Is it appropriate to describe Astell as a feminist?

Mary Astell’s critique of marriage, her philosophy of education, and her call for women’s intellectual and moral development can certainly be viewed as feminist. However, this assessment must be situated within the framework of her religious beliefs and the historical context of her time. In A Serious Proposal to the Ladies and Some Reflections Upon Marriage Astell’s feminism is deeply intertwined with her devout Christian faith, which informed her views on women’s intellectual and moral potential. Rather than seeking political equality or legal reforms, Astell’s feminist ideas were primarily concerned with advocating for women’s intellectual development, autonomy, and moral agency, which were systematically denied within the patriarchal structures of her society. She challenged the prevailing view of women as intellectually inferior, proposing instead that they be educated to cultivate reason, virtue, and self-understanding in alignment with divine order. Astell’s ideas were shaped by the social and religious norms of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries when women’s roles were predominantly confined to the private sphere. While Astell did not appear to make an outright call for radical social upheaval, her ideas laid the groundwork for later feminist movements, advocating for women’s intellectual equality and moral autonomy within the bounds of a deeply patriarchal world.

Astell’s advocacy for women's intellectual and moral equality, though shaped by her conservative views, aligns with many core feminist concerns; her critique of gender inequality and her calls for women’s intellectual empowerment is of profound historical importance. While Astell’s conservative feminist thought does not match with many contemporary political movements, it should be considered an early and important contribution to feminist discourse. If feminism is not rigidly defined by and bound to a fixed set of ideas but rather understood as a dynamic and evolving ideal, grounded in the pursuit of gender equality, this  inclusive view enriches the critiques of the structures that perpetuate male dominance. Acknowledging that feminist consciousness takes diverse forms across different historical and cultural contexts better enables us to challenge the entrenched gender hierarchies that have long governed social, political, and cultural institutions. If feminism, in its many forms, is to be understood as ‘a critique of male supremacy’ or ’the recognition that women constitute a group that is wrongfully oppressed by male-defined values’ then Astell’s critique of the social customs and attitudes of her time allows us to describe her as a feminist.  

Astell engaged with the prominent philosophical debates on women's rights of her time. When women’s education was overlooked, denied, and ridiculed, Astell challenged these views, advocating for the intellectual and moral development of women. It does justice to Astell if we reconstruct her ideas within their historical context; this allows for critical engagement with past thought while respecting the methodology and terms of the time, offering a deeper understanding of her philosophical ideals. Astell critiques the seventeenth-century norms that promoted women's irrationality, asking her reader to consider examples of women in ‘’all Ages, which sufficiently confute the Ignorance and Malice of this Assertion’’ ... that women are intellectually inferior to men.’’ Astell sought to bring about lasting changes in how women lived and engaged with society; it was a call for women to reclaim their freedom, aiming for a lasting impact on future generations. Astell’s long-term vision can be seen as aspiring toward a revolutionary form of feminism.

Mary Astell’s position within feminist thought is both constrained and inspired by the historical and religious context in which she lived. Though her religious beliefs on the subordination of women in marriage and the church can most definitely be read as being at times anti-feminist to the modern-day reader, it is her faith in the equality of the sexes before God that underlines her belief in equality. To Astell, a deficiency of intellect based on gender is not due to nature nor designed by God; it is due to bad customs of the time, the attitudes held, and the lack of good education and the bad education forced upon women to ensure their ignorance. Astell argues to the 17th-century women that God has given both men and women an equal capacity of soundness of mind—both created as ‘intelligent souls — and pleads with the reader to consider  ‘’why should they be forbidden to improve Reflect.’’ Astell even applies the use of scriptural metaphors to argue for her feminist ideas. For Astell, it is God's will that all his creatures enrich their minds — it is both his purpose and in service of him that all —women and men — attend to the ‘’improvement of their own Minds’’

A devout Anglican, Astell framed her calls for women’s education and moral development within the context of divine order, asserting that both men and women were equally endowed with rational souls by God. For Astell, the struggle for women’s intellectual and moral development was not simply about achieving social or political equality but about restoring women to their rightful position as rational beings capable of self-improvement and virtue. Astell's deontological ethics and her application of Cartesian epistemology fortify her commitment to the fact that women are as ‘’capable of Learning as men are’’ Astell reasons that, ‘’Since sex attaches to bodies and not to souls, women’s human essence is identical with - and thus equal to - that of men.’’ In Astell’s own words, ’’there no other Proof of Masculine Wisdom.’’Astell’s metaphysical and epistemological views are shaped by Cartesian thought, which serves as a framework for her philosophy—to support critiques of the gendered social structures that impede women’s intellectual and moral development, rather than purely abstract metaphysical concerns. While she adopts Descartes' emphasis on reason as central to human nature, Astell’s true focus lies on the intellectual potential of women living within the confines of a patriarchal society. Astell uses the dualism of the body and soul of the Cartesian ontology of the human to reason on the egalitarianism between the genders — this is an example of 17th-century ‘equality feminism.’

