Enfranchisement of women : $b Reprinted from the Westminster and Foreign Quarterly Review, for July 1851 — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
Enfranchisement of women : $b Reprinted from the Westminster and Foreign Quarterly Review, for July 1851
John Stuart Mill · en
That those who were physically weaker should have been made legally
inferior, is quite conformable to the mode in which the world has been
governed. Until very lately, the rule of physical strength was the
general law of human affairs. Throughout history, the nations, races,
classes, which found themselves the strongest, either in muscles,
in riches, or in military discipline, have conquered and held in
subjection the rest. If, even in the most improved nations, the law
of the sword is at last discountenanced as unworthy, it is only since
the calumniated eighteenth century. Wars of conquest have only ceased
since democratic revolutions began. The world is very young, and has
but just begun to cast off injustice. It is only now getting rid of
negro slavery. It is only now getting rid of monarchical despotism.
It is only now getting rid of hereditary feudal nobility. It is only
now getting rid of disabilities on the ground of religion. It is
only beginning to treat any _men_ as citizens, except the rich and a
favored portion of the middle class. Can we wonder that it has not
yet done as much for women? As society was constituted until the last
few generations, inequality was its very basis; association grounded
on equal rights scarcely existed; to be equals was to be enemies; two
persons could hardly coöperate in anything, or meet in any amicable
relation, without the law's appointing that one of them should be the
superior of the other. Mankind have outgrown this state, and all things
now tend to substitute, as the general principle of human relations,
a just equality instead of the dominion of the strongest. But, of
all relations, that between men and women being the nearest and most
intimate, and connected with the greatest number of strong emotions,
was sure to be the last to throw off the old rule and receive the new;
for, in proportion to the strength of a feeling, is the tenacity with
which it clings to the forms and circumstances with which it has even
accidentally become associated.
When a prejudice which has any hold on the feelings finds itself
reduced to the unpleasant necessity of assigning reasons, it thinks it
has done enough when it has reässerted the very point in dispute, in
phrases which appeal to the preëxisting feeling. Thus, many persons
think they have sufficiently justified the restrictions on women's
field of action when they have said that the pursuits from which women
are excluded are _unfeminine_, and that the _proper sphere_ of women is
not politics or publicity, but private and domestic life.