Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7





P assa gc A

From boyhood, nal€s ar€ bombard€d with

the mcssage thar "real men

dominaie worien, \hich mcans they control womcn's behalrour and

nray abuse them v€rb]lly and physically.iSo powerlul and pcrvasivc rs

this fomula for the appearance of nanhood that a ma with anequal,

mutual relalionship with a woman may .adopt a posture of dominance

towards her when oth€r [ren arc around l Such behaviour susgests mcn

believe "manhood" is not inherent in a man, but dep€nds on both tl,c

opinion ofother men and the existence ofa subjected person or group l


Females have enormous power in this d]'namics because the appearance

of virilily depends on them. Women ai€ its centre: domination of a womalr is supposei to mak€ a man feei like a marr that is, superior.

Still, to justify abusive treat.rent ofwomen in their own minds (a{ler all,

most men love some womeD)) men must view them as a separate

species, like pigs or dogs or cows (terms often appl;ed to women); and

dominating a lowly "dog" or "cow" can hardly be very satisfying. The

fo.mula achieves its goal only Iieetrngly. Yet iDstead of abandoning thrs

unsuccessful road to self worth, mcn walk it ovel and over

again, as if

enough rcpetition will somehow bring them to th end blessed relief

from self-doubt.

[3] Other men, too, have power in this fomula. This fonn of seif-esteem

can only be achiev€d by being witnessed by other men, who alone can

confd marihood on a man. Moreover,\.Iren cannot dominate women

wiihour maintaining solidarity against them, Even a woman who accepts

the status of obedient dog has capacities for independent thought,

action, speech, and qrealivity tlat militate against easy consigrlment of

her to inferior status. \To supprcss these qualities, men mDst alty solidly



' '-.J





,,- i

' against women, cr%ting

to women

except breeder sewanthood, tluust them into and keep them in the

hs-titutiglqthat tbreclose all roles





ofsubhuman inferiors. Thal even a united male 6ont has nerer

totally succeeded in keepirg ry'omen silenT6?-!i56frlii6[E does not

d€ter men from continuing in this effort either.



Most men do not make policy in goyernrnents, churches, or other

powerful institutions. Most men se.ve as dogs, bulls, or rcbots to lreir masters. Men continualiy rernind women that they too are victims, are

not responsible for government policy or economic disadvantage or war,

that like women, they are oppressed. This is true. I

question why they do

Irot join the feminist movement or create a panlle] movcn1cnt.

Nonetheless, the entire system of female oppression rcsts on ordinary

men, who maintaid it with a fcrvour and dcdication to duty that any

secret police force night cn!y: What odrcr systen c.an depend on almost

halfthe populaiion to eDlorce a policy daiiy, publicly and privately, wiih
















[5] As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men

need not. The knowledge thal some men do suffices to threaten all

women. Beyond that, it is not necessary to beal up a woman to beat her

down. A man can simply refitse to hire women in well-paid jobs, extract as mDch or more work from women than men but pay them less, or treat

women disrespectfully at work or at home. He can fail to suppofl a child

he has engendered, demand the woman he lives with wait on him like a

servant- He can beat or kill tie woman he claims to love; he can rape

women, whethq mate, acquaintance, or stanger; he can rape or

sexually molest his daughters, stepchildren, or the children of a wornan

he claims to love. The vast majoriry of men in the world do one or iore

ofthe above.



o*^@i!rE64rhe Lyar Asainst won@t










-1-l \


Pass age l]

Thc wonlan, tradihonally, owrnlt to her seclusion in the "honrc", the

place ofpivate propeny, has long b€en nothllrg. bu1 a

nor or,l) r'

'o rh,


molher loday,

ur,' ut f,rodl .o'r r ,.t 'l


more so? - {h€ wid€spread availabilily ofconti eeption and abonion arc



to that

role being a woman And rf




db-oriion\are spokr of mosl often as possible ways

. rhc hrnl rdr. ol b-rng a rnorlr, r



thy imply the possibility of


of social

orionno-iffi or e\pr 'rnd

choice", the fact remains that

women's social slqlus, atld thus ot modilying th€ nodcs

relrtr-dfsSdw-e en meu and women

But to what reality would woman correspond, independently of her

reproductive function? It seems that two possible roles are availablc to


roies that are occasionally or frequently contradictory. ygjlSrL


this case she would enjoy, in a rnorc or less

near future, the samE economic, social, political rights as men. Sbe

co.ol4 b:ly!;





would be a potential man- But on the exchalrge mark€t especially, or


to presefle

woman would accrue to her from ber matemal

the market of sexual exchange - woman would also have

and mainiarn what is called fe ininit,. The value ol a

role, and, in addition,

a-role, aD imaP.e,_ a

ftom her "femininity". But in fact that "felllldlylls


value. imDosed uDon women bv male svslertrLof represenralion In lhi!



playing on

rnd ioses herselr b)

her feminidty. The fact rcmains illat this Basquerade

requjres an effar oo-ber fart fnr u,hi"h she is not compensatirl. Unless

ber pleasure comes simply ftom being chosen as an object of

consumption or ofdesire by masculine "subjects". And, moreover, how

can she do olherwrse witloul bcing out or ctrculation"? .\

In or:r social order, women are "product6" used and exchanged by men.

