Sandra Lee Bartky

1. Introduction

Sandra Lee Bartky (1935–2016) was an American feminist philosopher whose work is widely regarded as foundational for contemporary feminist theory, especially in Anglophone philosophy. She is best known for analyzing how gendered power is lived through the body: in posture, movement, appearance, emotions, and self‑understanding. Bringing together phenomenology, existentialism, and critical theory, she argued that oppression is sustained not only by institutions and explicit rules but also by subtle disciplines that shape how women inhabit their own bodies and minds.

Bartky’s writings offered early and influential feminist engagements with Michel Foucault’s notion of disciplinary power, contending that modern femininity itself functions as a disciplinary regime. Her essays, many collected in Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (1990), advanced distinctive analyses of objectification, internalized oppression, and shame, helping to define what is now called critical feminist phenomenology.

In later work, Bartky developed a feminist ethics centered on sympathy and solidarity, exploring how moral agents should respond to structural injustice and the suffering it produces. This ethical orientation connected her analyses of embodiment to questions about political responsibility and collective action.

Her work has been integrated into curricula in philosophy, gender studies, sociology, and cultural studies, and remains a frequent point of reference in debates about normalization, cosmetic surgery, eating disorders, and media representation. Across these domains, commentators treat Bartky as a key figure in showing how everyday practices and emotions can be sites where domination is both reproduced and contested.

2. Life and Historical Context

Bartky was born on 5 May 1935 in Chicago, Illinois, and spent most of her life in that city. She received her PhD in philosophy from the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign in 1963 and joined the faculty of the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) in 1969, where she remained for decades. Her academic formation in mid‑century American philosophy exposed her both to analytic methods and to continental thinkers such as Jean‑Paul Sartre and Maurice Merleau‑Ponty.

Her intellectual trajectory unfolded alongside the second‑wave feminist movement in the United States. The emergence of women’s liberation groups in the late 1960s and 1970s provided the political and experiential backdrop for her early essays on feminist consciousness and psychological oppression. Bartky’s work is often situated among those of contemporaries such as Catharine MacKinnon, Iris Marion Young, and Susan Bordo, who were also exploring how gendered power shapes embodiment and subjectivity.

Key contextual milestones include:

Bartky died on 17 October 2016 in Chicago. Obituaries and memorial essays highlighted both her role in legitimating feminist philosophy within academic departments and her participation in broader feminist intellectual networks. Her career spans a period in which feminist theory moved from the margins to a recognized field, and her writings are frequently read as emblematic of this transition.

3. Intellectual Development and Influences

Bartky’s intellectual development is commonly divided into several phases, each marked by distinct influences and shifts of emphasis.

Early Training and Existential Phenomenology

During her graduate studies, Bartky engaged deeply with phenomenology and existentialism, especially Sartre and Merleau‑Ponty. This period fostered her interest in subjectivity, freedom, embodiment, and bad faith. Commentators note that her later feminist analyses of lived experience and bodily comportment echo Merleau‑Ponty’s account of the “lived body,” while her sensitivity to self‑deception and internalization of norms bears traces of Sartrean bad faith.

Turn to Feminism

The women’s liberation movement of the late 1960s and 1970s prompted Bartky to reinterpret existential themes through a feminist lens. In essays like “Toward a Phenomenology of Feminist Consciousness” (1977), she drew on consciousness‑raising practices, arguing that experiences of humiliation and exclusion could be philosophically analyzed to reveal systemic oppression. Here, Marxist and critical‑theory influences are also apparent, particularly in her attention to ideology and false consciousness.

Engagement with Foucault and Critical Theory

In the late 1970s and 1980s, Bartky turned to Michel Foucault’s work on discipline and normalization. While influenced by his analyses of modern power, she argued they were “gender‑blind,” reworking them to explain specifically feminine bodily disciplines. At the same time, she remained in dialogue with the Frankfurt School and broader critical theory, sharing its concern with domination, reification, and emancipation.

Later Ethical and Psychological Focus

From the 1990s onward, Bartky’s attention shifted toward moral psychology and feminist ethics, informed by both analytic discussions of responsibility and continental reflections on affect. Her essay “Sympathy and Solidarity” (1997) reflects this synthesis, as do later writings on shame, guilt, and the emotional conditions of political solidarity.

Across these phases, she combined continental sources (phenomenology, Foucault, critical theory) with Anglo‑American concerns about conceptual clarity, helping to forge what later scholars describe as critical feminist phenomenology.

