This essay seeks to draw a comparison between Thorstein Veblen’s and Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s most
respective books “The Theory of the Leisure Class” and “Women and Economics.”
The purpose of this essay is to show how Veblen’s basic theory of the Leisure Class relates to Gilman’s notion of power relations between the sexes in the 19th century.
Taking a closer look on the economic situation of women in the 19th century, we find them to be the main consumer of economic goods and actively participating in what Veblen calls wasteful consumption. Although many aspects of their criticism are no longer valid, the question raised by Veblen and Gilman concerning economic independence and equality between the sexes remains pertinent today.
Table of Contents
I Introduction – Why and Wherefore
II Methodological Reflection
III Common Denominators between Veblen and Gilman
III 1 Adaptation and Reception Processes
III 2 Seeking Roots of Gender and Class Discrimination
III 2.1 Male Canons of Taste – Structural Repression
III 2.2 Fashion as Social Marker and Discriminatory Factor
III 3 Reproduction Processes of Discrimination
IV Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Topics
The primary objective of this paper is to conduct a comparative analysis of Thorstein Veblen’s "The Theory of the Leisure Class" and Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s "Women and Economics," exploring the structural intersections between class formation and gender discrimination in 19th-century America.
- The relationship between economic independence and the "sexuo-economic" status of women.
- The role of "conspicuous consumption" and "pecuniary canons of taste" in reinforcing social inequality.
- Mechanisms of human adaptation to oppressive social and economic environments.
- The reproduction of discrimination through cultural conventions, fashion, and upbringing.
- Critique of Social-Darwinist justifications for inequality and imperialism.
Excerpt from the Book
III 1 Adaptation and Reception Processes
When Charlotte Perkins Gilman writes that “it is perfectly possible for an individual to become accustomed to the most disadvantageous conditions, and fail to notice them,” she points out one of the mechanisms that keeps individuals from realizing a discriminatory or even an oppressive environment --- namely, adaptation. Gilman describes adaptation as the “steady, ceaseless pressure that tends to fit the organism to the environment,” which nevertheless is a necessary process for all species and serves their survival.
Like all animals, the life of humans is shaped by the material world, locality as well as climatic conditions and shows a necessity to exchange and interact with this world. We are affected by physical, chemical and electrical forces. Apart from these general factors, economy, i.e. the need for individual subsistence is the driving force for all biological and social interactions. Yet, what distinguishes human beings from all other species on the planet is the complexity of interaction in a social sphere, namely the ways and conditions we humans choose to live collectively. Because of the complexity of our social world, adaptation can become a factor of obscurity and irrationality, especially when we adapt our behavior to conditions that we only believe to be (or are made to believe to be) in existence.
Chapter Summary
I Introduction – Why and Wherefore: This chapter introduces the theoretical context by connecting Veblen and Gilman's works to the utopian influence of Edward Bellamy and establishes the goal of exploring the roots of social inequality.
II Methodological Reflection: This section outlines the analytical framework, focusing on how the paper will identify intersections between class stratification and the "sexuo-economic" relationship.
III Common Denominators between Veblen and Gilman: The chapter argues that both authors view modern civilization as a continuation of pre-civilized, predatory states masked by institutions and honorific waste.
III 1 Adaptation and Reception Processes: This chapter examines how the biological drive for adaptation leads to psychological blindness, where individuals fail to recognize oppressive social conditions as they become normalized.
III 2 Seeking Roots of Gender and Class Discrimination: The section analyzes how a society driven by the need for reputation and "pecuniary canons of taste" reinforces gender roles and economic dependence.
III 2.1 Male Canons of Taste – Structural Repression: This chapter explores how cultural norms, shaped by the superior male class, define beauty and propriety to serve exploitative, predatory economic ends.
III 2.2 Fashion as Social Marker and Discriminatory Factor: The chapter details how clothing serves as an immediate social indicator of class and status, with the corset cited as a prime example of female mutilation for economic and status-based purposes.
III 3 Reproduction Processes of Discrimination: This chapter discusses how mothers, under economic pressure, pass down the necessity of marriage as a livelihood, effectively training the next generation to be marketable commodities.
IV Conclusion: The conclusion summarizes the enduring relevance of Veblen and Gilman’s critiques, emphasizing the necessity of addressing man-made social conditions to achieve true equality.
Keywords
Evolutionary Economics, Leisure Class, Sexuo-economic, Conspicuous Consumption, Gender Discrimination, Social Stratification, Pecuniary Canons of Taste, Ownership-marriage, Social Adaptation, Predatory Behavior, Institutional Economics, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Thorstein Veblen, Reproductive Labor, Social Reform.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper performs a comparative analysis of Thorstein Veblen’s "The Theory of the Leisure Class" and Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s "Women and Economics," specifically focusing on the intersection of class and gender in the 19th century.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The key themes include the "sexuo-economic" relationship, the role of wasteful consumption as a status marker, the social reproduction of gender discrimination, and the critique of evolutionary theories as a justification for inequality.
What is the main research question or objective?
The essay aims to demonstrate how Veblen’s anthropological and economic insights can support and extend Gilman’s theory regarding the inherited, unhealthy nature of gender-based economic dependency.
Which scientific methods does the author employ?
The author uses a historical and theoretical comparative approach, analyzing sociological and economic texts from the late 19th century and applying these historical insights to contemporary social problems.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body examines the mechanisms of human adaptation, the definition of gender roles through "pecuniary canons of taste," the symbolic use of fashion to display class status, and the generational reproduction of these oppressive structures.
Which keywords define this work?
The work is characterized by terms such as Conspicuous Consumption, Evolutionary Economics, Sexuo-economic relations, Social Stratification, and Institutional Economics.
How does Veblen explain the economic origin of marriage?
Veblen identifies marriage as a historically "predatory" institution, emerging in archaic times when men realized that capturing women as trophies was more advantageous than competing with other males, leading to an ownership-based household structure.
What does Gilman mean by the "sexuo-economic" relationship?
Gilman uses this term to describe a system where the female's economic subsistence is derived entirely through her relationship to the male, effectively turning marriage into a form of subtle slavery rather than a partnership of equals.
Why is the "corset" a significant example in the text?
The corset is analyzed by both authors as a symbol of the unnatural adaptation process; Veblen views it as a mutilation that renders women unfit for work, while Gilman sees it as a physical mechanism used to increase sexual attraction for survival in a male-dominated economy.
What does the author suggest is the solution to these social problems?
The author suggests that since most problems are man-made, individuals should adopt the role of "social gardeners," working both individually and collectively to alter the cultural and social frameworks that sustain these inequalities.
- Quote paper
- Bert Bobock (Author), 2004, Women & Evolutionary Economics - A comparison of Thorstein Veblen's "Theory of the Leisure Class" and Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "Women and Economics" in historical perspective, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/93231
