Without doubt, one of the most influential critics of Social contract is made by feminist thinkers, or let put it more correctly, by the feminist thought. As one of the most influential person in the contractarianist tradition, Hobbes got his share from these serious criticisms. In this short commentary, I want to deal with Carole Pateman's Hobbes critic. Basically, I will try to evaluate her basic premises and make a critic of his understanding of Hobbes. .
As Carol Pateman herself informs Hobbes is the only contract theorist, which began from the premise that there is not natural domination of men over women since both of the sexes are vulnerable to the danger of physical assault in the state of nature and they are equal in terms of strength, rationality and prudence as far as the dangers in the state of nature are concerned. As a result of this hypothetical equality proposed by Hobbes, many writers from the feminist point of view claimed that there is no inherent sexism in the Hobbesian thought. However, Pateman rejects this view and claims that although he is not at the same degree with the other contract theories in sexism, Hobbesian thought has a patriarchal outlook. .
Yet she rejects any idea about possible gender neutrality in Hobbesian thought. Basically, according to her, there is a modern form of patriarchy in Hobbes. She claims that Hobbes distinguishes between equality of men and women in the first generation of the state of nature and the domination of men over women in civil society. She states that thorough the contract theory Hobbes replaces the patriarchal political right with the individual contract and consequently, overturns paternal right as the origin of political authority, but retains conjugal right. Thus, Hobbes's contract theory frees men from fatherly patriarchal political power, but not women from masculine patriarchal power. Therefore, according to her, Hobbes does not cover women with his individualist umbrella.
