Source: French to English Tester Published on: 2026-05-18
Source: The Conversation – France (in French)– By Guillaume Vallet, Professor at the University, Université Grenoble Alpes (UGA)
At the end of the 19th centuryeIn the United States of the century, Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1860-1935) advocates for the “new woman,” placing gender at the heart of economic sciences. Faced with capitalism designed by and for men, she highlights the interdependence of domestic and professional spheres. The challenge: to create new forms of work organization that are more inclusive, more cooperative andde factomore collectively efficient.
It is common today to link thegender issues to those of economic sciences, the history of the discipline reveals to us that it has not always been so. Economic sciences have been, and remain, a scienceandrocentric, namely a world considered from the men’s point of view.
That is why it is fundamental to return to the time of the pioneers who insisted on the primacy of the link between gender and economic sciences. In many respects, this is the case of Charlotte Perkins Gilman, an American writer of theAmerican progressive era (1890-1920), member of theAmerican Economic Associationfrom 1892-1893 to 1895-1896.
“Man must work to be fully human, and so must woman,” she emphasized in 1895.
During this period marked by the triptych industrialization-urbanization-immigration that permanently transformed the United States, she was at the forefront of new reflections on the previously mentioned link. She published books with innovative contributions such asWomen and Economics(1898),The Home. Its Work and Influence(1903), but also fiction such asHerland(1915).
Based on archival work related to his work carried out in 2021, and relying on a recent publication onhis/her vision of the household economy, this article aims to present the contribution of this author to economic thought.
Economic independence of women
Her various works, just like her numerous newspaper articles that she wrote, including in the monthly magazineThe Forerunner, allowed her to disseminate her new conception of economics. Progressive, Charlotte Perkins Gilman aimed to determine a collective order capable of promoting the common good in a rapidly transforming American society. While she paid particular attention to the condition of women — the term “feminism” did not enter the American political lexicon until the 1910s — she considered herself more of a “humanist” rather than strictly a “feminist”:
“I abhor being labeled a feminist”.she recalls.
In this respect, the originality of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s thought was to insist on the centrality of women’s economic independence through paid work, thanks to a new articulation between the domestic, professional, and political spheres:
“The economic independence of women implies a change in the household and in family relationships”she emphasizes.
Unlike some feminists of the time, who suchHubertine AuclertIn France, prioritizing the acquisition of political rights for women — mainly the right to vote — Charlotte Perkins Gilman considers that obtaining such rights is meaningless if women do not have the real economic capacities to exercise them.
“The banner proclaims “equality before the law,” the share of women in political liberty; but the main focus of progress is and has always been economic equality and liberty.”she asserts.
Nearly 147,357 male workers for 2 women
In this perspective, Charlotte Perkins Gilman proposes to change the condition of women in the labor market. In the United States before the 1920s, most jobs in the American labor market — particularly in industry — were not accessible to women. For example, the iron and steel industries employed at the time147,357 male workers for only 2 women, throughout the country.
Employed women are concentrated in certain personal services, and in industries such as textiles, agri-food, and tobacco, which account for three-quarters of female industrial jobs. They represent 20% of theactive population in 1920.
Also to read:
“Nobel” in economics: Claudia Goldin and the emancipation of American women
This situation poses a problem for Charlotte Perkins Gilman: women, although increasingly educated, are only offered poor jobs. They remain under the economic domination of men. The latter control the main activities, creatingde factoa poor allocation of resources, both for women and for society as a whole.
Women in the domestic sphere
Charlotte Perkins Gilman advocates for a profound change in the status and role of women in the domestic sphere, victims of an economic division of labor that is unfavorable to them:
“We are once again blinded by the primitive division of ‘man’s work’ and ‘woman’s work,’ and by the honor and dishonor arbitrarily attached to each.”she says.
She specifically emphasizes marriage, an androcentric institution, which confines women to economically undervalued roles despite being essential:
“This means either that the husband is the employer and the wife the employee, or that the marriage is a partnership and that the wife contributes as much as the husband to the creation of wealth.”
Wikimedia
This situation poses a major problem for American society in search of a new economic, social, and moral order. In its view, women unfulfilled by their work are worse mothers. Its objective is to reform institutions for an “efficient motherhood”; women must be able to better reconcile their productive and reproductive activities. Work becomes a moral duty for women:
“A race of women confined to the roles of cooks and maids does not offer a maternity as noble as the world needs”she asserts.
“New woman”
Given this observation, Charlotte Perkins Gilman advocates for the emergence of the “new woman.” This term is coined by thefeminist Sarah Grand, characterizing the new generation of adult women of the 1890s, whose economic potential must be exploited differently. With this model in mind, Charlotte Perkins Gilman suggests changes in two interdependent directions:
Ensuring that economic activities do not depend solely on the market, an institution assumed to be neutral in the distribution of economic positions, based on individual merit. According to her, the market must be regulated, as there are non-market relations in society, but also due to men’s dominance over the main economic activities. For both women and society, it is crucial to value relationships based on reciprocity and redistribution.
Build an economic democracy based on“on women’s freedom”, that is a system based on cooperation within the industry. This society would forge non-oppressive, non-hierarchical relationships between individuals, requiring a new type of division of labor between men and women.
At a time when the creation of large companies both worries and fascinates, Charlotte Perkins Gilman proposes outsourcing to this structure the activities of meal preparation, housekeeping, as well as childcare. The expected consequence: a reduction in production costs.
Wikimedia
The utopia “Herland”
Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s goal is not only to feminize the productive sphere, but to promote new forms of work organization that are more inclusive, more cooperative andde factomore collectively efficient. She demonstrates this in her utopiaHerland, a society without men where economic abundance, social cooperation, and the flourishing of women prevail.
Also to read:
Hazel Kyrk, the little-known economist who anticipated our modern consumer society
In this novel, in the absence of men, women are offered a wide range of productive tasks, according to their skills and personal preferences. In Herland, society is conceived as a coherent chain of individuals having succeeded in creating both economic growth and social bonds:
“With all our efforts, this country will be able to meet the needs of an indeterminate number of people, offering them the level of peace, comfort, health, beauty, and progress to which we aspire”does she describe.
Critical look at his work
In view of the above, it is important to highlight the originality of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s economic proposals. Although not an economist by training, she managed through her experience, her foundational intuitions, and her connections with many influential social science researchers of the time — Edward Bellamy and Edward Alsworth Ross in particular — to show that it is not possible to think about economics without taking an interest in gender issues.
This does not prevent adopting a critical view of her work, regarding her vision of feminism or the fact that she primarily addresses — and in a “brutal” way by current standards for other categories — white middle-class American women. Similar to the name given to her newspaperThe Forerunner, Charlotte Perkins Gilman is a pioneer. She paved the way for many economists. As such, her work is essential and invaluable.
Guillaume Vallet does not work for, advise, own shares in, receive funds from any organization that could benefit from this article, and has declared no other affiliation than his research institution.
–ref. Charlotte Perkins Gilman, the economist who denounces the domestic confinement of women –https://theconversation.com/charlotte-perkins-gilman-the-economist-who-denounces-the-domestic-confinement-of-women-273378