4. Major Works and Key Essays

Bartky wrote primarily in essay form; several of her most influential pieces were later collected in book‑length volumes. Scholars often highlight the following works:

Femininity and Domination (1990)

This volume gathers essays written mainly in the 1970s and 1980s. It is widely used as the principal reference for Bartky’s views on disciplinary femininity, psychological oppression, and shame. The book is frequently cited in debates about body politics, normalization, and objectification.

“Foucault, Femininity, and the Modernization of Patriarchal Power”

In this essay, Bartky appropriates Foucault’s account of disciplinary power to show how practices such as dieting, makeup, and posture training produce a specifically feminine body. She argues that without attention to gender, Foucault’s theory underdescribes modern power relations. The piece is often treated as a classic in feminist engagements with Foucault.

Sympathy and Solidarity and Other Essays (2002)

This later collection assembles essays on ethics, emotions, and political solidarity, including the widely discussed “Sympathy and Solidarity.” Here Bartky shifts focus from diagnosis of oppression toward normative questions about how individuals and groups ought to respond to injustice, developing an ethic that emphasizes affective understanding and committed alliance.

5. Core Ideas: Embodiment, Discipline, and Femininity

A central thread in Bartky’s work is the claim that femininity operates as a disciplinary regime inscribed in the body. She maintains that women’s everyday practices of grooming, dieting, posture, and movement are not merely personal choices but socially organized techniques that normalize a particular kind of feminine body.

Femininity as Bodily Discipline

Drawing on Foucault, Bartky describes modern power as disciplinary, producing “docile bodies” through surveillance and self‑regulation. She argues that:

• Feminine comportment (e.g., constrained gestures, careful walking, controlled spatial occupation) trains women to take up less space and appear nonthreatening.
• Beauty practices (makeup, hair removal, skin and weight regimes) construct the body as an ongoing project that is “never finished,” demanding continuous labor.
• These practices are internalized so that women often monitor and correct themselves without direct external enforcement.

"

“Under the standard of feminine bodily acceptability, the woman’s body is not simply something she has, it is something she must constantly work on, a project that is never finished.”

— Sandra Lee Bartky, Femininity and Domination

Normalization and Modern Patriarchal Power

Bartky contends that these bodily disciplines modernize patriarchy: rather than relying on overt coercion, they operate through normalized expectations of attractiveness and propriety. Proponents read her as showing how contemporary gender norms harness consumer culture and expert discourses (dieting, fashion, cosmetics) to sustain women’s subordination.

Some interpreters emphasize the ambivalence of these practices, noting that they can involve agency, pleasure, and creativity, while still being shaped by constraining norms. Others stress their coercive dimension, highlighting how failure to conform may incur social penalties.

Overall, Bartky’s core idea is that gendered power must be analyzed at the level of embodied habit and self‑relation, where domination may be reproduced through what appear to be freely chosen practices.

6. Objectification and the Phenomenology of Oppression

Bartky is widely credited with refining the concept of objectification in feminist philosophy by attending to its experiential, psychological, and bodily dimensions.

Objectification as Lived Experience

Building on and modifying earlier accounts, Bartky argues that objectification involves both being treated as an object by others and coming to see oneself through that objectifying gaze. She describes situations in which a woman’s body is fragmented into parts for visual or sexual evaluation, while her subjectivity is ignored:

"

“To be looked at without being seen, to be treated as a body without being acknowledged as a person, is to suffer a peculiarly modern form of objectification.”

— Sandra Lee Bartky, “On Psychological Oppression,” in Femininity and Domination

This dual structure—external treatment and internalized self‑view—is central to her phenomenology of oppression.

Phenomenology of Oppression

Bartky’s approach, often called a phenomenology of oppression, describes how systemic domination appears in everyday experience. She examines:

• Feelings of being on display in public spaces, leading to self‑consciousness and self‑monitoring.
• A sense of fragmentation, as attention is directed to isolated body parts rather than the person as a whole.
• The development of an internalized observer—an imagined other whose standards one continually tries to meet.

Through such descriptions, she seeks to show how large‑scale structures of sexism are reproduced in micro‑experiences of the body and perception.

Interpretive Debates

Commentators disagree on how broadly Bartky’s analysis applies. Some argue that her account illuminates many women’s experiences in Western consumer cultures; others contend that it may overgeneralize, underestimating variations across race, class, sexuality, and cultural context. Subsequent theorists have extended or revised her work to incorporate more explicitly intersectional dimensions, while still drawing on her basic insight that oppression must be understood from the standpoint of lived, embodied subjectivity.

