Femininity

by Susan Brownmiller

Examines the nature of femininity and analyzes society's view of a woman's ideal body, appearance, and behavior

Genres: Feminism, Nonfiction, Gender, Womens, Sociology, Gender Studies, Womens Studies

270 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1984

About the author

Susan Brownmiller was an American journalist, author and feminist activist best known for her 1975 book Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape, which was selected by The New York Public Library as one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century.

Reviews

[Sarahc Caflisch · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you like lists of cultural mores that are oppressing you, then read this book. Actually, if you like lists of things that informed and oppressed your mother, and maybe grandmother, and then informed how they reared you, then read this book. If you don't like that, walk on by and leave it in the Little Free Library and just know that all of us have been messed with and are doing the best that we can and everyone should leave us alone to figure it out. Upshot: Girdles will injure your organs. Bobbing your hair is a temporary tragedy.

[Christine · Rating 3 out of 5]

Disclaimer: ARC read via Netgalley for a fair review. Thank you to Open Road.

There is apparently a rule for the Olympics that can require female athletes to prove that they are, in fact, female. There is no corresponding rule for male athletes. This new rule, established prior to the London Olympics I believe, was most likely done because of the success and “controversy” surrounding an African woman who participated in track events. Apparently, her competitors thought she was too manly, read too fast.

So even in the world of sports you have to be a feminine woman. Presumably a woman who transgenders to would not have an advantage. (But don’t women have better coordination or reflexes?) Or does it mean that being a woman is so desirable but who wants to be a man?

No, I don’t think it is the last one either.

I was thinking of this as I was trying to start my review to this book. The question of what it means to be a woman (I refuse to use female. I am not an animal) is still raised today. Look at what happened in Australia prior to the recent election. Hilary Clinton was said to be too mannish until she was too emotional. I have lost track of how many woman hip-hop singers were first supposedly men because they took forever to perform some sexy video or something.

It would be fair to say that in some degrees Brownmiller’s book is a little weak and does to show its age a bit. The Open Road edition which I read lists the original copyright as 1984. For instance, there is really nothing about women dressing in man’s clothes. In fact, men are more likely to be penalized or question if they wear skinny jeans. Additionally, I would have preferred stories other than her personal ones. While Brownmiller does give statistics and sources, I would have liked to see some stories from other women.

These weaknesses aside, the collection of personal essays (for they do feel this way) makes a good companion to The Beauty Myth or Cinderella Ate My Daughter. The breaking of the book into different sections – emotion, hair, skin, voice, body, ambition, clothes, and movement – allows Brownmiller to explore the concept on various levels. Like Naomi Wolf, Brownmiller’s stories are largely personal, yet unlike Wolf there seems to be a more general feel to them (except for the curtsey story). The sections also allow Brownmiller to look at any conflicting ideals that exist – such as in the case for ballerinas. Her section on hair focuses on all types of hair, and the section about certain types of shoe and porn movie, while you might want to look at your own shoes (or your wife’s, daughter’s, sister’s). In many ways, perhaps because of the personal feel of the essays, Brownmiller makes connects and examines details that Wolf let pass – such as the connection between the decline of the corset and the raise of the tottering heel, both things constraining women’s movements.

In her sections about hair and skin, Brownmiller looks at each aspect from both a gender and racial perspective. Her analysis in these topics stands out from those of other writers who tend not even to mention race when discussing the issue of appearance. It would be fair to say that race should also be taken in consideration when discussing the other aspects (in particular voice and ambition), but I wonder if this lack is due in part to when this book was written. What would Brownmiller say about Nicki Minaj? I’m not sure, but if she ever updates this book should take dress in terms of music stars into consideration.

