第1章

1869 CHAPTER1TheobjectofthisEssayistoexplainasclearlyasIamablegrounds ofanopinionwhichIhaveheldfromtheveryearliestperiodwhenIhad formedanyopinionsatallonsocialpoliticalmatters，andwhich，instead ofbeingweakenedormodified，hasbeenconstantlygrowingstrongerbythe progressreflectionandtheexperienceoflife。Thattheprinciplewhich regulatestheexistingsocialrelationsbetweenthetwosexes——thelegal subordinationofonesextotheother——iswrongitself，andnowoneof thechiefhindrancestohumanimprovement;andthatitoughttobereplaced byaprincipleofperfectequality，admittingnopowerorprivilegeontheoneside，nordisabilityontheother。TheverywordsnecessarytoexpressthetaskIhaveundertaken，showhow arduousitis。Butitwouldbeamistaketosupposethatthedifficultyof thecasemustlieintheinsufficiencyorobscurityofthegroundsofreason onwhichmyconvictions。Thedifficultyisthatwhichexistsinallcases inwhichthereisamassoffeelingtobecontendedagainst。Solongasopinion isstronglyrootedinthefeelings，itgainsratherthanlosesinstability byhavingapreponderatingweightofargumentagainstit。Forifitwere acceptedasaresultofargument，therefutationoftheargumentmightshake thesolidityoftheconviction;butwhenitrestssolelyonfeeling，worse itfaresinargumentativecontest，themorepersuadedadherentsarethat theirfeelingmusthavesomedeeperground，whichtheargumentsdonotreach; andwhilethefeelingremains，itisalwaysthrowingupfreshintrenchments ofargumenttorepairanybreachmadeintheold。Andtherearesomanycauses tendingtomakethefeelingsconnectedwiththissubjectthemostintense andmostdeeply—rootedofthosewhichgatherroundandprotectoldinstitutions andcustom，thatweneednotwondertofindthemasyetlessunderminedand loosenedthananyoftherestbytheprogressthegreatmodernspiritual andsocialtransition;norsupposethatthebarbarismstowhichmenclinglongestmustbelessbarbarismsthanthosewhichtheyearliershakeoff。Ineveryrespecttheburthenishardonthosewhoattackanalmostuniversal opinion。Theymustbeveryfortunatewellasunusuallycapableiftheyobtain ahearingatall。Theyhavemoredifficultyinobtainingatrial，thanany otherlitigantshaveingettingaverdict。Iftheydoextortahearing，they aresubjectedtoasetoflogicalrequirementstotallydifferentfromthose exactedfromotherpeople。Inallothercases，burthenofproofissupposed toliewiththeaffirmative。Ifapersonischargedwithamurder，itrests withthosewhoaccusehimtogiveproofofhisguilt，notwithhimselfto provehisinnocence。Ifthereisadifferenceofopinionaboutthereality ofanallegedhistoricalevent，inwhichthefeelingsofmengeneralare notmuchinterested，astheSiegeofTroyexample，thosewhomaintainthat theeventtookplaceexpectedtoproducetheirproofs，beforethosewhotake theothersidecanberequiredtosayanything;andatnotimetheserequired todomorethanshowthattheevidenceproducedbytheothersisofnovalue。 Again，inpracticalmatters，theburthenofproofissupposedtobewith thosewhoareagainstliberty;whocontendforanyrestrictionorprohibition eitheranylimitationofthegeneralfreedomofhumanactionoranydisqualification ordisparityofprivilegeaffectingonepersonorkindofpersons，ascompared withothers。Theaprioripresumptionisinfavouroffreedomandimpartiality。 ItisheldthatthereshouldbenorestraintnotrequiredbyIgeneralgood， andthatthelawshouldbenorespecterofpersonsbutshouldtreatallalike， savewheredissimilarityoftreatmentisrequiredbypositivereasons，either ofjusticeorofpolicy。Butofnoneoftheserulesofevidencewillthe benefitbeallowedtothosewhomaintaintheopinionIprofess。Itisuseless metosaythatthosewhomaintainthedoctrinethatmenhaarighttocommand andwomenareunderanobligationobey，orthatmenarefitforgovernment andwomenunfit，ontheaffirmativesideofthequestion，andthattheyare boundtoshowpositiveevidencefortheassertions，orsubmittotheirrejection。 Itisequallyunavailingformetosaythatthosewhodenytowomenanyfreedom orprivilegerightlyallowtomen，havingthedoublepresumptionagainst themthattheyareopposingfreedomandrecommendingpartiality，mustheld tothestrictestproofoftheircase，andunlesstheirsuccessbesuchas toexcludealldoubt，thejudgmentoughttoagainstthem。Thesewouldbe thoughtgoodpleasinanycommoncase;buttheywillnotbethoughtsoin thisinstance。BeforeIcouldhopetomakeanyimpression，Ishouldbeexpected notonlytoanswerallthathaseverbeensaidbyewhotaketheotherside ofthequestion，buttoimaginethatcouldbesaidbythem——tofindthem inreasons，asIasanswerallIfind：andbesidesrefutingallarguments fortheaffirmative，Ishallbecalleduponforinvinciblepositivearguments toproveanegative。AndevenifIcoulddoallandleavetheoppositeparty withahostofunansweredargumentsagainstthem，andnotasingleunrefuted oneonside，Ishouldbethoughttohavedonelittle;foracausesupported ontheonehandbyuniversalusage，andontheotherbysogreatapreponderance ofpopularsentiment，issupposedtohaveapresumptioninitsfavour，superior toanyconvictionwhichanappealtoreasonhaspowertoproduceinintellectsbutthoseofahighclass。