Gender and Race in John Stuart Mill’s The Subjection of Women

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q2 WOMENS STUDIES
Aurélie Knüfer
{"title":"Gender and Race in John Stuart Mill’s The Subjection of Women","authors":"Aurélie Knüfer","doi":"10.1353/fro.2023.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Focusing on Mill’s The Subjection of Women (1869), this paper adopts the perspective of the feminist and decolonial history of philosophy. It defends the idea that this book may be read as making a contribution to the construction of a Euro-centered white feminism, which developed in the nineteenth century. In this book, Mill dissociates race from gender issues and characterizes feminism and its subject as being indifferent to racial problems. Indeed, the comparisons that the book makes between sexism and racism, between women and slaves, are not used as a way of drawing a connection between feminist and antiracist causes. On the contrary, they are usually used to dissociate the different fights and to separate the defense of English women’s rights from the defense of the rights of non-white men and women. In the first part of the paper, I show that Mill defines anti-Black racism as a non-European problem, unrelated to the domination of women. Next, I argue that he disconnects the subjection of women from slavery by affirming their non-contemporaneity and the exceptionality of the subjection of women in the modern world. Finally, I demonstrate how Mill appropriates and modifies the meaning of “slavery,” applying it primarily to English married women, and establishes a hierarchy that ranks Black enslaved women lower than white women on a scale of subjection. Thus, this paper uncovers and interprets these blind spots in order to allow contemporary feminists to make a cautious and mindful use of Mill’s The Subjection of Women.","PeriodicalId":46007,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers-A Journal of Women Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":"53 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers-A Journal of Women Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/fro.2023.0003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"WOMENS STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Focusing on Mill’s The Subjection of Women (1869), this paper adopts the perspective of the feminist and decolonial history of philosophy. It defends the idea that this book may be read as making a contribution to the construction of a Euro-centered white feminism, which developed in the nineteenth century. In this book, Mill dissociates race from gender issues and characterizes feminism and its subject as being indifferent to racial problems. Indeed, the comparisons that the book makes between sexism and racism, between women and slaves, are not used as a way of drawing a connection between feminist and antiracist causes. On the contrary, they are usually used to dissociate the different fights and to separate the defense of English women’s rights from the defense of the rights of non-white men and women. In the first part of the paper, I show that Mill defines anti-Black racism as a non-European problem, unrelated to the domination of women. Next, I argue that he disconnects the subjection of women from slavery by affirming their non-contemporaneity and the exceptionality of the subjection of women in the modern world. Finally, I demonstrate how Mill appropriates and modifies the meaning of “slavery,” applying it primarily to English married women, and establishes a hierarchy that ranks Black enslaved women lower than white women on a scale of subjection. Thus, this paper uncovers and interprets these blind spots in order to allow contemporary feminists to make a cautious and mindful use of Mill’s The Subjection of Women.
约翰·斯图尔特·密尔《女性主体》中的性别与种族
摘要:本文以密尔的《女性主体论》(1869)为中心,采用女性主义和非殖民化哲学史的视角。它为这样一种观点辩护,即这本书可以被解读为对19世纪发展起来的以欧洲为中心的白人女权主义的建设做出了贡献。在这本书中,米尔将种族与性别问题脱钩,并将女权主义及其主题描述为对种族问题漠不关心。事实上,这本书对性别歧视和种族主义、妇女和奴隶之间的比较并没有被用来将女权主义和反种族主义事业联系起来。相反,它们通常被用来区分不同的斗争,并将捍卫英国妇女权利与捍卫非白人男女权利分开。在论文的第一部分,我展示了米尔将反黑人种族主义定义为一个非欧洲问题,与女性统治无关。接下来,我认为,他通过肯定女性的非当代性和现代世界女性服从的特殊性,将女性服从与奴隶制割裂开来。最后,我展示了米尔如何挪用和修改“奴隶制”的含义,主要将其应用于英国已婚女性,并建立了一个等级制度,在服从程度上,黑人被奴役女性的排名低于白人女性。因此,本文对这些盲点进行了揭示和解读,以期让当代女权主义者对米尔的《女性主体论》有一个谨慎和审慎的运用。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
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