賵氐 亘賯賵賱 賲丕乇賵: 廿賳 丕賱賮乇賯 亘賷賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 丕賱丿毓丕乇丞 賵丕賱亘睾丕亍貙 賵亘賷賳 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 亘賵丕爻胤丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩貙 賷賳丨氐乇 賮賷 孬賲賳 賵賲丿丞 毓賯丿 丕賱亘賷毓.
亘賱 廿賳 丕賱夭賵丕噩 賮賷 兀賮囟賱 丕賱丨丕賱丕鬲 賱丕 賷鬲毓丿賶 賰賵賳賴 廿鬲丨丕丿 廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵噩賳爻丕賳賷 賷賯賳賳 毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 亘丕賱乇噩賱 囟賲賳 丨賯賵賯 賵賵丕噩亘丕鬲 賱賷爻 廿賱丕. 賮賳乇丕賴丕 鬲賯賵賱: 賱丕 賷賰賵賳 丕賱丨亘 睾丕賱亘丕賸 爻亘亘丕賸 賱賱夭賵丕噩. 賮丕賱夭賵噩 賰賲丕 賷賯賵賱 賮乇賵賷丿 賱賷爻 爻賵賶 亘丿賷賱 毓賳 丕賱賲丨亘賵亘 賵賱賷爻 丕賱賲丨亘賵亘 匕丕鬲賴. 廿賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲亘丕賷賳 賱賷爻 兀賲乇丕賸 胤丕乇卅丕賸 亘賱 鬲賯鬲囟賷賴 胤亘賷毓丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩 賳賮爻賴. 賮丕賱睾丕賷丞 賲賳賴 丕賱鬲爻丕賲賷 廿賱賶 丕賱賲氐賱丨丞 丕賱噩賲丕毓賷丞 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 丕賱廿鬲丨丕丿 丕賱廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵丕賱噩賳爻賷 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞貙 賵賱賷爻 丕賱賴丿賮 賲賳賴 鬲兀賲賷賳 丕賱爻毓丕丿丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞.
賵賰丕賳 賱賱兀爻乇丞 賳氐賷亘 賰匕賱賰 賮賷 丌乇丕亍 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賮賳乇丕賴丕 鬲賯賵賱: 賮亘賲賯丿丕乇 賲丕鬲鬲丨乇乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 丕賱兀爻乇丞 鬲鬲丨乇乇 賲賳 丕賱鬲亘毓賷丞. 賵鬲囟賷賮 亘兀賳 賳爻丕亍 兀爻亘丕乇胤丞 賰賳 兀丨乇丕乇丕賸 賰丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵匕賱賰 賱兀賳 兀爻亘丕乇胤丞 賰丕賳鬲 鬲胤亘賯 賳馗丕賲 丕賱賲卮丕毓 !
鬲丨丕賵賱 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 廿毓胤丕亍 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丨乇賷鬲賴丕 賮賷 噩爻丿賴丕.. 賵賴賵 丨賯 丿賵賳 卮賰.. 賱賰賳賴丕 匕賴亘鬲 賮賷 匕賱賰 亘毓賷丿丕賸 噩丿丕賸 毓賳丿 丨丿賷孬賴丕 毓賳 賲爻兀賱丞 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟.. 賮賳乇丕賴丕 鬲賯賵賱: 賵氐丿賯 爻鬲賷賰賱 亘賯賵賱賴: 廿賳 鬲丨馗賷乇 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 賯丕賳賵賳 睾賷乇 兀禺賱丕賯賷 賱兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賯丕賳賵賳 爻賷禺丕賱賮 丨鬲賲丕賸 賮賷 賰賱 賷賵賲 賵賮賷 賰賱爻丕毓丞.
賵賱丕 亘丿 賴賳丕 賱賱賲乇亍 兀賳 賷賱丨馗 匕賱賰 丕賱廿爻鬲丿賱丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 賷賵氐賮 賮賷 兀賮囟賱 丕賱馗乇賵賮 廿賱丕毓賱賶 兀賳賴 "睾賷乇 爻賵賷" 賱兀賳賳丕 賷賲賰賳 賵亘賰賱 亘爻丕胤丞 兀賳 賳賯賵賱 賳賮爻 丕賱丨噩丞 毓賳 賯丕賳賵賳 丨馗乇 丕賱賯鬲賱.. 兀賱丕 賷丨丿孬 兀賳 鬲鬲賲 賲禺丕賱賮丞 賴匕丕 丕賱賯丕賳賵賳 賮賷 賰賱 賷賵賲 責 賴賱 賷噩毓賱 匕賱賰 賲賳 賯丕賳賵賳 丨馗乇 丕賱賯鬲賱 賱丕 兀禺賱丕賯賷丕賸 責 廿賳 丕賱丿丕毓賷 丕賱兀禺賱丕賯賷 賱丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賱賯賵賱 匕賱賰 兀賳賴丕 鬲亘乇乇 丨賲賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 睾賷乇 丕賱卮乇毓賷 亘賰賵賳賴 亘爻亘亘 廿睾賵丕亍 丕賱乇噩賱 賱賴丕 賵兀賳賴丕 賱丕 賷噩亘 兀賳 鬲鬲丨賲賱 丕賱賲爻丐賵賱賷丞 賵丨丿賴丕.. 賵鬲乇賶 兀賳 賲賳毓 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 賷囟毓 毓亘卅丕賸 廿囟丕賮賷丕賸 毓賱賶 賰丕賴賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞. 賴賷 賲丨賯丞 亘禺氐賵氐 兀賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賱丕 亘丿 賲賳 兀賳 賷鬲丨賲賱 丕賱賲爻丐賵賱賷丞 賰匕賱賰.. 賱賰賳 匕賱賰 賱丕 賷賰賵賳 亘鬲卮乇賷毓 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 亘兀賷 丨丕賱. 賵賴賳丕 賳丨賳 賱丕 賳鬲丨丿孬 毓賳 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 賱兀爻亘丕亘 胤亘賷丞 亘賰賱 鬲兀賰賷丿..
兀毓噩亘賳賷 鬲丨賱賷賱賴丕 丕賱賳賮爻賷 賱兀胤賵丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丨丿賷孬賴丕 毓賳 兀爻亘丕亘 卮匕賵匕賴丕 賵亘乇賵丿賴丕 賵丨鬲賶 賱噩賵卅賴丕 賱賱丿毓丕乇丞.. 賰丕賳 亘卮賰賱 毓丕賲 賲孬賷乇丕賸 賱賱廿賴鬲賲丕賲 禺丕氐丞 兀賳賴 賷賳爻噩賲 賲毓 賲丕 賯乇兀鬲賴丕 賮賷 丕賱爻丕亘賯 賮賷 賰鬲亘 兀禺乇賶 亘毓賱賲 丕賱賳賮爻.
鬲禺鬲鬲賲 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 亘丨孬賴丕 賴匕丕 亘賳鬲賷噩丞 賲賮丕丿賴丕 兀賳賴 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱賱賲乇兀丞 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇乇 廿賱丕 亘丨氐賵賱賴丕 毓賱賶 丕賱廿爻鬲賯賱丕賱 丕賱廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 毓賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賰賲丕 兀賳賴丕 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱賴丕 兀賳 鬲丨氐賱 毓賱賶 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 丕賱鬲丕賲丞 亘丕賱乇噩賱 廿賱丕 賮賷 馗賱 賲噩鬲賲毓 鬲爻賵丿賴 丕賱廿卮鬲乇丕賰賷丞. 丨賷孬 兀賳賴 賮賷 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱乇兀爻賲丕賱賷 賱丕亘丿 兀賳 鬲禺囟毓 賮賷賴 賱兀氐丨丕亘 乇丐賵爻 丕賱兀賲賵丕賱.
賵賴賳丕 賱丕 亘丿 賱賷 賲賳 鬲毓賱賷賯 賵賱毓賱賷 兀賯鬲亘爻: 賰丕賳 乇賯賷賯 丕賱兀乇囟 賱丕 賷賲賱賰賵賳 賲毓 夭賵噩丕鬲賴賲 廿賱丕 丨賯 丕賱鬲賲鬲毓 丕賱賲卮鬲乇賰 亘丕賱賲賳夭賱 賵丕賱兀孬丕孬 賵兀丿賵丕鬲 丕賱賲賳夭賱. 賮賱賲 賷賰賳 賱賱乇噩賱 廿匕賳 兀賷 爻亘亘 賷丿賮毓賴 廿賱賶 丕賱鬲爻賱胤 毓賱賶 夭賵噩鬲賴 賱兀賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲賲賱賰 卮賷卅丕賸. 賵毓賱賶 丕賱毓賰爻 賲賳 匕賱賰貙 賰丕賳鬲 毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱毓賲賱 賵丕賱賲氐丕賱丨 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤 亘賷賳賴賲丕貙 鬲乇賮毓 賱賱夭賵噩丞 廿賱賶 賵孬亘丞 乇賮賷毓丞. 賵賱賲丕 兀賱睾賷 丕賱乇賯 亘賯賷 丕賱賮賯乇. 賮賰丕賳 賷乇賶貙 賮賷 亘賷賵鬲 丕賱乇賷賮賷賷賳 賵丕賱丨乇賮賷賷賳貙 丕賱夭賵噩丕賳 賵賴賲丕 賷毓賷卮丕賳 毓賱賶 賯丿賲 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞. 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 賲孬賱 賴匕賴 丕賱丨丕賱 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳 賱丕 賲鬲丕毓丕賸 賵賱丕 禺丕丿賲丕賸 賱兀賳 賴匕丕亘匕禺 賱丕 賷鬲丕丨 廿賱丕 賱賱兀睾賳賷丕亍. 賮賮賷 丕賱毓賲賱 丕賱丨乇貙 鬲丨氐賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 毓賱賶 廿爻鬲賯賱丕賱賴丕 丕賱賮毓賱賷 賱兀賳賴丕 鬲毓賵丿 廿賱賶 廿丨鬲賱丕賱 丿賵乇 廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵廿噩鬲賲丕毓賷.
廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賮賯乇丞 鬲毓賳賷 兀賳 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賲賲賰賳丞 賮賷 馗賱 廿爻鬲毓亘丕丿 賲卮鬲乇賰 賱賱夭賵噩 賲毓 夭賵噩鬲賴 賲賳 賯亘賱 兀氐丨丕亘 乇丐賵爻 丕賱兀賲賵丕賱.. 賱賰賳 賷馗賱 賴賳丕賰 賴丕賲卮 亘丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 丕賱乇噩賱 氐丕丨亘 乇兀爻 丕賱賲丕賱 賱賱賲乇兀丞 亘卮賰賱 禺丕氐.. 賱賰賳 丕賱賲卮賰賱丞 賴賳丕 兀賳 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷賰賵賳 亘爻亘亘 賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 "兀賳孬賶" 賱賰賳賴 賷丨丿孬 賱賰賵賳賴丕 丕賱胤乇賮 丕賱兀囟毓賮.. 賵賴匕丕 賴賵 匕丕鬲賴 賲丕 賷丨丿孬 賱賱乇噩賱 丕賱賮賯賷乇 賮賷 匕丕鬲 丕賱馗乇賵賮. 廿賳 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 賲噩鬲賲毓 胤亘賯賷.. 賷爻鬲囟毓賮 賮賷賴 丕賱賯賵賷 丕賱囟毓賷賮 賵賷爻鬲毓亘丿賴.. 賵丿丕卅賲丕賸 賲丕 賵噩丿 丕賱賯賵賷 胤乇賷賯丞 賲锟斤拷 賱丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 丕賱丌禺乇賷賳 丨鬲賶 賵廿賳 賱賲 賷賰賳 賴賳丕賰 毓亘賵丿賷丞 亘丕賱賲賮賴賵賲 丕賱氐乇賷丨 賱賴丕. 賮丕賱丿賵賱 丕賱賷賵賲 鬲爻鬲毓亘丿 亘毓囟賴丕 亘毓囟丕賸.. 賮賲丕 亘丕賱賰 亘丕賱兀賮乇丕丿 責 廿賳 賱賲 賷賰賳 賴賳丕賰 賵丕夭毓 丿丕禺賱賷 賱丿賶 丕賱賲乇亍 亘丕丨鬲乇丕賲 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱卮賷亍 賲丕 兀賳 賷賮乇囟 匕賱賰 賮賷賴.. 賵賴丐賱丕亍 賯賵賲 賷爻鬲丨賯賵賳 丕賱卮賮賯丞 亘丨賯 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 兀賷 卮賷亍 丌禺乇.
賮賷 丕賱禺鬲丕賲貙 賱丕 亘丿 賱賱賲乇亍 賲賳 亘毓丿 丕賱廿胤賱丕毓 毓賱賶 兀賮賰丕乇 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 兀賳 賷鬲賮賴賲 賰賷賮賷丞 賵賱丕丿丞 兀賮賰丕乇 丕賱賲賳馗賲丕鬲 丕賱賳爻賵賷丞 丕賱丿丕毓賷丞 賱鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞.. 賮丕賱馗賱賲 亘丕賱毓丕丿丞 賷賵賱丿 丕賱鬲胤乇賮.. 賱丕賷賲賰賳 丕賱廿賳賰丕乇 亘兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲馗賱賵賲丞 亘卮賰賱 毓丕賲.. 賱賰賳 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷亘乇乇 兀賲賵乇丕賸 賰噩乇賷賲丞 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟.. 兀賵 賮鬲丨 丿賵乇 丿毓丕乇丞 賷賰賵賳 丕賱毓丕賲賱賵賳 賮賷賴 乇噩丕賱丕賸 賰賷 鬲賯囟賷 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵胤乇賴賳 賮賷賴 !
兀賵丕賮賯 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賮賷 賰賵賳 鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賴賵 鬲丨乇賷乇 禺丕賱氐 賱賱乇噩賱 賳賮爻賴. 賱賰賳賳丕 賳禺鬲賱賮 賰孬賷乇丕賸 賮賷賲丕 賷噩亘 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇乇 賲賳賴. 賳毓賲貙 賱丕 亘丿 賱賴丕 賲賳 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇乇 賲賳 丕賱噩賴賱.. 賵丕賱毓亘賵丿賷丞 賵丕賱鬲亘毓賷丞.. 賱賰賳 匕賱賰 賱丕 賷毓賳賷 丕賱賲卮丕毓 兀賵 丕賱卮匕賵匕 丕賵 賴丿賲 丕賱兀爻乇丞 賵賲丐爻爻丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩.. 兀賵 廿亘丕丨丞 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟.
賴賷 賰丕鬲亘丞 賵賲賮賰乇丞 賮乇賳爻賷丞 卮賴賷乇丞 鬲賳賮賷 毓賳 賳賮爻賴丕 賰賵賳賴丕 賮賷賱爻賵賮丞 乇睾賲 丕賱鬲賱丕賲爻 丕賱氐乇賷丨 賱賰鬲丕亘丕鬲賴丕 賵鬲兀孬乇賴丕 亘丕賱賵噩賵丿賷丞 賵丕賱鬲賷 賱乇亘賲丕 賰丕賳 賱毓賱丕賯鬲賴丕 賲毓 爻丕乇鬲乇 丿賵乇 賰亘賷乇 賮賷 匕賱賰. 毓丕賳鬲 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賲賳 賲卮丕賰賱 乇賵丨丕賳賷丞 毓賳丿賲丕 兀賱丨賯賴丕 賵丕賱丿賴丕 亘丿賷乇 賵鬲丨賵賱鬲 亘毓丿賴丕 賱鬲賰賲賱 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賰賲賱丨丿丞 賵賯丿 賷亘乇乇 賴匕丕 鬲兀賰賷丿丕鬲賴丕 丕賱賲爻鬲賲乇丞 賱賰賵賳 丕賱丿賷賳 賴賵 丕丨丿 兀爻亘丕亘 廿囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞. 毓乇賮鬲 毓賳賴丕 丕賱毓賱丕賯丕鬲 丕賱卮丕匕丞 賲毓 鬲賱賲賷匕丕鬲 賱賴丕 賵賯丿 兀賵賯賮鬲 毓丕賲 1943 毓賳 丕賱毓賲賱 亘爻亘亘 丕鬲賴丕賲 兀丨丿 鬲賱賲賷匕丕鬲賴丕 賱賴丕 亘廿睾賵丕卅賴丕. 賵賰丕賳鬲 丨賷賳卅匕 賲乇鬲亘胤丞 亘爻丕乇鬲乇 亘毓賱丕賯鬲賴丕 丕賱卮賴賷乇丞 賲毓賴.. 丨鬲賶 兀賳 爻丕乇鬲乇 賰丕賳 賯丿 鬲賯丿賲 賱賱夭賵丕噩 賲賳賴丕 廿賱丕 兀賳賴丕 乇賮囟鬲 賱賰賳賴丕 亘賯賷鬲 毓賱賶 毓賱丕賯丞 賲毓賴 賵賱賲 鬲爻賰賳 賲毓賴 賮賷 亘賷鬲 賵丕丨丿 兀亘丿丕賸.. 賰賲丕 兀賳賴丕 賱賲 鬲賳噩亘 毓賱賶 丕賱廿胤賱丕賯 賲賲丕 鬲乇賰 賱賴丕 丕賱賲噩丕賱 賱賱鬲賮賵賯 丕賱兀賰丕丿賷賲賷. 賵賱丕 亘丿 賱賱賲乇亍 兀賳 賷賱丕丨馗 鬲兀孬賷乇 賲爻丕乇 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賴匕丕 毓賱賶 兀賮賰丕乇賴丕 丕賱賲匕賰賵乇丞 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘.
