9

Sandra Bartky

In Black Skin, White Masks, Frantz Fanon offers To oppress, says Webster, is "to lie heavy on, to
an anguished and eloquent description of the weigh down, to exercise harsh dominion over."
psychological effects of colonialism on the colonized, When we describe a people as oppressed, what we
a "clinical study" of what he calls the "psychic have in mind most often is an oppression that is
alienation of the black man." "Those who recognize economic and political in character. But recent
themselves in it," he says, "will have made a step liberation movements, the black liberation move-
forward.,,1 Fanon's black American readers saw at ment and the women's movement in particular,
once that he had captured the corrosive effects not have brought to light forms of oppression that
only of classic colonial oppression but of domestic are not immediately economic or political. It is
racism too, and that his study fitted well the possible to be oppressed in ways that need involve
picture of black America as an internal colony. neither physical deprivation, legal inequality, nor
Without wanting in any way to diminish the economic exploitation;3 one can be oppressed
oppressive and stifling realities of black experience psychologically - the "psychic alienation" of which
that Fanon reveals, let me say that I, a white Fanon speaks. To be psychologically oppressed is to
woman, recognize myself in this book too, not only be weighed down in your mind; it is to have a harsh
in'my "shameful livery of white incomprehension,"z dominion exercised over your self-esteem. The
but as myself the victim of a "psychic alienation" psychologically oppressed become their own
sh~1ilar to the one Fanon has described. In this oppressors; they come to exercise harsh dominion
chapter I shall try to explore that moment of over their own self-esteem. Differently put,
r~sognition, to reveal the ways in which the psychological oppression can be regarded as the
Psychological effects of sexist oppression resemble "internalization of intimations of inferiority.,,4
th'~se of racism and colonialism. Like economic oppression, psychological
oppression is institutionalized and systematic; it
serves to make the work of domination easier by
Slandra Bartky, "On Psychological Oppression,"
Pp. 22-32 and 121-4 (notes) from Femininity and breaking the spirit of the dominated and by
Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of rendering them incapable of understanding' the
Oppression. New York: Routledge, 1990. Reproduced nature of those agencies responsible for their
by permission of Routledge/Taylor & Francis subjugation. This allows those who benefit from
Books"lnc. the established order of things to maintain their
Sandra Bartky

ascendancy with more appearance of legitimacy "Latin spitfire," are lustful and hotbloodecl; they
and with less recourse to overt acts of violence than are thought to lack thc capacities for instinctual
they mig'ht otherwise require. Now, poverty and control that diiitinguish people from animals. What
powerlessness can destroy a person's self-esteem, is seell as an excess in persons of color appears as a
and the fact that one occupies an inferior position deficiency in the white woman; comparatively
in society is all too often racked up to one's bcing an frigid, she has been, nonetheless, defined by her
inferior sort of person. Clearly, then, economic and sexu<llity as well, here her reproductive role or
political oppression are themselves psychologically function. In regard to capability and competence,
oppressive. But there arc unique modes of psycho- black women have, again, an excess of what in white
logical oppression that can be distinguished from women is a deficiency. White women have been
the usual forms of economic and political domin- seen as incapable and incompetent: no matter, for
ation. Fanon olTcrs a series of what are essentially these are traits of the truly femininc woman. Black
phenomenological descriptions of psychic alienation. 5 women, on the other hand, have been seen as overly
In spite of considerable overlapping, the experiences capable, hence, as unfeminine bitches who threaten,
of oppression he describes £111 into three categories: through their very competence, to castrate
stereotyping, cultural domination, and sexual their men.
objectification. These, I shall contend, arc some of Stereotyping is morally reprehensible as well as
the ways in which the tel1ible mesiiabres of inferiority psycholog'ically oppressive on two counts, at least.
