第2章

Manufacturershavestoodinthepilloryforpresumingtocarryontheirbusiness bynewandimprovedmethods。InmodernEurope，andmostinthosepartsof itwhichhaveparticipatedmostlargelyinallothermodernimprovements， diametricallyoppositedoctrinesnowprevail。Lawandgovernmentdonotundertake toprescribebywhomanysocialorindustrialoperationshallorshallnot beconducted，orwhatmodesofconductingthemshallbelawful。Thesethings arelefttotheunfetteredchoiceofindividuals。Eventhelawswhichrequired thatworkmenshouldserveanapprenticeship，haveinthiscountrybeenrepealed： therebeingampleassurancethatinallcasesinwhichanapprenticeship isnecessary，itsnecessitywillsufficetoenforceit。Theoldtheorywas， thattheleastpossibleshouldbelefttothechoiceoftheindividualagent; thatallhehadtodoshould，asfaraspracticable，belaiddownforhim bysuperiorwisdom。Lefttohimselfhewassuretogowrong。Themodernconviction， thefruitofathousandyearsofexperience，is，thatthingsinwhichthe individualisthepersondirectlyinterested，nevergorightbutasthey arelefttohisowndiscretion;andthatanyregulationofthembyauthority， excepttoprotecttherightsofothers，issuretobemischievous。Thisconclusion slowlyarrivedat，andnotadopteduntilalmosteverypossibleapplication ofthecontrarytheoryhadbeenmadewithdisastrousresult，now（inthe industrialdepartment）prevailsuniversallyinthemostadvancedcountries， almostuniversallyinallthathavepretensionstoanysortofadvancement。 Itisnotthatallprocessesaresupposedtobeequallygood，orallpersons tobeequallyqualifiedforeverything;butthatfreedomofindividualchoice isnowknowntobetheonlythingwhichprocurestheadoptionofthebest processes，andthrowseachoperationintothehandsofthosewhoarebest qualifiedforit。Nobodythinksitnecessarytomakealawthatonlyastrong—armed manshallbeablacksmith。Freedomandcompetitionsufficetomakeblacksmiths strong—armedmen，becausetheweakarmedcanearnmorebyengaginginoccupations forwhichtheyaremorefit。Inconsonancewiththisdoctrine，itisfelt tobeanoversteppingoftheproperboundsofauthoritytofixbeforehand， onsomegeneralpresumption，thatcertainpersonsarenotfittodocertain things。Itisnowthoroughlyknownandadmittedthatifsomesuchpresumptions exist，nosuchpresumptionisinfallible。Evenifitbewellgroundedin amajorityofcases，whichitisverylikelynottobe，therewillbeaminority ofexceptionalcasesinwhichitdoesnothold：andinthoseitisbothan injusticetotheindividuals，andadetrimenttosociety，toplacebarriers inthewayoftheirusingtheirfacultiesfortheirownbenefitandforthat ofothers。Inthecases，ontheotherhand，inwhichtheunfitnessisreal， theordinarymotivesofhumanconductwillonthewholesufficetopreventtheincompetentpersonfrommaking，orfrompersistingin，theattempt。Ifthisgeneralprincipleofsocialandeconomicalscienceisnottrue; ifindividuals，withsuchhelpastheycanderivefromtheopinionofthose whoknowthem，arenotbetterjudgesthanthelawandthegovernment，of theirowncapacitiesandvocation;theworldcannottoosoonabandonthis principle，andreturntotheoldsystemofregulationsanddisabilities。 Butiftheprincipleistrue，weoughttoactasifwebelievedit，andnot toordainthattobebornagirlinsteadofaboy，anymorethantobeborn blackinsteadofwhite，oracommonerinsteadofanobleman，shalldecide theperson’spositionthroughalllife——shallinterdictpeoplefromall themoreelevatedsocialpositions，andfromall，exceptafew，respectable occupations。Evenwerewetoadmittheutmostthatiseverpretendedato thesuperiorfitnessofmenforallthefunctionsnowreservetothem，the sameargumentapplieswhichforbidsalegalqualificationforMembersof Parliament。Ifonlyonceinadozenyearstheconditionsofeligibilityexclude afitperson，thereisarealloss，whiletheexclusionofthousandsofunfit personsisnogain;foriftheconstitutionoftheelectoralbodydisposes themtochooseunfitpersons，therearealwaysplentyofsuchpersonsto choosefrom。Inallthingsofanydifficultyandimportance，thosewhocan dothemwellarefewerthantheneed，evenwiththemostunrestrictedlatitude ofchoice：andanylimitationofthefieldofselectiondeprivessociety ofsomechancesofbeingservedbythecompetent，withouteversavingitfromtheincompetent。Atpresent，inthemoreimprovedcountries，thedisabilitiesofwomen aretheonlycase，saveone，inwhichlawsandinstitutionstakepersons attheirbirth，andordainthattheyshallneverinalltheirlivesbeallowed tocompeteforcertainthings。Theoneexceptionisthatofroyalty。Persons stillareborntothethrone;noone，notofthereigningfamily，canever occupyit，andnooneevenofthatfamilycan，byanymeansbutthecourse ofhereditarysuccession，attainit。Allotherdignitiesandsocialadvantages areopentothewholemalesex：manyindeedareonlyattainablebywealth， butwealthmaybestrivenforbyanyone，andisactuallyobtainedbymany menoftheveryhumblestorigin。Thedifficulties，tothemajority，areindeed insuperablewithouttheaidoffortunateaccidents;butnomalehumanbeing isunderanylegalban：neitherlawnoropinionsuperaddartificialobstacles tothenaturalones。Royalty，asIhavesaid，isexcepted：butinthiscase everyonefeelsittobeanexception——ananomalyinthemodernworld，in markedoppositiontoitscustomsandprinciples，andtobejustifiedonly byextraordinaryspecialexpediences，which，thoughindividualsandnations differinestimatingtheirweight，unquestionablydoinfactexist。Butin thisexceptionalcase，inwhichahighsocialfunctionis，forimportant reasons，bestowedonbirthinsteadofbeingputuptocompetition，allfree nationscontrivetoadhereinsubstancetotheprinciplefromwhichthey nominallyderogate;fortheycircumscribethishighfunctionbyconditions avowedlyintendedtopreventthepersontowhomitostensiblybelongsfrom reallyperformingit;whilethepersonbywhomitisperformed，theresponsible minister，doesobtainthepostbyacompetitionfromwhichnofull—grown citizenofthemalesexislegallyexcluded。Thedisabilities，therefore， towhichwomenaresubjectfromthemerefactoftheirbirth，arethesolitary examplesofthekindinmodernlegislation。Innoinstanceexceptthis，which comprehendshalfthehumanrace，arethehighersocialfunctionsclosedagainst anyonebyafatalityofbirthwhichnoexertions，andnochangeofcircumstances， canovercome;forevenreligiousdisabilities（besidesthatinEnglandand inEuropetheyhavepracticallyalmostceasedtoexist）donotcloseanycareertothedisqualifiedpersonincaseofconversion。Thesocialsubordinationofwomenthusstandsoutanisolatedfactin modernsocialinstitutions;asolitarybreachofwhathasbecometheirfundamental law;asinglerelicofanoldworldofthoughtandpracticeexplodedineverything else，butretainedintheonethingofmostuniversalinterest;asifagigantic dolmen，oravasttempleofJupiterOlympius，occupiedthesiteofSt。Paul’s andreceiveddailyworship，whilethesurroundingChristianchurcheswere onlyresortedtoonfastsandfestivals。Thisentirediscrepancybetween onesocialfactandallthosewhichaccompanyit，andtheradicalopposition betweenitsnatureandtheprogressivemovementwhichistheboastofthe modernworld，andwhichhassuccessivelysweptawayeverythingelseofan analogouscharacter，surelyaffords，toaconscientiousobserverofhuman tendencies，seriousmatterforreflection。Itraisesaprimafaciepresumption ontheunfavourableside，faroutweighinganywhichcustomandusagecould insuchcircumstancescreateonthefavourable;andshouldatleastsuffice tomakethis，likethechoicebetweenrepublicanismandroyalty，abalancedquestion。Theleastthatcanbedemandedis，thatthequestionshouldnotbeconsidered asprejudgedbyexistingfactandexistingopinion，butopentodiscussion onitsmerits，asaquestionofjusticeandexpediency：thedecisiononthis， asonanyoftheothersocialarrangementsofmankind，dependingonwhat anenlightenedestimateoftendenciesandconsequencesmayshowtobemost advantageoustohumanityingeneral，withoutdistinctionofsex。Andthe discussionmustbearealdiscussion，descendingtofoundations，andnot restingsatisfiedwithvagueandgeneralassertions。Itwillnotdo，for instancetoassertingeneralterms，thattheexperienceofmankindhaspronounced infavouroftheexistingsystem。Experiencecannotpossiblyhavedecided betweentwocourses，solongastherehasonlybeenexperienceofone。If itbesaidthatthedoctrineoftheequalityofthesexesrestsonlyontheory， itmustberememberedthatthecontrarydoctrinealsohasonlytheoryto restupon。Allthatisprovedinitsfavourbydirectexperience，isthat mankindhavebeenabletoexistunderit，andtoattainthedegreeofimprovement andprosperitywhichwenowsee;butwhetherthatprosperityhasbeenattained sooner，orisnowgreater，thanitwouldhavebeenundertheothersystem， experiencedoesnotsay。Ontheotherhand，experiencedoessay，thatevery stepinimprovementhasbeensoinvariablyaccompaniedbyastepmadein raisingthesocialpositionofwomen，thathistoriansandphilosophershave beenledtoadopttheirelevationordebasementasonthewholethesurest testandmostcorrectmeasureofthecivilisationofapeopleoranage。 Throughalltheprogressiveperiodofhumanhistory，theconditionofwomen hasbeenapproachingnearertoequalitywithmen。Thisdoesnotofitself provethattheassimilationmustgoontocompleteequality;butitassuredlyaffordssomepresumptionthatsuchisthecase。Neitherdoesitavailanythingtosaythatthenatureofthetwosexes adaptsthemtotheirpresentfunctionsandposition，andrenderstheseappropriate tothem。Standingonthegroundofcommonsenseandtheconstitutionofthe humanmind，Idenythatanyoneknows，orcanknow，thenatureofthetwo sexes，aslongastheyhaveonlybeenseenintheirpresentrelationtoone another。Ifmenhadeverbeenfoundinsocietywithoutwomen，orwomenwithout men，oriftherehadbeenasocietyofmenandwomeninwhichthewomenwere notunderthecontrolofthemen，somethingmighthavebeenpositivelyknown aboutthementalandmoraldifferenceswhichmaybeinherentinthenature ofeach。Whatisnowcalledthenatureofwomenisaneminentlyartificial thing——theresultofforcedrepressioninsomedirections，unnaturalstimulation inothers。Itmaybeassertedwithoutscruple，thatnootherclassofdependents havehadtheircharactersoentirelydistortedfromitsnaturalproportions bytheirrelationwiththeirmasters;for，ifconqueredandslaveraceshave been，insomerespects，moreforciblyrepressed，whateverinthemhasnot beencrusheddownbyanironheelhasgenerallybeenletalone，andifleft withanylibertyofdevelopment，ithasdevelopeditselfaccordingtoits ownlaws;butinthecaseofwomen，ahot—houseandstovecultivationhas alwaysbeencarriedonofsomeofthecapabilitiesoftheirnature，forthe benefitandpleasureoftheirmastersThen，becausecertainproductsofthe generalvitalforcesproutluxuriantlyandreachagreatdevelopmentinthis heatedatmosphereandunderthisactivenurtureandwatering，whileother shootsfromthesameroot，whichareleftoutsideinthewintryair，with icepurposelyheapedallroundthem，haveastuntedgrowth，andsomeare burntoffwithfireanddisappear;men，withthatinabilitytorecognise theirownworkwhichdistinguishestheunanalyticmind，indolentlybelieve thatthetreegrowsofitselfinthewaytheyhavemadeitgrow，andthat itwoulddieifonehalfofitwerenotkeptinavapourbathandtheotherhalfinthesnow。Ofalldifficultieswhichimpedetheprogressofthought，andtheformation ofwell—groundedopinionsonlifeandsocialarrangements，thegreatestis nowtheunspeakableignoranceandinattentionofmankindinrespecttothe influenceswhichformhumancharacter。Whateveranyportionofthehuman speciesnoware，orseemtobe，such，itissupposed，theyhaveanatural tendencytobe：evenwhenthemostelementaryknowledgeofthecircumstances inwhichtheyhavebeenplaced，clearlypointsoutthecausesthatmadethem whattheyare。Becauseacottierdeeplyinarrearstohislandlordisnot industrious，therearepeoplewhothinkthattheIrisharenaturallyidle。 Becauseconstitutionscanbeoverthrownwhentheauthoritiesappointedto executethemturntheirarmsagainstthem，therearepeoplewhothinkthe Frenchincapableoffreegovernment。BecausetheGreekscheatedtheTurks， andtheTurksonlyplunderedtheGreeks，therearepersonswhothinkthat theTurksarenaturallymoresincere：andbecausewomen，asisoftensaid， carenothingaboutpoliticsexcepttheirpersonalities，itissupposedthat thegeneralgoodisnaturallylessinterestingtowomenthantomen。History， whichisnowsomuchbetterunderstoodthanformerly，teachesanotherlesson： ifonlybyshowingtheextraordinarysusceptibilityofhumannaturetoexternal influences，andtheextremevariablenessofthoseofitsmanifestationswhich aresupposedtobemostuniversalanduniform。Butinhistory，asintravelling， menusuallyseeonlywhattheyalreadyhadintheirownminds;andfewlearnmuchfromhistory，whodonotbringmuchwiththemtoitsstudy。Hence，inregardtothatmostdifficultquestion，whatarethenatural differencesbetweenthetwosexes——asubjectonwhichitisimpossible inthepresentstateofsocietytoobtaincompleteandcorrectknowledge ——whilealmosteverybodydogmatisesuponit，almostallneglectandmake lightoftheonlymeansbywhichanypartialinsightcanbeobtainedinto it。Thisis，ananalyticstudyofthemostimportantdepartmentofpsychology， thelawsoftheinfluenceofcircumstancesoncharacter。For，howevergreat andapparentlyineradicablethemoralandintellectualdifferencesbetween menandwomenmightbe，theevidenceoftherebeingnaturaldifferencescould onlybenegative。Thoseonlycouldbeinferredtobenaturalwhichcould notpossiblybeartificial——theresiduum，afterdeductingeverycharacteristic ofeithersexwhichcanadmitofbeingexplainedfromeducationorexternal circumstances。Theprofoundestknowledgeofthelawsoftheformationof characterisindispensabletoentitleanyonetoaffirmeventhatthereis anydifference，muchmorewhatthedifferenceis，betweenthetwosexesconsidered asmoralandrationalbeings;andsincenoone，asyet，hasthatknowledge （forthereishardlyanysubjectwhich，inproportiontoitsimportance， hasbeensolittlestudied），nooneisthusfarentitledtoanypositive opiniononthesubject。Conjecturesareallthatcanatpresentbemade; conjecturesmoreorlessprobable，accordingasmoreorlessauthorisedby suchknowledgeasweyethaveofthelawsofpsychology，asappliedtotheformationofcharacter。Eventhepreliminaryknowledge，whatthedifferencesbetweenthesexes noware，apartfromallquestionastohowtheyaremadewhattheyare，is stillinthecrudestandmost’incompletestate。Medicalpractitionersand physiologistshaveascertained，tosomeextent，thedifferencesinbodily constitution;andthisisanimportantelementtothepsychologist：buthardly anymedicalpractitionerisapsychologist。Respectingthementalcharacteristics ofwomen;theirobservationsareofnomoreworththanthoseofcommonmen。 Itisasubjectonwhichnothingfinalcanbeknown，solongasthosewho alonecanreallyknowit，womenthemselves，havegivenbutlittletestimony， andthatlittle，mostlysuborned。Itiseasytoknowstupidwomen。Stupidity ismuchthesamealltheworldover。Astupidperson’snotionsandfeelings mayconfidentlybeinferredfromthosewhichprevailinthecirclebywhich thepersonissurrounded。Notsowiththosewhoseopinionsandfeelingsare anemanationfromtheirownnatureandfaculties。Itisonlyamanhereand therewhohasanytolerableknowledgeofthecharacterevenofthewomen ofhisownfamily。Idonotmean，oftheircapabilities;thesenobodyknows， noteventhemselves，becausemostofthemhaveneverbeencalledout。Imean theiractuallyexistingthoughtsandfeelings。Manyamanthinksheperfectly understandswomen，becausehehashadamatoryrelationswithseveral，perhaps withmanyofthem。Ifheisagoodobserver，andhisexperienceextendsto qualityaswellasquantity，hemayhavelearntsomethingofonenarrowdepartment oftheirnature——animportantdepartment，nodoubt。Butofalltherest ofit，fewpersonsaregenerallymoreignorant，becausetherearefewfrom whomitissocarefullyhidden。Themostfavourablecasewhichamancan generallyhaveforstudyingthecharacterofawoman，isthatofhisown wife：fortheopportunitiesaregreater，andthecasesofcompletesympathy notsounspeakablyrare。Andinfact，thisisthesourcefromwhichanyknowledge worthhavingonthesubjecthas，Ibelieve，generallycome。Butmostmen havenothadtheopportunityofstudyinginthiswaymorethanasinglecase： accordinglyonecan，toanalmostlaughabledegree，inferwhataman’swife islike，fromhisopinionsaboutwomeningeneral。Tomakeeventhisone caseyieldanyresult，thewomanmustbeworthknowing，andthemannotonly acompetentjudge，butofacharactersosympatheticinitself，andsowell adaptedtohers，thathecaneitherreadhermindbysympatheticintuition， orhasnothinginhimselfwhichmakeshershyofdisclosingit，Hardlyanything， Ibelieve，canbemorerarethanthisconjunction。Itoftenhappensthat thereisthemostcompleteunityoffeelingandcommunityofinterestsas toallexternalthings，yettheonehasaslittleadmissionintotheinternal lifeoftheotherasiftheywerecommonacquaintance。Evenwithtrueaffection， authorityontheonesideandsubordinationontheotherpreventperfect confidence。Thoughnothingmaybeintentionallywithheld，muchisnotshown。 Intheanalogousrelationofparentandchild，thecorrespondingphenomenon musthavebeenintheobservationofeveryone。Asbetweenfatherandson， howmanyarethecasesinwhichthefather，inspiteofrealaffectionon bothsides，obviouslytoalltheworlddoesnotknow，norsuspect，parts oftheson’scharacterfamiliartohiscompanionsandequals。Thetruthis， thatthepositionoflookinguptoanotherisextremelyunpropitioustocomplete sincerityandopennesswithhim。Thefearoflosinggroundinhisopinion orinhisfeelingsissostrong，thateveninanuprightcharacter，there isanunconscioustendencytoshowonlythebestside，orthesidewhich， thoughnotthebest，isthatwhichhemostlikestosee：anditmaybeconfidently saidthatthoroughknowledgeofoneanotherhardlyeverexists，butbetween personswho，besidesbeingintimates，areequals。Howmuchmoretrue，then， mustallthisbe，whentheoneisnotonlyundertheauthorityoftheother， buthasitinculcatedonherasadutytoreckoneverythingelsesubordinate tohiscomfortandpleasure，andtolethimneitherseenorfeelanything comingfromher，exceptwhatisagreeabletohim。Allthesedifficulties standinthewayofaman’sobtaininganythoroughknowledgeevenofthe onewomanwhomalone，ingeneral，hehassufficientopportunityofstudying。 Whenwefurtherconsiderthattounderstandonewomanisnotnecessarily tounderstandanyotherwoman;thatevenifhecouldstudymanywomenof onerank，orofonecountry，hewouldnottherebyunderstandwomenofother ranksorcountries;andevenifhedid，theyarestillonlythewomenof asingleperiodofhistory;wemaysafelyassertthattheknowledgewhich mencanacquireofwomen，evenastheyhavebeenandare，withoutreference towhattheymightbe，iswretchedlyimperfectandsuperficial，andalwayswillbeso，untilwomenthemselveshavetoldallthattheyhavetotell。Andthistimehasnotcome;norwillitcomeotherwisethangradually。 Itisbutofyesterdaythatwomenhaveeitherbeenqualifiedbyliterary accomplishmentsorpermittedbysociety，totellanythingtothegeneral public。Asyetveryfewofthemdaretellanything，whichmen，onwhomtheir literarysuccessdepends，areunwillingtohear。Letusrememberinwhat manner，uptoaveryrecenttime，theexpression，evenbyamaleauthor， ofuncustomaryopinions，orwhataredeemedeccentricfeelings，usuallywas， andinsomedegreestillis，received;andwemayformsomefaintconception underwhatimpedimentsawoman，whoisbroughtuptothinkcustomandopinion hersovereignrule，attemptstoexpressinbooksanythingdrawnfromthe depthsofherownnature。Thegreatestwomanwhohasleftwritingsbehind hersufficienttogiveheraneminentrankintheliteratureofhercountry， thoughtitnecessarytoprefixasamottotoherboldestwork，\"Unhomme peutbraverl’opinion;unefemmedoits’ysoumettre。\"（1*）Thegreater partofwhatwomenwriteaboutwomenismeresycophancytomen。Inthecase ofunmarriedwomen，muchofitseemsonlyintendedtoincreasetheirchance ofahusband。Many，bothmarriedandunmarried，overstepthemark，andinculcate aservilitybeyondwhatisdesiredorrelishedbyanyman，exceptthevery vulgarest。Butthisisnotsooftenthecaseas，evenataquitelateperiod， itstillwas。LiterarywomenIarebecomingmorefree—spoken，andmorewilling toexpresstheirrealsentiments。Unfortunately，inthiscountryespecially， theyarethemselvessuchartificialproducts，thattheirsentimentsarecompounded ofasmallelementofindividualobservationandconsciousness，andavery largeoneofacquiredassociations。Thiswillbelessandlessthecase， butitwillremaintruetoagreatextent，aslongassocialinstitutions donotadmitthesamefreedevelopmentoforiginalityinwomenwhichispossible tomen。Whenthattimecomes，andnotbefore，weshallsee，andnotmerely hear，asmuchasitisnecessarytoknowofthenatureofwomen，andtheadaptationofotherthingstoit。Ihavedweltsomuchonthedifficultieswhichatpresentobstructany realknowledgebymenofthetruenatureofwomen，becauseinthisasin somanyotherthings\"opiniocopiaeintermaximascausasinopiaeest\"; andthereislittlechanceofreasonablethinkingonthematterwhilepeople flatterthemselvesthattheyperfectlyunderstandasubjectofwhichmost menknowabsolutelynothing，andofwhichitisatpresentimpossiblethat anyman，orallmentakentogether，shouldhaveknowledgewhichcanqualify themtolaydownthelawtowomenastowhatis，orisnot，theirvocation。 Happily，nosuchknowledgeisnecessaryforanypracticalpurposeconnected withthepositionofwomenisrelationtosocietyandlife。For，according toalltheprinciplesinvolvedinmodernsociety，thequestionrestswith womenthemselves——tobedecidedbytheirownexperience，andbytheuse oftheirownfaculties。Therearenomeansoffindingwhateitheroneperson ormanycando，butbytrying——andnomeansbywhichanyoneelsecandiscoverforthemwhatitisfortheirhappinesstodoorleaveundone。Onethingwemaybecertainof——thatwhatiscontrarytowomen’snature todo，theyneverwillbemadetodobysimplygivingtheirnaturefreeplay。 Theanxietyofmankindtointerfereinbehalfofnature，forfearlestnature shouldnotsucceedineffectingitspurpose，isanaltogetherunnecessary solicitude。Whatwomenbynaturecannotdo，itisquitesuperfluoustoforbid themfromdoing。Whattheycando，butnotsowellasthemenwhoaretheir competitors，competitionsufficestoexcludethemfrom;sincenobodyasks forprotectivedutiesandbountiesinfavourofwomen;itisonlyaskedthat thepresentbountiesandprotectivedutiesinfavourofmenshouldberecalled。 Ifwomenhaveagreaternaturalinclinationforsomethingsthanforothers， thereisnoneedoflawsorsocialinculcationtomakethemajorityofthem dotheformerinpreferencetothelatter。Whateverwomen’sservicesare mostwantedfor，thefreeplayofcompetitionwillholdoutthestrongest inducementstothemtoundertake。And，asthewordsimply，theyaremost wantedforthethingsforwhichtheyaremostfit;bytheapportionmentof whichtothem，thecollectivefacultiesofthetwosexescanbeappliedonthewholewiththegreatestsumofvaluableresult。Thegeneralopinionofmenissupposedtobe，thatthenaturalvocation ofawomanisthatofawifeandmother。Isay，issupposedtobe，because， judgingfromacts——fromthewholeofthepresentconstitutionofsociety ——onemightinferthattheiropinionwasthedirectcontrary。Theymight besupposedtothinkthattheallegednaturalvocationofwomenwasofall thingsthemostrepugnanttotheirnature;insomuchthatiftheyarefree todoanythingelse——ifanyothermeansoflivingoroccupationoftheir timeandfaculties，isopen，whichhasanychanceofappearingdesirable tothem——therewillnotbeenoughofthemwhowillbewillingtoaccept theconditionsaidtobenaturaltothem。Ifthisistherealopinionof meningeneral，itwouldbewellthatitshouldbespokenout。Ishouldlike tohearsomebodyopenlyenunciatingthedoctrine（itisalreadyimpliedin muchthatiswrittenonthesubject）——Itisnecessarytosocietythatwomen shouldmarryandproducechildren。Theywillnotdosounlesstheyarecompelled。 Thereforeitisnecessarytocompelthem。\"Themeritsofthecasewould thenbeclearlydefined。Itwouldbeexactlythatoftheslave—holdersof SouthCarolinaandLouisiana。\"Itisnecessarythatcottonandsugar shouldbegrown。Whitemencannotproducethem。Negroeswillnot，forany wageswhichwechoosetogive。Ergotheymustbecompelled。\"Anillustration stillclosertothepointisthatofimpressment。Sailorsmustabsolutely behadtodefendthecountry。Itoftenhappensthattheywillnotvoluntarily enlist。Thereforetheremustbethepowerofforcingthem。Howoftenhas thislogicbeenused！and，butforoneflawinit，withoutdoubtitwould havebeensuccessfuluptothisday。Butitisopentotheretort——First paythesailorsthehonestvalueoftheirlabour。Whenyouhavemadeitas wellworththeirwhiletoserveyou，astoworkforotheremployers，you willhavenomoredifficultythanothershaveinobtainingtheirservices。 Tothisthereisnologicalanswerexcept\"Iwillnot\"：andas peoplearenownotonlyashamed，butarenotdesirous，torobthelabourer ofhishire，impressmentisnolongeradvocated。Thosewhoattempttoforce womenintomarriagebyclosingallotherdoorsagainstthem，laythemselves opentoasimilarretort。Iftheymeanwhattheysay，theiropinionmust evidentlybe，thatmendonotrenderthemarriedconditionsodesirableto women，astoinducethemtoacceptitforitsownrecommendations。Itis notasignofone’sthinkingtheboononeoffersveryattractive，whenone allowsonlyHobson’schoice，\"thatornone。\"Andhere，Ibelieve， isthecluetothefeelingsofthosemen，whohavearealantipathytothe equalfreedomofwomen。Ibelievetheyareafraid，notlestwomenshould beunwillingtomarry，forIdonotthinkthatanyoneinrealityhasthat apprehension;butlesttheyshouldinsistthatmarriageshouldbeonequal conditions;lestallwomenofspiritandcapacityshouldpreferdoingalmost anythingelse，notintheirowneyesdegrading，ratherthanmarry，whenmarrying isgivingthemselvesamaster，andamastertooofalltheirearthlypossessions。 Andtruly，ifthisconsequencewerenecessarilyincidenttomarriage，Ithink thattheapprehensionwouldbeverywellfounded。Iagreeinthinkingit probablethatfewwomen，capableofanythingelse，would，unlessunderan irresistibleentrainment，renderingthemforthetimeinsensibletoanything butitself，choosesuchalot，whenanyothermeanswereopentothemof fillingaconventionallyhonourableplaceinlife：andifmenaredetermined thatthelawofmarriageshallbealawofdespotism，theyarequiteright， inpointofmerepolicy，inleavingtowomenonlyHobson’schoice。But，in thatcase，allthathasbeendoneinthemodernworldtorelaxthechain onthemindsofwomen，hasbeenamistake。Theynevershouldhavebeenallowed toreceivealiteraryeducation。Womenwhoread，muchmorewomenwhowrite， are，intheexistingconstitutionofthings，acontradictionandadisturbing element：anditwaswrongtobringwomenupwithanyacquirementsbutthose ofanodalisque，orofadomesticservant。 NOTES： 1。Title—pageofMmedeStael’sDelphine。 CHAPTER2Itwillbewelltocommencethedetaileddiscussionofthesubjectby theparticularbranchofittowhichthecourseofourobservationshasled us：theconditionswhichthelawsofthisandallothercountriesannexto themarriagecontract。Marriagebeingthedestinationappointedbysociety forwomen，theprospecttheyarebroughtupto，andtheobjectwhichitis intendedshouldbesoughtbyallofthem，exceptthosewhoaretoolittle attractivetobechosenbyanymanashiscompanion;onemighthavesupposed thateverythingwouldhavebeendonetomakethisconditionaseligibleto themaspossible，thattheymighthavenocausetoregretbeingdeniedthe optionofanyother。Society，however，bothinthis，and，atfirst，inall othercases，haspreferredtoattainitsobjectbyfoulratherthanfair means：butthisistheonlycaseinwhichithassubstantiallypersisted inthemeventothepresentday。Originallywomenweretakenbyforce，or regularlysoldbytheirfathertothehusband。UntilalateperiodinEuropean history，thefatherhadthepowertodisposeofhisdaughterinmarriage athisownwillandpleasure，withoutanyregardtohers。TheChurch，indeed， wassofarfaithfultoabettermoralityastorequireaformal\"yes\" fromthewomanatthemarriageceremony;buttherewasnothingtoshowthat theconsentwasotherthancompulsory;anditwaspracticallyimpossible forthegirltorefusecomplianceifthefatherpersevered，exceptperhaps whenshemightobtaintheprotectionofreligionbyadeterminedresolution totakemonasticvows。Aftermarriage，themanhadanciently（butthiswas anteriortoChristianity）thepoweroflifeanddeathoverhiswife。She couldinvokenolawagainsthim;hewashersoletribunalandlaw。Fora longtimehecouldrepudiateher，butshehadnocorrespondingpowerinregard tohim。BytheoldlawsofEngland，thehusbandwascalledthelordofthe wife;hewasliterallyregardedashersovereign，inasmuchthatthemurder ofamanbyhiswifewascalledtreason（pettyasdistinguishedfromhigh treason），andwasmorecruellyavengedthanwasusuallythecasewithhigh treason，forthepenaltywasburningtodeath。Becausethesevariousenormities havefallenintodisuse（formostofthemwereneverformallyabolished， ornotuntiltheyhadlongceasedtobepractised）mensupposethatallis nowasitshouldbeinregardtothemarriagecontract;andwearecontinually toldthatcivilisationandChristianityhaverestoredtothewomanherjust rights。Meanwhilethewifeistheactualbondservantofherhusband：no lessso，asfaraslegalobligationgoes，thanslavescommonlysocalled。 Shevowsalivelongobediencetohimatthealtar，andisheldtoitall throughherlifebylaw。Casuistsmaysaythattheobligationofobedience stopsshortofparticipationincrime，butitcertainlyextendstoeverything else。Shecandonoactwhateverbutbyhispermission，atleasttacit。She canacquirenopropertybutforhim;theinstantitbecomeshers，evenif byinheritance，itbecomesipsofactohis。Inthisrespectthewife’sposition underthecommonlawofEnglandisworsethanthat—ofslavesinthelaws ofmanycountries：bytheRomanlaw，forexample，aslavemighthavehis peculium，whichtoacertainextentthelawguaranteedtohimforhisexclusive use。Thehigherclassesinthiscountryhavegivenananalogousadvantage totheirwomen，throughspecialcontractssettingasidethelaw，byconditions ofpin—money，etc。：sinceparentalfeelingbeingstrongerwithfathersthan theclassfeelingoftheirownsex，afathergenerallyprefershisowndaughter toason—in—lawwhoisastrangertohim。Bymeansofsettlements，therich usuallycontrivetowithdrawthewholeorpartoftheinheritedproperty ofthewifefromtheabsolutecontrolofthehusband：buttheydonotsucceed inkeepingitunderherowncontrol;theutmosttheycandoonlyprevents thehusbandfromsquanderingit，atthesametimedebarringtherightful ownerfromitsuse。Thepropertyitselfisoutofthereachofboth;and astotheincomederivedfromit，theformofsettlementmostfavourable tothewife（thatcalled\"toherseparateuse\"）onlyprecludes thehusbandfromreceivingitinsteadofher：itmustpassthroughherhands， butifhetakesitfromherbypersonalviolenceassoonasshereceives it，hecanneitherbepunished，norcompelledtorestitution。Thisisthe amountoftheprotectionwhich，underthelawsofthiscountry，themost powerfulnoblemancangivetohisowndaughterasrespectsherhusband。In theimmensemajorityofcasesthereisnosettlement：andtheabsorption ofallrights，allproperty，aswellasallfreedomofaction，iscomplete。 Thetwoarecalled\"onepersoninlaw，\"forthepurposeofinferring thatwhateverishersishis，buttheparallelinferenceisneverdrawnthat whateverishisishers;themaximisnotappliedagainsttheman，except tomakehimresponsibletothirdpartiesforheracts，asamasterisfor theactsofhisslavesorofhiscattle。Iamfarfrompretendingthatwives areingeneralnobettertreatedthanslaves;butnoslaveisaslaveto thesamelengths，andinsofullasenseoftheword，asawifeis。Hardly anyslave，exceptoneimmediatelyattachedtothemaster’sperson，isaslave atallhoursandallminutes;ingeneralhehas，likeasoldier，hisfixed task，andwhenitisdone，orwhenheisoffduty，hedisposes，withincertain limits，ofhisowntime，andhasafamilylifeintowhichthemasterrarely intrudes。\"UncleTom\"underhisfirstmasterhadhisownlifein his\"cabin，\"almostasmuchasanymanwhoseworktakeshimaway fromhome，isabletohaveinhisownfamily。Butitcannotbesowiththe wife。Aboveall，afemaleslavehas（inChristiancountries）anadmitted right，andisconsideredunderamoralobligation，torefusetohermaster thelastfamiliarity。Notsothewife：howeverbrutalatyrantshemayunfortunately bechainedto——thoughshemayknowthathehatesher，thoughitmaybe hisdailypleasuretotortureher，andthoughshemayfeelitimpossible nottoloathehim——hecanclaimfromherandenforcethelowestdegradation ofahumanbeing，thatofbeingmadetheinstrumentofananimalfunction contrarytoherinclinations。Whilesheisheldinthisworstdescription ofslaveryastoherownperson，whatisherpositioninregardtothechildren inwhomsheandhermasterhaveajointinterest？Theyarebylawhischildren。 Healonehasanylegalrightsoverthem。Notoneactcanshedotowardsor inrelationtothem，exceptbydelegationfromhim。Evenafterheisdead sheisnottheirlegalguardian，unlesshebywillhasmadeherso。Hecould evensendthemawayfromher，anddepriveherofthemeansofseeingorcorresponding withthem，untilthispowerwasinsomedegreerestrictedbySerjeantTalfourd’s Act。Thisisherlegalstate。Andfromthisstateshehasnomeansofwithdrawing herself。Ifsheleavesherhusband，shecantakenothingwithher，neither herchildrennoranythingwhichisrightfullyherown。Ifhechooses，he cancompelhertoreturn，bylaw，orbyphysicalforce;orhemaycontent himselfwithseizingforhisownuseanythingwhichshemayearn，orwhich maybegiventoherbyherrelations。Itisonlylegalseparationbyadecree ofacourtofjustice，whichentitleshertoliveapart，withoutbeingforced backintothecustodyofanexasperatedjailer——orwhichempowersherto applyanyearningstoherownuse，withoutfearthatamanwhomperhapsshe hasnotseenfortwentyyearswillpounceuponhersomedayandcarryall off。Thislegalseparation，untillately，thecourtsofjusticewouldonly giveatanexpensewhichmadeitinaccessibletoanyoneoutofthehigher ranks。Evennowitisonlygivenincasesofdesertion，oroftheextreme ofcruelty;andyetcomplaintsaremadeeverydaythatitisgrantedtoo easily。Surely，ifawomanisdeniedanylotinlifebutthatofbeingthe personalbody—servantofadespot，andisdependentforeverythinguponthe chanceoffindingonewhomaybedisposedtomakeafavouriteofherinstead ofmerelyadrudge，itisaverycruelaggravationofherfatethatsheshould beallowedtotrythischanceonlyonce。Thenaturalsequelandcorollary fromthisstateofthingswouldbe，thatsinceherallinlifedependsupon obtainingagoodmaster，sheshouldbeallowedtochangeagainandagain untilshefindsone。Iamnotsayingthatsheoughttobeallowedthisprivilege。 Thatisatotallydifferentconsideration。Thequestionofdivorce，inthe senseinvolvinglibertyofremarriage，isoneintowhichitisforeignto mypurposetoenter。AllInowsayis，thattothosetowhomnothingbut servitudeisallowed，thefreechoiceofservitudeistheonly，thougha mostinsufficient，alleviation。Itsrefusalcompletestheassimilationof thewifetotheslave——andtheslaveundernotthemildestformofslavery： forinsomeslavecodestheslavecould，undercertaincircumstancesofill usage，legallycompelthemastertosellhim。Butnoamountofillusage，withoutadulterysuperadded，willinEnglandfreeawifefromhertormentor。Ihavenodesiretoexaggerate，nordoesthecasestandinanyneedof exaggeration。Ihavedescribedthewife’slegalposition，notheractual treatment。Thelawsofmostcountriesarefarworsethanthepeoplewhoexecute them，andmanyofthemareonlyabletoremainlawsbybeingseldomornever carriedintoeffect。Ifmarriedlifewereallthatitmightbeexpectedto be，lookingtothelawsalone，societywouldbeahelluponearth。Happily therearebothfeelingsandinterestswhichinmanymenexclude，andinmost， greatlytemper，theimpulsesandpropensitieswhichleadtotyranny：and ofthosefeelings，thetiewhichconnectsamanwithhiswifeaffords，in anormalstateofthings，incomparablythestrongestexample。Theonlytie whichatallapproachestoit，thatbetweenhimandhischildren，tends， inallsaveexceptionalcases，tostrengthen，insteadofconflictingwith， thefirst。Becausethisistrue;becausemeningeneraldonotinflict，nor womensuffer，allthemiserywhichcouldbeinflictedandsufferedifthe fullpoweroftyrannywithwhichthemanislegallyinvestedwereactedon; thedefendersoftheexistingformoftheinstitutionthinkthatallits iniquityisjustified，andthatanycomplaintismerelyquarrellingwith theevilwhichisthepricepaidforeverygreatgood。Butthemitigations inpractice，whicharecompatiblewithmaintaininginfulllegalforcethis oranyotherkindoftyranny，insteadofbeinganyapologyfordespotism， onlyservetoprovewhatpowerhumannaturepossessesofreactingagainst thevilestinstitutions，andwithwhatvitalitytheseedsofgoodaswell asthoseofevilinhumancharacterdiffuseandpropagatethemselves。Not awordcanbesaidfordespotisminthefamilywhichcannotbesaidforpolitical despotism。Everyabsolutekingdoesnotsitathiswindowtoenjoythegroans ofhistorturedsubjects，norstripsthemoftheirlastragandturnsthem outtoshiverintheroadThedespotismofLouisXVIwasnotthedespotism ofPhilippeleBel，orofNadirShah，orofCaligula;butitwasbadenough tojustifytheFrenchRevolution，andtopalliateevenitshorrors。Ifan appealbemadetotheintenseattachmentswhichexistbetweenwivesandtheir husbands，exactlyasmuchmaybesaidofdomesticslavery。Itwasquitean ordinaryfactinGreeceandRomeforslavestosubmittodeathbytorture ratherthanbetraytheirmasters。IntheproscriptionsoftheRomancivil warsitwasremarkedthatwivesandslaveswereheroicallyfaithful，sons verycommonlytreacherous。YetweknowhowcruellymanyRomanstreatedtheir slaves。Butintruththeseintenseindividualfeelingsnowhererisetosuch aluxuriantheightasunderthemostatrociousinstitutions。ItISpartof theironyoflife，thatthestrongestfeelingsofdevotedgratitudeofwhich humannatureseemstobesusceptible，arecalledforthinhumanbeingstowards thosewho，havingthepowerentirelytocrushtheirearthlyexistence，voluntarily refrainfromusingthatpower。Howgreataplaceinmostmenthissentiment fills，eveninreligiousdevotion，itwouldbecrueltoinquire。Wedaily seehowmuchtheirgratitudetoHeavenappearstobestimulatedbythecontemplationoffellow—creaturestowhomGodhasnotbeensomercifulashehastothemselves。Whethertheinstitutiontobedefendedisslavery，politicalabsolutism， ortheabsolutismoftheheadofafamily，wearealwaysexpectedtojudge ofitfromitsbestinstances;andwearepresentedwithpicturesofloving exerciseofauthorityononeside，lovingsubmissiontoitontheother—— superiorwisdomorderingallthingsforthegreatestgoodofthedependents， andsurroundedbytheirsmilesandbenedictions。Allthiswouldbeverymuch tothepurposeifanyonepretendedthattherearenosuchthingsasgood men。Whodoubtsthattheremaybegreatgoodness，andgreathappiness，and greataffection，undertheabsolutegovernmentofagoodman？Meanwhile， lawsandinstitutionsrequiretobeadapted，nottogoodmen，buttobad。 Marriageisnotaninstitutiondesignedforaselectfew。Menarenotrequired， asapreliminarytothemarriageceremony，toprovebytestimonialsthat theyarefittobetrustedwiththeexerciseofabsolutepower。Thetieof affectionandobligationtoawifeandchildrenisverystrongwiththose whosegeneralsocialfeelingsarestrong，andwithmanywhoarelittlesensible toanyothersocialties;buttherearealldegreesofsensibilityandinsensibility toit，asthereareallgradesofgoodnessandwickednessinmen，downto thosewhomnotieswillbind，andonwhomsocietyhasnoactionbutthrough itsultimaratio，thepenaltiesofthelaw。Ineverygradeofthisdescending scalearementowhomarecommittedallthelegalpowersofahusband。The vilestmalefactorhassomewretchedwomantiedtohim，againstwhomhecan commitanyatrocityexceptkillingher，and，iftolerablycautious，cando thatwithoutmuchdangerofthelegalpenalty。Andhowmanythousandsare thereamongthelowestclassesineverycountry，who，withoutbeingina legalsensemalefactorsinanyotherrespect，becauseineveryotherquarter theiraggressionsmeetwithresistance，indulgetheutmosthabitualexcesses ofbodilyviolencetowardstheunhappywife，whoalone，atleastofgrown persons，canneitherrepelnorescapefromtheirbrutality;andtowardswhom theexcessofdependenceinspirestheirmeanandsavagenatures，notwith agenerousforbearance，andapointofhonourtobehavewelltoonewhose lotinlifeistrustedentirelytotheirkindness，butonthecontrarywith anotionthatthelawhasdeliveredhertothemastheirthing，tobeused attheirpleasure，andthattheyarenotexpectedtopractisetheconsideration towardsherwhichisrequiredfromthemtowardseverybodyelse。Thelaw， whichtilllatelylefteventheseatrociousextremesofdomesticoppression practicallyunpunished，haswithinthesefewyearsmadesomefeebleattempts torepressthem。Butitsattemptshavedonelittle，andcannotbeexpected todomuch，becauseitiscontrarytoreasonandexperiencetosupposethat therecanbeanyrealchecktobrutality，consistentwithleavingthevictim stillinthepoweroftheexecutioner。Untilaconvictionforpersonalviolence， oratalleventsarepetitionofitafterafirstconviction，entitlesthe womanipsofactotoadivorce，oratleasttoajudicialseparation，the attempttorepressthese\"aggravatedassaults\"bylegalpenaltieswillbreakdownforwantofaprosecutor，orforwantofawitness。###第3章Whenweconsiderhowvastisthenumberofmen，inanygreatcountry， whoarelittlehigherthanbrutes，andthatthisneverpreventsthemfrom beingable，throughthelawofmarriage，toobtainavictim，thebreadth anddepthofhumanmiserycausedinthisshapealonebytheabuseofthe institutionswellstosomethingappalling。Yettheseareonlytheextreme cases。Theyarethelowestabysses，butthereisasadsuccessionofdepth afterdepthbeforereachingthem。Indomesticasinpoliticaltyranny，the caseofabsolutemonsterschieflyillustratestheinstitutionbyshowing thatthereisscarcelyanyhorrorwhichmaynotoccurunderitifthedespot pleases，andthussettinginastronglightwhatmustbetheterriblefrequency ofthingsonlyalittlelessatrocious。Absolutefiendsareasrareasangels， perhapsrarer：ferocioussavages，withoccasionaltouchesofhumanity，are howeververyfrequent：andinthewideintervalwhichseparatesthesefrom anyworthyrepresentativesofthehumanspecies，howmanyaretheformsand gradationsofanimalismandselfishness，oftenunderanoutwardvarnishof civilisationandevencultivation，livingatpeacewiththelaw，maintaining acreditableappearancetoallwhoarenotundertheirpower，yetsufficient oftentomakethelivesofallwhoareso，atormentandaburthentothem！ Itwouldbetiresometorepeatthecommonplacesabouttheunfitnessofmen ingeneralforpower，which，afterthepoliticaldiscussionsofcenturies， everyoneknowsbyheart，wereitnotthathardlyanyonethinksofapplying thesemaximstothecaseinwhichaboveallotherstheyareapplicable，that ofpower，notplacedinthehandsofamanhereandthere，butofferedto everyadultmale，downtothebasestandmostferocious。Itisnotbecause amanisnotknowntohavebrokenanyoftheTenCommandments，orbecause hemaintainsarespectablecharacterinhisdealingswiththosewhomhecannot compeltohaveintercoursewithhim，orbecausehedoesnotflyoutinto violentburstsofill—temperagainstthosewhoarenotobligedtobearwith him，thatitispossibletosurmiseofwhatsorthisconductwillbeinthe unrestraintofhome。Eventhecommonestmenreservetheviolent，thesulky， theundisguisedlyselfishsideoftheircharacterforthosewhohavenopower towithstandit。Therelationofsuperiorstodependentsisthenurseryof thesevicesofcharacter，which，whereverelsetheyexist，areanoverflowing fromthatsource。Amanwhoismoroseorviolenttohisequals，issureto beonewhohaslivedamonginferiors，whomhecouldfrightenorworryinto submission。Ifthefamilyinitsbestformsis，asitisoftensaidtobe， aschoolofsympathy，tenderness，andlovingforgetfulnessofself，itis stilloftener，asrespectsitschief，aschoolofwilfulness，overbearingness， unboundedselfishindulgence，andadouble—dyedandidealisedselfishness， ofwhichsacrificeitselfisonlyaparticularform：thecareforthewife andchildrenbeingonlycareforthemaspartsoftheman’sowninterests andbelongings，andtheirindividualhappinessbeingimmolatedineveryshape tohissmallestpreferences。Whatbetteristobelookedforundertheexisting formoftheinstitution？Weknowthatthebadpropensitiesofhumannature areonlykeptwithinboundswhentheyareallowednoscopefortheirindulgence。 Weknowthatfromimpulseandhabit，whennotfromdeliberatepurpose，almost everyonetowhomothersyield，goesonencroachinguponthem，untilapoint isreachedatwhichtheyarecompelledtoresist。Suchbeingthecommontendency ofhumannature;thealmostunlimitedpowerwhichpresentsocialinstitutions givetothemanoveratleastonehumanbeing——theonewithwhomheresides， andwhomhehasalwayspresent——thispowerseeksoutandevokesthelatent germsofselfishnessintheremotestcornersofhisnature——fansitsfaintest sparksandsmoulderingembers——offerstohimalicencefortheindulgence ofthosepointsofhisoriginalcharacterwhichinallotherrelationshe wouldhavefounditnecessarytorepressandconceal，andtherepression ofwhichwouldintimehavebecomeasecondnature。Iknowthatthereis anothersidetothequestion。Igrantthatthewife，ifshecannoteffectually resist，canatleastretaliate;she，too，canmaketheman’slifeextremely uncomfortable，andbythatpowerisabletocarrymanypointswhichsheought， andmanywhichsheoughtnot，toprevailin。Butthisinstrumentofself—protection ——whichmaybecalledthepowerofthescold，ortheshrewishsanction—— hasthefataldefect，thatitavailsmostagainsttheleasttyrannicalsuperiors， andinfavouroftheleastdeservingdependents。Itistheweaponofirritable andself—willedwomen;ofthosewhowouldmaketheworstuseofpowerif theythemselveshadit，andwhogenerallyturnthispowertoabaduse。The amiablecannotusesuchaninstrument，thehighmindeddisdainit。Andon theotherhand，thehusbandsagainstwhomitisusedmosteffectivelyare thegentlerandmoreinoffensive;thosewhocannotbeinduced，evenbyprovocation， toresorttoanyveryharshexerciseofauthority。Thewife’spowerofbeing disagreeablegenerallyonlyestablishesacounter—tyranny，andmakesvictimsintheirturnchieflyofthosehusbandswhoareleastinclinedtobetyrants。Whatisit，then，whichreallytempersthecorruptingeffectsofthepower， andmakesitcompatiblewithsuchamountofgoodasweactuallysee？Mere feminineblandishments，thoughofgreateffectinindividualinstances，have verylittleeffectinmodifyingthegeneraltendenciesofthesituation; fortheirpoweronlylastswhilethewomanisyoungandattractive，often onlywhilehercharmisnew，andnotdimmedbyfamiliarity;andonmanymen theyhavenotmuchinfluenceatanytime。Therealmitigatingcausesare， thepersonalaffectionwhichisthegrowthoftimeinsofarastheman’s natureissusceptibleofitandthewoman’scharactersufficientlycongenial withhistoexciteit;theircommoninterestsasregardsthechildren，and theirgeneralcommunityofinterestasconcernsthirdpersons（towhichhowever thereareverygreatlimitations）;therealimportanceofthewifetohis dailycomfortsandenjoyments，andthevalueheconsequentlyattachesto heronhispersonalaccount，which，inamancapableoffeelingforothers， laysthefoundationofcaringforheronherown;andlastly，theinfluence naturallyacquiredoveralmostallhumanbeingsbythoseneartotheirpersons （ifnotactuallydisagreeabletothem）：who，bothbytheirdirectentreaties， andbytheinsensiblecontagionoftheirfeelingsanddispositions，areoften able，unlesscounteractedbysomeequallystrongpersonalinfluence，toobtain adegreeofcommandovertheconductofthesuperior，altogetherexcessive andunreasonable。Throughthesevariousmeans，thewifefrequentlyexercises eventoomuchpowerovertheman;sheisabletoaffecthisconductinthings inwhichshemaynotbequalifiedtoinfluenceitforgood——inwhichher influencemaybenotonlyunenlightened，butemployedonthemorallywrong side;andinwhichhewouldactbetteriflefttohisownprompting。But neitherintheaffairsoffamiliesnorinthoseofstatesispoweracompensation forthelossoffreedom。Herpoweroftengivesherwhatshehasnoright to，butdoesnotenablehertoassertherownrights。ASultan’sfavourite slavehasslavesunderher，overwhomshetyrannises;butthedesirablething wouldbethatsheshouldneitherhaveslavesnorbeaslave。Byentirely sinkingherownexistenceinherhusband;byhavingnowill（orpersuading himthatshehasnowill）buthis，inanythingwhichregardstheirjoint relation，andbymakingitthebusinessofherlifetoworkuponhissentiments， awifemaygratifyherselfbyinfluencing，andveryprobablyperverting， hisconduct，inthoseofhisexternalrelationswhichshehasneverqualified herselftojudgeof，orinwhichsheisherselfwhollyinfluencedbysome personalorotherpartialityorprejudice。