diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53937-8.txt | 10678 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53937-8.zip | bin | 191136 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53937-h.zip | bin | 253213 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53937-h/53937-h.htm | 13515 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53937-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 54146 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53937-h/images/logo.jpg | bin | 1653 -> 0 bytes |
9 files changed, 17 insertions, 24193 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..40d8651 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #53937 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/53937) diff --git a/old/53937-8.txt b/old/53937-8.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 8f1eb35..0000000 --- a/old/53937-8.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,10678 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's A Woman's Philosophy of Woman, by Jenny P. d'Héricourt - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: A Woman's Philosophy of Woman - or, Woman affranchised. An answer to Michelet, Proudhon, - Girardin, Legouvé, Comte, and other modern innovators - -Author: Jenny P. d'Héricourt - -Release Date: January 10, 2017 [EBook #53937] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A WOMAN'S PHILOSOPHY OF WOMAN *** - - - - -Produced by Clarity, Héléne de Mink; and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - - - -Obvious printer errors have been repaired, but spelling has not been -standardized. - - - - - A WOMAN'S PHILOSOPHY OF WOMAN; - - OR - - WOMAN AFFRANCHISED. - - AN ANSWER TO MICHELET, PROUDHON, GIRARDIN, LEGOUVÉ, - COMTE, AND OTHER MODERN INNOVATORS. - - BY MADAME D'HÉRICOURT. - - Translated from the last Paris Edition - - [Illustration] - - NEW YORK: - - _CARLETON, PUBLISHER, 413 BROADWAY._ - - M DCCC LXIV. - - - - - Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1864, by - - G. W. CARLETON, - - In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Southern District - of New York. - - - R. CRAIGHEAD, - Printer, Stereotyper, and Electrotyper, - Carton Building, - _81, 83, and 85 Centre Street_. - - - - -CONTENTS - - - INTRODUCTION 7 - - PREFACE 9 - - CHAP. - - I. MICHELET 17 - - II. PROUDHON 33 - - III. COMTE 119 - - IV. LEGOUVE 134 - - V. DE GIRARDIN 155 - - VI. MODERN COMMUNISTS 167 - - VII. SUMMARY 201 - - -PART II. - - OBJECTIONS TO THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN 211 - - NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF WOMAN 224 - - LOVE; ITS FUNCTIONS IN HUMANITY 248 - - MARRIAGE 270 - - SUMMARY OF PROPOSED REFORMS 294 - - APPEAL TO WOMEN 314 - - - - -INTRODUCTION - -TO THE AMERICAN EDITION. - - -The general interest evinced in the theories of Michelet and other -philosophers concerning the functions and province of woman, and the -lively opposition to these theories manifested in many quarters, have -called forth an American translation of the present work. This remarkable -book of Madame d'Héricourt on woman is conceded to be the best reply to -these philosophers extant. The work, intended by the author as "a -refutation of the coarse indecency of Proudhon, and of the perfumed -pruriency of Michelet, and the other false friends and would-be champions -of woman," has had a remarkable history. Published first at Brussels, it -was interdicted in France, and notice was given that all copies found -would be seized. Madame d'Héricourt appealed to the censorship to know -the reason of this interdiction, and was informed in reply that the -reason for such proceedings never was given. Not content with this, she -wrote to Napoleon III, enclosing a copy of the work, and called his -attention to the fact that a book by a French author could be suppressed -in France without any reason being given for it, and without any chance -being offered to the author to clear herself of the implied charge of -immorality. Immediately upon the reception of the letter, the Emperor -withdrew the interdiction. - -Madame d'Héricourt is well known in France as an able contributor to -various philosophic journals, and also as a member of the medical -profession, in which she holds a high and respected position. Her -opinions are entitled to great weight, and will be welcomed as throwing -much light on the practical question of the sphere of woman, which is -becoming one of increasing interest. The better to adapt the book to the -American public, it has been slightly abbreviated in portions of local -interest, referring chiefly to French legislation. It has been well -received in England, as is testified by the following extract from the -_London Critic_, one of the ablest of the English critical journals: - - "The work is calculated to do an immense service to French - society at the present time--just when the literature of the - country is on the verge of decay from the rottenness which is - eating to its very core. 