can be delivered even to those who may enjoy First, it can hardly be expected that those who
certain material benefits; they are special modes of hold a set of stereotyped beliefs about the sort of
psychic alienation. In what follows, I shall examine person I am will understand my needs or even
some of the ways in which American women - respect my rights. Second, suppose that I, thc
white women and women of color - arc stereotyped, object of some stereotype, believe in it myself - for
culturally dominated, and sexually objectified. In why should I not believe what everyone else
the course of the discussion, I shall argue that our believes? I may then find it difficult to achieve what
ordinary concept of oppression needs to be altered existentialists call an authentic choice of self, or
and expanded, for it is too restricted to encompass what some psychologists have regarded as a state of
what an analysis of psychological oppression reveals self-actualization. Moral philosophers have quite
about the nature of oppression in general. Finally, correctly placed a high value, sometimes the highest
I shall be concerned throughout to show how both value, on the development of autonomy and moral
fragmentation and mystification are present in agency. Clearly, the economic and political domin-
each mode of psychological oppression, although ation of women - our concrete powerlessness - is
in varying degrees: fragmentation, the splitting of what threatens our autonomy most. But stereotyping,
the whole person into parts of a person which, in in its own way, threatens our self-determination
stereotyping, may take the form of a war between a too. Even when economic and political obstacles on
"true" and "false" self - or, in sexual objectification, the path to autonomy are removed, a depreciated
the form of an often coerced and degrading identi- alter ego still blocks the way. It is hard enough for
fication of a person with her body; mystification, me to determine what sort of person I am or ought
the systematic obscuring of both the reality and to try to become without being shadowed by an
agencies of psychological oppression so that its alternate self, a truncated and inferior self that
intended effect, the depreciated sdf, is lived out as I have, in some sense, been doomed to be all the
destiny, guilt, or neurosis. time. For many, the prefabricated self triumphs
The stereotypes that sustain sexism are similar in over a more authentic self which, with work and
many ways to those that sustain racism. Like white encouragement, might sometime have emerged.
women, black and brown persons of both sexes For the talented few, retreat into the imago is
ha ve been regarded as childlike, happiest when raised to the status of art or comedy. Muhammad
they are occupying their "place"; more intuitive Ali has made himself what he could scarcely escape
than rational, more iipontaneolls than deliberate, being made into - a personification of Primitive
closer to nature, and less capable of substantial 1\1an; while Zsa Zsa Gabor is not so much a woman
cultural accomplishment. Black 111en and women as the parody of a woman.
of all races have been victims of sexual stereotyping: Female stereotypes threaten the autonomy of
the black man and the black woman, like the women not only by virtllc of their existence but
 On Psychological Oppression
6
also by virtue of their content. In the convcntional the black colonial whom Fanon describes with
portrait, women deny their femininity when they such pathos, women qua. womcn are not now in
undertake action that is too self-regarding or possession of an alternate culture, a "native" culture
independent. As we have seen, black women are which, even if rcgarded by everyone, including
condemned (often by black men) for supposedly ourselves, as decidcdly infcrior to the dominant
having done this already; white women stand culture, we could at least recognize as our own.
under an injunction not to follow their example. However degraded 01' distorted an image of
Many women in many places lacked (and many ourselves we see reflected in the patriarchal culture,
still lack) the elementary right to choose our own the culture of our men is still our culture. Certainly
mates; but for some women even in our own society in some respects, the condition of womcn is like
today, this is virtually the only major decision we the condition of a colonized people. But we are not
are thought capable of making without putting our a colonized people; we have never been more than
womanly nature in danger; what follows ever afi:er half a people. 7
is or ought to be a properly feminine ~ubmission to This lack of cultural autonomy has several
the decisions of men. We cannot be autonomous, important consequences for an understanding of
as men arc thought to be autonomous, without the condition of women. A culture has a global
in some sense ceasing to be women. When one character; hence, the limits of my culture are the
considers how interwoven are traditional female limits of my world. The subordination of women,
stereotypes with traditional female roles - and then, because it is so pervasive a feature of my
these, in turn, with the ways in which we are culture, will (if uncontested) appear to be natural-
socialized - all this is seen in an even more sinister and because it is natural, unalterable. Unlike a
light: White women, at least, are psychologically colonized people, women have no memory ofa "time
conditioned not to pursue the kind of autonomous before": a time before the masters came, a time
development that is held by the culture to be before we were subjugated and ruled. Further,
a constitutive feature of masculinity. since one function of cultural identity is to allow
The truncated self I am to be is not something me to distinguish those who are like me from those
manufactured out there by an anonymous Other who are not, I may feel more kinship with those who
which I encounter only in the pages of Playboy or share my culture, even though they oppress me,
the Ladies' Home Joumal; it is inside of me, a part than with the women of another culture, whose
of myself. I may become infatuated with my femi- whole experience of life may well be closer to my
nine persona and waste my powers in the more or own than to any man's.
