Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1532169
Question 2
Whether we’d like to admit it or not, we live in a world where news and ideas are most
efficiently distributed in formats that can make an immediate impact. Organizations face the
challenge of how to disseminate informative yet digestible messages to advance their cause. How
then might the complex philosophical theories of Marxism, Existentialism and Postmodernism
be distilled into an impactful format with the aim of promoting gender equality? I’ve chosen to
utilize three slogans which could grab attention and prompt further exploration into the thought
behind each simple statement: Escape the Home! Escape the Role! Escape the Box! I have
intended these slogans to be a play on popular advertisements of the 1950s which often used the
housewife stereotype to sell their products and asserted the role of women in the home, kitchen,
and other spaces associated with femininity. Escape the Home highlights the usefulness of
Marxism to argue that capitalism has perpetuated the monogamous family unit as the norm and
that gender inequality is a manifestation of class differences between men and women. Escape
the Role is in reference to Existentialism and its argument that norms of femininity are false
constructions. Rather than being defined by their choices and existence as true Existentialism
argues for, women are constructed by outside forces which limit them by defining their essence.
Finally, Escape the Box is a distillation of the ideas of Postmodernism and its argument for the
recognition that ‘woman’ is a social construct, and by extension, female inferiority is a construct
as well.
The following paper will explore how the combined philosophies of Marxism,
Existentialism and Postmodernism can be used to promote gender equality. Throughout these
theories, it is revealed that gender inequality and identity are not natural, but constructed. While
it is frustrating that such constructions have limited the freedom of women today, the knowledge
of these constructions provides hope for women, and all people, to be able to define their own
3
identity. As we attempt to unite feminists pragmatically and push for increased intersectionality
in the movement, these theories hold the potential to unite feminists behind the freedom to create
identity as each individual wishes. Through the messages of Escape the Home, Escape the Role
and Escape the Box presented by Marxism, Existentialism, and Postmodernism, young feminists
can recognize how gender has been constructed and in turn, be able to construct their own
identities.
Marxism’s most useful application for the promotion of gender is its argument that the
inequalities present between men and women are born out of economic inequalities. Marxism, as
a theory, encompasses two main components. Firstly, that substructure (economics) is the
foundation that shapes the superstructure (all other parts of society) (Kerbo 102). Secondly,
Marxism believes that history tends to occur in successional stages as the world inevitably
evolves toward global Communism (Kerbo 104). These stages begin with Primitive Communism
in which all citizens contribute to survival, and all contributions are valued; and now we have
evolved into the current stage of capitalism and production by industrial means. These means are
The economic lens required by Marxism helps to explain some of the norms found in our
superstructure today, particularly as it relates to the relationships of men and women. While
more women have entered the workforce, the dominant narrative of marriage and family is still
focused on the nuclear family unit. Engels, co-founder of Marxist Theory, helps pin this
normalization of the family unit on capitalism. He begins by pointing out that a patriarchal,
monogamous family has not always been the norm and that lineage used to be tracked through
maternal relations in the age of hetaerism, in which sexual relationships were not monogamous
4
(Engels 290). Engels suggests that the function of a monogamous family lies in economic roots
of wealth preservation; men wanted a secure way of ensuring that their fortune would be passed
on to biological children. A monogamous family unit provided irrefutable proof of who should
receive a father’s private property as capitalism gave rise to increasingly privatized material
While the benefit of monogamy is clear for men, the advantage for women is far less
clear and largely serves to sequester them to the home unit. With the rise of capitalism and the
normalization of nuclear family units, women became further isolated from the means of
production. Along with this isolation came a growing disrespect for household tasks (Engels
292) because the focus on privatization of property required participation in opportunities to gain
property outside of the home. Together, these contributed to the oppression of women, as
women’s financial dependence on men grew, while women’s own contributions at home grew
less valued.