賷賵孬賯 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱賳馗乇丞 丕賱賵噩賵丿賷丞 賱丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賱丨賰丕賷丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲毓 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱亘卮乇賷..賵鬲亘丿兀 亘胤乇丨 鬲毓乇賷賮 賲丕賴賷丞 丕賱兀賳孬賶 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賱廿賳爻丕賳 賵賴賳丕 鬲兀鬲賷 賱賳丕 亘禺賱丕氐丞 亘賰賵賳 丕賱兀賳孬賶 賴賷 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賱匕賰乇 賵匕賱賰 賷鬲囟賲賳 兀賳 賵噩賵丿賴丕 賷乇鬲亘胤 亘匕丕鬲 丕賱匕賰乇 賵賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱賴丕 兀賳 鬲賵噩丿 丿賵賳賴.. 賵賴賷 亘賴匕丕 丕賱鬲毓乇賷賮 鬲賯乇 亘賴匕丕 亘賰賵賳賴 丨賯賷賯丞 賱賰賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲賯亘賱賴丕 賵鬲賯賵賱 亘兀賳賴丕 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱丕 賱賲丕賴賷鬲賴丕 丕賱丨賯賷賯賷丞 毓賱賶 兀賷 丨丕賱.
鬲賳鬲賯賱 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 亘毓丿 匕賱賰 廿賱賶 廿爻鬲毓乇丕囟 鬲丕乇賷禺賷 賯丿 賱丕 賷禺賱賵 賲賳 丕賱賲睾丕賱胤丕鬲.. 廿丨丿丕賴丕 賳賮賷賴丕 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賯丿 噩賱爻鬲 賷賵賲丕賸 毓賱賶 毓乇卮 丕賱爻賱胤丞 丕賱亘卮乇賷丞 乇睾賲 賲丕 鬲丐賰丿賴 丕賱兀亘丨丕孬 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 毓賳 丕賱夭賲賳 丕賱匕賷 賰丕賳鬲 賮賷賴 丕賱丌賱賴丞 "丕賲乇兀丞"賵賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱禺氐賵氐 鬲賯賵賱 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 兀賳賴 氐丨賷丨 兀賳賴丕 賰丕賳鬲 丌賱賴丞 賱賰賳 丕賱爻賱胤丞 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷丞 賰丕賳鬲 丿丕卅賲丕賸 亘賷丿 丕賱乇噩賱. 乇睾賲 鬲兀賰賷丿 丕賱兀亘丨丕孬 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 毓賰爻 匕賱賰. 賵賲賳賴丕 鬲賱賰 丕賱賲匕賰賵乇丞 賮賷 "馗賱 丕賱兀賮毓賶" 賱賷賵爻賮 夭賷丿丕賳.
廿賳 睾丕賷丞 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賲賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賴賵 廿爻鬲毓乇丕囟 賵亘丨孬 兀爻亘丕亘 廿囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丌孬丕乇賴 丕賱賳賮爻賷丞 毓賱賷賴丕.. 賵賷鬲囟賲賳 鬲丨賱賷賱丕賸 賳賮爻賷丕賸 賲賮氐賱丕賸 賱賱賲乇兀丞 囟賲賳 賲爻丕乇 丨賷丕鬲賴丕 賰丕賲賱丕賸 賲賳匕 丕賱胤賮賵賱丞 廿賱賶 丕賱賰賴賵賱丞.. 賵鬲賳鬲賴賷 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 廿賱賶 賰賷賮賷丞 丕賱爻亘賷賱 賱鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞.
禺賱丕賱 丕賱鬲丨賱賷賱 丕賱賳賮爻賷 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賰丕賳鬲 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 鬲爻鬲毓乇囟 賰匕賱賰 兀賯賵丕賱 丕賱賰孬賷乇賷賳 賲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵毓賱賲丕亍 丕賱賳賮爻 賵丕賱賲賮賰乇賷賳 賮賷賲丕 賷禺氐 丕賱賲乇兀丞.. 賮賷 亘丨孬 賷丿賱 毓賱賶 賲噩賴賵丿 賰亘賷乇 亘丨賯.
賱丕 亘丿 賱賱賲乇亍 丕賱賯丕乇賷亍 賱賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 兀賳 賷鬲賮賴賲 爻亘亘 賳賮賵乇 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賲賳 賲丐爻爻爻丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩 亘丕毓鬲亘丕乇賴丕 賱丕 鬲卮賰賱 爻賵賶 賵噩賴丕賸 丌禺乇 賱賱丿毓丕乇丞 丕賱卮乇毓賷丞 廿賳 兀賲賰賳 賱賴丕 賯賵賱 匕賱賰 賵鬲爻鬲卮賴丿 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱禺氐賵氐 亘賯賵賱 賲丕乇賵: 廿賳 丕賱賮乇賯 亘賷賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 丕賱丿毓丕乇丞 賵丕賱亘睾丕亍貙 賵亘賷賳 丕賱賱賵丕鬲賷 賷亘毓賳 兀賳賮爻賴賳 亘賵丕爻胤丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩貙 賷賳丨氐乇 賮賷 孬賲賳 賵賲丿丞 毓賯丿 丕賱亘賷毓.
亘賱 廿賳 丕賱夭賵丕噩 賮賷 兀賮囟賱 丕賱丨丕賱丕鬲 賱丕 賷鬲毓丿賶 賰賵賳賴 廿鬲丨丕丿 廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵噩賳爻丕賳賷 賷賯賳賳 毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 亘丕賱乇噩賱 囟賲賳 丨賯賵賯 賵賵丕噩亘丕鬲 賱賷爻 廿賱丕. 賮賳乇丕賴丕 鬲賯賵賱: 賱丕 賷賰賵賳 丕賱丨亘 睾丕賱亘丕賸 爻亘亘丕賸 賱賱夭賵丕噩. 賮丕賱夭賵噩 賰賲丕 賷賯賵賱 賮乇賵賷丿 賱賷爻 爻賵賶 亘丿賷賱 毓賳 丕賱賲丨亘賵亘 賵賱賷爻 丕賱賲丨亘賵亘 匕丕鬲賴. 廿賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲亘丕賷賳 賱賷爻 兀賲乇丕賸 胤丕乇卅丕賸 亘賱 鬲賯鬲囟賷賴 胤亘賷毓丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩 賳賮爻賴. 賮丕賱睾丕賷丞 賲賳賴 丕賱鬲爻丕賲賷 廿賱賶 丕賱賲氐賱丨丞 丕賱噩賲丕毓賷丞 毓賳 胤乇賷賯 丕賱廿鬲丨丕丿 丕賱廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵丕賱噩賳爻賷 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞貙 賵賱賷爻 丕賱賴丿賮 賲賳賴 鬲兀賲賷賳 丕賱爻毓丕丿丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞.
賵賰丕賳 賱賱兀爻乇丞 賳氐賷亘 賰匕賱賰 賮賷 丌乇丕亍 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賮賳乇丕賴丕 鬲賯賵賱: 賮亘賲賯丿丕乇 賲丕鬲鬲丨乇乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 丕賱兀爻乇丞 鬲鬲丨乇乇 賲賳 丕賱鬲亘毓賷丞. 賵鬲囟賷賮 亘兀賳 賳爻丕亍 兀爻亘丕乇胤丞 賰賳 兀丨乇丕乇丕賸 賰丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵匕賱賰 賱兀賳 兀爻亘丕乇胤丞 賰丕賳鬲 鬲胤亘賯 賳馗丕賲 丕賱賲卮丕毓 !
鬲丨丕賵賱 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 廿毓胤丕亍 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丨乇賷鬲賴丕 賮賷 噩爻丿賴丕.. 賵賴賵 丨賯 丿賵賳 卮賰.. 賱賰賳賴丕 匕賴亘鬲 賮賷 匕賱賰 亘毓賷丿丕賸 噩丿丕賸 毓賳丿 丨丿賷孬賴丕 毓賳 賲爻兀賱丞 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟.. 賮賳乇丕賴丕 鬲賯賵賱: 賵氐丿賯 爻鬲賷賰賱 亘賯賵賱賴: 廿賳 鬲丨馗賷乇 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 賯丕賳賵賳 睾賷乇 兀禺賱丕賯賷 賱兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賯丕賳賵賳 爻賷禺丕賱賮 丨鬲賲丕賸 賮賷 賰賱 賷賵賲 賵賮賷 賰賱爻丕毓丞.
賵賱丕 亘丿 賴賳丕 賱賱賲乇亍 兀賳 賷賱丨馗 匕賱賰 丕賱廿爻鬲丿賱丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 賷賵氐賮 賮賷 兀賮囟賱 丕賱馗乇賵賮 廿賱丕毓賱賶 兀賳賴 "睾賷乇 爻賵賷" 賱兀賳賳丕 賷賲賰賳 賵亘賰賱 亘爻丕胤丞 兀賳 賳賯賵賱 賳賮爻 丕賱丨噩丞 毓賳 賯丕賳賵賳 丨馗乇 丕賱賯鬲賱.. 兀賱丕 賷丨丿孬 兀賳 鬲鬲賲 賲禺丕賱賮丞 賴匕丕 丕賱賯丕賳賵賳 賮賷 賰賱 賷賵賲 責 賴賱 賷噩毓賱 匕賱賰 賲賳 賯丕賳賵賳 丨馗乇 丕賱賯鬲賱 賱丕 兀禺賱丕賯賷丕賸 責 廿賳 丕賱丿丕毓賷 丕賱兀禺賱丕賯賷 賱丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賱賯賵賱 匕賱賰 兀賳賴丕 鬲亘乇乇 丨賲賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 睾賷乇 丕賱卮乇毓賷 亘賰賵賳賴 亘爻亘亘 廿睾賵丕亍 丕賱乇噩賱 賱賴丕 賵兀賳賴丕 賱丕 賷噩亘 兀賳 鬲鬲丨賲賱 丕賱賲爻丐賵賱賷丞 賵丨丿賴丕.. 賵鬲乇賶 兀賳 賲賳毓 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 賷囟毓 毓亘卅丕賸 廿囟丕賮賷丕賸 毓賱賶 賰丕賴賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞. 賴賷 賲丨賯丞 亘禺氐賵氐 兀賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賱丕 亘丿 賲賳 兀賳 賷鬲丨賲賱 丕賱賲爻丐賵賱賷丞 賰匕賱賰.. 賱賰賳 匕賱賰 賱丕 賷賰賵賳 亘鬲卮乇賷毓 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 亘兀賷 丨丕賱. 賵賴賳丕 賳丨賳 賱丕 賳鬲丨丿孬 毓賳 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟 賱兀爻亘丕亘 胤亘賷丞 亘賰賱 鬲兀賰賷丿..
兀毓噩亘賳賷 鬲丨賱賷賱賴丕 丕賱賳賮爻賷 賱兀胤賵丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丨丿賷孬賴丕 毓賳 兀爻亘丕亘 卮匕賵匕賴丕 賵亘乇賵丿賴丕 賵丨鬲賶 賱噩賵卅賴丕 賱賱丿毓丕乇丞.. 賰丕賳 亘卮賰賱 毓丕賲 賲孬賷乇丕賸 賱賱廿賴鬲賲丕賲 禺丕氐丞 兀賳賴 賷賳爻噩賲 賲毓 賲丕 賯乇兀鬲賴丕 賮賷 丕賱爻丕亘賯 賮賷 賰鬲亘 兀禺乇賶 亘毓賱賲 丕賱賳賮爻.
鬲禺鬲鬲賲 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 亘丨孬賴丕 賴匕丕 亘賳鬲賷噩丞 賲賮丕丿賴丕 兀賳賴 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱賱賲乇兀丞 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇乇 廿賱丕 亘丨氐賵賱賴丕 毓賱賶 丕賱廿爻鬲賯賱丕賱 丕賱廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 毓賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賰賲丕 兀賳賴丕 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱賴丕 兀賳 鬲丨氐賱 毓賱賶 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 丕賱鬲丕賲丞 亘丕賱乇噩賱 廿賱丕 賮賷 馗賱 賲噩鬲賲毓 鬲爻賵丿賴 丕賱廿卮鬲乇丕賰賷丞. 丨賷孬 兀賳賴 賮賷 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱乇兀爻賲丕賱賷 賱丕亘丿 兀賳 鬲禺囟毓 賮賷賴 賱兀氐丨丕亘 乇丐賵爻 丕賱兀賲賵丕賱.
賵賴賳丕 賱丕 亘丿 賱賷 賲賳 鬲毓賱賷賯 賵賱毓賱賷 兀賯鬲亘爻: 賰丕賳 乇賯賷賯 丕賱兀乇囟 賱丕 賷賲賱賰賵賳 賲毓 夭賵噩丕鬲賴賲 廿賱丕 丨賯 丕賱鬲賲鬲毓 丕賱賲卮鬲乇賰 亘丕賱賲賳夭賱 賵丕賱兀孬丕孬 賵兀丿賵丕鬲 丕賱賲賳夭賱. 賮賱賲 賷賰賳 賱賱乇噩賱 廿匕賳 兀賷 爻亘亘 賷丿賮毓賴 廿賱賶 丕賱鬲爻賱胤 毓賱賶 夭賵噩鬲賴 賱兀賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲賲賱賰 卮賷卅丕賸. 賵毓賱賶 丕賱毓賰爻 賲賳 匕賱賰貙 賰丕賳鬲 毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱毓賲賱 賵丕賱賲氐丕賱丨 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤 亘賷賳賴賲丕貙 鬲乇賮毓 賱賱夭賵噩丞 廿賱賶 賵孬亘丞 乇賮賷毓丞. 賵賱賲丕 兀賱睾賷 丕賱乇賯 亘賯賷 丕賱賮賯乇. 賮賰丕賳 賷乇賶貙 賮賷 亘賷賵鬲 丕賱乇賷賮賷賷賳 賵丕賱丨乇賮賷賷賳貙 丕賱夭賵噩丕賳 賵賴賲丕 賷毓賷卮丕賳 毓賱賶 賯丿賲 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞. 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 賲孬賱 賴匕賴 丕賱丨丕賱 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳 賱丕 賲鬲丕毓丕賸 賵賱丕 禺丕丿賲丕賸 賱兀賳 賴匕丕亘匕禺 賱丕 賷鬲丕丨 廿賱丕 賱賱兀睾賳賷丕亍. 賮賮賷 丕賱毓賲賱 丕賱丨乇貙 鬲丨氐賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 毓賱賶 廿爻鬲賯賱丕賱賴丕 丕賱賮毓賱賷 賱兀賳賴丕 鬲毓賵丿 廿賱賶 廿丨鬲賱丕賱 丿賵乇 廿賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵廿噩鬲賲丕毓賷.
廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賮賯乇丞 鬲毓賳賷 兀賳 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賲賲賰賳丞 賮賷 馗賱 廿爻鬲毓亘丕丿 賲卮鬲乇賰 賱賱夭賵噩 賲毓 夭賵噩鬲賴 賲賳 賯亘賱 兀氐丨丕亘 乇丐賵爻 丕賱兀賲賵丕賱.. 賱賰賳 賷馗賱 賴賳丕賰 賴丕賲卮 亘丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 丕賱乇噩賱 氐丕丨亘 乇兀爻 丕賱賲丕賱 賱賱賲乇兀丞 亘卮賰賱 禺丕氐.. 賱賰賳 丕賱賲卮賰賱丞 賴賳丕 兀賳 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷賰賵賳 亘爻亘亘 賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 "兀賳孬賶" 賱賰賳賴 賷丨丿孬 賱賰賵賳賴丕 丕賱胤乇賮 丕賱兀囟毓賮.. 賵賴匕丕 賴賵 匕丕鬲賴 賲丕 賷丨丿孬 賱賱乇噩賱 丕賱賮賯賷乇 賮賷 匕丕鬲 丕賱馗乇賵賮. 廿賳 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 賲噩鬲賲毓 胤亘賯賷.. 賷爻鬲囟毓賮 賮賷賴 丕賱賯賵賷 丕賱囟毓賷賮 賵賷爻鬲毓亘丿賴.. 賵丿丕卅賲丕賸 賲丕 賵噩丿 丕賱賯賵賷 胤乇賷賯丞 賲锟斤拷 賱丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 丕賱丌禺乇賷賳 丨鬲賶 賵廿賳 賱賲 賷賰賳 賴賳丕賰 毓亘賵丿賷丞 亘丕賱賲賮賴賵賲 丕賱氐乇賷丨 賱賴丕. 賮丕賱丿賵賱 丕賱賷賵賲 鬲爻鬲毓亘丿 亘毓囟賴丕 亘毓囟丕賸.. 賮賲丕 亘丕賱賰 亘丕賱兀賮乇丕丿 責 廿賳 賱賲 賷賰賳 賴賳丕賰 賵丕夭毓 丿丕禺賱賷 賱丿賶 丕賱賲乇亍 亘丕丨鬲乇丕賲 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賱丕 賷賲賰賳 賱卮賷亍 賲丕 兀賳 賷賮乇囟 匕賱賰 賮賷賴.. 賵賴丐賱丕亍 賯賵賲 賷爻鬲丨賯賵賳 丕賱卮賮賯丞 亘丨賯 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 兀賷 卮賷亍 丌禺乇.
賮賷 丕賱禺鬲丕賲貙 賱丕 亘丿 賱賱賲乇亍 賲賳 亘毓丿 丕賱廿胤賱丕毓 毓賱賶 兀賮賰丕乇 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 兀賳 賷鬲賮賴賲 賰賷賮賷丞 賵賱丕丿丞 兀賮賰丕乇 丕賱賲賳馗賲丕鬲 丕賱賳爻賵賷丞 丕賱丿丕毓賷丞 賱鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞.. 賮丕賱馗賱賲 亘丕賱毓丕丿丞 賷賵賱丿 丕賱鬲胤乇賮.. 賱丕賷賲賰賳 丕賱廿賳賰丕乇 亘兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲馗賱賵賲丞 亘卮賰賱 毓丕賲.. 賱賰賳 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷亘乇乇 兀賲賵乇丕賸 賰噩乇賷賲丞 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟.. 兀賵 賮鬲丨 丿賵乇 丿毓丕乇丞 賷賰賵賳 丕賱毓丕賲賱賵賳 賮賷賴 乇噩丕賱丕賸 賰賷 鬲賯囟賷 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵胤乇賴賳 賮賷賴 !
兀賵丕賮賯 丿賷 亘賵賮賵丕乇 賮賷 賰賵賳 鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賴賵 鬲丨乇賷乇 禺丕賱氐 賱賱乇噩賱 賳賮爻賴. 賱賰賳賳丕 賳禺鬲賱賮 賰孬賷乇丕賸 賮賷賲丕 賷噩亘 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇乇 賲賳賴. 賳毓賲貙 賱丕 亘丿 賱賴丕 賲賳 兀賳 鬲鬲丨乇乇 賲賳 丕賱噩賴賱.. 賵丕賱毓亘賵丿賷丞 賵丕賱鬲亘毓賷丞.. 賱賰賳 匕賱賰 賱丕 賷毓賳賷 丕賱賲卮丕毓 兀賵 丕賱卮匕賵匕 丕賵 賴丿賲 丕賱兀爻乇丞 賵賲丐爻爻丞 丕賱夭賵丕噩.. 兀賵 廿亘丕丨丞 丕賱廿噩賴丕囟.
September 3, 2016
No Wonder Intrigue and Strife Abound
"A Man never begins by representing himself as an individual of a certain sex; it goes without saying that he is a Man."
Man represents himself as both the positive and the neutral. He represents Woman as the negative. Man represents himself as objective. He represents Woman as subjective.
Ironically, Man is the Subject, but objective; Woman is the Object, but subjective.
Aristotle defines a Woman in terms of a certain lack of qualities and therefore as defective. Woman is defined relative to Man. Man is not defined relative to Woman.
Yet, both together constitute a pairing, a duality, "a totality of which the two components are necessary to one another." A pairing does not necessarily imply the permanent subjection or submission of One to the Other.
Yet, a certain level of subjection is present in all relationships. "The category of the Other is as primordial as consciousness itself." It derives from the duality of the Self and the Other.
De Beauvoir argues that subjection would be incomprehensible, "if in fact human society were simply a Mitsein or fellowship based on solidarity and friendliness." However, according to Hegel, we find in consciousness, the ego, itself "a fundamental hostility toward every other consciousness; the subject can be posed only in being opposed."
Thus, there is subjection, but it is not simply in one direction. The Subject opposes the Object. It defines itself as the essential as opposed to the inessential. However, the other consciousness, the other ego, makes a reciprocal claim.
In its (the second consciousness鈥�) perception, it is the Subject and the first consciousness is the Object. Each Subject is the Master and each Other is the Slave. "Willy-nilly, individuals and groups are forced to realise the reciprocity of their relations."
De Beauvoir asks the killer question, "How is it, then, that this reciprocity has not been recognised between the sexes, that one of the contrasting terms [the Male] is set up as the sole essential, denying any relativity in regard to its correlative [the Female] and defining the latter as pure Otherness? Why is it that Women do not dispute Male sovereignty?
No Subject will readily volunteer to become the Object, the inessential; it is not the Other who, in defining [itself] as the Other, establishes the One.
The Other is posed as such by the One in defining [itself] as the One. But if the Other is not to regain the status of being the One, [she] must be submissive enough to accept this alien point of view."
What, then, is the origin of Woman鈥檚 submission? What is the origin of Man鈥檚 domination of Woman? Why does Man "stabilize" Woman as Object and doom her to be "overshadowed and forever transcended by another ego (conscience) which is essential and sovereign?
The drama of Woman lies in this conflict between the fundamental aspirations of every Subject (ego) 鈥� who always regards the Self as the essential 鈥� and the compulsions of a situation in which she is the inessential?
What circumstances limit Woman鈥檚 liberty and how can they be overcome?"
Although built on a philosophical foundation, "The Second Sex" seeks concrete answers to these questions.
"A Man never begins by representing himself as an individual of a certain sex; it goes without saying that he is a Man."
Man represents himself as both the positive and the neutral. He represents Woman as the negative. Man represents himself as objective. He represents Woman as subjective.
Ironically, Man is the Subject, but objective; Woman is the Object, but subjective.
Aristotle defines a Woman in terms of a certain lack of qualities and therefore as defective. Woman is defined relative to Man. Man is not defined relative to Woman.
Yet, both together constitute a pairing, a duality, "a totality of which the two components are necessary to one another." A pairing does not necessarily imply the permanent subjection or submission of One to the Other.
Yet, a certain level of subjection is present in all relationships. "The category of the Other is as primordial as consciousness itself." It derives from the duality of the Self and the Other.
De Beauvoir argues that subjection would be incomprehensible, "if in fact human society were simply a Mitsein or fellowship based on solidarity and friendliness." However, according to Hegel, we find in consciousness, the ego, itself "a fundamental hostility toward every other consciousness; the subject can be posed only in being opposed."
Thus, there is subjection, but it is not simply in one direction. The Subject opposes the Object. It defines itself as the essential as opposed to the inessential. However, the other consciousness, the other ego, makes a reciprocal claim.
In its (the second consciousness鈥�) perception, it is the Subject and the first consciousness is the Object. Each Subject is the Master and each Other is the Slave. "Willy-nilly, individuals and groups are forced to realise the reciprocity of their relations."
De Beauvoir asks the killer question, "How is it, then, that this reciprocity has not been recognised between the sexes, that one of the contrasting terms [the Male] is set up as the sole essential, denying any relativity in regard to its correlative [the Female] and defining the latter as pure Otherness? Why is it that Women do not dispute Male sovereignty?
No Subject will readily volunteer to become the Object, the inessential; it is not the Other who, in defining [itself] as the Other, establishes the One.
The Other is posed as such by the One in defining [itself] as the One. But if the Other is not to regain the status of being the One, [she] must be submissive enough to accept this alien point of view."
What, then, is the origin of Woman鈥檚 submission? What is the origin of Man鈥檚 domination of Woman? Why does Man "stabilize" Woman as Object and doom her to be "overshadowed and forever transcended by another ego (conscience) which is essential and sovereign?
The drama of Woman lies in this conflict between the fundamental aspirations of every Subject (ego) 鈥� who always regards the Self as the essential 鈥� and the compulsions of a situation in which she is the inessential?
What circumstances limit Woman鈥檚 liberty and how can they be overcome?"
Although built on a philosophical foundation, "The Second Sex" seeks concrete answers to these questions.
March 5, 2012
This was surprisingly old-fashioned. It was published in 1949 but it just seems so out-dated and often - dare I say it? - wrong and irrelevant.
de Beauvoir's mission is to define woman and find out why the male is the "default" or "normal" sex, while the female sex is the other, the one who deviates from the norm. She does this by looking at biology, psychoanalysis, the history of women from the stone ages to today (or well, 1949) in France, USA, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Scandinavia, the Middle East...She looks at how women have been represented in literature, religion and myths, and she looks at the different stages of a woman's life, from childhood through puberty to middle age. She leaves no stone unturned, and yet it just seems... out-dated. But what is worse, de Beauvoir comes across as a bitter old hag who blames men that their lives are so easy, while women's are oh, so hard.
For instance, puberty is apparently easy for boys, while it leads to neurosis and mental break-downs in girls. Men love conquering the world and see women as silly, stupid puppets, while women hate their lot in life, hate their off-spring, hate their husbands and are filled with Freudian complexes. When de Beauvoir started analysing why some women become lesbians I had to laugh out loud (this is one of the places where the out-datedness shines through).
The introduction was great and thought-provoking, the first chapter boring, the next handful of chapters OK, and from there on I started skipping pages here and there because of all the repetitions. de Beauvoir's central message can be boiled down to this: Men achieve transcendence, women are doomed to immanence (and I cannot tell you how many times she wrote that during the 740 pages. Every third page had de B. blaming men their transcendence and regretting women their immanence from whence everything bad comes. Oh, the repetitions!) And also, much as I love literature, I hardly think quoting passages from D.H.Lawrence, Tolstoy or even my beloved Virginia Woolf constitutes hardcore truth or facts that can be used in scientific study, which is what Simone de B. does here.
Finally, it is hard to take someone seriously who claims that a) marriages are never founded on love but is merely a social institution meant to keep women in place, and b) "Women's fellow feeling rarely rises to genuine friendship" because women must fight individually to gain a place in the masculine world and so they are hostile towards other women.
Seriously.
Simone de Beauvoir has not aged well.
de Beauvoir's mission is to define woman and find out why the male is the "default" or "normal" sex, while the female sex is the other, the one who deviates from the norm. She does this by looking at biology, psychoanalysis, the history of women from the stone ages to today (or well, 1949) in France, USA, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Scandinavia, the Middle East...She looks at how women have been represented in literature, religion and myths, and she looks at the different stages of a woman's life, from childhood through puberty to middle age. She leaves no stone unturned, and yet it just seems... out-dated. But what is worse, de Beauvoir comes across as a bitter old hag who blames men that their lives are so easy, while women's are oh, so hard.
For instance, puberty is apparently easy for boys, while it leads to neurosis and mental break-downs in girls. Men love conquering the world and see women as silly, stupid puppets, while women hate their lot in life, hate their off-spring, hate their husbands and are filled with Freudian complexes. When de Beauvoir started analysing why some women become lesbians I had to laugh out loud (this is one of the places where the out-datedness shines through).
The introduction was great and thought-provoking, the first chapter boring, the next handful of chapters OK, and from there on I started skipping pages here and there because of all the repetitions. de Beauvoir's central message can be boiled down to this: Men achieve transcendence, women are doomed to immanence (and I cannot tell you how many times she wrote that during the 740 pages. Every third page had de B. blaming men their transcendence and regretting women their immanence from whence everything bad comes. Oh, the repetitions!) And also, much as I love literature, I hardly think quoting passages from D.H.Lawrence, Tolstoy or even my beloved Virginia Woolf constitutes hardcore truth or facts that can be used in scientific study, which is what Simone de B. does here.
Finally, it is hard to take someone seriously who claims that a) marriages are never founded on love but is merely a social institution meant to keep women in place, and b) "Women's fellow feeling rarely rises to genuine friendship" because women must fight individually to gain a place in the masculine world and so they are hostile towards other women.
Seriously.
Simone de Beauvoir has not aged well.
February 4, 2019
丕诏乇 禺丕賳賲 芦爻蹖賲賵賳 丿賵亘賵丌乇禄 丕賳丿蹖卮賲賳丿 賮賲蹖賳蹖爻鬲 丕诏夭蹖爻鬲丕賳爻蹖丕賱蹖爻鬲 亘賴 賴賲丕賳 夭蹖亘丕蹖蹖 讴賴 芦噩賳爻 丿賵賲禄 乇丕 賲蹖 賳賵卮鬲貙 亘賴 賴賲丕賳 夭蹖亘丕蹖蹖 賴賲 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲蹖 讴乇丿貙 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賲賴賲 丕賵 禺蹖賱蹖 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賵 丿賯蹖賯 鬲乇 賮賴賲蹖丿賴 賲蹖 卮丿 賵 賲孬賲乇 孬賲乇. 丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丨賵丕卮蹖 賵 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲 賮乇丕賵丕賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕賵 讴丕乇蹖 讴乇丿 鬲丕 賲賵丕賮賯 賵 賲禺丕賱賮卮貙 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕卮 乇丕 賳鬲蹖噩賴 賯胤毓蹖 丕賳丿蹖卮賴 賵 賳賵卮鬲賴 賴丕蹖卮 亘丿丕賳賳丿. 亘賱丕蹖蹖 讴賴 爻乇 禺蹖賱蹖 丕夭 賲鬲賮讴乇丕賳 丿蹖诏乇 賴賲 丌賲丿賴
.
