Comment by globuous

6 years ago

I love to quote Beauvoir's plato page [1], which is particularly well written I find (emph mine), and relates very well to what you've just brought up:

"Before The Second Sex, the sexed/gendered body was not an object of phenomenological investigation. Beauvoir changed that. Her argument for sexual equality takes two directions. First, it exposes the ways that masculine ideology exploits the sexual difference to create systems of inequality. Second, it identifies the ways that arguments for equality erase the sexual difference in order to establish the masculine subject as the absolute human type. Here Plato is her target. Plato, beginning with the premise that sex is an accidental quality, concludes that women and men are equally qualified to become members of the guardian class. The price of women’s admission to this privileged class, however, is that they must train and live like men. Thus the discriminatory sexual difference remains in play. Only men or those who emulate them may rule. Beauvoir’s argument for equality does not fall into this trap. She insists that women and men treat each other as equals and that such treatment requires that their sexual differences be validated. Equality is not a synonym for sameness."

[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/beauvoir/

EDIT: from an artistic point, imagining what a sexless voice would sound like is an interesting project !

2 comments

globuous

Reply
belorn  6 years ago

Anyone citing platos republic do so with great disservice if they don't mention that it use satire as a mechanism for political commentary. Below is a few quotes and extracts from plato's republic, and just imagine this being spoken with a straight face.

The guardian class is a selected breeding program where the best women and best men exclusive breed with each other, and any deformetives or lower quality personage got put in an “unspeakable and unseen place”.

When a child is born it get immediately taken from the parent into the hands of breeding pens to be trained into protecting and valuing the collective community above all else. The breeding pens is located in a certain section of the city and apart from the guardians in order to preserve equality and avoid personal possession from the parents.

The children, being pre-destined to participate in wars, should accompany and observe the guardians in battle as “spectators of war”. The involvement of the children in war serves as an opportunity for the Republic to instill a sense of patriotism to the state and admiration of the mighty Guardian class. They should help out and serve in the whole business of war.

To sum up: We are talking about Eugenics, genocide, removal of personhood and individualism, extermination of the concept of family, and creating child armies from the elite. This in a time period where nobility, monarchs, family and arranged marries was the focus point of high society, and the bulk of armies came from lower classes. It is about as subtle political commentary as Monty Python, which is why drawing conclusions such as "the price of women’s admission to the guardian class is that they must live like men" is supported by very loose ground. At best it is just show the cultural assumption of connecting war with masculinity, and at worst asserts that personhood and individualism is feminine.