Thank you Polina for the review. It’s very detailed and well explained. I’ve always found it difficult to digest heavy philosophical works, but your explanation make the work much more approachable, without making it too simplistic
This is such a great explanation! I am so sick and struggling unable to properly read but this video made everything easy and I am able to understand the text! Thankyou! because of you I will be able to still write in the examination....💕
Thank you for this video Polina, been reading the book on my own but I needed a bit of a book club vibe to discuss and your content is the perfect complement!
aww thank you Stephanie, that is lovely to hear that I could act like a virtual book club:) i also have a book club on discord if you ever feel like you want to join with something that is no pressure x
This was great! I’ve been meaning to get around to this book, but in the back of my mind is the notion that the information in it would be dated by today’s standards. But after watching this it seems like the ideas in this book were decades ahead of their time and it’s more than worthy of a read. Can’t wait for part 2 when you get around to it!😁
Thanks so much! I actually had the same thoughts in my head before starting, and I am rly glad I decided to read the book. Looking forward to reading part 2:)
Thank you! I have my A-Level French Speaking Exam on Monday (It's friday now) and the topic I chose as my independent research was Simone de Beauvoir. I watched her 1075 interview today and just finished this, will watch Part 2 tomorrow. Last minute revision!!
this a great synopsis, analysis and review! you are so articulate, I liked the simplifications and examples given to help decipher this very hard to read style of writing. thank you for your hard work
brilliant work! I have read some continental philosophy mostly around epistemology and ethics such as Kant, Hegel, and Nietzsche. I never got an opportunity to read the french philosphers especially Simone de Beauvoir. I encountered Philosophers of Science citing Beauvoir's Second Sex and I always wanted to read the whole book. Watching your video has just made me wanna buy the book as soon as I can :)). I am especially interested in the women empowerment movement happening in the Soviet Union, and Beauvoir's critic on it. I think this will be a great read indeed. As a feminist I believe this book is of a paramount importance for us.
Thank you so much for your detailed comment, it is always fascinating for me to read comments such as these and hear thoughts on works of such paramount importance. I absolutely agree that this is a feminist must read, as this is a key foundational text. Which texts would you recommend from continental philosophy? I am actually the opposite, I mostly read French philosophers but no one else unfortunately haha. It always makes me really happy to hear that people buy a book because of me, and curious to hear their thoughts. Please do update me on what you think of Beauvoir's Second Sex.
@@PolinasPages ahh I think usually it's a good idea to start with Kantian Critiques (3 books, but you can just get most of it from first few chapters), and especially critique of Judgement! Followed by a lil bit of Hegel (which is a annoyingly hard read😂) and then read Nietzsche's "On truth and lies in an extra-moral sense". But I'm a bit biased towards Nietzsche😅 I absolutely love his work!
Ever since I first heard about Freud's theory of penis envy, I have found it childish. It seemed meaningless to me that an entire value judgment should be based on the absence of a limb. After this video, I started to think that Freud's thesis was not a new theory, but a new discourse that supported the popular belief of that day. The fact that gender inequality has been going on for so long must be due to the idea that it stems from the distorted value judgments of the human species that have ossified over time, rather than from the imposition of a gender. In my opinion, the expression of feminist doctrines by an existentialist has prepared a more rational basis for populist discourses. Great content👍 Please keep up the good work 💪💪
This was fascinating, but some things stood out to me that seemed off, most notably the part where Simone de Beauvoir argued that women are unable to form an in-group bias. If anything, it’s the opposite. Women do tend to have an in-group bias in favor of other women, whereas men do not have an in-group bias for other men. In fact, men have an out-group bias in favor of women. Still, this was interesting and I’m looking forward to part 2!