Astell’s feminist critique extended beyond education into the institution of marriage. In Reflections Upon Marriage (1700), Astell compared marriage to slavery, pointing out how women, in her time, often entered marriages without real choice or agency. Astell did not call for the abolition of marriage, viewing it as a divine institution ordained by God, but instead, she envisioned a reformed institution in which women could freely choose their partners based on an educated reason. Astell alarmed women of the dangers of marriage and cautioned them to be on their guard concerning marriage, viewing the customary courtship of the time as ‘’rank idolatry.’’ While she views marriage as a ''Blessing, not a Curse'' in terms of God’s purpose for it, Astell does not deny and even highlights the dangers of the legal arrangement between husband and wife. When reading the attitude toward marriage at the time, it is no wonder why Astell cautions so greatly against it— which she does with boldness, at a time her views would not have been welcomed by all. What some may read as her condoning marriage can also be read as her simply laying out the facts to her reader as a warning. The relationship between a woman and a man in marriage was a reflection of the opinion of women held in society at large; this she blames on custom and not scripture. In Astell’s own words, ‘’how can a Man respect his Wife when he has a contemptible Opinion of her and her Sex?’’ I read Astell’s writing of obedience in marriage, separate from her religious views, as not condoning the blind obedience and complete subservience expected but rather she is openly exposing the realities and consequences of the time.

Unlike modern feminists, who often focus on the necessary legal and political reforms, Astell’s vision for women’s empowerment was more concerned with private virtue and moral development. While her feminism is read as focusing on the cultivation of reason and spirituality within women’s lives and not the dismantling of societal structures, the educational proposal, critique on the gender socialising customs of her time, and her reinterpretation of scripture can be read as a radical attempt at changing society within the framework of the time. While she does not radically oppose political structures or authority outright—which can be seen as limiting the scope of her feminist agenda—her writings should mark her as a pioneer in advocating for the intellectual equality of women.

At the heart of Astell’s feminist philosophy is her conviction in the intellectual equality of women. Astell’s educational proposal was an attempt to help women rid themselves of ignorance and the ‘’ internalisation of their subordinate epistemic status’’ that hindered their freedom. Astell’s advocacy was not simply for equal access to knowledge but for an education that would foster the virtues of reason and self-understanding. Astell aimed to expose the gender biased ‘’ Tyrant Custom’’, to show women that by nature they are free to become wise, and to encourage them to be educated, which will enable them to ‘’ improve their conditions despite hostile social circumstances.’’ For Astell, education was not an end in itself but a means to develop women’s moral and intellectual faculties in accordance with divine order. This religious dimension to Astell’s feminism places her thought outside the realm of secular feminist arguments but also highlights the deep moral and ethical considerations that underpin her views on women’s education. Astell’s emphasis on education, self-improvement, and moral development laid the groundwork for future feminist movements.

Astell wrote for her second proposal that ‘’the best Commendation you can bestow on a Book is immediately to put it into practice.’’ Perhaps her work can be read as 17th-century feminist self-help books, awakening the individual to their intellectual capability and raising a new self-awareness needed for them to gain the self-confidence required to fight for feminist causes. Her emphasis on individual virtue, rather than public rights, distinguishes her from modern feminist views that prioritise political and legal equality — both are necessary! Astell’s quest to educate the individual enables the possibility of greater equality before the law, as only when one is educated and aware of their freedom will they be able to make the structural changes required.

Describing Astell as a feminist is not only appropriate but also a necessary justice, not only to Astell herself but to all feminist causes. To deny the feminist ideals of one thinker due to our not agreeing with their beliefs in their entirety or ignoring the historical and social context of their time would truly be a moral and intellectual shame. If we recognise feminism as a continual historical movement concerned with women's intellectual, moral, and social equality, then Astell’s thought would be considered a foundational contribution to feminist discourse.  While Astell’s work does not align perfectly with modern feminist movements, her critique of the social inequalities that restrict women’s opportunities and her commitment to intellectual equality and social justice align with feminist ideals.