The lens of Marxism reveals that the oppression of women and their association with the
home have less of a social origin, and more of an economic origin. The home then becomes a
microcosm in which the same class struggles present in capitalism between the workers and the
bourgeois, who own the means of production, are acted out: the wife (the worker) is subjugated
by the husband, who holds the economic power (Engels 293). How then do we use this
Firstly, Marxism’s focus on the transition of history through stages suggests that there is
no inherent naturalness to the way the home is currently organized. Since it was constructed by
capitalism, and economically based, the subjugation of women is constructed. Marxism itself
predicts a natural tendency towards Communism. By extension of Engels’ arguments, the ruin of
5
capitalism is predicted to change the family unit, and thus, the condition of women. For example,
there is the prediction of a tendency toward “individual sexlove,” (Engels 294) where monogamy
would be sought out for purposes of love alone and not for any economic benefit. This would
elevate the partnership component of marriage and devalue its current focus on economics, thus
However, we must pick our battles carefully, and while capitalism is to be blamed for
subjugation of women in the home, more immediate and pragmatic suggestions should be
derived from Marxism. Engels arrives at the conclusion that the attainment of legal independence
is dependent on the dissolution of the family unit (Engels 293). For our pragmatic purposes, we
can push for the normalization of more than one kind of family (Mitchell 54). While today
women make up a large percentage of the workforce, the absence of equal pay serves as proof
that women face obstacles in their attempts to Escape the Home. As Mitchell notes in her
critique of Marxism, equality does not immediately follow from women entering the workforce
(Mitchell 45). Adjustment of policies in the current work environment, like improved pay and
day care, to support working mothers (Mitchell 49) are necessary for assisting in this transition.
That being said, at least female participation in the workforce provides the grounds by which
men and women can negotiate how legal equality outside of the home translates to social
Additionally, Marxism has the potential to improve intersectionality and improve the
lives of different kinds of women. While lobbying for access to equal opportunity in the work
force and procurement of legal equality have been central to feminists of the past, these
arguments have been focused on upper-middle class, white women (Leacock 296). However, as
6
Leacock suggests, the struggles faced by all women in the workforce are similar (Leacock 297),
It is also important to note that Escape the Home is by no means a command for all. In
our campaign for the promotion of gender, women should be able to construct a definition of
themselves as they wish; for many, this identity involves having and raising children. Marxism
can also be used to revalue the work traditionally performed by women in the home, and remove
the gendered nature of it. By showing that the economic circumstances of capitalism have
debased women, the argument that childbearing itself devalues women is less credible (Leacock
296). As proposed by Marx, all contributions to society were considered valuable in the stage of
Primitive Communism. Thus a reversion to this way of life could help re-value the work women
have been expected to do and re-value their role in the raising of children. Similarly, in many
double-income homes today, there has already been an increase in the work men do around the
house, which now include tasks previously reserved for women. Escape the Home is primarily
intended to suggest that the norm of the family unit should dissolve, and that a woman has roles
to fill beyond those expected of her in the home. Ultimately, the feminist movement is working
for the social, economic, and political equality of the sexes (WIWT Bright 1), and by Escaping
the Home women are able to exert their economic independence, thus eliminating the
subjugation of women by men which results from economic difference. For our purposes,
women can begin constructing identities that are not reliant on their role in the home alone.
While Marxism provides an economic explanation for women’s inequality and a plea to
introduces questions about what it even means to be a woman. In the fight for gender equality, it
7
is useful to question if there is inherent truth to the idea of woman-ness, and how ideals of a
woman’s role are regulated by society. Existentialism, and the message Escape the Role asserts
women’s rights to refuse to fulfill the role set forth for them by society. To begin, it is important
to note that Sartre and his writings alone do not assist the promotion of women. However,
Existentialism as a theory can be summarized by the idea that existence precedes essence
(WIWT 316). In other words, human nature is not inherent but instead that an identity is formed
by the amalgamation of choices one makes as they move through life. A human is distinguished
existence (Macintyre 27). However, as Sartre describes his own theory, the female is ‘Othered’
in relation to men and fixed in a definition similar to objects. While men can create themselves
through action, women are reduced to preconceived notions and archetypes that try to capture the
fixed “Truth” of women (de Beauvoir 325). However, examination of Existentialism exposes the
lack of logic behind the ‘Othering’ of women and serves to elevate the theory itself as a useful
tool. It is challenging to reconcile Sartre’s belief in the fixed definition of women with his
insistence that there is no inherent essence of humanity (Collins & Pierce 319). Considering that
human nature cannot be distilled into any one truth, situating half of the world’s human
population into a fixed nature akin to objects defies Sartre’s idea of what it means to be human.
