Author: Dr. Anupriya Singh

Abstract: Feminism has become a very contentious issue now days. We have come across a number of definitions but none seems adequate enough to encompass all the situations which may or may not fall within the realm of feminism. In support of feminism, we have found people carrying out demonstrations, writing in the newspapers, giving speeches without attempting to know if the particular situation should be addressed under the banner of feminism. Recently, actor Swara Bhaskar in an open derisive letter to Sanjay Leela Bhansali accuses him of glorifying “Sati” and “Jauhar” in his film ‘Padmaavat’. Even more ironical is the fact that people have formulated ethnically specific forms of feminism like Black feminism and Intersectional feminism, thus segregating the gender women according to race, class and religion. This paper tries to explore two aspects related to feminism- First, should the definition of feminism be culture specific; Second, is it possible to have one universal definition which applies to all women on this earth. In order to address these issues, I have taken up the study of two novels in the light of the theory of Jean Paul Sartre who has often been accused of being hostile to women and an anti-feminist, thereby also proving that Sartre’s concepts of “Bad faith”, “Immanence” and “Freedom of Choice” are not abstract but universal.

Keywords: Bad faith, Being-for-itself Being-in-itself, Feminism, Freedom of choice.

Article Info: Received: 09 Jan 2021; Received in revised form: 11 Mar 2021; Accepted: 03 Apr 2021; Available online: 15 Apr 2021

DOI: 10.22161/ijels.62.36