This essay was a university assignment. Module—Women in Philosophy. Autumn, 2024.

Bibliography

A serious proposal to the ladies, for the advancement of their true and greatest interest. In two parts. By a lover of her sex. London: Printed for Richard Wilkin at the king’s-head in St. Paul’s church-yard, 1697. A serious Proposal to the Ladies, for the advancement of their True and Greatest Interest (In Two Parts) [1697], by Mary Astell,--a Project Gutenberg eBook. 

Allauren Samantha Forbes, 'Mary Astell on Bad Custom and Epistemic Injustice' Hypatia (2019) 34: 777-801

Alice Sowaal, ‘Mary Astell’s Serious Proposal: Mind, Method, and Custom’ Philosophy Compass (2007) 2/2: 227-43

Ann Jessie Van Sant, '"Tis Better that I Endure": Mary Astell's Exclusion of Equity' in W. Kolbrener and M. Michaelson (eds.), Mary Astell: Reason, Gender, Faith (Ashgate, 2007)

Eileen O’Neill, ‘Introduction’ in E. O’Neill and M. Lascano (eds.), Feminist History of Philosophy: The Recovery and Evaluation of Women's Philosophical Thought (Springer, 2019)

Hilda L. Smith, '"Cry Up Liberty": The Political Context for Mary Astell's Feminism' in W. Kolbrener and M. Michaelson (eds.), Mary Astell: Reason, Gender, Faith (Ashgate, 2007)

Jacqueline Broad, 'Astell, Cartesian Ethics, and the Critique of Custom' in W. Kolbrener and M. Michaelson (eds.), Mary Astell: Reason, Gender, Faith (Ashgate, 2007)

Jacqueline Broad, 'Mary Astell on Marriage and Lockean Slavery' History of Political Thought (2014) 36: 717-38

Jacqueline Broad, The Philosophy of Mary Astell: An Early Modern Theory of Virtue (Oxford University Press, 2015)

Karen Detlefsen, 'Cartesianism and its Feminist Promise and Limits: The Case of Mary Astell’ in S. Gaukroger and C. Wilson (eds.), Descartes and Cartesianism: Essays in Honour of Desmond Clarke (Oxford University Press, 2017)

Karen Detlefsen, ʻCustom, Freedom and Equality: Mary Astell on Marriage and Womenʼs Educationʼ in P. Weiss and A. Sowaal (eds.), Feminist Interpretations of Mary Astell (Penn State University Press, 2016)

Lisa Shapiro, ‘Learning to Live a Human Life’ in S. James (ed.), Life and Death in Early Modern Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2021)

Mary Astell, Some Reflections Upon Marriage (1700), fourth edition (including Appendix) ,--a Project Gutenberg eBook. 

'Mary Astell' by Alice Sowaal, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2005)

References in order

Detlefsen, 2017 p 193

 O’Neill, 2019 p3

 O’Neill, 2019 p4

 Shapiro, 2021 p106 - One example was Locke’s Some Thoughts Concerning Education, which, reflective of the time, primarily focused on the education of males.

 O’Neill, 2019 p10

 Astell, 1697 I p16

 Astell,1697 I p32

 Astell, 1697 I p40/41

 Astell, 1700 p6 & p127 - It would be sinful for a wife to question her husband's right to govern over her - ‘’A peaceable Woman’’ would never ‘retaliate’. 

 Astell, 1697 I p17 

 Forbes, 2019 p 784

 Astell, 1697 I p53

 Astell, 1697 I p19 - ’’The Soil is rich’’

 Astell, 1697 I p42

 Sowaal, (2005) 4.3

 ,Astell, 1697 I p58  

 Detlefsen, 2017 p196

 ,Astell, 1700 p91 

 Detlefsen, 2017 p193

 Astell, 1700 p112

 Astell, 1700 p92

 Astell, 1700 p80 

 Astell, 1700 p17

 Broad, 2014 p724 - John Sprints example of the common views of a women's place in marriage and society at the time.

  Broad, 2014 p725 

 Astell, 1700 p70

 Astell, 1700 p83 

 Broad, 2007 p179

  Jessie Van Sant, 2007 p130

 Detlefsen, 2016 p75

 Forbes, 2019 p793  

 Astell, 1697 I p31 

 Forbes, 2019 p796

 Sowaal, 2007 p233