our androcentric culture-第25节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


civilization。　　Progressive　people　are　proud　of　the　freedom　and　honor
given　their　women；　and　our　nation　honestly　believes　itself　the　leader　in
this　line。　　〃American　women　are　the　freest　in　the　world！〃　we　say；　and
boast　of　it。

Since　the　agitation　for　women's　rights　began；　many　concessions　have　been
made　to　further　improve　their　condition。　　Men；　seeing　the　justice　of
certain　demands；　have　granted　in　many　states　such　privileges　as
admission　to　schools；　colleges；　universities；　and　special　instruction
for　professions；　followed　by　admission　to　the　bar；　the　pulpit；　and　the
practice　of　medicine。　　Married　women；　in　many　states；　have　now　a　right
to　their　own　earnings；　and　in　a　few；　mothers　have　an　equal　right　in　the
guardianship　of　their　children。

We　are　proud　and　glad　that　our　women　are　free　to　go　unveiled；　to　travel
alone；　to　choose　their　own　husbands；　we　are　proud　and　glad　of　every
extension　of　justice　already　granted　by　men　to　women。

Now：Have　any　of　these　concessions　been　granted　because　a　majority　of
women　asked　for　them？　　Was　it　advanced　in　opposition　to　any　of　them　that
〃women　did　not　want　it？〃　　Have　as　many　women　ever　asked　for　these　things
as　are　now　asking　for　the　ballot？　　If　it　was　desirable　to　grant　these
other　rights　and　privileges　without　the　demand　of　a　majority；　why　is　the
demand　of　a　majority　required　before　this　one　is　granted？

The　child　widows　of　India　did　not　unitedly　demand　the　abolition　of　the
〃suttee。〃

The　tortured　girl　children　of　China　did　not　rise　in　overwhelming
majority　to　demand　free　feet；　yet　surely　no　one　would　refuse　to　lift
these　burdens　because　only　a　minority　of　progressive　women　insisted　on
justice。

It　is　a　sociological　impossibility　that　a　majority　of　an　unorganized
class　should　unite　in　concerted　demand　for　a　right；　a　duty；　which　they
have　never　known。

The　point　to　be　decided　is　whether　political　equality　is　to　the
advantage　of　women　and　of　the　statenot　whether　either；　as　a　body；　is
asking　for　it。

Now　for　the　〃society〃　theory。　　There　is　a　venerable　fiction　to　the
effect　that　women　makeand　manage；　〃society。〃　　No　careful　student　of
comparative　history　can　hold　this　belief　for　a　moment。　　Whatever　the
conditions　of　the　age　or　place；　industrial；　financial；　religious；
political；　educational；　these　conditions　are　in　the　hands　of　men；　and
these　conditions　dictate　the　〃society〃　of　that　age　or　place。

〃Society〃　in　a　constitutional　monarchy　is　one　thing；　in　a　primitive
despotism　another；　among　millionaires　a　third；　but　women　do　not　make　the
despotism；　the　monarchy；　or　the　millions。　　They　take　social　conditions
as　provided　by　men；　precisely　as　they　take　all　other　conditions　at　their
hands。　　They　do　not　even　modify　an　existing　society　to　their　own
interests；　being　powerless　to　do　so。　　The　〃double　standard　of　morals；〃
ruling　everywhere　in　〃society；〃　proves　this；　as　does　the　comparative
helplessness　of　women　to　enjoy　even　social　entertainments；　without　the
constant　attendance　and　invitation　of　men。

Even　in　its　great　function　of　exhibition　leading　to　marriage；　it　is　the
girls　who　are　trained　and　exhibited；　under　closest　surveillance；　while
the　men　stroll　in　and　out；　to　chose　at　will；　under　no　surveillance
whatever。

That　women；　otherwise　powerful；　may　use　〃society〃　to　further　their　ends；
is　as　true　as　that　men　do；　and　in　England；　where　women；　through　their
titled　and　landed　position；　have　always　had　more　political　power　than
here；　〃society〃　is　a　very　useful　vehicle　for　the　activities　of　both
sexes。

But；　in　the　main；　the　opportunities　of　〃society〃　to　women；　are　merely
opportunities　to　use　their　〃feminine　influence〃　in　extra　domestic
linesa　very　questionable　advantage　to　the　home　and　family；　to
motherhood；　to　women；　or　to　the　state。

In　religion　women　have　always　filled　and　more　than　filled　the　place
allowed　them。　　Needless　to　say　it　was　a　low　one。　　The　power　of　the
church；　its　whole　management　and　emoluments；　were　always　in　the　hands　of
men；　save　when　the　Lady　Abbess　held　her　partial　sway；　but　the　work　of
the　church　has　always　been　helped　by　womenthe　men　have　preached　and
the　women　practised！

Charity；　as　a　vocation；　is　directly　in　line　with　the　mother　instinct；
and　has　always　appealed　to　women。　　Since　we　have　learned　how　injurious
to　true　social　development　this　mistaken　kindness　is；　it　might　almost　be
classified　as　a　morbid　by…product　of　suppressed　femininity！

In　passing　we　may　note　that　charity　as　a　virtue　is　ranked　highest　among
those　nations　and　religions　where　women　are　held　lowest。　　With　the
Moslems　it　is　a　universal　lawand　in　the　Moslem　Paradise　there　are　no
womensave　the　Houries！