Thanks! Actually for me this stood out too, I also thought it was strange, if anything it seems that the oppressed group would work together with other oppressed people AND with their loved ones, creating this conflict in action against their husbands as she argues. I’m glad you mentioned this here, because I completely forgot to comment about my own confusion with this point! Thanks for your comment:)
@@PolinasPages I don’t even think it’s about oppression, I suspect it’s rooted in biology. Women are the limiting factor in reproduction, so from an evolutionary perspective I would guess that our bias toward women’s wellbeing is the reason why our species was able to survive. This raises the question, if that’s true, can it be changed, or should we even try?
@@Asdfgh-xr6qw perhaps, a very complex subject I’d like to read up more on. I think in the earliest primitive societies, it makes sense for that to be the case, of course biology played a role, if women had to mange everything by themselves, it would have been very hard to survive and mass reproduce. However, I think that Beauvoir here argues about this in the cultural sense, her argument that the reason women don’t confront inequality, particularly social status inequality, is because they don’t form that bias, (again a strange point) and also it would mean loss of privileges that come with relinquishing control, seems to concern societal difference in association and in group preference, rather than looking at the biological factors specifically here. The biology of course came in other sections. Regardless of whether this is in biological or status in society sense, I think the question you pose is important when it comes to both sexes, not only the bias toward’s women’s well-being in matters of reproductive health (although that itself often leads to many problems, and I’m curious to see specific statistics where we can clearly point out the favoritism, but I do recognize it can be difficult to show when creating a fair and logical test.) But I do think the bias is not only leaning towards women, perhaps the scales keep swinging, and the scale tilts even more when we take race into account, so I don’t think it’s clear to point out one specific case where one sex has it ‘better’ than the other, especially with the constant change of the world. We can recognize patters and see why can be done, perhaps that’s the best approach to take, seeing the history of the issue, and then finding solutions. I think it is a lot different than how it was before, even in the way people view biology and reproduction. I’m hopeful that things will eventually be more equal, but how we go about it, and how it should be changed is so difficult, that I feel like so many mistakes are made along the way it can almost feel pointless. But the progress that has been made must be recognized, both in now talking about male feelings, and problems in choosing between careers and families, and about recognizing the hardships of both sexes. I think we must keep going, with facing inequality, a more equal or at least informed about the problem world, while idealistic, is a great goal to have, just one of the reasons is that it encourages empathy and understanding from both sides. Do you believe we should continue striving towards equality in opportunity in every field?
1:05 - you say that biological and social sciences no longer believe that your characteristics dictate the choices you make. Then you use the example: just because you're black, doesn't mean you'll react in a certain way towards a situation. Ok, maybe because the main difference in our bodies is the presence of melanin, which changes the pigmentation of the skin. But in the case of men and women, maybe the main difference are hormones, and boy, those do pack a punch. I saw a documentary about a transgender woman>men who started hormone therapy and he mentioned that among the many changes in the body, even the colors seemed more vivid. Great book by the way!
I think when Beauvoir wrote this book a lot of the hormone stuff was unknown. Which is why in my summary I cited what she said, rather than the modern situation, but you’re right in stating that hormones make a difference. As a humanities student though, I can’t really provide any significant scientific knowledge to what you said haha
can i get an article on feminist thought from Simone de beauvoir? It also coincides at this time I am writing a thesis and taking on feminism using Simone de beauvoir's thoughts
@@PolinasPages I mean, I'd like to ask you for feminism material on Simone de beauvoir if you have the material. but I'm sorry because I'm not passive in English yet. 🙏
@@markchannel1766 this video, and my part two. I didn't really do a lot of extra research, I just analyzed the work for itself. However, jstor, the oxford university library, and Google scholar have some great articles so check out those. I'm pretty sure I also listened to a podcast on Apple podcasts about Simone, and read a NYT article.
Your great work is hampered by your indistinct diction. It is more fundamental work but I believe you will do greater justice to the wonderful effort you have put in. Thank you
Thanks! You can change the speed in settings:) people tell me to talk faster to get more across in a shorter video, so I’m a bit conflicted on what to do.
