John Stewart Mill's The Subjection Of Women

Linda Kerber’s Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America was a refreshing historian analysis of the role of women in our nation’s history. In the early Revolution eras, the political role of women was nonexistent due to the traditional roles held by the patriarchal society the colonists lived in for most of their years. Kerber intertwined her book with an intelligent analysis, but also conveys this analysis in a clear way so that reader can comprehend further. Throughout the book, chapters divide each segment of women’s rights by explaining the slow, but progressive build of them. The exploration of womens rights in Women of the Republic is developed by each opportunity opened during the American Revolution.

Judith Sargent Murray was a revolutionary woman- born into a socially prominent and wealthy family during the start of the American Revolution, Murray was recognized for her intellect at a young age and given an education along with her brother. Later in life, she had her written works widely published and read during a time when women’s voices were seen as fundamentally inferior to those of men. In one of her most influential and strongly opinionated works, ‘On the Equality of the Sexes’, Murray makes a strong case for the spiritual and intellectual equality of men and women, arguing that women and men are born equal, but that men are simply given more education and

The second argument, on women being too emotional and sentimental to be able to vote objectively, is dismantled because men, even political leaders, express the same emotions that could cloud the judgment of important decisions. Next, with the third argument, Blackwell explains how gender is not connected to the rights given to citizens. With the final argument, on how growing feminist and suffrage groups would destroy the home image and marital relationship, Blackwell presents the following statement, “We believe that woman’s ballot will strengthen the power of the home, and sustain the dignity and sacredness of marriage.” The central idea Blackwell was trying to convey was that women are on the same level as men, mentally and emotionally, as well as the fact that allowing women basic civil rights would not jeopardize the future of the nation, if not improve it. As stated by Blackwell, “Is there any equally good reason why no account should be taken of the opinions of women?” The truth is, there was no adequate answer to why women could not participate in society with the principals written out in the United States’ original, outdated Constitution. These weightless allegations against women’s suffrage proved nothing but the great divide between genders present at the time.

Since the Revolutionary War, women have been seen as inferior to men, a status that was especially clear in the lack of legal rights for women [1]. Women’s’ rights has been an issue that is still fought today with the struggles of being treated equally against men. In 1779, Judith Sargent Murray, was an essayist in support for women’s rights, once wrote that “women’s minds were as good as men’s and that girls as well as boys, therefore deserved access to education” [1]. Women were very domesticated by their husbands in this era which most men believed that a women’s only place was to maintain the household and taking care of children. The war gave some women the opportunity to demonstrate their ability to show responsibilities regarded as a

Mill lived in an era when women were seen as a lower class than men by law and custom. They were expected to do nothing more but to marry, bear children, and give up much of their time to their families. In most cases they could not pursue a formal education, own property, vote, or even seek a divorce from an abusive husband. Women lived by having to follow the rules of their “masters,” their husbands.

Women’s rights activists in the late 19th century objected an amendment proposing a “man’s government” in America. The amendment faced strong opposition because suffragists believed there was already excessive executive power given to men. So, these women demanded equal representation and access to the same civil liberties as men had by exposing the gender inequality they met through a series of persuasive tactics demonstrated in the article: “Manhood Suffrage.”

In writing this document, “Abigail Adams to John Adams, 31 March 1776,” the author, Abigail Adams, is trying to illustrate a desperate need for equality.1 As she has the ear and respect of a man well placed to impact the treatment of and protections for women within the realm of the new government, Abigail takes the opportunity to stress the importance of being “more generous and favourable to them [women] than your ancestors” by taking away a man 's legal control over, and ability to be tyrannical towards, their wives.1 She cleverly illustrates the frustrating plight of women by implicitly correlating the vexation over lack of representation that has brought her husband to the Second Continental Congress in the first place and the potential for women to rebel based on their own frustration over lack of representation in society.1,2

Although the American Revolution is often presented as an uncomplicated success story and the triumph of freedom and liberty, for women, slaves, and Native Americans, this was far from the case. During the American Revolution, women were strong supporters of revolutionary activity in many capacities. Women worked as seamstresses, nurses, and even as spies (Faragher et al 2009: 159). Women demonstrated their competency and autonomy from males when they took over the running of farms and businesses when males were serving in the Revolutionary army. These were striking, practical, real-life examples of how the idea of female incompetence was in error. Women published political satire and letters from the period demonstrate how women were critically engaged in a thoughtful manner about politics and what it meant to be free and independent. Women served on the front lines, offering food and supplies to soldiers and many later received pensions and acclaim for their efforts. However, none of these initiatives were enough to motivate the Founding Fathers to give women the right to vote even white, propertied women. In their eyes, all men were created equal (Faragher et al 2009: 160).

Mill makes a very strong argument that the position women have in society is not the only possible way to structure societal hierarchy. The reason it seems unnatural to change its structure, he claims, is because it is uncustomary.

In “The Subjection of Women” by John Stuart Mill, he argues that there should be perfect equality between males and females rather than one sex dominating the other. During the time in which he wrote this, women did not hold much power, so his stance appeared very radical. He began the essay by stating that, “the legal subordination of one sex to the other is wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement” (p. 1105). Because he began his essay by stating the flaw he saw in society that he wished to change, the rest of the essay flowed smoothly and led the reader to comprehend the validity of his argument. Mill made several well-thought out emotional and logical appeals in order to prove that women were being

A Woman’s Right: A Human Issue The works of Mary Wollstonecraft and John Stuart Mill delved into the subject matter of women’s rights and equality. Both authors strike milestone by composing works regarding forward thinking that discussed women’s issues and being the first or one of first ever to address the subject matter. Mill was influenced by Wollstonecraft with his book, though he never mentioned that he was because her life very scandalous (extramarital affairs and birthing a child with one of her (“boy toys”), yet it was known publicly, his wife, Harriet Taylor provoked and inspired him to write on the topic of women’s rights.

However, Mill’s differs from Aristotle in many respects in terms of his thoughts on women, power, and the effects of education. Based on Mill’s beliefs of the

In the Subjection of Woman, John Staurt Mill examines the roles of woman in during the 19th century. Woman were viewed as inferior to man, receiving fewer opportunities for political standing or education. Mill stated that the standard or custom were for woman to find a husband, marry, start a family, and aim to please and submit to her husband. Mill was against this view, believing that woman should be liberated and empowered. Rather than rely on their husbands entirely, like slaves, women should be given standing. They did not go against their husbands due to fear of losing everything including their home. He argued the point that giving woman rights benefitted society as a whole. So, not only woman would be hindered by not being able to

In this first unit, one of the readings that really caught my attention was John Stuart Mill’s The Subjection of Women. In his essay, Mill’s presents a very compelling argument that the subordination of one sex to another is wrong and that there should be instead, perfect equality amongst the sexes. Having previously studied about gender inequality issues from another class, I have a broad understanding of how and why gender inequality has been perpetuated through various historical, political, and social contexts. Incorporating this knowledge as well as information learned through the readings and lectures, I hope to share my thoughts on the subjection of women and its relationship to slavery in this personal response paper.

For Mill the solution to gender equality lies in changing marital contracts, and allowing women to own property. “But if marriage were an equal contract, not implying the obligation of obedience; if the connexion were no longer enforced to the oppression of those to whom it is purely a mischief, but a separation, on just terms,