Sayers does not seem to be a militant feminist, but rather a humanist (please ignore the normal connotations of the word). To the question many men post of “what do women want?” Sayers would answer, “Are women not human, that they may all want the same thing?” Take women out of her response and replace it with men, African Americans, homosexuals, Jews, Christians, Asians, Latinos, straight people, children, the elderly, etc. and I think you will find a very workable rule for life. No two humans are exactly alike, so why would anyone assume that two women will be?

Perhaps sadly, Sayers’ remarks seem as applicable now as when she wrote the essays closer to the middle of the 20th century. I think that “Are Women Human?” is definitely something worth reading.

For the whole review:
http://www.devourerofbooks.com/2008/0... ( )

How did I miss Dorothy L. Sayers for so long? This pair of thoughtful and witty essays speaks eloquently the language that I fear still rings true: a struggle exists for the recognition that the state of one being human does not have to be mediated by a label of gender, race, ethnicity, age, etc. Women, men, boys, girls, blacks, whites, Latinos -- we are all human beings before we are any of those other things. Can we not recognize people as people and as individuals before we lump ourselves into groups and assign generalities that are viewed as immutable truth? Sayers gave this speech at a women's group in 1938 - I am a little saddened that its relevance has not faded.

The second essay in the book, "The Human-Not-Quite-Human" was written directly to the Church, and is another argument for the recognition of each person as an individual, and the ability of the individual to exercise his or her giftings and talents, regardless of "proper role" limitations. She ends this with a pointed jab at the male authority of the Church and its abandonment of the character of Christ as it is today exercised. "Perhaps it is no wonder that the women were the first at the Cradle and last at the Cross," she wrote. "They had never known a man like this Man - there never has been such another. ... There is no act, no sermon, no parable in the whole Gospel that borrows its pungency from female perversity; nobody could possibly guess from the words and deeds of Jesus that there was anything "funny" about woman's nature. But we might easily deduce it from His contemporaries, and from His prophets before Him, and from His Church to this day..."

I think this is a must-read for any person interested in the evolution of gender roles or the movement toward a more whole society. Entertaining, engaging, thought-provoking, a quick read - there is no reason NOT to pick this up. ( )

Precisely because I know little about women, I thought this might be a good read. I think I expected it to be a sort of feminist tract, albeit with a Christian bent (Sayers being a believer).

This is exactly what I did not find. Under the thin garb of arguing for women, what Sayers describes is actually what it means to simply be human. Women are simply the vehicle she is required to use (she died in 1957 so the role of women in society was a BIG argument in her lifetime), to best explain her point of view on the nature of humanity.

Full Review at Grasping for the Wind