TOWARD A NEW PSYCHOLOGY OF WOMEN

by Jean Baker Miller

Pelican edition

Genres: Psychology, Feminism, Nonfiction, Counselling, Womens, Sociology, Womens Studies

147 pages, Paperback

First published May 1, 2005

Reviews

[Zsa Zsa · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is my second book by Jean Baker Miller and I was gonna give it four because it seemed too short, I wanted her to talk more about everything. That's how selfish I am. She explains all with examples and suggests solutions when she can but apparently I can't have enough. I suggest this to all interested in other modes of life, one better than we are already suffering in because it's just too damn destructive, suppressive, inflexible, male dominant, inhumane and unwomanly.

[Fadillah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Male culture has built an amazingly large mythology around the idea of feminine evil - Eve, Pandora's box, and the like. All this mythology seems clearly to be linked to men's unsolved problems, the things they fear they will find if they open Pandora's box. Women, meanwhile, have been prepared to stand ready and willing to accept all that evil. Women are thus caught with no real power in a situation militating toward failure. They not only feel like failures but come to believe that failure further confirms their evilness. (In our society, especially, we tend to incorporate the notion that success confirms goodness.) Women, themselves, are simultaneously likely to feel most keenly the direct effects of our societies' deepest problems, To touch on one large area, our culture tends to 'objectify' people, that is, to treat most people as if they were things; it treats women almost totally in this way. To be considered as an object can lead to the deep inner sense that there must be some thing wrong and bad about oneself. Workers on an assembly line have felt this dehumanization, and stadents have protested about it in the last decade. Women feel it not only because it is pervasive in the dominant society but also because it is carried into their most intimate relationships. To be treated like an object is to be threatened with psychic annihilation. It is a truly dreadfal experience.
- Doing Good and Feeling Bad : Toward a new psychology of women by Jean Baker Miller
.
Not gonna lie, a lot of points in the book reminded me of ‘The feminine mystique’ by Betty Friedan particularly on emotional fulfilment that women being denied of simple because they were pushed to the direction of being a wife and expected to excel at motherhood. That being said, there’s a lot of generalisation which some of it can be outdated. Unfortunately, its only about 30% (in my opinion). The other 70% is still applicable despite the book being published in 1970s. The first section of the book highlighted ‘Domination and subordination’ and how it
affected the psyche of both gender. One was being raised to be strong, overtly masculine and must take the role of provider seriously. The other was raised submissive, outrageously feminine and must aim being an obedient partner and a loving mother. The first section also highlighted the navigation of both gender in facing and resolving conflicts either covert and overt. Since women were geared towards being silent and expected to keep it to themselves unless men asked them to, this is where the narrative of women are naturally tricky - men just couldn’t handle how women let them think they are a problem solver when in fact women has laid out all the plans to remove the crisis. The second section argued on vulnerability of feelings and the needs of women to serve others so that she can be useful. The way patriarchal works is pushing the agenda how men are doing an important work and it’s incomparable to what women has been doing. Hence, these men believed that they are not allowed to fail and expected to man up whenever there’s a conflict. They cannot talk about their feelings and bottled it up which often led to violent behaviour. While women most of the time were okay being vulnerable, emotionally involved simply because society put them in a category of emotional’ . While women has been indoctrinated for as long as patriarchy works that they will never be good as man and always have a ‘penis envy’. Women were expected to stay in their lane and did their roles quietly. This has been internalised by many women that the only things that made them felt good is to serve others endlessly and faithfully (in this case, their husband and kids) . Men took this kind of women for granted and rather than felt affection towards their wives, they felt its somehow their rights to be treated like a king while women were left with these unpaid labor. The updated version of this book would have highlighted statistically that married men is happier compared to single men while single women is happier than married women. And you wonder why it happened that way? The last section emphasised on the authenticity and women’s inability to navigate power handed to them. Women has been pushed to hide behind facade of society code, femininity imagery and rather than owning their true identity, they now most of the time tolerate what seems to be the standard set by the other gender. As for power, self doubt and lack of confidence often came due to the impression that women can never be good enough. This somehow reminded me of how many muslim men and women at least some of it internalised that women cannot be a leader and even if they are, they will not be good at it which infuriating to say the least. Overall, a good read. While some are outdated, but most of it sadly still applicable and relevant to BIPOC women. The author did put disclaimer that the study is broad and it may not encompasses some women specifically from racial lenses but it still serves its lessons toward a new psychology of women.

