A

PROJECT REPORT ON

J.S. Mill as a Champion of Women’s Rights

SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. B.K. Mahakul

(Faculty Political Science)

Submitted By:

Onindya Mitra

Roll No. : 97

Semester- II

Hidaytullah National Law University Raipur

1

Certificate of Declaration

I hereby declare that the project work entitled “J.S. Mill as a champion of Women’s Rights”

submitted to HNLU, Raipur, is record of an original work done by me under the guidance of

M, Faculty Member, HNLU, Raipur.

Onindya Mitra

Roll. No. - 97

Semester – II

2

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my political science teacher Mr. B.K. Mahakul for giving this project

entitled “J.S. Mill as a Champion of Women’s Rights” which has widened my idea as well as

understanding of the theory and specifically about the concept of women’s right. His

guidance has also been instrumental towards the completion of this project.

My heartfelt gratitude also goes out to the staff and administration of HNLU for the

infrastructure in the form of our library and IT lab that was a source of great help in the

completion of this project.

I also thank my friends for their precious inputs which have been very helpful in the

completion of this project.

3

Table of Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………………………….05

Objectives…………………………………………………………………………....07

Research Methodology………………………………………………………………09

J.S. Mill on Women’s Right…………………………….…………………………...10

Subjection of Women in Contemporary Times.....................................................…...12

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………....14

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….15

4

Introduction

The Subjection of Women is the title of an essay written by John Stuart Mill in 18691 possibly

jointly with his wife Harriet Taylor Mill, stating an argument in favour of equality between

the sexes. At the time it was published in 1869, this essay was an affront to European

conventional norms for the status of men and women.

When Mill's The Subjection of Women was published in i869 it was ahead of its time in

boldly championing feminism. It failed to inaugurate a respectable intellectual debate.

Feminist writers have tended to refer to it with respect but without any serious attempt to

come to grips with Mill's actual argument. "The Subjection of Women" (1869) offers both

detailed argumentation and passionate eloquence in opposition to the social and legal

inequalities commonly imposed upon women by a patriarchal culture.

Just as in "On Liberty," Mill defends the emancipation of women on utilitarian grounds. Mill

was convinced that the moral and intellectual advancement of humankind would result in

greater happiness for everybody. He asserted that the higher pleasures of the intellect yielded

far greater happiness than the lower pleasure of the senses. He conceived of human beings as

morally and intellectually capable of being educated and civilized.

Mill believed everyone should have the right to vote, with the only exceptions being

barbarians and uneducated people. Mill argues that people should be able to vote to defend

their own rights and to learn to stand on their two feet, morally and intellectually. This

argument is applied to both men and women. Mill often used his position as a Member of

Parliament to demand the vote for women, a controversial position for the time.

In Mill's time a woman was generally subject to the whims of her husband and/or father due

to social norms which said women were both physically and mentally less able than men, and

therefore needed to be "taken care of." Contributing to this view were social theories,

i.e. survival of the fittest and biological determinism, based on a now considered incorrect

understanding of the biological theory of evolution and also religious views supporting a

1 Mill, John Stuart (1869). The Subjection of Women, 1st edn. London: Longmans, Green, Reader & Dyer, 1869.

5

hierarchical view of men and women within the family. The archetype of the ideal woman as

mother, wife and homemaker was a powerful idea in 19th century society.

At the time of writing, Mill recognized that he was going against the common views of

society and was aware that he would be forced to back up his claims persistently. Mill argued

that the inequality of women was a relic from the past, when "might was right,”  but it had no

place in the modern world.2 Mill saw that having effectively half the human race unable to

contribute to society outside of the home as a hindrance to human development. It is,

however, simply false to say that Mill's essay is mostly concerned with legal technicalities

which have since been changed, and so of no great interest today.

The Subjection of Women is concerned with women's legal disabilities only in so far as they

reflect profound social and economic inequalities between the sexes.3 While today there are

few ways in which women are under legal disabilities compared with men (though it would

be a mistake to think there are none) women are still subject to economic and social

discrimination in a variety of ways. For example: today a battered wife is no longer under

legal compulsion to return to her husband, as she was in Mill's day, but until very recently the

pressure for her to do so was overwhelming. Although we are more receptive to the ideal, we

are nowhere near achieving in practice the kind of equality between the sexes that Mill looks

forward to.

2 John Stuart Mill, On the Subjection of Women, Chapter I, 1st edn , 1869.3Julia Annas, Mill and the Subjection of Women, 1st edn., pp. 179-194, Cambridge University, 1977.

6

Objectives

To discuss the work of J.S. Mill for women’s rights.

To critically analyse his particular theory in contemporary times.

Research Methodology

The present study will be a descriptive and analytical study based on review of secondary sources such as books, literature, articles, journals, web pages, etc.

