What do you think?
Rate this book
Il posto della donna nella società degli uomini
Book by Figes, Eva
245 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published May 18, 1978
About the author
Eva Figes
41 books33 followersEva Figes (born Eva Unger) is a German-born English author.
Figes has written novels, literary criticism, studies of feminism, and vivid memoirs relating to her Berlin childhood and later experiences as a Jewish refugee from Hitler's Germany. She arrived in Britain in 1939 with her parents and a younger brother. Figes is now a resident of north London and the mother of the academic Orlando Figes and writer Kate Figes.
In the 1960s she was associated with an informal group of experimental British writers influenced by Rayner Heppenstall, which included Stefan Themerson, Ann Quin and its informal leader, B. S. Johnson.
Figes's fiction has certain similarities with the writings of Virginia Woolf. The 1983 novel, Light, is an impressionistic portrait of a single day in the life of Claude Monet from sunrise to sunset.
Figes has written novels, literary criticism, studies of feminism, and vivid memoirs relating to her Berlin childhood and later experiences as a Jewish refugee from Hitler's Germany. She arrived in Britain in 1939 with her parents and a younger brother. Figes is now a resident of north London and the mother of the academic Orlando Figes and writer Kate Figes.
In the 1960s she was associated with an informal group of experimental British writers influenced by Rayner Heppenstall, which included Stefan Themerson, Ann Quin and its informal leader, B. S. Johnson.
Figes's fiction has certain similarities with the writings of Virginia Woolf. The 1983 novel, Light, is an impressionistic portrait of a single day in the life of Claude Monet from sunrise to sunset.
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
February 25, 2021
Though dated, it's an excellent second wave feminist text. Very well researched and presented.
January 6, 2022
Although majorly outdated in her solutions, language, lack of intersectionality and lack of LGBT critique, this is an interesting book. Whilst the last chapter can be disregarded due to her solutions being outdated, the strength of the book lies with her outstanding critique of western philosophers. She deconstructs thinkers like Tolstoy, Nietzsche and Freud and portrays them to be like the misogynistic pigs that they seemed to be. This literary criticism of showing how misogynist the western Canon of literature and philosophy really is is by far the strength and often the focus of the book.
Most modern readers will find the rest of the book though problematic at times and outdated, however it still offers a feminist analysis beyond what much of modern society recognises yet.
Most modern readers will find the rest of the book though problematic at times and outdated, however it still offers a feminist analysis beyond what much of modern society recognises yet.
June 2, 2026
Follow/Subscribe: YouTube, Patreon, Instagram
2.5 Stars
Feelings about the book:
- There are a few important general points to touch upon in this section of my review:
o Early on in this book we run into a classic problem. Did men start to dominate once they realised their role in creating offspring?
o I’m also still not convinced by the whole ‘men formed patriarchy and started dominating women so they can cheat death by passing their legacy on to their sons’ argument.
Premise/Plot:
- Calling upon and analysing research from Margaret Mead, Malinowski, Darwin and more - Figes constructs a picture of historical and present patriarchal attitudes.
Themes:
- Patriarchal religions and societies, analysing religious texts, Freud and more.
Pros:
- Figes does nicely lay out issues such as sexual double standards among other things.
- Figes’ writing is very accessible and to the point, there is hardly any fluff in this book. Which isn’t a surprise given that it comes in at under 200 pages long.
Cons:
- Figes’ brief comment about Margaret Thatcher in the introduction was notable. Being authoritative is not all that it is cracked up to be.
- One of the glaring struggles I see in feminist literature (especially in regards to pre-Christian mythology), is the function of supposed earlier versions of goddesses. Usually there is some sort of old myth about women being the centre and men stealing power etc, which sounds plausible to be fair. But it is an old planet, yet a circular nature to divine power isn’t ever bought up.
- There seems to be a reoccurring theme in feminist literature where they are quite timid in their approach to religion. And that's if they delve deeply into it at all. Meaning, that if there is no strong, general judgement about people continuing to believe in religion, the analysis lacks that final, decisive blow. The feminist alternative is either non-existent or undesirable. Yet, their critique (and Figes’ critique in this book), has a sense of urgency to it that demands direction, judgement and any viable alternative.
- Figes analysis of classic texts that were misogynist, and wrong does get repetitive and tedious at times. Especially given that she isn’t really adding anything new to the conversation. As this goes on it made the book tedious, even with its short length.
- This book severely lacks empirical evidence to support Figes thesis.
- There is hardly any engagement with race, class, and global perspectives. Figes does the classic thing of throwing in some racial inequality references like it's seasoning. This is quite common in feminist literature unfortunately.
Quotes:
‘Man’s vision of woman is not objective, but an uneasy combination of what he wishes her to be and what he fears her to be, and it is to this mirror image that woman has had to comply.’
‘When things go wrong we feel lost and tend to think that it is because we have departed too far from tradition, and try that much harder to conform to the image. Which is only a mirage.’
‘The motivation for male domination over the female is intimately connected with the idea of paternity.’
‘In a book entitled Purity and Danger Mary Douglas argues that there are less sexual taboos in a society where the male can enforce his domination directly, and where society allows a man to punish his wife with direct physical force.’