[Jessica · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this book an entertaining and fascinating exploration of the phenomenon, "femininity." I would like to start with the caveat that I just picked up this book in a used book store, so I have no preconceived notions of who the author "is" within activist or feminist circles. For me, this book was exactly what I was looking for. She explores the topic appropriately starting with a chapter entitled "Body", and ending with "Ambition". Each chapter is quite dense with historical references to trace current trends and perceptions in America - illustrating what is considered the norm and then referencing American women who either challenged or solidified this conception. She shares her own personal reflections as she has questioned her body, her skin, her clothing. I think it is these personal anecdotes that really make this book readable. They are honest and clearly illustrated how she has struggled to resist, but not too much, to live up to society's expectations of being a woman.
If anything, I was moved and filled with pride to learn about the women that truly paved the way for the rights I have as a woman today. I did not appreciate how hard it was for women to evolve from restrictive clothing (corsets, long skirts) to comfortable clothing that allowed for freedom of movement. Often she digresses to make evolutionary comparisons to primates, other species. At times these tangents add color and a worthy perspective (I happen to welcome this sort of thing, typically), other times it is just a dead end, a futile attempt to explain human behavior or preference through evolution. Fashion, after all, really has nothing to do with survival.
I was trying to imagine how this book would feel from a man's perspective. Since I have such a deep and personal history of trying to avoid being sexualized in clothing, a swim suit, etc. it was really hard for me to step out of my life experience and consider a male perspective.
Overall this book can read a little too much like a history book, crammed with facts and figures, but in the end I remain positive as I found most of the information fascinating and it illuminated the topic.
For example, I've often thought, what is the deal with long hair? Not so much in America anymore, but in India (where I happen to be living) I think I have seen 2 young girls with short hair cuts. Two! Granted, long, healthy hair is a beautiful thing.I was pleased to read about Etruscan or Spartan warriors being proud of their long tresses. If a woman's long hair is admirable, why not a man's? Apparently, it was Saint Paul who pushed hair length as a gender specific feature. "But if a woman have long hair it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering," he said. It is always a sad day when anyone is discriminated against or socially pressured to conform in the name of religion.
It is tempting to just close my eyes tightly and convince myself that this is all behind us, and women are now "free" to wear what they want. Wear pants, men's pants even, or skirts or dresses, whatever you wish! But, sadly, it is not that simple. Female competition to get male attention still runs deep and I myself am discovering how fun it can be to comfortably reveal more of my skin. But, why? Why does this feel like giving up? Does a woman's appearance define her more than a man's? What are the implications of that? I'll accept and applaud the progress that has been made, but I think the topic of femininity should continually be critiqued. I admire this book and will look to read more from her - I look forward to becoming more knowledgeable about feminism in the US and internationally. Gender and sexuality are topics all too often ignored, despite how much they influence our lives.

[Kerry · Rating 5 out of 5]

Femininity is educational while being entertaining, and it is precisely so because it presents its case without being emotionally overwrought or preachy. It veers into neither misogyny nor misandry. Except for a somewhat derisive take on makeup, Brownmiller, for the most part, presents an idea fraught with booby traps with the emotionally neutral and orderly journalistic precision that is engaging without being irritating, straightforward without being oversimplified, and personal without being self-centered.

One of the most interesting aspects of this book is its continued relevance. Despite being first published in the 80s, it is incredible to notice what has changed, and more so, what hasn't. Though some of the language and anecdotes are dated, the principles of traditional femininity, cultivated over centuries or millennia, continue to be expressed, admired, encouraged, and even competed over. While she reveals the facts behind the myths about femininity (for example, that length of hair is a characteristic of gender, an idea written into the Bible as a result of a narrow-sighted St. Paul), she also doesn't argue vehemently against them; she presents the facts as she has gathered them and lets the reader decide for her- or himself. Additionally, rather than dismissing some ideas about femininity that have been portrayed as negative, she instead illustrates how such traits might be useful or necessary (for example "gossip" a way to make sense of a world). She is also careful to acknowledge biological differences, stressing how men and women are different and how evolution might explain these differences.

This book is an important read not only for women, but men too. It shows how and why women have been (or are) seen in certain lights, the historical origins of some misconceptions or characterizations, and why these stereotypes are mistaken or could be viewed through a different perspective. Men and women sometimes treat each other as mysterious, heightening the alienation between the sexes rather than trying to bridge the divide through a gathering of information that leads to understanding, dismissing each other as one way or another without critically thinking about what they are saying--is a man "incapable" of showing emotion because that is the deficiency of men or because that is what society dictates is masculine; is a woman "shrill" when she tries to make her ideas known and heard, or is she being judged for having a naturally higher voice? The book is important reading for anyone who wants to get to the humanity behind gender stereotyping, and, it might be argued, for those who have or want children who are interested in questioning their own ideas about sex and gender and what that means for the world their child grows up in.

