I believe that this book is even more timely and significant today, than ever before! Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex (originally published in 1949), is a groundbreaking study that was clearly years ahead of its time (it still is). Here, one will find a thorough and well-thought-out thesis. One that examined what/who has shaped the role, place, and personality of women in the world at large—from the ancient societies of Mesopotamia, right down to the present time. Clearly, we should already know the answer to that one.However, what’s really different about Simone de Beauvoir’s tome—she didn’t let all the ‘women’ off that easily—since she readily admitted that not all ‘men’ were responsible for the forced or assumed conditions of inferiority, mistreatment, injustice, inequality, etc., and all the other miseries that the ‘men’ in ‘charge of the world’ have imposed on women and on other men, for that matter. She also allotted and assigned blame to the inactive, ignorant, narcissistic, and 'parasitic woman' (her words), for not ‘rising up’ against the system. And not just for women, but for all of humanity in general. Here are some excerpts that I found to be exceptionally important and relevant, and right-on-the-mark.From pages 381 – 382:“The girl’s character and behavior express her situation: if it changes, the adolescent girl’s attitude also changes. Today, it is becoming possible for her to take her future in her hands, instead of putting it in those of the man. If she is absorbed by studies, sports, a professional training, or a social and political activity, she frees herself from the male obsession; she is less preoccupied by love and sexual conflicts. However, she has a harder time than the young man in accomplishing herself as an autonomous individual. I have said that neither her family nor customs assist her attempts. Besides, even if she chooses independence, she still makes a place in her life for the man, for love. She will often be afraid of missing her destiny as a woman if she gives herself over entirely to any undertaking. She does not admit this feeling to herself: but it is there, it distorts all her best efforts, it sets up limits. In any case, the woman who works wants to reconcile her success with purely feminine successes; that not only requires devoting considerable time to her appearance and beauty but also, what is more serious, implies that her vital interests are divided. Outside of his regular studies, the male student amuses himself by freely exercising his mind, and from there emerge his best discoveries; the woman’s daydreams are oriented in a different direction: she will think of her physical appearance, of man, of love, she will give the bare minimum to her studies to her career, whereas in these areas nothing is as necessary as the superfluous. It is not a question of mental weakness, of a lack of concentration, but of a split in her interests that do not coincide well. A vicious circle is knotted here: people are often surprised to see how easily a woman gives up music, studies, or a job as soon as she has found a husband; this is because she had committed too little of herself to her projects to derive benefit from their accomplishment. Everything converges to hold back her personal ambition while enormous social pressure encourages her to find a social position and justification in marriage. It is natural that she should not seek to create her place in this world by and for herself or that she should seek it timidly. As long as perfect economic equality is not realized in society and as long as customs allow the woman to profit as wife and mistress from the privileges held by certain men, the dream of passive success will be maintained in her and will hold back her own accomplishments.”From page 612:“Cinderella does not always dream of Prince Charming: husband or lover, she fears he may change into a tyrant; she prefers to dream of her own smiling face on a movie theater marquee. But it is more often thanks to her masculine “protection” that she will attain her goal; and it is men—husbands, lovers, suitors—who confirm her triumph by letting her share their fortune or their fame. It is this need to please another or a crowd that connects the movie star to the hetaera. They play a similar role in society: I will use the word “hetaera” to designate women who use not only their bodies but also their entire position as exploitable capital. Their attitude is very different from that of a creator who, transcending himself in a work, goes beyond the given and appeals to a freedom in others to whom he opens up the future; the hetaera does not uncover the world, she opens no road to human transcendence: on the contrary, she seeks to take possession of it for her profit; offering herself for the approval of her admirers, she does not disavow this passive femininity that dooms her to man: she endows it with a magic power that allows her to take males into the trap of her presence, and to feed herself on them; she engulfs them with herself in immanence.”I couldn’t have said it better myself! That passage was an amazingly accurate description of the endless parade of the interchangeable and artless ‘scion’ of young women (and men, as well), produced by Hollywood and the music industry here in the US and abroad. Their only talent is ‘self-aggrandizement’ and ‘publicity’ thanks to the polluted world of social media.I could go on and on about this all-important work, that is not only relative to women or ‘feminism,’ but encompasses something—for all of humanity as well—men and women alike. Her words were truly eloquent and poetic too, which were made all the more so in this new edition and translation by Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier (thank you, both). A huge debt of appreciation and gratitude is owed to them.I can truly say that Simone de Beauvoir was one of the greatest minds of our times, and believe me, there aren’t that many anyway! She herself acknowledged that there were very few truly ‘great minds’ (i.e., whether in art/science/history, etc.), that were women (due to their social position). let alone very few men, for similar reasons. But she explained that that was not due to some natural predisposition or biological cause, but was the result of the ‘man-made’ world that we live in. And this in turn was assisted and enabled—by the weak, unaware, unknowing, and just plain ignorant ‘men and women’ that were willing to play along with the charade!The Second Sex (hardcover) by Simone de Beauvoir, complete and unabridged for the first time. Translated by Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. Alfred A. Knopf, New York 2010.Love and Peace,Carlos E RomeroI picked up this book because I wanted to read more female philosophers and because I enjoy the work of Simone de