7. Emotions, Shame, and Moral Psychology

Bartky’s writings on shame and related emotions form a key component of her contribution to feminist moral psychology. She argues that emotions are not merely private feelings but are socially structured and can function as mechanisms of oppression.

Shame Under Oppression

In essays such as “Shame and Gender,” Bartky analyzes shame phenomenologically as an experience of the self as diminished, exposed, and judged by an internalized other:

"

“Shame is the experience of the self as diminished, exposed, and found wanting before an internalized other.”

— Sandra Lee Bartky, “Shame and Gender,” in Femininity and Domination

Under sexist norms, she maintains, women are particularly vulnerable to shame about their bodies, sexual desires, aging, and failure to meet ideals of femininity. This shame encourages self‑surveillance and compliance, reinforcing disciplinary practices discussed in her work on embodiment.

Internalized Oppression and Self‑Evaluation

Bartky links shame to internalized oppression, where members of subordinated groups adopt the dominant culture’s demeaning standards. She explores how:

• Women may feel shame not only for actual norm violations but for imagined shortcomings measured against unrealistic ideals.
• Shame can lead to self‑alienation, as individuals distance themselves from aspects of their own bodies or identities.
• Feelings of guilt and self‑blame may displace recognition of structural injustice.

Ambivalence and Transformative Possibilities

While emphasizing shame’s oppressive functions, Bartky also suggests that emotions can have critical and transformative roles. Some readers interpret her as indicating that shared experiences of shame, once articulated and politicized (for instance, through consciousness‑raising), can contribute to feminist consciousness and resistance.

Later commentators have debated how far Bartky’s account allows for such positive potentials. Some see her focus as primarily diagnostic, highlighting how emotions sustain domination; others detect a more ambivalent view, in which naming and analyzing these emotions is a step toward their political reworking.

8. Sympathy, Solidarity, and Feminist Ethics

In her later work, Bartky develops an explicitly ethical perspective centered on sympathy and solidarity. She argues that moral life under conditions of structural injustice must go beyond abstract principles to encompass emotionally informed, politically engaged relationships with the oppressed.

Sympathy

For Bartky, sympathy involves an imaginative and affective understanding of another’s situation. She emphasizes:

• The importance of attentiveness to the specific experiences of marginalized groups.
• The risk that sympathy can remain paternalistic or sentimental if it does not challenge one’s own complicity in unjust structures.
• The need to distinguish between fleeting emotional responses and more sustained, reflective engagements with others’ suffering.

Solidarity

Bartky reconceives solidarity as an active practice rather than a mere feeling:

"

“Solidarity is not a sentiment that we have, but a practice that we do; it is the work of aligning ourselves with the oppressed in their struggle for liberation.”

— Sandra Lee Bartky, “Sympathy and Solidarity,” in Sympathy and Solidarity and Other Essays

She holds that genuine solidarity requires:

• Recognizing and taking responsibility for structural inequalities.
• Willingness to change one’s own life, including relinquishing unearned advantages.
• Ongoing dialogue and accountability to those with whom one claims solidarity.

Place within Feminist Ethics

Commentators situate Bartky’s account in relation to care ethics, virtue ethics, and debates on political responsibility. Some interpret her as extending care ethics by foregrounding structural injustice and political struggle; others stress her alignment with virtue‑ethical concerns about character and emotional dispositions.

There is also discussion about the scope of her framework: some argue it offers a promising model for cross‑group alliances (e.g., between relatively privileged feminists and more marginalized women), while critics question whether it fully addresses complexities of power and voice within such solidarities. Nonetheless, her analyses are widely cited as a significant contribution to feminist normative theory.

9. Methodology: Feminist Phenomenology and Critical Theory

Bartky’s methodology combines phenomenological description with critical social theory, a synthesis that has been influential in shaping what later scholars call critical feminist phenomenology.

Phenomenological Description

From phenomenology, Bartky adopts the practice of describing lived experience from the first‑person perspective. She focuses on:

• Bodily comportment (how one walks, sits, occupies space).
• Perceptual experience (being looked at, feeling on display).
• Emotional textures (shame, anxiety, self‑consciousness).

These descriptions aim to reveal how social norms and power relations are sedimented in everyday habits and feelings, rather than treating them as purely external conditions.