Idonotmentionthesedifficultiestocomplainofthem;first，useit wouldbeuseless;theyareinseparablefromhavingtocontendthroughpeople’s understandingsagainstthehostilitytheirfeelingsandpracticaltendencies： andtrulytheunderstandingsofthemajorityofmankindwouldneedtobe muchbettercultivatedthanhaseveryetbeenthecase，beforetheybeasked toplacesuchrelianceintheirownpowerofestimatingarguments，asto giveuppracticalprinciplesinwhichhavebeenbornandbredandwhichare thebasisofmuchexistingorderoftheworld，atthefirstargumentative attackwhichtheyarenotcapableoflogicallyresisting。Idonottherefore quarrelwiththemforhavingtoolittlefaithinargument，butforhaving toomuchfaithincustomandthegeneralfeeling。Itisoneofthecharacteristic prejudicesoftheionofthenineteenthcenturyagainsttheeighteenth，to accordtotheunreasoningelementsinhumannaturetheinfallibilitywhich theeighteenthcenturyissupposedtohaveascribedtothereasoningelements。 FortheapotheosisofReasonwehavesubstitutedthatofInstinct;andwe callthinginstinctwhichwefindinourselvesandforwhichwecannottrace anyrationalfoundation。Thisidolatry，infinitelymoredegradingthanthe other，andthemostperniciousofthefalseworshipsofthepresentday， ofallofwhichitisthemainsupport，willprobablyholditsgrounduntil itwaybeforeasoundpsychologylayingbaretherealrootofmuchthatis boweddowntoastheintentionofNatureandordinanceofGod。Asregards thepresentquestion，Iamgoingtoaccepttheunfavourableconditionswhich theprejudiceassignstome。Iconsentthatestablishedcustom，andthegeneral feelings，shouldbedeemedconclusiveagainstme，unlessthatcustomand feelingfromagetoagecanbeshowntohaveowedtheirexistencetoother causesthantheirsoundness，andtohavederivedtheirpowerfromtheworse ratherthanthebetterpartsofhumannature。Iamwillingthatjudgment shouldgoagainstme，unlessIcanshowthatmyjudgehasbeentamperedwith。 Theconcessionisnotsogreatasitmightappear;fortoprovethis，isbyfartheeasiestportionofmytask。Thegeneralityofapracticeisinsomecasesastrongpresumptionthat itis，oratalleventsoncewas，conducivetolaudableends。Thisisthe case，whenthepracticewasfirstadopted，orafterwardskeptup，asameans tosuchends，andwasgroundedonexperienceofthemodeinwhichtheycould bemosteffectuallyattained。Iftheauthorityofmenoverwomen，whenfirst established，hadbeentheresultofaconscientiouscomparisonbetweendifferent modesofconstitutingthegovernmentofsociety;if，aftertryingvarious othermodesofsocialorganisation——thegovernmentofwomenovermen，equality betweenthetwo，andsuchmixedanddividedmodesofgovernmentasmight beinvented——ithadbeendecided，onthetestimonyofexperience，that themodeinwhichwomenarewhollyundertheruleofmen，havingnoshare atallinpublicconcerns，andeachinprivatebeingunderthelegalobligation ofobediencetothemanwithwhomshehasassociatedherdestiny，wasthe arrangementmostconducivetothehappinessandwell—beingofboth;itsgeneral adoptionmightthenbefairlythoughttobesomeevidencethat，atthetime whenitwasadopted，itwasthebest：thougheventhentheconsiderations whichrecommendeditmay，likesomanyotherprimevalsocialfactsofthe greatestimportance，havesubsequently，inthecourseofages，ceasedto exist。Butthestateofthecaseisineveryrespectthereverseofthis。 Inthefirstplace，theopinioninfavourofthepresentsystem，whichentirely subordinatestheweakersextothestronger，restsupontheoryonly;for thereneverhasbeentrialmadeofanyother：sothatexperience，inthe senseinwhichitisvulgarlyopposedtotheory，cannotbepretendedtohave pronouncedanyverdict。Andinthesecondplace，theadoptionofthissystem ofinequalityneverwastheresultofdeliberation，orforethought，orany socialideas，oranynotionwhateverofwhatconducedtothebenefitofhumanity orthegoodorderofsociety。Itarosesimplyfromthefactthatfromthe veryearliesttwilightofhumansociety，everywomanowingtothevalueattached toherbymen，combinedwithherinferiorityinmuscularstrength）wasfound inastateofbondagetosomeman。Lawsandsystemsofpolityalwaysbegin byrecognisingtherelationstheyfindalreadyexistingbetweenindividuals。 Theyconvertwhatwasamerephysicalfactintoalegalright，giveitthe sanctionofsociety，andprincipallyaimatthesubstitutionofpublicand organisedmeansofassertingandprotectingtheserights，insteadofthe irregularandlawlessconflictofphysicalstrength。Thosewhohadalready beencompelledtoobediencebecameinthismannerlegallyboundtoit。Slavery， frombeinnamereaffairofforcebetweenthemasterandtheslave，became regularisedandamatterofcompactamongthemasters，who，bindingthemselves tooneanotherforcommonprotection，guaranteedbytheircollectivestrength theprivatepossessionsofeach，includinghisslaves。Inearlytimes，the greatmajorityofthemalesexwereslaves，aswellasthewholeofthefemale。 Andmanyageselapsed，someofthemagesofhighcultivation，beforeany thinkerwasboldenoughtoquestiontherightfulness，andtheabsolutesocial necessity，eitheroftheoneslaveryoroftheother。Bydegreessuchthinkers didarise;and（thegeneralprogressofsocietyassisting）theslaveryof themalesexhas，inallthecountriesofChristianEuropeatleast（though， inoneofthem，onlywithinthelastfewyears）beenatlengthabolished， andthatofthefemalesexhasbeengraduallychangedintoamilderform ofdependence。