Their stafus is that of merchandise, "corfinodities". How cal such

to speak arrd to participate

objcts ofuse and tftnsaction claim the right

in exchange in geoeral? Commodities,

as we all klow, do lot take

theftselves to market od thei own; and if they could talk

havc to remain an "infrasauchue" unecognised

So women

as such by our society

and oul culfure. The use, consumption, and circulation of their

sexualiscd bodies underwrite the

oryanisation and tle reproduction of




the social order, in which they have nevor taken pad as "subjects".


'Women ate thtrs in a situation of sPecifc exPlaltation with rcspect to exchange operations: sexual exchanges, but also economic, social, a:rd

cultural exchan8es in general- A woman "enters into" these exchanges

oniy as thc object of a transaction, unless she a8rees to renounce the specifrcity of her sex, whose "identity" is imposed on her according to


nlodels thai remain lbreigt to her. Women's social iDlenority ls

reinlorced and complicated by the faci that wolnan does irot have access

to language, except through recouEe lc) 'rnasculin{]" syslems of

representatioD which disappropriate her from her relation to hersell and

to olher women I'he "feminine" is never to be idenlified except by and


lor th€ masculine- the reciprocal proposition not being "lrue".


But this situation of specihc oppression is perhaps what can allow

women today to elabonte a "critique

of the political economy",

inasmuch as they are in a position extemai to the laws of exchange,


even though they ar€ inclr-rded in them as "commodities". For, without

the exploitation of the body-matter of women, what would become of the sl,,mbolic proccss that govems society? What modification would

this prccess, this

society, undergo,


women, who have

been only

objects of consumption or exchange, were to become "speaking


subjects" as well? Not, of cou6e, in compliance with the mascuiine, or

tJ,e phalIoclatic, model '.


1.lr1.t )

16] That would not fail to challenge the discourse that lays down the law

today, that legislates olr ever)'thing, including sexual difference.

Adapted from Luce Irigaray TIis Sex Which Is Not One



1- rt/ r ri

[r i

Answer 3ll q!eslio.s

Nole \,\rhe. a qlest.n asks lor a. answer rN YOUR O!!N WOROS AS FAR AS

POSSBLe and yo! seecl rhe

a.sw€r, y.! musl


approprale materia lrom lhe passaoe for your

it Lil(lecredlGnbegvenlo

stillse ycur own words 10 express

vrh ch o.y coFyqods cf pirrases irom the passa!.

R€ad PassageA n lhe separale rnserl and rhen a.swer lhe queslio.s beow.

i. wi(h reieren.€ to paragraph o.e, why does rhe writer betieve thar even me.

lfeatwofren equaLy a.d respecttuLy,may


adopr a poslure ofdohinance towa.ds

herwhen olher hen a.e around

(rnes5 6)?

Use yolr own words as rar as possib/e


From paragrlfh lwo exp.i.wlry dom natng a towly dog or'cou can hardybe

Usa yorr ow, wo.ds as far 6s possib/e.

4 Fon.llelouahparaqrcph.eTp<inft

dnd u e relalonsnip ess

opp,es6nre. ree,ner


this opFi;e@

aad h-r to,ced;*oms,



Re:d P.ssase A in lh sepa.ale tnsertand rhen answer rhe c. :lion!


5. Give lhe meaiing of *ch ot rhe

rou may ff tc lhe answer in a word ora shod phrzse




rheyare lsed n the passage

(b) compefsaled irre 24)



(el conpricared (/he 43)


5 a\ F on .l-








wr does

re n,,te.arguF r_ai,tFF


and abo-o, z-.,erl,

es 4,S)?



tr. *o_z_i

lhFossihte rote:beinq aroman'(/t


li, ed"J:i:"ph Ih,"", accordine ro rhe Mrrer,

in what ways sre women



7 The wdrer be ieves that {here are lwo

sumhary lo show how lhese two roL€s

possibe .otes avaisbe (o women l/v re a

difler ftom each ourer a.d lhe pr.bem5

u- ;;i;ia


e-" EJpr. ,


women ra@ qhen rry nq ro f r 610 rhs_,orea

Org.n se youraiswers soas tob ng od pairs ofconkastbeh!€e.lhe |wo r.5

Da nal neety hst rhe difteren.es in anisataredfashiot).

Wnte na natethan 15a wotds Use yout.||. ||ards es t'u aspossible

3. French and lrigaray took ar ditterenr ways men asse.t @nt,ot over womef.

ldentify lwo such issues lhat adse and whidr aro comhon lo both wrilers.

Discuss howthese issLes wo!'d be ofparticutarconcer.

Dhw appraptiate irfomation f@ the ll-ns. Howev'a

to your own society.

you shauld rcty t\Aety on



yout own rete@ht ideas and expenence i4 aFlertaiustity wuranswe;,

Men asse.l conr@rover women in difierent ways. One such y is