Political theory essay: Exegesis on Mary Wollstonecraft

Written By: Stella Kemp

“One cause of this barren blooming I attribute to a false system of education, gathered from the books written on this subject by men who, considering females rather as women than human creatures, have been more anxious to make them alluring mistresses than affectionate wives and rational mothers; and the understanding of the sex has been so bubbled by this specious homage, that the civilized women of the present century, with a few exceptions, are only anxious to inspire love, when they ought to cherish a nobler ambition, and by their abilities and virtues exact respect.” –Mary Wollstonecraft.

In “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman,” Wollstonecraft writes that the “false system of education,” based on men’s writings, which prioritises women’s attractiveness over their intellect and virtues, has limited women’s potential, leading them to focus on pleasing men rather than demanding respect.[1] I posit Wollstonecraft’s argument that women are rational beings and her criticism of Rousseau's views on women's education. Secondly, I posit that, as Wollstonecraft understood women to be rational and capable of contributing to society, they should therefore receive equal education to develop their abilities and virtues. Thirdly, I posit Wollstonecraft’s call to action for female readers: to develop their intellectual capabilities and independence. Overall, “A Vindication” illustrates the importance of women being educated to develop their intellect, virtues, and independence, which she believed were integral to make women effective participants in society.

Wollstonecraft criticises the “false system of education” as a key contributor to the continuing oppression of women. This may refer to social conditioning, in which women are viewed as objects of desire rather than as human beings with rational minds.[2] This “false system” refers to several aspects of women’s education, including social conditioning, patriarchal expectations, and the inadequate education women had been receiving.[3] Wollstonecraft posits that discourse about women’s education had been dominated by a male narrative.[4] One key philosopher “A Vindication” critiques is Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Although Wollstonecraft agrees with Rousseau's central ideas on the importance of education to achieve social justice and benefit youth, she denounces his views on women's education and their societal role.[5] In Rousseau’s book, "Emile," he questions women’s capability to reason or possess the necessary intellect to cultivate it.[6]He believed that women lacked the competency for “the quest for abstract and speculative truths, principles, and axioms in the sciences” and that a woman’s purpose is to please and be useful to men.[7] Wollstonecraft argues that women's intellectual capacities cannot be judged based on their current uneducated state, and that it is impossible to accurately assess a woman's true capacity based on her current imperfect state.[8] She believed that women should be trained to be independent, rational beings capable of making their own decisions and thus, contribute to society, rejecting Rousseau’s idea that women should be dependent on men.[9]

Wollstonecraft’s main argument in Chapter Two is that women are rational and that educating them would make them useful participants in society, at least through being “affectionate wives and rational mothers”[10]. Without “sense”, a woman could not be a good mother, and “unless the understanding of woman be enlarged (through education) … she will never have sufficient sense or command of temper to manage her children properly”.[11] Wollstonecraft claims that Rousseau forgets the dependence that men have on the physical and emotional work of women.[12] Indeed, it is impossible for a society to thrive while its children are raised in unfree, immature conditions.[13] While Wollstonecraft did not dispute women’s inferiority to men in terms of their physical bodies, she condemns the objectification of women who were viewed by their gender first and as “human creatures” second, thus refusing their full humanity[14]. Once women could be recognised for their morality and rationality, it would become clear that they deserved to be educated by the same means as men, instead of as a “fanciful kind of half being”.[15] In denying the ability of women to be rational, it simultaneously denies her personhood.

Secondly, after asserting that women could be rational and capable of reason in the same way that men can, Wollstonecraft evaluates the necessity for women to contribute equally to society. This could only be achieved through educating women in the same way as men, to develop their reason, which would thus develop their abilities and virtues, from which they could “exact respect”.[16] She reflects ideas originally brought forth by Aristotle and Stoicism: reason makes humans superior to animals and virtue “exalts one being over another.”[17] The idea that virtue is achieved through reason was in line with many other Enlightenment philosophers and her religious beliefs – God would not create half of humankind to be incapable of improvement.[18] Wollstonecraft proposes that educating women to cultivate their reasoning abilities is essential for them to attain virtue and be useful members of society. To achieve true freedom, women must be financially independent, and for virtue to prevail, both sexes must base their virtues on reason.[19]

The demand to regard people, regardless of gender, as rational beings who can be judged on virtues has been critiqued by contemporary feminists. Feminist philosopher Carol Gilligan found morality to be conceptualised differently across genders: morality as justice is predominantly male, while morality as caring is predominantly female.[20] Thus, to defend women’s rights there should be a focus on female ways of understanding the world, rather than accepting the mainstream male view of morality.[21]

Wollstonecraft also attempts to persuade women to take hold of their lives. She metaphorically compares a woman's mind to "flowers planted in too rich a soil," stating that societal conditioning has led women to prioritize their husband's desires and domestic duties over "nobler ambitions," such as developing their abilities, intellect, and virtues, resulting in their minds being unable to bloom without proper education.[22] She encourages women to strengthen their minds and bodies and to avoid speaking softly rather than speaking their mind, and being overly emotional, [23] seeing true beauty in intellectual beauty.[24] Women should reject traditional femininity and instead separate themselves from their sex.[25]They should strive to become “more masculine and respectable”[26] and to see the qualities typically associated with femininity as potential weaknesses that can be overcome.[27] Inadequate education leads to "artificial weakness," which in turn breeds cunning, an adversary of strength, according to Wollstonecraft.[28] Women should not be constrained by the notion that they are inferior to men. Instead, they should prioritize developing their intellect, rather than sacrificing it for “libertine notions of beauty”.[29] Otherwise, women will become “ridiculous and useless” when their beauty fades.[30] Wollstonecraft sees that women could achieve greater social and political power by cultivating their own strength and independence, rather than relying on men or conforming to traditional gender roles. Thus, Wollstonecraft opposed the idea of women being married, writing that it infantilised them and reduced them to the level of animals,[31] even comparing it to slavery.[32] By highlighting societal conditioning and lack of education as reasons for women's perceived intellectual inferiority to men, she encourages women to take control of their lives and break free from stereotypes.

In conclusion, Mary Wollstonecraft's “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman” contends that women's education should be equal to men's, to enable women to develop their intellect, virtues, and independence. She critiqued the failing education system and culture that prioritised women's appearance over their intellect and virtues, limiting their potential and encouraging them to prioritise fulfilling male expectations over asserting their worth. Wollstonecraft posits that women are rational beings and deserve to be educated to develop their abilities and virtues to make effective participants in society. Moreover, in alignment with Stoicism as Aristotle, she believed that virtue is achievable through reason. Lastly, Wollstonecraft encouraged women to reject the quest for beauty to develop their abilities and independence. Although contemporary feminists have criticised Wollstonecraft's views for neglecting female worldviews, her work remains crucial to feminist thought. She underscores the significance of educating women to fulfill their potential as human beings.

Bibliography

Berges, Sandrine. The Routledge guidebook to Wollstonecraft’s A vindication of the rights of woman. London: Routledge, 2013.

Falco, Maria J. Feminist interpretations of Mary Wollstonecraft. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996.

Ferguson, Moira. "Mary Wollstonecraft and the problematic of slavery." Feminist Review 42, no. 1 (1992): 82-102.

Gilligan, Carol. "The Contribution of Women's Thought to Developmental Theory: The Elimination of Sex Bias in Moral Development Research and Education." Cambridge: Harvard University, 1982.

Griffiths, Morwenna. “Educational Relationships: Rousseau, Wollstonecraft and Social Justice.” Journal of Philosophy of Education 48, no. 2 (2014): 339–354.

Gubar, Susan. “Feminist Misogyny: Mary Wollstonecraft and the Paradox of “it Takes One to Know One.” Feminist Studies 20, no. 2 (Fall 1994): 453.

Honig, Bonnie. “A vindication of Political Virtue: The Political Theory of Mary Wollstonecraft.” American Political Science Review 87, no. 3 (1993): 167-178.