Butthisdependence，asitexistsatpresent，isnotanoriginal institution，takingafreshstartfromconsiderationsofjusticeandsocial expediency——itistheprimitivestateofslaverylastingon，throughsuccessive mitigationsandmodificationsoccasionedbythesamecauseswhichhavesoftened thegeneralmanners，andbroughtallhumanrelationsmoreunderthecontrol ofjusticeandtheinfluenceofhumanity。Ithasnotlostthetaintofits brutalorigin。Nopresumptioninitsfavour，therefore，canbedrawnfrom thefactofitsexistence。Theonlysuchpresumptionwhichitcouldbesupposed tohave，mustbegroundedonitshavinglastedtillnow，whensomanyother thingswhichcamedownfromthesameodioussourcehavebeendoneawaywith。 Andthis，indeed，iswhatmakesitstrangetoordinaryears，tohearitasserted thattheinequalityofrightsbetweenmenandwomenhasnoothersourcethanthelawofthestrongest。Thatthisstatementshouldhavetheeffectofaparadox，isinsomerespects creditabletotheprogressofcivilisation，andtheimprovementofthemoral sentimentsofmankind。Wenowlive——thatistosay，oneortwoofthemost advancednationsoftheworldnowlive——inastateinwhichthelawof thestrongestseemstobeentirelyabandonedastheregulatingprinciple oftheworld’saffairs：nobodyprofessesit，and，asregardsmostofthe relationsbetweenhumanbeings，nobodyispermittedtopractiseit。When anyonesucceedsindoingso，itisundercoverofsomepretextwhichgives himthesemblanceofhavingsomegeneralsocialinterestonhisside。This beingtheostensiblestateofthings，peopleflatterthemselvesthatthe ruleofmereforceisended;thatthelawofthestrongestcannotbethe reasonofexistenceofanythingwhichhasremainedinfulloperationdown tothepresenttime。Howeveranyofourpresentinstitutionsmayhavebegun， itcanonly，theythink，havebeenpreservedtothisperiodofadvancedcivilisation byawell—groundedfeelingofitsadaptationtohumannature，andconduciveness tothegeneralgood。Theydonotunderstandthegreatvitalityanddurability ofinstitutionswhichplacerightonthesideofmight;howintenselythey areclungto;howthegoodaswellasthebadpropensitiesandsentiments ofthosewhohavepowerintheirhands，becomeidentifiedwithretaining it;howslowlythesebadinstitutionsgiveway，oneatatime，theweakest first，beginningwiththosewhichareleastinterwovenwiththedailyhabits oflife;andhowveryrarelythosewhohaveobtainedlegalpowerbecause theyfirsthadphysical，haveeverlosttheirholdofituntilthephysical powerhadpassedovertotheotherside。Suchshiftingofthephysicalforce nothavingtakenplaceinthecaseofwomen;thisfact，combinedwithall thepeculiarandcharacteristicfeaturesoftheparticularcase，madeit certainfromthefirstthatthisbranchofthesystemofrightfoundedon might，thoughsoftenedinitsmostatrociousfeaturesatanearlierperiod thanseveraloftheothers，wouldbetheverylasttodisappear。Itwasinevitable thatthisonecaseofasocialrelationgroundedonforce，wouldsurvive throughgenerationsofinstitutionsgroundedonequaljustice，analmost solitaryexceptiontothegeneralcharacteroftheirlawsandcustoms;but which，solongasitdoesnotproclaimitsownorigin，andasdiscussion hasnotbroughtoutitstruecharacter，isnotfelttojarwithmoderncivilisation， anymorethandomesticslaveryamongtheGreeksjarredwiththeirnotionofthemselvesasafreepeople。Thetruthis，thatpeopleofthepresentandthelasttwoorthreegenerations havelostallpracticalsenseoftheprimitiveconditionofhumanity;and onlythefewwhohavestudiedhistoryaccurately，orhavemuchfrequented thepartsoftheworldoccupiedbythelivingrepresentativesofageslong past，areabletoformanymentalpictureofwhatsocietythenwas。People arenotawarehowentirely，informerages，thelawofsuperiorstrengthwas theruleoflife;howpubliclyandopenlyitwasavowed，Idonotsaycynically orshamelessly——forthesewordsimplyafeelingthattherewassomething inittobeashamedof，andnosuchnotioncouldfindaplaceinthefaculties ofanypersoninthoseages，exceptaphilosopherorasaint。Historygives acruelexperienceofhumannature，inshowinghowexactlytheregarddue tothelife，possessions，andentireearthlyhappinessofanyclassofpersons， wasmeasuredbywhattheyhadthepowerofenforcing;howallwhomadeany resistancetoauthoritiesthathadarmsintheirhands，howeverdreadful mightbetheprovocation，hadnotonlythelawofforcebutallotherlaws， andallthenotionsofsocialobligationagainstthem;andintheeyesof thosewhomtheyresisted，werenotonlyguiltyofcrime，butoftheworst ofallcrimes，deservingthemostcruelchastisementwhichhumanbeingscould inflict。Thefirstsmallvestigeofafeelingofobligationinasuperior toacknowledgeanyrightininferiors，beganwhenhehadbeeninduced，for convenience，tomakesomepromisetothem。Thoughthesepromises，evenwhen sanctionedbythemostsolemnoaths，wereformanyagesrevokedorviolated onthemosttriflingprovocationortemptation，itisprobablythatthis， exceptbypersonsofstillworsethantheaveragemorality，wasseldomdone withoutsometwingesofconscience。Theancientrepublics，beingmostlygrounded fromthefirstuponsomekindofmutualcompact，oratanyrateformedby anunionofpersonsnotveryunequalinstrength，afforded，inconsequence， thefirstinstanceofaportionofhumanrelationsfencedround，andplaced underthedominionofanotherlawthanthatofforce。