Accordingly，asthingsnoware， thosewhoactmostkindlytotheirwives，arequiteasoftenmadeworse， asbetter，bythewife’sinfluence，inrespecttoallinterestsextending beyondthefamily。Sheistaughtthatshehasnobusinesswiththingsout ofthatsphere;andaccordinglysheseldomhasanyhonestandconscientious opiniononthem;andthereforehardlyevermeddleswiththemforanylegitimate purpose，butgenerallyforaninterestedone。Sheneitherknowsnorcares whichistherightsideinpolitics，butsheknowswhatwillbringinmoney orinvitations，giveherhusbandatitle，hersonaplace，orherdaughteragoodmarriage。Buthow，itwillbeasked，cananysocietyexistwithoutgovernment？In afamily，asinastate，someonepersonmustbetheultimateruler。Who shalldecidewhenmarriedpeopledifferinopinion？Bothcannothavetheirway，yetadecisiononewayortheothermustbecometo。Itisnottruethatinallvoluntaryassociationbetweentwopeople，one ofthemmustbeabsolutemaster：stilllessthatthelawmustdeterminewhich ofthemitshallbe。Themostfrequentcaseofvoluntaryassociation，next tomarriage，ispartnershipinbusiness：anditisnotfoundorthoughtnecessary toenactthatineverypartnership，onepartnershallhaveentirecontrol overtheconcern，andtheothersshallbeboundtoobeyhisorders。Noone wouldenterintopartnershipontermswhichwouldsubjecthimtotheresponsibilities ofaprincipal，withonlythepowersandprivilegesofaclerkoragent。 Ifthelawdealtwithothercontractsasitdoeswithmarriage，itwould ordainthatonepartnershouldadministerthecommonbusinessasifitwas hisprivateconcern;thattheothersshouldhaveonlydelegatedpowers;and thatthisoneshouldbedesignatedbysomegeneralpresumptionoflaw，for exampleasbeingtheeldest。Thelawneverdoesthis：nordoesexperience showittobenecessarythatanytheoreticalinequalityofpowershouldexist betweenthepartners，orthatthepartnershipshouldhaveanyotherconditions thanwhattheymaythemselvesappointbytheirarticlesofagreement。Yet itmightseemthattheexclusivepowermightbeconcededwithlessdanger totherightsandinterestsoftheinferior，inthecaseofpartnershipthan inthatofmarriage，sinceheisfreetocancelthepowerbywithdrawing fromtheconnexion。Thewifehasnosuchpower，andevenifshehad，itis almostalwaysdesirablethatsheshouldtryallmeasuresbeforeresortingtoit。Itisquitetruethatthingswhichhavetobedecidedeveryday，andcannot adjustthemselvesgradually，orwaitforacompromise，oughttodependon onewill;onepersonmusthavetheirsolecontrol。Butitdoesnotfollow thatthisshouldalwaysbethesameperson。Thenaturalarrangementisa divisionofpowersbetweenthetwo;eachbeingabsoluteintheexecutive branchoftheirowndepartment，andanychangeofsystemandprinciplerequiring theconsentofboth。Thedivisionneithercannorshouldbepre—established bythelaw，sinceitmustdependonindividualcapacitiesandsuitabilities。 Ifthetwopersonschose，theymightpre—appointitbythemarriagecontract， aspecuniaryarrangementsarenowoftenpre—appointed。Therewouldseldom beanydifficultyindecidingsuchthingsbymutualconsent，unlessthemarriage wasoneofthoseunhappyonesinwhichallotherthings，aswellasthis， becomesubjectsofbickeringanddispute。Thedivisionofrightswouldnaturally followthedivisionofdutiesandfunctions;andthatisalreadymadeby consent，oratalleventsnotbylaw，butbygeneralcustom，modifiedandmodifiableatthepleasureofthepersonsconcerned。Therealpracticaldecisionofaffairs，towhichevermaybegiventhe legalauthority，willgreatlydepend，asitevennowdoes，uponcomparative qualifications。Themerefactthatheisusuallytheeldest，willinmost casesgivethepreponderancetotheman;atleastuntiltheybothattain atimeoflifeatwhichthedifferenceintheiryearsisofnoimportance。 Therewillnaturallyalsobeamorepotentialvoiceontheside，whichever itis，thatbringsthemeansofsupport。Inequalityfromthissourcedoes notdependonthelawofmarriage，butonthegeneralconditionsofhuman society，asnowconstituted。Theinfluenceofmentalsuperiority，either generalorspecial，andofsuperiordecisionofcharacter，willnecessarily tellformuch。Italwaysdoessoatpresent。Andthisfactshowshowlittle foundationthereisfortheapprehensionthatthepowersandresponsibilities ofpartnersinlife（asofpartnersinbusiness），cannotbesatisfactorily apportionedbyagreementbetweenthemselves。Theyalwaysaresoapportioned， exceptincasesinwhichthemarriageinstitutionisafailure。Thingsnever cometoanissueofdownrightpowerononeside，andobedienceontheother， exceptwheretheconnexionaltogetherhasbeenamistake，anditwouldbe ablessingtobothpartiestoberelievedfromit。Somemaysaythatthe verythingbywhichanamicablesettlementofdifferencesbecomespossible， isthepoweroflegalcompulsionknowntobeinreserve;aspeoplesubmit toanarbitrationbecausethereisacourtoflawinthebackground，which theyknowthattheycanbeforcedtoobey。Buttomakethecasesparallel， wemustsupposethattheruleofthecourtoflawwas，nottotrythecause， buttogivejudgmentalwaysforthesameside，supposethedefendant。If so，theamenabilitytoitwouldbeamotivewiththeplaintifftoagreeto almostanyarbitration，butitwouldbejustthereversewiththedefendant。 Thedespoticpowerwhichthelawgivestothehusbandmaybeareasonto makethewifeassenttoanycompromisebywhichpowerispracticallyshared betweenthetwo，butitcannotbethereasonwhythehusbanddoes。Thatthere isalwaysamongdecentlyconductedpeopleapracticalcompromise，though oneofthematleastisundernophysicalormoralnecessityofmakingit， showsthatthenaturalmotiveswhichleadtoavoluntaryadjustmentofthe unitedlifeoftwopersonsinamanneracceptabletoboth，doonthewhole， exceptingunfavourablecases，prevail。Thematteriscertainlynotimproved bylayingdownasanordinanceoflaw，thatthesuperstructureoffreegovernment shallberaiseduponalegalbasisofdespotismononesideandsubjection ontheother，andthateveryconcessionwhichthedespotmakesmay，athis merepleasure，andwithoutanywarning，berecalled。Besidesthatnofreedom isworthmuchwhenheldonsoprecariousatenure，itsconditionsarenot likelytobethemostequitablewhenthelawthrowssoprodigiousaweight intoonescale;whentheadjustmentrestsbetweentwopersonsoneofwhom isdeclaredtobeentitledtoeverything，theothernotonlyentitledto nothingexceptduringthegoodpleasureofthefirst，butunderthestrongestmoralandreligiousobligationnottorebelunderanyexcessofoppression。Apertinaciousadversary，pushedtoextremities，maysay，thathusbands indeedarewillingtobereasonable，andtomakefairconcessionstotheir partnerswithoutbeingcompelledtoit，butthatwivesarenot：thatifallowed anyrightsoftheirown，theywillacknowledgenorightsatallinanyone else，andneverwillyieldinanything，unlesstheycanbecompelled，by theman’smereauthority，toyieldineverything。Thiswouldhavebeensaid bymanypersonssomegenerationsago，whensatiresonwomenwereinvogue， andmenthoughtitacleverthingtoinsultwomenforbeingwhatmenmade them。Butitwillbesaidbynoonenowwhoisworthreplyingto。Itisnot thedoctrineofthepresentdaythatwomenarelesssusceptibleofgoodfeeling， andconsiderationforthosewithwhomtheyareunitedbythestrongestties， thanmenare。Onthecontrary，weareperpetuallytoldthatwomenarebetter thanmen，bythosewhoaretotallyopposedtotreatingthemasiftheywere asgood;sothatthesayinghaspassedintoapieceoftiresomecant，intended toputacomplimentaryfaceuponaninjury，andresemblingthosecelebrations ofroyalclemencywhich，accordingtoGulliver，thekingofLilliputalways prefixedtohismostsanguinarydecrees。Ifwomenarebetterthanmenin anything，itsurelyisinindividualself—sacrificeforthoseoftheirown family。ButIlaylittlestressonthis，solongastheyareuniversally taughtthattheyarebornandcreatedforself—sacrifice。Ibelievethat equalityofrightswouldabatetheexaggeratedself—abnegationwhichisthe presentartificialidealoffemininecharacter，andthatagoodwomanwould notbemoreself—sacrificingthanthebestman：butontheotherhand，men wouldbemuchmoreunselfishandself—sacrificingthanatpresent，because theywouldnolongerbetaughttoworshiptheirownwillassuchagrand thingthatitisactuallythelawforanotherrationalbeing。Thereisnothing whichmensoeasilylearnasthisself—worship：allprivilegedpersons，and allprivilegedclasses，havehadit。Themorewedescendinthescaleof humanity，theintenseritis;andmostofallinthosewhoarenot，andcan neverexpecttobe，raisedaboveanyoneexceptanunfortunatewifeandchildren。 Thehonourableexceptionsareproportionallyfewerthaninthecaseofalmost anyotherhumaninfirmity。Philosophyandreligion，insteadofkeepingit incheck，aregenerallysubornedtodefendit;andnothingcontrolsitbut thatpracticalfeelingoftheequalityofhumanbeings，whichisthetheory ofChristianity，butwhichChristianitywillneverpracticallyteach，while itsanctionsinstitutionsgroundedonanarbitrarypreferenceofonehumanbeingoveranother。Thereare，nodoubt，women，astherearemen，whomequalityofconsideration willnotsatisfy;withwhomthereisnopeacewhileanywillorwishisregarded buttheirown。Suchpersonsareapropersubjectforthelawofdivorce。 Theyareonlyfittolivealone，andnohumanbeingsoughttobecompelled toassociatetheirliveswiththem。Butthelegalsubordinationtendsto makesuchcharactersamongwomenmore，ratherthanless，frequent。Ifthe manexertshiswholepower，thewomanisofcoursecrushed：butifsheis treatedwithindulgence，andpermittedtoassumepower，thereisnorule tosetlimitstoherencroachments。Thelaw，notdeterminingherrights， buttheoreticallyallowinghernoneatall，practicallydeclaresthatthemeasureofwhatshehasarightto，iswhatshecancontrivetoget。Theequalityofmarriedpersonsbeforethelaw，isnotonlythesolemode inwhichthatparticularrelationcanbemadeconsistentwithjusticeto bothsides，andconducivetothehappinessofboth，butitistheonlymeans ofrenderingthedailylifeofmankind，inanyhighsense，aschoolofmoral cultivation。Thoughthetruthmaynotbefeltorgenerallyacknowledgedfor generationstocome，theonlyschoolofgenuinemoralsentimentissociety betweenequals。Themoraleducationofmankindhashithertoemanatedchiefly fromthelawofforce，andisadaptedalmostsolelytotherelationswhich forcecreates。Inthelessadvancedstatesofsociety，peoplehardlyrecognise anyrelationwiththeirequals。Tobeanequalistobeanenemy。Society， fromitshighestplacetoitslowest，isonelongchain，orratherladder， whereeveryindividualiseitheraboveorbelowhisnearestneighbour，and whereverhedoesnotcommandhemustobey。Existingmoralities，accordingly， aremainlyfittedtoarelationofcommandandobedience。Yetcommandand obediencearebutunfortunatenecessitiesofhumanlife：societyinequality isitsnormalstate。Alreadyinmodernlife，andmoreandmoreasitprogressively improves，commandandobediencebecomeexceptionalfactsinlife，equalassociation itsgeneralrule。Themoralityofthefirstagesrestedontheobligation tosubmittopower;thatoftheagesnextfollowing，ontherightofthe weaktotheforbearanceandprotectionofthestrong。Howmuchlongeris oneformofsocietyandlifetocontentitselfwiththemoralitymadefor another？Wehavehadthemoralityofsubmission，andthemoralityofchivalry andgenerosity;thetimeisnowcomeforthemoralityofjustice。Whenever， informerages，anyapproachhasbeenmadetosocietyinequality，Justice hasasserteditsclaimsasthefoundationofvirtue。Itwasthusinthefree republicsofantiquity。Buteveninthebestofthese，theequalswerelimited tothefreemalecitizens;slaves，women，andtheunenfranchisedresidents wereunderthelawofforce。ThejointinfluenceofRomancivilisationand ofChristianityobliteratedthesedistinctions，andintheory（ifonlypartially inpractice）declaredtheclaimsofthehumanbeing，assuch，tobeparamount tothoseofsex，class，orsocialposition。Thebarrierswhichhadbegun tobelevelledwereraisedagainbythenorthernconquests;andthewhole ofmodernhistoryconsistsoftheslowprocessbywhichtheyhavesincebeen wearingaway。Weareenteringintoanorderofthingsinwhichjusticewill againbetheprimaryvirtue;groundedasbeforeonequal，butnowalsoon sympatheticassociation;havingitsrootnolongerintheinstinctofequals forselfprotection，butinacultivatedsympathybetweenthem;andnoone beingnowleftout，butanequalmeasurebeingextendedtoall。Itisno noveltythatmankinddonotdistinctlyforeseetheirownchanges，andthat theirsentimentsareadaptedtopast，nottocomingages。Toseethefuturity ofthespecieshasalwaysbeentheprivilegeoftheintellectualelite，or ofthosewhohavelearntfromthem;tohavethefeelingsofthatfuturity hasbeenthedistinction，andusuallythemartyrdom，ofastillrarerelite。 Institutions，books，education，society，allgoontraininghumanbeings fortheold，longafterthenewhascome;muchmorewhenitisonlycoming。 Butthetruevirtueofhumanbeingsisfitnesstolivetogetherasequals; claimingnothingforthemselvesbutwhattheyasfreelyconcedetoeveryone else;regardingcommandofanykindasanexceptionalnecessity，andinall casesatemporaryone;andpreferring，wheneverpossible，thesocietyof thosewithwhomleadingandfollowingcanbealternateandreciprocal。To thesevirtues，nothinginlifeasatpresentconstitutedgivescultivation byexercise。Thefamilyisaschoolofdespotism，inwhichthevirtuesof despotism，butalsoitsvices，arelargelynourished。Citizenship，infree countries，ispartlyaschoolofsocietyinequality;butcitizenshipfills onlyasmallplaceinmodernlife，anddoesnotcomenearthedailyhabits orinmostsentiments。Thefamily，justlyconstituted，wouldbetherealschool ofthevirtuesoffreedom。Itissuretobeasufficientoneofeverything else。Itwillalwaysbeaschoolofobedienceforthechildren，ofcommand fortheparents。Whatisneededis，thatitshouldbeaschoolofsympathy inequality，oflivingtogetherinlove，withoutpowerononesideorobedience ontheother。Thisitoughttobebetweentheparents。Itwouldthenbean exerciseofthosevirtueswhicheachrequirestofitthemforallotherassociation， andamodeltothechildrenofthefeelingsandconductwhichtheirtemporary trainingbymeansofobedienceisdesignedtorenderhabitual，andtherefore natural，tothem。Themoraltrainingofmankindwillneverbeadaptedto theconditionsofthelifeforwhichallotherhumanprogressisapreparation， untiltheypractiseinthefamilythesamemoralrulewhichisadaptedto thenormalconstitutionofhumansociety。Anysentimentoffreedomwhich canexistinamanwhosenearestanddearestintimacies，arewiththoseof whomheisabsolutemaster，isnotthegenuineorChristianloveoffreedom， but，whattheloveoffreedomgenerallywasintheancientsandinthemiddle ages——anintensefeelingofthedignityandimportanceofhisownpersonality; makinghimdisdainayokeforhimself，ofwhichhehasnoabhorrencewhatever intheabstract，butwhichheisabundantlyreadytoimposeonothersforhisowninterestorglorification。Ireadilyadmit（anditistheveryfoundationofmyhopes）thatnumbers ofmarriedpeopleevenunderthepresentlaw（inthehigherclassesofEngland probablyagreatmajority），liveinthespiritofajustlawofequality。 Lawsneverwouldbeimproved，iftherewerenotnumerouspersonswhosemoral sentimentsarebetterthantheexistinglaws。Suchpersonsoughttosupport theprincipleshereadvocated;ofwhichtheonlyobjectistomakeallother marriedcouplessimilartowhatthesearenow。Butpersonsevenofconsiderable moralworth，unlesstheyarealsothinkers，areveryreadytobelievethat lawsorpractices，theevilsofwhichtheyhavenotpersonallyexperienced， donotproduceanyevils，but（ifseemingtobegenerallyapprovedof）probably dogood，andthatitiswrongtoobjecttothem。Itwould，however，bea greatmistakeinsuchmarriedpeopletosuppose，becausethelegalconditions ofthetiewhichunitesthemdonotoccurtotheirthoughtsonceinatwelve month，andbecausetheyliveandfeelinallrespectsasiftheywerelegally equals，thatthesameisthecasewithallothermarriedcouples，wherever thehusbandisnotanotoriousruffian。Tosupposethis，wouldbetoshow equalignoranceofhumannatureandoffact。Thelessfitamanisforthe possessionofpower——thelesslikelytobeallowedtoexerciseitover anypersonwiththatperson’svoluntaryconsent——themoredoeshehughimself intheconsciousnessofthepowerthelawgiveshim，exactitslegalrights totheutmostpointwhichcustom（thecustomofmenlikehimself）willtolerate， andtakepleasureinusingthepower，merelytoenliventheagreeablesense ofpossessingit。Whatismore;inthemostnaturallybrutalandmorally uneducatedpartofthelowerclasses，thelegalslaveryofthewoman，and somethinginthemerelyphysicalsubjectiontotheirwillasaninstrument， causesthemtofeelasortofdisrespectandcontempttowardstheirownwife whichtheydonotfeeltowardsanyotherwoman，oranyotherhumanbeing， withwhomtheycomeincontact;andwhichmakesherseemtothemanappropriate subjectforanykindofindignity。Letanacuteobserverofthesignsof feeling，whohastherequisiteopportunities，judgeforhimselfwhetherthis isnotthecase：andifhefindsthatitis，lethimnotwonderatanyamount ofdisgustandindignationthatcanbefeltagainstinstitutionswhichleadnaturallytothisdepravedstateofthehumanmind。Weshallbetold，perhaps，thatreligionimposesthedutyofobedience; aseveryestablishedfactwhichistoobadtoadmitofanyotherdefence， isalwayspresentedtousasaninjunctionofreligion。TheChurch，itis verytrue，enjoinsitinherformularies，butitwouldbedifficulttoderive anysuchinjunctionfromChristianity。WearetoldthatSt。Paulsaid，\"Wives， obeyyourhusbands\"：buthealsosaid，\"Slaves，obeyyourmasters。\" ItwasnotSt。Paul’sbusiness，norwasitconsistentwithhisobject，the propagationofChristianity，toinciteanyonetorebellionagainstexisting laws。TheApostle’sacceptanceofallsocialinstitutionsashefoundthem， isnomoretobeconstruedasadisapprovalofattemptstoimprovethemat thepropertime，thanhisdeclaration，\"Thepowersthatbeareordained ofGod，\"giveshissanctiontomilitarydespotism，andtothatalone， astheChristianformofpoliticalgovernment，orcommandspassiveobedience toit。TopretendthatChristianitywasintendedtostereotypeexistingforms ofgovernmentandsociety，andprotectthemagainstchange，istoreduce ittothelevelofIslamismorofBrahminism。ItispreciselybecauseChristianity hasnotdonethis，thatithasbeenthereligionoftheprogressiveportion ofmankind，andIslamism，Brahminism，etc。havebeenthoseofthestationary portions;orrather（forthereisnosuchthingasareallystationarysociety） ofthedecliningportions。Therehavebeenabundanceofpeople，inallages ofChristianity，whotriedtomakeitsomethingofthesamekind;toconvert usintoasortofChristianMussulmans，withtheBibleforaKoran，prohibiting allimprovement：andgreathasbeentheirpower，andmanyhavehadtosacrifice theirlivesinresistingthem。Buttheyhavebeenresisted，andtheresistancehasmadeuswhatweare，andwillyetmakeuswhatwearetobe。Afterwhathasbeensaidrespectingtheobligationofobedience，itis almostsuperfluoustosayanythingconcerningthemorespecialpointincluded inthegeneralone——awoman’srighttoherownproperty;forIneednot hopethatthistreatisecanmakeanyimpressionuponthosewhoneedanything toconvincethemthatawoman’sinheritanceorgainsoughttobeasmuch herownaftermarriageasbefore。Theruleissimple：whateverwouldbethe husband’sorwife’siftheywerenotmarried，shouldbeundertheirexclusive controlduringmarriage;whichneednotinterferewiththepowertotieup propertybysettlement，inordertopreserveitforchildren。Somepeople aresentimentallyshockedattheideaofaseparateinterestinmoneymatters asinconsistentwiththeidealfusionoftwolivesintoone。Formyownpart， Iamoneofthestrongestsupportersofcommunityofgoods，whenresulting fromanentireunityoffeelingintheowners，whichmakesallthingscommon betweenthem。ButIhavenorelishforacommunityofgoodsrestingonthe doctrine，thatwhatismineisyours，butwhatisyoursisnotmine;and Ishouldprefertodeclineenteringintosuchacompactwithanyone，thoughIweremyselfthepersontoprofitbyit。Thisparticularinjusticeandoppressiontowomen，whichis，tocommon apprehensions，moreobviousthanalltherest，admitsofremedywithoutinterfering withanyothermischiefs：andtherecanbelittledoubtthatitwillbeone oftheearliestremedied。Already，inmanyofthenewandseveralofthe oldStatesoftheAmericanConfederation，provisionshavebeeninsertedeven inthewrittenConstitutions，securingtowomenequalityofrightsinthis respect：andtherebyimprovingmateriallytheposition，inthemarriagerelation， ofthosewomenatleastwhohaveproperty，byleavingthemoneinstrument ofpowerwhichtheyhavenotsignedaway;andpreventingalsothescandalous abuseofthemarriageinstitution，whichisperpetratedwhenamanentraps agirlintomarryinghimwithoutasettlement，forthesolepurposeofgetting possessionofhermoney。Whenthesupportofthefamilydepends，notonproperty， butonearnings，thecommonarrangement，bywhichthemanearnstheincome andthewifesuperintendsthedomesticexpenditure，seemstomeingeneral themostsuitabledivisionoflabourbetweenthetwopersons。If，inaddition tothephysicalsufferingofbearingchildren，andthewholeresponsibility oftheircareandeducationinearlyyears，thewifeundertakesthecareful andeconomicalapplicationofthehusband’searningstothegeneralcomfort ofthefamily;shetakesnotonlyherfairshare，butusuallythelarger share，ofthebodilyandmentalexertionrequiredbytheirjointexistence。 Ifsheundertakesanyadditionalportion，itseldomrelievesherfromthis， butonlypreventsherfromperformingitproperly。Thecarewhichsheis herselfdisabledfromtakingofthechildrenandthehousehold，nobodyelse takes;thoseofthechildrenwhodonotdie，growupastheybestcan，and themanagementofthehouseholdislikelytobesobad，aseveninpoint ofeconomytobeagreatdrawbackfromthevalueofthewife’searnings。 Inanotherwisejuststateofthings，itisnot，therefore，Ithink，adesirable custom，thatthewifeshouldcontributebyherlabourtotheincomeofthe family。Inanunjuststateofthings，herdoingsomaybeusefultoher， bymakingherofmorevalueintheeyesofthemanwhoislegallyhermaster; but，ontheotherhand，itenableshimstillfarthertoabusehispower， byforcinghertowork，andleavingthesupportofthefamilytoherexertions， whilehespendsmostofhistimeindrinkingandidleness。Thepowerofearning isessentialtothedignityofawoman，ifshehasnotindependentproperty。 Butifmarriagewereanequalcontract，notimplyingtheobligationofobedience; iftheconnexionwerenolongerenforcedtotheoppressionofthosetowhom itispurelyamischief，butaseparation，onjustterms（Idonotnowspeak ofadivorce），couldbeobtainedbyanywomanwhowasmorallyentitledto it;andifshewouldthenfindallhonourableemploymentsasfreelyopen toherastomen;itwouldnotbenecessaryforherprotection，thatduring marriagesheshouldmakethisparticularuseofherfaculties。Likeaman whenhechoosesaprofession，so，whenawomanmarries，itmayingeneral beunderstoodthatshemakeschoiceofthemanagementofahousehold，and thebringingupofafamily，asthefirstcalluponherexertions，during asmanyyearsofherlifeasmayberequiredforthepurpose;andthatshe renounces，notallotherobjectsandoccupations，butallwhicharenotconsistent withtherequirementsofthis。Theactualexercise，inahabitualorsystematic manner，ofoutdooroccupations，orsuchascannotbecarriedonathome， wouldbythisprinciplebepracticallyinterdictedtothegreaternumber ofmarriedwomen。Buttheutmostlatitudeoughttoexistfortheadaptation ofgeneralrulestoindividualsuitabilities;andthereoughttobenothing topreventfacultiesexceptionallyadaptedtoanyotherpursuit，fromobeying theirvocationnotwithstandingmarriage：dueprovisionbeingmadeforsupplying otherwiseanyfalling—shortwhichmightbecomeinevitable，inherfullperformance oftheordinaryfunctionsofmistressofafamily。Thesethings，ifonce opinionwererightlydirectedonthesubject，mightwithperfectsafetybe lefttoberegulatedbyopinion，withoutanyinterferenceoflaw。 CHAPTER3Ontheotherpointwhichisinvolvedinthejustequalityofwomen，their admissibilitytoallthefunctionsandoccupationshithertoretainedasthe monopolyofthestrongersex，Ishouldanticipatenodifficultyinconvincing anyonewhohasgonewithmeonthesubjectoftheequalityofwomeninthe family。