[K Kriesel · Rating 3 out of 5]

There are many problems with this book: transphobia, stereotyping lesbians and gay men, summarizing of and speaking for all women, racial insensitivity, generalizing and bemoaning all femininities. Excellent points are made as well, sometimes in extremely specific contexts, but strong media literacy skills (the dreaded "critical thinking") are needed in order to process the book as a whole.

This is a very important Second Wave tome. I've heard/read many people bemoan Second Wave feminists for demonizing femininity, for transphobia, homophobia, racism, and for authoritarianism over all women - but not having found any actual firsthand declarations (save for Catherine McKinnon and Andrea Dworkin), have had a difficult time taking such complaints seriously. Here it is! Reading Brownmiller's "Femininity" is an exceptional study in recent feminist history above all, in order to heal the wounds made by such insensitive leaders and to ensure that their mistakes aren't made again.

I do highly recommend this book to anyone interested in feminist history - this is not for beginners!

[Dave · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the books that brought me to feminism. Maybe a little dated now, but Brownmiller presents the common assumption that aspects of femininity are pre-determined by nature, and proceeds to demolish all of them. Unapologetic and potent.

[Abby · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Femininity pleases men because it makes them appear more masculine by contrast; and, in truth, conferring an extra portion of unearned gender distinction on men, an unchallenged space in which to breathe freely and feel stronger, wiser, more competent, is femininity’s special gift. One could say that masculinity is often an effort to please women, but masculinity is known to please by displays of mastery and competence while femininity pleases by suggesting that these concerns, except in small matters, are beyond its intent. Whimsy, unpredictability and patterns of thinking and behavior that are dominated by emotion, such as tearful expressions of sentiment and fear, are thought to be feminine precisely because they lie outside the established route to success.”

To women readers, this book doesn't contain much new information, but it's a thought-provoking collection of all the ways that femininity is impressed and enforced upon us. I appreciated the moments when Susan Brownmiller divulged that she too, despite being a pants-only, makeup-less feminist, is sucked into the femininity vortex (obsessing about her hair, modulating her posture to appear smaller or more deferential, etc.); it makes you feel less alone, and just as confused as every other thinking women about what to perform and what to eschew. The book left me feeling the same as I always do when I contemplate the masculine-feminine binary, which is, simply: frustrated. Useful to have a collection of all of these cultural rules in one place, though, I suppose, if only to wonder about their origin and how to rebel against them.

After all, as she says, "Women are all female impersonators to some degree."

“To fail at the feminine difference is to appear not to care about men, and to risk the loss of their attention and approval. To be insufficiently feminine is viewed as a failure in core sexual identity, or as a failure to care sufficiently about oneself, for a woman found wanting will be appraised (and will appraise herself) as mannish or neutered or simply unattractive, as men have defined these terms.”

[Domenique Geeve · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am not used to reading these kind of books, so it was a new experience for me. I have a lot of respect for the amount of research done that went into this book. It was both interesting as difficult to read sometimes as I wasn't familiar with some difficult words and it requiers for me as a reader to be 'on, focussed and really understanding the information that is displayed'. Not as easy to read as a fiction book for example. It was refreshing to really dive into the aestethic of feminity over the course of our evolution and within society (also compared to the male and animals). This topic still remains very relevant as the feminine gender is still battling everyday to just be seen, understood and treated as an equal. I hope for every female that within your own life, you get closer to your true self everyday and understand more and more your own position where you feel confident<3

[Hillary · Rating 4 out of 5]

I whish that when women were speaking of reading “chick - lit” these are the kind of books they were referring to.