‘Significantly, Freud also regarded the female as sexually insatiable, though he did not express it quite so bluntly: woman, he said, is incapable of renouncing her instinctual demands in the interests of civilisation.’
‘Ironically, Karl Marx saw mechanisation as a major cause of the exploitation of women’s labour, since machines made muscle power unnecessary!’
‘Rousseau idealised the married state, which he saw as the basic unit of a natural, primeval way of life before a more complex, corrupt society had depraved human morality.’
‘Darwin’s fundamental difficulties on the topic of man and woman stems from his inability to make any clear distinction between social conditioning and inherited tendencies.’
‘But love, says Nietzsche, is blundering and helpless. Love does not save, it destroys. Nietzsche represents the kind of man who would shoot an injured dog, not to end the dog’s suffering, but to end his own. Because he cannot bear to hear it whimper.’
2.5 Stars
Feelings about the book:
- There are a few important general points to touch upon in this section of my review:
o Early on in this book we run into a classic problem. Did men start to dominate once they realised their role in creating offspring?
o I’m also still not convinced by the whole ‘men formed patriarchy and started dominating women so they can cheat death by passing their legacy on to their sons’ argument.
Premise/Plot:
- Calling upon and analysing research from Margaret Mead, Malinowski, Darwin and more - Figes constructs a picture of historical and present patriarchal attitudes.
Themes:
- Patriarchal religions and societies, analysing religious texts, Freud and more.
Pros:
- Figes does nicely lay out issues such as sexual double standards among other things.
- Figes’ writing is very accessible and to the point, there is hardly any fluff in this book. Which isn’t a surprise given that it comes in at under 200 pages long.
Cons:
- Figes’ brief comment about Margaret Thatcher in the introduction was notable. Being authoritative is not all that it is cracked up to be.
- One of the glaring struggles I see in feminist literature (especially in regards to pre-Christian mythology), is the function of supposed earlier versions of goddesses. Usually there is some sort of old myth about women being the centre and men stealing power etc, which sounds plausible to be fair. But it is an old planet, yet a circular nature to divine power isn’t ever bought up.
- There seems to be a reoccurring theme in feminist literature where they are quite timid in their approach to religion. And that's if they delve deeply into it at all. Meaning, that if there is no strong, general judgement about people continuing to believe in religion, the analysis lacks that final, decisive blow. The feminist alternative is either non-existent or undesirable. Yet, their critique (and Figes’ critique in this book), has a sense of urgency to it that demands direction, judgement and any viable alternative.
- Figes analysis of classic texts that were misogynist, and wrong does get repetitive and tedious at times. Especially given that she isn’t really adding anything new to the conversation. As this goes on it made the book tedious, even with its short length.
- This book severely lacks empirical evidence to support Figes thesis.
- There is hardly any engagement with race, class, and global perspectives. Figes does the classic thing of throwing in some racial inequality references like it's seasoning. This is quite common in feminist literature unfortunately.
Quotes:
‘Man’s vision of woman is not objective, but an uneasy combination of what he wishes her to be and what he fears her to be, and it is to this mirror image that woman has had to comply.’
‘When things go wrong we feel lost and tend to think that it is because we have departed too far from tradition, and try that much harder to conform to the image. Which is only a mirage.’
‘The motivation for male domination over the female is intimately connected with the idea of paternity.’
‘In a book entitled Purity and Danger Mary Douglas argues that there are less sexual taboos in a society where the male can enforce his domination directly, and where society allows a man to punish his wife with direct physical force.’
‘Significantly, Freud also regarded the female as sexually insatiable, though he did not express it quite so bluntly: woman, he said, is incapable of renouncing her instinctual demands in the interests of civilisation.’
‘Ironically, Karl Marx saw mechanisation as a major cause of the exploitation of women’s labour, since machines made muscle power unnecessary!’
‘Rousseau idealised the married state, which he saw as the basic unit of a natural, primeval way of life before a more complex, corrupt society had depraved human morality.’
‘Darwin’s fundamental difficulties on the topic of man and woman stems from his inability to make any clear distinction between social conditioning and inherited tendencies.’
‘But love, says Nietzsche, is blundering and helpless. Love does not save, it destroys. Nietzsche represents the kind of man who would shoot an injured dog, not to end the dog’s suffering, but to end his own. Because he cannot bear to hear it whimper.’
June 27, 2023
This book made me very angry. Explains exactly what is going on currently in the United States.
January 3, 2019
He descubierto muchas cosas qué desconocía, no conocía apenas de Freud y ahora mismo le tengo bastante tirría, es descorazonador saber cómo de arraigado esta el patriarcado en nuestra sociedad, religión, valores morales, literatura... Cómo los cambios sociales en favor de los derechos de la mujer no son suficientes sino se da también un cambio de pensamiento, de actitudes, la inportancia del sistema educativo y la familia qué son los qué nos moldean. Lo qué la sociedad pide de nosotras.. In libro muy recomendable, algunas partes son más tediosas qué otras pero creo qué es necesario leerlo para entender muchas cosas.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews