Abstract
When Mill's The Subjection of Women was published in 1869 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 arguments. Kate Millett's chapter in Sexual Politics is the only sustained discussion of Mill in the feminist literature that I am aware of, but it is not from a philosophical viewpoint, and deals with Mill only in the service of an extended comparison with Ruskin. Philosophical books on Mill give the essay short measure. Alan Ryan in J. S. Mill heads one chapter ‘Liberty and The Subjection of Women’, but the former work gets twenty-six pages and the latter only four. Ryan says that ‘it is almost entirely concerned with the legal disabilities of women in Victorian England’. H. J. McCloskey, injfohn Stuart Mill: A Critical Study, gives the essay one and a half pages, commenting that it reads ‘like a series of truisms’ and seems so unimportant today because equality of the sexes has been achieved!
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference7 articles.
1. Ryan A. , Jf. Mill S. , p. 125)
2. Nochlin L. , ‘Why are there no great women artists?’ in Women in Sexist Society
3. Essays on Sex Equality
4. Rossi (pp. 41–43)
5. Gornick and Moran (eds.), also (abbreviated) in Art and Sexual Politics
Cited by
46 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Moralphilosophischer Diskurs;Mill-Handbuch;2024
2. The Subjection of Women (1869);Mill-Handbuch;2024
3. Harriet Taylor Mill on Gender Equality;Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences;2024
4. Local and Contextual: John Stuart Mill's The Subjection of Women;Australian Journal of Politics & History;2023-06
5. Introduction;The Rights of Women in Comparative Constitutional Law;2023-04-15