The subjection of women (1869): John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor

-In the tradition of Mary Wollstonecraft and of Enlightenment feminism, John Stuart Mill and
Harriet Taylor contributed to the social debate on marriage and on the role of wives, mothers,
and daughters that played an important role in the women’s suffrage movement.
-Their thesis: ‘The principle which regulates the existing social relations between the two
sexes [...] is wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement; it
aught to be replaced by a principle of perfect equality’.
-The essay deconstructs the notion of natural superiority using the analogy with slavery and
feudalism. It is custom, not nature, that directs these relations, and no one can know what the
‘nature of the two sexes’ is as long as they are educated differently.
-The essay also deconstructs the idea that women choose to be dominated : many women do
not do so, and they are in fact subjected by laws and by domestic ideology to their husbands:
they are brought up as ‘willing slaves’.
-It argues that this subordination is an anachronism and that it needs to be challenged
empirically: ‘human beings are no longer born to their place in life...What is now called the
nature if women is an eminently artificial thing’.
-Mill begins by addressing the assumption that women are the inferior sex, being less
intelligent and less skilled by nature. He says that this assumption has no supporting evidence
because men have never allowed women to have a fair shot and try things to see how good
they really are. Therefore, he concludes that sexism is a conclusion drawn by spurious logic.
He continues by arguing that women will be able to do by their nature whatever nature
intended for them to be able to do. Therefore it would be illogical to assume that women need
to be protected from trying things, since failure is a built in response to the lack of capacity.
In other words, nature will limit women to whatever extent it does limit women, and men
don’t need to be involved in that process at all. He then offers a threefold utilitarian response
to the problem of sexism. He says that by allowing women to participate in trade, there can
be the free trade of the commodities that women would like to introduce. He also argues that
by educating women, we expedite the progress of man by introducing more chance for
breakthrough and learning. He also includes here a defence of the home life of women,
saying that although men would like to assume that they would dislike their wives if they
were equals, they would actually probably like them a lot more, because by allowing their
wives to be real people, their friendships can begin with women as intellectual equals.
Finally, he attacks marriage law for placing restrictions on wives to submit them to a type of
slavery. He mentions the problem of the vote and notices that since women constitute half the
population, that the removal of their political opinions was both tyrannical and against the
ideas of democracy. He ends the book with an exploration of a few of his favourite powerful
women, Elizabeth I, Victoria, and even Joan of Arc.
-Men use spurious logic to maintain sexist views: By saying that women are inferior and then
“protecting” women by insulating them from experience, men are establishing a straw man
argument. They are saying “Look how bad women are” without ever having given them the
chance to seriously try at things to see if they really are bad. It’s an argument from silence,
and Mill challenges men to be scientific about their assumptions, and to not assume
something until it has been proven with evidence. Therefore, women should be free to try
anything, and if they are naturally inferior, nature itself will restrain them.
-Voting, comparing woman’s situation with slavery and the notion that they live in a world
where people were not born into their destiny: problems
-He says that people mistake something natural with something that is custom. Just because a
patriarchal society exists since the start of everything doesn’t mean is natural or right. He
uses images like tyranny, Queen Victoria slavery because he knows people are against slavery
and love Queen Victoria. Slavery has just been abolishes in the United States. If you are
against slavery you should also be against the subjection of women. If Queen Victoria can
lead a country that means women also can work.
- There ideas come from custom and tradition, they are not natural or right  both sexes
have been taught to uphold these ideas.
Chapter 1: challenges views of justifying the subjection of women, slaves analogy
Chapter 2: marital laws favour patriarchal mind-sets, women and divorce, women and the
custody of children
Chapter 3: business part analogy; talks about the ideas that men have on women,; purity,
submissiveness, empathy etc.
Chapter 4: how reforms are beneficial; women should be able to pursue whatever they want,
healthy competition which is good for man
-His ulterialism view: humanity will not achieve greatness or it’s full potential if half the
population is excluded from participating.
-Without scientific evidence that proves women are weaker or less intelligent than man, it’s a
social construct. There is no logical basis; It was an historical accident: past societies were
build up like this (on the basis of physical strength) so they just kept with it, but it is an
acronym.
-The lack of education of women and the fact that they were being educated to think their
situation was natural, normal and right is the reason why nothing really changed.