賲賳 賯氐丿 鬲賯丿蹖爻 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賵 丿賮丕毓 丕夭 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲卮 乇丕 賳丿丕乇賲. 丕氐賱丕 丿乇 丿賵乇賴 倬爻鬲 賮賲蹖賳蹖爻賲 賵 賲賵噩 爻賵賲 禺蹖賱蹖 丕夭 賮賲蹖賳蹖爻鬲賴丕 賵 賲鬲賮讴乇丕賳 睾乇亘蹖 賴賲 亘賴 禺蹖賱蹖 丕夭 丕賳丿蹖卮賴 賴丕蹖 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賲蹖 禺賳丿賳丿. 賳讴鬲賴 丕蹖賳噩丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕 賴賲賴 夭賲蹖賳賴 賴丕 賵 鬲賱賯蹖 賴丕蹖 丕卮鬲亘丕賴卮貙 蹖讴 丨乇讴鬲 噩丿蹖 賮讴乇蹖 賵 賮賱爻賮蹖 亘賵丿 賵 亘丕毓孬 卮丿 賮乇丕鬲乇 丕夭 賳诏丕賴賴丕蹖 爻胤丨蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖貙 丕丨爻丕爻蹖 賵 跇賵乇賳丕賱蹖爻鬲蹖 亘賴 賲賵囟賵毓 夭賳丕賳 賮讴乇 卮賵丿. 丕蹖賳 賲卮賯 丕賵賱 亘賵丿貙 丕诏乇 丿乇爻鬲 丕丿丕賲賴 倬蹖丿丕 賲蹖 讴乇丿貙 爻乇賲卮賯 賲卮賯 賴丕蹖 亘賴鬲乇 賵 丿賯蹖賯 鬲乇 賲蹖 卮丿貙 丕賲丕 丌蹖丕 卮丿責 丿乇 噩賴丕賳 卮丕蹖丿 丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲蹖 丕賮鬲丕丿賴 亘丕卮丿貙 丕賲丕 賴賳賵夭 賴賲 賵賯鬲蹖 氐賮丨丕鬲 乇賵卮賳賮讴乇賳诏丕卮鬲賴 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 乇丕 賲蹖 禺賵丕賳賲 賲蹖 亘蹖賳賲 鬲讴乇丕乇 賲讴乇乇丕鬲 丕爻鬲 賵 毓賲賵賲丕 賴賲 賳賴 丕夭 賲賳亘毓 丕氐賱蹖 賵 毓賱賲蹖. 賴蹖趩 丿蹖讴鬲賴 丕蹖 亘蹖 睾賱胤 賳蹖爻鬲貙 丕蹖賳 賲鬲賳 亘乇丕蹖 蹖讴 卮乇賵毓 賮賱爻賮蹖 禺賵亘 丕爻鬲貙 亘賴 卮乇胤蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 匕賴賳 賮賱爻賮蹖 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 賵 亘鬲賵丕賳丿 丿乇讴 讴賳丿 卮乇丕蹖胤 賵 夭賲蹖賳賴 賴丕蹖 賮讴乇蹖 賮乇赖賳诏蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 乇丕. 丕蹖賳 賲鬲賳貙 丿乇 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 丨丕賱鬲貙 丕诏乇 賴蹖趩 毓蹖亘蹖 賴賲 賳丿丕卮鬲貙 賲鬲賳蹖 亘乇丌賲丿賴 丕夭 賮乇赖賳诏 睾乇亘 賵 賲賳丕爻亘 倬跇賵賴卮 丿乇 賮賴賲 夭賳 睾乇亘蹖 丕爻鬲貙 丕賲丕 丨鬲蹖 丕诏乇 賳賴 丕夭 賳鬲蹖噩賴 倬跇賵賴卮貙 丕夭 乇賵卮 丕賵 讴賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 丿乇爻 诏乇賮鬲. 亘丕 賴賲蹖賳 丿賯鬲 賵 賯賵鬲貙 賵 亘蹖 鬲讴乇丕乇 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲 賯亘賱蹖貙 夭賳 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 賵 夭賳 賲爻賱賲丕賳卮 乇丕 趩賴 讴爻蹖 賳賵卮鬲賴 賵 蹖丕 賲蹖 賳賵蹖爻丿責 丌蹖丕 讴爻蹖 鬲丕讴賳賵賳 亘丕 丕賳丿蹖卮賴 賮賱爻賮蹖 亘賴 趩蹖爻鬲蹖 賵 賴爻鬲蹖賽 夭賳 賲爻賱賲丕賳貙 夭賳 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 賵 夭賳 卮乇賯蹖 賮讴乇 讴乇丿賴 丕爻鬲 責
.
丿賵 丕卮鬲亘丕賴 毓賲丿賴 丿賵亘賵丕乇 賵 賮賲蹖賳蹖爻鬲 賴丕蹖 讴賱丕爻蹖讴 蹖讴蹖 丕蹖賳 亘賵丿 讴賴 賴蹖趩 丿乇讴蹖 丕夭 禺賱賯鬲貙 賮胤乇鬲 賵 胤亘蹖毓鬲 夭賳 賳丿丕卮鬲賳丿 賵 亘賴 賯賵賱 禺賵丿 丿賵亘賵丌乇 芦夭賳貙 夭賳 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 賳賲蹖 丌蹖丿貙 夭賳 賲蹖 卮賵丿禄 丿乇丨丕賱蹖讴賴 丕蹖賳 蹖讴蹖 乇丕 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿 讴丕乇蹖卮 讴乇丿貙 丕诏乇 亘倬匕蹖乇蹖賲 匕賴賳蹖鬲 夭賳 亘賵丿賳 乇丕 賲乇丿丕賳 爻丕禺鬲賴 丕賳丿貙 噩爻賲蹖鬲卮 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇 讴丕乇 賲乇丿丕賳 賳亘賵丿賴! 丿蹖诏乇 丕蹖賳讴賴 亘丕 倬丕賮卮丕乇蹖 賴丕蹖 亘蹖卮 丕夭 丨丿 亘乇 芦夭賳 亘賵丿賳禄貙 賲賮賴賵賲賽 芦丕賳爻丕賳 亘賵丿賳禄 乇丕 亘賴 丨丕卮蹖賴 亘乇丿賳丿貙 丿乇丨丕賱蹖讴賴 賴乇 賲乇丿 賵 賴乇 夭賳蹖 丕亘鬲丿丕 亘丕蹖丿 丕賳爻丕賳 亘丕卮丿 賵 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 賴賲貙 賲卮鬲乇讴丕鬲 夭賳丕賳 賵 賲乇丿丕賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘賴 賵噩賵丿丌賵乇賳丿賴 丨賯蹖賯鬲 丕賳爻丕賳蹖貙 賵噩賵丿貙 賮乇丿蹖鬲 賵 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕賵 賴爻鬲賳丿. 夭賳 亘賵丿賳 賵 賲乇丿亘賵丿賳 賮乇毓 亘乇 丕氐賱 賲爻卅賱賴 丕爻鬲. 丕蹖賳 賳诏丕賴 丕賳爻丕賳蹖 趩蹖夭蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丿乇 賴賲賴 丕丿蹖丕賳 鬲丨乇蹖賮 賳卮丿賴 賲賵乇丿 鬲賵噩賴 丕爻鬲.
.
亘禺卮蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘
芦丿乇 賲噩賲賵毓 毓賯蹖丿賴 賲乇丿丕賳 賯乇賵賳 賵爻胤蹖 賳爻亘鬲 亘賴 夭賳賴丕 亘賴 乇丕爻鬲蹖 禺蹖賱蹖 賲爻丕毓丿 賳蹖爻鬲. 丿乇爻鬲 丕爻鬲 讴賴 卮丕毓乇丕賳 丌丿丕亘 卮賳丕爻 亘賴 爻鬲丕蹖卮 毓卮賯 倬乇丿丕禺鬲賴 丕賳丿貙 丿乇爻鬲 丕爻鬲 讴賴 芦賴賳乇 毓卮賯 賵乇夭蹖丿賳禄賴丕蹖 賲鬲毓丿丿蹖 ... 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 噩賵丕賳丕賳 乇丕 賲賱夭賲 亘賴 丌賳 賲蹖 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 賵賯賮 禺丿賲鬲 亘賴 亘丕賳賵丕賳 讴賳賳丿 禺賱賯 賲蹖 卮賵丿貨 丕賲丕 丿乇亘乇丕亘乇 丕蹖賳 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 鬲丕孬蹖乇倬匕蹖乇賮鬲賴 丕夭 禺賳蹖丕诏乇丕賳 卮丕毓乇貙 賳賵卮鬲賴 賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 讴賴 鬲丨鬲 鬲兀孬蹖乇亘賵乇跇賵丕夭蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 丿乇 丌賳 賴丕 亘丕 亘丿噩賳爻蹖 亘賴 夭賳 賴丕 丨賲賱賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿: 丕賳賵丕毓 卮毓乇賴丕 賵 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴 賴丕蹖 禺賳丿賴 丿丕乇貙 夭賳 賴丕 乇丕 亘賴 爻亘亘 鬲賳亘賱蹖貙 毓卮賵賴 诏乇蹖 賵 鬲噩賲賱卮丕賳 賲賵乇丿 丕賳鬲賯丕丿 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖 丿賴丿. 讴賱蹖爻丕 丕夭丿賵丕噩 乇丕 鬲賯丿蹖爻 讴乇丿賴 賵賱蹖 胤亘賯賴 亘乇诏夭蹖丿賴 賲匕賴亘蹖 乇丕 丕夭 丌賳 亘丕夭丿丕卮鬲賴 ... 賵賯鬲蹖 亘蹖賳 丕夭丿賵丕噩 賵 賲賵賯毓蹖鬲 讴卮蹖卮蹖 爻丕夭卮蹖 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿貙 趩乇丕 禺丿丕賵賳丿 夭賳 賴丕 乇丕 丌賮乇蹖丿賴 丕爻鬲責 丿乇 丕夭丿賵丕噩 氐賱丨 賵 丌乇丕賲卮蹖 賳賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 賵噩賵丿 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿: 丕夭丿賵丕噩 亘丕蹖丿 讴丕乇蹖 卮蹖胤丕賳蹖 亘丕卮丿!...禄
.
賲賳 賯氐丿 鬲賯丿蹖爻 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賵 丿賮丕毓 丕夭 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲卮 乇丕 賳丿丕乇賲. 丕氐賱丕 丿乇 丿賵乇賴 倬爻鬲 賮賲蹖賳蹖爻賲 賵 賲賵噩 爻賵賲 禺蹖賱蹖 丕夭 賮賲蹖賳蹖爻鬲賴丕 賵 賲鬲賮讴乇丕賳 睾乇亘蹖 賴賲 亘賴 禺蹖賱蹖 丕夭 丕賳丿蹖卮賴 賴丕蹖 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賲蹖 禺賳丿賳丿. 賳讴鬲賴 丕蹖賳噩丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕 賴賲賴 夭賲蹖賳賴 賴丕 賵 鬲賱賯蹖 賴丕蹖 丕卮鬲亘丕賴卮貙 蹖讴 丨乇讴鬲 噩丿蹖 賮讴乇蹖 賵 賮賱爻賮蹖 亘賵丿 賵 亘丕毓孬 卮丿 賮乇丕鬲乇 丕夭 賳诏丕賴賴丕蹖 爻胤丨蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖貙 丕丨爻丕爻蹖 賵 跇賵乇賳丕賱蹖爻鬲蹖 亘賴 賲賵囟賵毓 夭賳丕賳 賮讴乇 卮賵丿. 丕蹖賳 賲卮賯 丕賵賱 亘賵丿貙 丕诏乇 丿乇爻鬲 丕丿丕賲賴 倬蹖丿丕 賲蹖 讴乇丿貙 爻乇賲卮賯 賲卮賯 賴丕蹖 亘賴鬲乇 賵 丿賯蹖賯 鬲乇 賲蹖 卮丿貙 丕賲丕 丌蹖丕 卮丿責 丿乇 噩賴丕賳 卮丕蹖丿 丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲蹖 丕賮鬲丕丿賴 亘丕卮丿貙 丕賲丕 賴賳賵夭 賴賲 賵賯鬲蹖 氐賮丨丕鬲 乇賵卮賳賮讴乇賳诏丕卮鬲賴 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 乇丕 賲蹖 禺賵丕賳賲 賲蹖 亘蹖賳賲 鬲讴乇丕乇 賲讴乇乇丕鬲 丕爻鬲 賵 毓賲賵賲丕 賴賲 賳賴 丕夭 賲賳亘毓 丕氐賱蹖 賵 毓賱賲蹖. 賴蹖趩 丿蹖讴鬲賴 丕蹖 亘蹖 睾賱胤 賳蹖爻鬲貙 丕蹖賳 賲鬲賳 亘乇丕蹖 蹖讴 卮乇賵毓 賮賱爻賮蹖 禺賵亘 丕爻鬲貙 亘賴 卮乇胤蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 匕賴賳 賮賱爻賮蹖 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 賵 亘鬲賵丕賳丿 丿乇讴 讴賳丿 卮乇丕蹖胤 賵 夭賲蹖賳賴 賴丕蹖 賮讴乇蹖 賮乇赖賳诏蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 乇丕. 丕蹖賳 賲鬲賳貙 丿乇 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 丨丕賱鬲貙 丕诏乇 賴蹖趩 毓蹖亘蹖 賴賲 賳丿丕卮鬲貙 賲鬲賳蹖 亘乇丌賲丿賴 丕夭 賮乇赖賳诏 睾乇亘 賵 賲賳丕爻亘 倬跇賵賴卮 丿乇 賮賴賲 夭賳 睾乇亘蹖 丕爻鬲貙 丕賲丕 丨鬲蹖 丕诏乇 賳賴 丕夭 賳鬲蹖噩賴 倬跇賵賴卮貙 丕夭 乇賵卮 丕賵 讴賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 丿乇爻 诏乇賮鬲. 亘丕 賴賲蹖賳 丿賯鬲 賵 賯賵鬲貙 賵 亘蹖 鬲讴乇丕乇 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲 賯亘賱蹖貙 夭賳 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 賵 夭賳 賲爻賱賲丕賳卮 乇丕 趩賴 讴爻蹖 賳賵卮鬲賴 賵 蹖丕 賲蹖 賳賵蹖爻丿責 丌蹖丕 讴爻蹖 鬲丕讴賳賵賳 亘丕 丕賳丿蹖卮賴 賮賱爻賮蹖 亘賴 趩蹖爻鬲蹖 賵 賴爻鬲蹖賽 夭賳 賲爻賱賲丕賳貙 夭賳 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 賵 夭賳 卮乇賯蹖 賮讴乇 讴乇丿賴 丕爻鬲 責
.
丿賵 丕卮鬲亘丕賴 毓賲丿賴 丿賵亘賵丕乇 賵 賮賲蹖賳蹖爻鬲 賴丕蹖 讴賱丕爻蹖讴 蹖讴蹖 丕蹖賳 亘賵丿 讴賴 賴蹖趩 丿乇讴蹖 丕夭 禺賱賯鬲貙 賮胤乇鬲 賵 胤亘蹖毓鬲 夭賳 賳丿丕卮鬲賳丿 賵 亘賴 賯賵賱 禺賵丿 丿賵亘賵丌乇 芦夭賳貙 夭賳 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 賳賲蹖 丌蹖丿貙 夭賳 賲蹖 卮賵丿禄 丿乇丨丕賱蹖讴賴 丕蹖賳 蹖讴蹖 乇丕 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿 讴丕乇蹖卮 讴乇丿貙 丕诏乇 亘倬匕蹖乇蹖賲 匕賴賳蹖鬲 夭賳 亘賵丿賳 乇丕 賲乇丿丕賳 爻丕禺鬲賴 丕賳丿貙 噩爻賲蹖鬲卮 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇 讴丕乇 賲乇丿丕賳 賳亘賵丿賴! 丿蹖诏乇 丕蹖賳讴賴 亘丕 倬丕賮卮丕乇蹖 賴丕蹖 亘蹖卮 丕夭 丨丿 亘乇 芦夭賳 亘賵丿賳禄貙 賲賮賴賵賲賽 芦丕賳爻丕賳 亘賵丿賳禄 乇丕 亘賴 丨丕卮蹖賴 亘乇丿賳丿貙 丿乇丨丕賱蹖讴賴 賴乇 賲乇丿 賵 賴乇 夭賳蹖 丕亘鬲丿丕 亘丕蹖丿 丕賳爻丕賳 亘丕卮丿 賵 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 賴賲貙 賲卮鬲乇讴丕鬲 夭賳丕賳 賵 賲乇丿丕賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘賴 賵噩賵丿丌賵乇賳丿賴 丨賯蹖賯鬲 丕賳爻丕賳蹖貙 賵噩賵丿貙 賮乇丿蹖鬲 賵 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕賵 賴爻鬲賳丿. 夭賳 亘賵丿賳 賵 賲乇丿亘賵丿賳 賮乇毓 亘乇 丕氐賱 賲爻卅賱賴 丕爻鬲. 丕蹖賳 賳诏丕賴 丕賳爻丕賳蹖 趩蹖夭蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丿乇 賴賲賴 丕丿蹖丕賳 鬲丨乇蹖賮 賳卮丿賴 賲賵乇丿 鬲賵噩賴 丕爻鬲.
.