Andthoughtheoriginal lawofforceremainedinfulloperationbetweenthemandtheirslaves，and also（exceptsofaraslimitedbyexpresscompact）betweenacommonwealth anditssubjects，orotherindependentcommonwealths;thebanishmentofthat primitivelawevenfromsonarrowafield，commencedtheregenerationof humannature，bygivingbirthtosentimentsofwhichexperiencesoondemonstrated theimmensevalueevenformaterialinterests，andwhichthenceforwardonly requiredtobeenlarged，notcreated。Thoughslaveswerenopartofthecommonwealth， itwasinthefreestatesthatslaveswerefirstfelttohaverightsashuman beings。TheStoicswere，Ibelieve，thefirst（exceptsofarastheJewish lawconstitutesanexception）whotaughtasapartofmoralitythatmenwere boundbymoralobligationstotheirslaves。Noone，afterChristianitybecame ascendant，couldeveragainhavebeenastrangertothisbelief，intheory; nor，aftertheriseoftheCatholicChurch，wasiteverwithoutpersonsto standupforit。YettoenforceitwasthemostarduoustaskwhichChristianity everhadtoperform。FormorethanathousandyearstheChurchkeptupthe contest，withhardlyanyperceptiblesuccess。Itwasnotforwantofpower overmen’sminds。Itspowerwasprodigious。Itcouldmakekingsandnobles resigntheirmostvaluedpossessionstoenrichtheChurch。Itcouldmake thousandsintheprimeoflifeandtheheightofworldlyadvantages，shut themselvesupinconventstoworkouttheirsalvationbypoverty，fasting， andprayer。Itcouldsendhundredsofthousandsacrosslandandsea，Europe andAsia，togivetheirlivesforthedeliveranceoftheHolySepulchre。 Itcouldmakekingsrelinquishwiveswhoweretheobjectoftheirpassionate attachment，becausetheChurchdeclaredthattheywerewithintheseventh （byourcalculationthefourteenth）degreeofrelationship。Allthisitdid; butitcouldnotmakemenfightlesswithoneanother，nortyranniseless cruellyovertheserfs，andwhentheywereable，overburgesses。Itcould notmakethemrenounceeitheroftheapplicationsofforce;forcemilitant， orforcetriumphant。Thistheycouldneverbeinducedtodountiltheywere themselvesintheirturncompelledbysuperiorforce。Onlybythegrowing powerofkingswasanendputtofightingexceptbetweenkings，orcompetitors forkingship;onlybythegrowthofawealthyandwarlikebourgeoisiein thefortifiedtowns，andofaplebeianinfantrywhichprovedmorepowerful inthefieldthantheundisciplinedchivalry，wastheinsolenttyrannyof thenoblesoverthebourgeoisieandpeasantrybroughtwithinsomebounds。 Itwaspersistedinnotonlyuntil，butlongafter，theoppressedhadobtained apowerenablingthemoftentotakeconspicuousvengeance;andontheContinent muchofitcontinuedtothetimeoftheFrenchRevolution，thoughinEngland theearlierandbetterorganisationofthedemocraticclassesputanendtoitsooner，byestablishingequallawsandfreenationalinstitutions。Ifpeoplearemostlysolittleawarehowcompletely，duringthegreater partofthedurationofourspecies，thelawofforcewastheavowedrule ofgeneralconduct，anyotherbeingonlyaspecialandexceptionalconsequence ofpeculiarties——andfromhowveryrecentadateitisthattheaffairs ofsocietyingeneralhavebeenevenpretendedtoberegulatedaccording toanymorallaw;aslittledopeoplerememberorconsider，howinstitutions andcustomswhichneverhadanygroundbutthelawofforce，lastoninto agesandstatesofgeneralopinionwhichneverwouldhavepermittedtheir firstestablishment。Lessthanfortyyearsago，Englishmenmightstillby lawholdhumanbeingsinbondageassaleableproperty：withinthepresent centurytheymightkidnapthemandcarrythemoff，andworkthemliterally todeath。Thisabsolutelyextremecaseofthelawofforce，condemnedby thosewhocantoleratealmosteveryotherformofarbitrarypower，andwhich， ofallotherspresentsfeaturesthemostrevoltingtothefeelingsofall wholookatitfromanimpartialposition，wasthelawofcivilisedandChristian Englandwithinthememoryofpersonsnowliving：andinonehalfofAnglo—Saxon Americathreeorfouryearsago，notonlydidslaveryexist，buttheslave—trade， andthebreedingofslavesexpresslyforit，wasageneralpracticebetween slavestates。Yetnotonlywasthereagreaterstrengthofsentimentagainst it，but，inEnglandatleast，alessamounteitheroffeelingorofinterest infavourofit，thanofanyotherofthecustomaryabusesofforce：for itsmotivewastheloveofgain，unmixedandundisguised;andthosewhoprofited byitwereaverysmallnumericalfractionofthecountry，whilethenatural feelingofallwhowerenotpersonallyinterestedinit，wasunmitigated abhorrence。Soextremeaninstancemakesitalmostsuperfluoustoreferto anyother：butconsiderthelongdurationofabsolutemonarchy。InEngland atpresentitisthealmostuniversalconvictionthatmilitarydespotism isacaseofthelawofforce，havingnootheroriginorjustification。Yet inallthegreatnationsofEuropeexceptEnglanditeitherstillexists， orhasonlyjustceasedtoexist，andhasevennowastrongpartyfavourable toitinallranksofthepeople，especiallyamongpersonsofstationand consequence。