John Stuart Mill's "The Subjection of Women"

Paper Summary:

This paper argues that, as a political commentary, Mill's "The Subjection of Women" is not a product of his time, but rather a critique of the restrictions on women's political and civic rights; therefore, John Stuart Mill holds the distinction of being the first male philosopher to argue publicly in favor of women's rights. The author points out that the book is an impassioned argument for the recognition of women's personal, legal, and political rights, including the right to work outside the home, the right to higher education, and the right to equal rights in the institution of marriage. The paper relates that, as a utilitarian, Mill believes that prohibiting the potential contributions from half the members of society went against the general good.

Table of Contents
Arguments of "The Subjection of Women"
Social and Philosophical Context
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"Most of the social theorists of the time, such as Edmund Burke and even Mill's own father James Mill argued that personal relationships, such as those between husbands and wives, were timeless and should be seen as "natural." In response to John Stuart's criticism, Burke harked back to the abstract reason of older philosophers like John Locke, Jean Jacques Rousseau and Jeremy Bentham. Bentham, in particular, was the father of utilitarianism, which John Stuart had adopted as his own personal philosophy."

More papers on John Stuart Mill's "The Subjection of Women":

• Analytical Essay # 117455 : "John Stuart Mill's 'Subjection of Women'"
• Argumentative Essay # 134487 : "John Stuart Mill and the Subjection of Women"
• Research Paper # 92747 : "Mill's 'The Subjection of Women'"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: