A Middlesex University resource provided by Andrew Roberts   -   click for referencing advice
home page for society  and
science home page to all of Andrew
Roberts' web site Radicals, socialists and early feminists
Time Line 1825 and Thompson and Wheeler resources

Extracts from
"Appeal of One-half of the Human Race, Women"

William Thompson (1785-1833) and Anna Wheeler (1785-1850s?) were utilitarians. They were also Owenite socialists. Owenism was a socialist political economy, developed in opposition to the free-market competition theories of Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Thomas Malthus. Owenites argued that true self-interest is to seek the common good of all. By weaving together the strands of these two theories, Thompson and Wheeler created one of the earliest socialist feminist theories.

William Thompson, 1825 Appeal of One-half of the Human Race, Women, Against the Pretensions of the Other Half, Men, to Retain Them in Political, and Thence in Civil and Domestic Slavery.

[In this book, Thompson criticises an article written by James Mill (John Stuart Mill's father) in 1820 called an Essay on Government. The argument of James Mill's article is outlined in Social Science History Essay 1: "Theory and the Imagination", and Owenism and Utilitarianism are discussed in Essay 5: "Social Science and the 1834 Poor Law". Radicals, Socialists and Early Feminists (SHE Document 8) discusses Thompson and Wheeler and the intellectual roots of their theories in Owenism and Utilitarianism.


Introductory Letter to Mrs Wheeler

Part One: Examination of the general argument of the
"Article on Government" [by James Mill], for political rights.

Part Two: Application of this argument to the case of women

Question 1 Does an identity, or an involving, of interest, in point of fact and of necessity, exist between women and men?

Question 2 - If this involving of the interests of women in those of men do exist, is it a sufficient cause, or any reason at all, why either of the parties, men or women, with interests so identified, should threfore be deprived of civil or political rights?

Question 3 Is there in the nature of things any security for equality of enjoyments, proportioned to exertion and capabilities, but by means of equal civil rights? or any security for equal civil but by means of equal political rights?

Introductory Letter to Mrs Wheeler

You look forward, as I do, to a state of society very different from that which now exists, in which effort of all is to out wit, supplant, and snatch from each other; where interest is systematically opposed to duty; where the so-called system of morals is little more than a mass of hypocrisy preached by knaves, and practised by them, to keep their slaves, male as well as female, in blind uninquiring obedience;

and where the whole motley fabric is kept together by fear and blood. You look forward to a better aspect of society; where the principle of benevolence shall supersede that of fear; where restless and anxious individual competition shall give place to mutual co-operation and joint possession; where individuals in large numbers, male and female, forming voluntary associations, shall become a mutual guarantee to each other for the supply of all useful wants, and form an unsalaried and uninsolvent insurance company against all insurable casualties; where perfect freedom of opinion and perfect equality will reign amongst the co-operators; and where the children of all will be equally educated and provided for by the whole, even these children longer the slaves of individual caprice.

In truth, under the present arrangements of society, the principle of individual competition remaining, as it is, the master-key and moving principle of the whole social organisation, individual wealth the great object sought after by all, and the quantum of happiness of each individual (other things being equal) depending on the quantum of wealth, the means of happiness, possessed by each ; it seems impossible - even were all unequal legal and unequal moral restraints removed, and were no secret current of force or influence exerted to baffle new regulations of equal justice - that women should attain to equal happiness with men. Two circumstances - permanent inferiority of strength, and occasional loss of time in gestation and rearing infants - must eternally render the average exertions of women in the race of the competition for wealth less successful than those of men. The pleasant compensation that men now affect to give for these two natural sources of inferior accumulation of wealth on the part of women (aggravated a thousand

degrees by their exclusions from knowledge and almost all means of useful exertions, (the very lowest only excepted), is the existing system of marriage; under which, for the mere faculty of eating, breathing and living, in whatever degree of comfort husbands may think fit, women are reduced to domestic slavery, without will of their own, or power of locomotion, otherwise than as permitted by their respective masters.