[Sally Duros · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a brilliant and ground-breaking book, with ideas that will always be fresh and true. It inspired me to write the following essay.

Women whistle in conflict and cause growth
Posted on January 23, 2003
By Sally Duros
Originally published Sally’s World, January 10, 2003
http://www.sallyduros.com/women-whist...

Did you see that TIME Magazine chose three women as their persons of the year? Sharing the honor are Cynthia Cooper of Worldcom, Coleen Rowley of the FBI and Sherron Watkins of Enron.

On its cover TIME dubbed them “The Whitleblowers.” In the photo, the three women look at the camera straight on, stern-faced, arms crossed, silhouettes dramatically lit, their hair framing their faces like haloes. They look annoyed, a bit like moms who’ve caught their 10-year olds throwing firecrackers at each other in the basement.

The photo portrait of this triumvirate doesn’t exactly fit the formula of what we think of as “out of the box” thinkers, but that is precisely what they are. To think out of the box is to be truly radical. It’s not simply to zig when you see a sign that says “zag,” but to blaze with a light that signals a whole new direction. It’s a risk and it’s a signal of what’s to come.

And in stepping out of the box, what did these three expose? Conflict, pure and simple. The conflict between what their organizations said they were doing and what they were REALLY doing.

I understand why TIME called them whistleblowers, but the term can be seen as, well, negative. It brings to mind other words like snitch and disgruntled. None of these women went to the press. The press went to them when their internal memos were leaked. None of them had an ax to grind. They all loved their jobs and believed in their organizations. As TIME says in its report, they are more like “the truest of the true believers.”

If not whistleblowers, then what to call them? These three “Persons of the Year” wriggled just as uncomfortably with being called heroes or role models.
Here’s a proposal: Let’s call them a harbinger.

And here’s why. Like the first robins of spring, our “Persons of the Year” are a signal of new growth to come in the cultures of our organizations.

If you read the TIME reports about what they did and why they did it, you will see that they were motivated by a desire to help their organizations to succeed and grow. If this succeed and grow motivation sounds like a “chick” thing to you, well it has for a long time considered to be so. But since these women are a harbinger, it won’t be a “chick” thing for long.

The fact that they stood up could be a sign of an opening in our business organizations of benefit to all of us – men and women and future generations of employees. If we look beyond the headlines and read the subtext, this story is about how people – men and women alike – are driven to connect with each other in mutually enhancing relationships – inside and outside of organization.

It’s an opening that’s been a long time coming and was effectively advanced by Jean Baker Miller in her book, Toward a New Psychology of Women. Penned in 1976 at a time of dramatic change for women, this work is, in my layperson’s opinion, a work of remarkable clarity and brilliance.

Baker-Miller recognized that, socially, women through their activities carry human essentials that are not valued. Of these, the most important woman’s life activity is participating in growth fostering relationships – the process of acting in relationship with another person so that person can develop and grow.

This is the everyday stuff of rising children, and it is often described as nurturing or mothering. But these are gender-based words that negate the fact that all people – men and women alike -want to participate in growth-fostering relationships. Baker-Miller and her colleagues call this mutual psychological development and they say that it is essential to all of life and functioning.

So where do our whistleblowers/harbingers fit into this?

These three were so driven to foster growth within their organizations that they risked the conflict to make the growth happen.

Because women are usually subordinates, they do not actively engage in conflict with their dominants – their bosses. When the conflict is forced underground, it becomes covert, distorted and saturated with “destructive force.” But conflict doesn’t have to be that way, and by it’s nature it is not.

Conflict is actually good for us. Entered into with integrity, respect, confidence and hope, conflict is the source of all growth. “The infant would never grow if it interacted with a mirror image of itself,” Baker-Miller writes. “Growth requires engagement with difference and with people embodying the difference.”

28 years ago in her book, Baker-Miller called on women to reclaim conflict.

That is exactly what the ladies of the harbinger have done.

Their actions show that we have learned at least that much – that some conflict is necessary if we are to grow. Twenty years ago, these three would have had neither the position nor the means to even ponder a conflict. The fact that they stepped forward is a very good sign.

It’s not the end of the road but a beginning. For a long time, many of us have questioned the values of our institutions. We have looked for evolution to a more responsive organization that is more tolerant of authenticity. There’s been a lot of dissatisfaction but few guideposts to the next destination. Many of us have wondered how we have gotten into this mess and how we will get out of it.