Critical Theoretical Orientation

At the same time, Bartky aligns herself with the critical theory tradition in seeking to unmask forms of domination and contribute to emancipation. Her analyses are explicitly normative and political: they do not simply catalog experiences but interpret them as shaped by patriarchy, consumer capitalism, and disciplinary power.

In her engagement with Foucault, she both uses and revises his concepts. She accepts his emphasis on micro‑practices and normalization but argues that his framework must be supplemented with attention to gender, and with more explicit normative critique.

Methodological Features and Debates

Characteristic features of Bartky’s method include:

• Starting from concrete examples (e.g., beauty routines, walking down the street) rather than abstract theorizing.
• Treating individual experiences as symptomatic of broader structures, without reducing them to mere effects.
• Combining textual analysis of canonical theorists with reflection on ordinary life.

Supporters view this method as bridging theory and experience, making structural power intelligible at the level of everyday life. Critics caution that phenomenological generalizations may risk over‑universalizing particular experiences, especially those of white, middle‑class women, and argue for more intersectionally differentiated descriptions. Subsequent work in critical feminist phenomenology often takes Bartky’s approach as a starting point while seeking to address these concerns.

10. Impact on Philosophy and Gender Studies

Bartky’s work has had lasting influence across several academic fields, particularly philosophy and gender studies.

Impact on Philosophy

Within philosophy, Bartky is often cited as a key figure in establishing feminist philosophy as a recognized subfield. Her essays have been widely anthologized and assigned in courses on:

• Social and political philosophy (power, oppression, normalization).
• Ethics and moral psychology (emotions, responsibility, solidarity).
• Continental philosophy and phenomenology (embodiment, subjectivity).

Her reworking of Foucault’s concept of disciplinary power contributed to broader philosophical debates about subject formation, self‑surveillance, and the relationship between freedom and normalization. Philosophers of embodiment and feminist phenomenologists frequently reference her analyses of feminine comportment and bodily discipline.

Impact on Gender Studies and Related Fields

In gender studies, Bartky’s ideas inform research on body image, beauty culture, eating disorders, cosmetic surgery, and media representation. Scholars draw on her concepts of internalized oppression and disciplinary femininity to analyze how gender norms are reproduced in consumer practices and popular culture.

Her work has also been taken up in sociology, psychology, and cultural studies. For instance:

Ongoing Debates and Extensions

Subsequent theorists have extended Bartky’s insights in more intersectional directions, examining how race, class, sexuality, and disability intersect with disciplinary norms. Some argue that her work provides a flexible framework for such analyses; others see it as requiring significant revision to accommodate diverse experiences.

Despite these debates, her writings remain canonical references in discussions of gendered embodiment and continue to shape both theoretical arguments and empirical research.

11. Legacy and Historical Significance

Bartky’s legacy is often framed in terms of her role in transforming how philosophers and theorists understand the relationship between power, embodiment, and everyday life.

Place in the History of Feminist Thought

Historically, she is placed among second‑wave feminist philosophers who brought women’s lived experiences into dialogue with established philosophical traditions. Her work is frequently juxtaposed with that of Iris Marion Young, Susan Bordo, and Catharine MacKinnon, with commentators noting:

Bartky’s writings helped define a specifically philosophical approach to issues that had also been discussed in feminist literature and activism, contributing to the institutional consolidation of feminist theory in universities.

Influence on Subsequent Generations

Her analyses of disciplinary femininity and shame have become touchstones for later critical feminist phenomenologists and theorists of self‑objectification. Many scholars acknowledge her as a mentor and intellectual model who demonstrated that rigorous philosophical work could be grounded in feminist political commitments.

Assessments of Significance

Supporters emphasize her pioneering status in:

• Reorienting phenomenology toward questions of gender and power.
• Introducing Foucault’s ideas into feminist debates while critically revising them.
• Linking moral psychology to structural analyses of oppression.

Critical assessments suggest that her focus on a relatively specific cultural context—often read as that of white, middle‑class women in late‑20th‑century North America—limits the universality of some claims. Yet even these critiques typically treat her work as an indispensable reference point, from which more intersectional or global analyses depart.

In historical overviews of feminist philosophy and gender theory, Bartky is consistently credited with articulating how domination becomes a matter of habit, perception, and feeling, thereby shaping subsequent discussions of both the burdens and possibilities of embodied agency under conditions of inequality.