While these two natural impediments in the way of the production or accumulation of wealth, and of course of the independence and equal enjoyments of women, exist - and exist they must - it should seem that the present arrangements of society, founded on individual competition, and of course allowing of no real compensation for these impediments, are absolutely irreconcilable with the equality, in point of the command of enjoyments, of women with men. Were all partial restraints, were unequal laws and unequal morals removed, were all the means and careers of all species of knowledge and exertion equally open to both sexes; still the barriers of physical organisation must, under the system of individual competition, keep depressed the average station of women beneath that of men. Though in point of knowledge, talent, and virtue, they might become their equals; in point of independence arising from wealth they must, under the present principle of social arrangements, remain inferior. No doubt, so much the more dastardly appears the baseness of man, that not satisfied with these indisputable advantages of organisation in the pursuit of happiness on his own theatre of free competition, he paralyses to impotence even those means which Nature has given his feebler competitor, nor ceases his oppression till he has made her his slave. The more physical advantages Nature has given man, the

less excusable is he in superadding factitious advantages, by the abuse of strength, to those which are natural and unavoidable. Were he generous, were he just, knew he how to promote his own happiness, he would be anxious to afford compensations for these physical inconveniences, instead of aggravating them ; that he might raise woman to a perfect equality in all things with himself, and enjoy the highest pleasures of which his nature is susceptible - those of freedom, of voluntary association amongst perfect equals. Perhaps out of the system of "Association" or " Mutual Co- operation" such happiness is not to be expected.

But I hear you indignantly reject the boon of equality with such creatures as men now are. With you I would equally elevate both sexes. Really enlightened women, disdaining equally the submissive tricks of the slave and the caprices of the despot, breathing freely only in the air. of the esteem of equals, and of mutual, unbought, uncommanded, affection, would find it difficult to meet with associates worthy of them in men as now formed, full of ignorance and vanity, priding themselves on a sexual superiority, entirely independent of any merit, any superior qualities, or pretensions to them, claiming respect from the strength of their arm and the lordly faculty of producing beards attached by nature to their chins ! No : unworthy of, as incapable of appreciating, the delight of the society of such women, are the great majority of the existing race of men. The pleasures of mere animal appetite, the pleasures of commanding (the prettier and more helpless the slave, the greater these pleasures of the brute), are the only pleasures which the majority of men seek for from women, are the only pleasures which their education and the hypocritical system of morals with which they have been

necessarily imbued, permit them to expect. To wish for the fragrance of the rose, we must have an organisation capable of receiving pleasure from it, and must be persuaded that such lovely flowers as roses exist. To wish for the enjoyment of the higher pleasures of sympathy and communication of knowledge between the sexes, heightened by that mutual grace and glow, that decorum and mutual respect, to which the feeling of perfect, unrestrained equality in the intercourse gives birth, a man must have heard of such pleasures, must be able to conceive them, and must have an organisation from nature or education, or both, capable of receiving delight from them when presented to him. To enjoy these pleasures, to which their other pleasures, a few excepted, are but the play of children or brutes, the bulk of men want a sixth sense; they want the capacity of feeling them, and of believing that such things are in nature to be found. A mole cannot enjoy the " beauties and glories" (as a Professor terms them) of the visible world ; nor can brute men enjoy the intellectual and sympathetic pleasures of equal intercourse with women, such as some are, such as all might be. Real and comprehensive knowledge, physical and moral, equally and impartially given by education and by all other means to both sexes, is the key to such higher enjoyments. Even under the present arrangements of society, founded as they all are on the basis of individual competition, nothing could be more easy than to put the rights of women, political and civil, on a perfect equality with those of men. It is only to abolish all prohibitory and exclusive laws, - statute or what arc called ''common," - the remnants of the barbarous customs of our ignorant ancestors; particularly the horrible and odious inequality and

indissolubility of that disgrace of civilisation, the present marriage code. Women then might exert in a free career with men their faculties of mind and body, to whatever degree developed, in pursuit of happiness by means of exertion, as men do. But this would not raise women to an equality of happiness with men: their rights might be equal, but not their happiness, because unequal powers under free competition must produce unequal effects.

