1

1532169

Question 2

Marxism, Existentialism, Postmodernism

Clare Bright, Honors 394A

 2

Whether we’d like to admit it or not, we live in a world where news and ideas are most

efficiently distributed in formats that can make an immediate impact. Organizations face the

challenge of how to disseminate informative yet digestible messages to advance their cause. How

then might the complex philosophical theories of Marxism, Existentialism and Postmodernism

be distilled into an impactful format with the aim of promoting gender equality? I’ve chosen to

utilize three slogans which could grab attention and prompt further exploration into the thought

behind each simple statement: Escape the Home! Escape the Role! Escape the Box! I have

intended these slogans to be a play on popular advertisements of the 1950s which often used the

housewife stereotype to sell their products and asserted the role of women in the home, kitchen,

and other spaces associated with femininity. Escape the Home highlights the usefulness of

Marxism to argue that capitalism has perpetuated the monogamous family unit as the norm and

that gender inequality is a manifestation of class differences between men and women. Escape

the Role is in reference to Existentialism and its argument that norms of femininity are false

constructions. Rather than being defined by their choices and existence as true Existentialism

argues for, women are constructed by outside forces which limit them by defining their essence.

Finally, Escape the Box is a distillation of the ideas of Postmodernism and its argument for the

recognition that ‘woman’ is a social construct, and by extension, female inferiority is a construct

as well.

The following paper will explore how the combined philosophies of Marxism,

Existentialism and Postmodernism can be used to promote gender equality. Throughout these

theories, it is revealed that gender inequality and identity are not natural, but constructed. While

it is frustrating that such constructions have limited the freedom of women today, the knowledge

of these constructions provides hope for women, and all people, to be able to define their own
 3

identity. As we attempt to unite feminists pragmatically and push for increased intersectionality

in the movement, these theories hold the potential to unite feminists behind the freedom to create

identity as each individual wishes. Through the messages of Escape the Home, Escape the Role

and Escape the Box presented by Marxism, Existentialism, and Postmodernism, young feminists

can recognize how gender has been constructed and in turn, be able to construct their own

identities.

Escape the Home

Marxism’s most useful application for the promotion of gender is its argument that the

inequalities present between men and women are born out of economic inequalities. Marxism, as

a theory, encompasses two main components. Firstly, that substructure (economics) is the

foundation that shapes the superstructure (all other parts of society) (Kerbo 102). Secondly,

Marxism believes that history tends to occur in successional stages as the world inevitably

evolves toward global Communism (Kerbo 104). These stages begin with Primitive Communism

in which all citizens contribute to survival, and all contributions are valued; and now we have

evolved into the current stage of capitalism and production by industrial means. These means are

held by a select few, the bourgeois (Kerbo 105-106).

The economic lens required by Marxism helps to explain some of the norms found in our

superstructure today, particularly as it relates to the relationships of men and women. While

more women have entered the workforce, the dominant narrative of marriage and family is still

focused on the nuclear family unit. Engels, co-founder of Marxist Theory, helps pin this

normalization of the family unit on capitalism. He begins by pointing out that a patriarchal,

monogamous family has not always been the norm and that lineage used to be tracked through

maternal relations in the age of hetaerism, in which sexual relationships were not monogamous
 4

(Engels 290). Engels suggests that the function of a monogamous family lies in economic roots

of wealth preservation; men wanted a secure way of ensuring that their fortune would be passed

on to biological children. A monogamous family unit provided irrefutable proof of who should

receive a father’s private property as capitalism gave rise to increasingly privatized material

property (Engels 290).

While the benefit of monogamy is clear for men, the advantage for women is far less

clear and largely serves to sequester them to the home unit. With the rise of capitalism and the

normalization of nuclear family units, women became further isolated from the means of

production. Along with this isolation came a growing disrespect for household tasks (Engels

292) because the focus on privatization of property required participation in opportunities to gain

property outside of the home. Together, these contributed to the oppression of women, as

women’s financial dependence on men grew, while women’s own contributions at home grew

less valued.

The lens of Marxism reveals that the oppression of women and their association with the

home have less of a social origin, and more of an economic origin. The home then becomes a

microcosm in which the same class struggles present in capitalism between the workers and the

bourgeois, who own the means of production, are acted out: the wife (the worker) is subjugated

by the husband, who holds the economic power (Engels 293). How then do we use this

knowledge to promote gender equality?