less hopeless pursuit of a Vogue figure, the look of Our true situation in regard to male supremacist
an Essence model, or a home that "expresses my culture is one of domination and exclusion. But
personality." Or I may find the parts of myself this manifests itself in an extremely deceptive way;
fragmented and the fragments at war with one mystification once more holds sway. Our relative
another. Women are only now learning to identify absence from the "higher" culture is taken as proof
and struggle against the forces that have laid these that we are unable to participate in it ("Why are
psychic burdens upon us. More often than not, there no great women artists?"). Theories of the
wclive out this struggle, which is really a struggle female nature must then be brought forward to try
against oppression, in a mystified way: What we to account for this. 8 Thes plitting or fragmenting
. ate enduring we believe to be entirely intrapsychic in of women's consciousness which takes place in the
'. character, the result of immaturity, maladjustment, cultural sphere is also apparent. While remaining
,;'or even neurosis. myself, I must at the same time transform myself
. " Tyler, the great classical anthropologist, defined into that abstract and "universal" subject for whom
culture as all the items in the general life of a people. cultural artifacts are made and whose values and
To. claim that women are victims of cultural experience they express. This subject is not
dom.ination is to claim that all the items in the universal at all, however, but male. Thus, I must
g;el,eral life of our people - our language, our approve the taming of the shrew, laugh at the
institutions, our art and literature, our popular mother-in-law or the dumb blonde, and somehow
culture- are sexist; that all, to a greater 01' lesser identify with all those heroes of fiction from Faust
de~ree, manifest male supremacy. There is some to the personae of Norman Mailer and Henry
exaggeration in this claim, but not much. Unlike Miller, whose Bildul1gsgeschidltel1 involve the
Sandra Bartky
that takes the part [01' the whole. An
en of color inappropriate,
sexual exploitation of women. Wom make this clearer. A young woman
The dom inan t example may
have, of course, a ~pecial problcm: was recently inter view ed for a
teaching job in
not only male , but white, so their
cultu ral subje ct is by the acadcmic chairman of a larg'e
arc expccted to philosophy
cultural alienation is doubled; they Duri ng mos t of the interview, so
she
not only mascu- department.
assimilate cultural motifs that are repo rted, the man stare d fixed ly at her breasts.
9
linist but racist. m, not a job
and cthn icitie s, like Fano n's In this situation, the woman is a boso
'Women of alJ races
Was this depa rtme nt chair man guilty
k man, " arc subje ct not only to ~tereotyping candidate. ess and pleasL\l'e?
"blac between busin
l objectification only of a confusion
and cultural depreciation but to sexua ; at her breas ts for his sake, not
written about Scarcely. He starer
as well. Even though much has been want s and need s not only play no role in
of the women's hers. Hcr
sexual objectification in the litera ture because of the direction of his
notio n itself i~ comp !cx, obscure, the encounter but,
movement, the attention, she is disco mfited, feels humiliated, and
clarification.
and muc h in nced of philosophical performs badly. Not smpr ising ly,
she fails to get
characterization
I offer the following preliminary of the time , sexu al objectification
n is sexually the job. Muc h
of sexual objectilication: A perso inde pend ently of what wom en want; it is
sexual functions " occurs
objectified when her sexual parts or to us again st ouI' will. It is clear
her personality some thing done
are separated out from the rest of pJe that the objec tifyin g perce ption
instr ume nts or from this exam
and reduced to the status of mere split s a perso n into parts serve s to elevate one
of representing that
else regarded as if they were capable her. Now it stands revealed not
ition, then, the prost itute would be interest above anot
her. On this defin
only as a way of perce iving, but as a way of main-
as would the
a victim of sexual objectification, e as well. It is not clear to me that
and the bathing taining dominanc
Playboy bunny, the female brceder, the sexual and nons exual spheres of experience can
beau ty. separate forever (Marcuse, for
a person is or ough t to be kept
To say that the sexual part of of all areas of
her is to imply one, has envisioned the eroticization
reg'arded as if it could repr esen t but as thing s stand now, sexualization
the whole are hum an life);
that it cannot, that the part and g disadvanta ged perso ns in their
are times, in is one way of fixin
incommensurable. But surely there to their clear detri men t and within
a woman migh t disadvantage,
the sexual embrace perhaps, when repressive eros.
but a sexually a narrow and
want to be regarded as noth ing Cons ider now a second example of the way in
paid to some
intoxicating body and when attention that fragm enting perception, which is so
mathematical which
other aspect of her person - say, to her t in the sexual objectification of
place. If sexual large an ingredien
ability - would be absurdly out of s to main tain the dominance of men.
tification, then women, serve
relations involve some sexual objec It is a fine sprin g day, and with an utter lack of self-
sh situations in
it becomes necessary to disti ngui consciousness, I am boun cing' down the street.