In truth, the system of the most enlightened of the school of those reformers called political economists, is still founded on exclusions. Its basis is too narrow for human happiness. A more comprehensive system, founded on equal benevolence, on the true development of the principle of Utility, is wanting. Let the competitive political economists be satisfied with the praise of causing the removal of some of the rubbish of ignorant restrictions, under the name of laws, impeding the development of human exertion in the production of wealth. To build up a new fabric of social happiness, comprehending equally the interests of all existing human beings, has never been contemplated by them, and is altogether beyond the scope of their little theories ; aiming at the utmost at increasing the number of what they style the happy middling orders, but leaving the great bulk of human beings to eternal ignorance and toil, requited by the mere means of prolonging from day to day an unhealthy and precarious existence. To a new science, the social science, or the science of promoting human happiness, that of political economy, or the mere science of producing wealth by individual competition, must give way. As one of the preliminary measures to this great end, let us proceed to lay to rest the presumptuous anathema of the "Article of Government" against half the human race.

Part One:
Examination of the general argument of the
"Article on Government", for political rights.

Topics of Part 1

1. The general argument of the "Article" for human rights is founded on the universal love of power of all human beings over all their fellow- creatures, for selfish purposes. This is stated to be the grand governing law of human nature.

4. This alleged primary law of human nature, is...but a secondary law, operating under peculiar and ill-arranged circumstances only. The primary law of human nature operating equally under all circumstances, is simply the desire of happiness, or love of pleasure, and aversion to pain.

At the head of moral, including political, philosophy, in Britain, stands Mr Bentham ....Amongst the most eminent of his disciples and admirers, is Mr Mill ....Mr Mill, one of the most successful advocates of the doctrine of utility, as the test of morals, as established by Mr Bentham, has written several excellent articles on this basis... Amongst these articles, the most important, perhaps, is that on `Government'.

...this male philosopher maintains, that, with respect to one half the human race, women, this universal disposition of man to use power for his own exclusive benefit ceases, and... their happiness coincides with his, and is included with it....

But it does not appear that Mr Mill has laid a sufficiently broad basis for the great argument on which the institution of government ought to depend, in order to promote the greatest possible happiness to those influenced by it. It would appear that Mr Mill's alleged primary law of human nature, is but a secondary principle, and dependent on particular conditions. It is not true that all men are inclined to use power for their own exclusive benefit. It is not true that all men are in-

clined to use power beneficently, so as to calculate the effect of its exercise on the happiness of all to be affected by it. The original principle of human nature is neither the one nor the other of these two: it is simply the desire of happiness and aversion to misery, without any wish, kindly or malignant, to others.

As men acquire knowledge, and become surrounded, in the course of barbarism or civilisation, by circumstances conciliating their happiness with, or putting it in opposition to, that of their fellow-creatures, they pursue to a greater or less extent their own individual happiness in connection with, or to the exclusion of, that of others. It is neither an original, nor an universal, principle of human beings, to trample on... the happiness of others. It is never trampled on but when rightly, or erroneously judged to be incompatible with the happiness of the agent.

The two conditions requisite to the truth of Mr Mill's proposition... are, that the persons possessing power shall, from the operation of circumstances, be shut out from the moral knowledge requisite to show them the identity of their real comprehensive interest with that of their fellow-creatures, and shall also be divested of those dispositions or habits of sympathy necessary to enable them to act according to their knowledge.

With such knowledge and dispositions, no restraint on power would be wanting: and such knowledge and dispositions are certainly possible.

Part Two:
Application of this argument to the case of women

Question 1 Does an identity, or an involving, of interest, in point of fact and of necessity, exist between women and men?

Topics of Question 1
There are three great classes, or divisons, of women, whose interests or happiness are to be considered.

