Malthus and gender

0 ECONOMICS
Alison Bashford
{"title":"Malthus and gender","authors":"Alison Bashford","doi":"10.1111/aehr.12250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article re-reads Malthus's <i>Essay on the Principle of Population</i> for his explicit discussion of men and women, masculinity and femininity. A feminist reading is possible, but not undertaken here. Rather, the purpose is simply to demonstrate how ‘gender’ was Malthus's own object of inquiry. Historical actors, perhaps especially economic thinkers, often considered gender far more fully and explicitly than almost all subsequent analysts of them. It therefore remains not just insufficient, but empirically erroneous not to inquire into how ‘men’ and ‘women’ were considered, constructed, instructed, symbolised or valued by the historical actors we study, including those in the political economy canon.</p>","PeriodicalId":100132,"journal":{"name":"Asia‐Pacific Economic History Review","volume":"62 3","pages":"198-210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aehr.12250","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia‐Pacific Economic History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aehr.12250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article re-reads Malthus's Essay on the Principle of Population for his explicit discussion of men and women, masculinity and femininity. A feminist reading is possible, but not undertaken here. Rather, the purpose is simply to demonstrate how ‘gender’ was Malthus's own object of inquiry. Historical actors, perhaps especially economic thinkers, often considered gender far more fully and explicitly than almost all subsequent analysts of them. It therefore remains not just insufficient, but empirically erroneous not to inquire into how ‘men’ and ‘women’ were considered, constructed, instructed, symbolised or valued by the historical actors we study, including those in the political economy canon.

马尔萨斯与性别
本文重读马尔萨斯的《人口原理》,对男人和女人、男性气质和女性气质进行了明确的讨论。女权主义的解读是可能的,但不是在这里进行的。相反,其目的只是为了证明“性别”是马尔萨斯自己探究的对象。历史人物,尤其是经济思想家,往往比几乎所有对他们的后续分析都更充分、更明确地考虑性别问题。因此,不去探究“男人”和“女人”是如何被我们所研究的历史角色(包括那些政治经济学经典中的角色)所考虑、构建、指导、象征或评价的,不仅是不充分的,而且在经验上是错误的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信