In Holes and Slime Sartre suggests that the anatomy of women is the cause of her “obscenity”
(Collins & Pierce 321). In doing this, he tethers an essence of women to their fixed anatomy
which goes against Sartre’s inherent abhorrence to “appealing” to anything as natural (Collins &
Pierce 320). This inconsistency between definitions of humanity and definitions of women
8
suggests that Existentialism as a theory is not the problem, but that its application to women is
the problem. Reinterpretation and examination of Existentialism was the aim of philosopher
Simone de Beauvoir, and it is through her arguments that I believe gender promotion can be
supported in two ways: firstly, because she helps elucidate the negative impact that preconceived
notions of femininity have on women, and secondly, because her arguments can inspire women
It is important to ask why we are concerned that women are given a predetermined
essence, and why Escape the Role is a message we can derive from Existentialism. As de
Beauvoir presents, women’s constructed ‘essences’ are often intentional and necessary for their
subservient position in society, and it is important to elucidate how even today these ideas are
reinforced. For example, altruism is typically associated with women and, as de Beauvoir argues,
the labeling of this trait as feminine places pressure on a woman to devote herself to her husband
(de Beauvoir 326). Another common idea is the “feminine mystery” and how this excuses men
from having to seek understanding of women; however, for women, this suggests they come into
the world misunderstood. If women’s essence is mystery, it is as if their actions are unintelligible
to the outside world (de Beauvoir 327). Since men expect a woman to be an ‘Other,’ the actions
she takes and successes she enjoys always defy her femininity as prescribed by males (de
Beauvoir 331).
particularly if one examines their experiences. Unfortunately, de Beauvoir explains that in our
society women who defy the definition are seen as deviant from standards of femininity (Minow
quoting de Beauvoir 69) and ultimately punished for it. This is also personal to de Beauvoir: her
9
father explained her excellence in academics as evidence of her having a “man’s brain,” (WIWT
Women enter the world with their femininity decided, rather than being able to construct
a composite femininity based on their own actions. Contrary to men who are able to exist and
create their identity, women enter the world with a preconceived essence. In this way, women
become who they are based on society (Minow citing de Beauvoir, 66). Thus, any conceptions of
women are culturally created and not inherent: reinforcing Existentialism’s message of existence
preceding essence. This liberates women and promotes gender equality. In reality, there is no one
kind of woman: it is simply society that pushes women to conform to certain ideals. These labels
ultimately constrain women’s freedom, and it is imperative in our battle for gender promotion
that we recognize that labels are not inherent, but instead are forced and reinforced by society.
De Beauvoir’s pragmatic solution for women to rise above these constraints is parallel to
the message of Marxism: that holding economic privilege will raise women’s status (de Beauvoir
328). From De Beauvoir’s viewpoint, the historical reliance of women on men for marriage, as a
social and financial support, allows men to play an active role, and limits women to remaining
passive in their own lives (de Beauvoir 328-329). While not as applicable in our society today
where many families have shared incomes, Existentialism’s message still holds true: women
must act as independent forces, because it is through action alone that they can create their
identity.
It is important to concede that there are limitations to de Beauvoir’s writing: while strong
for the support of gender equality, this is arguably equality for a limited sector of women: the
white middle-class (Minow 75). De Beauvoir herself concedes that her arguments are most
applicable when men and women are of equal class and race (Minow 66); however, this is not
10
license to discard de Beauvoir’s arguments as a whole. A group that is often excluded by non-
intersectional feminists are trans individuals. Since this investigation of theory is for the
individuals in order to alleviate some of the oppression they face. De Beauvoir’s insistence that
humans are responsible for attached meaning to male or female bodies implies that it is not
genitalia itself, but instead how people react to it, that creates constructions of gender (Minow
quoting de Beauvoir 67). She takes this argument further and also asserts that although women
undergo the same biological processes like menstruation or menopause, these experiences are
different for each woman (Minow 67). By extension, these ideas can apply to gender as well. An
individual’s biological experiences are their own, and their gender is constructed by an
individual’s reactions to them, not by any inherent meaning held in their biology. The theory of
existence preceding essence provides strength to the argument of promoting all genders, even
Existentialism can be used to promote gender equality since it helps women to shed any
expectations of femininity held in our society. It is through existence instead that women, and
people in general, create themselves through the choices they make. It is an Existentialist idea
that only at our death is our identity truly decided (Hampshire 61), therefore let us not seal the
fate of a woman before she has had the opportunity to live and create the identity she wishes.