Firstly, Marxism’s focus on the transition of history through stages suggests that there is

no inherent naturalness to the way the home is currently organized. Since it was constructed by

capitalism, and economically based, the subjugation of women is constructed. Marxism itself

predicts a natural tendency towards Communism. By extension of Engels’ arguments, the ruin of
 5

capitalism is predicted to change the family unit, and thus, the condition of women. For example,

there is the prediction of a tendency toward “individual sexlove,” (Engels 294) where monogamy

would be sought out for purposes of love alone and not for any economic benefit. This would

elevate the partnership component of marriage and devalue its current focus on economics, thus

freeing women of their current role in the home.

However, we must pick our battles carefully, and while capitalism is to be blamed for

subjugation of women in the home, more immediate and pragmatic suggestions should be

derived from Marxism. Engels arrives at the conclusion that the attainment of legal independence

is dependent on the dissolution of the family unit (Engels 293). For our pragmatic purposes, we

can push for the normalization of more than one kind of family (Mitchell 54). While today

women make up a large percentage of the workforce, the absence of equal pay serves as proof

that women face obstacles in their attempts to Escape the Home. As Mitchell notes in her

critique of Marxism, equality does not immediately follow from women entering the workforce

(Mitchell 45). Adjustment of policies in the current work environment, like improved pay and

day care, to support working mothers (Mitchell 49) are necessary for assisting in this transition.

That being said, at least female participation in the workforce provides the grounds by which

men and women can negotiate how legal equality outside of the home translates to social

equality inside the home (Engels 293).

Additionally, Marxism has the potential to improve intersectionality and improve the

lives of different kinds of women. While lobbying for access to equal opportunity in the work

force and procurement of legal equality have been central to feminists of the past, these

arguments have been focused on upper-middle class, white women (Leacock 296). However, as
 6

Leacock suggests, the struggles faced by all women in the workforce are similar (Leacock 297),

and a push for improved policies would elevate all women.

It is also important to note that Escape the Home is by no means a command for all. In

our campaign for the promotion of gender, women should be able to construct a definition of

themselves as they wish; for many, this identity involves having and raising children. Marxism

can also be used to revalue the work traditionally performed by women in the home, and remove

the gendered nature of it. By showing that the economic circumstances of capitalism have

debased women, the argument that childbearing itself devalues women is less credible (Leacock

296). As proposed by Marx, all contributions to society were considered valuable in the stage of

Primitive Communism. Thus a reversion to this way of life could help re-value the work women

have been expected to do and re-value their role in the raising of children. Similarly, in many

double-income homes today, there has already been an increase in the work men do around the

house, which now include tasks previously reserved for women. Escape the Home is primarily

intended to suggest that the norm of the family unit should dissolve, and that a woman has roles

to fill beyond those expected of her in the home. Ultimately, the feminist movement is working

for the social, economic, and political equality of the sexes (WIWT Bright 1), and by Escaping

the Home women are able to exert their economic independence, thus eliminating the

subjugation of women by men which results from economic difference. For our purposes,

women can begin constructing identities that are not reliant on their role in the home alone.

Escape the Role

While Marxism provides an economic explanation for women’s inequality and a plea to

remove barriers so women can meaningfully participate in the workforce, Existentialism

introduces questions about what it even means to be a woman. In the fight for gender equality, it
 7

is useful to question if there is inherent truth to the idea of woman-ness, and how ideals of a

woman’s role are regulated by society. Existentialism, and the message Escape the Role asserts

women’s rights to refuse to fulfill the role set forth for them by society. To begin, it is important

to note that Sartre and his writings alone do not assist the promotion of women. However,

Existentialism as a theory and others’ interpretations of it show Existentialism as useful in

supporting gender equality.

Existentialism as a theory can be summarized by the idea that existence precedes essence

(WIWT 316). In other words, human nature is not inherent but instead that an identity is formed

by the amalgamation of choices one makes as they move through life. A human is distinguished

as “being-for-itself” and incomplete, whereas an object is a “being-in-itself” and fixed in its

existence (Macintyre 27). However, as Sartre describes his own theory, the female is ‘Othered’

in relation to men and fixed in a definition similar to objects. While men can create themselves

through action, women are reduced to preconceived notions and archetypes that try to capture the

fixed “Truth” of women (de Beauvoir 325). However, examination of Existentialism exposes the

lack of logic behind the ‘Othering’ of women and serves to elevate the theory itself as a useful

tool. It is challenging to reconcile Sartre’s belief in the fixed definition of women with his

insistence that there is no inherent essence of humanity (Collins & Pierce 319). Considering that

human nature cannot be distilled into any one truth, situating half of the world’s human

population into a fixed nature akin to objects defies Sartre’s idea of what it means to be human.