“One adopts measures in keeping with his past training–and the very soundness of this training may lead him to adopt the wrong measures. People may be unfitted by being fit in an unfit fitness,” said the noted theorist of rhetoric, Kenneth Burke, who Baker-Miller quotes in her book.

That’s good for a giggle and it’s also true. Our three harbingers have pushed back against the “unfit fitness.”

With a little luck, they have cleared a path and planted a tiny seed for a new type of organization, one that is geared toward engendering authenticity and relationships of mutual growth.

And one that will allow us to have a good, clean fight when we need to.
Toward a New Psychology of WomenJean Baker Miller

[Amy Holstead · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s strange reading a book about feminism which was published in 1976 because everything Miller says sounds obvious in this day and age but was revolutionary at the time

Definitely not suggesting that sexism is solved in 2025, more that the themes she talks about are very mainstream now eg objectification of women, standing up for yourself etc.

Also the chapter on depression was strange as I feel our understanding of it has changed drastically (or the med skl just teach us about it differently). She says “Depression, for example, which is related to one’s sense of the loss of connection with another(s), is much more common in women” (83). Maybe this is still the psychological understanding of depression nowadays need to do some digging.

[Laura-leigh · Rating 4 out of 5]

Still a must-read in 2019.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

AN EARLY ‘FEMINIST’ PERSPECTIVE ON WOMEN’S PSYCHOLOGY

Psychiatrist Jean Baker Miller (1927-2006) wrote in the Foreword to this 1975 book, “There is a new spirit abroad among women today, a new kind of collective and cooperative devotion to each other and to the search for knowledge about important matters. One woman’s thoughts readily spark additions and elaborations by others. There are many women who will build on an idea if it has value. If it does not, they will be penetrating in their criticism…

“What follows is an attempt to understand the forces acting on and in women, qua women---life as it has been and still is foremost of us. The hope is that in seeking to understand women, as women, we can find the ways to help with the psychological problems of all women… In the effort to convey the main ideas here I have cited experiences from certain women’s lives. It is important to emphasize here that these descriptions are simplified and schematic; they are used as illustrations only… I have not even attempted to deal with the class and racial factors which make an enormous difference in women’s lives. In general, I have concentrated on the forces which I believe affect all women, by virtue of the fact of being women.”

She states, “Two types of inequality are pertinent for present purposes. The first might be called temporary inequality. Here, the lesser party is SOCIALLY defined as unequal… parents and children, teachers and students… It is clear, then, that the paramount goal is to end the … relationship of inequality. The period of disparity is meant to be temporary. People may continue their association as friends, colleagues, or even competitors, but not as ‘superior’ and ‘lesser.’ At least this is the goal… The second type of inequality teaches us how to enforce inequality, but not how to make the journey from unequal to equal… In this book we will concentrate on this second kind of inequality. However, the underlying notion is that this second type has determined, and still determines, the only ways we can think and feel in the first type.” (Pg. 4-5)

She asserts, “Inevitably, the dominant group is the model for ‘normal human relationships.’ It then becomes ‘normal’ to treat others destructively and to derogate them, to obscure the truth of what you are doing, by creating false explanations, and to oppose actions toward equality. In short, if one’s identification is with the dominant group, it is ‘normal’ to continue in this pattern… to keep doing these things, one need only to behave ‘normally.’…” (Pg. 8)

She asks, “What of the subordinates’ part in this?... Initial expressions of dissatisfaction and early actions by subordinates always come as a surprise; they are usually rejected as atypical. After all, dominants KNEW that all women needed and wanted was a man around whom to organize their lives. Members of the dominant group do not understand why ‘they’---the first to speak out---are so upset and angry.” (Pg. 9) She continues, “To the extent that subordinates move toward freer expression and action, they will expose the inequality and throw into question the basis for its existence. And they will make the inherent conflict an open conflict. They will then have to bear the burden and take the risks that go with being defined as ‘troublemakers.’ Since this role flies in the face of their conditioning, subordinates, especially women, do not come to it with ease.” (Pg. 12)

She observes, “Beyond inequality, women have a further, more complex relation to male society. Women have not only been treated as unequals---in many ways like other groups of people socially defined as subordinate—but they have been sustaining a special, more total dynamic.” (Pg. 27)

