Transcript by Gabrielle Dubois of a 1975 television interview #10
Question:
Isn’t there a sort of counter offensive by men who want to “save something from the wreckage”? Who say that these are problems of the past, that women already control the household finances? In
working-class households, for example, a lot of men turn their pay checks over to their wives minus a little pocket money, and in fact have no say. They’ll complain that they’re seen as nothing
but money makers, that they have to work 8 hours at the factory or the office, that women have it good and they’d readily trade places. That’s the basic picture…
Simone de Beauvoir:
Perhaps, but in fact, they would never trade places for many reasons like work, for example. In low income households, the housework performed by a woman with several children is exhausting, more
exhausting than 8 hours at the factory.
Question:
And women do often both.
Simone de Beauvoir:
In addition, yes, women often do both. Sometimes a husbands gives his wife the pay, but the day he gets fed up and wants to leave, finds it too hard to supports a wife and kids, he can leave
whenever he wants and still be able to earn a living. But she won’t have anything. Unfortunately, this happens quite often.
Question:
You raise a problem that could make people think you’re advising women to choose the path of individual freedom, which means; don’t get married, don’t have children, you’ll be freer. And yes,
they would be freer. But globally, that’s not the way things work in society: people get married, don’t want to be alone, it’s quite natural. And having children can be wonderful. It is one of
the beautiful thing in life, one of the best things in life for most people. How can one reconcile living in this society without depriving oneself of some things in life?
Simone de Beauvoir:
I think men need to participate in the tasks of the household and childcare in the same way as women. All the chores should be shared. Men should also give up their authority over women. It’s
very nice of him to give his pay, but I’ve received so many unbelievable letters that describe situations that are almost too hard to believe, though more common than we think. I know of women
who are not allowed to visit any friends or relatives without their husbands. He call this “love” and “sharing everything”. But it’s tyrannical. I once received a letter from a woman who said: “I
write to you while through the window I’m watching for my husband to come out of the café across the street. Because when he comes out of the café, I’ll have to hide this letter because he would
be furious if I wrote to you. And I don’t know how I’ll get the letter out of the house” ― it was a thick letter, 30 to 40 pages. She needed to get it all out. “And if you reply, reply to Mrs
***.” All of this secrecy…, this behaviour, that are basically undignified, that are imposed on women by the tyranny of some men.
Question:
You say they are extreme examples. But in the society we live in, it’s quite surprising, we talk about divorce, but statistics show that most couples don’t divorce. This may hide a few family
tragedies. But in fact, people generally do want to try and get along. And your examples are more frequent, nowadays, in Latin America than in France. Fortunately, we’re now raised to be more
civilised
Simone de Beauvoir:
You’re very optimistic. I know that in certain areas it goes on, for example, up in Besançon, where my sister did cultural activities, she got on to know some of the workers’ wives, not workers
themselves: women who stayed at home. Well, if these women went to have a coffee with a neighbour, and the husband found out, there’d be a huge row. The wife was supposed to stay home, talk to no
one, except her husband at night, never go out, or do anything else but the housework. That’s all she was allowed to do: look after the children, the house, etc. This tyranny is found among the
working class, the middle class and the upper class. It is very, very widespread.
Question:
For a number of executives, even today, men in high positions, it’s a personal status symbol to have a non-working wife, even if she’s as educated as he is. They say: “I make enough money, you
don’t need to work.” In other words, there’s a deep-seated idea that when you’re bourgeois, when you attain a certain standard of living, your wife shouldn’t work, you should buy her a fur
coat.
Simone de Beauvoir:
Yes. And since women have been taught to believe that a real woman lets her husband work, they often accept it. Or sometimes they’re torn. And also a working woman is made to feel so guilty about
the house and children, that it becomes very hard on her. Although it’s far from being impossible to do both, but she’s made to feel guilty, she’s told she neglects her children, is not home
enough, so she gives in. it’s often hard. Even if she has the same degree, t’s understood that he’s the one who will be, I don’t know… a doctor or a lawyer, and she’ll remain a housewife, and
often she suffers from this
Question:
Does this mean that you think that all women should work? Young women, nowadays, have to make these choices. Should they work at any cost, even though the situation isn’t perfect since men aren’t
going to change or start doing housework overnight? Is it vital to have the independence that comes from earning a living?
Simone de Beauvoir:
I think so, yes. It’s vital, no matter how hard it is, to be financially independent, even if it costs them a lot and it will, since it will still be their job to keep house. But it’s a necessary
condition for being independent on the inside: mentally, psychologically independent. Otherwise, women are offered no alternative way of thinking, they’re forced to think like their husbands, to
cater to his whims, do his bidding, etc.
Gabrielle Dubois©
#Simone de #Beauvoir #feminism #financial #independence #women
Interview