亘禺卮蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘
芦丿乇 賲噩賲賵毓 毓賯蹖丿賴 賲乇丿丕賳 賯乇賵賳 賵爻胤蹖 賳爻亘鬲 亘賴 夭賳賴丕 亘賴 乇丕爻鬲蹖 禺蹖賱蹖 賲爻丕毓丿 賳蹖爻鬲. 丿乇爻鬲 丕爻鬲 讴賴 卮丕毓乇丕賳 丌丿丕亘 卮賳丕爻 亘賴 爻鬲丕蹖卮 毓卮賯 倬乇丿丕禺鬲賴 丕賳丿貙 丿乇爻鬲 丕爻鬲 讴賴 芦賴賳乇 毓卮賯 賵乇夭蹖丿賳禄賴丕蹖 賲鬲毓丿丿蹖 ... 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 噩賵丕賳丕賳 乇丕 賲賱夭賲 亘賴 丌賳 賲蹖 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 賵賯賮 禺丿賲鬲 亘賴 亘丕賳賵丕賳 讴賳賳丿 禺賱賯 賲蹖 卮賵丿貨 丕賲丕 丿乇亘乇丕亘乇 丕蹖賳 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 鬲丕孬蹖乇倬匕蹖乇賮鬲賴 丕夭 禺賳蹖丕诏乇丕賳 卮丕毓乇貙 賳賵卮鬲賴 賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 讴賴 鬲丨鬲 鬲兀孬蹖乇亘賵乇跇賵丕夭蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 丿乇 丌賳 賴丕 亘丕 亘丿噩賳爻蹖 亘賴 夭賳 賴丕 丨賲賱賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿: 丕賳賵丕毓 卮毓乇賴丕 賵 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴 賴丕蹖 禺賳丿賴 丿丕乇貙 夭賳 賴丕 乇丕 亘賴 爻亘亘 鬲賳亘賱蹖貙 毓卮賵賴 诏乇蹖 賵 鬲噩賲賱卮丕賳 賲賵乇丿 丕賳鬲賯丕丿 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖 丿賴丿. 讴賱蹖爻丕 丕夭丿賵丕噩 乇丕 鬲賯丿蹖爻 讴乇丿賴 賵賱蹖 胤亘賯賴 亘乇诏夭蹖丿賴 賲匕賴亘蹖 乇丕 丕夭 丌賳 亘丕夭丿丕卮鬲賴 ... 賵賯鬲蹖 亘蹖賳 丕夭丿賵丕噩 賵 賲賵賯毓蹖鬲 讴卮蹖卮蹖 爻丕夭卮蹖 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿貙 趩乇丕 禺丿丕賵賳丿 夭賳 賴丕 乇丕 丌賮乇蹖丿賴 丕爻鬲責 丿乇 丕夭丿賵丕噩 氐賱丨 賵 丌乇丕賲卮蹖 賳賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 賵噩賵丿 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿: 丕夭丿賵丕噩 亘丕蹖丿 讴丕乇蹖 卮蹖胤丕賳蹖 亘丕卮丿!...禄
March 9, 2021
搁别蝉别帽补:
Valoraci贸n 2.5/5
Empec茅 a leer este ensayo sobre feminismo con la idea de aprender qu茅 es el feminismo, de d贸nde viene, c贸mo surge, c贸mo estaba en el momento de escribirse este ensayo, las dificultades de la igualdad, hacia donde iban las mujeres, problemas y soluciones, cre铆a que iba a poder distinguir conductas machistas que se dan ahora para poder corregirlas, cre铆a que me iba a ense帽ar a corregir mi propio comportamiento y comentarios, cre铆a que me iba a ense帽ar a reeducarme en la igualdad y a educar a futuras generaciones. Y nada m谩s lejos de la realidad.
Es un ensayo muy bien estructurado en los inicios pero ca贸tico en el fondo, repetitivo, influenciado por la filosof铆a y pol铆tica de los 谩mbitos en los que la escritora se movi贸, un ensayo visto desde la 茅lite para la 茅lite, sin tener en cuenta a minor铆as, a otras clases sociales inferiores, otras culturas, continentes o razas.
A pesar de entender que est谩 publicado en 1949, situ谩ndome en esa 茅poca, ni entiendo ni comparto el pensamiento de esta fil贸sofa, en gran parte de este ensayo, no en todo.
De este ensayo de 830 p谩ginas, al que le sobran la mitad por repetitivo y porque muchos datos que se dan no son de ella, ni siquiera su opini贸n, me quedo con la deconstrucci贸n que hace la mujer, el an谩lisis tan completo y complejo que hace de ella y con la reflexi贸n a la que me ha llevado al finalizar su lectura sobre el feminismo: El feminismo es la igualdad de g茅neros, los hombres necesitan a las mujeres y viceversa, nadie es m谩s que nadie por pertenecer una religi贸n, sexo, pa铆s, raza, estatus social o cultural, y solo lo alcanzaremos cuando entendamos que estamos todos juntos en este barco y que por supuesto nadie debe apropiarse del feminismo en su provecho, es un movimiento que debe ser independiente de cualquier corriente filos贸fica e ideolog铆a pol铆tica.
Valoraci贸n 2.5/5
Empec茅 a leer este ensayo sobre feminismo con la idea de aprender qu茅 es el feminismo, de d贸nde viene, c贸mo surge, c贸mo estaba en el momento de escribirse este ensayo, las dificultades de la igualdad, hacia donde iban las mujeres, problemas y soluciones, cre铆a que iba a poder distinguir conductas machistas que se dan ahora para poder corregirlas, cre铆a que me iba a ense帽ar a corregir mi propio comportamiento y comentarios, cre铆a que me iba a ense帽ar a reeducarme en la igualdad y a educar a futuras generaciones. Y nada m谩s lejos de la realidad.
Es un ensayo muy bien estructurado en los inicios pero ca贸tico en el fondo, repetitivo, influenciado por la filosof铆a y pol铆tica de los 谩mbitos en los que la escritora se movi贸, un ensayo visto desde la 茅lite para la 茅lite, sin tener en cuenta a minor铆as, a otras clases sociales inferiores, otras culturas, continentes o razas.
A pesar de entender que est谩 publicado en 1949, situ谩ndome en esa 茅poca, ni entiendo ni comparto el pensamiento de esta fil贸sofa, en gran parte de este ensayo, no en todo.
De este ensayo de 830 p谩ginas, al que le sobran la mitad por repetitivo y porque muchos datos que se dan no son de ella, ni siquiera su opini贸n, me quedo con la deconstrucci贸n que hace la mujer, el an谩lisis tan completo y complejo que hace de ella y con la reflexi贸n a la que me ha llevado al finalizar su lectura sobre el feminismo: El feminismo es la igualdad de g茅neros, los hombres necesitan a las mujeres y viceversa, nadie es m谩s que nadie por pertenecer una religi贸n, sexo, pa铆s, raza, estatus social o cultural, y solo lo alcanzaremos cuando entendamos que estamos todos juntos en este barco y que por supuesto nadie debe apropiarse del feminismo en su provecho, es un movimiento que debe ser independiente de cualquier corriente filos贸fica e ideolog铆a pol铆tica.
October 11, 2011
賰丕賳 賴匕丕 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丿丕卅賲丕 毓丕賱賲 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵賰賱 丕賱兀爻亘丕亘 丕賱賲毓賱賱丞 賱匕賱賰 亘丿鬲 賱賳丕 睾賷乇 賰丕賮賷丞 毓賱賶 兀賳賳丕 爻賳鬲賲賰賳 兀賳 賳賮賴賲 賰賷賮 鬲卮賰賱 丕賱鬲賲丕賷夭 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 ,毓賱賶 囟賵亍 丕賱賮賱爻賮丞 丕賱賵噩賵丿賷丞 , 賵賲賳 匕賱賰 鬲賳胤賱賯 丕賱賰丕鬲亘丞 丕賱賳爻賵賷丞 丕賱賵噩賵丿賷丞 爻賷賲賵賳 丿賷 賮賵乇丕 亘毓丿丿 鬲乇丿丿 賰賲丕 匕賰乇鬲 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘丞 毓賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 兀賲乇 賲孬賷乇 賵賱賰賳 賱賷爻 亘丕賱卮賷亍 丕賱噩丿賷丿 .
廿匕丕 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱兀賳賵孬丞 賵丨丿賴丕 賱丕 鬲賰賮賷 賱鬲毓乇賷賮 丕賱賲乇兀丞 , 賵 賷賳亘睾賷 兀賳 賳爻賱賲 賵賱賵 亘氐賵乇丞 賲丐賯鬲丞 兀賳 賴賳丕賰 賳爻丕亍 毓賱賶 丕賱兀乇囟 賮毓賱賷賳丕 丨賷賳卅匕 兀賳 賳鬲爻丕亍賱 賲丕 賴賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 責
賮賮賷 毓賴丿 丕賱賯丿賷爻 鬲賵賲丕爻 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲亘丿賵 賰噩賵賴乇 鬲丨丿丿 禺氐丕卅氐賴 賰賲丕 鬲丨丿丿 禺氐丕卅氐 賵賲夭丕賷丕 賳亘丕鬲 丕賱禺卮禺丕卮. 丕賱丕 丕賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賲匕賴亘 丕賱賮賰乇賷 賮賯丿 賲賳 賳賮賵匕賴 賱兀賳 丕賱毓賱賵賲 丕賱亘賷賱賵噩賷丞 賵丕賱兀噩鬲賲丕毓賷丞 賱賲 鬲毓丿 鬲賯乇 亘賵噩賵丿 噩賵賴乇 孬丕亘鬲 賷丨丿丿 賳賲丕匕噩 賲毓賷賳丞 賰丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱賷賴賵丿賷 賵丕賱夭賳噩賷.
兀賳 賲賵賯賮 丕賱鬲丨丿賷 丕賱匕賷 鬲賯賮賴 丕賱賳爻丕亍 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丕鬲 賷孬亘鬲 兀賳 卮毓賵乇 丕賱兀賳賵孬丞 賷胤睾賷 毓賱賷賴賳 , 賵丕賱丨賯賷賯丞 兀賳賴 賷賰賮賷 廿賱賯丕亍 賳馗乇丞 賱賱鬲兀賰丿 賲賳 兀賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷丞 鬲賳賯爻賲 丕賱賶 賮卅鬲賷賳 鬲鬲賲丕賷夭丕賳 亘丕賱賱亘丕爻 賵丕賱賵噩賴 賵丕賱噩爻賲 賵丕賱丕亘鬲爻丕賲丞 賵丕賱賲卮賷丞 賵丕賱丕賴鬲賲丕賲 賵丕賱賲卮丕睾賱 鬲賲丕賷夭丕 賵丕囟丨丕 賵賯丿 鬲賰賵賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賮賵丕乇賯 爻胤丨賷丞 賵爻丕卅乇丞 廿賱賶 丕賱夭賵丕賱 . 兀賳賲丕 丕賱兀賰賷丿 兀賳賴丕 賲賵噩賵丿丞 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱丨丕賱賷 亘賰賱 賵囟賵丨 .
丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賷賮乇囟 賳賮爻賴 賴賳丕 賴賵 : 賰賷賮 鬲賲賰賳 兀丨丿 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 賮賯胤 賲賳 賮乇囟 賳賮爻賴 賰噩賵賴乇 賵丨賷丿 賲賳賰乇丕賸 賵噩賵丿 賰賱 賳爻亘賷丞 鬲乇亘胤賴 亘丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇, 賲毓乇賮丕賸 廿賷丕賴 亘兀賳賴 丕賱丌禺乇 丕賱氐乇賮 .賵賲賳 兀賷賳 丕鬲賶 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賴匕丕 丕賱乇囟賵禺 責!
賴賳丕賰 丨丕賱丕鬲 丕禺乇賶 鬲乇賷賳丕 鬲賲賰賳 賮卅丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 亘賮卅丞 兀禺乇賶 禺賱丕賱 賮鬲乇丞 賲賳 丕賱夭賲賳 賵賰丕賳 賴匕丕 丕賱丕賲鬲賷丕夭 賳丕噩賲丕 賮賷 丕賱睾丕賱亘 毓賳 鬲賲丕賷夭 丕賱毓丿丿 賮鬲賮乇囟 丕賱兀賰孬乇賷丞 賯丕賳賵賳賴丕 毓賱賶 丕賱兀賯賱賷丞 賵鬲囟胤賴丿賴丕 廿賱丕 廿賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賱爻賳 兀賯賱賷丞 賮囟賱丕賸 毓賳 兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲爻賱胤 賱賴
賲賴賲丕 兀賵睾賱賳丕 賮賷 鬲鬲亘毓 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 , 賳乇賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賲購賱丨賯丕鬲 亘丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵賴匕賴 丕賱鬲亘毓賷丞 賳鬲賷噩丞 丨丕丿孬 鬲丕乇賷禺賷 賵賱賷爻鬲 丕賱兀賲乇 丕賱胤丕乇卅 賮賯胤 丕賱匕賷 賷噩毓賱 賲賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 亘氐賵乇丞 賲胤賱賯丞 .
賰賲丕 鬲乇賶 爻賷賲賵賳 兀賳 賳囟丕賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱賲 賷賰賳 賯胤 廿賱丕 賳囟丕賱丕賸 乇賲夭賷丕 賵賱賲 鬲賮夭 廿賱丕 亘賲丕 兀乇丕丿 丕賱乇噩賱 丕賱鬲賳丕夭賱 毓賳賴 賵賱賲 鬲兀禺匕 卮賷卅丕 兀亘丿丕 亘賱 鬲爻賱賲鬲 賲丕 兀毓胤賷 廿賱賷賴丕
賮賱丕 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丨鬲賶 賮賷 丕賱丨賱賲 廿夭丕賱丞 丕賱匕賰賵乇 賮丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤賴丕 亘賲囟胤賴丿賷賴丕 , 賱丕 賲孬賷賱 賱賴丕 匕賱賰 兀賳 丕賳賯爻丕賲 丕賱噩賳爻 賴賵 賮賷 丕賱賵丕賯毓 卮賷亍 毓囟賵賷 賲丨爻賵爻 賵賱賷爻 賲乇丨賱丞 賲賳 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱亘卮乇 .
*
賯丿 賷禺賷賱 賱賳丕 廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱賲鬲亘丕丿賱丞 賯丿 爻丕毓丿鬲 毓賱賶 鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱丨賯賷賯丞 兀賳 丕賱丨丕噩丞 丕賱亘賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲噩毓賱 丕賱匕賰乇 賲賯賷丿丕賸 亘丕賱兀賳孬賶 賱賲 鬲丨乇乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕噩鬲賲丕毓賷丕賸 , 賵廿匕丕 賰丕賳 廿賱丨丕丨 丕賱丨丕噩丞 賲鬲爻丕賵賷丕 毓賳丿 丕賱胤乇賮賷賳 賮丕賳賴 賷鬲丿禺賱 丿丕卅賲丕 賮賷 氐丕賱丨 丕賱賲囟胤賴丿賷賳 囟丿 丕賱賲囟胤賴丿賷賳 .
