Exclusion from history makes women mistrust the future and defend the status quo

Evidence

The man knows he can reconstruct other institutions, another ethics, another code; grasping himself as transcendence, he also envisages history as a becoming; even the most conservative knows that some change is inevitable and that he has to adapt his action and thinking to it; as the woman does not participate in history, she does not understand its necessities; she mistrusts the future and wants to stop time. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 1743

Categorization

• XREF: Directly extends the immanence/transcendence distinction from earlier chapters: man as transcendence apprehends history as becoming, woman in immanence wants to stop time. — connects to: To act upon history one must first be anchored in society, which subjugates women. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 289; Women’s otherness lacks the historical before that enables other groups to rebel — Christine Daigle, Jacob Golomb (eds.), Beauvoir and Sartre: The Riddle of…, 58; Historical insignificance caused women’s inferiority, not the reverse. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 289 (+1 more)
• QUESTION: This mechanism predicts women should be universally conservative — yet the historical record includes women-led progressive movements. Is Beauvoir overgeneralizing class privilege?