Cruelty and Companionship

Hammerton, A. James

doi:10.4324/9780203990575

Cited by 152 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…So, just to give one example, manliness is associated with domestic virtue in Mill's articles on domestic violence; like the magistrates, Mill saw men who beat their wives as brutal, animal, cowardly, unmanly. 90 When the epithet 'manly' is used in this way, by contrast with 'brutal', it is of course perfectly possible to apply it to women-as Mill does. 91 In accordance with this way of thinking he believed that representative government was inappropriate to insufficiently civilized nations where certain mental and moral characteristics were lacking in the people; so for example he thought India was not yet ready.…”

Section: The Qualities Of a Democratic Citizenrymentioning

confidence: 97%

Is Mill's ‘liberal’ feminism ‘masculinist’?

Stafford

2004

Journal of Political Ideologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

John Stuart Mill is examined as a test case of the charge levelled by some feminist critics that liberal ideology is essentially 'masculinist'. This charge is rejected on the grounds that it misinterprets Mill, fails to recognize the variety and flexibility of liberal ideology, and falsely assumes unchanging concepts of masculinity and femininity. An older tradition regards this representative liberal as a 'feminine philosopher', and it can be argued that Mill 'feminized' his radical heritage. His ideology sustains policy proposals that pay attention to women, his conception of subjectivity breaks with a neo-Hobbesian model which he would balance with 'feminine' qualities, and his concept of the citizen is neither explicitly nor implicitly 'masculine'. He does not assume a gendered public/private divide, nor rank the public above the private; and in the light of all his writings the charge that he consigns most women to the domestic is exaggerated.

show abstract

Section: The Qualities Of a Democratic Citizenrymentioning

confidence: 97%

Is Mill's ‘liberal’ feminism ‘masculinist’?

Stafford

2004

Journal of Political Ideologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 A common factor complicating both a husband's ability to support his wife and a wife's ability to keep a good home was "intemperance." 12 Mrs. Williamson took the children and left her husband due to his drinking, keeping their new address a secret to evade his abuse and to prevent him from spending their money on drink. 13 Mr. Porte removed his children from his wife's custody for similar reasons.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Irregular Marriages: Unorthodox Working-Class Domestic Life in Liverpool, Birmingham, and Manchester, 1900-1939

Klein

2005

Journal of Family History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

English police personnel records provide a perspective on working-class marriages not available in standard sources. Police officers were respectable workingclass men expected to uphold the reputation of the force both on and off the job, and yet 119 cases of irregular marriages appear in police records in Liverpool, Birmingham, and Manchester. Their affairs, separations, cohabitation, and other unorthodox marital arrangements clearly demonstrate that attempts to impose a strict legal model of marriage on police officers could not displace the more flexible ideas of matrimony still common to respectable working-class culture in the first half of the twentieth century. have relied on court records, newspapers, charity records, oral history, and sources such as popular ballads and fiction. 1 Yet while marital episodes such as violence or separations could provoke public attention, many domestic irregularities never prompted such regard. The personnel records of English police forces provide a window into working-class domestic situations that did not appear in judicial records, newspapers, or other standard sources. Police officers were respectable working-class men expected to uphold

show abstract

“…Judges also believed men to be morally, if not legally, responsible for women they lived with and any children they produced. James Hammerton found that Preston magistrates, though repulsed by violence, were just as disapproving of men who «failed to live up to their proper role as providers and family protectors» 29 . This proved to be true even when the man was not legally responsible for «keeping» the family.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…27 The most common way for people to lose control of themselves was alcohol abuse, and judges not only did not accept it as an excuse, but often made long speeches about the evils of drink. Since alcohol figured in eighty-three of the cases in my sample, the authorities had plenty of evidence of the effects of alcohol abuse, and they rarely hesitated to point them out 48 ... no person can have been present and heard this trial but what must have known that the cause of your committing this terrible offence was the intemperate and constant drinking to which you were addicted... this must be added to the many other instances that occur from time to time of solemn warning to all persons how they allow themselves ever to give way to that terrible temptation 50 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

«He Could Not Hold His Passions»: Domestic Violence and Cohabitation in England (1850-1905)

Frost¹

2008

chs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many historians, including Ellen Ross, Shani D'Cruze, and James Hammerton, have explored domestic abuse in the working class 2. Though their approaches differ, these historians share one assumption-that married couples and cohabiting couples were virtually indistinguishable. In many ways, historians are justified in doing this, since long-term cohabitees did share many of the experiences of those legally wed, both socially and legally. But these similarities can be overstated; cohabitees had peculiarities all their own. The motives and justifications for violence show that for many couples, cohabitation was similar to marriage, yet did not have its security or legal status. The irregular status of the couple compounded the well-known strains of living together in poverty and with strongly gendered expectations. The Victorian courts, too, struggled with the problem of applying marital expectations to non-marital couples; the results could be contradictory decisions and conflict between judges and juries. Ironically, in an age in which many couples could not marry legally, the courts held couples, but especially men, to middle-class domestic standards. 2 I will base my conclusions on a sample of 217 violent incidents within cohabiting families culled fromthe Yorkshire Gazette, Lancaster Guardian, and London Times between 1850 and 1905. To find this sample, I read through all the issues of the Yorkshire Gazette and the Lancaster Guardian (both weeklies) in ten separate years between 1850 and 1905, finding the cases in police reports, assize reports, and magistrates' court reports. For the Times, which as a daily had far more issues, I limited myself to reading the police, assize, and Old Bailey reports for four months (March-April and August-September) in nine separate years between 1853 and 1893 3. I also included cases from other sources, such as criminal appeals casebooks, and supplemented The Times with reports in local newspapers whenever possible. I then looked up all the relevant Old Bailey and Home Office files, in

show abstract

Cruelty and Companionship

Cited by 152 publications

References 0 publications

Is Mill's ‘liberal’ feminism ‘masculinist’?

Is Mill's ‘liberal’ feminism ‘masculinist’?

Irregular Marriages: Unorthodox Working-Class Domestic Life in Liverpool, Birmingham, and Manchester, 1900-1939

«He Could Not Hold His Passions»: Domestic Violence and Cohabitation in England (1850-1905)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About