From Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews:
Particularly in the closing contributions of the editors, but also in the general framework of the book, the philosophy of Wollstonecraft is presented in the context of current discussions, from a feminist as well as from a general political perspective. The collection abandons the schemata of fruitless one-dimensional interpretations that position Wollstonecraft as either a proto-feminist or a rationalist misogynist. Her feminist ideas are embedded in a broader reflection that begins by retracing her sources back to the classics, and follows by positioning her thoughts with the republican ideas of natural laws, pointing to the relevance of her ideas in identifying questions about particular rights and duties in a socially and politically diverse society.
From Hypatia Reviews Online:
Now, if it were possible to travel back in time to ask Wollstonecraft and Mill which is the "real" source for the appeal of human rights, and more specifically, to present them with our current menu of options and ask whether it is the protection of normative agency, or the pursuit of eudemonism, or the pull of a sentimental connection, or spiritual fulfillment, my sense is that their reply would be "yes!" What I mean to say--and in the spirit of the old joke, "Would you prefer chicken or fish? Yes, please!"--is that Botting's book gets us to see that Wollstonecraft's and Mill's works on (women's) human rights are rich tapestries that layer overlapping justifications and inspirations for human rights.