Women must remove themselves from the fixed identity they have been forced to inhabit too
Postmodernism, and the message of Escape the Box, serves as the rallying point by which
gender equality could best be achieved. As de Beauvoir demonstrated, feminism’s legacy has
11
often failed to be intersectional and this can be a point of contention within the movement.
Ultimately, if the promotion of gender equality and the feminist movement are to be politically
successful, unity has to be forged. Yet, it is hard to pinpoint the rallying point for this unity.
Postmodernism successfully questions all norms we take for granted and suggests that unity
within the movement could be forged on a strong belief in people being able to shape their own
contradictory, I believe it is the most useful method to dissipate dissent. Escape the Box
advocates for the individual rejection of any norms surrounding what it means to be a woman.
Postmodernism advocates for the rejection of logocentrism, the driving thought that the
world is a single, fixed system (Sands & Nuccio 491). It is similar to Existentialism, which
denies the existence of anything essential or definable about human nature (Sands and Nuccio
492). This calls into question why the inferiority of women is ingrained in our society. The
solution offered by Postmodernism is that how we define anything is contingent upon the culture
we exist within, thus suggesting that the inferiority of women is culturally produced (Sands and
Nuccio 491), and for our purposes, that it could be culturally changed. This is also liberating for
individuals questioning whether or not they fulfill feminine ideals, and thus strengthens the
rallying point of autonomy in individual identity that could ground the promotion of gender
equality.
Two other forces at work in Postmodernist Theory include deconstruction and the
elevating previously marginalized voices (Sands & Nuccio 491), while the push for multiple
discourses acknowledges that those who write history are those who hold power (Sands &
Nuccio 491). Both of these notions acknowledge the oppression of women and the extensive
12
oppression of women with intersecting identities, and helps to lend them voices in the movement
Postmodernism theorizes that the individual has no constant identity but instead that it is
the construction of where they are situated in the context of other identities (Sands & Nuccio
491). While the Postmodernist idea of identity’s impermanence may seem contradictory to the
idea that individuals should construct their own identity, I believe it elucidates the degree to
which our identity is the construct of what others project onto us. For the purpose of gender
identity, in lieu of the identities projected upon them. In alignment with Existentialism, this
provides more people the freedom to act and make choices in order to create the identities they
wish to embody.
Ultimately, Postmodern feminists push for recognition that the concept of ‘woman,’ and
beyond that gender, are cultural constructs and the search for a “universal woman” will always
be fruitless (Sands & Nuccio 492). That said, they do believe in the existence of the “particular
woman” (Sands & Nuccio 492) and it is this notion of the particular woman that echoes my
belief that all individuals are able to choose their own autonomous identities. Postmodernism
could help create a culture free of judgment in which all notions of femininity and gender are
deserving of equality. This freedom to choose will help connect each particular woman with a
universal goal, rather than forcing women to fit into a universal identity. With the slogan Escape
the Box, the aim of gender promotion is less about arguing up the position of women and more
Escape the Home! Escape the Role! Escape the Box! Ultimately, the union of the three
theories, Marxism, Existentialism, and Postmodernism, and the messages behind these slogans
13
reveals the constructed expectations we have of women, and how these have contributed to the
intentional assertion of their inferiority. For an organization wishing to promote gender equality,
it is essential that feminists be aware of external constructions on women, before they can begin
to construct their own identities. Of all the components in the slogan, I believe Escape the Box
could best connect feminists across borders of sexuality, race, class, religion and political parties
by recognizing and accepting the differences between them. I feel that the Postmodernist desire
to ‘decenter’ any one message could translate to the greatest promotion of equality. There is
nothing inherently natural about the roles and labels we have constructed around gender. By
acknowledging that gender differences are constructed, we are able to undermine any belief in
the supposed naturalness of one gender’s inferiority. Ultimately, the feminists of today are owed
the element of choice to determine how they want to define themselves, and if gender is even