In Holes and Slime Sartre suggests that the anatomy of women is the cause of her “obscenity”

(Collins & Pierce 321). In doing this, he tethers an essence of women to their fixed anatomy

which goes against Sartre’s inherent abhorrence to “appealing” to anything as natural (Collins &

Pierce 320). This inconsistency between definitions of humanity and definitions of women
 8

suggests that Existentialism as a theory is not the problem, but that its application to women is

the problem. Reinterpretation and examination of Existentialism was the aim of philosopher

Simone de Beauvoir, and it is through her arguments that I believe gender promotion can be

supported in two ways: firstly, because she helps elucidate the negative impact that preconceived

notions of femininity have on women, and secondly, because her arguments can inspire women

to construct their own identity.

It is important to ask why we are concerned that women are given a predetermined

essence, and why Escape the Role is a message we can derive from Existentialism. As de

Beauvoir presents, women’s constructed ‘essences’ are often intentional and necessary for their

subservient position in society, and it is important to elucidate how even today these ideas are

reinforced. For example, altruism is typically associated with women and, as de Beauvoir argues,

the labeling of this trait as feminine places pressure on a woman to devote herself to her husband

(de Beauvoir 326). Another common idea is the “feminine mystery” and how this excuses men

from having to seek understanding of women; however, for women, this suggests they come into

the world misunderstood. If women’s essence is mystery, it is as if their actions are unintelligible

to the outside world (de Beauvoir 327). Since men expect a woman to be an ‘Other,’ the actions

she takes and successes she enjoys always defy her femininity as prescribed by males (de

Beauvoir 331).

Today women often stand in opposition to preconceived definitions of femininity,

particularly if one examines their experiences. Unfortunately, de Beauvoir explains that in our

society women who defy the definition are seen as deviant from standards of femininity (Minow

quoting de Beauvoir 69) and ultimately punished for it. This is also personal to de Beauvoir: her
 9

father explained her excellence in academics as evidence of her having a “man’s brain,” (WIWT

323) since aptitude does not fall within norms of femininity.

Women enter the world with their femininity decided, rather than being able to construct

a composite femininity based on their own actions. Contrary to men who are able to exist and

create their identity, women enter the world with a preconceived essence. In this way, women

become who they are based on society (Minow citing de Beauvoir, 66). Thus, any conceptions of

women are culturally created and not inherent: reinforcing Existentialism’s message of existence

preceding essence. This liberates women and promotes gender equality. In reality, there is no one

kind of woman: it is simply society that pushes women to conform to certain ideals. These labels

ultimately constrain women’s freedom, and it is imperative in our battle for gender promotion

that we recognize that labels are not inherent, but instead are forced and reinforced by society.

De Beauvoir’s pragmatic solution for women to rise above these constraints is parallel to

the message of Marxism: that holding economic privilege will raise women’s status (de Beauvoir

328). From De Beauvoir’s viewpoint, the historical reliance of women on men for marriage, as a

social and financial support, allows men to play an active role, and limits women to remaining

passive in their own lives (de Beauvoir 328-329). While not as applicable in our society today

where many families have shared incomes, Existentialism’s message still holds true: women

must act as independent forces, because it is through action alone that they can create their

identity.

It is important to concede that there are limitations to de Beauvoir’s writing: while strong

for the support of gender equality, this is arguably equality for a limited sector of women: the

white middle-class (Minow 75). De Beauvoir herself concedes that her arguments are most

applicable when men and women are of equal class and race (Minow 66); however, this is not
 10

license to discard de Beauvoir’s arguments as a whole. A group that is often excluded by non-

intersectional feminists are trans individuals. Since this investigation of theory is for the

promotion of gender equality, it is important to note Existentialism’s implications for trans*

individuals in order to alleviate some of the oppression they face. De Beauvoir’s insistence that

humans are responsible for attached meaning to male or female bodies implies that it is not

genitalia itself, but instead how people react to it, that creates constructions of gender (Minow

quoting de Beauvoir 67). She takes this argument further and also asserts that although women

undergo the same biological processes like menstruation or menopause, these experiences are

different for each woman (Minow 67). By extension, these ideas can apply to gender as well. An

individual’s biological experiences are their own, and their gender is constructed by an

individual’s reactions to them, not by any inherent meaning held in their biology. The theory of

existence preceding essence provides strength to the argument of promoting all genders, even

those which do not fit the binary.

Existentialism can be used to promote gender equality since it helps women to shed any

expectations of femininity held in our society. It is through existence instead that women, and

people in general, create themselves through the choices they make. It is an Existentialist idea

that only at our death is our identity truly decided (Hampshire 61), therefore let us not seal the

fate of a woman before she has had the opportunity to live and create the identity she wishes.

Women must remove themselves from the fixed identity they have been forced to inhabit too

early in life in order to construct their own identity.

Escape the Box

Postmodernism, and the message of Escape the Box, serves as the rallying point by which

gender equality could best be achieved. As de Beauvoir demonstrated, feminism’s legacy has
 11

often failed to be intersectional and this can be a point of contention within the movement.

Ultimately, if the promotion of gender equality and the feminist movement are to be politically

successful, unity has to be forged. Yet, it is hard to pinpoint the rallying point for this unity.

Postmodernism successfully questions all norms we take for granted and suggests that unity

within the movement could be forged on a strong belief in people being able to shape their own

identities. While grounding a collective movement on individual choice may appear

contradictory, I believe it is the most useful method to dissipate dissent. Escape the Box

advocates for the individual rejection of any norms surrounding what it means to be a woman.

Postmodernism advocates for the rejection of logocentrism, the driving thought that the

world is a single, fixed system (Sands & Nuccio 491). It is similar to Existentialism, which

denies the existence of anything essential or definable about human nature (Sands and Nuccio

492). This calls into question why the inferiority of women is ingrained in our society. The

solution offered by Postmodernism is that how we define anything is contingent upon the culture

we exist within, thus suggesting that the inferiority of women is culturally produced (Sands and

Nuccio 491), and for our purposes, that it could be culturally changed. This is also liberating for

individuals questioning whether or not they fulfill feminine ideals, and thus strengthens the

rallying point of autonomy in individual identity that could ground the promotion of gender

equality.

Two other forces at work in Postmodernist Theory include deconstruction and the

importance of multiple discourses. Deconstruction helps to decenter dominant narratives while

elevating previously marginalized voices (Sands & Nuccio 491), while the push for multiple

discourses acknowledges that those who write history are those who hold power (Sands &

Nuccio 491). Both of these notions acknowledge the oppression of women and the extensive
 12

oppression of women with intersecting identities, and helps to lend them voices in the movement

to promote gender equality.

Postmodernism theorizes that the individual has no constant identity but instead that it is

the construction of where they are situated in the context of other identities (Sands & Nuccio

491). While the Postmodernist idea of identity’s impermanence may seem contradictory to the

idea that individuals should construct their own identity, I believe it elucidates the degree to

which our identity is the construct of what others project onto us. For the purpose of gender

promotion, Postmodernism should inspire individuals to appropriate their own individual

identity, in lieu of the identities projected upon them. In alignment with Existentialism, this

provides more people the freedom to act and make choices in order to create the identities they

wish to embody.

Ultimately, Postmodern feminists push for recognition that the concept of ‘woman,’ and

beyond that gender, are cultural constructs and the search for a “universal woman” will always

be fruitless (Sands & Nuccio 492). That said, they do believe in the existence of the “particular

woman” (Sands & Nuccio 492) and it is this notion of the particular woman that echoes my

belief that all individuals are able to choose their own autonomous identities. Postmodernism

could help create a culture free of judgment in which all notions of femininity and gender are

deserving of equality. This freedom to choose will help connect each particular woman with a

universal goal, rather than forcing women to fit into a universal identity. With the slogan Escape

the Box, the aim of gender promotion is less about arguing up the position of women and more

about eliminating the boxing in and subjugation of any people.

Escape the Home! Escape the Role! Escape the Box! Ultimately, the union of the three

theories, Marxism, Existentialism, and Postmodernism, and the messages behind these slogans
 13

reveals the constructed expectations we have of women, and how these have contributed to the

intentional assertion of their inferiority. For an organization wishing to promote gender equality,

it is essential that feminists be aware of external constructions on women, before they can begin

to construct their own identities. Of all the components in the slogan, I believe Escape the Box

could best connect feminists across borders of sexuality, race, class, religion and political parties

by recognizing and accepting the differences between them. I feel that the Postmodernist desire

to ‘decenter’ any one message could translate to the greatest promotion of equality. There is

nothing inherently natural about the roles and labels we have constructed around gender. By

acknowledging that gender differences are constructed, we are able to undermine any belief in

the supposed naturalness of one gender’s inferiority. Ultimately, the feminists of today are owed

the element of choice to determine how they want to define themselves, and if gender is even

part of that composite identity.