'La Femme Affranchie' points out the - remedy to the social cancer which has gnawed away the vital - principle of domestic life in France, and caused that antagonism - between the sexes which foreigners behold with the most profound - amazement. Madame d'Héricourt's bold and nervous arguments - completely destroy the brutal commonplaces of Proudhon as regards - the moral and intellectual capacity of women. She takes him on - his own ground, and to his medical propositions returns medical - objections of far greater weight and power, being more competent - to judge the question, as she has passed examinations as - 'Maitresse sage femme' of 'La Clinique,' and received her diploma - as medical practitioner many years ago." - - - - -AUTHOR'S PREFACE. - -TO MY READERS. - - -Readers, male and female, I am about to tell you the end of this book, -and the motives which caused me to undertake it, that you may not waste -your time in reading it, if its contents are not suited to your -intellectual and moral temperament. - -My end is to prove that woman has the same rights as man. - -To claim, in consequence, her emancipation; - -Lastly, to point out to the women who share my views, the principal -measures that they must take to obtain justice. - -The word emancipation giving room for equivocation, let us in the first -place establish its meaning. - -To emancipate woman is not to acknowledge her right to use and abuse -love; such an emancipation is only the slavery of the passions; the use -of the beauty and youth of woman by man; the use of man by woman for his -fortune or credit. - -To emancipate woman is to acknowledge and declare her free, the equal of -man in the social and the moral law, and in labor. - -At present, over the whole surface of the globe, woman, in certain -respects, is not subjected to the same moral law as man; her chastity is -given over almost without restriction to the brutal passions of the other -sex, and she often endures alone the consequences of a fault committed by -both. - -In marriage, woman is a serf. - -In public instruction, she is sacrificed. - -In labor, she is made inferior. - -Civilly, she is _a_ minor. - -Politically, she has no existence. - -_She is the equal of man only when punishment and the payment of taxes -are in question._ - -I claim the rights of woman, because it is time to make the nineteenth -century ashamed of its culpable denial of justice to half the human -species; - -Because the state of inferiority in which we are held corrupts morals, -dissolves society, deteriorates and enfeebles the race; - -Because the progress of enlightenment, in which woman participates, has -transformed her in social power, and because this new power produces evil -in default of the good which it is not permitted to do; - -Because the time for according reforms has come, since women are -protesting against the order which oppresses them; some by disdain of -laws and prejudices; others by taking possession of contested positions, -and by organizing themselves into societies to claim their share of human -rights, as is done in America; - -Lastly, because it seems to me useful to reply, _no longer with -sentimentality_, but with vigor, to those men who, terrified by the -emancipating movement, call to their aid false science to prove that -woman is outside the pale of right; and carry indecorum and the opposite -of courage, even to insult, even to the most revolting outrages. - -Readers, male and female, several of the adversaries of the cause which I -defend, have carried the discussion into the domain of science, and have -not shrunk before the nudity of biological laws and anatomical details. I -praise them for it; the body being respectable, there is no indecency in -speaking of the laws which govern it; but as it would be an inconsistency -on my part to believe that blamable in myself which I approve in them, -you will not be surprised that I follow them on the ground which they -have chosen, persuaded that Science, the chaste daughter of Thought, can -no more lose her chastity under the pen of a pure woman than under that -of a pure man. - -Readers, male and female, I have but one request to make; namely, that -you will pardon my simplicity of style. It would have cost me too much -pains to write in the approved fashion; it is probable, besides, that I -should not have succeeded. My work is one of conscience. If I enlighten -some, if I make others reflect; if I awaken in the heart of men the -sentiment of justice, in that of women the sentiment of their dignity; if -I am clear to all, fully comprehended by all, useful to all, even to my -adversaries, it will satisfy me and will console me for displeasing those -who love ideas only as they love women: in full dress. - - -TO MY ADVERSARIES. - -Many among you, gentlemen, adversaries of the great and holy cause which -I defend, have cited me, evidently without having read me, without even -knowing how to write my name. To such as these I have nothing to say, -unless that their opinion matters little to me. Others, who have taken -the trouble to read my preceding works in the _Revue Philosophique_ and -the _Ragione_, accuse me of _not writing like a woman_, of being harsh, -unsparing to my adversaries, nothing but a _reasoning machine, lacking -heart_. - -Gentlemen, I cannot write otherwise than as a woman, since I have the -honor to be a woman. - -If am I harsh and unsparing to my adversaries, it is because they appear -to me to be those of reason and of justice; it is because they, the -strong and well armed, attack harshly and unsparingly a sex which they -have taken care to render timid