Ibelievethattheirdisabilitieselsewhereareonlyclungtoin ordertomaintaintheirsubordinationindomesticlife;becausethegenerality ofthemalesexcannotyettoleratetheideaoflivingwithanequal。Were itnotforthat，Ithinkthatalmosteveryone，intheexistingstateofopinion inpoliticsandpoliticaleconomy，wouldadmittheinjusticeofexcluding halfthehumanracefromthegreaternumberoflucrativeoccupations，and fromalmostallhighsocialfunctions;ordainingfromtheirbirtheither thattheyarenot，andcannotbyanypossibilitybecome，fitforemployments whicharelegallyopentothestupidestandbasestoftheothersex，orelse thathoweverfittheymaybe，thoseemploymentsshallbeinterdictedtothem， inordertobepreservedfortheexclusivebenefitofmales。Inthelast twocenturies，when（whichwasseldomthecase）anyreasonbeyondthemere existenceofthefactwasthoughttoberequiredtojustifythedisabilities ofwomen，peopleseldomassignedasareasontheirinferiormentalcapacity; which，intimeswhentherewasarealtrialofpersonalfaculties（fromwhich allwomenwerenotexcluded）inthestrugglesofpubliclife，noonereally believedin。Thereasongiveninthosedayswasnotwomen’sunfitness，but theinterestofsociety，bywhichwasmeanttheinterestofmen：justas theraisond’etat，meaningtheconvenienceofthegovernment，andthesupport ofexistingauthority，wasdeemedasufficientexplanationandexcusefor themostflagitiouscrimes。Inthepresentday，powerholdsasmootherlanguage， andwhomsoeveritoppresses，alwayspretendstodosofortheirowngood： accordingly，whenanythingisforbiddentowomen，itisthoughtnecessary tosay，anddesirabletobelieve，thattheyareincapableofdoingit，and thattheydepartfromtheirrealpathofsuccessandhappinesswhenthey aspiretoit。Buttomakethisreasonplausible（Idonotsayvalid），those bywhomitisurgedmustbepreparedtocarryittoamuchgreaterlength thananyoneventurestodointhefaceofpresentexperience。Itisnotsufficient tomaintainthatwomenontheaveragearelessgiftedthenmenontheaverage， withcertainofthehighermentalfaculties，orthatasmallernumberof womenthanofmenarefitforoccupationsandfunctionsofthehighestintellectual character。Itisnecessarytomaintainthatnowomenatallarefitforthem， andthatthemosteminentwomenarcinferiorinmentalfacultiestothemost mediocreofthemenonwhomthosefunctionsatpresentdevolve。Forifthe performanceofthefunctionisdecidedeitherbycompetition，orbyanymode ofchoicewhichsecuresregardtothepublicinterest，thereneedsbeno apprehensionthatanyimportantemploymentswillfallintothehandsofwomen inferiortoaveragemen，ortotheaverageoftheirmalecompetitors。The onlyresultwouldbethattherewouldbefewerwomenthanmeninsuchemployments; aresultcertaintohappeninanycase，ifonlyfromthepreferencealways likelytobefeltbythemajorityofwomenfortheonevocationinwhich thereisnobodytocompetewiththem。Now，themostdetermineddepreciator ofwomenwillnotventuretodeny，thatwhenweaddtheexperienceofrecent timestothatofagespast，women，andnotafewmerely，butmanywomen， haveprovedthemselvescapableofeverything，perhapswithoutasingleexception， whichisdonebymen，andofdoingitsuccessfullyandcreditably。Theutmost thatcanbesaidis，thattherearcmanythingswhichnoneofthemhavesucceeded indoingaswellastheyhavebeendonebysomemen——manyinwhichthey havenotreachedtheveryhighestrank。Butthereareextremelyfew，dependent onlyonmentalfaculties，inwhichtheyhavenotattainedtheranknextto thehighest。Isnotthisenough，andmuchmorethanenough，tomakeita tyrannytothem，andadetrimenttosociety，thattheyshouldnotbeallowed tocompetewithmenfortheexerciseofthesefunctions？Isitnotamere truismtosay，thatsuchfunctionsareoftenfilledbymenfarlessfitfor themthannumbersofwomen，andwhowouldbebeatenbywomeninanyfair fieldofcompetition？Whatdifferencedoesitmakethattheremaybemen somewhere，fullyemployedaboutotherthings，whomaybestillbetterqualified forthethingsinquestionthanthesewomen？Doesnotthistakeplacein allcompetitions？Istheresogreatasuperfluityofmenfitforhighduties， thatsocietycanaffordtorejecttheserviceofanycompetentperson？Are wesocertainofalwaysfindingamanmadetoourhandsforanydutyorfunction ofsocialimportancewhichfallsvacant，thatwelosenothingbyputting abanupononehalfofmankind，andrefusingbeforehandtomaketheirfaculties available，howeverdistinguishedtheymaybe？Andevenifwecoulddowithout them，woulditbeconsistentwithjusticetorefusetothemtheirfairshare ofhonouranddistinction，ortodenytothemtheequalmoralrightofall humanbeingstochoosetheiroccupation（shortofinjurytoothers）according totheirownpreferences，attheirownrisk？Noristheinjusticeconfined tothem：itissharedbythosewhoareinapositiontobenefitbytheir services。Toordainthatanykindofpersonsshallnotbephysicians，or shallnotbeadvocates，orshallnotbeMembersofParliament，istoinjure notthemonly，butallwhoemployphysiciansoradvocates，orelectMembers ofParliament，andwhoaredeprivedofthestimulatingeffectofgreater competitionontheexertionsofthecompetitors，aswellasrestrictedtoanarrowerrangeofindividualchoice。ItwillperhapsbesufficientifIconfinemyself，inthedetailsofmy argument，tofunctionsofapublicnature：since，ifIamsuccessfulasto those，itprobablywillbereadilygrantedthatwomenshouldbeadmissible toallotheroccupationstowhichitisatallmaterialwhethertheyare admittedornot。Andhereletmebeginbymarkingoutonefunction，broadly distinguishedfromallothers，theirrighttowhichisentirelyindependent ofanyquestionwhichcanberaisedconcerningtheirfaculties。Imeanthe suffrage，bothparliamentaryandmunicipal。Therighttoshareinthechoice ofthosewhoaretoexerciseapublictrust，isaltogetheradistinctthing fromthatofcompetingforthetrustitself。IfnoonecouldvoteforaMember ofParliamentwhowasnotfittobeacandidate，thegovernmentwouldbe anarrowoligarchyindeed。Tohaveavoiceinchoosingthosebywhomone istobegoverned，isameansofself—protectionduetoeveryone，though heweretoremainforeverexcludedfromthefunctionofgoverning：andthat womenareconsideredfittohavesuchachoice，maybepresumedfromthe fact，thatthelawalreadygivesittowomeninthemostimportantofall casestothemselves：forthechoiceofthemanwhoistogovernawomanto theendoflife，isalwayssupposedtobevoluntarilymadebyherself。In thecaseofelectiontopublictrusts，itisthebusinessofconstitutional lawtosurroundtherightofsuffragewithallneedfulsecuritiesandlimitations; butwhateversecuritiesaresufficientinthecaseofthemalesex，noothers needberequiredinthecaseofwomen。Underwhateverconditions，andwithin whateverlimits，menareadmittedtothesuffrage，thereisnotashadow ofjustificationfornotadmittingwomenunderthesame。Themajorityof thewomenofanyclassarenotlikelytodifferinpoliticalopinionfrom themajorityofthemenofthesameclass，unlessthequestionbeonein whichtheinterestsofwomen，assuch，areinsomewayinvolved;andifthey areso，womenrequirethesuffrage，astheirguaranteeofjustandequal consideration。Thisoughttobeobviouseventothosewhocoincideinno otherofthedoctrinesforwhichIcontend。Evenifeverywomanwereawife， andifeverywifeoughttobeaslave，allthemorewouldtheseslavesstand inneedoflegalprotection：andweknowwhatlegalprotectiontheslaveshave，wherethelawsaremadebytheirmasters。Withregardtothefitnessofwomen，notonlytoparticipateinelections， butthemselvestoholdofficesorpractiseprofessionsinvolvingimportant publicresponsibilities;Ihavealreadyobservedthatthisconsideration isnotessentialtothepracticalquestionindispute：sinceanywoman，who succeedsinanopenprofession，provesbythatveryfactthatsheisqualified forit。Andinthecaseofpublicoffices，ifthepoliticalsystemofthe countryissuchastoexcludeunfitmen，itwillequallyexcludeunfitwomen： whileifitisnot，thereisnoadditionalevilinthefactthattheunfit personswhomitadmitsmaybeeitherwomenormen。Aslongthereforeasit isacknowledgedthatevenafewwomenmaybefitfortheseduties，thelaws whichshutthedooronthoseexceptionscannotbejustifiedbyanyopinion whichcanbeheldrespectingthecapacitiesofwomeningeneral。But，though thislastconsiderationisnotessential，itisfarfrombeingirrelevant。 Anunprejudicedviewofitgivesadditionalstrengthtotheargumentsagainst thedisabilitiesofwomen，andreinforcesthembyhighconsiderationsofpracticalutility。Letusfirstmakeentireabstractionofallpsychologicalconsiderations tendingtoshow，thatanyofthementaldifferencessupposedtoexistbetween womenandmenarebutthenaturaleffectofthedifferencesintheireducation andcircumstances，andindicatenoradicaldifference，farlessradicalinferiority， ofnature。Letusconsiderwomenonlyastheyalreadyare，orastheyare knowntohavebeen;andthecapacitieswhichtheyhavealreadypractically shown。Whattheyhavedone，thatatleast，ifnothingelse，itisproved thattheycando。Whenweconsiderhowsedulouslytheyarealltrainedaway from，insteadofbeingtrainedtowards，anyoftheoccupationsorobjects reservedformen，itisevidentthatIamtakingaveryhumblegroundfor them，whenIresttheircaseonwhattheyhaveactuallyachieved。For，in thiscase，negativeevidenceisworthlittle，——whileanypositiveevidence isconclusive。Itcannotbeinferredtobeimpossiblethatawomanshould beaHomer，oranAristotle，oraMichaelAngelo，oraBeethoven，because nowomanhasyetactuallyproducedworkscomparabletotheirsinanyofthose linesofexcellence。Thisnegativefactatmostleavesthequestionuncertain， andopentopsychologicaldiscussion。Butitisquitecertainthatawoman canbeaQueenElizabeth，oraDeborah，oraJoanofArc，sincethisisnot inference，butfact。Nowitisacuriousconsideration，thattheonlythings whichtheexistinglawexcludeswomenfromdoing，arethethingswhichthey haveprovedthattheyareabletodo。Thereisnolawtopreventawoman fromhavingwrittenalltheplaysofShakespeare，orcomposedalltheoperas ofMozart。ButQueenElizabethorQueenVictoria，hadtheynotinherited thethrone，couldnothavebeenentrustedwiththesmallestofthepoliticalduties，ofwhichtheformershowedherselfequaltothegreatest。###第4章Ifanythingconclusivecouldbeinferredfromexperience，withoutpsychological analysis，itwouldbethatthethingswhichwomenarenotallowedtodoare theveryonesforwhichtheyarepeculiarlyqualified;sincetheirvocation forgovernmenthasmadeitsway，andbecomeconspicuous，throughthevery fewopportunitieswhichhavebeengiven;whileinthelinesofdistinction whichapparentlywerefreelyopentothem，theyhavebynomeanssoeminently distinguishedthemselves。Weknowhowsmallanumberofreigningqueenshistory presents，incomparisonwiththatofkings。Ofthissmallernumberafar largerproportionhaveshowntalentsforrule;thoughmanyofthemhaveoccupied thethroneindifficultperiods。Itisremarkable，too，thattheyhave，in agreatnumberofinstances，beendistinguishedbymeritsthemostopposite totheimaginaryandconventionalcharacterofwomen：theyhavebeenasmuch remarkedforthefirmnessandvigouroftheirrule，asforitsintelligence。 When，toqueensandempresses，weaddregents，andviceroysofprovinces， thelistofwomenwhohavebeeneminentrulersofmankindswellstoagreat length。（1*）Thisfactissoundeniable，thatsomeone，longago，triedto retorttheargument，andturnedtheadmittedtruthintoanadditionalinsult， bysayingthatqueensarebetterthankings，becauseunderkingswomengovern，butunderqueens，men。Itmayseemawasteofreasoningtoargueagainstabadjoke;butsuch thingsdoaffectpeople’sminds;andIhaveheardmenquotethissaying， withanairasiftheythoughtthattherewassomethinginit。Atanyrate， itwillserveasanything，elseforastarting—pointindiscussion。Isay， then，thatitisnottruethatunderkings，womengovern。Suchcasesare entirelyexceptional：andweakkingshavequiteasoftengovernedillthrough theinfluenceofmalefavourites，asoffemale。Whenakingisgovernedby awomanmerelythroughhisamatorypropensities，goodgovernmentisnotprobable， thougheventhenthereareexceptions。ButFrenchhistorycountstwokings whohavevoluntarilygiventhedirectionofaffairsduringmanyyears，the onetohismother，theothertohissister：oneofthem，CharlesVIII，was amereboy，butindoingsohefollowedtheintentionsofhisfatherLouis XI，theablestmonarchofhisage。Theother，SaintLouis，wasthebest， andoneofthemostvigorousrulers，sincethetimeofCharlemagne。Both theseprincessesruledinamannerhardlyequalledbyanyprinceamongtheir contemporaries。TheEmperorCharlestheFifth，themostpoliticprinceof histime，whohadasgreatanumberofablemeninhisserviceasaruler everhad，andwasoneoftheleastlikelyofallsovereignstosacrifice hisinteresttopersonalfeelings，madetwoprincessesofhisfamilysuccessively GovernorsoftheNetherlands，andkeptoneorotheroftheminthatpost duringhiswholelife（theywereafterwardssucceededbyathird）。Bothruled verysuccessfully，andoneofthem，MargaretofAustria，asoneoftheablest politiciansoftheage。Somuchforonesideofthequestion。Nowastothe other。Whenitissaidthatunderqueensmengovern，isthesamemeaning tobeunderstoodaswhenkingsaresaidtobegovernedbywomen？Isitmeant thatqueenschooseastheirinstrumentsofgovernment，theassociatesof theirpersonalpleasures？Thecaseisrareevenwiththosewhoareasunscrupulous onthelatterpointasCatherineII：anditisnotinthesecasesthatthe goodgovernment，allegedtoarisefrommaleinfluence，istobefound。If itbetrue，then，thattheadministrationisinthehandsofbettermenunder aqueenthanunderanaverageking，itmustbethatqueenshaveasuperior capacityforchoosingthem;andwomenmustbebetterqualifiedthanmenboth forthepositionofsovereign，andforthatofchiefminister;fortheprincipal businessofaPrimeMinisterisnottogoverninperson，buttofindthe fittestpersonstoconducteverydepartmentofpublicaffairs。Themorerapid insightintocharacter，whichisoneoftheadmittedpointsofsuperiority inwomenovermen，mustcertainlymakethem，withanythinglikeparityof qualificationsinotherrespects，moreaptthanmeninthatchoiceofinstruments， whichisnearlythemostimportantbusinessofeveryonewhohastodowith governingmankind。EventheunprincipledCatherinedeMedicicouldfeelthe valueofaChancellordel’Hopital。Butitisalsotruethatmostgreatqueens havebeengreatbytheirowntalentsforgovernment，andhavebeenwellserved preciselyforthatreason。Theyretainedthesupremedirectionofaffairs intheirownhands：andiftheylistenedtogoodadvisers，theygavebythat factthestrongestproofthattheirjudgmentfittedthemfordealingwiththegreatquestionsofgovernment。Isitreasonabletothinkthatthosewhoarefitforthegreaterfunctions ofpolitics，areincapableofqualifyingthemselvesfortheless？Isthere anyreasoninthenatureofthings，thatthewivesandsistersofprinces should，whenevercalledon，befoundascompetentastheprincesthemselves totheirbusiness，butthatthewivesandsistersofstatesmen，andadministrators， anddirectorsofcompanies，andmanagersofpublicinstitutions，shouldbe unabletodowhatisdonebytheirbrothersandhusbands？Therealreason isplainenough;itisthatprincesses，beingmoreraisedabovethegenerality ofmenbytheirrankthanplacedbelowthembytheirsex，haveneverbeen taughtthatitwasimproperforthemtoconcernthemselveswithpolitics; buthavebeenallowedtofeeltheliberalinterestnaturaltoanycultivated humanbeing，inthegreattransactionswhichtookplacearoundthem，and inwhichtheymightbecalledontotakeapart。Theladiesofreigningfamilies aretheonlywomenwhoareallowedthesamerangeofinterestsandfreedom ofdevelopmentasmen;anditispreciselyintheircasethatthereisnot foundtobeanyinferiority。Exactlywhereandinproportionaswomen’scapacitiesforgovernmenthavebeentried，inthatproportionhavetheybeenfoundadequate。Thisfactisinaccordancewiththebestgeneralconclusionswhichthe world’simperfectexperienceseemsasyettosuggest，concerningthepeculiar tendenciesandaptitudescharacteristicofwomen，aswomenhavehitherto been。Idonotsay，astheywillcontinuetobe;for，asIhavealreadysaid morethanonce，Iconsideritpresumptioninanyonetopretendtodecide whatwomenareorarenot，canorcannotbe，bynaturalconstitution。They havealwayshithertobeenkept，asfarasregardsspontaneousdevelopment， insounnaturalastate，thattheirnaturecannotbuthavebeengreatlydistorted anddisguised;andnoonecansafelypronouncethatifwomen’snaturewere lefttochooseitsdirectionasfreelyasmen’s，andifnoartificialbent wereattemptedtobegiventoitexceptthatrequiredbytheconditionsof humansociety，andgiventobothsexesalike，therewouldbeanymaterial difference，orperhapsanydifferenceatall，inthecharacterandcapacities whichwouldunfoldthemselves。Ishallpresentlyshow，thateventheleast contestableofthedifferenceswhichnowexist，aresuchasmayverywell havebeenproducedmerelybycircumstances，withoutanydifferenceofnatural capacity。But，lookingatwomenastheyareknowninexperience，itmaybe saidofthem，withmoretruththanbelongstomostothergeneralisations onthesubject，thatthegeneralbentoftheirtalentsistowardsthepractical。 Thisstatementisconformabletoallthepublichistoryofwomen，inthe presentandthepast。Itisnolessborneoutbycommonanddailyexperience。 Letusconsiderthespecialnatureofthementalcapacitiesmostcharacteristic ofawomanoftalent。Theyareallofakindwhichfitsthemforpractice， andmakesthemtendtowardsit。Whatismeantbyawoman’scapacityofintuitive perception？Itmeans，arapidandcorrectinsightintopresentfact。Ithas nothingtodowithgeneralprinciples。Nobodyeverperceivedascientific lawofnaturebyintuition，norarrivedatageneralruleofdutyorprudence byit。Theseareresultsofslowandcarefulcollectionandcomparisonof experience;andneitherthemennorthewomen。Ofintuitionusuallyshine inthisdepartment，unless，indeed，theexperiencenecessaryissuchasthey canacquirebythemselves。Forwhatiscalledtheirintuitivesagacitymakes thempeculiarlyaptingatheringsuchgeneraltruthsascanbecollected fromtheirindividualmeansofobservation。When，consequently，theychance tobeaswellprovidedasmenarewiththeresultsofotherpeople’sexperience， byreadingandeducation（Iusethewordchanceadvisedly，for，inrespect totheknowledgethattendstofitthemforthegreaterconcernsoflife， theonlyeducatedwomenaretheself—educated）theyarebetterfurnished thanmeningeneralwiththeessentialrequisitesofskilfulandsuccessful practice。Menwhohavebeenmuchtaught，areapttobedeficientinthesense ofpresentfact;theydonotsee，inthefactswhichtheyarecalledupon todealwith，whatisreallythere，butwhattheyhavebeentaughttoexpect。 Thisisseldomthecasewithwomenofanyability。Theircapacityof\"intuition\" preservesthemfromit。Withequalityofexperienceandofgeneralfaculties， awomanusuallyseesmuchmorethanamanofwhatisimmediatelybeforeher。 Nowthissensibilitytothepresent，isthemainqualityonwhichthecapacity forpractice，asdistinguishedfromtheory，depends。Todiscovergeneral principles，belongstothespeculativefaculty：todiscernanddiscriminate theparticularcasesinwhichtheyareandarenotapplicable，constitutes practicaltalent：andforthis，womenastheynowarehaveapeculiaraptitude。 Iadmitthattherecanbenogoodpracticewithoutprinciples，andthatthe predominantplacewhichquicknessofobservationholdsamongawoman’sfaculties， makesherparticularlyapttobuildoverhastygeneralisationsuponherown observation;thoughatthesametimenolessreadyinrectifyingthosegeneralisations， asherobservationtakesawiderrange。Butthecorrectivetothisdefect， isaccesstotheexperienceofthehumanrace;generalknowledge——exactly thethingwhicheducationcanbestsupply。Awoman’smistakesarespecifically thoseofacleverself—educatedman，whooftenseeswhatmentrainedinroutine donotsee，butfallsintoerrorsforwantofknowingthingswhichhavelong beenknown。Ofcoursehehasacquiredmuchofthepre—existingknowledge， orhecouldnothavegotonatall;butwhatheknowsofithehaspickedupinfragmentsandatrandom，aswomendo。Butthisgravitationofwomen’smindstothepresent，tothereal，to actualfact，whileinitsexclusivenessitisasourceoferrors，isalso amostusefulcounteractiveofthecontraryerror。Theprincipalandmost characteristicaberrationofspeculativemindsassuch，consistsprecisely inthedeficiencyofthislivelyperceptionandever—presentsenseofobjective fact。Forwantofthis，theyoftennotonlyoverlookthecontradictionwhich outwardfactsopposetotheirtheories，butlosesightofthelegitimate purposeofspeculationaltogether，andlettheirspeculativefacultiesgo astrayintoregionsnotpeopledwithrealbeings，animateorinanimate，even idealised，butwithpersonifiedshadowscreatedbytheillusionsofmetaphysics orbythemereentanglementofwords，andthinktheseshadowstheproper objectsofthehighest，themosttranscendant，philosophy。Hardlyanything canbeofgreatervaluetoamanoftheoryandspeculationwhoemployshimself notincollectingmaterialsofknowledgebyobservation，butinworkingthem upbyprocessesofthoughtintocomprehensivetruthsofscienceandlaws ofconduct，thantocarryonhisspeculationsinthecompanionship，andunder thecriticism，ofareallysuperiorwoman。Thereisnothingcomparableto itforkeepinghisthoughtswithinthelimitsofrealthings，andtheactual factsofnature。Awomanseldomrunswildafteranabstraction。Thehabitual directionofhermindtodealingwiththingsasindividualsratherthanin groups，and（whatiscloselyconnectedwithit）hermorelivelyinterest inthepresentfeelingsofpersons，whichmakesherconsiderfirstofall， inanythingwhichclaimstobeappliedtopractice，inwhatmannerpersons willbeaffectedbyit——thesetwothingsmakeherextremelyunlikelyto putfaithinanyspeculationwhichlosessightofindividuals，anddeals withthingsasiftheyexistedforthebenefitofsomeimaginaryentity， somemerecreationofthemind，notresolvableintothefeelingsofliving beings。Women’sthoughtsarethusasusefulingivingrealitytothoseof thinkingmen，asmen’sthoughtsingivingwidthandlargenesstothoseof women。Indepth，asdistinguishedfrombreadth，Igreatlydoubtifevennow，women，comparedwithmen，areatanydisadvantage。Iftheexistingmentalcharacteristicsofwomenarethusvaluableeven inaidofspeculation，theyarestillmoreimportant，whenspeculationhas doneitswork，forcarryingouttheresultsofspeculationintopractice。 Forthereasonsalreadygiven，womenarecomparativelyunlikelytofallinto thecommonerrorofmen，thatofstickingtotheirrulesinacasewhose specialitieseithertakeitoutoftheclasstowhichtherulesareapplicable， orrequireaspecialadaptationofthem。Letusnowconsideranotherofthe admittedsuperioritiesofcleverwomen，greaterquicknessofapprehension。 Isnotthispre—eminentlyaqualitywhichfitsapersonforpractice？In action，everythingcontinuallydependsupondecidingpromptly。Inspeculation， nothingdoes。Amerethinkercanwait，cantaketimetoconsider，cancollect additionalevidence;heisnotobligedtocompletehisphilosophyatonce， lesttheopportunityshouldgoby。Thepowerofdrawingthebestconclusion possiblefrominsufficientdataisnotindeeduselessinphilosophy;the constructionofaprovisionalhypothesisconsistentwithallknownfacts isoftentheneedfulbasisforfurtherinquiry。Butthisfacultyisrather serviceableinphilosophy，thanthemainqualificationforit：and，forthe auxiliaryaswellasforthemainoperation，thephilosophercanallowhimself anytimehepleases。Heisinnoneedofthecapacityofdoingrapidlywhat hedoes;whatheratherneedsispatience，toworkonslowlyuntilimperfect lightshavebecomeperfect，andaconjecturehasripenedintoatheorem。 Forthose，onthecontrary，whosebusinessiswiththefugitiveandperishable ——withindividualfacts，notkindsoffacts——rapidityofthoughtisa qualificationnextonlyinimportancetothepowerofthoughtitself。He whohasnothisfacultiesunderimmediatecommand，inthecontingenciesof action，mightaswellnothavethematall。Hemaybefittocriticise，but heisnotfittoact。Nowitisinthisthatwomen，andthemenwhoaremost likewomen，confessedlyexcel。Theothersortofman，howeverpre—eminent maybehisfaculties，arrivesslowlyatcompletecommandofthem：rapidity ofjudgmentandpromptitudeofjudiciousaction，eveninthethingsheknowsbest，arethegradualandlateresultofstrenuouseffortgrownintohabit。