Suchisthepowerofanestablishedsystem，evenwhenfarfrom universal;whennotonlyinalmosteveryperiodofhistorytherehavebeen greatandwell—knownexamplesofthecontrarysystem，butthesehavealmost invariablybeenaffordedbythemostillustriousandmostprosperouscommunities。 Inthiscase，too，thepossessoroftheunduepower，thepersondirectly interestedinit，isonlyoneperson，whilethosewhoaresubjecttoitand sufferfromitareliterallyalltherest。Theyokeisnaturallyandnecessarily humiliatingtoallpersons，excepttheonewhoisonthethrone，together with，atmost，theonewhoexpectstosucceedtoit。Howdifferentarethese casesfromthatofthepowerofmenoverwomen！*Iamnotnowprejudging thequestion—ofitsjustifiableness。Iamshowinghowvastlymorepermanent itcouldnotbutbe，evenifnotjustifiable，thantheseotherdominations whichhaveneverthelesslasteddowntoourowntime。Whatevergratification ofpridethereisinthepossessionofpower，andwhateverpersonalinterest initsexercise，isinthiscasenotconfinedtoalimitedclass，butcommon tothewholemalesex。Insteadofbeing，tomostofitssupporters）athing desirablechieflyintheabstract，or，likethepoliticalendsusuallycontended forbyfactions，oflittleprivateimportancetoanybuttheleaders;it comeshometothepersonandhearthofeverymaleheadofafamily，andof everyonewholooksforwardtobeingso。Theclodhopperexercises，oristo exercise，hisshareofthepowerequallywiththehighestnobleman。Andthe caseisthatinwhichthedesireofpoweristhestrongest：foreveryone whodesirespower，desiresitmostoverthosewhoarenearesttohim，with whomhislifeispassed，withwhomhehasmostconcernsincommonandin whomanyindependenceofhisauthorityisoftenestlikelytointerferewith hisindividualpreferences。If，intheothercasesspecified，powersmanifestly groundedonlyonforce，andhavingsomuchlesstosupportthem，aresoslowly andwithsomuchdifficultygotridof，muchmoremustitbesowiththis， evenifitrestsonnobetterfoundationthanthose。Wemustconsider，too， thatthepossessorsofthepowerhavefacilitiesinthiscase，greaterthan inanyother，topreventanyuprisingagainstit。Everyoneofthesubjects livesundertheveryeye，andalmost，itmaybesaid，inthehands，ofone ofthemastersincloserintimacywithhimthanwithanyofherfellow—subjects; withnomeansofcombiningagainsthim，nopowerofevenlocallyovermastering him，and，ontheotherhand，withthestrongestmotivesforseekinghisfavour andavoidingtogivehimoffence。Instrugglesforpoliticalemancipation， everybodyknowshowoftenitschampionsareboughtoffbybribes，ordaunted byterrors。Inthecaseofwomen，eachindividualofthesubject—classis inachronicstateofbriberyandintimidationcombined。Insettingupthe standardofresistance，alargenumberoftheleaders，andstillmoreof thefollowers，mustmakeanalmostcompletesacrificeofthepleasuresor thealleviationsoftheirownindividuallot。Ifeveranysystemofprivilege andenforcedsubjectionhaditsyoketightlyrivetedonthethosewhoare keptdownbyit，thishas。Ihavenotyetshownthatitisawrongsystem： buteveryonewhoiscapableofthinkingonthesubjectmustseethateven ifitis，itwascertaintooutlastallotherformsofunjustauthority。 Andwhensomeofthegrossestoftheotherformsstillexistinmanycivilised countries，andhaveonlyrecentlybeengotridofinothers，itwouldbe strangeifthatwhichissomuchthedeepestrootedhadyetbeenperceptibly shakenanywhere。Thereismorereasontowonderthattheprotestsandtestimoniesagainstitshouldhavebeensonumerousandsoweightyastheyare。Somewillobject，thatacomparisoncannotfairlybemadebetweenthe governmentofthemalesexandtheformsofunjustpowerwhichIhaveadduced inillustrationofit，sincethesearearbitrary，andtheeffectofmere usurpation，whileitonthecontraryisnatural。Butwasthereeveranydomination whichdidnotappearnaturaltothosewhopossessedit？Therewasatime whenthedivisionofmankindintotwoclasses，asmalloneofmastersand anumerousoneofslaves，appeared，eventothemostcultivatedminds，to benatural，andtheonlynatural，conditionofthehumanrace。Nolessan intellect，andonewhichcontributednolesstotheprogressofhumanthought， thanAristotle，heldthisopinionwithoutdoubtormisgiving;andrested itonthesamepremisesonwhichthesameassertioninregardtothedominion ofmenoverwomenisusuallybased，namelythattherearedifferentnatures amongmankind，freenatures，andslavenatures;thattheGreekswereofa freenature，thebarbarianracesofThraciansandAsiaticsofaslavenature。 ButwhyneedIgobacktoAristotle？Didnottheslave—ownersoftheSouthern UnitedStatesmaintainthesamedoctrine，withallthefanaticismwithwhich mendingtothetheoriesthatjustifytheirpassionsandlegitimatetheir personalinterests？Didtheynotcallheavenandearthtowitnessthatthe dominionofthewhitemanovertheblackisnatural，thattheblackrace isbynatureincapableoffreedom，andmarkedoutforslavery？someeven goingsofarastosaythatthefreedomofmanuallabourersisanunnatural orderofthingsanywhere。Again，thetheoristsofabsolutemonarchyhave alwaysaffirmedittobetheonlynaturalformofgovernment;issuingfrom thepatriarchal，whichwastheprimitiveandspontaneousformofsociety， framedonthemodelofthepaternal，whichisanteriortosocietyitself， and，astheycontend，themostnaturalauthorityofall。Nay，forthatmatter， thelawofforceitself，tothosewhocouldnotpleadanyotherhasalways seemedthemostnaturalofallgroundsfortheexerciseofauthority。