7

J.S. Mill on Women’s Rights

According, to Mill, women are brought up to act as if they were weak, emotional, docile - a traditional prejudice. If we tried equality, we would see that there were benefits for individual women. They would be free of the unhappiness of being told what to do by men. And there would be benefits for society at large - it would double the mass of mental faculties available for the higher service of humanity.

The ideas and potential of half the population would be liberated, producing a great effect on human development. Mill attacks the argument that women are naturally worse at some things than men, and should, therefore, be discouraged or forbidden from doing them. He says that we simply don't know what women are capable of, because we have never let them try - one cannot make an authoritative statement without evidence. We can't stop women from trying things because they might not be able to do them. An argument based on speculative physiology is just that, speculation. He resents this particular speculation. His resent is very well understood through the quote given below.

"The anxiety of mankind to intervene on behalf of nature...is an altogether unnecessary solicitude. What women by nature cannot do is quite superfluous to forbid them from doing."4

In this, men are basically contradicting themselves because they say women cannot do an activity and want to stop them from doing it. Here Mill suggests that men are basically admitting that women are capable of doing the activity, but that men do not want them to do so. Whether women can do them or not must be found out in practice. In reality, we don't know what women's nature is, because it is so wrapped up in how they have been raised.

Mill suggests we should test out what women can and can't do through experiment only and not through speculations. Mill's essay is clearly utilitarian in nature on three counts: The immediate greater good, the enrichment of society, and individual development. If society really wanted to discover what is truly natural in gender relations, Mill argued, it should establish a free market for all of the services women perform, ensuring a fair economic return for their contributions to the general welfare. Only then would their practical choices be likely to reflect their genuine interests and abilities.

4 John Stewart Mill, The Subjection of Women, Chapter I, 1869.

8

Mill felt that the emancipation and education of women would have positive benefits for men also. The stimulus of female competition and companionship of equally educated persons would result in the greater intellectual development of all.

He stressed the insidious effects of the constant companionship of an uneducated wife or husband. Mill also felt that men and women married only to follow the customs and that the relation between them was a purely domestic one. By emancipating women, Mill believed, they would be better able to connect on an intellectual level with their husbands, thereby improving relationships.

Mill therefore attacked the marriage laws, which he argued that it contributed to the slavery of women he had said that "there remain no legal slaves, save the mistress of every house 5." He alludes to the subjection of women becoming redundant as slavery did before it. He also argues for the need for reforms of marriage legislation whereby it is reduced to a business agreement, placing no restrictions on either party.

Again he raises the issue of women's suffrage. He argued that women make up half of the population, thus they also have a right to a vote since political policies affect women too. He theorizes that most men will vote for the MPs which will subordinate women, therefore women must be allowed to vote to protect their own interests.Mill felt that even in societies as unequal as England and Europe that one could already find evidence that when given a chance women could excel. He pointed to such English queens asElizabeth I, or Victoria, or the French patriot, Joan of Arc. He always held that if given the chance women would excel in other arenas and they should at least be given the opportunity to try like their male counter-parts.

Mill argues that the subjection of women has been justified by the claim that it is natural for men to dominate women. Women, so the claim goes, are naturally inferior to men. Mill, on the other hand, argues that it is impossible to know the true nature of women. Mill argues that women's subordinate position in society is a remnant of the past practice of the rule of the physically strong over the weak.

The practice of men dominating women has since become customary though the rule of the physically strong over the weak has become obsolete in civilized society) and has been mistaken as the "natural" order. Women are believed to be naturally inferior because of the unquestioning acceptance of this order and a resulting socialization process which creates

5J.S. Mill The Subjection of Women, The family, justly constituted, would be the real school of the virtues of freedom, Chapter II, 1869.

9

women who will act in such a way to fill these inferior positions.6 Mill argues that we cannot claim to know the true nature of women based on their behaviour because this behaviour is a product of social forces that have conditioned women to behave in a certain way and have thus hidden and sup- pressed their true natural inclination.

6 Mill, The Subjection of Women, pg. 132, 1869.

10

Subjection of Women in Contemporary Times

To critically analyse the relevance this particular theory in contemporary times and draw ou

its criticisms.

Modern interpreters and critics tend to have few problems with these points of Mill's

argument. However, Mill's The Subjection of Women has been subjected to considerable

criticism. The critiques of The Subjection of Women are multifaceted and diversified.

However, I will only discuss some of the common criticisms which have emerged from the

writings of a number of thinkers. To start with the criticisms, in Chapter Two of The

Subjection of Women, Mill carefully explains that it is wrong to look at women's present

behavior as a sign of their "nature" since their present behavior is simply the result of

conditioning by society.