Itwillbesaid，perhaps，thatthegreaternervoussusceptibilityofwomen isadisqualificationforpractice，inanythingbutdomesticlife，byrendering themmobile，changeable，toovehementlyundertheinfluenceofthemoment， incapableofdoggedperseverance，unequalanduncertaininthepowerofusing theirfaculties。Ithinkthatthesephrasessumupthegreaterpartofthe objectionscommonlymadetothefitnessofwomenforthehigherclassof seriousbusiness。Muchofallthisisthemereoverflowofnervousenergy runtowaste，andwouldceasewhentheenergywasdirectedtoadefinite end。Muchisalsotheresultofconsciousorunconsciouscultivation;as weseebythealmosttotaldisappearanceof\"hysterics\"andfainting—fits， sincetheyhavegoneoutoffashion。Moreover，whenpeoplearebroughtup， likemanywomenofthehigherclasses（thoughlesssoinourowncountry thananyother），akindofhot—houseplants，shieldedfromthewholesome vicissitudesofairandtemperature，anduntrainedinanyoftheoccupations andexerciseswhichgivestimulusanddevelopmenttothecirculatoryand muscularsystem，whiletheirnervoussystem，especiallyinitsemotional department，iskeptinunnaturallyactiveplay;itisnowonderifthose ofthemwhodonotdieofconsumption，growupwithconstitutionsliable toderangementfromslightcauses，bothinternalandexternal，andwithout staminatosupportanytask，physicalormental，requiringcontinuityof effort。Butwomenbroughtuptoworkfortheirlivelihoodshownoneofthese morbidcharacteristics，unlessindeedtheyarechainedtoanexcessofsedentary workinconfinedandunhealthyrooms。Womenwhointheirearlyyearshave sharedinthehealthfulphysicaleducationandbodilyfreedomoftheirbrothers， andwhoobtainasufficiencyofpureairandexerciseinafter—life，very rarelyhaveanyexcessivesusceptibilityofnerveswhichcandisqualifythem foractivepursuits。Thereisindeedacertainproportionofpersons，in bothsexes，inwhomanunusualdegreeofnervoussensibilityisconstitutional， andofsomarkedacharacterastobethefeatureoftheirorganisationwhich exercisesthegreatestinfluenceoverthewholecharacterofthevitalphenomena。 Thisconstitution，likeotherphysicalconformations，ishereditary，and istransmittedtosonsaswellasdaughters;butitispossible，andprobable， thatthenervoustemperament（asitiscalled）isinheritedbyagreater numberofwomenthanofmen。Wewillassumethisasafact：andletmethen ask，aremenofnervoustemperamentfoundtobeunfitforthedutiesand pursuitsusuallyfollowedbymen？Ifnot，whyshouldwomenofthesametemperament beunfitforthem？Thepeculiaritiesofthetemperamentare，nodoubt，within certainlimits，anobstacletosuccessinsomeemployments，thoughanaid toitinothers。Butwhentheoccupationissuitabletothetemperament， andsometimesevenwhenitisunsuitable，themostbrilliantexamplesof successarecontinuallygivenbythemenofhighnervoussensibility。They aredistinguishedintheirpracticalmanifestationschieflybythis，that beingsusceptibleofahigherdegreeofexcitementthanthoseofanother physicalconstitution，theirpowerswhenexciteddiffermorethaninthe caseofotherpeople，fromthoseshownintheirordinarystate：theyare raised，asitwere，abovethemselves，anddothingswitheasewhichthey arewhollyincapableofatothertimes。Butthisloftyexcitementisnot， exceptinweakbodilyconstitutions，amereflash，whichpassesawayimmediately， leavingnopermanenttraces，andincompatiblewithpersistentandsteady pursuitofanobject。Itisthecharacterofthenervoustemperamenttobe capableofsustainedexcitement，holdingoutthroughlong—continuedefforts。 Itiswhatismeantbyspirit。Itiswhatmakesthehigh—bredracehorserun withoutslackeningspeedtillhedropsdowndead。Itiswhathasenabled somanydelicatewomentomaintainthemostsublimeconstancynotonlyat thestake，butthroughalongpreliminarysuccessionofmentalandbodily tortures。Itisevidentthatpeopleofthistemperamentareparticularly aptforwhatmaybecalledtheexecutivedepartmentoftheleadershipof mankind。Theyarethematerialofgreatorators，greatpreachers，impressive diffusersofmoralinfluences。Theirconstitutionmightbedeemedlessfavourable tothequalitiesrequiredfromastatesmaninthecabinet，orfromajudge。 Itwouldbeso，iftheconsequencenecessarilyfollowedthatbecausepeople areexcitabletheymustalwaysbeinastateofexcitement。Butthisiswholly aquestionoftraining。Strongfeelingistheinstrumentandelementofstrong self—control：butitrequirestobecultivatedinthatdirection。Whenit is，itformsnottheheroesofimpulseonly，butthosealsoofself—conquest。 Historyandexperienceprovethatthemostpassionatecharactersarethe mostfanaticallyrigidintheirfeelingsofduty，whentheirpassionhas beentrainedtoactinthatdirection。Thejudgewhogivesajustdecision inacasewherehisfeelingsareintenselyinterestedontheotherside， derivesfromthatsamestrengthoffeelingthedeterminedsenseoftheobligation ofjustice，whichenableshimtoachievethisvictoryoverhimself。Thecapability ofthatloftyenthusiasmwhichtakesthehumanbeingoutofhisevery—day character，reactsuponthedailycharacteritself。Hisaspirationsandpowers whenheisinthisexceptionalstate，becomethetypewithwhichhecompares， andbywhichheestimates，hissentimentsandproceedingsatothertimes： andhishabitualpurposesassumeacharactermouldedbyandassimilatedto themomentsofloftyexcitement，althoughthose，fromthephysicalnature ofahumanbeing，canonlybetransient。Experienceofraces，aswellas ofindividuals，doesnotshowthoseofexcitabletemperamenttobelessfit， ontheaverage，eitherforspeculationorpractice，thanthemoreunexcitable。 TheFrench，andtheItalians，areundoubtedlybynaturemorenervouslyexcitable thantheTeutonicraces，and，comparedatleastwiththeEnglish，theyhave amuchgreaterhabitualanddailyemotionallife：buthavetheybeenless greatinscience，inpublicbusiness，inlegalandjudicialeminence，or inwar？ThereisabundantevidencethattheGreekswereofold，astheir descendantsandsuccessorsstillare，oneofthemostexcitableoftheraces ofmankind。Itissuperfluoustoask，whatamongtheachievementsofmen theydidnotexcelin。TheRomans，probably，asanequallysouthernpeople， hadthesameoriginaltemperament：butthesterncharacteroftheirnational discipline，likethatoftheSpartans，madethemanexampleoftheopposite typeofnationalcharacter;thegreaterstrengthoftheirnaturalfeelings beingchieflyapparentintheintensitywhichthesameoriginaltemperament madeitpossibletogivetotheartificial。Ifthesecasesexemplifywhat anaturallyexcitablepeoplemaybemade，theIrishCeltsaffordoneofthe aptestexamplesofwhattheyarewhenlefttothemselves;（ifthosecanbe saidtobelefttothemselveswhohavebeenforcenturiesundertheindirect influenceofbadgovernment，andthedirecttrainingofaCatholichierarchy andofasincerebeliefintheCatholicreligion）。TheIrishcharactermust beconsidered，therefore，asanunfavourablecase：yet，wheneverthecircumstances oftheindividualhavebeenatallfavourable，whatpeoplehaveshowngreater capacityforthemostvariedandmultifariousindividualeminence？Likethe FrenchcomparedwiththeEnglish，theIrishwiththeSwiss，theGreeksor ItalianscomparedwiththeGermanraces，sowomencomparedwithmenmaybe found，ontheaverage，todothesamethingswithsomevarietyintheparticular kindofexcellence。But，thattheywoulddothemfullyaswellonthewhole， iftheireducationandcultivationwereadaptedtocorrectinginsteadof aggravatingtheinfirmitiesincidenttotheirtemperament，Iseenotthesmallestreasontodoubt。Supposingit，however，tobetruethatwomen’smindsarebynaturemore mobilethanthoseofmen，lesscapableofpersistinglonginthesamecontinuous effort，morefittedfordividingtheirfacultiesamongmanythingsthanfor travellinginanyonepathtothehighestpointwhichcanbereachedbyit： thismaybetrueofwomenastheynoware（thoughnotwithoutgreatandnumerous exceptions），andmayaccountfortheirhavingremainedbehindthehighest orderofmeninpreciselythethingsinwhichthisabsorptionofthewhole mindinonesetofideasandoccupationsmayseemtobemostrequisite。Still， thisdifferenceisonewhichcanonlyaffectthekindofexcellence，not theexcellenceitself，oritspracticalworth：anditremainstobeshown whetherthisexclusiveworkingofapartofthemind，thisabsorptionof thewholethinkingfacultyinasinglesubject，andconcentrationofiton asinglework，isthenormalandhealthfulconditionofthehumanfaculties， evenforspeculativeuses。Ibelievethatwhatisgainedinspecialdevelopment bythisconcentration，islostinthecapacityofthemindfortheother purposesoflife;andeveninabstractthought，itismydecidedopinion thattheminddoesmorebyfrequentlyreturningtoadifficultproblem，than bystickingtoitwithoutinterruption。Forthepurposes，atallevents， ofpractice，fromitshighesttoitshumblestdepartments，thecapacityof passingpromptlyfromonesubjectofconsiderationtoanother，withoutletting theactivespringoftheintellectrundownbetweenthetwo，isapowerfar morevaluable;andthispowerwomenpre—eminentlypossess，byvirtueofthe verymobilityofwhichtheyareaccused。Theyperhapshaveitfromnature， buttheycertainlyhaveitbytrainingandeducation;fornearlythewhole oftheoccupationsofwomenconsistinthemanagementofsmallbutmultitudinous details，oneachofwhichthemindcannotdwellevenforaminute，butmust passontootherthings，andifanythingrequireslongerthought，muststeal timeatoddmomentsforthinkingofit。Thecapacityindeedwhichwomenshow fordoingtheirthinkingincircumstancesandattimeswhichalmostanyman wouldmakeanexcusetohimselffornotattemptingit，hasoftenbeennoticed： andawoman’smind，thoughitmaybeoccupiedonlywithsmallthings，can hardlyeverpermititselftobevacant，asaman’ssoofteniswhennot engagedinwhathechoosestoconsiderthebusinessofhislife。Thebusiness ofawoman’sordinarylifeisthingsingeneral，andcanaslittleceasetogoonastheworldtogoround。But（itissaid）thereisanatomicalevidenceofthesuperiormentalcapacity ofmencomparedwithwomen：theyhavealargerbrain。Ireply，thatinthe firstplacethefactitselfisdoubtful。Itisbynomeansestablishedthat thebrainofawomanissmallerthanthatofaman。Ifitisinferredmerely becauseawoman’sbodilyframegenerallyisoflessdimensionsthanaman’s， thiscriterionwouldleadtostrangeconsequences。Atallandlarge—boned manmustonthisshowingbewonderfullysuperiorinintelligencetoasmall man，andanelephantorawhalemustprodigiouslyexcelmankind。Thesize ofthebraininhumanbeings，anatomistssay，variesmuchlessthanthesize ofthebody，orevenofthehead，andtheonecannotbeatallinferredfrom theother。Itiscertainthatsomewomenhaveaslargeabrainasanyman。 Itiswithinmyknowledgethatamanwhohadweighedmanyhumanbrains，said thattheheaviestheknewof，heaviereventhanCuvier’s（theheaviestpreviously recorded），wasthatofawoman。Next，Imustobservethatthepreciserelation whichexistsbetweenthebrainandtheintellectualpowersisnotyetwell understood，butisasubjectofgreatdispute。Thatthereisaveryclose relationwecannotdoubt。Thebrainiscertainlythematerialorganofthought andfeeling：and（makingabstractionofthegreatunsettledcontroversyrespecting theappropriationofdifferentpartsofthebraintodifferentmentalfaculties） Iadmitthatitwouldbeananomaly，andanexceptiontoallweknowofthe generallawsoflifeandorganisation，ifthesizeoftheorganwerewholly indifferenttothefunction;ifnoaccessionofpowerwerederivedfromthe greatmagnitudeoftheinstrument。Buttheexceptionandtheanomalywould befullyasgreatiftheorganexercisedinfluencebyitsmagnitudeonly。 Inallthemoredelicateoperationsofnature——ofwhichthoseoftheanimated creationarethemostdelicate，andthoseofthenervoussystembyfarthe mostdelicateofthese——differencesintheeffectdependasmuchondifferences ofqualityinthephysicalagents，asontheirquantity：andifthequality ofaninstrumentistobetestedbythenicetyanddelicacyoftheworkit cando，theindicationspointtoagreateraveragefinenessofqualityin thebrainandnervoussystemofwomenthanofmen。Dismissingabstractdifference ofquality，athingdifficulttoverify，theefficiencyofanorganisknown todependnotsolelyonitssizebutonitsactivity：andofthiswehave anapproximatemeasureintheenergywithwhichthebloodcirculatesthrough it，boththestimulusandthereparativeforcebeingmainlydependenton thecirculation。Itwouldnotbesurprising——itisindeedanhypothesis whichaccordswellwiththedifferencesactuallyobservedbetweenthemental operationsofthetwosexes——ifmenontheaverageshouldhavetheadvantage inthesizeofthebrain，andwomeninactivityofcerebralcirculation。 Theresultswhichconjecture，foundedonanalogy，wouldleadustoexpect fromthisdifferenceoforganisation，wouldcorrespondtosomeofthosewhich wemostcommonlysee。Inthefirstplace，thementaloperationsofmenmight beexpectedtobeslower。Theywouldneitherbesopromptaswomeninthinking， norsoquicktofeel。Largebodiestakemoretimetogetintofullaction。 Ontheotherhand，whenoncegotthoroughlyintoplay，men’sbrainwould bearmorework。Itwouldbemorepersistentinthelinefirsttaken;itwould havemoredifficultyinchangingfromonemodeofactiontoanother，but， intheonethingitwasdoing，itcouldgoonlongerwithoutlossofpower orsenseoffatigue。Anddowenotfindthatthethingsinwhichmenmost excelwomenarethosewhichrequiremostploddingandlonghammeringata singlethought，whilewomendobestwhatmustbedonerapidly？Awoman’s brainissoonerfatigued，soonerexhausted;butgiventhedegreeofexhaustion， weshouldexpecttofindthatitwouldrecoveritselfsooner。Irepeatthat thisspeculationisentirelyhypothetical;itpretendstonomorethanto suggestalineofinquiry。Ihavebeforerepudiatedthenotionofitsbeing yetcertainlyknownthatthereisanynaturaldifferenceatallintheaverage strengthordirectionofthementalcapacitiesofthetwosexes，muchless whatthatdifferenceis。Norisitpossiblethatthisshouldbeknown，so longasthepsychologicallawsoftheformationofcharacterhavebeenso littlestudied，eveninageneralway，andintheparticularcaseneverscientifically appliedatall;solongasthemostobviousexternalcausesofdifference ofcharacterarehabituallydisregarded——leftunnoticedbytheobserver， andlookeddownuponwithakindofsuperciliouscontemptbytheprevalent schoolsbothofnaturalhistoryandofmentalphilosophy：who，whetherthey lookforthesourceofwhatmainlydistinguisheshumanbeingsfromoneanother， intheworldofmatterorinthatofspirit，agreeinrunningdownthose whoprefertoexplainthesedifferencesbythedifferentrelationsofhumanbeingstosocietyandlife。Tosoridiculousanextentarethenotionsformedofthenatureofwomen， mereempiricalgeneralisations，framed，withoutphilosophyoranalysis，upon thefirstinstanceswhichpresentthemselves，thatthepopularideaofit isdifferentindifferentcountries，accordingastheopinionsandsocial circumstancesofthecountryhavegiventothewomenlivinginitanyspeciality ofdevelopmentornon—development。Anorientalthinksthatwomenarebynature peculiarlyvoluptuous;seetheviolentabuseofthemonthisgroundinHindoo writings。AnEnglishmanusuallythinksthattheyarebynaturecold。The sayingsaboutwomen’sficklenessaremostlyofFrenchorigin;fromthefamous distichofFrancistheFirst，upwardanddownward。InEnglanditisacommon remark，howmuchmoreconstantwomenarethanmen。Inconstancyhasbeenlonger reckoneddiscreditabletoawoman，inEnglandthaninFrance;andEnglishwomen arebesides，intheirinmostnature，muchmoresubduedtoopinion。Itmay beremarkedbytheway，thatEnglishmenareinpeculiarlyunfavourablecircumstances forattemptingtojudgewhatisorisnotnatural，notmerelytowomen，but tomen，ortohumanbeingsaltogether，atleastiftheyhaveonlyEnglish experiencetogoupon：becausethereisnoplacewherehumannatureshows solittleofitsoriginallineaments。Bothinagoodandabadsense，the Englisharefartherfromastateofnaturethananyothermodernpeople。 Theyare，morethananyotherpeople，aproductofcivilisationanddiscipline。 Englandisthecountryinwhichsocialdisciplinehasmostsucceeded，not somuchinconquering，asinsuppressing，whateverisliabletoconflict withit。TheEnglish，morethananyotherpeople，notonlyactbutfeelaccording torule。Inothercountries，thetaughtopinion，ortherequirementofsociety， maybethestrongerpower，butthepromptingsoftheindividualnatureare alwaysvisibleunderit，andoftenresistingit：rulemaybestrongerthan nature，butnatureisstillthere。InEngland，rulehastoagreatdegree substituteditselffornature。Thegreaterpartoflifeiscarriedon，not byfollowinginclinationunderthecontrolofrule，butbyhavingnoinclination butthatoffollowingarule。Nowthishasitsgoodsidedoubtless，though ithasalsoawretchedlybadone;butitmustrenderanEnglishmanpeculiarly ill—qualifiedtopassajudgmentontheoriginaltendenciesofhumannature fromhisownexperience。Theerrorstowhichobserverselsewhereareliable onthesubject，areofadifferentcharacter。AnEnglishmanisignorantrespecting humannature，aFrenchmanisprejudiced。AnEnglishman’serrorsarenegative， aFrenchman’spositive。AnEnglishmanfanciesthatthingsdonotexist，because heneverseesthem;aFrenchmanthinkstheymustalwaysandnecessarilyexist， becausehedoesseethem。AnEnglishmandoesnotknownature，becausehe hashadnoopportunityofobservingit;aFrenchmangenerallyknowsagreat dealofit，butoftenmistakesit，becausehehasonlyseenitsophisticated anddistorted。Fortheartificialstatesuperinducedbysocietydisguises thenaturaltendenciesofthethingwhichisthesubjectofobservation， intwodifferentways：byextinguishingthenature，orbytransformingit。 Intheonecasethereisbutastarvedresiduumofnatureremainingtobe studied;intheothercasethereismuch，butitmayhaveexpandedinanydirectionratherthanthatinwhichitwouldspontaneouslygrow。Ihavesaidthatitcannotnowbeknownhowmuchoftheexistingmental differencesbetweenmenandwomenisnaturalandhowmuchartificial;whether thereareanynaturaldifferencesatall;or，supposingallartificialcauses ofdifferencetobewithdrawn，whatnaturalcharacterwouldberevealedI amnotabouttoattemptwhatIhavepronouncedimpossible：butdoubtdoes notforbidconjecture，andwherecertaintyisunattainable，theremayyet bethemeansofarrivingatsomedegreeofprobability。Thefirstpoint， theoriginofthedifferencesactuallyobserved，istheonemostaccessible tospeculation;andIshallattempttoapproachit，bytheonlypathbywhich itcanbereached;bytracingthementalconsequencesofexternalinfluences。 Wecannotisolateahumanbeingfromthecircumstancesofhiscondition， soastoascertainexperimentallywhathewouldhavebeenbynature;but wecanconsiderwhatheis，andwhathiscircumstanceshavebeen，andwhethertheonewouldhavebeencapableofproducingtheother。Letustake，then，theonlymarkedcasewhichobservationaffords，of apparentinferiorityofwomentomen，ifweexceptthemerelyphysicalone ofbodilystrength。Noproductioninphilosophy，science，orart，entitled tothefirstrank，hasbeentheworkofawoman。Isthereanymodeofaccounting forthis，withoutsupposingthatwomenarenaturallyincapableofproducingthem？Inthefirstplace，wemayfairlyquestionwhetherexperiencehasafforded sufficientgroundsforaninduction。Itisscarcelythreegenerationssince women，savingveryrareexceptionshavebeguntotrytheircapacityinphilosophy， science，orart。Itisonlyinthepresentgenerationthattheirattempts havebeenatallnumerous;andtheyareevennowextremelyfew，everywhere butinEnglandandFrance。Itisarelevantquestion，whetheramindpossessing therequisitesoffirstrateeminenceinspeculationorcreativeartcould havebeenexpected，onthemerecalculationofchances，toturnupduring thatlapseoftime，amongthewomenwhosetastesandpersonalpositionadmitted oftheirdevotingthemselvestothesepursuitsInallthingswhichthere hasyetbeentimefor——inallbuttheveryhighestgradesinthescale ofexcellence，especiallyinthedepartmentinwhichtheyhavebeenlongest engaged，literature（bothproseandpoetry）——womenhavedonequiteasmuch， haveobtainedfullyashighprizesandasmanyofthem，ascouldbeexpected fromthelengthoftimeandthenumberofcompetitors。Ifwegobacktothe earlierperiodwhenveryfewwomenmadetheattempt，yetsomeofthosefew madeitwithdistinguishedsuccess。TheGreeksalwaysaccountedSapphoamong theirgreatpoets;andwemaywellsupposethatMyrtis，saidtohavebeen theteacherofPindar，andCorinna，whofivetimesboreawayfromhimthe prizeofpoetry，mustatleasthavehadsufficientmerittoadmitofbeing comparedwiththatgreatname。Aspasiadidnotleaveanyphilosophicalwritings; butitisanadmittedfactthatSocratesresortedtoherforinstruction，andavowedhimselftohaveobtainedit。Ifweconsidertheworksofwomeninmoderntimes，andcontrastthemwith thoseofmen，eitherintheliteraryortheartisticdepartment，suchinferiority asmaybeobservedresolvesitselfessentiallyintoonething：butthatis amostmaterialone;deficiencyoforiginality。Nottotaldeficiency;for everyproductionofmindwhichisofanysubstantivevalue，hasanoriginality ofitsown——isaconceptionoftheminditself，notacopyofsomething else。Thoughtsoriginal，inthesenseofbeingunborrowed——ofbeingderived fromthethinker’sownobservationsorintellectualprocesses——areabundant inthewritingsofwomen。Buttheyhavenotyetproducedanyofthosegreat andluminousnewideaswhichformanerainthought，northosefundamentally newconceptionsinart，whichopenavistaofpossibleeffectsnotbefore thoughtof，andfoundanewschool。Theircompositionsaremostlygrounded ontheexistingfundofthought，andtheircreationsdo—notdeviatewidely fromexistingtypes。Thisisthesortofinferioritywhichtheirworksmanifest： forinpointofexecution，inthedetailedapplicationofthought，andthe perfectionofstyle，thereisnoinferiority。Ourbestnovelistsinpoint ofcomposition，andofthemanagementofdetail，havemostlybeenwomen; andthereisnotinallmodernliteratureamoreeloquentvehicleofthought thanthestyleofMadamedeStael，nor，asaspecimenofpurelyartistic excellence，anythingsuperiortotheproseofMadameSand，whosestyleacts uponthenervoussystemlikeasymphonyofHaydnorMozart。Highoriginality ofconceptionis，asIhavesaid，whatischieflywanting。Andnowtoexamineifthereisanymannerinwhichthisdeficiencycanbeaccountedfor。Letusremember，then，sofarasregardsmerethought，thatduringall thatperiodintheworld’sexistence，andintheprogressofcultivation， inwhichgreatandfruitfulnewtruthsIcouldbearrivedatbymereforce ofgenius，withlittlepreciousstudyandaccumulationofknowledge——during allthattimewomendidnotconcernthemselveswithspeculationatall。From thedaysofHypatiatothoseoftheReformation，theillustriousHeloisa isalmosttheonlywomantowhomanysuchachievementmighthavebeenpossible; andweknownothowgreatacapacityofspeculationinhermayhavebeen losttomankindbythemisfortunesofherlife。Neversinceanyconsiderable numberofwomenhavebegantocultivateseriousthought，hasoriginality beenpossibleoneasyterms。Nearlyallthethoughtswhichcanbereached bymerestrengthoforiginalfaculties，havelongsincebeenarrivedat; andoriginality，inanyhighsenseoftheword，isnowscarcelyeverattained butbymindswhichhaveundergoneelaboratediscipline，andaredeeplyversed intheresultsofpreviousthinking。ItisMr。Maurice，Ithink，whohas remarkedonthepresentage，thatitsmostoriginalthinkersarethosewho haveknownmostthoroughlywhathadbeenthoughtbytheir;predecessors： andthiswillalwayshenceforthbethecase。Everyfreshstoneintheedifice hasnowtobeplacedonthetopofsomanyothers，thatalongprocessof climbing，andofcarryingupmaterials，hastobegonethroughbywhoever aspirestotakeashareinthepresentstageofthework。Howmanywomen aretherewhohavegonethroughanysuchprocess？Mrs。Somerville，alone perhapsofwomen，knowsasmuchofmathematicsasisnowneedfulformaking anyconsiderablemathematicaldiscovery：isitanyproofofinferiorityin women，thatshehasnothappenedtobeoneofthetwoorthreepersonswho inherlifetimehaveassociatedtheirnameswithsomestrikingadvancement ofthescience？Twowomen，sincepoliticaleconomyhasbeenmadeascience， haveknownenoughofittowriteusefullyonthesubject：ofhowmanyof theinnumerablemenwhohavewrittenonitduringthesametime，isitpossible withtruthtosaymore？Ifnowomanhashithertobeenagreathistorian， whatwomanhashadthenecessaryerudition？Ifnowomanisagreatphilologist， whatwomanhasstudiedSanscritandSlavonic，theGothicofUlphilaandthe PersicoftheZendavesta？Eveninpracticalmattersweallknowwhatisthe valueoftheoriginalityofuntaughtgeniuses。Itmeans，inventingoveragain initsrudimentaryformsomethingalreadyinventedandimproveduponbymany successiveinventors。Whenwomenhavehadthepreparationwhichallmennow requiretobeeminentlyoriginal，itwillbetimeenoughtobeginjudgingbyexperienceoftheircapacityfororiginality。Itnodoubtoftenhappensthataperson，whohasnotwidelyandaccurately studiedthethoughtsofothersonasubject，hasbynaturalsagacityahappy intuition，whichhecansuggest，butcannotprove，whichyetwhenmatured maybeanimportantadditiontoknowledge：buteventhen，nojusticecan bedonetoituntilsomeotherperson，whodoespossessthepreviousacquirements， takesitinhand，testsit，givesitascientificorpracticalform，and fitsitintoitsplaceamongtheexistingtruthsofphilosophyorscience。 Isitsupposedthatsuchfelicitousthoughtsdonotoccurtowomen？They occurbyhundredstoeverywomanofintellect。Buttheyaremostlylost， forwantofahusbandorfriendwhohastheotherknowledgewhichcanenable himtoestimatethemproperlyandbringthembeforetheworld：andevenwhen theyarebroughtbeforeit，theygenerallyappearashisideas，nottheir realauthor’s。Whocantellhowmanyofthemostoriginalthoughtsputforth bymalewriters，belongtoawomanbysuggestion，tothemselvesonlybyverifyingandworkingout？IfImayjudgebymyowncase，averylargeproportionindeed。Ifweturnfrompurespeculationtoliteratureinthenarrowsenseof theterm，andthefinearts，thereisaveryobviousreasonwhywomen’sliterature is，initsgeneralconceptionandinitsmainfeatures，animitationofmen’s。 WhyistheRomanliterature，ascriticsproclaimtosatiety，notoriginal， butanimitationoftheGreek？SimplybecausetheGreekscamefirst。Ifwomen livedinadifferentcountryfrommen，andhadneverreadanyoftheirwritings， theywouldhavehadaliteratureoftheirown。Asitis，theyhavenotcreated one，becausetheyfoundahighlyadvancedliteraturealreadycreated。If therehadbeennosuspensionoftheknowledgeofantiquity，oriftheRenaissance hadoccurredbeforetheGothiccathedralswerebuilt，theyneverwouldhave beenbuilt。Weseethat，inFranceandItaly，imitationoftheancientliterature stoppedtheoriginaldevelopmentevenafterithadcommenced。Allwomenwho writearepupilsofthegreatmalewriters。Apainter’searlypictures，even ifhebeaRaffaello，areundistinguishableinstylefromthoseofhismaster。 EvenaMozartdoesnotdisplayhispowerfuloriginalityinhisearliestpieces。 Whatyearsaretoagiftedindividual，generationsaretoamass。Ifwomen’s literatureisdestinedtohaveadifferentcollectivecharacterfromthat ofmen，dependingonanydifferenceofnaturaltendencies，muchlongertime isnecessarythanhasyetelapsed，beforeitcanemancipateitselffromthe influenceofacceptedmodels，andguideitselfbyitsownimpulses。Butif， asIbelieve，therewillnotprovetobeanynaturaltendenciescommonto women，anddistinguishingtheirgeniusfromthatofmen，yeteveryindividual writeramongthemhasherindividualtendencies，whichatpresentarestill subduedbytheinfluenceofprecedentandexample：anditwillrequiregenerations more，beforetheirindividualityissufficientlydevelopedtomakeheadagainstthatinfluence。###第5章Itisinthefinearts，properlysocalled，thattheprimafacieevidence ofinferiororiginalpowersinwomenatfirstsightappearsthestrongest： sinceopinion（itmaybesaid）doesnotexcludethemfromthese，butrather encouragesthem，andtheireducation，insteadofpassingoverthisdepartment， isintheaffluentclassesmainlycomposedofit。Yetinthislineofexertion theyhavefallenstillmoreshortthaninmanyothers，ofthehighesteminence attainedbymen。Thisshortcoming，however，needsnootherexplanationthan thefamiliarfact，moreuniversallytrueinthefineartsthaninanything else;thevastsuperiorityofprofessionalpersonsoveramateurs。Womenin theeducatedclassesarealmostuniversallytaughtmoreorlessofsomebranch orotherofthefinearts，butnotthattheymaygaintheirlivingortheir socialconsequencebyit。Womenartistsareallamateurs。Theexceptions areonlyofthekindwhichconfirmthegeneraltruth。Womenaretaughtmusic， Ibutnotforthepurposeofcomposing，onlyofexecutingit：andaccordingly itisonlyascomposers，thatmen，inmusic，aresuperiortowomen。Theonly oneofthefineartswhichwomendofollow，toanyextent，asaprofession， andanoccupationforlife，isthehistrionic;andinthattheyareconfessedly equal，ifnotsuperior，tomen。Tomakethecomparisonfair，itshouldbe madebetweentheproductionsofwomeninanybranchofart，andthoseof mennotfollowingitasaprofession。Inmusicalcomposition，forexample， womensurelyhaveproducedfullyasgoodthingsashaveeverbeenproduced bymaleamateurs。Therearenowafewwomen，averyfew，whopractisepainting asaprofession，andthesearealreadybeginningtoshowquiteasmuchtalent ascouldbeexpected。Evenmalepainters（paceMr。Ruskin）havenotmade anyveryremarkablefiguretheselastcenturies，anditwillbelongbefore theydoso。Thereasonwhytheoldpaintersweresogreatlysuperiortothe modern，isthatagreatlysuperiorclassofmenappliedthemselvestothe art。InthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturiestheItalianpainterswere themostaccomplishedmenoftheirage。Thegreatestofthemweremenof encyclopaedicalacquirementsandpowers，likethegreatmenofGreece。But intheirtimesfineartwas，tomen’sfeelingsandconceptions，amongthe grandestthingsinwhichahumanbeingcouldexcel;andbyitmenweremade，— whatonlypoliticalormilitarydistinctionnowmakesthem，thecompanions ofsovereigns，andtheequalsofthehighestnobility。Inthepresentage， menofanythinglikesimilarcalibrefindsomethingmore—importanttodo， fortheirownfameandtheusesofthemodernworld，thanpainting：andit isonlynowandthenthataReynoldsoraTurner（ofwhoserelativerank amongeminentmenIdonotpretendtoanopinion）applieshimselftothat art。Musicbelongstoadifferentorderofthings：itdoesnotrequirethe samegeneralpowersofmind，butseemsmoredependentonanaturalgift： anditmaybethoughtsurprisingthatnooneofthegreatmusicalcomposers hasbeenawoman。Buteventhisnaturalgift，tobemadeavailableforgreat creations，requiresstudy，andprofessionaldevotiontothepursuit。The onlycountrieswhichhaveproducedfirst—ratecomposers，evenofthemale sex，areGermanyandItaly——countriesinwhich，bothinpointofspecial andofgeneralcultivation，womenhaveremainedfarbehindFranceandEngland， beinggenerally（itmaybesaidwithoutexaggeration）verylittleeducated， andhavingscarcelycultivatedatallanyofthehigherfacultiesofmind。 Andinthosecountriesthemenwhoareacquaintedwiththeprinciplesof musicalcompositionmustbecountedbyhundreds，ormoreprobablybythousands， thewomenbarelybyscores：sothathereagain，onthedoctrineofaverages， wecannotreasonablyexpecttoseemorethanoneeminentwomantofiftyeminent men;andthelastthreecenturieshavenotproducedfiftyeminentmalecomposerseitherinGermanyorinItaly。Thereareotherreasons，besidesthosewhichwehavenowgiven，thathelp toexplainwhywomenremainbehindmen，eveninthepursuitswhichareopen toboth。Foronething，veryfewwomenhavetimeforthem。Thismayseem aparadox;itisanundoubtedsocialfact。Thetimeandthoughtsofevery womanhavetosatisfygreatpreviousdemandsonthemforthingspractical。 Thereis，first，thesuperintendenceofthefamilyandthedomesticexpenditure， whichoccupiesatleastonewomanineveryfamily，generallytheoneofmature yearsandacquiredexperience;unlessthefamilyissorichastoadmitof delegatingthattasktohiredagency，andsubmittingtoallthewasteand malversationinseparablefromthatmodeofconductingit。Thesuperintendence ofahousehold，evenwhennotinotherrespectslaborious，isextremelyonerous tothethoughts;itrequiresincessantvigilance，aneyewhichnodetail escapes，andpresentsquestionsforconsiderationandsolution，foreseen andunforeseen，ateveryhouroftheday，fromwhichthepersonresponsible forthemcanhardlyevershakeherselffree。Ifawomanisofarankand circumstanceswhichrelieveherinameasurefromthesecares，shehasstill devolvingonherthemanagementforthewholefamilyofitsintercoursewith others——ofwhatiscalledsociety，andthelessthecallmadeonherby theformerduty，thegreaterisalwaysthedevelopmentofthelatter：the dinnerparties，concerts，eveningparties，morningvisits，letter—writing， andallthatgoeswiththem。Allthisisoverandabovetheengrossingduty whichsocietyimposesexclusivelyonwomen，ofmakingthemselvescharming。 Acleverwomanofthehigherranksfindsnearlyasufficientemploymentof hertalentsincultivatingthegracesofmannerandtheartsofconversation。 Tolookonlyattheoutwardsideofthesubject：thegreatandcontinual exerciseofthoughtwhichallwomenwhoattachanyvaluetodressingwell （Idonotmeanexpensively，butwithtaste，andperceptionofnaturaland ofartificialconvenance）mustbestowupontheirowndress，perhapsalso uponthatoftheirdaughters，wouldalonegoagreatwaytowardsachieving respectableresultsinart，orscience，orliterature，anddoesactually exhaustmuchofthetimeandmentalpowertheymighthavetospareforeither。（2*） Ifitwerepossiblethatallthisnumberoflittlepracticalinterests（which aremadegreattothem）shouldleavethemeithermuchleisure，ormuchenergy andfreedomofmind，tobedevotedtoartorspeculation，theymusthave amuchgreateroriginalsupplyofactivefacultythanthevastmajorityof men。Butthisisnotall。Independentlyoftheregularofficesoflifewhich devolveuponawoman，sheisexpectedtohavehertimeandfacultiesalways atthedisposalofeverybody。Ifamanhasnotaprofessiontoexempthim fromsuchdemands，still，ifhehasapursuit，heoffendsnobodybydevoting histimetoit;occupationisreceivedasavalidexcuseforhisnotanswering toeverycasualdemandwhichmaybemadeonhim。Areawoman’soccupations， especiallyherchosenandvoluntaryones，everregardedasexcusingherfrom anyofwhataretermedthecallsofsociety？Scarcelyarehermostnecessary andrecogniseddutiesallowedasanexemption。Itrequiresanillnessin thefamily，orsomethingelseoutofthecommonway，toentitlehertogive herownbusinesstheprecedenceoverotherpeople’samusement。Shemustalways beatthebeckandcallofsomebody，generallyofeverybody。Ifshehasa studyorapursuit，shemustsnatchanyshortintervalwhichaccidentally occurstobeemployedinit。Acelebratedwoman，inaworkwhichIhopewill somedaybepublished，remarkstrulythateverythingawomandoesisdone atoddtimes。Isitwonderful，then，ifshedoesnotattainthehighesteminence inthingswhichrequireconsecutiveattention，andtheconcentrationonthem ofthechiefinterestoflife？Suchisphilosophy，andsuch，aboveall，is art，inwhich，besidesthedevotionofthethoughtsandfeelings，thehandalsomustbekeptinconstantexercisestoattainhighskill。Thereisanotherconsiderationtobeaddedtoallthese。Inthevarious artsandintellectualoccupations，thereisadegreeofproficiencysufficient forlivingbyit，andthereisahigherdegreeonwhichdependthegreat productionswhichimmortaliseaname。Totheattainmentoftheformer，there areadequatemotivesinthecaseofallwhofollowthepursuitprofessionally： theotherishardlyeverattainedwherethereisnot，orwheretherehas notbeenatsomeperiodoflife，anardentdesireofcelebrity。Nothingless iscommonlyasufficientstimulustoundergothelongandpatientdrudgery， which，inthecaseevenofthegreatestnaturalgifts，isabsolutelyrequired forgreateminenceinpursuitsinwhichwealreadypossesssomanysplendid memorialsofthehighestgenius。Now，whetherthecausebenaturalorartificial， womenseldomhavethiseagernessforfame。Theirambitionisgenerallyconfined withinnarrowerbounds。Theinfluencetheyseekisoverthosewhoimmediately surroundthem。Theirdesireistobeliked，loved，oradmired，bythosewhom theyseewiththeireyes：andtheproficiencyinknowledge，arts，andaccomplishments， whichissufficientforthat，almostalwayscontentsthem。Thisisatrait ofcharacterwhichcannotbeleftoutoftheaccountinjudgingofwomen astheyare。Idonotatallbelievethatitisinherentinwomen。Itis onlythenaturalresultoftheircircumstances。Theloveoffameinmenis encouragedbyeducationandopinion：to\"scorndelightsandlivelaborious days\"foritssake，isaccountedthepartof\"nobleminds，\" evenifspokenofastheir\"lastinfirmity，\"andisstimulated bytheaccesswhichfamegivestoallobjectsofambition，includingeven thefavourofwomen;whiletowomenthemselvesalltheseobjectsareclosed， andthedesireoffameitselfconsidereddaringandunfeminine。Besides， howcoulditbethatawoman’sinterestsshouldnotbeallconcentratedupon theimpressionsmadeonthosewhocomeintoherdailylife，whensociety hasordainedthatallherdutiesshouldbetothem，andhascontrivedthat allhercomfortsshoulddependonthem？Thenaturaldesireofconsideration fromourfellow—creaturesisasstronginawomanasinaman;butsociety hassoorderedthingsthatpublicconsiderationis，inallordinarycases， onlyattainablebyherthroughtheconsiderationofherhusbandorofher malerelations，whileherprivateconsiderationisforfeitedbymakingherself individuallyprominent，orappearinginanyothercharacterthanthatof anappendagetomen。Whoeverisintheleastcapableofestimatingtheinfluence onthemindoftheentiredomesticandsocialpositionandthewholehabit ofalife，musteasilyrecogniseinthatinfluenceacompleteexplanation ofnearlyalltheapparentdifferencesbetweenwomenandmen，includingthewholeofthosewhichimplyanyinferiority。Asformoraldifferences，consideredasdistinguishedfromintellectual， thedistinctioncommonlydrawnistotheadvantageofwomen。Theyaredeclared tobebetterthanmen;anemptycompliment，whichmustprovokeabittersmile fromeverywomanofspirit，sincethereisnoothersituationinlifein whichitistheestablishedorder，andconsideredquitenaturalandsuitable， thatthebettershouldobeytheworse。Ifthispieceofidletalkisgood foranything，itisonlyasanadmissionbymen，ofthecorruptinginfluence ofpower;forthatiscertainlytheonlytruthwhichthefact，ifitbea fact，eitherprovesorillustrates。Anditistruethatservitude，except whenitactuallybrutalises，thoughcorruptingtoboth，islesssotothe slavesthantotheslave—masters。Itiswholesomerforthemoralnatureto berestrained，evenbyarbitrarypower，thantobeallowedtoexercisearbitrary powerwithoutrestraint。Women，itissaid，seldomerfallunderthepenal law——contributeamuchsmallernumberofoffenderstothecriminalcalendar， thanmen。Idoubtnotthatthesamethingmaybesaid，withthesametruth， ofnegroslaves。Thosewhoareunderthecontrolofotherscannotoftencommit crimes，unlessatthecommandandforthepurposesoftheirmasters。Ido notknowamoresignalinstanceoftheblindnesswithwhichtheworld，including theherdofstudiousmen，ignoreandpassoveralltheinfluencesofsocial circumstances，thantheirsillydepreciationoftheintellectual，andsillypanegyricsonthemoral，natureofwomen。Thecomplimentarydictumaboutwomen’ssuperiormoralgoodnessmaybe allowedtopairoffwiththedisparagingonerespectingtheirgreaterliability tomoralbias。Women，wearetold，arenotcapableofresistingtheirpersonal partialities：theirjudgmentingraveaffairsiswarpedbytheirsympathies andantipathies。Assumingittobeso，itisstilltobeprovedthatwomen areoftenermisledbytheirpersonalfeelingsthanmenbytheirpersonal interests。Thechiefdifferencewouldseeminthatcasetobe，thatmenare ledfromthecourseofdutyandthepublicinterestbytheirregardforthemselves， women（notbeingallowedtohaveprivateinterestsoftheirown）bytheir regardforsomebodyelse。Itisalsotobeconsidered，thatalltheeducation whichwomenreceivefromsocietyinculcatesonthemthefeelingthatthe individualsconnectedwiththemaretheonlyonestowhomtheyoweanyduty ——theonlyoneswhoseinteresttheyarecalledupontocarefor;while， asfaraseducationisconcerned，theyareleftstrangerseventotheelementary ideaswhicharepresupposedinanyintelligentregardforlargerinterests orhighermoralobjects。Thecomplaintagainstthemresolvesitselfmerely intothis，thattheyfulfilonlytoofaithfullythesoledutywhichtheyaretaught，andalmosttheonlyonewhichtheyarepermittedtopractise。Theconcessionsoftheprivilegedtotheunprivilegedaresoseldombrought aboutbyanybettermotivethanthepoweroftheunprivilegedtoextortthem， thatanyargumentsagainsttheprerogativeofsexarelikelytobelittle attendedtobythegenerality，aslongastheyareabletosaytothemselves thatwomendonotcomplainofit。Thatfactcertainlyenablesmentoretain theunjustprivilegesometimelonger;butdoesnotrenderitlessunjust。 Exactlythesamethingmaybesaidofthewomenintheharemofanoriental： theydonotcomplainofnotbeingallowedthefreedomofEuropeanwomen。 Theythinkourwomeninsufferablyboldandunfeminine。Howrarelyitisthat evenmencomplainofthegeneralorderofsociety;andhowmuchrarerstill wouldsuchcomplaintbe，iftheydidnotknowofanydifferentorderexisting anywhereelse。Womendonotcomplainofthegenerallotofwomen;orrather theydo，forplaintiveelegiesonitareverycommoninthewritingsofwomen， andwerestillmoresoaslongasthelamentationscouldnotbesuspected ofhavinganypracticalobject。Theircomplaintsarelikethecomplaints whichmenmakeofthegeneralunsatisfactorinessofhumanlife;theyare notmeanttoimplyblame，ortopleadforanychange。Butthoughwomendo notcomplainofthepowerofhusbands，eachcomplainsofherownhusband， orofthehusbandsofherfriends。Itisthesameinallothercasesofservitude， atleastinthecommencementoftheemancipatorymovement。Theserfsdid notatfirstcomplainofthepoweroftheirlords，butonlyoftheirtyranny。 Thecommonsbeganbyclaimingafewmunicipalprivileges;theynextasked anexemptionforthemselvesfrombeingtaxedwithouttheirownconsent;but theywouldatthattimehavethoughtitagreatpresumptiontoclaimany shareintheking’ssovereignauthority。Thecaseofwomenisnowtheonly caseinwhichtorebelagainstestablishedrulesisstilllookeduponwith thesameeyesaswasformerlyasubject’sclaimtotheIrightofrebelling againsthisking。Awomanwhojoinsinanymovementwhichherhusbanddisapproves， makesherselfamartyr，withoutevenbeingabletobeanapostle，forthe husbandcanlegallyputastoptoherapostleship。Womencannotbeexpected todevotethemselvestotheemancipationofwomen，untilmeninconsiderable numberarepreparedtojoinwiththemintheundertaking。 NOTES：1。EspeciallyisthistrueifwetakeintoconsiderationAsiaaswell asEurope。IfaHindooprincipalityisstrongly，vigilantly，andeconomically governed;iforderispreservedwithoutoppression;ifcultivationisextending， andthepeopleprosperous，inthreecasesoutoffourthatprincipalityis underawoman’srule。Thisfact，tomeanentirelyunexpectedone，Ihave collectedfromalongknowledgeofHindoogovernments。Therearemanysuch instances：forthough，byHindooinstitutions，awomancannotreign，she isthelegalregentofakingdomduringtheminorityoftheheir;andminorities arefrequent，thelivesofthemalerulersbeingsooftenprematurelyterminated throughtheeffectofinactivityandsensualexcesses。Whenweconsiderthat theseprincesseshaveneverbeenseeninpublic，haveneverconversedwith anymannotoftheirownfamilyexceptfrombehindacurtain，thattheydo notread，andiftheydidthereisnobookintheirlanguageswhichcangive themthesmallestinstructiononpoliticalaffairs;theexampletheyaffordofthenaturalcapacityofwomenforgovernmentisverystriking。2。\"Itappearstobethesamerightturnofmindwhichenablesa mantoacquirethetruth，orjustideaofwhatisright，intheornaments， asinthemorestableprinciplesofart。Ithasstillthesamecentreof perfection，thoughitisthecentreofasmallercircle。——Toillustrate thisbyfashionofdress，inwhichthereisallowedtobeagoodorbadtaste。 Thecomponentpartsofdressarecontinuallychangingfromgreattolittle， fromshorttolong;butthegeneralformstillremains;itisstillthesame generaldresswhichiscomparativelyfixed，thoughonaveryslenderfoundation; butitisonthiswhichfashionmustrest。Hewhoinventswiththemostsuccess， ordressesinthebesttaste，wouldprobably，fromthesamesagacityemployed togreaterpurposes，havediscoveredequalskill，orhaveformedthesame correcttaste，inthehighestlaboursofart。\"——SirJoshuaReynold’s Discourses，Disc。vii。 CHAPTER4Thereremainsaquestion，notoflessimportancethanthosealreadydiscussed， andwhichwillbeaskedthemostimportunatelybythoseopponentswhoseconviction issomewhatshakenonthemainpoint。Whatgoodarewetoexpectfromthe changesproposedinourcustomsandinstitutions？Wouldmankindbeatall betteroffifwomenwerefree？Ifnot，whydisturbtheirminds，andattempttomakeasocialrevolutioninthenameofanabstractright？Itishardlytobeexpectedthatthisquestionwillbeaskedinrespect tothechangeproposedintheconditionofwomeninmarriage。Thesufferings， immoralities，evilsofallsorts，producedininnumerablecasesbythesubjection ofindividualwomentoindividualmen，arefartooterribletobeoverlooked。 Unthinkingoruncandidpersons，countingthosecasesalonewhichareextreme， orwhichattainpublicity，maysaythattheevilsareexceptional;butno onecanbeblindtotheirexistence，nor，inmanycases，totheirintensity。 Anditisperfectlyobviousthattheabuseofthepowercannotbeverymuch checkedwhilethepowerremains。Itisapowergiven，oroffered，notto goodmen，ortodecentlyrespectablemen，buttoallmen;themostbrutal， andthemostcriminal。Thereisnocheckbutthatofopinion，andsuchmen areingeneralwithinthereachofnoopinionbutthatofmenlikethemselves。 Ifsuchmendidnotbrutallytyranniseovertheonehumanbeingwhomthe lawcompelstobeareverythingfromthem，societymustalreadyhavereached aparadisiacalstate。Therecouldbenoneedanylongeroflawstocurbmen’s viciouspropensities。Astraeamustnotonlyhavereturnedtoearth，butthe heartoftheworstmanmusthavebecomehertemple。Thelawofservitude inmarriageisamonstrouscontradictiontoalltheprinciplesofthemodern world，andtoalltheexperiencethroughwhichthoseprincipleshavebeen slowlyandpainfullyworkedout。Itisthesolecase，nowthatnegroslavery hasbeenabolished，inwhichahumanbeingintheplenitudeofeveryfaculty isdelivereduptothetendermerciesofanotherhumanbeing，inthehope forsooththatthisotherwillusethepowersolelyforthegoodoftheperson subjectedtoit。Marriageistheonlyactualbondageknowntoourlaw。Thereremainnolegalslaves，exceptthemistressofeveryhouse。Itisnot，therefore，onthispartofthesubject，thatthequestionis likelytobeasked，Cuibono。Wemaybetoldthattheevilwouldoutweigh thegood，buttherealityofthegoodadmitsofnodispute。Inregard，however， tothelargerquestion，theremovalofwomen’sdisabilities——theirrecognition astheequalsofmeninallthatbelongstocitizenship——theopeningto themofallhonourableemployments，andofthetrainingandeducationwhich qualifiesforthoseemployments——therearemanypersonsforwhomitis notenoughthattheinequalityhasnojustorlegitimatedefence;theyrequiretobetoldwhatexpressadvantagewouldbeobtainedbyabolishingit。Towhichletmefirstanswer，theadvantageofhavingthemostuniversal andpervadingofallhumanrelationsregulatedbyjusticeinsteadofinjustice。 Thevastamountofthisgaintohumannature，itishardlypossible，byany explanationorillustration，toplaceinastrongerlightthanitisplaced bythebarestatement，toanyonewhoattachesamoralmeaningtowords。All theselfishpropensities，theself—worship，theunjustself—preference，which existamongmankind，havetheirsourceandrootin，andderivetheirprincipal nourishmentfrom，thepresentconstitutionoftherelationbetweenmenand women。Thinkwhatitistoaboy，togrowuptomanhoodinthebeliefthat withoutanymeritoranyexertionofhisown，thoughhemaybethemostfrivolous andemptyorthemostignorantandstolidofmankind，bythemerefactof beingbornamaleheisbyrightthesuperiorofallandeveryoneofan entirehalfofthehumanrace：includingprobablysomewhoserealsuperiority tohimselfhehasdailyorhourlyoccasiontofeel;butevenifinhiswhole conducthehabituallyfollowsawoman’sguidance，still，ifheisafool， shethinksthatofcoursesheisnot，andcannotbe，equalinabilityand judgmenttohimself;andifheisnotafool，hedoesworse——heseesthat sheissuperiortohim，andbelievesthat，notwithstandinghersuperiority， heisentitledtocommandandsheisboundtoobey。Whatmustbetheeffect onhischaracter，ofthislesson？Andmenofthecultivatedclassesareoften notawarehowdeeplyitsinksintotheimmensemajorityofmaleminds。For， amongright—feelingandwellbredpeople，theinequalityiskeptasmuchas possibleoutofsight;aboveall，outofsightofthechildren。