chocolatelibrary's review

Go to review page

challenging informative reflective fast-paced

4.0

victoriousmariner's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

the tea is scalding hot, ladies and gentlemen

bahnree's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

I like how the subtitle includes “the role of women” and DS is very “shut up about the role of women!”

I don’t agree with her on everything (she’s more optimistic on where we are headed socially) but her arguments and ideas are blessedly free of generalizations and bad faith.

turtletrackz's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging funny hopeful informative inspiring reflective fast-paced

5.0

bookworm_baggins's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

I read the two essays that comprise this book today. Many underlines, hearts and stars, and a few notes in the margins. Many moments of laughter. But so much more depth that I will be back, soon and often.

shewritesinmargins's review

Go to review page

fast-paced

5.0

bronwynmb's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

The "I'm not a feminist but..." thing is quite old, apparently (not that I'm surprised). If this isn't a feminist work though I don't know what is. Such wonderful writings that are still a bit ahead of their time in many ways. The second essay was better and really resonated with me. The first was still very good, but a bit weaker. Really excellent work. Now to read her fiction.

marlisenicole's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

These 2 essays depict one of the core reasons why I adore Dorothy Sayers. All she asked was that women be treated as humans. That’s all. She wasn’t a feminist or a Puritan. She just thought that women should be treated as individuals who have their own unique qualities and strengths - just like men do - rather than treating women as a generalized group.

notafraidofvirginiawoolf's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

Extremely incisive and enjoyable. This woman does not fuck around

holtfan's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

2021 Review
Irritated with G.K. Chesterton's condescending tone towards women in [b:What's Wrong with the World|184565|What's Wrong with the World|G.K. Chesterton|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1328864028l/184565._SY75_.jpg|646052], I decided I needed a dose of Sayers's common sense to wash the taste of him from my mouth. And in the process, I discovered I just needed her common sense, period.

She answers questions I didn't even know I was asking.

2016 Review
I picked up Are Women Human? by Dorothy L. Sayers expecting a rather lengthy and involved discussion on feminism that I would need to re-read several times to fully grasp. Instead I got a volume of barely 75 pages composed of two essays and an introduction so full of common sense that it hardly took any time to read at all. Though groundbreaking as one of the first females to graduates from Oxford and well-known for her work as a writer of fiction and academia, Sayers did not have much to say about feminism. In fact, I would say this volume fulfills more our need (as readers) to have her say something than her need, or even desire, (as an author) to say anything about what it means to be a woman.

The essays were originally published with several others by Sayers in 1947. While they are somewhat dated, they remain quite relevant today. Many of the issues women struggled with then apply to both men and women today. Sayers’s main point is primarily that men and women have more in common than not and that each should be allowed to find the role that suits them best. If a woman is good at business, she should do it because that is what she was made to do. However, if a woman desires to have a family and be a traditional housewife, that too should be regarded as good because that is what she is meant to do. The same standards apply to men and women equally. She gets a bit more snarky in the second essay, “The Human-Not-Quite-Human,” but her point remains the same.

One of my favorite parts comes from her discussion of women wearing “trousers.” While this isn’t controversial today, I think this passage illustrates her style, and humor, well:

“Let me give one simple illustration of the difference between the right and the wrong kind of feminism. Let us take this terrible business…of the women who go about in trousers. We are asked: ‘Why do you want to go about in trousers? They are extremely unbecoming to most of you. You only do it to copy the men.’ To this we may very properly reply: ‘It is true that they are unbecoming. Even on men they are remarkably unattractive. But, as you men have discovered for yourselves, they are comfortable, they do not get in the way of one’s activities like skirts and they protect the wearer from draughts about the ankles. As a human being, I like comfort and dislike draughts. If the trousers do not attract you, so much the worse; for the moment I do not want to attract you. I want to enjoy myself as a human being, and why not?”