Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T16:21:11.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mill, Political Economy, and Women's Work

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2008

NANCY J. HIRSCHMANN
NANCY J. HIRSCHMANN*
Affiliation:
The University of Pennsylvania
*
Nancy J. Hirschmann is R. Jean Brownlee Endowed Term Professor, Department of Political Science, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The sexual division of labor and the social and economic value of women's work in the home has been a problem that scholars have struggled with at least since the advent of the “second wave” women's movement, but it has never entered into the primary discourses of political science. This paper argues that John Stuart Mill's Political Economy provides innovative and useful arguments that address this thorny problem. Productive labor is essential to Mill's conception of property, and property was vital to women's independence in Mill's view. Yet since Mill thought most women would choose the “career” of wife and mother rather than working for wages, then granting that work productive status would provide a radical and inventive foundation for women's equality. Mill, however, is ambiguous about the productive status of domestic labor, and is thereby representative of a crucial failure in political economic thought, as well as in egalitarian liberal thought on gender. But because Mill at the same time develops a conception of production that goes well beyond the narrow limits offered by other prominent political economists, he offers contemporary political scientists and theorists a way to rethink the relationship of reproductive to productive labor, the requirements for gender equality, and the accepted categories of political economy.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 102 , Issue 2 , May 2008 , pp. 199 - 213
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2008