The　playground　of　a　man…fenced　〃society〃；　the　work…ground　of　a
man…taught　church；　and　this　〃osmosis〃　of　social　nutrition；　this　leakage
and　seepage　of　values　which　should　circulate　normally；　called　charity；
these　are　not　a　sufficient　field　for　the　activities　of　women。

As　for　those　limitations　of　the　〃feminine　mind〃　which　render　her　unfit
to　consider　the　victuallage　of　a　nation；　or　the　justice　of　a　tax　on
sugar；　it　hardly　seems　as　if　the　charge　need　be　taken　seriously。　　Yet　so
able　a　woman　as　Mrs。　Humphry　Ward　has　recently　advanced　it　in　all
earnestness。

In　her　view　women　are　capable　of　handling　municipal；　but　not　state
affairs。　　Since　even　this　was　once　denied　them；　and　since；　in　England；
they　have　had　municipal　suffrage　for　some　time；　it　would　seem　as　if
their　abilities　grew　with　use；　as　most　abilities　do；　which　is　in　truth
the　real　answer。

Most　women　spend　their　whole　lives；　and　have　spent　their　whole　lives　for
uncounted　generations；　in　the　persistent　and　exclusive　contemplation　of
their　own　family　affairs。　　They　are　near…sighted；　or　near…minded；
rather；　the　trouble　is　not　with　the　nature　of　their　minds；　but　with　the
use　of　them。

If　men　as　a　class　had　been　exclusively　confined　to　the　occupation　of
house…service　since　history　began；　they　would　be　similarly　unlikely　to
manifest　an　acute　political　intelligence。

We　may　agree　with　Tennyson　that　〃Woman　is　not　undeveloped　man；　but
diverse；〃　that　is　_women_　are　not　undeveloped　_men；_　but　the　feminine
half　of　humanity　is　undeveloped　human。　　They　have　exercised　their
feminine　functions；　but　not　their　human…functions；　at　least　not　to　their
full　extent。

Here　appears　a　distinction　which　needs　to　be　widely　appreciated。

We　are　not　merely　male　and　femaleall　animals　are　thatour　chief
distinction　is　that　of　race；　our　humanness。

Male　characteristics　we　share　with　all　males；　bird　and　beast；　female
characteristics　we　share　with　all　females；　similarly；　but　human
characteristics　belong　to　_genus　homo_　alone；　and　are　possessed　by　both
sexes。　　A　female　horse　is　just　as　much　a　horse　as　a　male　of　her　species；
a　female　human　being　is　just　as　human　as　the　male　of　her　speciesor
ought　to　be！

In　the　special　functions　and　relations　of　sex　there　is　no　contest；　no
possible　rivalry　or　confusion；　but　in　the　general　functions　of　humanity
there　is　great　misunderstanding。

Our　trouble　is　that　we　have　not　recognized　these　human　functions　as
such；　but　supposed　them　to　be　exclusively　masculine；　and；　acting　under
that　idea；　strove　to　prevent　women　from　an　unnatural　imitation　of　men。

Hence　this　minor　theory　of　the　limitations　of　the　〃female　mind。〃

The　mind　is　pre…eminently　human。　　That　degree　of　brain　development　which
distinguishes　our　species；　is　a　human；　not　a　sex　characteristic。

There　may　be；　has　been；　and　still　is；　a　vast　difference　in　our　treatment
of　the　minds　of　the　two　sexes。　　We　have　given　them　a　different
education；　different　exercises；　different　conditions　in　all　ways。　　But
all　these　differences　are　external；　and　their　effect　disappears　with
them。

The　〃female　mind〃　has　proven　its　identical　capacity　with　the　〃male
mind；〃　_in　so　far　as　it　has　been　given　identical　conditions。_　　It　will
take　a　long　time；　however；　before　conditions　are　so　identical；　for
successive　generations；　as　to　give　the　〃female　mind〃　a　fair　chance。

In　the　meantime；　considering　its　traditional；　educational　and
associative　drawbacks；　the　〃female　mind〃　has　made　a　remarkably　good
showing。

The　field　of　politics　is　an　unfortunate　one　in　which　to　urge　this
alleged　limitation；　because　politics　is　one　of　the　few　fields　in　which
some　women　have　been　reared　and　exercised　under　equal　conditions　with
men。

We　have　had　queens　as　long　as　we　have　had　kings；　perhaps　longer；　and
history　does　not　show　the　male　mind；　in　kings；　to　have　manifested　a
numerically　proportionate　superiority　over　the　female　mind；　in　queens。　
There　have　been　more　kings　than　queens；　but　have　there　been　more　good
and　great　ones；　in　proportion？

Even　one　practical　and　efficient　queen　is　proof　enough　that　being　a
woman　does　not　preclude　political　capacity。　　Since　England　has　had　such
an　able　queen　for　so　long；　and　that　within　Mrs。　Humphry　Ward's　personal
memory；　her　position　seems　fatuous　in　the　extreme。

It　has　been　advanced　that　great　queens　owed　their　power　to　the
association　and　advice　of　the　noble　and　high…minded　men　who　surrounded
them；　and；　further；　that　the　poor　showing　made　by　many　kings；　was　due　to
the　association　and　vice　of　the　base　and　low…minded　women　who　surrounded
them。

This　is　a　p