Despite H.M. Parshley's introductory assurances that his abridgment of the original text in the 1953 translation is minor, the audiobook (based on the most recent and unabridged translation) makes it very clear that the original translation (1953 by Parshley) misses out on material that is very noteworthy and very much is part of de Beauvoir's argument.
Right now, I am mightily peeved that Parshley cut quite a few parts from the chapters on women's history. While Parshley may have felt that he was merely "reducing the extent of the author's illustrative material", the removal of said illustrative material kinda feels like a silencing or an glancing over or outright omitting of the fact that certain people, works, or ideas even existed.
I certainly would not have known them had de Beauvoir not listed them for illustration.
So, I am rather glad I am having both the old and the new translation at hand for comparison.
But, yes, I'm peeved at Parshley right now.