She says of married couples, “With some couples, the mythology may seem to ‘work.’ Both partners know what is going on to some extent, and a balance is struck so that the arrangement is sufficiently satisfactory to sustain the status quo. The woman, considering the alternatives that faced her outside of marriage until now, was often willing to accept the situation. Such marriages, however, may create another kind of reaction in women… The woman usually knows well her husband’s areas of weakness, and she provides the needed supports. But… such women … increasingly develop the pervasive sense that … he must have an entirely unknown area of strength… that enables him to manage in ‘the real world.’” (Pg. 34)

She notes, “Women have grown up knowing the goals most valued for individual development were not to be THEIR goals. On the other hand, women do grow and develop. They have constructed an inner person who is different from the person most valued in this society.” (Pg. 44)

She summarizes, “The overall attempt of this book is to look toward a more accurate understanding of women’s psychology as it arises out of women’s life experience rather than as it has been perceived by those who do not have that experience. In doing so, we have suggested… a possible third stage of psychoanalysis or of psychodynamic understanding---one in which cooperation and creativity assume their full and rightful place. We have postulated that this third stage may become explicit through women’s effort to act on their situation---the basic proposition being that the prior two stages are linked to women’s situation too but have not been recognized as such.” (Pg. 48)

She argues, “Men’s only hope lies in affiliation, too, but for them it can SEEM an impediment, a loss, a danger, or at least second best. By contrast, affiliations, relationships, make women feel deeply satisfied, fulfilled, ‘successful,’ free go on to other things. It is not that men are not concerned about relationships, or that men do not have deep yearnings for affiliation… people in the field of psychodynamics are constantly finding … evidence of these needs in men as well as in women, deep UNDER THE SURFACE of social appearance… the time with their mothers was the time when [men] could really believe in and rely on affiliation. As soon as they start to grow in the male mold, they are supposed to give up this belief and even this desire… and build their lives on something else. And they are REWARDED for doing so.” (Pg. 87-88)

She observes, “psychological troubles are the worst kind of slavery---one becomes enlisted in creating one’s own enslavement---one uses so much of one’s own energies to create one’s own defeat.” (Pg. 94)

She points out, “a woman’s whole conditioning is contrary to seriously finding out what she wants. Today, the lack of a definite desire is, in itself, very discouraging for many women. It ultimately represents one kind of ‘copout,’ although an understandable one. If you do not know what you want, you can avoid taking the risk to get it; for women this is a serious risk. Women find they have to begin to explore their own thoughts and feelings, whatever these are, and wherever they must begin.” (Pg. 109) She adds, “for [women]… the attempt at authenticity requires a clear and direct risk. For women to act and react out of their own being is to fly in the face of their appointed definition and their prescribed way of living. To move toward authenticity, then, also involves creation, in an immediate and pressing personal way.” (Pg. 113-114)

She acknowledges, “As women seek self-definition and self-determination, they will, perforce, illuminate, on a broad scale, the existence of conflict as a basic process of existence. As long as women were used … to suppress certain fundamental human conflicts, the basic process of conflict itself remained obscure. As women move out of that position, conflict can become known and therefore available for more appropriate attention---with much greater hope of eventually understanding our minds. That is, women are not CREATING conflict; they are exposing the fact that conflict exists.” (Pg. 126)

This book will be of keen interest to those studying the psychology of women (and of men, too).

[Chalice · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eye-opening and not what I expected. I may be female, but before reading this book I never identified as feminist because it felt too aggressive and direct to me. But Jean Baker-Miller illustrated concepts and ideas that relate to all types of people. She writes with compassion to both genders. The book is a bit outdated and controversial, but taking into account the time period it was written, it's still extremely applicable in our everyday experiences today. This is an essential book for anyone that wants to become more aware of the things we all see but don't notice. And definitely essential for mental health professionals.

[Amber · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a basic, simply written text that explores the psychology of women from a feminist perspective. This book was revolutionary at the time it was written, undermining many of the assumptions held about women's psychology since the studies of Freud, and elucidating the factors that the oppression of women has had on women's behavior.

[Lisa]

this book is about the psychology of the oppressed: it isn't 'only about women'. the author taught at Wellesley and Harvard, a brilliant woman.

[Mary Lynne · Rating 5 out of 5]

Short, simple, amazing and so important!

[April · Rating 4 out of 5]

My 4-star review is based on the impact this book must have had in the 70's when it was first written. In today's times it feels jarring to read so many broad generalizations and blanket definitions about who is a woman, while remaining completely silent on race (Sojourner Truth asked 'ain't I a woman?' in 1851) or queerness. However, still powerful is the critical re-framing of freudian psychoanalysis as the psychology of patriarchy and perhaps of oppression itself. Whether or not collaboration and the need for connection with others are "female" or "woman's" natural skills/strengths, it seems apparent today that these are the strengths of any oppressed group. All in all, I still found it helpful to read such generalizations about women, because they were and are still beliefs throughout the world, even in places that feel that women and men are equal.

