Simone de Beauvoir writes about women who are "the Other". The Other identifies itself as conceptualizing what is defined, as different from itself. It refers to what is different from the first concept and is identified by its difference. It has no original definition per se, it is defined by its difference from another original concept. Otherness creates mental boundaries, stigmas and dehumanizing thought patterns. Simone argues that this is the destiny of femininity. By being female, you become the Other to males. Women seem to be defined only by the difference they make to humanity. She writes that females and males are intertwined in a necessary partnership, but it is the partnership between a slave and a master, where each participant relies on each other, yet one is granted power. Even the question of how to define a woman, in itself, provides clues that her definition is not independent of what it means to be male, and that males can be defined easily. Throughout history it has been seen that humanity has considered femininity as a secondary evolution of man and sees humanity as being of male origin. The duality of self and other seems to be a natural propensity to navigate the world, and genders are no exception. He describes it as a fundamental category of human thought and continues by saying that it is a fundamental hostility for the consciousness of the Other. Racism and income differences between classes can both be explained using this theory. Even though the relationship between the sexes seems to be mutual, it took a long time for revelations about gender equality to emerge. Compared to racial or religious groups, Beauvoir argues that women find it more difficult to organize as a group against inequality, since in the middle of the paper there is an inherent power shift that causes capitalists to profit. from the suffering of others. Capitalists need to exploit and maintain power and money, and to make workers believe they are being treated fairly in an economic exchange for their services. Marx believed this because he could observe the obvious difference in power between those who owned businesses and those who worked for them. He saw a big difference between rich and poor, and this seemed to suggest that capitalists were exploiting the sensitive position of those less fortunate in the class. Ordinary people cannot survive without selling their labor to those who are more fortunate and do not have as much power. I believe Marx is right and it seems that to this day people who find themselves in a position of less social power will be exploited for their ability to give power to others for little in return.