and to disarm; it is, in short, because I -believe it perfectly lawful to defend weakness against tyranny which has -the audacity and insolence to erect itself into right. - -If I appear to you in the unattractive aspect of a _reasoning_ -_machine_, is, in the first place, because Nature has made me so, and I -see no good reason for modifying her work; secondly, because it is not -amiss for a woman that has attained majority to prove to you that her -sex, when not fearing your judgment, reasons as well, and, often, better -than you. - -I have no heart, you say. I am lacking in it, perhaps, towards tyrants, -but the conflict that I undertake proves that I am not lacking in it -towards their victims; I have therefore a sufficient quantity of it, the -more, inasmuch as I neither desire to please you, nor care to be loved by -any among you. - -Be advised by me, gentlemen; break yourselves of the habit of confounding -heart with nerves; cease to create an imaginary type of woman to make it -the standard of your judgment of real women; it is thus that you pervert -your reason and become, without wishing it, the thing of all others the -most hateful and least estimable--tyrants. - - -TO MY FRIENDS. - -Now to you, my friends, known and unknown, a few lines of thanks. - -You all comprehend that woman, as a human being, has the right to develop -herself, and to manifest, like man, her spontaneity; - -That she has the right, like man, to employ her activity; that she has -the right, like man, to be respected in her dignity and in the use which -she sees fit to make of her free will. - -That as half in the social order, a producer, a tax-payer, amenable to -the laws, she has the right to count as half in society. - -You all comprehend that it is in the enjoyment of these various rights -that her emancipation consists; not in the faculty of making use of love -outside a moral law based on justice and self respect. - -Thanks first to you, Ausonio Franchi, the representative of Critical -Philosophy in Italy, a man as eminent for the profundity of your ideas as -for the impartiality and elevation of your character; and who so -generously and so long lent the columns of your _Ragione_ to my first -labors. - -Thanks to you, my beloved co-laborers of the _Revue Philosophique_ of -Paris, Charles Lemonnier, Massol, Guepin, Brothier, etc., who have not -hesitated to bring to light the question of the emancipation of my sex; -who have welcomed the works of a woman to your columns with so much -impartiality, and have on all occasions expressed for me interest and -sympathy. - -Thanks to you, in particular, my oldest friend, Charles Fauvety, the -indefatigable searcher after truth, whose elegant, refined and limpid -style is solely and constantly at the service of progressive ideas and -generous aspirations, as your rich library and your counsels are at the -service of those who are seeking to enlighten humanity. Why, alas! do you -join to so many talents and noble qualities the fault of always remaining -in the background to give place to others! - -Thanks to you, Charles Renouvier, the most learned representative of -Critical Philosophy in France, who join to such profound doctrine, such -acute perception and such sureness of judgment; I would add, such modesty -and unpretending virtue, did I not know that it displeases you to bring -you before the public. - -It is from your encouragement and approbation, my friends and former -co-laborers, that I have drawn the strength necessary to the work I am -undertaking; it is just, therefore, that I should thank you in the -presence of all. - -It is equally just that I should publicly express my gratitude to the -Italian, English, Dutch, American and German journals that have -translated many of my articles; and to the men and women of these -different countries as well as of France, who have kindly expressed -sympathy for me, and encouraged me in the struggle which I have -undertaken against the adversaries of the rights of my sex. - -To you all, my friends, both Frenchmen and foreigners, I dedicate this -work. May it be useful _everywhere_ in the triumph of the liberty of -woman, and of the equality of all before the law; this is the sole wish -that a Frenchwoman can make who believes in the unity of the human -family, as well as in the legitimacy of national autonomies, and who -loves all nations, since all are the organs of a single great -body,--Humanity. - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -MICHELET. - - -Several women have sharply criticised Michelet's "Love." - -Why are intelligent women thus dissatisfied with so upright a man as -Michelet? - -Because to him woman is a perpetual invalid, who should be shut up in a -gynæceum in company with a dairy maid, as fit company only for chickens -and turkeys. - -Now we, women of the west, have the audacity to contend that we are not -invalids, and that we have a holy horror of the harem and the gynæceum. - -Woman, _according to Michelet_, is a being of a nature opposite to that -of man; a creature weak, _always wounded, exceedingly barometrical_, and, -consequently, unfit for labor. - -She is incapable of abstracting, of generalizing, of comprehending -conscientious labors. She does not like to occupy herself with business, -and she is destitute, in part, of judicial