What do you think?
Rate this book
Parity of the Sexes
Sylviane Agacinski has never shied away from controversy. Vilified by some―including many feminists―and celebrated by others as a pioneer of gender equality, she has galvanized the French political scene. Her articulation of the theory of "parity" helped inspire a law that went into effect in May 2000 requiring the country's political parties to fill 50 percent of the candidacies in every race with women.
Sylviane Agacinski, according to The New Yorker, "is sometimes credited with making parité respectable." Agacinski begins with the notion that sexual difference should be affirmed rather than denied. Sex, Agacinski points out, is not a social, cultural, or ethnic characteristic―it is a universal human trait. In her argument for the necessary recognition of sexual difference, she enters into today's most controversial social territory.
Agacinski's model of parity does not strive for the nebulous ideal of "equality" between the sexes; instead, it demands a concrete formula for political an equal number of female and male candidates in every election. It is a theory that has sparked impassioned debate across Are female politicians necessarily different from male politicians? Is parity democratic? Is it truly feminist?
Agacinski's sophisticated polemic will stimulate debate on American shores as it has in France. Parity of the Sexes sheds light on one of the crucial spheres of public life in which earlier French feminists left their work unfinished―the realm of political power.
Sylviane Agacinski, according to The New Yorker, "is sometimes credited with making parité respectable." Agacinski begins with the notion that sexual difference should be affirmed rather than denied. Sex, Agacinski points out, is not a social, cultural, or ethnic characteristic―it is a universal human trait. In her argument for the necessary recognition of sexual difference, she enters into today's most controversial social territory.
Agacinski's model of parity does not strive for the nebulous ideal of "equality" between the sexes; instead, it demands a concrete formula for political an equal number of female and male candidates in every election. It is a theory that has sparked impassioned debate across Are female politicians necessarily different from male politicians? Is parity democratic? Is it truly feminist?
Agacinski's sophisticated polemic will stimulate debate on American shores as it has in France. Parity of the Sexes sheds light on one of the crucial spheres of public life in which earlier French feminists left their work unfinished―the realm of political power.
- GenresNonfictionGender
208 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1998
2 people are currently reading
86 people want to read
About the author
Sylviane Agacinski
22 books4 followersSylviane Agacinski-Jospin is a French philosopher, feminist, author, professor at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales, and wife of Lionel Jospin, former Prime Minister of France.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
October 18, 2022
Quite old perspective of sexes and gender but provides great context to history of human and feminist philosophy.
May 22, 2014
While the viewpoint is not new and the argument is weak, however the philosophical perspective in viewing gender is refreshing, I recommend to elementary reader who likes gender, politics and philosophy, all three.
Agacinski considers gender as binary - only women and men, excluding intersex, transexual, asexual individuals.
The stronger point of the book:
She condemns the first wave feminism and Simone de Beauvoir for they reinforced the patriarchal concept to be 'masculine', women should work like men. She criticized Plato's 'desex' approach for overlooking the differences in sexes.
The weaker point is:
Agacinski adopts an essentialist approach in treating family and sexuality: there is naturally ,and only, two categories of human, men and women.
She then discusses the gender proportion in political regime and suggests an equal distribution in parliament.
Agacinski considers gender as binary - only women and men, excluding intersex, transexual, asexual individuals.
The stronger point of the book:
She condemns the first wave feminism and Simone de Beauvoir for they reinforced the patriarchal concept to be 'masculine', women should work like men. She criticized Plato's 'desex' approach for overlooking the differences in sexes.
The weaker point is:
Agacinski adopts an essentialist approach in treating family and sexuality: there is naturally ,and only, two categories of human, men and women.
She then discusses the gender proportion in political regime and suggests an equal distribution in parliament.
October 16, 2016
A lire pour le cours d'écriture politique qui se concentre pendant la première partie du semestre sur le féminisme.
3 étoiles. Une lecture qui m'a appris des choses et m'en a rappelé d'autres.
Je n'ai lu que la première et dernière partie, la deuxième qui s'oppose à l'adoption par les couples homosexuels nous a été déconseillé par la professeure, surtout parce que ça n'avait pas de liens avec notre cours, ainsi que parce qu'elle n'est pas d'accord avec ce chemin de pensée. Bien contente d'avoir pu échapper à cette lecture du coup!
Ce livre traite donc de la différence entre les sexes, la vision de celle ci d'un point de vue historique et philosophique et comment tout ceci à mener à notre paysage politique actuel.
3 étoiles. Une lecture qui m'a appris des choses et m'en a rappelé d'autres.
Je n'ai lu que la première et dernière partie, la deuxième qui s'oppose à l'adoption par les couples homosexuels nous a été déconseillé par la professeure, surtout parce que ça n'avait pas de liens avec notre cours, ainsi que parce qu'elle n'est pas d'accord avec ce chemin de pensée. Bien contente d'avoir pu échapper à cette lecture du coup!
Ce livre traite donc de la différence entre les sexes, la vision de celle ci d'un point de vue historique et philosophique et comment tout ceci à mener à notre paysage politique actuel.
April 5, 2013
penis envy - if it exists - would be a product of the pre-existing male valorization of virility, rather than a 'natural' instinct on the part of the female
and why, she asks, is the reverse not true (& seems more likely to me) - male envy of the female's procreative prowess
& really takes the piss out of Simone de Beauvoir's bashing of motherhood
and why, she asks, is the reverse not true (& seems more likely to me) - male envy of the female's procreative prowess
& really takes the piss out of Simone de Beauvoir's bashing of motherhood
October 22, 2015
A refreshing book. So much of what is said in regards to human rights is trite and unoriginal, it was exciting to read a new take.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews