30 pages • 1 hour read
John Stuart MillThe Subjection of Women
Nonfiction | Essay / Speech | Adult | Published in 1869A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Symbols & Motifs
Universality
Mill uses a universality motif in various ways, referring to the “universal opinion” (3), “universal custom” (23), “universal interest” (36), etc. This term implies that everyone everywhere has agreed on a particular custom or idea—for example, that women are passive while men are active. However, as Mill points out, these ideas are often based on assumptions or habits that require further investigation, and so they should not be taken as fact without scrutiny. The motif thus develops the theme of Nature Versus Society and the Gender Hierarchy: Much of what is “universal” is widespread not because it reflects an eternal truth of human nature but simply because it has been effectively promulgated throughout society, often by those with a vested interest in doing so (e.g., men).
A Priori
While the phrase “a priori” appears only once in The Subjection of Women—“The à [sic] priori presumption is in favour of freedom and impartiality” (3)—it is nonetheless an underlying motif throughout the work. The Latin “a priori” translates to “from the former” and refers to knowledge learned from deduction rather than experience, or “a posteriori.” Mill uses this concept to emphasize how a modern society should begin from a position of egalitarianism: When there are laws to impede a person’s freedom, the burden of proving why such a restraint is necessary must be provided. In the case of women, Mill argues, no such burden of proof has been established. In fact, despite a posteriori knowledge—e.g., that women suffer in abusive marriages and society misses out on the potential contributions of half of the population—the oppression continues.
Law of Force
Particularly in his discussion of Liberty, Slavery, and Marriage, Mill refers to the law of force as an outdated mode of structuring society. In simplest terms, he is referencing a “might makes right” mentality in which those with the most physical prowess rule; it also extends to those whose status (e.g., as a monarch or an enslaver) enables them to use force even if they themselves are not physically strong. While historically the law of force might have been necessary to protect one’s tribe or village from outside threats, Mill contends that civilization has evolved to a point where other characteristics and perspectives are necessary for society to advance further. As Mill argues, society must renounce the law of force to create a true meritocracy:
The principle of the modern movement in morals and politics, is that conduct, and conduct alone, entitles to respect: that not what men are, but what they do, constitutes their claim to deference; that, above all, merit, and not birth, is the only rightful claim to power and authority (152).
The brutality of the law of force does not reflect the ideals and needs of a society attempting to expand liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Ancient Greek and Roman Republics
Since the Age of Enlightenment, Europe looked upon Ancient Greece and Rome as models of democracy. While the reality was more complex—both civilizations relied on slave labor and had periods of despotic rule—their symbolism as proto-meritocracies was powerful and underpins Mill’s use of them as a measuring stick for Victorian England. For example, Mill criticizes Aristotle for suggesting that the Greeks were naturally “free” and those they warred with naturally fit to be enslaved, but he also argues that the Greeks were more advanced than Mill’s contemporary England when it came to matters of gender:
The independence of women seemed rather less unnatural to the Greeks […] and the partial example afforded by the Spartan women; who, though no less subordinate by law than in other Greek states, were more free in fact, and being trained to bodily exercises in the same manner with men, gave ample proof that they were not naturally disqualified for them (23-24).
Thus, Mill cites Ancient Greece as a civilization that, despite existing millennia prior to Victorian England and engaging in practices (e.g., slavery) the Victorians considered wrong, was nonetheless more progressive in its treatment of women. The motif serves as a damning indictment of Victorian society’s own gender hierarchy.
Related Titles
By John Stuart Mill
