04.06.2014 Views

Volu m e II - Purdue University Calumet

Volu m e II - Purdue University Calumet

Volu m e II - Purdue University Calumet

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Kristen Peters<br />

Central Michigan <strong>University</strong><br />

Changing Ideas of Womanhood in Judaism and Islam<br />

I. Introduction<br />

A. Simone de Beauvoir identified woman as Other in her book The Second Sex. Her use of<br />

Other conveyed the concept of woman as secondary to man, who was considered to<br />

normative human being. She used “Other” to explain the duality between groups, or the<br />

Self and the Other. Man was considered the normative human being, the whole person,<br />

and woman was considered the secondary human, defined in her difference to man.<br />

Throughout patriarchal history, women have been given a secondary status to men.<br />

B. This paper identifies the similarities in women’s status in Judaism and Islam, as described<br />

by Judith Plaskow in The Coming of Lilith and Kecia Ali in Sexual Ethics and Islam. Despite<br />

apparent differences in the traditions, the concerns raised by Plaskow and Ali are similar.<br />

C. To show this, I will identify examples of the secondary status of women in Jewish and<br />

Islamic practices discussed by Plaskow and Ali. Next, I will discuss critiques the authors<br />

make and use all three sources together to pull together some possible solutions.<br />

<strong>II</strong>.<br />

Simone de Beauvoir<br />

A. Simone de Beauvoir raised the question, “What is a woman?” in The Second Sex, which was<br />

first published in 1949. She asserted that to be biologically female is not the same as being a<br />

woman or feminine. Woman was a social construct that was important and expected for<br />

females to conform to. de Beauvoir claimed that this was because man is used to describe<br />

human beings as a whole; man was the normative human being.<br />

B. de Beauvoir raised the question, why do women cooperate with this system? She suggested<br />

several reasons for this:<br />

1. Women didn’t tend to identify with one another as women with a shared<br />

group identity (pg 9). They lacked solidarity because they were more likely to<br />

identify with the males in their economic, racial, or social group than to<br />

women across groups.<br />

2. Women were ultimately bonded to men by economic and biological need.<br />

Men needed women just as much as women needed men, but men had all of<br />

the social, political, and economic power, so they benefitted from the need<br />

(pg 10).<br />

3. Women found it easier to remain connected to the dominant social group.<br />

Men provided material and economic security (pg 11). If women were to<br />

distance themselves from men, they would lose these protections.<br />

C. de Beauvoir expressed a lack in confidence that men would be willing to give up the system<br />

that had given them so much privilege throughout the centuries (pg 15). She even<br />

suggested that men may not be completely aware of woman’s situation as secondary human<br />

being (pg 16). With that in mind, she expressed caution in trusting what even the most<br />

sympathetic of men have to say about women’s secondary status.<br />

D. de Beauvoir believed that women would be able to do away with their secondary status by<br />

gaining control of reproduction through the legalization of contraception and abortion.<br />

257

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!