Summary
Mill begins his essay by stating his purpose: to argue that the subordination of the female sex to the male sex is fundamentally wrong and a major barrier to human progress. He explains that his task is difficult because people worship the “instincts” that tell them that women should be inferior to men, though these beliefs have no logical justification. Mill explains that patriarchy is unjustified because it doesn’t come about from a process of testing and experimentation—it’s not as though society went through different reigns, in which women ruled over men, men ruled over women, or they both equally ruled, and eventually it was proven that men ruling over women is the best mode for society. What history has shown is that it is possible to live with patriarchy, but that doesn’t mean it is the most expedient approach to human advancement. Mill explains that patriarchy is formed through the law of force, which dictates that physical strength determines the social hierarchy. Women were initially compelled to obey men, and now they are legally bound to do so.
Mill goes on to suggest that the position of married women resembles that of slaves in several ways: society leaves women with few options other than getting married; after marriage, a woman’s legal identity is often merged with her husband’s; the abuse within marriage that is allowed by tradition and law is severe. For Mill, the legal and cultural subordination of the female sex represents a form of dependence that is milder than, but similar to, other forms of unjust dominance. Mill compares women's situation to various other examples. After Christianity introduced a moral obligation towards slaves, it struggled to enforce this moral law. Monarchy is clearly recognized as a law of force, and yet it wasn’t until relatively recently that it ended. The power dynamics between men and women differ significantly from these examples with their unique challenges. The desire for domination over women is widespread among men—half of the human race—making it persistent. Due to their intimate connections with men on whom they are reliant, women are under constant surveillance. Additionally, a wife tends not to do against the interests of her husband, as this would end up harming her as well.
Mill then addresses the most common objection to gender equality, which is that the current system is natural and therefore justified. He argues that what is considered natural is often merely customary and points out that many oppressive practices were once seen as natural, as every form of domination appears natural to those who are in a dominant position. For example, slave owners in the southern United States believed that their dominion over their slaves was natural. Advocates of absolute monarchy have also claimed that it is the only natural form of government. We can see that 'unnatural' in many cases just means unusual. As for the natural differences between the two sexes, Mill argues that there’s no way to know the true nature of women, since their characters are largely conditioned by society for the benefit of men. Only when the external circumstances that mold their nature are understood and accounted for can we see the real difference between men and women.
Mill then considers another objection, which argues that the subjugation of women is justified since women voluntarily accept it. Mill first states that this is simply not true. Historically, as women were allowed to express themselves through writing, an increasing number began protesting against their social positions. This includes petitions for parliamentary suffrage, demands for equal education, and access to professions. Mill gives examples of women’s rights movements in the United States and across Europe. He acknowledges that while at present some women don’t object to the system, many would if they were given the chance. Additionally, even more women might share these aspirations if they had different upbringings; currently, women are educated to believe that their character ideal (of submission) is opposite to that of men.
Mill points out that no oppressed class immediately demands complete freedom. Initially, they often rebel against specific instances of unjust power. In the context of women, many complain about mistreatment by their husbands. This shows that women would collectively complain about the larger male dominance if women’s education didn’t focus on teaching them to see themselves as reliant and subservient to men.
Analysis
The opening of Mill’s essay is one of the most devastating critiques of male domination in marriage in the history of Western philosophy. As a Member of Parliament in 1867, Mill tried to modify the Reform Bill to include voting rights for women, but he only received 73 out of 196 votes. In his speech on the Reform Bill of 1867, Mill mentioned a sentiment that MPs were reluctant to admit openly: the belief that women should only be concerned with being helpers for men. “The Subjection of Women” challenges such a sentiment and was meant to be a catalyst for a women’s rights movement.
Mill’s argument in the first chapter has been categorized as the “radical approach” to feminism by some scholars such as Julia Annas. In the first chapter, Mill acknowledges the lack of ambition of many women to challenge the system. However, instead of seeing this fact as justification for the current system, Mill, with his radical approach, sees this lack of ambition as an indication that women’s true desires have been suppressed by a social structure that teaches them to value submissiveness. This approach is considered radical because he denies that there is some “true desire” or “true nature” of women that can (or needs to be) recovered as the basis for his argument. His claim isn’t based on observable facts about women’s current behavior, but rather involves assumptions about women’s inherent nature. A radical perspective won’t stop at merely modifying the existing system. From this viewpoint, minor reforms only help a few women succeed by adopting male standards, without aiding the majority.
Mill differs from other utilitarians in his approach to feminism. While the Utilitarians were somewhat interested in women’s rights, they didn’t quite make a case for it. Bentham, Mill’s godfather and a utilitarian philosopher who greatly influenced him, personally felt that the issue of women’s suffrage wasn’t pressing enough to warrant action. Mill’s feminism was influenced less by fellow utilitarians than it was by early French and English Socialists. In his Autobiography, he references William Thompson’s Appeal when recalling his encounters with Thompson, whom he met through his early interactions with the Owenite socialists. Mill respected the Owenite and other socialist groups for their belief in granting women equal rights.