The first... error of the reasoning of the "Article" ...is, that although it affirms only a part of women find their interest involved in those of men, it yet excludes all women from political rights."

Wives....Are their interests involved in those of the husband?

The ex-parte marriage code, absurdly called the marriage contract, partakes no more of the nature of contracts than slave-codes, or any other codes of law made without the consent of those whose happiness they affect.

The great mass of women, under actual circumstances, must submit to them or starve. page 57

Although women, like men, as soon as adult, are in most civilised countries protected in civil and personal rights, against their fathers as against other individuals; yet, no sooner are they married, than by the marriage code, notwithstanding their experience, they are again deprived of all these inefficient rights, and thrown back into the class of children or idiots.

Disgusting falsehood...that the legal despotism of man in marriage, is neutralized by his dependence on his wife for sexual pleasures.

Neither by law, nor opinion, nor practice, is the husband dependent on the wife for such pleasures.

But, by law, by opinion, and in practice, the wife is entirely dependent on the husband for them.

The marriage codes of all nations, even the most civilised, render women in effect the slaves of men. Definition of a slave. page 66

Involving of interests must mean that the one enjoys as much as the other. Is this true as between husbands and wives? page 75

First, as to the pleasures of the senses. So notoriously are wives and all women restrained, that equal enjoyment of these pleasures with men, particularly eating and drinking, is esteemed immoral in them, while to men it is freely permitted. Sexual pleasures, in husbands, [involves] no punishment at all; in wives, punishment, legal and moral, only short of death. page 77

Other pleasures of the senses of the wife, as of the eye, the ear, mostly enjoyed in association with other pleasures intellectual or

sympathetic, are entirely under the control of the husband: the rule is privation: the exception is, occasional permission, as to children, to enjoy.

From intellectual pleasures even with their husbands and families wives are excluded by defect of education and contempt of the stronger and more improved sex. From social pleasures, those of sympathy and free intercourse, like men, with their fellow- creatures, male and female, at home and abroad, the marriage-code right of imprisonment in the hands of the husband, effectually cuts them off.

In social and intellectual, as in all sensual pleasures, the husband is entirely unrestrained by the wife. Even her remonstrance is presumption: she has been compelled to vow to obey.

The end of the Topics List for Part Two, Question One, is page 24

To produce a real identity of interest between any two individuals; first, all power to injure or molest must be taken away equally from both; next, benevolence and reason must have been so comprehensively cultivated by both, that they shall both perceive that it is their mutual interest to promote in every thing the real happiness of each other. If the "Article" will gravely maintain that such a state of things exists between adult daughters and fathers in any part of the world, it may still continue, in its next edition, the astounding assertion that the interest of daughters is involved in that of their fathers.

The gross, the vague interest, because it is the only one that exists, in which there is any thing analogous to an identity of interest, as alluded to by the "Article," between the daughters and the father, must be that which depends on the increasing or decreasing wealth of the master of the family and owner of all the wealth, to be distributed in whatever manner that master thinks fit, amongst its members. Whatever may be the absolute inequality of the shares of wealth and other means of happiness, dealt out to the different members of the family, the share of each, however absolutely dissimilar, would most probably be increased, by the abundance and good-nature which prosperous circumstances are wont to produce, and would

be apt to be lessened by the opposite circumstances arising from ill- success. In other words, the treatment of the individual members of the family, - sons, daughters, breeding-women, servants, slaves, and all other denominations of sentient beings, - may be improved by the prosperity of the affairs of the master, or deteriorated by his reverses or change of character. But what has this to do with individual identity of interest, with an equality of happiness necessarily co-existing between two individuals, so that in promoting the one, that of the other should be promoted in an equal degree, not added to in its particular sphere of unequal enjoyment, like the comforts of horses, dogs, or poultry?

All the members of a family, like all the members of community, have a common interest as against all the world beside: but as the members of a community have also particular interests as to each other, so have the members of families all of them their own particular and individual interests. The ox is better fed when the master is rich: so far the common interest extends: - but wherefore? because it is the interest of the master that the ox should be fattened as speedily as possible in order to be consumed. The permanent interest of the ox, that of health and long life, is sacrificed: his immediate pleasure of eating is promoted, because it coincides with the interest of the owner. No comfort is given to the ox but with subserviency to this superior claim of the master's interest. So with respect to all other beings - servants, daughters, sons, &c., in his power. The interest of each of them, is promoted, in as far only as it is coincident with, or subservient to, the master's interest. The more intelligent doubtless, particularly if at the same time benevolent, the master,

father or not father, may be, the more numerous the points of coincidence he will discover between his interest and that of his dependents, though his power be unrestrained. Unrestrained power is however the surest method of destroying this intelligence and benevolence. The interests of adult sons, then, coinciding more nearly with those of the masters, their fathers, are more promoted by the fathers.-: though even here, how soon does the pursuit of individual wealth falsify the notion of an involving of interests ! Then come the interests of the daughters, coinciding in comparatively few points with that of the fathers. Next the servants, between whom and the masters still fewer points of coincidence present themselves : and last of all, the domestic animals. As many sources of enjoyment as are open to the master, so many are all the rational adult members of the family capable of desiring, the pleasure of freedom from constraint being not the least conspicuous. But if the master's wealth be not capable of gratifying these desires, and his benevolence boundless, there must be a contrariety of interest between the different individual members, extending to every ungratified desire. The involving or identity of interest, is only then the exception, occurring when two interests happen to coincide: contrariety of interest is the general rule. And the mere power of law, that is, force in the ultimate resort, supported by superstition and opinion, is the rude means of compressing clashing interests, and preventing those eternal open collisions which they would seem calculated to produce. Because the slave or servant of necessity submits to the estarblished order, the order established universally by the masters, it does not follow that the interests, the pleasures and pains, of the servant or the slave, are involved in those of the master.

...are women kindly told, "they are free to marry or not". Things are so arranged, knowledge, property, civil as well as political exclusions, man's public opinion, that the great majority of adult women must marry on whatever terms their masters have willed, or starve: or if not absolutely starve, they must renounce at least all the means of enjoyment monopolized by the males. Under these circumstances, man makes it a condition, under which he admits women into a participation - always limited however be his uncontrolled will - of his means of happiness dependent on wealth, that woman shall, like the negro slave, surrender to him all control over her actions, except where those actions are regulated by the higher penalties of law, to all of which she is equally exposed, to many with more severity, than man.

Women is then compelled, in marriage, by the possession of superior strength on the part of men, by the want of knowledge, skill and wealth, by the positive, cruel, partial, and cowardly enactments of law, by the terrors of superstition, by the mockery of a pretended vow of obedience, and to crown all, and as a result of all, by the force of an unrelenting, unreasoning, unfeeling public opinion, to be a literal unequivocal slave of the man who may be styled her husband. I say emphatically the slave; for a slave is a person whose actions and earnings, instead of being, under his own control, liable only to equal laws, to public opinion, and to his own calculations, under these, of his own interest, are under the arbitrary control of any other human being, by whatever name called. This is the essence of slavery, and what distinguishes it from freedom. A domestic, a civil, a political slave, in the plain unsophisticated sense of the word - in no metaphorical sense - is every married woman.

Do wives enjoy as many pleasures of all sorts as their husbands, having the guardianship of their volitions do? This is an experimental touchstone to prove or disprove an identity of interest, or an involving, as it is called, of the happiness of one human being in that of another. Let us go through the different pleasures of which rational sentient beings are susceptible. First, of the senses and internal excitement: the husband possessed of almost unlimited power, that of personal restraint over his wife (limited only by direct injury to life or limb), and that of commanding all the means of gratifying the desires springing from these sources, does he, in point of fact, afford the woman under his control an equal extent of these enjoyments with himself? It is notorious that he does not do so, that he has made, every where, what he calls his system of morals to coincide with his practice. The same indulgence in sensual pleasures which is freely permitted to himself and his associates, is held quite unseemly in his weaker companions. Eating or drinking to excess, either in quality or quality of food, which is regarded by many as the prerogative of man rich enough to enjoy them, or to be limited only by prudential regard to immediate health, is looked upon as disgusting in woman; whereas, if wives had an equality of enjoyment in this respect with their masters, excess would be in public opinion equally pernicious and vicious in both....