[Samantha · Rating 3 out of 5]

“We have all heard the terms ‘castrating women,’ ‘bitch,’ and the like. They have been enough to deter many a women not only from aggression but even from mere straightforward assertion. But we must ask, who created these terms? Out of what experience did they originate?” (Jean Baker Miller, p. 119).

A very enlightening, yet overwhelmingly detail book. It really makes you consider our culture and the way in which women are viewed. I would be interested in reading a modern take on Millers’ view and statements.

[Vic · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5*

A solid and still relevant read about how to use psychotherapy to help dismantle years of societal oppression. It’s not an intersectional read, and I wish the author gave more sources to supplement instead of saying “other authors will do a better job of taking about that”, but a good primer overall

[Isabelle Callahan-Nasser · Rating 4 out of 5]

“[women] actually come to believe that there is some special, inherent ability, some factor that escapes them and must inevitably escape them. The fact that women are themselves discouraged from serious testing of themselves fosters and deepens the need to believe that men have this special quality. Most women have a lifelong conditioning that induces them to believe this myth.”

[Abdullah · Rating 3 out of 5]

i think it's not the problem of women only , it's the problem of men as well ?
actually , it's the problem of human being ?
alot of people don't understand themselves , leave alone others ? !
therefore , we need a new book ' toward a new psychology of human ?

[Angel Gonzalez · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a well written essay full of wisdom. Jean Baker Miller was very perceptive. Baker Miller taught us that to be incarnated is to live in constant conflict. We are invited to make that inevitable conflict worthwhile.

[Rahmah ♾️ · Rating 2 out of 5]

احس بعض الكتب تحتاج انها تنقطع من السوق بالاخص بهالزمن اللي احنا فيه ( اللي المراءه اصبحت فيه مختلفة تماما عن للازمنه اللي مضت)

هذا الكتاب العلمي الفلسفي يتكلم عن احقيه المراءه بكل شي حتى بالسلطه وانها قادره تكون بكل المجالات ومن هالكلام الفاضي 😏

ماحبيته ولا اضاف لي شي لاني حسيته عادي

[Julie · Rating 5 out of 5]

The most influential book I’ve read all year. No exceptions.

[Suheir · Rating 4 out of 5]

According to the era it was published in it would be amazing but I would rather to refer to our modern world and tackle the gender and race more.
Great examples and it sould be a great reference.

[Omkar Karande · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ok

[Anna · Rating 5 out of 5]

Somewhat outdated in the way that Feminine Mystique is outdated, but sadly not outdated enough. Sigh.

"Because our image of human possibilities is built on what men have done and what men have said is possible, we have not been able to conceive of more than "man" as so far defined. We are left believing that while many people [read: many women] have impulses that are generous, kind, and responsive to other human beings, at bottom, they are selfish, self-seeking, and out for themselves... We might say that one of the major issues before us as a human community is the question of how to create a way of life that includes serving others without being subservient... As suggested at the outset, women today have a highly developed basis for this social advance." (p. 71)

Good stuff. The author articulates some major issues for female and male dissatisfaction with the dominant-passive structure that exists. She suggests that moving beyond it would not only extend the limits of social possibilities by including female strengths and creativity, but would also allow men to become more whole people, as they would incorporate these strengths into their psyches as well.

[Holly · Rating 5 out of 5]

A phenomenal book. I wrote a 30 page history essay analysing this book and it’s relevance to issues facing women, psychology, and feminism today. There are flaws, there are dates ideas etc but the power of this book and it’s milestone in feminist psychoanalysis and the psychology of women cannot be overstated.

[Geraldine · Rating 3 out of 5]

Written in 1976 and updated in the 80s this book is still relevant for people wanting to address/change for the better expectations of gender roles individually and at a societal level.
She argues for a new co-operative approach. I think many people today would find it a helpful book.

[Willa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Aaargh!

[Carla]

ordering...thank you Randy

[Katherine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not only groundbreaking for its time, this groundbreaking meditation on women's self in society is a must read for anyone interested in working with girls and women.

[Susan]

Long ago.
only comment is "very dated"

[Nameh dah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Una exigencia de último minuto que se tornó necesidad.