Asmuchobedience isrequiredfromboystotheirmotherastotheirfather：theyarenotpermitted todomineerovertheirsisters，noraretheyaccustomedtoseethesepostponed tothem，butthecontrary;thecompensationsofthechivalrousfeelingbeing madeprominent，whiletheservitudewhichrequiresthemiskeptinthebackground。 Wellbrought—upyouthsinthehigherclassesthusoftenescapethebadinfluences ofthesituationintheirearlyyears，andonlyexperiencethemwhen，arrived atmanhood，theyfallunderthedominionoffactsastheyreallyexist。Such peoplearelittleaware，whenaboyisdifferentlybroughtup，howearly thenotionofhisinherentsuperioritytoagirlarisesinhismind;how itgrowswithhisgrowthandstrengthenswithhisstrength;howitisinoculated byoneschoolboyuponanother;howearlytheyouththinkshimselfsuperior tohismother，owingherperhapsforbearance，butno—realrespect;anahow sublimeandsultan—likeasenseofsuperiorityhefeels，aboveall，over thewomanwhomhehonoursbyadmittinghertoapartnershipofhislife。 Isitimaginedthatallthisdoesnotpervertthewholemannerofexistence oftheman，bothasanindividualandasasocialbeing？Itisanexactparallel tothefeelingofahereditarykingthatheisexcellentaboveothersby beingbornaking，oranoblebybeingbornanoble。Therelationbetween husbandandwifeisverylikethatbetweenlordandvassal，exceptthatthe wifeisheldtomoreunlimitedobediencethanthevassalwas。Howeverthe vassal’scharactermayhavebeenaffected，forbetterandforworse，byhis subordination，whocanhelpseeingthatthelord’swasaffectedgreatlyfor theworse？whetherhewasledtobelievethathisvassalswerereallysuperior tohimself，ortofeelthathewasplacedincommandoverpeopleasgood ashimself，fornomeritsorlaboursofhisown，butmerelyforhaving，as Figarosays，takenthetroubletobeborn。Theself—worshipofthemonarch， orofthefeudalsuperior，ismatchedbytheself—worshipofthemale。Human beingsdonotgrowupfromchildhoodinthepossessionofunearneddistinctions， withoutplumingthemselvesuponthem。Thosewhomprivilegesnotacquired bytheirmerit，andwhichtheyfeeltobedisproportionedtoit，inspire withadditionalhumility，arealwaysthefew，andthebestfew。Therest areonlyinspiredwithpride，andtheworstsortofpride，thatwhichvalues itselfuponaccidentaladvantages，notofitsownachieving。Aboveall，when thefeelingofbeingraisedabovethewholeoftheothersexiscombined withpersonalauthorityoveroneindividualamongthem;thesituation，if aschoolofconscientiousandaffectionateforbearancetothosewhosestrongest pointsofcharacterareconscienceandaffection，istomenofanotherquality aregularlyconstitutedacademyorgymnasiumfortrainingtheminarrogance andoverbearingness;whichvices，ifcurbedbythecertaintyofresistance intheirintercoursewithothermen，theirequals，breakouttowardsall whoareinapositiontobeobligedtotoleratethem，andoftenrevengethemselves upontheunfortunatewifefortheinvoluntaryrestraintwhichtheyareobligedtosubmittoelsewhere。Theexampleafforded，andtheeducationgiventothesentiments，bylaying thefoundationofdomesticexistenceuponarelationcontradictorytothe firstprinciplesofsocialjusticemust，fromtheverynatureofman，have apervertinginfluenceofsuchmagnitude，thatitishardlypossiblewith ourpresentexperiencetoraiseourimaginationstotheconceptionofso greatachangeforthebetteraswouldbemadebyitsremoval。Allthateducation andcivilisationaredoingtoeffacetheinfluencesoncharacterofthelaw offorce，andreplacethembythoseofjustice，remainsmerelyonthesurface， aslongasthecitadeloftheenemyisnotattacked。Theprincipleofthe modernmovementinmoralsandpolitics，isthatconduct，andconductalone， entitlestorespect：thatnotwhatmenare，butwhattheydo，constitutes theirclaimtodeference;that，aboveall，merit，andnotbirth，istheonly rightfulclaimtopowerandauthority。Ifnoauthority，notinitsnature temporary，wereallowedtoonehumanbeingoveranother，societywouldnot beemployedinbuildinguppropensitieswithonehandwhichithastocurb withtheother。Thechildwouldreally，forthefirsttimeinman’sexistence onearth，betrainedinthewayheshouldgo，andwhenhewasoldtherewould beachancethathewouldnotdepartfromit。Butsolongastherightof thestrongtopowerovertheweakrulesintheveryheartofsociety，the attempttomaketheequalrightoftheweaktheprincipleofitsoutward actionswillalwaysbeanuphillstruggle;forthelawofjustice，which isalsothatofChristianity，willnevergetpossessionofmen’sinmostsentiments;theywillbeworkingagainstit，evenwhenbendingtoit。Thesecondbenefittobeexpectedfromgivingtowomenthefreeuseof theirfaculties，byleavingthemthefreechoiceoftheiremployments，and openingtothemthesamefieldofoccupationandthesameprizesandencouragements astootherhumanbeings，wouldbethatofdoublingthemassofmentalfaculties availableforthehigherserviceofhumanity。Wherethereisnowoneperson qualifiedtobenefitmankindandpromotethegeneralimprovement，asapublic teacher，oranadministratorofsomebranchofpublicorsocialaffairs， therewouldthenbeachanceoftwo。Mentalsuperiorityofanykindisat presenteverywheresomuchbelowthedemand;thereissuchadeficiencyof personscompetenttodoexcellentlyanythingwhichitrequiresanyconsiderable amountofabilitytodo;thatthelosstotheworld，byrefusingtomake useofonehalfofthewholequantityoftalentitpossesses，isextremely serious。Itistruethatthisamountofmentalpowerisnottotallylost。 Muchofitisemployed，andwouldinanycasebeemployed，indomesticmanagement， andinthefewotheroccupationsopentowomen;andfromtheremainderindirect benefitisinmanyindividualcasesobtained，throughthepersonalinfluence ofindividualwomenoverindividualmen。Butthesebenefitsarepartial; theirrangeisextremelycircumscribed;andiftheymustbeadmitted，on theonehand，asadeductionfromtheamountoffreshsocialpowerthatwould beacquiredbygivingfreedomtoone—halfofthewholesumofhumanintellect， theremustbeadded，ontheother，thebenefitofthestimulusthatwould begiventotheintellectofmenbythecompetition;or（touseamoretrue expression）bythenecessitythatwouldbeimposedonthemofdeservingprecedencybeforetheycouldexpecttoobtainit。Thisgreataccessiontotheintellectualpowerofthespecies，andto theamountofintellectavailableforthegoodmanagementofitsaffairs， wouldbeobtained，partly，throughthebetterandmorecompleteintellectual educationofwomen，whichwouldthenimproveparipassuwiththatofmen。 Womeningeneralwouldbebroughtupequallycapableofunderstandingbusiness， publicaffairs，andthehighermattersofspeculation，withmenInthesame classofsociety;andtheselectfewoftheoneaswellasoftheothersex， whowerequalifiednotonlytocomprehendwhatisdoneorthoughtbyothers， buttothinkordosomethingconsiderablethemselves，wouldmeetwiththe samefacilitiesforimprovingandtrainingtheircapacitiesintheonesex asintheother。Inthisway，thewideningofthesphereofactionforwomen wouldoperateforgood，byraisingtheireducationtothelevelofthatof men，andmakingtheoneparticipateinallimprovementsmadeintheother。 Butindependentlyofthis，themerebreakingdownofthebarrierwouldof itselfhaveaneducationalvirtueofthehighestworth。Themeregetting ridoftheideathatallthewidersubjectsofthoughtandaction，allthe thingswhichareofgeneralandnotsolelyofprivateinterest，aremen’s business，fromwhichwomenaretobewarnedoff——positivelyinterdicted frommostofit，coldlytoleratedinthelittlewhichisallowedthem—— themereconsciousnessawomanwouldthenhaveofbeingahumanbeinglike anyother，entitledtochooseherpursuits，urgedorinvitedbythesame inducementsasanyoneelsetointerestherselfinwhateverisinteresting tohumanbeings，entitledtoexerttheshareofinfluenceonallhumanconcerns whichbelongstoanindividualopinion，whethersheattemptedactualparticipation inthemornot——thisalonewouldeffectanimmenseexpansionofthefacultiesofwomen，aswellasenlargementoftherangeoftheirmoralsentiments。Besidestheadditiontotheamountofindividualtalentavailablefor theconductofhumanaffairs，whichcertainlyarenotatpresentsoabundantly providedinthatrespectthattheycanaffordtodispensewithone—halfof whatnatureproffers;theopinionofwomenwouldthenpossessamorebeneficial， ratherthanagreater，influenceuponthegeneralmassofhumanbeliefand sentiment。Isayamorebeneficial，ratherthanagreaterinfluence;for theinfluenceofwomenoverthegeneraltoneofopinionhasalways，orat leastfromtheearliestknownperiod，beenveryconsiderable。Theinfluence ofmothersontheearlycharacteroftheirsons，andthedesireofyoung mentorecommendthemselvestoyoungwomen，haveinallrecordedtimesbeen importantagenciesintheformationofcharacter，andhavedeterminedsome ofthechiefstepsintheprogressofcivilisation。EvenintheHomericage， {alphaiotadeltaomegasigma}towardsthe{TAUrhoomegaalphadeltaalpha sigma}{epsilonlambdachiepsilonsigmaiotapiepsilonpilambdaomega upsilsonsigma}isanacknowledgedandpowerfulmotiveofactioninthegreat Hector。Themoralinfluenceofwomenhashadtwomodesofoperation。First， ithasbeenasofteninginfluence。Thosewhoweremostliabletobethevictims ofviolence，havenaturallytendedasmuchastheycouldtowardslimiting itssphereandmitigatingitsexcesses。Thosewhowerenottaughttofight， havenaturallyinclinedinfavourofanyothermodeofsettlingdifferences ratherthanthatoffighting。Ingeneral，thosewhohavebeenthegreatest sufferersbytheindulgenceofselfishpassion，havebeenthemostearnest supportersofanymorallawwhichofferedameansofbridlingpassion。Women werepowerfullyinstrumentalininducingthenorthernconquerorstoadopt thecreedofChristianity，acreedsomuchmorefavourabletowomenthan anythatprecededit。TheconversionoftheAnglo—SaxonsandoftheFranks maybesaidtohavebeenbegunbythewivesofEthelbertandClovis。The othermodeinwhichtheeffectofwomen’sopinionhasbeenconspicuous，is bygiving，apowerfulstimulustothosequalitiesinmen，which，notbeing themselvestrainedin，itwasnecessaryforthemthattheyshouldfindin theirprotectors。Courage，andthemilitaryvirtuesgenerally，haveatall timesbeengreatlyindebtedtothedesirewhichmenfeltofbeingadmired bywomen：andthestimulusreachesfarbeyondthisoneclassofeminentqualities， since，byaverynaturaleffectoftheirposition，thebestpassporttothe admirationandfavourofwomenhasalwaysbeentobethoughthighlyofby men。Fromthecombinationofthetwokindsofmoralinfluencethusexercised bywomen，arosethespiritofchivalry：thepeculiarityofwhichis，toaim atcombiningthehigheststandardofthewarlikequalitieswiththecultivation ofatotallydifferentclassofvirtues——thoseofgentleness，generosity， andself—abnegation，towardsthenon—militaryanddefenselessclassesgenerally， andaspecialsubmissionandworshipdirectedtowardswomen;whoweredistinguished fromtheotherdefencelessclassesbythehighrewardswhichtheyhadit intheirpowervoluntarilytobestowonthosewhoendeavouredtoearntheir favour，insteadofextortingtheirsubjection。Thoughthepracticeofchivalry fellevenmoresadlyshortofitstheoreticstandardthanpracticegenerally fallsbelowtheory，itremainsoneofthemostpreciousmonumentsofthe moralhistoryofourrace;asaremarkableinstanceofaconcertedandorganised attemptbyamostdisorganisedanddistractedsociety，toraiseupandcarry intopracticeamoralidealgreatlyinadvanceofitssocialconditionand institutions;somuchsoastohavebeencompletelyfrustratedinthemain object，yetneverentirelyinefficacious，andwhichhasleftamostsensible， andforthemostpartahighlyvaluableimpressontheideasandfeelingsofallsubsequenttimes。Thechivalrousidealistheacmeoftheinfluenceofwomen’ssentiments onthemoralcultivationofmankind：andifwomenaretoremainintheir subordinatesituation，itweregreatlytobelamentedthatthechivalrous standardshouldhavepassedaway，foritistheonlyoneatallcapableof mitigatingthedemoralisinginfluencesofthatposition。Butthechanges inthegeneralstateofthespeciesrenderedinevitablethesubstitution ofatotallydifferentidealofmoralityforthechivalrousone。Chivalry wastheattempttoinfusemoralelementsintoastateofsocietyinwhich everythingdependedforgoodorevilonindividualprowess，underthesoftening influencesofindividualdelicacyandgenerosity。Inmodernsocieties，all things，eveninthemilitarydepartmentofaffairs，aredecided，notbyindividual effort，butbythecombinedoperationsofnumbers;whilethemainoccupation ofsocietyhaschangedfromfightingtobusiness，frommilitarytoindustrial life。Theexigenciesofthenewlifearenomoreexclusiveofthevirtues ofgenerositythanthoseoftheold，butitnolongerentirelydependson them。Themainfoundationsofthemorallifeofmoderntimesmustbejustice andprudence;therespectofeachfortherightsofeveryother，andthe abilityofeachtotakecareofhimself。Chivalryleftwithoutlegalcheck allformsofwrongwhichreignedunpunishedthroughoutsociety;itonlyencouraged afewtodorightinpreferencetowrong，bythedirectionitgavetothe instrumentsofpraiseandadmiration。Buttherealdependenceofmorality mustalwaysbeuponitspenalsanctions——itspowertodeterfromevil。 Thesecurityofsocietycannotrestonmerelyrenderinghonourtoright， amotivesocomparativelyweakinallbutafew，andwhichonverymanydoes notoperateatall。Modernsocietyisabletorepresswrongthroughalldepartments oflife，byafitexertionofthesuperiorstrengthwhichcivilisationhas givenit，andthustorendertheexistenceoftheweakermembersofsociety （nolongerdefenselessbutprotectedbylaw）tolerabletothem，withoutreliance onthechivalrousfeelingsofthosewhoareinapositiontotyrannise。The beautiesandgracesofthechivalrouscharacterarestillwhattheywere， buttherightsoftheweak，andthegeneralcomfortofhumanlife，nowrest onafarsurerandsteadiersupport;orrather，theydosoineveryrelationoflifeexcepttheconjugal。Atpresentthemoralinfluenceofwomenisnolessreal，butitisno longerofsomarkedanddefiniteacharacter：ithasmorenearlymergedin thegeneralinfluenceofpublicopinion。Boththroughthecontagionofsympathy， andthroughthedesireofmentoshineintheeyesofwomen，theirfeelings havegreateffectinkeepingalivewhatremainsofthechivalrousideal—— infosteringthesentimentsandcontinuingthetraditionsofspiritandgenerosity。 Inthesepointsofcharacter，theirstandardishigherthanthatofmen; inthequalityofjustice，somewhatlower。Asregardstherelationsofprivate lifeitmaybesaidgenerally，thattheirinfluenceis，onthewhole，encouraging tothesoftervirtues，discouragingtothesterner：thoughthestatement mustbetakenwithallthemodificationsdependentonindividualcharacter。 Inthechiefofthegreatertrialstowhichvirtueissubjectintheconcerns oflife——theconflictbetweeninterestandprinciple——thetendencyof women’sinfluence——isofaverymixedcharacter。Whentheprincipleinvolved happenstobeoneoftheveryfewwhichthecourseoftheirreligiousor moraleducationhasstronglyimpresseduponthemselves，theyarepotentauxiliaries tovirtue：andtheirhusbandsandsonsareoftenpromptedbythemtoacts ofabnegationwhichtheyneverwouldhavebeencapableofwithoutthatstimulus。 But，withthepresenteducationandpositionofwomen，themoralprinciples whichhavebeenimpressedonthemcoverbutacomparativelysmallpartof thefieldofvirtue，andare，moreover，principallynegative;forbidding particularacts，buthavinglittletodowiththegeneraldirectionofthe thoughtsandpurposes。Iamafraiditmustbesaid，thatdisinterestedness inthegeneralconductoflife——thedevotionoftheenergiestopurposes whichholdoutnopromiseofprivateadvantagestothefamily——isvery seldomencouragedorsupportedbywomen’sinfluence。Itissmallblameto themthattheydiscourageobjectsofwhichtheyhavenotlearnttoseethe advantage，andwhichwithdrawtheirmenfromthem，andfromtheinterests ofthefamily。Buttheconsequenceisthatwomen’sinfluenceisoftenanythingbutfavourabletopublicvirtue。Womenhave，however，someshareofinfluenceingivingthetonetopublic moralitiessincetheirsphereofactionhasbeenalittlewidened，andsince aconsiderablenumberofthemhaveoccupiedthemselvespracticallyinthe promotionofobjectsreachingbeyondtheirownfamilyandhousehold。The influenceofwomencountsforagreatdealintwoofthemostmarkedfeatures ofmodernEuropeanlife——itsaversiontowar，anditsaddictiontophilanthropy。 Excellentcharacteristicsboth;butunhappily，iftheinfluenceofwomen isvaluableintheencouragementitgivestothesefeelingsingeneral，in theparticularapplicationsthedirectionitgivestothemisatleastas oftenmischievousasuseful。Inthephilanthropicdepartmentmoreparticularly， thetwoprovinceschieflycultivatedbywomenarereligiousproselytismand charity。Religiousproselytismathome，isbutanotherwordforembittering ofreligiousanimosities：abroad，itisusuallyablindrunningatanobject， withouteitherknowingorheedingthefatalmischiefs——fataltothereligious objectitselfaswellastoallotherdesirableobjects——whichmaybeproduced bythemeansemployed。Asforcharity，itisamatterinwhichtheimmediate effectonthepersonsdirectlyconcerned，andtheultimateconsequenceto thegeneralgood，areapttobeatcompletewarwithoneanother：whilethe educationgiventowomen——aneducationofthesentimentsratherthanof theunderstanding——andthehabitinculcatedbytheirwholelife，oflooking toimmediateeffectsonpersons，andnottoremoteeffectsonclassesof persons——makethembothunabletosee，andunwillingtoadmit，theultimate eviltendencyofanyformofcharityorphilanthropywhichcommendsitself totheirsympatheticfeelings。Thegreatandcontinuallyincreasingmass ofunenlightenedandshortsightedbenevolence，which，takingthecareof people’slivesoutoftheirownhands，andrelievingthemfromthedisagreeable consequencesoftheirownacts，sapstheveryfoundationsoftheself—respect， self—help，andself—controlwhicharetheessentialconditionsbothofindividual prosperityandofsocialvirtue——thiswasteofresourcesandofbenevolent feelingsindoingharminsteadofgood，isimmenselyswelledbywomen’scontributions， andstimulatedbytheirinfluence。Notthatthisisamistakelikelytobe madebywomen，wheretheyhaveactuallythepracticalmanagementofschemes ofbeneficence。Itsometimeshappensthatwomenwhoadministerpubliccharities ——withthatinsightintopresentfact，andespeciallyintothemindsand feelingsofthosewithwhomtheyareinimmediatecontact，inwhichwomen generallyexcelmen——recogniseintheclearestmannerthedemoralising influenceofthealmsgivenorthehelpafforded，andcouldgivelessons onthesubjecttomanyamalepoliticaleconomist。Butwomenwhoonlygive theirmoney，andarenotbroughtfacetofacewiththeeffectsitproduces， howcantheybeexpectedtoforeseethem？Awomanborntothepresentlot ofwomen，andcontentwithit，howshouldsheappreciatethevalueofself—dependence？ Sheisnotself—dependent;sheisnottaughtself—dependence;herdestiny istoreceiveeverythingfromothers，andwhyshouldwhatisgoodenough forherbebadforthepoor？Herfamiliarnotionsofgoodareofblessings descendingfromasuperior。Sheforgetsthatsheisnotfree，andthatthe poorare;thatifwhattheyneedisgiventothemunearned，theycannotbe compelledtoearnit：thateverybodycannotbetakencareofbyeverybody， buttheremustbesomemotivetoinducepeopletotakecareofthemselves; andthattobehelped—tohelpthemselves，iftheyarephysicallycapableofit，istheonlycharitywhichprovestobecharityintheend。###第6章Theseconsiderationsshowhowusefullythepartwhichwomentakeinthe formationofgeneralopinion，wouldbemodifiedforthebetterbythatmore enlargedinstruction，andpracticalconversancywiththethingswhichtheir opinionsinfluence，thatwouldnecessarilyarisefromtheirsocialandpolitical emancipation。Buttheimprovementitwouldworkthroughtheinfluencetheyexercise，eachinherownfamily，wouldbestillmoreremarkable。Itisoftensaidthatintheclassesmostexposedtotemptation，aman’s wifeandchildrentendtokeephimhonestandrespectable，bothbythewife’s directinfluence，andbytheconcernhefeelsfortheirfuturewelfare。This maybeso，andnodoubtoftenisso，withthosewhoaremoreweakthanwicked; andthisbeneficialinfluencewouldbepreservedandstrengthenedunderequal laws;itdoesnotdependonthewoman’sservitude，butis，onthecontrary， diminishedbythedisrespectwhichtheinferiorclassofmenalwaysatheart feeltowardsthosewhoaresubjecttotheirpower。Butwhenweascendhigher inthescale，wecomeamongatotallydifferentsetofmovingforces。The wife’sinfluencetends，asfarasitgoes，topreventthehusbandfromfalling belowthecommonstandardofapprobationofthecountry。Ittendsquiteas stronglytohinderhimfromrisingaboveit。Thewifeistheauxiliaryof thecommonpublicopinion。Amanwhoismarriedtoawomanhisinferiorin intelligence，findsheraperpetualdeadweight，or，worsethanadeadweight， adrag，uponeveryaspirationofhistobebetterthanpublicopinionrequires himtobe。Itishardlypossibleforonewhoisinthesebonds，toattain exaltedvirtue。Ifhediffersinhisopinionfromthemass——ifhesees truthswhichhavenotyetdawneduponthem，orif，feelinginhishearttruths whichtheynominallyrecognise，hewouldliketoactuptothosetruthsmore conscientiouslythanthegeneralityofmankind——toallsuchthoughtsand desires，marriageistheheaviestofdrawbacks，unlesshebesofortunateastohaveawifeasmuchabovethecommonlevelashehimselfis。For，inthefirstplace，thereisalwayssomesacrificeofpersonalinterest required;eitherofsocialconsequence，orofpecuniarymeans;perhapsthe riskofeventhemeansofsubsistence。Thesesacrificesandriskshemay bewillingtoencounterforhimself;buthewillpausebeforeheimposes themonhisfamily。Andhisfamilyinthiscasemeanshiswifeanddaughters; forhealwayshopesthathissonswillfeelashefeelshimself，andthat whathecandowithout，theywilldowithout，willingly，isthesamecause。 Buthisdaughters——theirmarriagemaydependuponit：andhiswife，who isunabletoenterintoorunderstandtheobjectsforwhichthesesacrifices aremade——who，ifshethoughtthemworthanysacrifice，wouldthinkso ontrust，andsolelyforhissake——whocouldparticipateinnoneofthe enthusiasmortheself—approbationhehimselfmayfeel，whilethethings whichheisdisposedtosacrificeareallinalltoher;willnotthebest andmostunselfishmanhesitatethelongestbeforebringingonherthisconsequence？ Ifitbenotthecomfortsoflife，butonlysocialconsideration，thatis atstake，theburthenuponhisconscienceandfeelingsisstillverysevere。 WhoeverhasawifeandchildrenhasgivenhostagestoMrsGrundy。Theapprobation ofthatpotentatemaybeamatterofindifferencetohim，butitisofgreat importancetohiswife。Themanhimselfmaybeaboveopinion，ormayfind sufficientcompensationintheopinionofthoseofhisownwayofthinking。 Buttothewomenconnectedwithhim，hecanoffernocompensation。Thealmost invariabletendencyofthewifetoplaceherinfluenceinthesamescale withsocialconsideration，issometimesmadeareproachtowomen，andrepresented asapeculiartraitoffeeblenessandchildishnessofcharacterinthem： surelywithgreatinjustice。Societymakesthewholelifeofawoman，in theeasyclasses，acontinuedselfsacrifice;itexactsfromheranunremitting restraintofthewholeofhernaturalinclinations，andthesolereturnit makestoherforwhatoftendeservesthenameofamartyrdom，isconsideration。 Herconsiderationisinseparablyconnectedwiththatofherhusband，and afterpayingthefullpriceforit，shefindsthatsheistoloseit，for noreasonofwhichshecanfeelthecogency。Shehassacrificedherwhole lifetoit，andherhusbandwillnotsacrificetoitawhim，afreak，an eccentricity;somethingnotrecognisedorallowedforbytheworld，andwhich theworldwillagreewithherinthinkingafolly，ifitthinksnoworse！ Thedilemmaishardestuponthatverymeritoriousclassofmen，who，without possessingtalentswhichqualifythemtomakeafigureamongthosewithwhom theyagreeinopinion，holdtheiropinionfromconviction，andfeelbound inhonourandconsciencetoserveit，bymakingprofessionoftheirbelief， andgivingtheirtime，labour，andmeans，toanythingundertakeninitsbehalf。 Theworstcaseofalliswhensuchmenhappentobeofarankandposition whichofitselfneithergivesthem，norexcludesthemfrom，whatisconsidered thebestsociety;whentheiradmissiontoitdependsmainlyonwhatisthought ofthempersonally——andhoweverunexceptionabletheirbreedingandhabits， theirbeingidentifiedwithopinionsandpublicconductunacceptabletothose whogivethetonetosocietywouldoperateasaneffectualexclusion。