As to sexual pleasures, so iniquitous is the inequality, so

enormous the hypocrisy of the pretended marriage contract, that one party, endowed by nature with equal capabilities and desires of enjoyment, and by education and circumstances with more liability to the pains and pleasures of sexual sympathy, is debarred by the public opinion of man formed in his own favour, from even murmuring at the neglects and irregularities of the other; while any neglect or irregularity on her part towards her master having the power is first punished, at his arbitrary domestic caprice, by using any of the numberless physical restraints and modes of mental torture within his reach, then by the cruelty of positive law, and last of all by public opinion hunting the victim by malice and ill offices to despair and pining, or to sudden death. The infidelity of the husband (essentially involving the happiness of the wife) to any extent, must be patiently borne by the wife; she has no redress, physical, legal, or of public opinion. The infidelity of the wife (scarcely abstracting from the mass of pleasures of the husband) in a single instance, is revenged by the husband with a complication of punishments, greater than those accorded by law to many of the most atrocious crimes.

Question 2 - If this involving of the interests of women in those of men do exist, is it a sufficient cause, or any reason at all, why either of the parties, men or women, with interests so identified, should threfore be deprived of civil or political rights?

Topics of Question 2

The effect of the exercise of political rights by women on the happiness of men is superfluous and irrelevant to the argument: the question is as to its effect on the happiness of women. page 118
Two grand reasons for which political rights are valuable;

    first, to obtain and secure civil and domestic rights, or security of person and property;

    second, as the most efficient means of improving the intellectual and social powers.

The second of these objects, the improvement of the intellectual and social powers, can only be obtained by the personal exercise of political rights: this object [is] peculiarly desirable for women, to counteract the tendency of their habits.

The end of the Topics List for Part Two, Question Two, is page 115

It is not necessary here to discuss whether it would promote the happiness of men that women should under such circumstances enjoy political rights. Women are one half of the human race, and as much entitled to happiness on their own account, for their own sakes, as men. Just as necessary would it be to inquire whether the possession of political rights by men would tend to pro-

-mote the happiness of women. The happiness of every individual, and of all classes, of the human race, ought to be promoted for the sake of such individual or individuals, and not in subservience to the happiness of any other individuals or classes whatever. When every individual is made happy, the happiness of the whole is promoted. The mountebank jargon of "public good" distinct from the good of the individual members of society, will lead astray the human mind no more. It will be found that no person or persons can promote their real happiness, looking comprehensively into all the results of their actions, by any line of conduct which is incompatible with the happiness of others; that is to say, which detracts more from their happiness than it adds to that of the agent or agents.

...the exercise of political rights affords the best opportunity for the exercise of the intellectual powers and enlargement of the sympathies of human beings, leading their attention out of themselves, to matters in which numbers of their fellow creatures, to an indefinite extent besides themselves, are interested.

[Men] exercising political rights from which [women] are excluded, could not by any means impart to [women] the exercise of the intellectual powers, and that enlargement of sympathy, that interest in the affairs of numbers mixed with our own, which distinguishes the benevolent from the selfish. This vice of character, want of comprehensive views, want of interest in anything out of themselves or of their own little domestic circle,...the necessary result of the state of barbarous exclusion, of domestic imprisonment, in which women have been kept,...can never be cured by the enjoyment by any others than themselves of those opportunities for unfolding their powers, which enlarged social, including political, interests, can alone create.

Question 3

Is there in the nature of things any security for equality of enjoyments, proportioned to exertion and capabilities, but by means of equal civil rights? or any security for equal civil but by means of equal political rights?