Conquering racesholdittobeNature’sowndictatethattheconqueredshouldobeythe conquerors，orastheyeuphoniouslyparaphraseit，thatthefeeblerandmore unwarlikeracesshouldsubmittothebraverandmanlier。Thesmallestacquaintance withhumanlifeinthemiddleages，showshowsupremelynaturalthedominion ofthefeudalnobilityovermenoflowconditionappearedtothenobility themselves，andhowunnaturaltheconceptionseemed，ofapersonoftheinferior classclaimingequalitywiththem，orexercisingauthorityoverthem。It hardlyseemedlesssototheclassheldinsubjection。Theemancipatedserfs andburgesses，evenintheirmostvigorousstruggles，nevermadeanypretension toashareofauthority;theyonlydemandedmoreorlessoflimitationto thepoweroftyrannisingoverthem。Sotrueisitthatunnaturalgenerally meansonlyuncustomary，andthateverythingwhichisusualappearsnatural。 Thesubjectionofwomentomenbeingauniversalcustom，anydeparturefrom itquitenaturallyappearsunnatural。Buthowentirely，eveninthiscase， thefeelingisdependentoncustom，appearsbyampleexperience。Nothing somuchastonishesthepeopleofdistantpartsoftheworld，whentheyfirst learnanythingaboutEngland，astobetoldthatitisunderaqueen;the thingseemstothemsounnaturalastobealmostincredible。ToEnglishmen thisdoesnotseemintheleastdegreeunnatural，becausetheyareusedto it;buttheydofeelitunnaturalthatwomenshouldbesoldiersorMembers ofParliament。Inthefeudalages，onthecontrary，warandpoliticswere notthoughtunnaturaltowomen，becausenotunusual;itseemednaturalthat womenoftheprivilegedclassesshouldbeofmanlycharacter，inferiorin nothingbutbodilystrengthtotheirhusbandsandfathers。Theindependence ofwomenseemedratherlessunnaturaltotheGreeksthantootherancients， onaccountofthefabulousAmazons（whomtheybelievedtobehistorical）， andthepartialexampleaffordedbytheSpartanwomen;who，thoughnoless subordinatebylawthaninotherGreekstates，weremorefreeinfact，and beingtrainedtobodilyexercisesinthesamemannerwithmen，gaveample proofthattheywerenotnaturallydisqualifiedforthem。Therecanbelittle doubtthatSpartanexperiencesuggestedtoPlato，amongmanyotherofhisdoctrines，thatofthesocialandpoliticalequalityofthetwosexes。But，itwillbesaid，theruleofmenoverwomendiffersfromallthese othersinnotbeingarulearuleofforce：itisacceptedvoluntarily;women makenocomplaint，andareconsentingpartiestoit。Inthefirstplace， agreatnumberofwomendonotacceptit。Eversincetherehavebeenwomen abletomaketheirsentimentsknownbytheirwritings（theonlymodeofpublicity whichsocietypermitstothem），anincreasingnumberofthemhaverecorded protestsagainsttheirpresentsocialcondition：andrecentlymanythousands ofthem，headedbythemosteminentwomenknowntothepublic，havepetitioned ParliamentfortheiradmissiontotheParliamentarySuffrageTheclaimof womentobeeducatedassolidly，andinthesamebranchesofknowledge，as men，isurgedwithgrowingintensity，andwithagreatprospectofsuccess; whilethedemandfortheiradmissionintoprofessionsandoccupationshitherto closedagainstthem，becomeseveryyearmoreurgent。Thoughtherearenot inthiscountry，asthereareintheUnitedStates，periodicalconventions andanorganisedpartytoagitatefortheRightsofWomen，thereisanumerous andactivesocietyorganisedandmanagedbywomen，forthemorelimitedobject ofobtainingthepoliticalfranchise。Norisitonlyinourowncountryand inAmericathatwomenarebeginningtoprotest，moreorlesscollectively， againstthedisabilitiesunderwhichtheylabour。France，andItaly，and Switzerland，andRussianowaffordexamplesofthesamething。Howmanymore womentherearewhosilentlycherishsimilaraspirations，noonecanpossibly know;butthereareabundanttokenshowmanywouldcherishthem，werethey notsostrenuouslytaughttorepressthemascontrarytotheproprieties oftheirsex。Itmustberemembered，also，thatnoenslavedclasseverasked forcompletelibertyatonce。WhenSimondeMontfortcalledthedeputies ofthecommonstositforthefirsttimeinParliament，didanyofthemdream ofdemandingthatanassembly，electedbytheirconstituents，shouldmake anddestroyministries，anddictatetothekinginaffairsofState？Nosuch thoughtenteredintotheimaginationofthemostambitiousofthem。Thenobility hadalreadythesepretensions;thecommonspretendedtonothingbuttobe exemptfromarbitrarytaxation，andfromthegrossindividualoppression oftheking’sofficers。Itisapoliticallawofnaturethatthosewhoare underanypowerofancientorigin，neverbeginbycomplainingofthepower itself，butonlyofitsoppressiveexercise。Thereisneveranywantofwomen whocomplainofill—usagebytheirhusbands。Therewouldbeinfinitelymore， ifcomplaintwerenotthegreatestofallprovocativestoarepetitionand increaseoftheill—usage。Itisthiswhichfrustratesallattemptstomaintain thepowerbutprotectthewomanagainstitsabuses。Innoothercase（except thatofachild）isthepersonwhohasbeenprovedjudiciallytohavesuffered aninjury，replacedunderthephysicalpoweroftheculpritwhoinflicted it。