賲賳 丕賱賲賮賴賵賲 丕賱卮丕卅毓 兀賳 賷鬲丨賵賱 丕夭丿賵丕噩 丕賱噩賳爻" 賰兀賷 丕夭丿賵丕噩 廿賱賶 賳夭丕毓
賵賲賳 丕賱賲毓乇賵賮 丕賳賴 廿匕丕 賳噩丨 丕丨丿 丕賱胤乇賮賷賳 賮賷 賮乇囟 鬲賮賵賯賴 賮廿賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲賮賵賯 賷賲賷賱 丕賱賶 鬲兀賰賷丿 賳賮爻賴 鬲兀賰賷丿丕賸 賲胤賱賯丕賸 賵賱賰賳 賷賳亘睾賶 賱賳丕 兀賳 賳爻鬲賮爻乇 賱賲丕匕丕 賰丕賳 丕賱乇噩賱 丕賱乇丕亘丨 賮賷 丕賱亘丿丕賷丞 責 賵賱賲丕匕丕 賰丕賳 賴匕丕 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丿丕卅賲丕賸 鬲丕亘毓丕賸 賱乇噩丕賱 賵賱賲丕匕丕 賱賲 鬲兀禺匕 丕賱兀卮賷丕亍 賮賷 丕賱鬲亘丿賱 廿賱丕 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱兀賷丕賲 賮賯胤 責 賵賴賱 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲亘丿賱 卮賷亍 丨爻賳 責 賵賴賱 爻賷賯爻賲 丕賱毓丕賱賲 鬲賯爻賷賲丕賸 毓丕丿賱丕賸 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵丕賱賳爻丕亍 責
賴匕賴 丕賱兀爻卅賱丞 賱賷爻鬲 亘丕賱噩丿賷丿丞 賵賱賯丿 賱賯賷鬲 兀噩賵亘丞 毓丿賷丿丞 , 廿賱丕 兀賳 賲噩乇丿 丕毓鬲亘丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 " 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇" 賷禺乇噩 賰賱 丕賱鬲亘乇賷乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 賷賯丿賲賴丕 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賱兀賳賴丕 賰丕賳鬲 賲爻鬲賵丨丕丞 賲賳 賲氐丕賱丨賴賲
賮賰賱 賲丕 賰鬲亘 毓賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 賯亘賱 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賷噩亘 兀賳 賷孬賷乇 丕賱卮亘賴丕鬲 賱兀賳賴賲 禺氐賵賲 賵丨賰丕賲 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 匕丕鬲賴 , 賵賯丿 爻禺乇賵丕 丕賱賱丕賴賵鬲 賵丕賱賮賱爻賮丞 賵丕賱賯賵丕賳賷賳 賱禺丿賲丞 賲氐丕賱丨賴賲
鬲乇賶 爻賷賲賵賳 丿賷 賮賵乇丕 :
兀賳 丕賱賮卅丞 丕賱賲賴賷賲賳丞 鬲丨丕賵賱 兀賳 鬲亘賯賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 丕賱賲賰丕賳 丕賱鬲賷 鬲禺氐氐賴 賱賴丕 賵鬲爻鬲賯賷 丕賱丨噩噩 賲賳 丕賱賵囟毓 丕賱匕賷 禺賱賯鬲賴 賴匕賴 丕賱賮卅丞 賳賮爻賴丕 賵賴匕丕 賷匕賰乇賳丕 亘賯賵賱 亘乇賳丕乇丿 卮賵 , 賮賷 丕賱夭賳賵噩 " 廿賳 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷 丕賱兀亘賷囟 賷賴亘胤 亘丕賱夭賳噩賷 廿賱賶 賲爻鬲賵賶 賲丕爻丨 丕賱兀丨匕賷丞 賱賷爻鬲賳鬲噩 賲賳 匕賱賰 兀賲 丕賱夭賳噩賷 賱賷爻 氐丕賱丨丕賸 爻賵賶 賱賲爻丨 丕賱兀丨匕賷丞 " 賳毓賲 兀賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賴賳 睾丕賱亘丕賸 賮賷 賷賵賲賳丕 賴匕丕 兀賯賱 賲賰丕賳丞 賲賳 丕賱乇噩丕賱 亘賲毓賳賶 兀賳 賵囟毓賴賲 賱丕 賷賮爻丨 賱賴賳 廿賱丕 賲噩丕賱丕鬲 兀囟賷賯 賵丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 賴賷 兀賳 賳毓乇賮 賮賷賲丕 廿匕丕 賰丕賳鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱丨丕賱丞 爻鬲丿賵賲 責
亘毓囟 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賷禺卮賵賳 賲賳丕賮爻丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱賲氐丕賱丨 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞 賱賷爻鬲 賵丨丿賴丕 賮賷 丕賱賲賷丿丕賳 賱廿賳 賲賳 賲丨丕爻賳 賵囟毓 丕賱賲囟胤賴丿賷賳 廿賳 兀亘爻胤賴賲 賷馗賳 賳賮爻賴 亘胤賱丕 賵賴賵 賷賯丕乇賳 賳賮爻賴 賲毓 賳爻丕亍 ( 丕禺鬲丕乇賴賳 賴賵 賳賮爻賴 ) 賲賳 兀賳 賷賯丕乇賳 賳賮爻賴 賵賴賵 賷兀禺匕 丿賵乇賴 賰乇噩賱 .
賵賴丕賴賵 賷賰鬲亘 " 賰賱賵丿 賲賵乇賷丕賰 亘禺氐賵氐 丕賱賳爻丕亍 " 賳丨賳 賳氐睾賷 亘賱丕賲亘丕賱丕丞 賲賴匕亘丞 賱兀匕賰賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵賳丨賳 賳毓賱賲 噩賷丿丕 兀賳 賮賰乇賴丕 賷毓賰爻 亘氐賵乇丞 賲鬲賲丕賷夭丞 丕賱賵囟賵丨 丕賱兀賮賰丕乇 丕賱鬲賷 鬲氐丿乇 毓賳丕 賳丨賳 賲毓卮乇 丕賱乇噩丕賱 " 毓賱賶 賰賱 丨丕賱 兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱鬲賷 賷鬲丨丿孬 毓賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲毓賰爻 兀賮賰丕乇賴 賱兀賳賴 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賳囟賵亘 賮賰乇賴 賵賱毓賱賴 賷丨鬲丕噩 丕賱賶 兀賳 賷毓賰爻 賴賵 賳賮爻賴 兀賮賰丕乇賴 賱兀賳賴 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賳囟賵亘 賮賰乇賴 賵賱毓賱賴 賷丨鬲丕噩 兀賳 賷毓賰爻 賴賵 賳賮爻賴 兀賰賮丕乇 賰亘丕乇 丕賱賮賱丕爻賮丞 賵賴賵 賷鬲丨丿孬 .!
兀賳 丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 丕賱賳爻丕卅賷丞 丕爻鬲丨丕賱鬲 廿賱賶 賳夭丕毓 賵禺氐丕賲 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱賵賯丕丨丞 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 丨賷賳 賷鬲禺丕氐賲 賷賮賯丿 賲賱賰丞 丕賱賲丨丕賰賲丞 賵廿匕丕 兀乇丿賳丕 丨賯丕賸 兀賳 賳爻賱胤 丕賱賳賵乇 毓賱賶 丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 賮賷賳亘睾賷 賱賳丕 兀賳 賳胤乇丨 賰賱 丕賱賲賮丕賴賷賲 丕賱賲亘賴賲丞 賰丕賱鬲賮賵賯 賵丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賵丕賱賳賯氐 賵兀賳 鬲賳胤賱賯 賲賳 噩丿賷丿 .
賱賰賳 賰賷賮 鬲胤乇丨 丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 廿匕賳 責 亘賱 賲賳 賳丨賳 丨鬲賶 賳胤乇丨賴丕 責 賮丕賱乇噩丕賱 賴賲 禺氐賵賲 賵丨賰丕賲 賮兀賷賳 賳噩丿 賲賱丕賰丕 賷賯賵賲 亘賲賴賲丞 丕賱賯囟丕亍 毓賱賶 丕賱鬲賮賵賯 賵丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賵丕賱毓丿丕賱丞責 廿賳賳賷 兀馗賳 賲毓 匕賱賰 廿賳 亘毓囟 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賴賳 兀丨爻賳 賲賳 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 鬲賵囟賷丨 賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賱賯丿 丨馗賷鬲 賳爻丕亍 賰孬賷乇丕鬲 賮賷 賷丐賲賳 賴匕丕 亘丕賱鬲賲鬲毓 亘賲夭丕賷丕 丕賱賰丕卅賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 賲賲丕 賷噩毓賱賴賳 睾賷乇 賲睾乇囟丕鬲 賵丕賱賵丕賯毓 廿賳 毓丿賲 丕賱鬲丨賷夭 賴匕丕 賷卮賰賱 丨丕噩丞 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵賳丨賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賳毓乇賮 禺賷乇丕 賲賳 丕賱乇噩丕賱 毓丕賱賲 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱兀賳賳丕 賲乇鬲亘胤丕鬲 丕賱噩匕賵乇 亘賴 , 賵賳丨賳 丕賯丿乇 毓賱賶 廿丿乇丕賰 賰賲毓賳賶 兀賳 賷賰賵賳 丕賱賰丕卅賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 : 丕賲乇兀丞"
賲丕 賷賱賮鬲 丕賱賳馗乇 兀賳 賲噩賲賵毓丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘丕鬲 丕賱賳爻賵賷丕鬲 賲賮毓賲丞 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱兀賷丕賲 亘噩賴丿 賱賱鬲賵囟賷丨 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱乇睾亘丞 賮賷 丕賱賲胤丕賱亘丞 賵賴賰匕丕 賷噩亘 兀賳 賷毓鬲亘乇 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲丨丕賵賱賴 .
賱賷爻 亘賵爻毓 丕賱亘賷賵賱賵噩賷丕 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賱賶 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賷卮睾賱 亘丕賱賳丕 : 賱賲丕匕丕 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 " 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 " 責
賷賳亘睾賷 賱賳丕 兀賳 賳毓乇賮 賲丕 賮毓賱鬲賴 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷丞 亘丕賱兀賳孬賶 丕賱亘卮乇賷丞 .
鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 .
兀賲丕 賱丿賶 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷鬲禺匕 賲乇賰亘 丕賱賳賯氐 卮賰賱 丕賱乇賮囟 丕賱賲禺噩賱 賱兀賳賵孬鬲賴丕 : 賯丿 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 毓丕噩夭丞 毓賳 鬲丨乇賷賰 兀丿丕丞 孬賯賷賱丞 賮賷亘丿賵 毓噩夭賴丕 賵丕囟丨丕 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賶 丕賱乇噩賱 廿賱丕 兀賳 丕賱鬲胤賵乇 丕賱賮賳賷 賯丿 賷賱睾賶 丕賱賮丕乇賯 丕賱毓囟賱賷 丕賱匕賷 賷賲賷夭 丕賱乇噩賱 毓賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵鬲氐亘丨 賲毓丕丿賱丞 賱賴 賮賷 丕賱毓賲賱 .
丕賳噩乇 賷爻乇丿 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 賰鬲丕亘賴 " 兀氐賱 丕賱兀爻乇丞 " 賵賷馗賴乇 兀賳 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲乇鬲亘胤 廿乇鬲亘丕胤 丕爻丕爻賷 亘鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱鬲賰賳賷賰 : 兀賷 廿賳賴丕 賮賷 毓氐乇 丕賱夭乇丕毓賷賷賳 , 賱賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱兀乇囟 賲卮丕毓丕 亘賷賳 兀賮乇丕丿 丕賱賯亘賷賱丞 賰丕賳鬲 賯賵丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賰丕賮賷丞 賱賱毓賲賱 賮賷 丕賱亘爻丕鬲賷賳 賵賰丕賳 賴賳丕賰 鬲賯爻賷賲 賲鬲爻丕賵 賱賱兀毓賲丕賱 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞 , 丕賱乇噩賱 賷氐胤丕丿 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲賯賵賲 亘兀毓賲丕賱 丕賱廿賳鬲丕噩賷丞 賰丕賱賳爻賷噩 賵丕賱亘爻鬲賳丞 賵亘丕賱鬲丕賱賷 賰丕賳 賱賴丕 丿賵乇 賰亘賷乇 賮賷 丕賱丨賷丕丞 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞 .
賮賱賲丕 丕賰鬲卮賮鬲 丕賱賲毓丕丿賳 賵丕禺鬲乇毓 丕賱賲丨乇丕孬 賵丕鬲爻毓 賳胤丕賯 丕賱丕爻鬲孬賲丕乇 丕賱夭乇丕毓賷 丕夭丿丕丿鬲 氐毓賵亘鬲賴 馗賴乇鬲 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 丕賱賮乇賷丞 賮氐丕乇 亘廿賲賰丕賳 丕賱乇噩賱 廿賳 賷氐亘丨 爻賷丿丕賸 賱賱毓亘賷丿 賵丕賱兀乇囟 賵兀氐亘丨 兀賷囟丕 賲丕賱賰丕 賱賱賲乇兀丞 .
賵丕賱廿賳賰爻丕乇 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷 丕賱賰亘賷乇 賱賱噩賳爻 丕賱賳爻丕卅賷 賷賮爻乇 亘丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱鬲賷 胤乇兀鬲 毓賱賶 鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱丕禺鬲乇丕毓 賵爻丕卅賱 噩丿賷丿丞 賮賷 丕賱廿賳鬲丕噩 賵丕賱丕爻鬲睾賳丕亍 毓賳 賲卮丕乇賰丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 丕賱賵囟毓 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵亘丕賱鬲丕賱賷 爻賷胤乇丞 賵丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 賴丕 賲賳 賯亘賱 丕賱乇噩賱
賮賰乇丞 丕賱鬲賲賱賰 丕賱賮乇丿賷 賱丕 鬲賰鬲爻亘 賲毓賳賶 廿賱丕 丕毓鬲亘丕乇丕 賲賳 丕賱賵囟毓 丕賱兀氐賱賷 賱賱賰丕卅賳 賵賰賷賮賲丕 鬲馗賴乇 賷噩亘 兀賳 賷賰賵賳 賮賷 丕賱卮禺氐 賲賷賱 廿賱賶 賮乇囟 賳賮爻賴 賮賷 賮乇丿賷鬲賴 丕賱噩匕乇賷丞 賵賳夭毓丞 廿賱賶 鬲兀賰賷丿 賵噩賵丿賴 丕賱賲爻鬲賯亘賱 丕賱賲賳賮氐賱 .
兀賳 毓馗賲丞 丕賱毓賲賱 賱賲 賷鬲賱賯賮賴丕 卮禺氐 爻賱亘賷 亘賱 兀賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 亘賳賶 賳賮爻賴 亘爻賷胤乇鬲丞 毓賱賶 丕賱兀乇囟 , 賵兀賳 鬲兀賰賷丿 丕賱匕丕鬲 賱丕 賷賰賮賷 賱鬲賮爻賷乇 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 賮賮賷 丕賱鬲丨丿賷 賵丕賱賳囟丕賱 賵丕賱賲毓乇賰丞 賷丨丕賵賱 丕賰鬲爻丕亘 卮毓賵乇 丕賱丕乇鬲賯丕亍 廿賱賶 丕賱爻賷丕丿丞 .