Topics of Question 3

Summary argument for political rights. page 182

The end of the Topics List for Part Two, Question Three, is page 153

Thus does it appear that no equal system of morals, that no equal system of laws, can be relied upon by women as affording them an equal chance of happiness, in proportion to their powers and faculties, natural or acquired, with men, if not accompanied and supported by equal political rights. Without them they can never attain that respectability and dignity in the social scale, which would cause either the bona fide execution or the permanence of equal laws or equal morals. They could not respect themselves. All their blessings would hang on straw, the continued good dispositions of good judgement of those immediate apparent interest must ever, under the system of exclusions, seem to be opposed to theirs. From the physical organisation of women, and consequent greater tendency to domesticity and confinement than men, they must be more apt to undervalue the relative importance of the effect of distant and comprehensive regulations; whence the greater necessity of the check and exercise of political rights in them than even in men, in order to counteract this unfavourable tendency of circumstances to inattention to such matters. The possession of equal political rights, if not a complete check (because there can be no complete check on human inclinations and intellect, themselves imperfect), is the best the present state of knowledge affords on old habits of injustice and errors of judgement. Under the shield of free inquiry, the real interests of all would gradually be discovered, acknowledged, and practised.

Women of England! Women in whatever country ye breathe - wherever ye breathe, degraded - awake! Awake to the contemplation of the happiness that awaits you when all your faculties of mind and body shall be fully cultivated

and developed; when every path in which ye can exercise those improved faculties shall be laid open and rendered delightful to you, even as to them who now ignorantly enslave and degrade you.

An education of baby clothes, and sounds and postures, you are given, instead of real knowledge; the incidents are withheld from you, by which you could learn, as man does, the management of affairs and the prudential guidance of your own actions; and thus factitiously incapacitated, man interposes, seizes on your property, leaves you none to manage, and assumes the despotic guidance of your actions, as the right of superior wisdom and prudence !

Citation suggestion


My referencing suggestion for this web page is a bibliography entry:

"Thompson, W., 1825, Appeal of One Half of the Human Race, Women, Against The Pretensions of The Other Half, Men, to Retain them in Political, And Thence in Civil and Domestic Slavery. London. Web extracts at <http://studymore.org.uk/xtho.htm>

With references in the text to "(Thompson, W. 1825, p.-)"

Referencing the printed book:

Modern editions of this book tend to reproduce the pages as they were in 1825. You could, therefore, have a bibliography entry

"Thompson, W., 1825, Appeal of One Half of the Human Race, Women, Against The Pretensions of The Other Half, Men, to Retain them in Political, And Thence in Civil and Domestic Slavery. London. [edition. e.g. Thoemmes Press, Bristol, 1994]

With references in the text to "(Thompson, W. 1825, p.-)"

ABC Referencing includes general advice on referencing internet sources

Study links outside this site
Picture introduction to this site
Andrew Roberts' web Study Guide
Top of Page Take a Break - Read a Poem
Click coloured words to go where you want

Andrew Roberts likes to hear from users:
To contact him, please use the Communication Form

Citation: see referencing suggestion

Click for Contents
and follow red links.


Jeremy Bentham:
Page 3

coincidence of interest [hierarchy of] father - sons - daughters - servants - domestic animals
Pages 49 - 50

class of children or idiots:
Page 23

domestic imprisonment
Page 122.
See also page 24.

education of baby-clothes
Page 191

highest pleasures
page xiii.

marriage contract:
Page 23

James Mill:
Page 3

ox and master:
Page 49

political rights:
Part one

political rights and intellectual powers:
Pages 121-122

pleasures of the senses: eating, drinking, sex: (page 23); pleasures of the ear and eye (page 23) and intellect (page 24):

respectability and diginity:
Page 182

sexual pleasure at greater length:
Page 77

slavery defined:
Page 66

Other Authors. Other Works

Olympe de Gouges

Mary Wollstonecraft

James Mill on Government

Mill and Taylor 1848

J.S. Mill Subjection of Women

Engels Origin of the Family...