Beauvoir's compatriots Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus. The Second Sex is as thorough a description of the social inequalities forced upon women as you'll find, especially for the time period in which it was written. And the first third of this book is excellent. De Beauvoir draws from myriad sources to show how women have been viewed at different points in history and in different cultures and how those views evolved to create the mid-twentieth-century society in which she lived. The depth of her research alone is impressive, and the conclusions she draws from her vast readings are insightful and original and were probably ground-breaking in 1949.This depth of research is no less impressive in the second volume of the book, "Lived Experience." But the passage of seventy years since the original publication is especially apparent in this section. Even setting aside de Beauvoir's outdated views on homosexuality and her conflation of homosexuality with intersexuality, the litany of questionable psychological interpretations is overwhelming. De Beauvoir devotes hundreds of pages to the psychological analysis of everything that could go wrong for women at every stage of their lives. She frequently cites psychoanalytical case studies of women suffering from various anxieties and neuroses related to their bad experiences with the male world. While her point may be that women are so affected by their unequal treatment that such diverse reactions occur, the breadth of these analyses overshadows the existence of many healthy, well-adjusted girls, wives, mothers and grandmothers, despite the social inequalities they face. The numerous case studies of what would seem to be rare cases also distract from the main issue that was so eloquently presented in the first volume: the fact that women are treated as inferior compared to men.The result is that most of the book was, for me, a slog through outdated information and questionable psychological assertions, such as the claim that morning sickness is a psychological, not a physical, response to pregnancy, or the assertion that many mothers advise their pregnant daughters to "provoke a miscarriage, not to breast-feed the child [after birth], or to rid herself of it" (p. 632). It is especially confounding that many of the psychological interpretations that de Beauvoir cites were made by male practitioners, a potential bias that de Beauvoir never questions.The concluding section, which suggests how men and women could make themselves social equals, is more engaging and further demonstrates de Beauvoir's persuasive writing and keen intellect. It is a shame more space was not devoted to these ideas.There are a small amount of reviews that I see and that troubles me. This new translation is a golden opportunity to show more precisely what is wrong with how men subjugate women. Also too one has to wonder how it can be that the High Priestess of Feminism was so willing to be subject to Sartre....what a contradiction. I have read that in a interview Sartre regularly lied to Simone to keep her content while he participated in his "other" interests. I think that Sartre was originally in the right place at the right time and since Simone has no use for the idea of God anymore and for a conventional relationship with men (marriage), Sartre (the master philosopher) fit the bill to fill the void. Simone said their love together transcended the understanding of everyone. How convenient. In any event, I wonder if secretly she observed what was wrong with this relationship and maybe that helped fuel The Second Sex. I think Sartre was a very smart selfish troll of a man. And if the heartache of his "rolls in the hay" with other women fueled The Second Sex......that breaks my heart too. It is commonplace that we see what is wrong with the world around us more clearly by looking in our own mirror. I am 45 now. I read the Parshley edition when I was 17 and 18 years old and at that time I was enormously intrigued by women. And The Second Sex blew my mind. And now I care so much about Simone that I have read "Memoirs of a Dutiful Daughter" and am now reading "The Prime of Life". I want to follow her life. And I want to know why she felt she had to stay so close to that selfish Sartre. Simone De Beauvoir is truly my hero. I think of her all the time. And by the way, I am a man.Wow, this book is as relevant today as it was in the late 1940’s with the renewed assault by middle aged white American men controlling with rights to control women & their own bodies! As a non religious white British male I must admit some parts are difficult to read as it’s shocking to the lengths men (Church) have gone to in his dominance over the female & when I had finished it made me feel embarrassed to be a male. Must read for both liberal and conservative readerThe content of the book is simply amazing - de Beauvoir is eloquent and articulate.However, the issues I have with the book are that of print quality.I bought this book for my university course - and have had to spend a lot of time deciphering the first word of each line of the text on the left-hand page because it is not printed properly. It becomes very frustrating and tiring. The difficulty of reading a book should be in the comprehension of the presentation and exploration of complex ideas - not trying to work out what the ink on the page says. I am thoroughly disappointed with the print quality of the text; particularly when the content of the text is so beautiful.Bought the Kindle edition so I had no problem with the printing. This is the Ur-text of modern feminism. Possibly the first book of the twentieth century that centres women and their experiences. It’s challenging because, while much of the content is pretty universal (for any post-agricultural society), a lot of it also concerns the psychology of post-war bourgeois French women. It’s not that the writer excludes or is unaware of other groups. She does write about working-class women and the experiences and political demand of Black American people too. It’s hard work, but worth reading as it puts a lot of other more modern feminist writing in context. (On a minor note, I wish that the editorial team had known that mantises don’t pray, they prey (on others). They are preying mantises. That mistake occurs throughout the book.)I think it should be more sexy.Like…kissing,fertilizing,men taking off their shirts,men fighting over women so they can have sex with them,and all things like that.So that is how I think it should go.This is a not-to-be-rushed book, one that really delivers the most when the reader can be deliberative. Timeless in her observations, De Beauvior lays out her thesis as to the existential impediments that confront the modern woman......Interestingly, as relevant today as it was when she penned it 40 years ago.