Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Introduction: Beauvoir and the ambiguity of “ambiguity” in ethics
- 1 Beauvoir’s place in philosophical thought
- 2 Reading Simone de Beauvoir with Martin Heidegger
- 3 The body as instrument and as expression
- 4 Beauvoir and Merleau-Ponty on ambiguity
- 5 Bergson’s influence on Beauvoir’s philosophical methodology
- 6 Philosophy in Beauvoir’s fiction
- 7 Complicity and slavery in The Second Sex
- 8 Beauvoir on Sade: making sexuality into an ethic
- 9 Beauvoir and feminism: interview and reflections
- 10 Life-story in Beauvoir’s memoirs
- 11 Beauvoir on the ambiguity of evil
- 12 Simone de Beauvoir: (Re)counting the sexual difference
- 13 Beauvoir and biology: a second look
- 14 Beauvoir’s Old Age
- Bibliography
- Index
13 - Beauvoir and biology: a second look
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 May 2006
- Frontmatter
- Introduction: Beauvoir and the ambiguity of “ambiguity” in ethics
- 1 Beauvoir’s place in philosophical thought
- 2 Reading Simone de Beauvoir with Martin Heidegger
- 3 The body as instrument and as expression
- 4 Beauvoir and Merleau-Ponty on ambiguity
- 5 Bergson’s influence on Beauvoir’s philosophical methodology
- 6 Philosophy in Beauvoir’s fiction
- 7 Complicity and slavery in The Second Sex
- 8 Beauvoir on Sade: making sexuality into an ethic
- 9 Beauvoir and feminism: interview and reflections
- 10 Life-story in Beauvoir’s memoirs
- 11 Beauvoir on the ambiguity of evil
- 12 Simone de Beauvoir: (Re)counting the sexual difference
- 13 Beauvoir and biology: a second look
- 14 Beauvoir’s Old Age
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Among the many eminently quotable lines from the corpus of Sigmund Freud are those concerning his supposition about the response of the young girl when she first sees the penis of a sibling or playmate: “She makes her judgement and her decision in a flash. She has seen it and knows that she is without it and wants to have it.” Even if a generous reader were to grant Freud his contentious supposition, a question remains: what does the girl see, and judge, on a second, or a third, or even a fourth look? According to Simone de Beauvoir, Freud's judgment about the role anatomy plays in the formation of the psychic life of women is based on “a masculine model” and envy “could not arise from a simple anatomical comparison.” “[T]his outgrowth,” Beauvoir continues, “this weak little rod of flesh can in itself inspire [young girls] only with indifference, or even disgust. The little girl's covetousness, when it exists, results from a previous evaluation of virility. Freud takes this for granted, when it should be accounted for.”
Taking little for granted, Beauvoir argues that whether girls will judge the penis to be enviable, “insignificant, or even laughable” (SS 300) will depend on its importance, its symbolic and social value “within the totality of their lives.” In any event, whatever attitude a girl may adopt, “it is wrong to assert that a biological datum is concerned” (SS 307). Unlike Freud, Beauvoir endeavors to offer a comprehensive account of girls’ and women’s desires, attitudes, and judgments as these are formed within the totality of their always situated existences.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Companion to Simone de Beauvoir , pp. 266 - 285Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2003
- 15
- Cited by