賲賳 丕賱賲爻鬲丨賷賱 兀賷囟丕 兀賳 賳爻鬲賳鬲噩 丕囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賴賵 賵賱賷丿 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞 賱賱乇噩賱 丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丕賸 , 丕賱丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 賴賵 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱噩亘乇賵鬲 丕賱卮毓賵乇 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 丕賱匕賷 賷亘丨孬 毓賳 鬲丨賯賷賯 爻賷丕丿鬲賴 亘氐賵乇丞 賮毓賱賷丞 賵賱賵 賱賲 賷賰賳 賮賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 氐賮丞 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷 丕賱丌禺乇
丕賳噩賱乇 丨丕賵賱 兀賳 賷毓夭賵 丕賱鬲毓丕乇囟 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 廿賱賶 禺賱丕賮 胤亘賯賷 , 賵氐丨賷丨 兀賳 鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱 毓賱賶 廿爻丕爻 丕賱噩賳爻 賵丕賱丕囟胤賴丕丿 賷賳噩賲 毓賳賴 賲丕 匕賰乇 亘鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱!! 賱賰賳 賱丕 賷賵噩丿 兀賷 兀爻丕爻 亘賷賱賵噩賷 賮賷 丕賱鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱胤亘賯賷 匕賱賰 賱兀賳 丕賱毓亘丿 賷卮毓乇 兀孬賳丕亍 丕賱毓賲賱 亘丕賱毓丿丕亍 賱賱爻賷丿 賵丕賱亘乇賵賱賷鬲丕乇賷丕 丕賱卮丕毓乇丞 亘賵囟毓賴丕 鬲卮賰賱 鬲賴賷丿賷丕 賱賲爻鬲卮毓乇賷賴丕 賵鬲賴丿賮 丕賱賶 丕賱賯囟丕亍 賴賱賶 賳賮爻賴丕 賰胤亘賯丞
兀賳 賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇丕丞 賱丕賷賲賰賳賳丕 丕毓鬲亘丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賰毓丕賲賱丞 賮賯胤 丿賵賳 兀賳 賳賰賵賳 賲睾乇
兀賳 賵馗賷賮鬲賳丕 賮賷 丕賱鬲賵丕賱丿 賲賴賲丞 賲孬賱 胤丕賯鬲賴丕 丕賱丕賳鬲丕噩賷丞 爻賵丕亍 賮賷 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿 丕賱丕噩鬲賲丕毓賷 兀賵 賮賷 丕賱丨賷丕丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞 賵賴賳丕賰 賮鬲乇丕鬲 賷噩丿賷 丕賰孬丕乇 丕賱匕乇賷丞 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱毓賲賱 亘丕賱賲丨乇丕孬
賮丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱丕鬲丨卮乇 賮賷 丕賱毓賱賲賷丞 丕賱噩賳爻賷丞 賵賮賷 丕賱兀賲賵賲丞 夭賲賳丕 賵賯賵丞 亘賱 賯賷賲丕賸 噩賵賴乇賷丞
丕賱賯丕賳賵賳 賵丕賱兀毓乇丕賮 鬲噩亘乇賴丕 毓賱賶 丕賱夭賵丕噩 賵賷賲賰賳 賲賳毓 丕賱賵爻丕卅賱 丕賱賲爻鬲毓賲賱丞 囟丿 丕賱丨賲賱 賰賲丕 賷賲賰賳 賲賳毓 丕賱胤賱丕賯
賮賷 丕丨丿 丕賱禺胤亘 賮賷 丕賱廿鬲丨丕丿 丕賱爻賵賮賷鬲賷 胤購賱亘 賲賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 兀賳 鬲毓賳賶 亘夭賷賳鬲賴丕 賱鬲爻鬲賴賵賷 夭賵噩賴丕 . 賵賷乇賶 賲賳 匕賱賰 兀賳 賲賳 丕賱賲爻鬲丨賷賱 丕毓鬲亘丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賯賵丞 賲賵賱丿丞 賮賯胤 兀賳賴丕 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賶 丕賱乇噩賱 卮乇賷賰丞 賵賲賵賱賵丿丞 賵賲鬲丕毓 賱賱卮賴賵丞 兀賳賴丕 丕賱胤乇賮 丕賱噩賳爻賷 丕賱丌禺乇 賵賲賳 禺賱丕賱賴丕 賷亘丨孬 丕賱乇噩賱 毓賳 匕丕鬲賴 .
丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱噩賳爻賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤 丕賱賲乇兀丞 亘丕賱乇噩賱 賱賷爻鬲 賲孬賱 丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤 丕賱乇锟斤拷賱 亘丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱毓賱丕賯丞丕賱鬲賶 鬲乇亘胤 丕賱賲乇兀丞 亘丕賱胤賮賱 賱賷爻 賱賴丕 兀賷 卮亘賷賴
*
胤亘賷毓賷 兀賳 賷賰賵賳 賱賱乇噩賱 廿乇丕丿丞 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 賮賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵賱賰賳 賲丕 丕賱廿賲鬲賷丕夭 丕賱匕賷 兀鬲丕丨 賱賴 鬲丨賯賷賯 賴匕賴 丕賱廿乇丕丿丞 責
賱賲 鬲賰賳 賴賳丕賰 賳購馗賲 鬲丐賰丿 毓丿賲 丕賱鬲爻丕賵賷 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 賱丕賳 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 賵丕賱賵乇丕孬丞 賵丕賱丨賯賵賯 賰丕賳鬲 賲噩賴賵賱丞 兀賲丕 丕賱丿賷賳 賮賰丕賳 賲丨丕賷丿丕 賵丕賱廿賱賴 丕賱賲毓亘賵丿 賱丕 噩賳爻 賱賴購
賲賱禺氐 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱匕賷 兀氐亘丨 兀賳胤賱丕賯丞 賱賱賮賰乇 丕賱賳爻賵賷 .
廿匕丕 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱兀賳賵孬丞 賵丨丿賴丕 賱丕 鬲賰賮賷 賱鬲毓乇賷賮 丕賱賲乇兀丞 , 賵 賷賳亘睾賷 兀賳 賳爻賱賲 賵賱賵 亘氐賵乇丞 賲丐賯鬲丞 兀賳 賴賳丕賰 賳爻丕亍 毓賱賶 丕賱兀乇囟 賮毓賱賷賳丕 丨賷賳卅匕 兀賳 賳鬲爻丕亍賱 賲丕 賴賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 責
賮賮賷 毓賴丿 丕賱賯丿賷爻 鬲賵賲丕爻 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲亘丿賵 賰噩賵賴乇 鬲丨丿丿 禺氐丕卅氐賴 賰賲丕 鬲丨丿丿 禺氐丕卅氐 賵賲夭丕賷丕 賳亘丕鬲 丕賱禺卮禺丕卮. 丕賱丕 丕賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賲匕賴亘 丕賱賮賰乇賷 賮賯丿 賲賳 賳賮賵匕賴 賱兀賳 丕賱毓賱賵賲 丕賱亘賷賱賵噩賷丞 賵丕賱兀噩鬲賲丕毓賷丞 賱賲 鬲毓丿 鬲賯乇 亘賵噩賵丿 噩賵賴乇 孬丕亘鬲 賷丨丿丿 賳賲丕匕噩 賲毓賷賳丞 賰丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱賷賴賵丿賷 賵丕賱夭賳噩賷.
兀賳 賲賵賯賮 丕賱鬲丨丿賷 丕賱匕賷 鬲賯賮賴 丕賱賳爻丕亍 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丕鬲 賷孬亘鬲 兀賳 卮毓賵乇 丕賱兀賳賵孬丞 賷胤睾賷 毓賱賷賴賳 , 賵丕賱丨賯賷賯丞 兀賳賴 賷賰賮賷 廿賱賯丕亍 賳馗乇丞 賱賱鬲兀賰丿 賲賳 兀賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷丞 鬲賳賯爻賲 丕賱賶 賮卅鬲賷賳 鬲鬲賲丕賷夭丕賳 亘丕賱賱亘丕爻 賵丕賱賵噩賴 賵丕賱噩爻賲 賵丕賱丕亘鬲爻丕賲丞 賵丕賱賲卮賷丞 賵丕賱丕賴鬲賲丕賲 賵丕賱賲卮丕睾賱 鬲賲丕賷夭丕 賵丕囟丨丕 賵賯丿 鬲賰賵賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賮賵丕乇賯 爻胤丨賷丞 賵爻丕卅乇丞 廿賱賶 丕賱夭賵丕賱 . 兀賳賲丕 丕賱兀賰賷丿 兀賳賴丕 賲賵噩賵丿丞 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱丨丕賱賷 亘賰賱 賵囟賵丨 .
丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賷賮乇囟 賳賮爻賴 賴賳丕 賴賵 : 賰賷賮 鬲賲賰賳 兀丨丿 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 賮賯胤 賲賳 賮乇囟 賳賮爻賴 賰噩賵賴乇 賵丨賷丿 賲賳賰乇丕賸 賵噩賵丿 賰賱 賳爻亘賷丞 鬲乇亘胤賴 亘丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇, 賲毓乇賮丕賸 廿賷丕賴 亘兀賳賴 丕賱丌禺乇 丕賱氐乇賮 .賵賲賳 兀賷賳 丕鬲賶 賱賱賲乇兀丞 賴匕丕 丕賱乇囟賵禺 責!
賴賳丕賰 丨丕賱丕鬲 丕禺乇賶 鬲乇賷賳丕 鬲賲賰賳 賮卅丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 亘賮卅丞 兀禺乇賶 禺賱丕賱 賮鬲乇丞 賲賳 丕賱夭賲賳 賵賰丕賳 賴匕丕 丕賱丕賲鬲賷丕夭 賳丕噩賲丕 賮賷 丕賱睾丕賱亘 毓賳 鬲賲丕賷夭 丕賱毓丿丿 賮鬲賮乇囟 丕賱兀賰孬乇賷丞 賯丕賳賵賳賴丕 毓賱賶 丕賱兀賯賱賷丞 賵鬲囟胤賴丿賴丕 廿賱丕 廿賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賱爻賳 兀賯賱賷丞 賮囟賱丕賸 毓賳 兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲爻賱胤 賱賴
賲賴賲丕 兀賵睾賱賳丕 賮賷 鬲鬲亘毓 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 , 賳乇賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賲購賱丨賯丕鬲 亘丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵賴匕賴 丕賱鬲亘毓賷丞 賳鬲賷噩丞 丨丕丿孬 鬲丕乇賷禺賷 賵賱賷爻鬲 丕賱兀賲乇 丕賱胤丕乇卅 賮賯胤 丕賱匕賷 賷噩毓賱 賲賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 亘氐賵乇丞 賲胤賱賯丞 .
賰賲丕 鬲乇賶 爻賷賲賵賳 兀賳 賳囟丕賱 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱賲 賷賰賳 賯胤 廿賱丕 賳囟丕賱丕賸 乇賲夭賷丕 賵賱賲 鬲賮夭 廿賱丕 亘賲丕 兀乇丕丿 丕賱乇噩賱 丕賱鬲賳丕夭賱 毓賳賴 賵賱賲 鬲兀禺匕 卮賷卅丕 兀亘丿丕 亘賱 鬲爻賱賲鬲 賲丕 兀毓胤賷 廿賱賷賴丕
賮賱丕 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丨鬲賶 賮賷 丕賱丨賱賲 廿夭丕賱丞 丕賱匕賰賵乇 賮丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤賴丕 亘賲囟胤賴丿賷賴丕 , 賱丕 賲孬賷賱 賱賴丕 匕賱賰 兀賳 丕賳賯爻丕賲 丕賱噩賳爻 賴賵 賮賷 丕賱賵丕賯毓 卮賷亍 毓囟賵賷 賲丨爻賵爻 賵賱賷爻 賲乇丨賱丞 賲賳 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱亘卮乇 .
*
賯丿 賷禺賷賱 賱賳丕 廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱賲鬲亘丕丿賱丞 賯丿 爻丕毓丿鬲 毓賱賶 鬲丨乇賷乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱丨賯賷賯丞 兀賳 丕賱丨丕噩丞 丕賱亘賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲噩毓賱 丕賱匕賰乇 賲賯賷丿丕賸 亘丕賱兀賳孬賶 賱賲 鬲丨乇乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕噩鬲賲丕毓賷丕賸 , 賵廿匕丕 賰丕賳 廿賱丨丕丨 丕賱丨丕噩丞 賲鬲爻丕賵賷丕 毓賳丿 丕賱胤乇賮賷賳 賮丕賳賴 賷鬲丿禺賱 丿丕卅賲丕 賮賷 氐丕賱丨 丕賱賲囟胤賴丿賷賳 囟丿 丕賱賲囟胤賴丿賷賳 .
賲賳 丕賱賲賮賴賵賲 丕賱卮丕卅毓 兀賳 賷鬲丨賵賱 丕夭丿賵丕噩 丕賱噩賳爻" 賰兀賷 丕夭丿賵丕噩 廿賱賶 賳夭丕毓
賵賲賳 丕賱賲毓乇賵賮 丕賳賴 廿匕丕 賳噩丨 丕丨丿 丕賱胤乇賮賷賳 賮賷 賮乇囟 鬲賮賵賯賴 賮廿賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲賮賵賯 賷賲賷賱 丕賱賶 鬲兀賰賷丿 賳賮爻賴 鬲兀賰賷丿丕賸 賲胤賱賯丕賸 賵賱賰賳 賷賳亘睾賶 賱賳丕 兀賳 賳爻鬲賮爻乇 賱賲丕匕丕 賰丕賳 丕賱乇噩賱 丕賱乇丕亘丨 賮賷 丕賱亘丿丕賷丞 責 賵賱賲丕匕丕 賰丕賳 賴匕丕 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丿丕卅賲丕賸 鬲丕亘毓丕賸 賱乇噩丕賱 賵賱賲丕匕丕 賱賲 鬲兀禺匕 丕賱兀卮賷丕亍 賮賷 丕賱鬲亘丿賱 廿賱丕 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱兀賷丕賲 賮賯胤 責 賵賴賱 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲亘丿賱 卮賷亍 丨爻賳 責 賵賴賱 爻賷賯爻賲 丕賱毓丕賱賲 鬲賯爻賷賲丕賸 毓丕丿賱丕賸 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵丕賱賳爻丕亍 責
賴匕賴 丕賱兀爻卅賱丞 賱賷爻鬲 亘丕賱噩丿賷丿丞 賵賱賯丿 賱賯賷鬲 兀噩賵亘丞 毓丿賷丿丞 , 廿賱丕 兀賳 賲噩乇丿 丕毓鬲亘丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 " 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇" 賷禺乇噩 賰賱 丕賱鬲亘乇賷乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 賷賯丿賲賴丕 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賱兀賳賴丕 賰丕賳鬲 賲爻鬲賵丨丕丞 賲賳 賲氐丕賱丨賴賲
賮賰賱 賲丕 賰鬲亘 毓賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲賳 賯亘賱 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賷噩亘 兀賳 賷孬賷乇 丕賱卮亘賴丕鬲 賱兀賳賴賲 禺氐賵賲 賵丨賰丕賲 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 匕丕鬲賴 , 賵賯丿 爻禺乇賵丕 丕賱賱丕賴賵鬲 賵丕賱賮賱爻賮丞 賵丕賱賯賵丕賳賷賳 賱禺丿賲丞 賲氐丕賱丨賴賲
鬲乇賶 爻賷賲賵賳 丿賷 賮賵乇丕 :
兀賳 丕賱賮卅丞 丕賱賲賴賷賲賳丞 鬲丨丕賵賱 兀賳 鬲亘賯賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 丕賱賲賰丕賳 丕賱鬲賷 鬲禺氐氐賴 賱賴丕 賵鬲爻鬲賯賷 丕賱丨噩噩 賲賳 丕賱賵囟毓 丕賱匕賷 禺賱賯鬲賴 賴匕賴 丕賱賮卅丞 賳賮爻賴丕 賵賴匕丕 賷匕賰乇賳丕 亘賯賵賱 亘乇賳丕乇丿 卮賵 , 賮賷 丕賱夭賳賵噩 " 廿賳 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷 丕賱兀亘賷囟 賷賴亘胤 亘丕賱夭賳噩賷 廿賱賶 賲爻鬲賵賶 賲丕爻丨 丕賱兀丨匕賷丞 賱賷爻鬲賳鬲噩 賲賳 匕賱賰 兀賲 丕賱夭賳噩賷 賱賷爻 氐丕賱丨丕賸 爻賵賶 賱賲爻丨 丕賱兀丨匕賷丞 " 賳毓賲 兀賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賴賳 睾丕賱亘丕賸 賮賷 賷賵賲賳丕 賴匕丕 兀賯賱 賲賰丕賳丞 賲賳 丕賱乇噩丕賱 亘賲毓賳賶 兀賳 賵囟毓賴賲 賱丕 賷賮爻丨 賱賴賳 廿賱丕 賲噩丕賱丕鬲 兀囟賷賯 賵丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 賴賷 兀賳 賳毓乇賮 賮賷賲丕 廿匕丕 賰丕賳鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱丨丕賱丞 爻鬲丿賵賲 責
亘毓囟 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賷禺卮賵賳 賲賳丕賮爻丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱賲氐丕賱丨 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞 賱賷爻鬲 賵丨丿賴丕 賮賷 丕賱賲賷丿丕賳 賱廿賳 賲賳 賲丨丕爻賳 賵囟毓 丕賱賲囟胤賴丿賷賳 廿賳 兀亘爻胤賴賲 賷馗賳 賳賮爻賴 亘胤賱丕 賵賴賵 賷賯丕乇賳 賳賮爻賴 賲毓 賳爻丕亍 ( 丕禺鬲丕乇賴賳 賴賵 賳賮爻賴 ) 賲賳 兀賳 賷賯丕乇賳 賳賮爻賴 賵賴賵 賷兀禺匕 丿賵乇賴 賰乇噩賱 .