Many awomanflattersherself（ninetimesoutoftenquiteerroneously）thatnothing preventsherandherhusbandfrommovinginthehighestsocietyofherneighbourhood ——societyinwhichotherswellknowntoher，andinthesameclassoflife， mixfreely——exceptthatherhusbandisunfortunatelyaDissenter，orhas thereputationofminglinginlowradicalpolitics。Thatitis，shethinks， whichhindersGeorgefromgettingacommissionoraplace，Carolinefrom makinganadvantageousmatch，andpreventsherandherhusbandfromobtaining invitations，perhapshonours，which，foraughtshesees，theyareaswell entitledtoassomefolks。Withsuchaninfluenceineveryhouse，either exertedactively，oroperatingallthemorepowerfullyfornotbeingasserted， isitanywonderthatpeopleingeneralarekeptdowninthatmediocrityofrespectabilitywhichisbecomingamarkedcharacteristicofmoderntimes？Thereisanotherveryinjuriousaspectinwhichtheeffect，notofwomen’s disabilitiesdirectly，butofthebroadlineofdifferencewhichthosedisabilities createbetweentheeducationandcharacterofawomanandthatofaman， requirestobeconsidered。Nothingcanbemoreunfavourabletothatunion ofthoughtsandinclinationswhichistheidealofmarriedlife。Intimate societybetweenpeopleradicallydissimilartooneanother，isanidledream。 Unlikenessmayattract，butitislikenesswhichretains;andinproportion tothelikenessisthesuitabilityoftheindividualstogiveeachother ahappylife。Whilewomenaresounlikemen，itisnotwonderfulthatselfish menshouldfeeltheneedofarbitrarypowerintheirownhands，toarrest inliminethelife—longconflictofinclinations，bydecidingeveryquestion onthesideoftheirownpreference。Whenpeopleareextremelyunlike，there canbenorealidentityofinterest。Veryoftenthereisconscientiousdifference ofopinionbetweenmarriedpeople，onthehighestpointsofduty。Isthere anyrealityinthemarriageunionwherethistakesplace？Yetitisnotuncommon anywhere，whenthewomanhasanyearnestnessofcharacter;anditisavery generalcaseindeedinCatholiccountries，whensheissupportedinherdissent bytheonlyotherauthoritytowhichsheistaughttobow，thepriest。With theusualbarefacednessofpowernotaccustomedtofinditselfdisputed， theinfluenceofpriestsoverwomenisattackedbyProtestantandLiberal writers，lessforbeingbadinitself，thanbecauseitisarivalauthority tothehusband，andraisesuparevoltagainsthisinfallibility。InEngland， similardifferencesoccasionallyexistwhenanEvangelicalwifehasallied herselfwithahusbandofadifferentquality;butingeneralthissource atleastofdissensionisgotridof，byreducingthemindsofwomentosuch anullity，thattheyhavenoopinionsbutthoseofMrs。Grundy，orthose whichthehusbandtellsthemtohave。Whenthereisnodifferenceofopinion， differencesmerelyoftastemaybesufficienttodetractgreatlyfromthe happinessofmarriedlife。Andthoughitmaystimulatetheamatorypropensities ofmen，itdoesnotconducetomarriedhappiness，toexaggeratebydifferences ofeducationwhatevermaybethenativedifferencesofthesexes。Ifthe marriedpairarewell—bredandwell—behavedpeople，theytolerateeachother’s tastes;butismutualtolerationwhatpeoplelookforwardto，whentheyenter intomarriage？Thesedifferencesofinclinationwillnaturallymaketheir wishesdifferent，ifnotrestrainedbyaffectionorduty，astoalmostall domesticquestionswhicharise。Whatadifferencetheremustbeinthesociety whichthetwopersonswillwishtofrequent，orbefrequentedby！Eachwill desireassociateswhosharetheirowntastes：thepersonsagreeabletoone， willbeindifferentorpositivelydisagreeabletotheother;yettherecan benonewhoarenotcommontoboth，formarriedpeopledonotnowlivein differentpartsofthehouseandhavetotallydifferentvisitinglists，as inthereignofLouisXV。Theycannothelphavingdifferentwishesasto thebringingupofthechildren：eachwillwishtoseereproducedinthem theirowntastesandsentiments：andthereiseitheracompromise，andonly ahalfsatisfactiontoeither，orthewifehastoyield——oftenwithbitter suffering;and，withorwithoutintention，heroccultinfluencecontinuestocounterworkthehusband’spurposes。Itwouldofcoursebeextremefollytosupposethatthesedifferences offeelingandinclinationonlyexistbecausewomenarebroughtupdifferently frommen，andthattherewouldnotbedifferencesoftasteunderanyimaginable circumstances。Butthereisnothingbeyondthemarkinsayingthatthedistinction inbringingupimmenselyaggravatesthosedifferences，andrendersthemwholly inevitable。Whilewomenarebroughtupastheyare，amanandawomanwill butrarelyfindinoneanotherrealagreementoftastesandwishesasto dailylife。Theywillgenerallyhavetogiveitupashopeless，andrenounce theattempttohave，intheintimateassociateoftheirdailylife，that idemvelle，idemnolle，whichistherecognisedbondofanysocietythat isreallysuch：orifthemansucceedsinobtainingit，hedoessobychoosing awomanwhoissocompleteanullitythatshehasnovelleornolleatall， andisasreadytocomplywithonethingasanotherifanybodytellsher todoso。Eventhiscalculationisapttofail;dullnessandwantofspirit arenotalwaysaguaranteeofthesubmissionwhichissoconfidentlyexpected fromthem。Butiftheywere，isthistheidealofmarriage？What，inthis case，doesthemanobtainbyit，exceptanupperservant，anurse，oramistress？ onthecontrary，wheneachoftwopersons，insteadofbeinganothing，is asomething;whentheyareattachedtooneanother，andarenottoomuch unliketobeginwith;theconstantpartakinginthesamethings，assisted bytheirsympathy，drawsoutthelatentcapacitiesofeachforbeinginterested inthethingswhichwereatfirstinterestingonlytotheother;andworks agradualassimilationofthetastesandcharacterstooneanother，partly bytheinsensiblemodificationofeach，butmorebyarealenrichingofthe twonatures，eachacquiringthetastesandcapacitiesoftheotherinaddition toitsown。Thisoftenhappensbetweentwofriendsofthesamesex，whoare muchassociatedintheirdailylife：anditwouldbeacommon，ifnotthe commonest，caseinmarriage，didnotthetotallydifferentbringingupof thetwosexesmakeitnexttoanimpossibilitytoformareallywell—assorted union。Werethisremedied，whateverdifferencestheremightstillbeinindividual tastes，therewouldatleastbe，asageneralrule，completeunityandunanimity astothegreatobjectsoflife。Whenthetwopersonsbothcareforgreat objects，andareahelpandencouragementtoeachotherinwhateverregards these，theminormattersonwhichtheirtastesmaydifferarenotall—important tothem;andthereisafoundationforsolidfriendship，ofanenduringcharacter， morelikelythananythingelsetomakeit，throughthewholeoflife，agreaterpleasuretoeachtogivepleasuretotheother，thantoreceiveit。Ihaveconsidered，thusfar，theeffectsonthepleasuresandbenefits ofthemarriageunionwhichdependonthemereunlikenessbetweenthewife andthehusband：buttheeviltendencyisprodigiouslyaggravatedwhenthe unlikenessisinferiority。Mereunlikeness，whenitonlymeansdifference ofgoodqualities，maybemoreabenefitinthewayofmutualimprovement， thanadrawbackfromcomfort。Wheneachemulates，anddesiresandendeavours toacquire，theother’speculiarqualitiesthedifferencedoesnotproduce diversityofinterest，butincreasedidentityofit，andmakeseachstill morevaluabletotheother。Butwhenoneismuchtheinferiorofthetoin mentalabilityandcultivation，andisnotactivelyattemptingbytheother’s aidtorisetotheother’slevel，thewholeinfluenceoftheconnexionupon thedevelopmentofthesuperiorofthetwoisdeteriorating：andstillmore soinatolerablyhappymarriagethaninanunhappyone。Itisnotwithimpunity thatthesuperiorinintellectshutshimselfupwithaninferior，andelects thatinferiorforhischosen，andsolecompletelyintimate，associate。Any societywhichisnotimprovingisdeteriorating：andthemoreso，thecloser andmorefamiliaritis。Evenareallysuperiormanalmostalwaysbegins todeterioratewhenheishabitually（asthephraseis）kingofhiscompany： andinhismosthabitualcompanythehusbandwhohasawifeinferiortohim isalwaysso。Whilehisself—satisfactionisincessantlyministeredtoon theonehand，ontheotherheinsensiblyimbibesthemodesoffeeling，and oflookingatthings，whichbelongtoamorevulgaroramorelimitedmind thanhisown。Thisevildiffersfrommanyofthosewhichhavehithertobeen dwelton，bybeinganincreasingone。Theassociationofmenwithwomenin dailylifeismuchcloserandmorecompletethaniteverwasbefore。Men’s lifeismoredomestic。Formerly，theirpleasuresandchosenoccupationswere amongmen，andinmen’scompany：theirwiveshadbutafragmentoftheir lives。Atthepresenttime，theprogressofcivilisation，andtheturnof opinionagainsttheroughamusementsandconvivialexcesseswhichformerly occupiedmostmenintheirhoursofrelaxation——togetherwith（itmust besaid）theimprovedtoneofmodernfeelingastothereciprocityofduty whichbindsthehusbandtowardsthewife——havethrownthemanverymuch moreuponhomeanditsinmates，forhispersonalandsocialpleasures：while thekindanddegreeofimprovementwhichhasbeenmadeinwomen’seducation， hasmadetheminsomedegreecapableofbeinghiscompanionsinideasand mentaltaste，whileleavingthem，inmostcases，stillhopelesslyinferior tohim。Hisdesireofmentalcommunionisthusingeneralsatisfiedbya communionfromwhichhelearnsnothing。Anunimprovingandunstimulating companionshipissubstitutedfor（whathemightotherwisehavebeenobliged toseek）thesocietyofhisequalsinpowersandhisfellowsinthehigher pursuits。Wesee，accordingly，thatyoungmenofthegreatestpromisegenerally ceasetoimproveassoonastheymarry，and，notimproving，inevitablydegenerate。 Ifthewifedoesnotpushthehusbandforward，shealwaysholdshimback。 Heceasestocareforwhatshedoesnotcarefor;henolongerdesires，and endsbydislikingandshunning，societycongenialtohisformeraspirations， andwhichwouldnowshamehisfalling—offfromthem;hishigherfaculties bothofmindandheartceasetobecalledintoactivity。Andthischange coincidingwiththenewandselfishinterestswhicharecreatedbythefamily， afterafewyearshediffersinnomaterialrespectfromthosewhohavenever hadwishesforanythingbutthecommonvanitiesandthecommonpecuniaryobjects。Whatmarriagemaybeinthecaseoftwopersonsofcultivatedfaculties， identicalinopinionsandpurposes，betweenwhomthereexiststhatbestkind ofequality，similarityofpowersandcapacitieswithreciprocalsuperiority inthem——sothateachcanenjoytheluxuryoflookinguptotheother， andcanhavealternatelythepleasureofleadingandofbeingledinthe pathofdevelopment——Iwillnotattempttodescribe。Tothosewhocanconceive it，thereisnoneed;tothosewhocannot，itwouldappearthedreamofan enthusiast。ButImaintain，withtheprofoundestconviction，thatthis，and thisonly，istheidealofmarriage;andthatallopinions，customs，and institutionswhichfavouranyothernotionofit，orturntheconceptions andaspirationsconnectedwithitintoanyotherdirection，bywhateverpretences theymaybecoloured，arerelicsofprimitivebarbarism。Themoralregeneration ofmankindwillonlyreallycommence，whenthemostfundamentalofthesocial relationsisplacedundertheruleofequaljustice，andwhenhumanbeings learntocultivatetheirstrongestsympathywithanequalinnightsandincultivation。Thusfar，thebenefitswhichithasappearedthattheworldwouldgain byceasingtomakesexadisqualificationforprivilegesandabadgeofsubjection， aresocialratherthanindividual;consistinginanincreaseofthegeneral fundofthinkingandactingpower，andanimprovementinthegeneralconditions oftheassociationofmenwithwomen。Butitwouldbeagrievousunderstatement ofthecasetoomitthemostdirectbenefitofall，theunspeakablegain inprivatehappinesstotheliberatedhalfofthespecies;thedifference tothembetweenalifeofsubjectiontothewillofothers，andalifeof rationalfreedom。Aftertheprimarynecessitiesoffoodandraiment，freedom isthefirstandstrongestwantofhumannature。Whilemankindarelawless， theirdesireisforlawlessfreedom。Whentheyhavelearnttounderstand themeaningofdutyandthevalueofreason，theyinclinemoreandmoreto beguidedandrestrainedbytheseintheexerciseoftheirfreedom;butthey donotthereforedesirefreedomless;theydonotbecomedisposedtoaccept thewillofotherpeopleastherepresentativeandinterpreterofthoseguiding principles。Onthecontrary，thecommunitiesinwhichthereasonhasbeen mostcultivated，andinwhichtheideaofsocialdutyhasbeenmostpowerful， arethosewhichhavemoststronglyassertedthefreedomofactionofthe individual——thelibertyofeachtogovernhisconductbyhisownfeelings ofduty，andbysuchlawsandsocialrestraintsashisownconsciencecansubscribeto。Hewhowouldrightlyappreciatetheworthofpersonalindependenceas anelementofhappiness，shouldconsiderthevaluehehimselfputsuponit asaningredientofhisown。Thereisnosubjectonwhichthereisagreater habitualdifferenceofjudgmentbetweenamanjudgingforhimself，andthe samemanjudgingforotherpeople。Whenhehearsotherscomplainingthat theyarenotallowedfreedomofaction——thattheirownwillhasnotsufficient influenceintheregulationoftheiraffairs——hisinclinationis，toask， whataretheirgrievances？whatpositivedamagetheysustain？andinwhat respecttheyconsidertheiraffairstobemismanaged？andiftheyfailto makeout，inanswertothesequestions，whatappearstohimasufficient case，heturnsadeafear，andregardstheircomplaintasthefancifulquerulousness ofpeoplewhomnothingreasonablewillsatisfy。Buthehasaquitedifferent standardofjudgmentwhenheisdecidingforhimself。Then，themostunexceptionable administrationofhisinterestsbyatutorsetoverhim，doesnotsatisfy hisfeelings：hispersonalexclusionfromthedecidingauthorityappears itselfthegreatestgrievanceofall，renderingitsuperfluouseventoenter intothequestionofmismanagement。Itisthesamewithnations。Whatcitizen ofafreecountrywouldlistentoanyoffersofgoodandskilfuladministration， inreturnfortheabdicationoffreedom？Evenifhecouldbelievethatgood andskilfuladministrationcanexistamongapeopleruledbyawillnottheir own，wouldnottheconsciousnessofworkingouttheirowndestinyundertheir ownmoralresponsibilitybeacompensationtohisfeelingsforgreatrudeness andimperfectioninthedetailsofpublicaffairs？Lethimrestassuredthat whateverhefeelsonthispoint，womenfeelinafullyequaldegree。Whatever hasbeensaidorwritten，fromthetimeofHerodotustothepresent，ofthe ennoblinginfluenceoffreegovernment——thenerveandspringwhichitgives toallthefaculties，thelargerandhigherobjectswhichitpresentsto theintellectandfeelings，themoreunselfishpublicspirit，andcalmer andbroaderviewsofduty，thatitengenders，andthegenerallyloftierplatform onwhichitelevatestheindividualasamoral，spiritual，andsocialbeing ——iseveryparticleastrueofwomenasofmen。Arethesethingsnoimportant partofindividualhappiness？Letanymancalltomindwhathehimselffelt onemergingfromboyhood——fromthetutelageandcontrolofevenlovedand affectionateelders——andenteringupontheresponsibilitiesofmanhood。 Wasitnotlikethephysicaleffectoftakingoffaheavyweight，orreleasing himfromobstructive，evenifnototherwisepainful，bonds？Didhenotfeel twiceasmuchalive，twiceasmuchahumanbeing，asbefore？Anddoeshe imaginethatwomenhavenoneofthesefeelings？Butitisastrikingfact， thatthesatisfactionsandmortificationsofpersonalpride，thoughallin alltomostmenwhenthecaseistheirown，havelessallowancemadefor theminthecaseofotherpeople，andarelesslistenedtoasagroundor ajustificationofconduct，thananyothernaturalhumanfeelings;perhaps becausemencomplimentthemintheirowncasewiththenamesofsomanyother qualities，thattheyareseldomconscioushowmightyaninfluencethesefeelings exerciseintheirownlives。Nolesslargeandpowerfulistheirpart，we mayassureourselves，inthelivesandfeelingsofwomen。Womenareschooled intosuppressingthemintheirmostnaturalandmosthealthydirection，but theinternalprincipleremains，inadifferentoutwardform。Anactiveand energeticmind，ifdeniedliberty，willseekforpower：refusedthecommand ofitself，itwillassertitspersonalitybyattemptingtocontrolothers。 Toallowtoanyhumanbeingsnoexistenceoftheirownbutwhatdependson others，isgivingfartoohighapremiumonbendingotherstotheirpurposes。 Wherelibertycannotbehopedfor，andpowercan，powerbecomesthegrand objectofhumandesire;thosetowhomotherswillnotleavetheundisturbed managementoftheirownaffairs，willcompensatethemselves，iftheycan， bymeddlingfortheirownpurposeswiththeaffairsofothers。Hencealso women’spassionforpersonalbeauty，anddressanddisplay;andalltheevils thatflowfromit，inthewayofmischievousluxuryandsocialimmorality。 Theloveofpowerandtheloveoflibertyareineternalantagonism。Where thereisleastliberty，thepassionforpoweristhemostardentandunscrupulous。 Thedesireofpoweroverotherscanonlyceasetobeadepravingagencyamong mankind，wheneachofthemindividuallyisabletodowithoutit：whichcan onlybewhererespectforlibertyinthepersonalconcernsofeachisanestablishedprinciple。Butitisnotonlythroughthesentimentofpersonaldignity，thatthe freedirectionanddisposaloftheirownfacultiesisasourceofindividual happiness，andtobefetteredandrestrictedinit，asourceofunhappiness， tohumanbeings，andnotleasttowomen。Thereisnothing，afterdisease， indigence，andguilt，sofataltothepleasurableenjoymentoflifeasthe wantofaworthyoutletfortheactivefaculties。Womenwhohavethecares ofafamily，andwhiletheyhavethecaresofafamily，havethisoutlet， anditgenerallysufficesforthem：butwhatofthegreatlyincreasingnumber ofwomen，whohavehadnoopportunityofexercisingthevocationwhichthey aremockedbytellingthemistheirproperone？Whatofthewomenwhosechildren havebeenlosttothembydeathordistance，orhavegrownup，married，and formedhomesoftheirown？Thereareabundantexamplesofmenwho，after alifeengrossedbybusiness，retirewithacompetencytotheenjoyment， astheyhope，ofrest，buttowhom，astheyareunabletoacquirenewinterests andexcitementsthatcanreplacetheold，thechangetoalifeofinactivity bringsennui，melancholy，andprematuredeath。Yetnoonethinksoftheparallel caseofsomanyworthyanddevotedwomen，who，havingpaidwhattheyare toldistheirdebttosociety——havingbroughtupafamilyblamelesslyto manhoodandwomanhood——havingkeptahouseaslongastheyhadahouse needingtobekept——aredesertedbythesoleoccupationforwhichthey havefittedthemselves;andremainwithundiminishedactivitybutwithno employmentforit，unlessperhapsadaughterordaughter—in—lawiswilling toabdicateintheirfavourthedischargeofthesamefunctionsinheryounger household。Surelyahardlotfortheoldageofthosewhohaveworthilydischarged， aslongasitwasgiventothemtodischarge，whattheworldaccountstheir onlysocialduty。Ofsuchwomen，andofthoseotherstowhomthisdutyhas notbeencommittedatall——manyofwhompinethroughlifewiththeconsciousness ofthwartedvocations，andactivitieswhicharenotsufferedtoexpand—— theonlyresources，speakinggenerally，arereligionandcharity。Buttheir religion，thoughitmaybeoneoffeeling，andofceremonialobservance， cannotbeareligionofaction，unlessintheformofcharity。Forcharity manyofthemarebynatureadmirablyfitted;buttopractiseitusefully， orevenwithoutdoingmischief，requirestheeducation，themanifoldpreparation， theknowledgeandthethinkingpowers，ofaskilfuladministrator。There arefewoftheadministrativefunctionsofgovernmentforwhichaperson wouldnotbefit，whoisfittobestowcharityusefully。Inthisasinother cases（pre—eminentlyinthatoftheeducationofchildren），thedutiespermitted towomencannotbeperformedproperly，withouttheirbeingtrainedforduties which，tothegreatlossofsociety，arenotpermittedtothem。Andhere letmenoticethesingularwayinwhichthequestionofwomen’sdisabilities isfrequentlypresentedtoview，bythosewhofinditeasiertodrawaludicrous pictureofwhattheydonotlike，thantoanswertheargumentsforit。When itissuggestedthatwomen’sexecutivecapacitiesandprudentcounselsmight sometimesbefoundvaluableinaffairsofState，theseloversoffunhold uptotheridiculeoftheworld，assittinginParliamentorintheCabinet， girlsintheirteens，oryoungwivesoftwoorthreeandtwenty，transported bodily，exactlyastheyare，fromthedrawing—roomtotheHouseofCommons。 Theyforgetthatmalesarenotusuallyselectedatthisearlyageforaseat inParliament，orforresponsiblepoliticalfunctions。Commonsensewould tellthemthatifsuchtrustswereconfidedtowomen，itwouldbetosuch ashavingnospecialvocationformarriedlife，orpreferringanotheremployment oftheirfaculties（asmanywomenevennowprefertomarriagesomeofthe fewhonourableoccupationswithintheirreach），havespentthebestyears oftheiryouthinattemptingtoqualifythemselvesforthepursuitsinwhich theydesiretoengage;orstillmorefrequentlyperhaps，widowsorwives offortyorfifty，bywhomtheknow—ledgeoflifeandfacultyofgovernment whichtheyhaveacquiredintheirfamilies，couldbytheaidofappropriate studiesbemadeavailableonalesscontractedscale。Thereisnocountry ofEuropeinwhichtheablestmenhavenotfrequentlyexperienced，andkeenly appreciated，thevalueoftheadviceandhelpofcleverandexperiencedwomen oftheworld，intheattainmentbothofprivateandofpublicobjects;and thereareimportantmattersofpublicadministrationtowhichfewmenare equallycompetentwithsuchwomen;amongothers，thedetailedcontrolof expenditure。Butwhatwearenowdiscussingisnottheneedwhichsociety hasoftheservicesofwomeninpublicbusiness，butthedullandhopeless lifetowhichitsooftencondemnsthem，byforbiddingthemtoexercisethe practicalabilitieswhichmanyofthemareconsciousof，inanywiderfield thanonewhichtosomeofthemneverwas，andtoothersisnolonger，open。 Ifthereisanythingvitallyimportanttothehappinessofhumanbeings， itisthattheyshouldrelishtheirhabitualpursuit。Thisrequisiteofan enjoyablelifeisveryimperfectlygranted，oraltogetherdenied，toalarge partofmankind;andbyitsabsencemanyalifeisafailure，whichisprovided， inappearance，witheveryrequisiteofsuccess。Butifcircumstanceswhich societyisnotyetskilfulenoughtoovercome，rendersuchfailuresoften forthepresentinevitable，societyneednotitselfinflictthem。Theinjudiciousness ofparents，ayouth’sowninexperience，ortheabsenceofexternalopportunities forthecongenialvocation，andtheirpresenceforanuncongenial，condemn numbersofmentopasstheirlivesindoingonethingreluctantlyandill， whenthereareotherthingswhichtheycouldhavedonewellandhappily。 Butonwomenthissentenceisimposedbyactuallaw，andbycustomsequivalent tolaw。What，inunenlightenedsocieties，colour，race，religion，orinthe caseofaconqueredcountry，nationality，aretosomemen，sexistoall women;aperemptoryexclusionfromalmostallhonourableoccupations，but eithersuchascannotbefulfilledbyothers，orsuchasthoseothersdo notthinkworthyoftheiracceptance。Sufferingsarisingfromcausesofthis natureusuallymeetwithsolittlesympathy，thatfewpersonsareawareof thegreatamountofunhappinessevennowproducedbythefeelingofawasted life。Thecasewillbeevenmorefrequent，asincreasedcultivationcreates agreaterandgreaterdisproportionbetweentheideasandfaculties——ofwomen，andthescopewhichsocietyallowstotheiractivity。Whenweconsiderthepositiveevilcausedtothedisqualifiedhalfof thehumanracebytheirdisqualification——firstinthelossofthemost inspiritingandelevatingkindofpersonalenjoyment，andnextintheweariness， disappointment，andprofounddissatisfactionwithlife，whicharesooften thesubstituteforit;onefeelsthatamongallthelessonswhichmenrequire forcarryingonthestruggleagainsttheinevitableimperfectionsoftheir lotonearth，thereisnolessonwhichtheymoreneed，thannottoaddto theevilswhichnatureinflicts，bytheirjealousandprejudicedrestrictions ononeanother。Theirvainfearsonlysubstituteotherandworseevilsfor thosewhichtheyareidlyapprehensiveof：whileeveryrestraintonthefreedom ofconductofanyoftheirhumanfellow—creatures（otherwisethanbymaking themresponsibleforanyevilactuallycausedbyit），driesupprotanto theprincipalfountainofhumanhappiness，andleavesthespecieslessrich， toaninappreciabledegree，inallthatmakeslifevaluabletotheindividual humanbeing。