A Communitarian Reading of Gender Domination in the Thought of John Stuart Mill

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• Fariba Niksiar ¹
• Seyed Khodayar Mortazavi Asl ²
• Faramarz Mirzazade Ahmad Beiglo ²

¹ Ph.D. Candidate in political thought, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

² Assistant professor, Department of Political Science and International Relations, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

10.30495/jzvj.2024.32816.4104

Abstract

Introduction: Dominance, monopoly, and the exercise of power lead to inequality, injustice, and marginalizing the oppressed person with unpleasant consequences for the individual and the society. The purpose of this study is to address the issue of domination as one of the obstacles to the growth and development of women’s capabilities and their participation in the development of society and politics. The liberal philosopher, John Stuart Mill (1806- 1873) condemned the domination of men over women in his book "The Subjection of Women" and considered laws and institutions to be involved in this process. But most of the selected communitarians in this study (Alasdir MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, Michael Walzer and Martha Nussbaum) relate domination with the enjoyment of social goods. Therefore, from the point of view of the selected communitarians, this article examines Mill’s opinion about gender domination.
Methods: As qualitative research, this study uses hermeneutic method of Quentin Skinner. Skinner considers the intention of the author and his/her social context. He believes that the main duty of the interpreter is to prove the meaning of the text, and the meaning can not be obtained simply by reading the text, but to achieve it, one must go beyond or below the literary level of the text, and discover the motivations and intentions of the author.
Findings: Michael Walzer prioritizes social ties and morality to laws and institutions and relates domination to the enjoyment of social goods. Attemptes are made to extend Walzer’s view to the other selected communitarians, because their intellectual backgrounds are similar. The findings show these efforts have been effective, but Martha Nussbaum's ideas are different from them; because of her different reading of Aristotle. Nussbaum’s Ideas are close to that of John Stuart Mill, who recommends amendment of laws and institutions to remove gender domination. Nussbaum recommends specific policies and legal rights to ensure equal abilities for women.

Keywords

• John Stuart Mill
• Communitarians
• Gender Domination
• Laws and Institutions
• Social Goods

---

References

1- Aristotle. Nikomakhos’a Etik. Translated by M H Lotfi, tarikhema.org. 1998; 317-318

2- Bartky S L. Body Politics. In A Companion to Feminist Philosophy.

Edited by A M Jaggar & I M Young. UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2000; 27.

3- Barzun C. Quentin Skinner v. Charles Taylor: Explanation and Practical Reasoning in History, Philosophy, and Law. Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities, 2021; 31 (2), 301.

4- Bourdieu P. Masculine Domination. Translated by Richard Nice. US: Stanford University Press, 2000; 30.

5- Donner W. John Stuart Mill’s Liberal Feminism. Philosophical Studies, 1993; 69.

6- Gasper D. Sen’s Capability Approach and Nussbaum’s Capabilities Ethic. Translated by K Oskouei & H Padash, Strategy for Development, 2007; 150.

7- Gray J. The Political Philosophy of Stuart Mill. Translated by Kh Deihimi, Amin Electronic Library, 2017; 138.

8- Hall D E. Subjectivity. NewYork: Routledge. 2004; 33, 45, 51.

9- Holmstrom N. Human Nature. In A Companion to Feminist Philosophy. Edited by Alison M. Jaggar & Iris Marion Young. UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2000; 288.

10- Hosseini Beheshti A. Theoretical Foundations of Politics in Multicultural Societies. Tehran: Bogheh Publisher, 2016; 62, 64.

11- Kiss E. Justice. In A Companion to Feminist Philosophy. Edited by Alison M. Jaggar & Iris Marion Young. UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2000; 492.

12- MacIntyre A. After Virtue. US: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007; 12, 31, 221.

13- Mardiha M. Philosophical Foundations of Radical Feminism. Politics Quarterly, 2008; 38 (240).

14- Mclaughlin J. Feminist Social and Political Theory, Translated by H. Moshirzade, Tehran: Shirazeh Publisher, 2010; 66.

15- Mill J S.  The Subjection of Women. US: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1999; 7, 10, 15, 13, 23, 33, 26, 37.

16- Moshirzade H.  The History of Two Centuries of Feminism: From Movement to Social Theory. Tehran: Shirazeh Publisher, 2017; 19.

17- Nozari H, Pourkhodagholi M. The Methodology of Political Thought: Quentin Skinner’s Methodology, Political Science Quarterly, 2010; (11), 110.

18- Nussbaum M C, Cogito. Key Philosophers in Conversation: The Cogito Interviews. Translated by A. A. Daraei. Letter of Philosophy. 1998; (3), P. 217.

19- Nussbaum M C. John Stuart Mill – Thought and Influence- The saint of rationalism. In Varouxakis Georgios. Kelly Paul. US: Routledge Publication, 2010; 135.

20- Nussbaum M C. Mill: Between Aristotle and Bentham, Daedalus, 2004; 68.

21- Nussbaum M C. Capabilities and Social Justice. US: University of Chicago, 2002; 133.

22- Nussbaum M C. Women and Human Development (The Capability Approach), UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001; 1-3, 242.

23- Okin S M. Justice, Gender and the Family. US: Basic Books, 1989; 4-73, 45-72.

24- Paknia M, Mardiha M. Sex Domination. Tehran: Nashr-e Nei Publisher, 200

25- Samiei Esfahani A. Feminist Theory and Method in Politics. Journal of political Science, 2013; 8 (4).

26- Sigot N, Beaurain C. John Stuart Mill and the Employment of Married Women:

27- Reconciling Utility and Justice. Journal of the History of Economic Thought. Informa. UK: Taylor Francis. 2011; 31 (3), 30.

28- Skinner Q. Liberty before Liberalism. UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003; ix.

29- Skinner Q.  Visions of Politics -Volume. 1: Regarding Method. UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002; 18, 25.

30- Smitz K. John Stuart Mill and the Social Construction of Identity. History of Political Thought, 2004; 25, 308.

31- Taghilo F. A Review of the Book “The Ethics of Authenticity” by Charles Taylor, Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science, Tehran University, 2005; (67). 291-292.

32- Tajik Neshatieh N. Justice in the Thought of John Stuart Mill. Tehran, Institute for Research and Development in Humanities, 2006.

33- Taylor C. The Ethics of Authenticity. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 2003; 3.

34- Taylor C. Philosophy and the Human Sciences. UK: Cambridge University Press, 1990; 206.

35- Walzer M. Interpretation and Social Criticism. (US) Harvard University Press, 1987; 17, 20,

36- Walzer M. Spheres of Justice. A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, Translated by S. Najafi, Tehran: Sales Publisher, 2015; 20,