essiv e from
whic h sexual objectification is oppr enly I hear men 's voice s. Catcalls and whistles
it is not,IO The Sudd
the sorts of situa tions in which e noises are clearly scxual in intent
ality becomes fill the air. Thes
identification of a person with her sexu mean t for me; they come from across
essiv e, one migh t ventu re, when such an iden- and they arc d say, I have
oppr e. As Sartr e woul
ded into every the street. I freez
tification becomes habitually exten been petrified by the gaze of the Othe r. My face
nely perceived
area of her experience. To be routi flushes and my moti ons beco me stiff and self-
sions when such
by others in a sexual light on occa conscious. The body whic h only a mom ent before
have one's vcry
a perception is inappropriate is to with such case now flood s my con-
e sexualization I inhabited
being subjected to that compulsiv have been made into an object. Whil
e
tiona l lot of both white sciousness. I
that has been the tradi for these men I am noth ing but, let us
color generally. it is true that
women and black men and women of say, a "nice piece of ass," there is more
involved in
men ," says Fano n, "the
"For the majority of white than their mere fi'agm ented perception
potency beyond this encounter
NegTo is the incarnation of a genital could , after all, have enjoy ed me in
Late r in Bla.ck of me. They
all moralities and prohibitions."l1 fully unaware, breas ts boun cing, eyes
Negro is the silence. Bliss
Skin, While Masks, he writes that "the on the birds in the trees , I could have passe d by
genital."lZ out havin g been tu\'1l ed to stone . But I must be
then, is to be with
One way to be sexually objectified, I am a "nice piece of ass": I must
kind of perc eptio n, unwe lcome and made to know that
the object of a
 On Psychological Oppression

be made to see myself as they see me. There is an Marxist humanist in defense of the contcmporary
clement of compulsion in this encounter, in this women's movement:
bcing-made-to-be-aware of one's own flesh; like
being made to apologi:le, it is humiliating. It is There is no reason why a woman's
unclear what role is played by sexual arousal or liberation activist should not try to look
even sexual connoisseurship in encounters like pretty and attractive. One of the universal
these. ~That I describe seems less the spontaneous human aspirations of all times was to raise
expression of a healthy eroticism than a ritual of reality to the level of art, to make the world
subjugation. more beautiful, to be more beautiful within
Sexual objectification as I have characterized it given limits. Beauty is a value in itself; it
involves two persons: the one who objectifies and will always be respected and will attract - to
the one who is objectified. But the observer and be sure various forms of beauty but not to
the one observed can be the same person. I can, of the exclusion of physical beauty. A woman
course, take pleasure in my own body as another does not become a sex object in herself, or
might take pleasure in it and it would be naive not only because of her pretty appearance. She
to notice that there are delights of a narcissistic becomes a sexual object in relationship,
kind that g"O along with the status "sex object." But when she allows a man to treat her in a certain
the extent to which the identification of women depersonalizing, degrading way; and vice
with their bodies feeds an essentially infantile versa, a woman does not become a sexual
narcissism - an attitude of mind in keeping with subject by neglecting her appearance. 14
our forced infantilization in other areas of life - is,
at least for me, an open question. Subject to the It is not for the sake of mere men that we women -
evaluating eye of the male connoisseur, women not just we women, but we women's liberation
learn to evaluate themselves first and best. Our activists - ought to look "pretty and attractive,"
identities can no more be kept separate from the but for the sake of something much more exalted:
appearance of our bodies than they can be kept for the sake of beauty. This preoccupation with the
separate from the shadow-selves of the female stereo- way we look and the fear that women might stop
type. "Much of a young woman's identity is trying to make themselves pretty and attractive
already defined in her kind of attractiveness and in (so as to "raise reality to the level of art") would
the selectivity of her search for the man (or men) by be a species of objectification anywhere; but it is
whom she wishes to be sought.,,13 There is something absurdly out of place in a paper on women's eman-
obsessional in the preoccupation of many women cipation. It is as if an essay on the black liberation
with their bodies, although the magnitude of the movement were to end by admonishing blacks not
obsession will vary somewhat with the presence or to forget their natural rhythm, or as if Marx had
absence in a woman's life of other sources of self- warned the workers of the world not to neglect
esteem and with her capacity to gain a living their appearance while throwing off their chains.
independent of her looks. Surrounded on all sides Markovic's concern with women's appearance
by images of perfect female beauty - for, in merely reflects a larger cultural preoccupation. It is
modern advertising, the needs of capitalism and the a fact that women in our society are regarded as
traditional values of patriarchy are happily having a virtual duty "to make the most of what we
Qurried - of course we fall short. The narcissism have." But the imperative not to neglect our
encouraged by our identification with the body is appearance suggests that we can neglect it, that it is
. sh~~tere,d by these images. Whose nose is not the within our power to make ourselves look better -
'lyrong shape, whose hips are not too wide or too not just neater and cleaner, but prettier, and more
narrow? Anyone who believes that such concerns attractive. What is presupposed by this is that we
aret90trivial to weigh very heavily with most don't look good enough already, that attention to
WOl)1en has failed to grasp the realities of the the ordinary standards of hygiene would be insuffi-
feminine condition. cient, that there is something wrong with us as we
, The idea that women ought always to make are. Here, the "intimations of inferiority" are clear:
thetnse1ves as pleasing to the eye as possible is very Not only must we continue to produce ourselves as
widespJ'ead indeed. It was dismaying to come across beautiful bodies, but the bodies we have to work with
this passage in a paper written by an eminent arc deficient to begin with. Even within an already
 Sandra Bartky

inferiorized identity (i.e., the identity of one who is all, the images we see are distorted or demeaning.
principally and most importantly a body), I turn Finally, sexual objectification leads to the identifi-
out once more to be inferior, for the body I am to cation of those who undergo it with what is both
be, never sulTicient unto itself, stands forever in human and not quite human - the body. Thus,
need of plucking or painting, of slimming down or psychological oppression is just what Fanon said it
fattening up, of firming or flattening. was - "psychic alienation" - the estrangement or
The foregoing examination of three modes of separating of a person from some of the essential
psychological oppression, so it appears, points up attributes of personhood.
the need for an alteration in our ordinary concept Mystification surrounds these processes of
of oppression. Oppression, I believe, is ordinarily human estrangement. The special modes of
conceived in too limited a filshion. This has placcd psychological oppression can be regarded as some
undue restrictions both on our understanding of of the many ways in which messages of inferiority
what oppression itself is and on the categories of arc delivered to those who arc to occupy an inferior
persons we might want to classify as oppressed. position in society. But it is important to remember
Consider, for example, the following paradigmatic that messages of this sort are neither sent nor
case of oppression: received in an unambiguous way. Vve arc taught
that white women and (among others) black men
And the Egyptians made the children of and women are deficient in those capacities that
Israel to serve with rigor; and they made distinguish persons from nonpersons, but at the
their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar same time we are assured that we are persons after
and in brick, and in all manner of service in all. qr collrse women are persons; of course blacks
the field; all their service wherein they maCle are human beings. Who but the lunatic fringe
them serve, was with rigor. 15 would deny it? The Antillean Negro, Fanon is fond
of repeating, is a Freudzman. The official ideology
Here the Eg-yptians, one group of persons, exercise announces with conviction that "all men are created
harsh dominion over the Israelites, another group equal"; and in spite of the suspect way in which
of persons. It is not suggested that the Israelites, this otherwise noble assertion is phrased, we
however great their sufferings, have lost their integ- women learn that they mean to include us after all.
rity and wholeness qua. persons. But psychological It is itself psycholog'ically oppressive both to
oppression is dehumanizing' and depersonalizing; believe and at the same time not to believe that one
it attacks the person in her personhood. I mean by is inferior - in other words, to believe a
this that the nature of psychological oppression is contradiction. Lacking an analysis of the larger
such that the oppressor and oppressed alike come system of social relations which produced it, one
to doubt that the oppressed have the capacity to do can only make sense of this contradiction in two
the sorts of things that only persons can do, to be ways. First, while accepting in some quite formal
what persons, in the fullest sense of the term, can sense the proposition that "all men are created
be. The possession of autonomy, for example, is equal," I can believe, inconsistently, what my
widely thoug'ht to distinguish persons from non- oppressors have always believed: that some types
persons; but some female stereotypes, as we have of persons are less equal than others. I mal' then
seen, threaten the autonomy of women. Oppressed live out my membership in my sex or race in
people might or might not be in a position to exercise shame; I am "only a woman" or "just a nigger."
their autonomy, but the psychologically oppressed Or, somewhat more consistently, I may reject
may come to believe that they lack the capacity to entirely the belief that my disadvantage is generic;
be autonomous whatever their position. but having still to account for it somehow, I may
Similarly, the creation of culture is a distinctly locate the cause squarely within myself, a bad destiny
human function, perhaps the most human function. of an entirely private sort - a character flaw, an
In its cultural life, a group is able to affirm its values "inferiority complex," or a neurosis.
and to grasp its identity in acts of self-reflection. Many oppressed persons come to regard them-
Frequently, oppressed persons,' cut off from the selves as uniquely unable to satisfi' normal criteria
cultural apparatus, are denied the exercise of this of psychological health or moral adequacy. To
function entirely. To the extent that we are able to believe that my inferiority is a function of the kind
catch sight of ourselves in the dominant culture at of person I am mal' make me ashamed of being one
 On Psychological Oppression

of this kind. On the other hand, a lack I share with Much has been written about alienation, but it is
many others just because of an accident of birth Marx's theory of alicnation that speaks most com-
would be unfortunate indeed, but at least I would pellingly to the concerns oi'feminist political theory.
