Feminine charm is a constructed mirage, not a genuine value worth oppression

Evidence

When woman is “the same” as her male, life will lose “its spice.” This argument is not new either: those who have an interest in perpetuating the present always shed tears for the marvelous past about to disappear without casting a smile on the young future. It is true that by doing away with slave markets, we destroyed those great plantations lined with azaleas and camellias, we dismantled the whole delicate Southern civilization; old lace was put away in the attics of time along with the pure timbres of the Sistine castrati, and there is a certain “feminine charm” that risks turning to dust as well. I grant that only a barbarian would not appreciate rare flowers, lace, the crystal clear voice of a eunuch, or feminine charm. When shown in her splendor, the “charming woman” is a far more exalting object than “the idiotic paintings, over-doors, decors, circus backdrops, sideboards, or popular illuminations” that maddened Rimbaud; adorned with the most modern of artifices, worked on with the newest techniques, she comes from the remotest ages, from Thebes, Minos, Chichén Itzá; and she is also the totem planted in the heart of the African jungle; she is a helicopter and she is a bird; and here is the greatest wonder: beneath her painted hair, the rustling of leaves becomes a thought and words escape from her breasts. Men reach out their eager hands to the marvel; but as soon as they grasp it, it vanishes; the wife and the mistress speak like everyone else, with their mouths: their words are worth exactly what they are worth; their breasts as well. Does such a fleeting miracle—and one so rare—justify perpetuating a situation that is so damaging for both sexes? The beauty of flowers and women’s charms can be appreciated for what they are worth; if these treasures are paid for with blood or misery, one must be willing to sacrifice them. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 1980

Categorization

• ADDENDUM: Directly parallels ‘Complaints About Immodesty Go Way Back’: both dismantle the nostalgic valorization of ‘charm’ and ornament as a manufactured, class-anchored aesthetic whose price is human freedom.
• DEFINE: Beauvoir anatomizes the ‘charming woman’ as a purely constructed object — the passage exposes what ‘feminine charm’ actually consists of.
• CANDY: The image of the ‘charming woman’ as ‘a helicopter and she is a bird’ who vanishes on touch is a striking, shareable encapsulation of the constructed feminine.
• XREF: connects to: Femininity is a negative imprint of masculine domination, not a natural essence — Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia: Reflections from…, 110; Beauty work is a servitude whose costs trap women economically. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 1568; Femininity is an artificial, inculcated product rather than a natural instinct — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 1037 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Femininity is an artificial, inculcated product rather than a natural instinct #corroborates (0.92) — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 1037