賵賴丕賴賵 賷賰鬲亘 " 賰賱賵丿 賲賵乇賷丕賰 亘禺氐賵氐 丕賱賳爻丕亍 " 賳丨賳 賳氐睾賷 亘賱丕賲亘丕賱丕丞 賲賴匕亘丞 賱兀匕賰賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵賳丨賳 賳毓賱賲 噩賷丿丕 兀賳 賮賰乇賴丕 賷毓賰爻 亘氐賵乇丞 賲鬲賲丕賷夭丞 丕賱賵囟賵丨 丕賱兀賮賰丕乇 丕賱鬲賷 鬲氐丿乇 毓賳丕 賳丨賳 賲毓卮乇 丕賱乇噩丕賱 " 毓賱賶 賰賱 丨丕賱 兀賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 丕賱鬲賷 賷鬲丨丿孬 毓賳賴丕 賱丕 鬲毓賰爻 兀賮賰丕乇賴 賱兀賳賴 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賳囟賵亘 賮賰乇賴 賵賱毓賱賴 賷丨鬲丕噩 丕賱賶 兀賳 賷毓賰爻 賴賵 賳賮爻賴 兀賮賰丕乇賴 賱兀賳賴 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賳囟賵亘 賮賰乇賴 賵賱毓賱賴 賷丨鬲丕噩 兀賳 賷毓賰爻 賴賵 賳賮爻賴 兀賰賮丕乇 賰亘丕乇 丕賱賮賱丕爻賮丞 賵賴賵 賷鬲丨丿孬 .!
兀賳 丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 丕賱賳爻丕卅賷丞 丕爻鬲丨丕賱鬲 廿賱賶 賳夭丕毓 賵禺氐丕賲 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱賵賯丕丨丞 丕賱乇噩丕賱 賵丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 丨賷賳 賷鬲禺丕氐賲 賷賮賯丿 賲賱賰丞 丕賱賲丨丕賰賲丞 賵廿匕丕 兀乇丿賳丕 丨賯丕賸 兀賳 賳爻賱胤 丕賱賳賵乇 毓賱賶 丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 賮賷賳亘睾賷 賱賳丕 兀賳 賳胤乇丨 賰賱 丕賱賲賮丕賴賷賲 丕賱賲亘賴賲丞 賰丕賱鬲賮賵賯 賵丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賵丕賱賳賯氐 賵兀賳 鬲賳胤賱賯 賲賳 噩丿賷丿 .
賱賰賳 賰賷賮 鬲胤乇丨 丕賱賲爻兀賱丞 廿匕賳 責 亘賱 賲賳 賳丨賳 丨鬲賶 賳胤乇丨賴丕 責 賮丕賱乇噩丕賱 賴賲 禺氐賵賲 賵丨賰丕賲 賮兀賷賳 賳噩丿 賲賱丕賰丕 賷賯賵賲 亘賲賴賲丞 丕賱賯囟丕亍 毓賱賶 丕賱鬲賮賵賯 賵丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賵丕賱毓丿丕賱丞責 廿賳賳賷 兀馗賳 賲毓 匕賱賰 廿賳 亘毓囟 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賴賳 兀丨爻賳 賲賳 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 鬲賵囟賷丨 賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賱賯丿 丨馗賷鬲 賳爻丕亍 賰孬賷乇丕鬲 賮賷 賷丐賲賳 賴匕丕 亘丕賱鬲賲鬲毓 亘賲夭丕賷丕 丕賱賰丕卅賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 賲賲丕 賷噩毓賱賴賳 睾賷乇 賲睾乇囟丕鬲 賵丕賱賵丕賯毓 廿賳 毓丿賲 丕賱鬲丨賷夭 賴匕丕 賷卮賰賱 丨丕噩丞 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賶 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賵賳丨賳 丕賱賳爻丕亍 賳毓乇賮 禺賷乇丕 賲賳 丕賱乇噩丕賱 毓丕賱賲 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱兀賳賳丕 賲乇鬲亘胤丕鬲 丕賱噩匕賵乇 亘賴 , 賵賳丨賳 丕賯丿乇 毓賱賶 廿丿乇丕賰 賰賲毓賳賶 兀賳 賷賰賵賳 丕賱賰丕卅賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 : 丕賲乇兀丞"
賲丕 賷賱賮鬲 丕賱賳馗乇 兀賳 賲噩賲賵毓丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘丕鬲 丕賱賳爻賵賷丕鬲 賲賮毓賲丞 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱兀賷丕賲 亘噩賴丿 賱賱鬲賵囟賷丨 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱乇睾亘丞 賮賷 丕賱賲胤丕賱亘丞 賵賴賰匕丕 賷噩亘 兀賳 賷毓鬲亘乇 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲丨丕賵賱賴 .
賱賷爻 亘賵爻毓 丕賱亘賷賵賱賵噩賷丕 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賱賶 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賷卮睾賱 亘丕賱賳丕 : 賱賲丕匕丕 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 " 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱丌禺乇 " 責
賷賳亘睾賷 賱賳丕 兀賳 賳毓乇賮 賲丕 賮毓賱鬲賴 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷丞 亘丕賱兀賳孬賶 丕賱亘卮乇賷丞 .
鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 .
兀賲丕 賱丿賶 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷鬲禺匕 賲乇賰亘 丕賱賳賯氐 卮賰賱 丕賱乇賮囟 丕賱賲禺噩賱 賱兀賳賵孬鬲賴丕 : 賯丿 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 毓丕噩夭丞 毓賳 鬲丨乇賷賰 兀丿丕丞 孬賯賷賱丞 賮賷亘丿賵 毓噩夭賴丕 賵丕囟丨丕 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賶 丕賱乇噩賱 廿賱丕 兀賳 丕賱鬲胤賵乇 丕賱賮賳賷 賯丿 賷賱睾賶 丕賱賮丕乇賯 丕賱毓囟賱賷 丕賱匕賷 賷賲賷夭 丕賱乇噩賱 毓賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵鬲氐亘丨 賲毓丕丿賱丞 賱賴 賮賷 丕賱毓賲賱 .
丕賳噩乇 賷爻乇丿 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 賰鬲丕亘賴 " 兀氐賱 丕賱兀爻乇丞 " 賵賷馗賴乇 兀賳 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賲乇鬲亘胤 廿乇鬲亘丕胤 丕爻丕爻賷 亘鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱鬲賰賳賷賰 : 兀賷 廿賳賴丕 賮賷 毓氐乇 丕賱夭乇丕毓賷賷賳 , 賱賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 丕賱兀乇囟 賲卮丕毓丕 亘賷賳 兀賮乇丕丿 丕賱賯亘賷賱丞 賰丕賳鬲 賯賵丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賰丕賮賷丞 賱賱毓賲賱 賮賷 丕賱亘爻丕鬲賷賳 賵賰丕賳 賴賳丕賰 鬲賯爻賷賲 賲鬲爻丕賵 賱賱兀毓賲丕賱 亘賷賳 丕賱乇噩賱 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞 , 丕賱乇噩賱 賷氐胤丕丿 賵丕賱賲乇兀丞 鬲賯賵賲 亘兀毓賲丕賱 丕賱廿賳鬲丕噩賷丞 賰丕賱賳爻賷噩 賵丕賱亘爻鬲賳丞 賵亘丕賱鬲丕賱賷 賰丕賳 賱賴丕 丿賵乇 賰亘賷乇 賮賷 丕賱丨賷丕丞 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞 .
賮賱賲丕 丕賰鬲卮賮鬲 丕賱賲毓丕丿賳 賵丕禺鬲乇毓 丕賱賲丨乇丕孬 賵丕鬲爻毓 賳胤丕賯 丕賱丕爻鬲孬賲丕乇 丕賱夭乇丕毓賷 丕夭丿丕丿鬲 氐毓賵亘鬲賴 馗賴乇鬲 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 丕賱賮乇賷丞 賮氐丕乇 亘廿賲賰丕賳 丕賱乇噩賱 廿賳 賷氐亘丨 爻賷丿丕賸 賱賱毓亘賷丿 賵丕賱兀乇囟 賵兀氐亘丨 兀賷囟丕 賲丕賱賰丕 賱賱賲乇兀丞 .
賵丕賱廿賳賰爻丕乇 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷 丕賱賰亘賷乇 賱賱噩賳爻 丕賱賳爻丕卅賷 賷賮爻乇 亘丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱鬲賷 胤乇兀鬲 毓賱賶 鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱丕禺鬲乇丕毓 賵爻丕卅賱 噩丿賷丿丞 賮賷 丕賱廿賳鬲丕噩 賵丕賱丕爻鬲睾賳丕亍 毓賳 賲卮丕乇賰丞 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賮賷 丕賱賵囟毓 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷 賵亘丕賱鬲丕賱賷 爻賷胤乇丞 賵丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 賴丕 賲賳 賯亘賱 丕賱乇噩賱
賮賰乇丞 丕賱鬲賲賱賰 丕賱賮乇丿賷 賱丕 鬲賰鬲爻亘 賲毓賳賶 廿賱丕 丕毓鬲亘丕乇丕 賲賳 丕賱賵囟毓 丕賱兀氐賱賷 賱賱賰丕卅賳 賵賰賷賮賲丕 鬲馗賴乇 賷噩亘 兀賳 賷賰賵賳 賮賷 丕賱卮禺氐 賲賷賱 廿賱賶 賮乇囟 賳賮爻賴 賮賷 賮乇丿賷鬲賴 丕賱噩匕乇賷丞 賵賳夭毓丞 廿賱賶 鬲兀賰賷丿 賵噩賵丿賴 丕賱賲爻鬲賯亘賱 丕賱賲賳賮氐賱 .
兀賳 毓馗賲丞 丕賱毓賲賱 賱賲 賷鬲賱賯賮賴丕 卮禺氐 爻賱亘賷 亘賱 兀賳 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 亘賳賶 賳賮爻賴 亘爻賷胤乇鬲丞 毓賱賶 丕賱兀乇囟 , 賵兀賳 鬲兀賰賷丿 丕賱匕丕鬲 賱丕 賷賰賮賷 賱鬲賮爻賷乇 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 賮賮賷 丕賱鬲丨丿賷 賵丕賱賳囟丕賱 賵丕賱賲毓乇賰丞 賷丨丕賵賱 丕賰鬲爻丕亘 卮毓賵乇 丕賱丕乇鬲賯丕亍 廿賱賶 丕賱爻賷丕丿丞 .
賲賳 丕賱賲爻鬲丨賷賱 兀賷囟丕 兀賳 賳爻鬲賳鬲噩 丕囟胤賴丕丿 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賴賵 賵賱賷丿 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞 賱賱乇噩賱 丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丕賸 , 丕賱丕爻鬲毓亘丕丿 賴賵 賳鬲賷噩丞 賱噩亘乇賵鬲 丕賱卮毓賵乇 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷 丕賱匕賷 賷亘丨孬 毓賳 鬲丨賯賷賯 爻賷丕丿鬲賴 亘氐賵乇丞 賮毓賱賷丞 賵賱賵 賱賲 賷賰賳 賮賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 氐賮丞 丕賱噩賳爻 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷 丕賱丌禺乇
丕賳噩賱乇 丨丕賵賱 兀賳 賷毓夭賵 丕賱鬲毓丕乇囟 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 廿賱賶 禺賱丕賮 胤亘賯賷 , 賵氐丨賷丨 兀賳 鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱 毓賱賶 廿爻丕爻 丕賱噩賳爻 賵丕賱丕囟胤賴丕丿 賷賳噩賲 毓賳賴 賲丕 匕賰乇 亘鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱毓賲賱!! 賱賰賳 賱丕 賷賵噩丿 兀賷 兀爻丕爻 亘賷賱賵噩賷 賮賷 丕賱鬲賯爻賷賲 丕賱胤亘賯賷 匕賱賰 賱兀賳 丕賱毓亘丿 賷卮毓乇 兀孬賳丕亍 丕賱毓賲賱 亘丕賱毓丿丕亍 賱賱爻賷丿 賵丕賱亘乇賵賱賷鬲丕乇賷丕 丕賱卮丕毓乇丞 亘賵囟毓賴丕 鬲卮賰賱 鬲賴賷丿賷丕 賱賲爻鬲卮毓乇賷賴丕 賵鬲賴丿賮 丕賱賶 丕賱賯囟丕亍 賴賱賶 賳賮爻賴丕 賰胤亘賯丞
兀賳 賵囟毓 丕賱賲乇丕丞 賱丕賷賲賰賳賳丕 丕毓鬲亘丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賰毓丕賲賱丞 賮賯胤 丿賵賳 兀賳 賳賰賵賳 賲睾乇
兀賳 賵馗賷賮鬲賳丕 賮賷 丕賱鬲賵丕賱丿 賲賴賲丞 賲孬賱 胤丕賯鬲賴丕 丕賱丕賳鬲丕噩賷丞 爻賵丕亍 賮賷 丕賱丕賯鬲氐丕丿 丕賱丕噩鬲賲丕毓賷 兀賵 賮賷 丕賱丨賷丕丞 丕賱賮乇丿賷丞 賵賴賳丕賰 賮鬲乇丕鬲 賷噩丿賷 丕賰孬丕乇 丕賱匕乇賷丞 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱毓賲賱 亘丕賱賲丨乇丕孬
賮丕賱賲乇兀丞 賱丕鬲丨卮乇 賮賷 丕賱毓賱賲賷丞 丕賱噩賳爻賷丞 賵賮賷 丕賱兀賲賵賲丞 夭賲賳丕 賵賯賵丞 亘賱 賯賷賲丕賸 噩賵賴乇賷丞
丕賱賯丕賳賵賳 賵丕賱兀毓乇丕賮 鬲噩亘乇賴丕 毓賱賶 丕賱夭賵丕噩 賵賷賲賰賳 賲賳毓 丕賱賵爻丕卅賱 丕賱賲爻鬲毓賲賱丞 囟丿 丕賱丨賲賱 賰賲丕 賷賲賰賳 賲賳毓 丕賱胤賱丕賯
賮賷 丕丨丿 丕賱禺胤亘 賮賷 丕賱廿鬲丨丕丿 丕賱爻賵賮賷鬲賷 胤購賱亘 賲賳 丕賱賲乇兀丞 兀賳 鬲毓賳賶 亘夭賷賳鬲賴丕 賱鬲爻鬲賴賵賷 夭賵噩賴丕 . 賵賷乇賶 賲賳 匕賱賰 兀賳 賲賳 丕賱賲爻鬲丨賷賱 丕毓鬲亘丕乇 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賯賵丞 賲賵賱丿丞 賮賯胤 兀賳賴丕 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賶 丕賱乇噩賱 卮乇賷賰丞 賵賲賵賱賵丿丞 賵賲鬲丕毓 賱賱卮賴賵丞 兀賳賴丕 丕賱胤乇賮 丕賱噩賳爻賷 丕賱丌禺乇 賵賲賳 禺賱丕賱賴丕 賷亘丨孬 丕賱乇噩賱 毓賳 匕丕鬲賴 .
丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱噩賳爻賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤 丕賱賲乇兀丞 亘丕賱乇噩賱 賱賷爻鬲 賲孬賱 丕賱毓賱丕賯丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲乇亘胤 丕賱乇锟斤拷賱 亘丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵丕賱毓賱丕賯丞丕賱鬲賶 鬲乇亘胤 丕賱賲乇兀丞 亘丕賱胤賮賱 賱賷爻 賱賴丕 兀賷 卮亘賷賴
*
胤亘賷毓賷 兀賳 賷賰賵賳 賱賱乇噩賱 廿乇丕丿丞 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 賮賷 丕賱賲乇兀丞 賵賱賰賳 賲丕 丕賱廿賲鬲賷丕夭 丕賱匕賷 兀鬲丕丨 賱賴 鬲丨賯賷賯 賴匕賴 丕賱廿乇丕丿丞 責
賱賲 鬲賰賳 賴賳丕賰 賳購馗賲 鬲丐賰丿 毓丿賲 丕賱鬲爻丕賵賷 亘賷賳 丕賱噩賳爻賷賳 賱丕賳 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞 賵丕賱賵乇丕孬丞 賵丕賱丨賯賵賯 賰丕賳鬲 賲噩賴賵賱丞 兀賲丕 丕賱丿賷賳 賮賰丕賳 賲丨丕賷丿丕 賵丕賱廿賱賴 丕賱賲毓亘賵丿 賱丕 噩賳爻 賱賴購
賲賱禺氐 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱匕賷 兀氐亘丨 兀賳胤賱丕賯丞 賱賱賮賰乇 丕賱賳爻賵賷 .
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,717 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.