This book fiercely attacks the beauty standards that women daily and tireless attempt to stand up to. She references the history of why beauty is what it is, such as why light colored smooth skin is the ideal. Not since a Bare Essential infomercial have I been so enthralled with skin! She references people like Darwin, Hans Christian Anderson, and even the book Pride and Prejudice, to promote her argument that beauty myths have been perpetuated through the ages, even as “unnatural” and exhausting as they are to achieve. She leaves no one unaccountable for this standard including MEN. To quote “Nearly one third of all Americans suffer from some sort of skin condition and more males than females are subject to major and minor disorders, Yet to judge from the multibillion-dollar industry of dermatologist, plastic surgeon and skin clinics that cater to the problems of beauty and aging, improving the texture and quality of the skin is a basic feminine obligation, while for men it remains an optional or irrelevant concern”.

My favorite line though is “In a culture that glorifies youth, men are hardly immune to the anguish of aging, but they have yet to resort in large numbers to the illusory feminine procedures for stopping the clock, even as they continue to judge women by standards they would not be foolish enough to apply to themselves.

However, even after reading all this, cheering for it, getting angry along with it, I think I spent at least an hour getting ready today, I want to go to ULTA tonight, tan this weekend, and start looking into cosmetic procedures myself. I am the biggest culprit of what this book attacks. Perhaps I need even more help, I wonder if there is a second volume to this book!!!???

[Ellen Keener · Rating 4 out of 5]

Somewhat dated but does show where progress has been made and where the struggle continues for women to be who they are as a person who doesn't have to meet some artificial standards that are humanly impossible.

[Athena · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is a book I had to read for class. It had a lot of interesting points, facts, and reminders. The author expressed her ideas extremely well and was clear and organized.There was an entire history of feminine behavior, be it voluntary or involuntary. Did you know that women were fired from their jobs if they cut their hair in a bob because men had fits about women with short hair? These women would be considered too masculine! If women wore pants then they would be accused of being cross-dressers! There was a ducking stool that was used for the "loud" women who disrupted the neighborhood, loud as in a woman who spoke. And of course domestic violence was allowed if a woman spoke out at her man in public. This book includes all these interesting facts and then some. On the other hand the author never lets you forget all of the trends that women were not allowed to participate in for fear of being too masculine. The makeup, clothes, the hair, the jewelry, it all had to be worn and worn correctly or women would be laughed out of public places or ridiculed back to what they rebelled from in the first place. I got the feeling that the author was incorporating her own beliefs and opinions in some of the complaints that were stated in the book regarding the suffragettes. She found long hair too hard to maintain, she didn't want to wear dresses but was afraid that she would look too boyish with short hair and no earrings. She gave the impression that she was using history as an excuse to vent about the limitations of how to appear more feminine when really she should've just been bold enough to what she needed to do in the name of comfort. The author needed to stop whining that she didn't want to do something but was forced to because of the opinions of her peers. This is why women were able to be bullied: because they cared too much about what everyone else thought of them. This comment is not for the times when it was illegal for a woman to be out alone without her man, or for being arrested for smoking cigarettes in public. Women need to be stronger and understand what they need and what they want, and, more importantly that they have the option.

[Mateo Dk]

DNF

I expected period typical transphobia and at about 30% through it got real period atypical. I understood most of it being based on cis standards because the bars for femininity and masculinity were set on those standards, and ignoring transgender experience is often ignored in 2nd wave feminist texts because it was seen as a separate gender experience entirely or as a separate experience layered on top of your "sex", because that's where most gender discourse was at even in progressive spaces! But it got weird reading about The Man Is Barred From A Feminine Voice Box When Pretending To Be A Woman and I stopped being able to learn anything from it without feeling gross when that type of rhetoric popped up. Usually when reading historical texts, I can ignore this type of casual bigotry because I know what 2nd wave feminism was like and these texts still are important and carry weight! But it sounded too much like what people today say when advocating for hate against trans people rather than just different discourse norms, so it was too upsetting to just gloss over. I did appreciate how educational and in depth it was in general and I wish it had continued with cisnormativity for its point instead of constant side notes with thinly veiled hate, because I imagine there was a lot more about femininity and its construct I would have liked to learn!