Accordinglywives，eveninthemostextremeandprotractedcasesofbodily ill—usage，hardlyeverdareavailthemselvesofthelawsmadefortheirprotection： andif，inamomentofirrepressibleindignation，orbytheinterference ofneighbours，theyareinducedtodoso，theirwholeeffortafterwardsis todiscloseaslittleastheycan，andtobegofftheirtyrantfromhismeritedchastisement。Allcauses，socialandnatural，combinetomakeitunlikelythatwomen shouldbecollectivelyrebellioustothepowerofmen。Theyaresofarin apositiondifferentfromallothersubjectclasses，thattheirmastersrequire somethingmorefromthemthanactualservice。Mendonotwantsolelythe obedienceofwomen，theywanttheirsentiments。Allmen，exceptthemost brutish，desiretohave，inthewomanmostnearlyconnectedwiththem，not aforcedslavebutawillingone，notaslavemerely，butafavourite。They havethereforeputeverythinginpracticetoenslavetheirminds。Themasters ofallotherslavesrely，formaintainingobedience，onfear;eitherfear ofthemselves，orreligiousfears。Themastersofwomenwantedmorethan simpleobedience，andtheyturnedthewholeforceofeducationtoeffect theirpurpose。Allwomenarebroughtupfromtheveryearliestyearsinthe beliefthattheiridealofcharacteristheveryoppositetothatofmen; notselfwill，andgovernmentbyself—control，butsubmission，andyielding tothecontrolofother。Allthemoralitiestellthemthatitistheduty ofwomen，andallthecurrentsentimentalitiesthatitistheirnature，to liveforothers;tomakecompleteabnegationofthemselves，andtohaveno lifebutintheiraffections。Andbytheiraffectionsaremeanttheonly onestheyareallowedtohave——thosetothemenwithwhomtheyareconnected， ortothechildrenwhoconstituteanadditionalandindefeasibletiebetween themandaman。Whenweputtogetherthreethings——first，thenaturalattraction betweenoppositesexes;secondly，thewife’sentiredependenceonthehusband， everyprivilegeorpleasureshehasbeingeitherhisgift，ordependingentirely onhiswill;andlastly，thattheprincipalobjectofhumanpursuit，consideration， andallobjectsofsocialambition，caningeneralbesoughtorobtained byheronlythroughhim，itwouldbeamiracleiftheobjectofbeingattractive tomenhadnotbecomethepolarstaroffeminineeducationandformation ofcharacter。And，thisgreatmeansofinfluenceoverthemindsofwomen havingbeenacquired，aninstinctofselfishnessmademenavailthemselves ofittotheutmostasameansofholdingwomeninsubjection，byrepresenting tothemmeekness，submissiveness，andresignationofallindividualwill intothehandsofaman，asanessentialpartofsexualattractiveness。Can itbedoubtedthatanyoftheotheryokeswhichmankindhavesucceededin breaking，wouldhavesubsistedtillnowifthesamemeanshadexisted，and hadbeensosedulouslyused，tobowdowntheirmindstoit？Ifithadbeen madetheobjectofthelifeofeveryyoungplebeiantofindpersonalfavour intheeyesofsomepatrician，ofeveryyoungserfwithsomeseigneur;if domesticationwithhim，andashareofhispersonalaffections，hadbeen heldoutastheprizewhichtheyallshouldlookoutfor，themostgifted andaspiringbeingabletoreckononthemostdesirableprizes;andif，when thisprizehadbeenobtained，theyhadbeenshutoutbyawallofbrassfrom allinterestsnotcentringinhim，allfeelingsanddesiresbutthosewhich hesharedorinculcated;wouldnotserfsandseigneurs，plebeiansandpatricians， havebeenasbroadlydistinguishedatthisdayasmenandwomenare？and wouldnotallbutathinkerhereandthere，havebelievedthedistinctiontobeafundamentalandunalterablefactinhumannature？Theprecedingconsiderationsareamplysufficienttoshowthatcustom， howeveruniversalitmaybe，affordsinthiscasenopresumption，andought nottocreateanyprejudice，infavourofthearrangementswhichplacewomen insocialandpoliticalsubjectiontomen。ButImaygofarther，andmaintain thatthecourseofhistory，andthetendenciesofprogressivehumansociety， affordnotonlynopresumptioninfavourofthissystemofinequalityof rights，butastrongoneagainstit;andthat，sofarasthewholecourse ofhumanimprovementuptothetime，thewholestreamofmoderntendencies， warrantsanyinferenceonthesubject，itis，thatthisrelicofthepastisdiscordantwiththefuture，andmustnecessarilydisappear。For，whatisthepeculiarcharacterofthemodernworld——thedifference whichchieflydistinguishesmoderninstitutions，modernsocialideas，modern lifeitself，fromthoseoftimeslongpast？Itis，thathumanbeingsare nolongerborntotheirplaceinlife，andchaineddownbyaninexorable bondtothewouldbeinfinitelymore，ifcomplaintwerenotthegreatest ofallprovocativestoarepetitionandincreaseoftheill—usage。Itis thiswhichfrustratesallattemptstomaintainthepowerbutprotectthe womanagainstitsabuses。Innoothercase（exceptthatofachild）isthe personwhohasbeenprovedjudiciallytohavesufferedaninjury，replaced underthephysicalpoweroftheculpritwhoinflictedit。Accordinglywives， eveninthemostextremeandprotractedcasesofbodilyill—usage，hardly everdareavailthemselvesofthelawsmadefortheirprotection：andif， inamomentofirrepressibleindignation，orbytheinterferenceofneighbours， theyareinducedtodoso，theirwholeeffortafterwardsistodiscloseas littleastheycan，andtobegofftheirtyrantfromhismeritedchastisement。 Allcauses，socialandnatural，combinetomakeitunlikelythatwomenshould becollectivelyrebellioustothepowerofmen。