Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T05:44:43.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When Feminism Is “High” and Ignorance Is “Low”: Harriet Taylor Mill on the Progress of the Species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Penelope Deutscher
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay considers the important role attributed to education in the writings of nineteenth-century feminist Harriet Taylor Mill. Taylor Mill connected ignorance to inequality between the sexes. She called up the specter of regression into lowness and ignorance when she associated feminism with progress. As she stressed the importance of education, she constructed an‘other’ to feminism, variously associated with lowness, poverty, and the primitive. She made a case for the advantages of civilization (education, enfranchisement, equality) to be opened up to women. Yet Taylor Mill's position that the ignorant poor, like all humans, should be in a position of so-called “perfect equality” drifted intermittently into the view that the elevation of women to perfect equality would refine and elevate the lower classes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 21 , Issue 3: Special Issue: Feminist Epistemologies of Ignorance , Summer 2006 , pp. 136 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Darwin, Charles. 1871/1981. The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. 2 vols. Facsimile, ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Deutscher, Penelope. 2004. The descent of man and the evolution of woman. Hypatia 19 (2): 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gamble, Eliza Burt. 1894. The evolution of woman: An inquiry into the dogma of her inferiority to man. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons [The Knickerbocker Press].Google Scholar
Gamble, Eliza Burt. 1916. The sexes in science and history. Rev. ed. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1951. John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor: Their friendship and subsequent marriage. New York: Augustus M. Kelley.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Jo Ellen. 1998. Introduction. In The complete works of Harriet Taylor Mill, ed. Jacobs, Jo Ellen. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Le Doeuff, Michèle. 1991. Hipparchia's choice: An essay concerning women, philosophy, etc. Trans. Selous, Trista. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Le Doeuff, Michèle. 2003. The sex of knowing. Trans. Hamer, Kathryn and Code, Lorraine. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1989. Autobiography. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1991. The subjection of women. In On liberty and other essays, ed. Gray, J.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Soper, Kate. 1983. New Introduction. In Enfranchisement of Women (185/) and The Subjection of Women 0869), Taylor Mill, Harriet and Stuart Mill, John, ed. Kate Soper, London: Virago.Google Scholar
Taylor Mill, Harriet. 1983. Enfranchisement of women. In The subjection of women [John Stuart Mill] Enfranchisement of women [Harriet Taylor Mill], ed. Soper, Kate. London: Virago.Google Scholar
Taylor Mill, Harriet. 1998. The complete works of Harriet Taylor Mill, ed. Jacobs, Jo Ellen. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.Google Scholar