[Tracy · Rating 4 out of 5]

She takes various "aspects" of femininity, puts them in a historical context, looks at them up through the feminist movement, adds her own critiques, and compares all this to what is expected of men. I enjoyed it. Women have a crazy amount of societal expectations placed on them, and she takes a step back and says, "Ummmm...why exactly am I supposed to keep my legs smooth and speak softly?" She doesn't say don't do these things, but questions why we're "supposed" to do them. She also throws in her own personal dilemmas--like knowing that her hair does not change her character, yet breaking down (and admittedly feeling better about herself afterward) and dyeing her gray hair--which make it more real. It was written in 1984, so it was interesting to see which things I think have improved in gender roles since then and what hasn't changed.

[Reading with Cats · Rating 4 out of 5]

Originally published in the 80s and, sadly, not a lot has changed since then.

[Meggie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked this up out of sheer interest. It raises some very good points and interesting discussion BUT this book is very much of its time and it has some outdated views especially of trans women - whilst it doesn't seem to be transphobic it can certainly be offensive to some as it discusses "passing" and how certain physical attributes outs people (whilst using incorrect pronouns). I believe the discussion was meant to be about associations with femininity and gender but it doesn't work in our more knowledgeable and inclusive world.

The other issue is of the author itself. Whilst Brownmiller is a trailblazer and her works were incredibly influential - she is a modern day controversial figure making comments that again don't reflect our current world.

Did I enjoy the read - yes. Overall the discussion was good but read knowing the context and modern day issues.

[Emily · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting exploration of femininity that struck me deeply at many points. I think in some aspects held up remarkably well, and would have been excellent if not for its whiteness and eurocentricity. There were also some quite frankly shocking and incorrect things said or implied about trans people.

[Casey · Rating 4 out of 5]

a bunch of hard to swallow pills

[Aura · Rating 5 out of 5]

38 years after its publication and it is still just as valid. If you want to understand how femininity comes to be a set of restrictions and limitations in favor of the subordination of women, this is the book for you. If you want to start freeing yourself from femininity, this book is for you. Susan Brownmiller thank you 💜.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

THE FAMED ANTI-RAPE ACTIVIST CHANGES TO A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SUBJECT

Susan Brownmiller (1935-2025) was a feminist author and activist. She wrote in the Prologue to this 1984 book about her childhood and youth, “I loved being a little girl, or rather I loved being a fairy princess, for that was who I thought I was. As I passed through a stormy adolescence to a stormy maturity, femininity increasingly became an exasperation, a brilliant, subtle esthetic that was bafflingly inconsistent at the same time that it was minutely, demandingly concrete, a rigid code of appearance and behavior defined by do’s and don’t-do’s that went against my rebellious grain. Femininity was a challenge thrown down to the female sex, a challenge no proud, self-respecting young woman could afford to ignore… Femininity, in essence, is a romantic sentiment, a nostalgic tradition of imposed limitations. Even as it hurries forward in the 1980s, putting on lipstick and high heels to appear well dressed, it trips on the ruffled petticoats and hoopskirts on an era gone by.” (Pg. 14-15)

She continues, “But clearly, biological femaleness is not enough. Femininity always demands more. It must constantly assure its audience by a willing demonstration of difference, even when one does not exist in nature, or it must seize and embrace a natural variation and compose a rhapsodic symphony upon the notes… To fail at the feminine difference is to appear not to care about men, and to risk the loss of their attention and approval…” (Pg. 15)

She observes, “Enormous pleasure can be extracted from feminine pursuits as a creative outlet or purely as relaxation; indeed, indulgence for the sake of fun, or art, or attention, is among femininity’s chief joys… The world smiles favorably on the feminine woman: it extends little courtesies and minor privileges. Yet the nature of this competitive edge is ironic, at best, for one works in femininity by accepting restrictions, by limiting one’s sights… Femininity pleases men because it makes them appear more masculine by contrast; and in truth, conferring an extra portion of unearned gender distinction on men, an unchallenged space in which to breathe freely and feel stronger, wiser, more competent, is femininity’s special gift.” (Pg. 15-16)