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

REFERENCES

Annas, Julia. 1977. “Mill and the Subjection of Women.” Philosophy 52 (March): 179–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, Gary S. 1991. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Jess, Rogerson, Richard, and Wright, Randall. 1991. “Homework in Macroeconomics: Household Production and Aggregate Fluctuations.” The Journal of Political Economy 99, No. 6 (Dec.): 1166–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bladen, V. W. 1960. “Adam Smith on Productive and Unproductive Labour: A Theory of Full Development.” The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 26 No. 4 (Nov.): 625–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1978. Economic Theory in Retrospect. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Braunstein, Elissa, and Nancy, Folbre. 2001. “To Honor and Obey: Efficiency, Inequality, and Patriarchal Property Rights.” Feminist Economics 7 (1): 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess-Jackson, Keith. 1995. “John Stuart Mill, Radical Feminist.” Social Theory and Practice 21 (Fall): 369–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condorcet, Jean-Antoine-Nicolas de Caritat, de, marquis. 1996. “On the Admission of Women to the Rights of Citizenship.” In The French Revolution and Human Rights: A Brief Documentary History, trans. and ed. Hunt, Lynn. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Dalla, Costa Mariarosa, and James, Selma. 1975. The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community. Bristol: Falling Wall Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Delphy, Christine. 1984. Close to Home: A Materialist Analysis of Women's Oppression. Trans. Diana Leonard. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Dimand, Robert, Forget, Evelyn, and Nyland, Chris. 2004. “Gender in Classical Economics.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (winter): 229–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiStefano, Christine Stefano, Christine. 1991. Configurations of Masculinity: A Feminist Perspective on Modern Political Theory. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, Zillah. 1981. The Radical Future of Liberal Feminism. New York: Longman's.Google Scholar
Engels, Friedrich. 1972. Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State. Ed. Leacock, Eleanor. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Estevez-Abe, Margarita, Iversen, Torben, and Sockie, David. 2001. “Social Protection and the Formation of Skills: A Reinterpretation of the Welfare State.” In Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, ed. Hall, Peter A. and Soskice, David. New York: Oxford, 2001.Google Scholar
Fernandez, Raquel, Guner, Nezih, and Knowles, John. 2005. “Love and Money: Inequality, Education, and Marital Sorting.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 120 (1): 273–344.Google Scholar
Fineman, Martha. 1991. The Illusion of Equality: The Rhetoric and Reality of Divorce Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Folbre, Nancy. 2001. The Invisible Heart: Economics and Family Values. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Folbre, Nancy. 2006. “Measuring Care: Gender, Empowerment, and the Care Economy.” Journal of Human Development 7 (2): 183–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galbraith, John Kenneth. 1979. Annals of an Abiding Liberal. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. 1994. Women and Economics: A Study of the Economic Relation Between Men and Women as a Factor in Social Evolution. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
Gilpin, Robert. 1987. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glendon, Mary Ann. 1989. The Transformation of Family Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Leslie. 1980. “Mill, Marx, and Women's Liberation.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 18 (July): 319–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, Jeremy, Rogerson, Richard, and Wright, Randall. 1993. “Putting Home Economics in Macroeconomics.” Quarterly Review 17, no. 3 (Fall): 2–11. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Peter A., and Soskice, David. 2001. Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, Heidi. 1981. “The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Toward a More Progressive Union.” In Women and Revolution, ed. Lydia, Sargent. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
Hartsock, Nancy C. M. 1984. Money, Sex and Power: Toward a Feminist Historical Materialism. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. 1974. On Liberty and Liberalism: The Case of John Stuart Mill. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Hirschmann, Nancy J. 2002. “Liberal-Conservativism Once and Again: Locke's Essay on the Poor Law and U.S. Welfare Reform.” Constellations: An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory 9 (3): September.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschmann, Nancy J. 2008. Gender, Class, and Freedom in Modern Political Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hirschmann, Nancy J., and Liebert, Ulrike, eds. 2001. Women and Welfare: Theory and Practice in the United States and Europe. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Hochschild, Arlie. 1989. The Second Shift. With Anne Manchung. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar
Hoskyns, Catherine and Rai, Shirin M.. 2007. “Recasting the Global Political Economy: Counting Women's Unpaid Work.” New Political Economy 12 (September): 297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
House, Christopher, Laitner, John, and Stolyarov, Dmitriy. 2006. “Home Production of Dual Earner Couples and Consumption During Retirment.” Michigan Retirement Research Center Working Paper, Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Rosenbluth, Frances. 2006. “The Political Economy of Gender: Explaining Cross-National Variation in Household Bargaining.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (1): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Jo Ellen. 2002. The Voice of Harriet Taylor Mill. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1993. Two Treatise of Government, ed. Laslett, Peter. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1997. “An Essay on the Poor Law.” In John Locke, Political Essays, ed. Goldie, Mark. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, Rhona. 1995. Kidding Ourselves: Breadwinning, Babies, and Bargaining Power. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Malthus, Thomas. 1951. Principles of Political Economy. New York: Augustus Kelly Inc.Google Scholar
Martineau, Harriet. 1859. “Female Industry.” Edinburgh Review 222 (April): 293–336.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1965. Principles of Political Economy: With Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy. In Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Vol. 2 and 3, ed. Robson, J. M.. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1967a. Essays on Some Unsettled Questions of Political Economy. In Collected Works, Vol. 4: Essays on Economics and Society, Part I, ed. Robson, J. M., Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1967b. “Chapters on Socialism.” In Collected Works, Vol. 5: Essays on Economics and Society, Part II, ed. Robson, J. M., Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1970. “Essay on Marriage and Divorce.” In John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill, Essays on Sex equality, ed. Rossi, Alice S.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1984. “Statement on Marriage.” In The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Vol. 21: Essays on Equality, Law, and Education, ed. Robson, John M.. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1991a. The Subjection of Women. In Mill, On Liberty and Other Essays, ed. Gray, John. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1991b. On Liberty. In Mill, On Liberty and Other Essays, ed. Gray, John. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mink, Gwendolyn. 1998. Welfare's End. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha C. 2001. Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O'Connor, Julia S., Orloff, Ann Shola, and Shaver, Sheila. 1999. States, Markets, Families: Gender, Liberalism and Social Policy in Australia, Canada, Great Britain and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1979. Women in Western Political Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1982. “Women and the Making of the Sentimental Family.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 11 (Winter): 65–88.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1989. Justice, Gender and the Family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Belknap Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricardo, David. 1963. The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.Google Scholar
Rossi, Alice S. 1970. “Sentiment and Intellect: The Story of John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill.” In Essays on Sex Equality, ed. Rossi, Alice S.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ross, Michael L. 2008. “Oil, Islam, and Women.” American Political Science Review 101 (February): 107–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandel, Michael J. 1982. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sarvasy, Wendy. 1984. “J. S. Mill's Theory of Democracy for a Period of Transition Between Capitalism and Socialism.” Polity 16 (Summer): 567–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Say, Jean-Baptiste. 2001. A Treatise on Political Economy. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Schor, Juliet B. 1991. The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya. 1999. Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Shanley, Mary Lyndon. 1981. “Marital Slavery and Friendship: John Stuart Mill's The Subjection of Women.” Political Theory 9 (2) May: 229–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1976. Lectures on Jurisprudence, ed. Meek, R. L., Raphael, D. D. and Stein, P. G.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 2000. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, Anthony, Susan B., and Gage, Matilda Jocelyn. 1882. History of Woman Suffrage, Vol. 1. New York: Fowler & Wells.Google Scholar
Stewart, Mary Joyce, and Stewart, Jay. 1999. “What Can We Learn from Time-Use Data?” Monthly Labor Review (August).Google Scholar
Tolleson-Rinehart, Sue, and Carroll, Susan J.. 2006. “Far from Ideal: The Gender Politics of Political Science.” American Political Science Review 100 (4): 507–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 1991. “John Stuart Mill on Androgyny and Ideal Marriage.” Political Theory 19 (4) November: 626–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 2002. Mill on Democracy: From the Athenian Polis to Representative Government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
van, Parijs Philippe. 1995. Real Freedom for All: What (if Anything) Can Justify Capitalism? New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wakefield, Priscilla 1798. Reflections on the Present Condition of the Female Sex: With Suggestions for Its Improvement. London: J. Johnson, Darton and Harvey.Google Scholar
Waring, Marilyn. 1999. Counting for Nothing: What Men Value and What Women Are Worth. Second edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Winch, Donald. 2006. “The Problematic Status of the Consumer in Orthodox Economic Thought.” In The Making of the Consumer: Knowledge, Power and Identity in the Modern World, ed. Trentmann, Frank. New York: Berg.Google Scholar
Zerilli, Linda. 1994. Signifying Woman: Culture and Chaos in Rousseau, Burke, and Mill. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.