not have to regard myself as having failed uniquely Alienation for M,arx is primarily the alienation of
to measure up to standards that people like myself labo!'. What distinguishes human beings from
are expected to meet. It should be pointed out, animals is "labor" - for M,arx, the free, conscious,
however, that both of these "resolutions" - the and creative transformation of nature in accordance
ascription of one's inferiority to idiosyncratic or else with human needs. But under capitalism, workers
to generic causes - produces a "poor self-image," are alienated in production, estranged from the
a bloodless term of' the behavioral sciences that products of their labor, from their own productive
refers to a very wide variety of possible ways to activity, and from their fello,v workers.
suffer. 16 I-Iuman productive activity, according to Marx,
To take one's oppression to be an inherent is "objectified" in its products. What this means is
flaw of birth, or of psychology, is to have what that we are able to grasp ourselves reflectively
Marxists have characterized as "false consciousness." primarily in the things we have produced; human
Systematically deceived as we are about the nature needs and powers become concrete "in their products
and origin of our unhappiness, our struggles are as the amount and type of change which their exercise
directed inward toward the self, or toward other has brought about.,,18 But in capitalist production,
similar selves in whom we may see our deficiencies the capitalist has a right to appropriate what workers
mirrored, not outward upon those social forces have produced. Thus, the product goes to augment
responsible for our predicament. Like the psycho- capital, where it becomes part of an alien force
log'ically disturbed, the psychologically oppressed exercising power over those who produced it. An
often lack a viable identity. Frequently we are unable "objectification" 01' extension of the worker's self,
to make sense of our own impulses 01' feelings, not the product is split off from this self and turned
only because our drama of fragmentation gets against it. But workers are alienated not only from
played out on an inner psychic stage, but because the products they produce but from their own
we are forced to find our way about in a world laboring activity as well, for labor under capitalism is
which presents itself to us in a masked and decep- not, as labor should be, an occasion for human self-
tive fashion. Regarded as persons, yet depersonalized, realization but mere drudgery which "mortifies the
we are treated by our society the way the parents body and ruins the mind.,,19 The worker's labor "is
of some schizophrenics are said by R. D. Laing t11erefore not voluntary, but coerced; it is forced
to treat their children - professing love at the labor. It is therefore not the satisfaction of a need; it is
very moment they shrink from their children's merely a means to satisfy needs external to it.,,2o
touch. When the free and creative productive activity that
In sum, then, to be psychologically oppressed is should define human functioning is reduced to a
to be caught in the double bind of a society which mere means to sustain life, to "forced labor," workers
both affirms my human status and at the same time suffer fragmentation and loss of self. Since labor is
bars me from the exercise of many of those the most characteristic human life activity, to be
typically human functions that bestow this status. alienated fi'om one's own labor is to be estranged
To be denied an autonomous choice of self, for- from oneself.
~ldden cultlll'al expression, and condemned to the In many ways, psychic alienation and the
il11 rn anenee of mere bodily being is to be cut off alienation of labor are profoundly alike. Both
froin the sorts of activities that define what it is to be involve a splitting off of human functions from the
, human. A person whose being has been subjected human person, a forbidding of activities thought
, to these cleavages may be described as "alienated." to be essential to a fully human existence. Both
"Alienation in any form causes a rupture within the subject the individual to fragmentation and impov-
:,' h,uman· person, an estrangement from self, a erishment. Alienation is not a condition into which
"splintering of human nature into a number of someone might stumble by accident; it has come
n:isb.egotten parts.,,17 Any adequate theory of the both to the victim of psycholog'ical opprcssion and to
nature',and varieties of human alienation, then, the alienated worker fi'om without, as a llsurpation by
must llIi,compass psychological oppression - or, to someone else of what is, by rights, 1101 his to usurp.21
use Fan9n's term once more, "psychic alienation." Alienation occurs in each case when activitics
Sandra Bartky
Iny own view of sexual objectifica tion to an extended
which not only belong to the domain of the self but
discussion anel critique. 'The exclusion of women in ou]'
define, in large measure, the proper functioning of
society li'om cultural productio n, especially from art,
this self, fall under the control of others. To be a literature, and fllltsic, has, of course, never been total.
victim of alienation is to have a part of one's being But since J wrote this chapter, there has been an enormolls
stolen by another. Both psychic alienation and the OLlt.pouring of work in these fields by creative ,vomcn
alienation of labor might be regarded as varieties seeking very self-consc iollsly to express a female
of alienated productivity. From this perspective, and often a feminist pcrspective. Some of this work has
cultural domination would be the estrangement or reached a lnass audience, for example, the art of
alienation of production in the cultural sphere; Judy Chicag'o, the music of Holly Neal' and Tracey
while the subjective effects of stereotyping as well Chapman , and the novels of Toni Morrison, Marilyn
Frcnch, Alice Walker, Marge Piercy, Erica jong, and
as the self-objectification that regularly accom-
Gloria Naylor.
panies sexual objectification could be interpreted
as an alienation in the production of one's own Frantz Fanon, B/lu·k Skim, Wlrile Jl1l1sks (New Y01'1<:
person. Grove Press, 19(7), p. 12.