However, then in Chapter Three, Mill proceeds to use examples of the behavior of women to

justify his argument for the liberty of women. Mill discusses women leaders in the past who

"have shown talent for rule.7"' He argues that women have "greater quickness of

apprehension" and that their "nervous temperament," while making them unfit for certain

occupations, would give them advantages in other occupations, and especially in what he

calls the "executive leadership of mankind."8

He argues that women's seeming inability to maintain a persistent line of thought their

flightiness or what Mill calls their "mobility of thought" does not detract from their ability to

make intellectual contributions but merely means that they will make different kinds of

contribution.9Mill's use of women's current and past behavior and successes to show the

utility of allowing women liberty and equality has been severely criticized by modern- day

scholars. Scholars argue that Mill, in using women's behavior which he has previously argued

is a result of conditioning a sign of their abilities and nature, commits the very mistake he has

warned us to avoid. Mill's adherence to an empirical approach has implications regarding his

7 Mill, The Subjection of Women, pg. 170, 1869.8Mill, The Subjection of Women, pg. 176, 177, 178, 1869.9 Mill, The Subjection of Women, pg. 180, 1869.

11

arguments for full equality for women. Mill's empiricism forces him to look at observable

differences between men and women in order to make his argument for equality10.

Mill is inconsistent, Jennifer Ring argues, because he holds that women's behavior has been

so conditioned by society that it is impossible to get at women's true nature by observing their

behavior; and, yet, he is forced by his empiricism to use women's behavior to convince the

reader of women's abilities and the advantages that will be gained by giving women freedom

and equality.

In a similar vein, Julia Annas argues that in The Subjection of Women Mill conflates what

she calls a "reformist" approach which includes a utilitarian appeal and a more radical

approach in his argument for equality of the sexes11. In particular, Annas argues that despite

Mill's more radical argument that we cannot know women's nature until they are free, in his

desire to also make a utilitarian appeal he points to examples of women's present behavior to

show that women's freedom would bring the greatest happiness to all.

The second major criticism of The Subjection of Women that has been leveled against Mill

by twentieth-century interpreters concerns propositions advanced by Mill at the end of

Chapter Two. Unlike Ring and Annas, who are offering a critique of Mill's method, other

scholars focus primarily on the limits of the substance of his argument as feminist theory.

After having argued for equality and freedom of opportunity for women in Chapter One and

the beginning of Chapter Two, Mill goes on to say that once a just and equal society has been

created the best division of duties between man and wife would have the man working

outside the home and the woman taking care of the family and home which is quite

contradictory to the ideas discussed by him in the first chapter.12 "Many scholars have thus

seen this assertion by Mill in The Subjection of Women as evidence of the inadequacies of

his feminist theory and as evidence of Mill's ambivalence about women's role in society.

10 Mill, The Subjection of Women, pg. 183, 1869. 11 Annas, "Mill and The Subjection of Women," pg. 180-181.12 Mill, The Subjection of Women, pg. 164, 1869.

12

Conclusion

Mill began writing The Subjection of Women in 1860, yet, he did not publish the work until

1869. During the period from 1865 to 1868, Mill was an MP in the British House of

Commons. In this role, Mill made a motion for granting suffrage to women who met the

property requirements men had to meet in order to be able to vote. However, this motion for

suffrage was not one that Mill made hastily nor without preparation and careful strategic

consideration. As with most of his progressive reform ideas, Mill was not facing a

particularly receptive audience. And Mill himself was painfully aware of this fact.

In other words, The Subjection of Women was most likely also a strategic maneuver by Mill

to further the cause for women and advance their appeal for suffrage. Mill admitted in a letter

to John Nichol in August of 1869 that his decision not to include a discussion of the question

of divorce in The Subjection of Women was in part because of "the obvious inexpediency of

establishing a connation in people's minds between the equality and any particular opinions

on the divorce question." Mill omitted a prolonged discussion of divorce and emphasized that

even if women were given freedom of opportunity they would remain in the home as a means

of 'softening the blow' for those men in the Victorian period who might be willing to consider

extending the rights of women and for those women whose support he needed to enlist to

push for change. Mill did not forego his views on women's rights that he had presented in his

earlier works, he merely presented them in what he believed would be their most favorable

light from the perspective of other nineteenth-century parliamentarians and men and women

who were not as progressive as Mill in their thinking but who held the power to make a

change.

Lastly, I would like conclude that the interpretations of The Subjection of Women offered by

contemporary critics are incomplete in that they fail to consider adequately the historical,

personal and political context in which this essay was written and released. In many ways,

critics have underplayed or overlooked Mill's nineteenth- century political context and his

hope of acting effectively within its confine.

13

Bibliography

John Stuart Mill's "The Subjection of Women": A Re-Examination, Elizabeth S. Smith,

Polity , Vol. 34, No. 2 , pp. 181-203, Palgrave Macmillan Journals, 2001.

Julia Annas, Mill and the Subjection of Women, Vol. 52, No. 200, pp. 179-194 Cambridge

University Press, 1977.

John Stewart Mill, The Subjection of Women, 1st edn., Cambridge University Press, 1869.

14