She admits, “I have been at odds with the hair on my head for most of my life… I harbor a deep desire to wear my hair long because, like all the women I know, I grew up believing that long hair is irrefutably feminine… but I happen to look terrible when my hair is long. I know what some people think about short hair… short hair is mannish, dyky. I could risk wearing my hair quite short if I wore makeup and dresses, or put on some earrings, or if I weren’t a feminist and an ambitious careerist, or if I were married and had two children, but close-cropped hair on someone like me adds to an image I do not mean to project… I need to go my own way, yet I also need to stand on the safe side of femininity.” (Pg. 55)

She explains, “why do I persist in not wearing skirts? Because I don’t like this artificial gender distinction. Because I don’t wish to start shaving my legs again. Because I don’t want to return to the expanse and aggravation of nylons… Because I remember resenting the enormous amount of thinking that I used to pour into superficial upkeep concerns, and because the nature of feminine dressing is superficial in essence---even my objections seem superficial as I write them down. But that is the point. To care about feminine fashion… is to be obsessively involved in inconsequential details on a serious basis.” (Pg. 81) She adds, “To be truly feminine is to accept the handicap of restraint and restriction, and to come to adore it." (Pg. 86)

She notes, “Shopping is indeed the woman’s opiate, yet the economy would suffer a new crisis if the American woman dropped her feminine interest in clothes and ceased to be a conspicuous consumer.” (Pg. 99)

She recalls, “At the beginning of the new feminist movement, when many of us rebelled… against artificial beauty from girdles to lipstick, I saw the emergence of several bearded women. Peach fuzz, really… but nonetheless a groundcover of surprising, dense growth. I was shocked and wished they would do something about it… The women with hair on their faces were asking for support, but a lifetime of social conditioning ordained my esthetic aversion.” (Pg. 139) Later, she adds, “As a matter of principle I stopped shaving my legs and under my arms several years ago, but I have yet to accept the unesthetic result…” (Pg. 156)

She acknowledges, “There is no getting around the fact that I have an anti-makeup bias, believing with as much objectivity as I can muster that I have one of those faces that simply do not benefit from an application of paintbox colors… An unadorned face became the honorable new look of feminism in the early 1970s, and no one was happier with the freedom not to wear makeup than I, yet it could hardly escape my attention that more women supported the Equal Rights Amendment and legal abortion than could walk out of the house without their eye shadow… Cosmetics… are proof, if anything, of feminine insecurity, and abiding belief that the face underneath is insufficient to itself.” (Pg 158-159)

She suggests, “Hollywood’s contribution in the late 1930s to the concept of seductive glamour …[was] a set of protruding, enameled nails [that] transforms the simplest gesture into the contrived, t0phe self-conscious, or in some cases the impossible or the to-be-avoided-at-all-costs… the feminine competition of nail-growing, woman against herself … and woman against other women, is so absorbing that accounts of the struggle … have been written by Shirley MacLaine and Helen Gurley Brown, among others. And the results are indeed a tactile sensation. Thumb against nail, nail against palm, finger against doorbell, the merest gesture gives reassurance of the feminine difference…Even when they are glued-on fakes.” (Pg. 179-180)

She notes, “‘Sensible shoes' announce an unfeminine sensibility, a value system that places physical comfort above the critical mission of creating a sex difference where one does not exist in nature. Sensible shoes betray a lack of concern for the esthetic and sexual feelings of men.” (Pg. 186)

She explains, “Love of babies, any baby and all babies… is a celebrated and anticipated feminine emotion, and a woman who fails to ooh and ahh at the snapshot of a baby or cuddle a proffered infant in her arms is instantly suspect… But despite … evidence that day-to-day motherhood is not a suitable or a stimulating occupation for all, the myth persists that a woman who prefers to remain childless must be heartless or selfish or less than complete.” (Pg. 214)

She concludes, “Gender does ultimately rest on how the species reproduces, but while femaleness will continue to be defined by the XX chromosomal count and its reproductive potential, many women have ceased to define themselves by their reproductive role… The post-reproductive years grow longer and longer, putting into perspective an emerging truth: the problem is not that some women are feminine failures, but that femininity fails as a reliable goal.” (Pg. 237)

Completely unlike her first book, Brownmiller’s incisive and honest comments are surprising, yet quite interesting.

[Keith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Undoubtedly an out-of-date book, it sadly still depicts a society that places an emphasis on male definitions of 'femininity' and the need for women to meet its ideals.