All the modes of oppression - psychological, 2 [bid.
political, and economic - and the kinds of alienation For an excellent comparison of the concepts of
exploitation and oppression, sec Judith Fan Tormey,
they generate serve to main tain a vast system of
<'Exploitation, Oppression and Self-Sacrifice," in
privilege - privilege of race, of sex, and of class.
WOlllen lind Philosophy, cd. Carol C. Gould and Marx
Every mode of oppression within the system has its W. Warto(sl<y (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1976),
own part to play, but each serves to support and to pp.206-2 1.
maintain the others. Thus, for example, the a~sault 4 Joyce Mitchell Cook, paper delivered at Philosophy
on the self-esteem of white women and of black and the Black Liberation Struggle Conference,
persons of both sexes prepares us for the historic role University of lllinois, Chicago Circle, November
that a disproportionate number of us are destined 19-20, 1970.
to play within the process of production: that of Fanon's phCl1OlnCnology of oppression, however, is
a cheap or reserve bbor supply. Class oppression, in almost entirely a phenomenology of the oppression of
colonized mel1. He seems unaware of the ways in
turn, encourages those who are somewhat higher
which the oppression of women by their men in the
in the hierarch ies of race or gender to cling' to a
societies he examines is itself similar to the colonization
false sense of superiority - a poor compensation of natives by Europeans. Sometimes, as in A Dying
indeed. Because of the interlocking character of the Colonialism (New York: Gl'Ove Press, 19(8), he goes
modes of oppression, I think it highly unlikely that so far as to defend the clinging to oppressive practices,
any form of oppression will disappear entirely until such as the sequestration of women in Moslem
the system of oppression as a whole is overthrown. countries, as an authentic resistance by indigenou s
people to Western cultural intl'Usion. For a penetrating
critique of Fanon's attitude toward women, see
Barbara Burris, "Fourth World Manifesto," in Radical
Notes Fellli1l1~Wl, cd. A. Koedt, E. Levine, and A. Rapone
(New York: Qj1adrangle, 1973), pp. 322-57,
Several works that have appeared since the publication 6 I have in mind Abraham Maslow's concept of
of this chapter may interest the reader. Linda autonomy, a notion which has the advantage of being
Tschirhar t Sanford and Mary Ellen Donovan have neutral as regards the controversy between free will
written a lucid, detailed, and powerful account of the and determinism. For Maslow, the sources of behavior
1113111' sources of \vomen's low self-esteel n: JIVomel1
nnd of autonomous or "psychologically li'ee" individuals
Self-Esteem (New York: Doubleday, 1984). Also are Inore internal than reactive:
recommen ded is Ann Wilson Schaef, Women's Reality
(New York: Harper and Row, 1981). In Cumlllon Such people become far more selt~sufficient and
D1jfil'rcnces: Conilil'/s in Block and While Felllinist Per- self-contained. The determinants which govcrn them
spcl'tives (New York: Anchor/D oubleday , 1981), Gloria arc now primaril), inner ones ... They are the laws of
Joseph and Jill Lewis examine differences, including their own inner nature, their potentialities and
psychological differences, between black and white capacities, their talents, their latent resources, their
womcn. Linda LeMoncheck has written an analytically creative impulses, their needs to know themselves
acute monograph on the subject of sexual objectification, and to become more and more integrated and unified,
Dehn1llanizing Women: Trellting Perso11S as Sc.\' Objects more and more aware of what they really are, of what
(Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanhcld, 1985); she subjects the)' really want, of what thcir call or vocation or fate
 On Psychological OppreSSion

is to be. TOJPllnl {{ P~),,11Ology oj Bei1lg, 2nd edn. tradition. Further, Sartre's phcnomenology of
[New York: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1968], p. 35. sexual desire in Bei1lg IIud Nothiuguess (New York:
Philosophical Library, 1966) draws heavil], on a
It would be absurd to suggest that most men arc concept of objectification in an unusually compelling
autonomous in this sense of the term. Nevertheless, description of the experienced character of that state:
insofar as there arc individuals who resemble this
portrait, I think it likelier that they will be men than The caress by realizing the Other's incarnation reveals
women - at least white women. I think it likel], that to ll1C my own incarnation; that is, I 111ake ll1ysclf
more white men than white women believe themselves flesh in order to impel tbe Other to realize for-herself
to be autonomous; this belief, even if false, is widely and for-me her own flesh, and my caresses cause my
held, and this in itself has implications that are flesh to be born for me in so far as it is for the Other
important to consider. Whatever the facts mal' be in flesh causing her 1:0 be born as flesh. I make her
regard to men's lives, the point to remember is this: enjoy my flesh through her flesh in order to compel
women have been thought to have neither the her to feel herself l1esh. And so possession truly
capacity nor the right to aspire to an ideal of autonom]" appears as a double reciprocal incarnation. (p. 508)
an ideal to which there accrues, whatever its relation What J call "objectification," Sarll'e here calls
to mental heal th, an enormous social prestige. "incarnation," a refinement not necessary for Iny pur-
7 Man]' feminists would object vigorously to m]' claim poses. ~lhat he calls "sadism) is incarnation ·without
that there has been no female culture (sce, e.g., reciprocity. Most of m]' examples of sexual
llurris, "Fourth World Manifesto"). I am not claiming objectification would fall into the latter category.