Hughes, Patricia. “Mary Wollstonecraft: Stoic Liberal-Democrat.” CTheory 1, no. 2 (1977): 59-74.

Hunt Botting, Eileen. Wollstonecraft, Mill, and women’s human rights. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2016: 116-123.

Johnson, Claudia. The Cambridge Companion to Mary Wollstonecraft. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Reuter, Martina. “Like a Fanciful Kind of Half Being’: Mary Wollstonecraft’s Criticism of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.” Hypatia 29, no. 4 (2014): 925–41.

Reuter, Martina. Mary Wollstonecraft. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Émile, or, on education: Includes Emile and Sophie, or, the solitaries. New Hampshire: Hackett Publishing Company, 2010.

Taylor, Barbara. “Misogyny and Feminism: The Case of Mary Wollstonecraft.” Constellations 6, no. 4 (1999): 500.

Wollstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: an authoritative text, backgrounds, the Wollstonecraft debate. Edited by Carol Poston. New York: W. W. Norton, 1988.

[1] Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: an authoritative text, backgrounds, the Wollstonecraft debate, ed. Carol Poston. (New York: W. W. Norton, 1988), 7.

[2] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 7.

[3] Sandrine Berges, The Routledge guidebook to Wollstonecraft’s A vindication of the rights of woman (London: Routledge, 2013), 48.

[4] Claudia Johnson, The Cambridge Companion to Mary Wollstonecraft (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 33.

[5] Morwenna Griffiths, “Educational Relationships: Rousseau, Wollstonecraft and Social Justice.” Journal of Philosophy of Education48, no. 2 (2014): 339–354.

[6] Maria J. Falco, Feminist interpretations of Mary Wollstonecraft (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996) 186.

[7] Falco, Feminist Interpretations, 186; Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Émile, or, on education: Includes Emile and Sophie, or, the solitaries. (New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 2010), 532-565.

[8]Martina Reuter, “Like a Fanciful Kind of Half Being’: Mary Wollstonecraft’s Criticism of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.” Hypatia 29, no. 4 (2014): 925–41.

[9] Bonnie Honig, “A vindication of Political Virtue: The Political Theory of Mary Wollstonecraft.” American Political Science Review87, no. 3 (1993): 167-178.

[10] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 7-38.

[11] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 152.

[12] Morwenna Griffiths, “Educational Relationships: Rousseau, Wollstonecraft and Social Justice.” Journal of Philosophy of Education 48, no. 2 (2014): 339–354.

[13] Bonnie Honig, “A vindication of Political Virtue: The Political Theory of Mary Wollstonecraft.” American Political Science Review87, no. 3 (1993): 167-178.

[14] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 7.

[15] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 39.

[16] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 7.

[17]Berges, The Routledge guidebook, 42-43; Patricia Hughes, “Mary Wollstonecraft: Stoic Liberal-Democrat,” CTheory 1, no. 2 (1977): 59-74.

[18]Berges, The Routledge guidebook, 44-46; Eileen Hunt Botting, Wollstonecraft, Mill, and women’s human rights. (Conneticut: Yale University Press, 2016), 116-123; Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 21.

[19] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 165.

[20] Carol Gilligan, "The Contribution of Women's Thought to Developmental Theory: The Elimination of Sex Bias in Moral Development Research and Education." (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1982), 1-19.

[21] Berges, The Routledge guidebook, 49.

[22] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 7.

[23] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 10.

[24] Martina Reuter, Mary Wollstonecraft, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022), 9.

[25] Barbara Taylor, “Misogyny and Feminism: The Case of Mary Wollstonecraft,” Constellations 6, no. 4 (1999): 500.

[26] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 11.

[27] Gubar, “Feminist Misogyny,” 453.

[28] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 11.

[29] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 10.

[30] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 11.

[31] Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 11.

[32] Moira Ferguson, "Mary Wollstonecraft and the problematic of slavery," Feminist Review 42, no. 1 (1992): 82-102; Wollstonecraft, A Vindication, 155.