Broken into sections, the book describes in detail the historical context of 'Body', 'Hair', 'Clothes', 'Voice', 'Skin', 'Movement', 'Emotion', 'Ambition' and how how a woman should deport herself in each of these areas of her life in order to be 'feminine'.

It should be read in conjunction with Naomi Wolf's 'The Beauty Myth' as both authors touch upon similar themes, although Susan Brownmiller does show a touch more humour particularly about her personal interaction with femininity.

Favourite quote: "“Don’t lose your femininity” and “Isn’t it remarkable how she manages to retain her femininity?” had terrifying implications. They spoke of a bottom-line failure so irreversible that nothing else mattered." - Femininity; Susan Brownmiller

[jenna · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yeah, baby, wake up and smell the misogeny!

Tho I'm not the uber-feminist I once was when I read this at age 22 (I shave now, care how I look and I accept that others have the right to their opinions), the book's critical analysis of the feminine did make me very aware of different injunctions around me.

It woke me up to realities I took for granted and I'm still lucid of these influences and integrate them into my understand of myself and others. I think feminism is about choices-whether that be to inflate one's endowments, slap on some Tammy Fey eyes, stay at home with the kids, conquer the universe, cook, cry, play football, etc etc. is secondary to the freedom of the choice. the book was helpful for me to dissect my choices: is this me, or a response? how comfortable am i with that? what does that mean?

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brownmiller offers a fascinating treatise on the origins and history of the traditional concept of femininity, distilling several thousand years of development into a slim volume packed with trivia. (As an aside, this is the book that taught me, years ago, just exactly what that whole footbinding thing really entailed.) Femininity works best in its first chapters, where Brownmiller has a tighter focus (body/hair/clothes) for her historical explorations. Toward the end, when the categories become less clear cut (emotion/ambition), her focus seems to slip a bit and her text becomes more of a recitation of personal experiences...still fascinating, but hardly what we signed up for. A somewhat dated but still intriguing read.

[KD · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was this month's selection for my feminist book club and I loved it! It was written in the 80s but everything in it is (unfortunately) still relevant today. I have always felt uncomfortable with my lack of free choice with regard to appearing feminine or not; this book helped me understand better the source of that discomfort.

[Jezzyka · Rating 5 out of 5]

Love love love. Jam-packed with very interesting information and perspectives.

The writing is just formal enough that it's understandable but sophisticated and not dumbed down. Except for that part where she said "The phantasmagorical specter of the engulfing superbeast". Wow, Susan.

[Guy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I bought off of a discount table. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and the interesting — and significant trivia — it contains, such as where "rule-of-thumb" and "blue blood" come from.

[Lara · Rating 4 out of 5]

Required reading for modern feminist theory. Some outdated material on trans women and men. Overall an incredible analysis of the costs to women of femininity.

[Karen-Leigh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Should be read by every woman at least once.

[Kate · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is excellent. I loved it.

[emily · Rating 3 out of 5]

took me ages to get through i really liked some parts but it just felt the writing was missing something???

[Carrotcakie]

published in 1984, so dated in many ways, with the pitfalls of white-centric feminism. the punitive/judgmental attitude re how one should resist (which permeated the tone of the book) is generally unhelpful imo (ie, to be a "real" feminist, you should wear pants).

however, there were some moments that were genuinely moving and compelling for me. for ex, this quote: “A ‘return to masculinity’ is an unthinkable concept, for masculine is defined by the present tense. But in clothes, in attitude, and in everything else, to be safely feminine–to ‘retain’ her femininity–a woman must look to the distant past” (88).--> I found the idea of time as defined by masculinity/femininity, and what that implies about everything else in our families, our careers, our future as a society, etc., compelling.

i also found this quote poignant (about women writers): “A more feminine woman might have given up thought of publication altogether, to pour her passion into her diary where she could express her emotions as freely as she wished, and never face up to the unfeminine task of pounding her thoughts into hard-edged shape. The hope, of course, would always remain that one day a reader would discover her soul" (126). it evokes the clinging to the hope to be known and seen/the repressed desire for freedom that lived/s in the hearts of so many despite continued disappointment.