that women have had no enelaves within the dominant
culture, that we have 'never made valuable contributions 11 Fanon, Blru'k Skin, White Masks, p. 177. Eldridge
to the larger culture, OJ' even that we have never Cleaver sounds a similar theme in Soul OIl he
dominated any avenue of cultural expression - ori'c (New York: Dell, 1968). The archetypal white man
would have to think only of the way in which women in American society, for Cleaver, is the "Omnipotent
have dominated ccrtain forms of folk art (e.g., quilting). Administrator," the archetypal black man the
What I am claiming is that none of this adds up to "Super-Masculine lVlenial."
a "culture," in the sense in vi'hich we speak of Jewish 12 Ibid., p. 180.
culture, Arapesh culture, 01' Afro-American culture. 13 Erik Erikson, "Inner and Outer Space: Reflections on
Further, the fact that man]' women are today Womanhood," Daedll/lIs, VoL 93, 1961, pp. 582-606.
engaged in the self~conscious attempt to create a female 14 Mihailo Markovic, "Women's Liberation and
culture testifies, I think, to the situation regarding Human Emancipation," in Women a.ud Philosophy,
culture being essentially as I describe it. pp. 165-6. In spite of this lapse and some questionable
The best-kuown modern theory of this type is, opinions concerning the nature of female sexuality,
of course, Freud's. He maintains that the relative Markovic's paper is a most compelling defense of the
absence of women from the higher culture is the claim that the emancipation of women cannot come
consequence of a lesser ability to sublimate libidinal about under capitalism.
drives. Sec "Femininity" in NelP illtrodut"t01J' Lectures 15 Exod.I:13-14.
ill Psycho(tnllO'sis (New York: W. W. Norton, 1933). 16 The available clinical literature on the psychological
I take it that something like this forms the back- effects of social inferiority supports this claim. See
drop to the enjo]'ment of the average movie. It is William H. Grier and Price M. Cobbs, Black Rage
daunting to consider the maguitude of the task of (New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1969); Pauline Bart,
neutralization or trausformation of hostile cultural "Depression in Middle-Aged Women," in Women iu
messages that must fall constantly to the average Sexist Society, eel. Vivian Gornick and llarbara
female, non-white or even working class white male Moran (New York: New American Library, 1971),
TV \vatcher or 1110viegoer. The pleasure we continue pp. 163-86; also Phyllis Chesler, Women (l.l1dMaduess
to take in cultural products that may disparage us (New York: Doubleday, 1972).
remains, at least to me something of a m],ster],. 17 Bertell Ollman, Alieuatiou: Ma.I''''' Conceptioll of
There might be some objection to regarding ordin- Man ill Capitalist Sodely (London and New York:
ary sexual relations as involving sexual objcctifica- Cambridge University Press, 1971), p. 135.
tion, since this use of the term seems not to jibe 18 Ibid., p. 143.
with its use in more ordinary contexts. For Hegel, 19 Karl Marx, The Ea!l1omic !tud PhilosojJhicaJ MIIlIlIScl'ijJts
Marx, and Sartrc, Hobjectification" is an inlportant oj 1844, cd. Dirk J. Struik (New York: International
moment in tbe dialectic of consciousness. My Publishcrs, 1964),p. Ill.
decision to trent ordinary sexual relations 01' even 20 Ibid .
. sexual desire alone as involviug some objectifi- 21 The usc of the masculine possessive pronoun is
cation is based on a desire to remain within this deliberate.