Theyaresofarinaposition differentfromallothersubjectclasses，thattheirmastersrequiresomething morefromthemthanactualserviceMendonotwantsolelytheobedienceof women，theywanttheirsentiments。Allmen，exceptthemostbrutish，desire tohave，inthewomanmostnearlyconnectedwiththem，notaforcedslave butawillingone，notaslavemerely，butafavourite。Theyhavetherefore puteverythinginpracticetoenslavetheirminds。Themastersofallother slavesrely，formaintainingobedience，onfear;eitherfearofthemselves， orreligiousfears。Themastersofwomenwantedmorethansimpleobedience， andtheyturnedthewholeforceofeducationtoeffecttheirpurpose。All womenarebroughtupfromtheveryearliestyearsinthebeliefthattheir idealofcharacteristheveryoppositetothatofmen;notself—will，and governmentbyself—control，butsubmission，andyieldingtothecontrolof others。Allthemoralitiestellthemthatitisthedutyofwomen，andall thecurrentsentimentalitiesthatitistheirnature，toliveforothers; tomakecompleteabnegationofthemselves，andtohavenolifebutintheir affections。Andbytheiraffectionsaremeanttheonlyonestheyareallowed tohave——thosetothemenwithwhomtheyareconnected，ortothechildren whoconstituteanadditionalandindefeasibletiebetweenthemandaman。 Whenweputtogetherthreethings——first，thenaturalattractionbetween oppositesexes;secondly，thewife’sentiredependenceonthehusband，every privilegeorpleasureshehasbeingeitherhisgift，ordependingentirely onhiswill;andlastly，thattheprincipalobjectofhumanpursuit，consideration， andallobjectsofsocialambition，caningeneralbesoughtorobtained byheronlythroughhim，itwouldbeamiracleiftheobjectofbeingattractive tomenhadnotbecomethepolarstaroffeminineeducationandformation ofcharacter。And，thisgreatmeansofinfluenceoverthemindsofwomen havingbeenacquired，aninstinctofselfishnessmademenavailthemselves ofittotheutmostasameansofholdingwomeninsubjection，byrepresenting tothemmeekness，submissiveness，andresignationofallindividualwill intothehandsofaman，asanessentialpartofsexualattractiveness。Can itbedoubtedthatanyoftheotheryokeswhichmankindhavesucceededin breaking，wouldhavesubsistedtillnowifthesamemeanshadexisted，and hadbeensosedulouslyused，tobowdowntheirmindstoit？Ifithadbeen madetheobjectofthelifeofeveryyoungplebeiantofindpersonalfavour intheeyesofsomepatrician，ofeveryyoungserfwithsomeseigneur;if domesticationwithhim，andashareofhispersonalaffections，hadbeen heldoutastheprizewhichtheyallshouldlookoutfor，themostgifted andaspiringbeingabletoreckononthemostdesirableprizes;andif，when thisprizehadbeenobtained，theyhadbeenshutoutbyawallofbrassfrom allinterestsnotcentringinhim，allfeelingsanddesiresbutthosewhich hesharedorinculcated;wouldnotserfsandseigneurs，plebeiansandpatricians， havebeenasbroadlydistinguishedatthisdayasmenandwomenare？and wouldnotallbutathinkerhereandthere，havebelievedthedistinction tobeafundamentalandunalterablefactinhumannature？Theprecedingconsiderations areamplysufficienttoshowthatcustom，howeveruniversalitmaybe，affords inthiscasenopresumption，andoughtnottocreateanyprejudice，infavour ofthearrangementswhichplacewomeninsocialandpoliticalsubjection tomen。ButImaygofarther，andmaintainthatthecourseofhistory，and thetendenciesofprogressivehumansociety，affordnotonlynopresumption infavourofthissystemofinequalityofrights，butastrongoneagainst it;andthat，sofarasthewholecourseofhumanimprovementuptothetime， thewholestreamofmoderntendencies，warrantsanyinferenceonthesubject， itis，thatthisrelicofthepastisdiscordantwiththefuture，andmust necessarilydisappear。For，whatisthepeculiarcharacterofthemodern world——thedifferencewhichchieflydistinguishesmoderninstitutions， modernsocialideas，modernlifeitself，fromthoseoftimeslongpast？It is，thathumanbeingsarenolongerborntotheirplaceinlife，andchained downbyaninexorablebondtotheplacetheyarebornto，butarefreeto employtheirfaculties，andsuchfavourablechancesasoffer，toachieve thelotwhichmayappeartothemmostdesirable。Humansocietyofoldwas constitutedonaverydifferentprinciple。Allwereborntoafixedsocial position，andweremostlykeptinitbylaw，orinterdictedfromanymeans bywhichtheycouldemergefromit。Assomemenarebornwhiteandothers black，sosomewerebornslavesandothersfreemenandcitizens;somewere bornpatricians，othersplebeians;somewerebornfeudalnobles，otherscommoners androturiers。Aslaveorserfcouldnevermakehimselffree，nor，except bythewillofhismaster，becomeso。InmostEuropeancountriesitwasnot tilltowardsthecloseofthemiddleages，andasaconsequenceofthegrowth ofregalpower，thatcommonerscouldbeennobled。Evenamongnobles，the eldestsonwasborntheexclusiveheirtothepaternalpossessions，anda longtimeelapsedbeforeitwasfullyestablishedthatthefathercoulddisinherit him。Amongtheindustriousclasses，onlythosewhowerebornmembersofa guild，orwereadmittedintoitbyitsmembers，couldlawfullypractisetheir callingwithinitslocallimits;andnobodycouldpractiseanycallingdeemed important，inanybutthelegalmanner——byprocessesauthoritativelyprescribed。