sense. But, in return, she is -revealed all gentleness, all love, all grace, all devotion. - -_Created for man_, she is the altar of his heart, his refreshment, his -consolation. In her presence he gains new vigor, becomes inspirited, -draws the strength necessary to the accomplishment of his high mission -as worker, creator, organizer. - -He should love her, watch over her, maintain her; be at once her father, -her lover, her instructor, her priest, her physician, her nurse, and her -waiting-maid. - -When, at eighteen, a virgin in reason, heart and body, she is given to -this husband, who should be twenty-eight, neither more nor less, he -confines her in the country in a charming cottage, at a distance from her -parents and friends, with the rustic maid that we just mentioned. - -Why this sequestration in the midst of the nineteenth century, do you -ask? - -Because the husband can have no power over his wife in society, and can -have full power over her in solitude. Now, it is necessary that he should -have this full power over her, since it belongs to him to form her heart, -to give her ideas, to sketch within her the incarnation of himself. For -know, readers, that woman is destined to reflect her husband, more and -more, until the last shade of difference, namely, that which is -maintained by the separation of the sexes, shall be at last effaced by -death, and unity in love be thus effected. - -At the end of half a score years of housekeeping, the wife is permitted -to cross the threshold of the gynæceum, and to enter the world, or _the -great Battle of Life_. Here she will meet more than one danger; but she -will escape them all if she keeps the oath she has taken _to make her -husband her confessor_.... It is evident that Michelet respects the -rights of the soul. The husband, who at this epoch has become absorbed in -his profession, has necessarily degenerated, hence there is danger that -the wife may love another; may become enamored, for instance, of her -young nephew. In the book, she does not succumb, because she confesses -everything to her husband; still it may happen that she succumbs, then -repents, and solicits correction from her lord and master. The latter -should at first refuse, but, if she insists, rather than drive her to -despair, Michelet--who would on no account drive a woman to -despair--counsels the husband to administer to his wife _the chastisement -that mothers infliction inflict on their darlings_. - -There must be no separation between the husband and wife; when the latter -has given herself away, she is no longer her own property. She becomes -more and more the incarnation of the man who has espoused her; -fecundation transforms her into him, so that the children of the lover or -of the second husband resemble the first impregnator. The husband, being -ten years older than the wife, dies first; the woman must preserve her -widowhood; her rôle henceforth until death is to fructify within her and -about her the ideas which her husband has bequeathed, to remain the -center of his friendships, to raise up to him posthumous disciples, and -thus remain his property until she rejoins him in death. - -In case the husband survives, which may happen, the author does not tell -us whether he should re-marry. Probably not, since love exists only -between two; unless Michelet, who reproves polygamy in this world, admits -it as morality in the life to come. - -You see, my readers, that in Michelet's book, woman is created for man; -without him she would be nothing; he it is who pronounces the _fiat lux_ -in her intellect; he it is who makes her in his image, as God made man in -his own. - -Accepting the Biblical Genesis, we women can appeal from Adam to God; for -it was not Adam, but God, who created Eve. Admitting the Genesis of -Michelet, there is no pretext, no excuse for disobedience; woman must be -subordinate to man and must yield to him, for she belongs to him as the -work to the workman, as the vessel to the potter. - -The book of Michelet and the two studies of Proudhon on woman, are but -two forms of the same thought. The sole difference that exists between -these gentlemen is, that the first is as sweet as honey, and the second -as bitter as wormwood. - -Nevertheless, I prefer the rude assailant to the poet; for insults and -blows rouse us to rebel and to clamor for liberty, while compliments lull -us to sleep and make us weakly endure our chains. - -It would be somewhat cruel to be harsh to Michelet, who piques himself on -love and poetry, and, consequently, is thin skinned; we will therefore -castigate him only over the shoulders of M. Proudhon, who may be -cannonaded with red-hot shot; and we will content ourselves with -criticising in his book what is not found in that of Proudhon. - -The two chief pillars of the book on Love are, - -First, that woman is a wounded, weak, barometrical, constantly diseased -being; - -Second, that the woman belongs to the man who has fructified and -incarnated himself in her; a proposition proved by the resemblance of the -children of the wife to the husband, whoever may be the father. - -Michelet and his admirers and disciples do not dispute that the only good -method of proving the truth of a principle, or the legitimateness of a -generalization, is _verification by facts_; neither do they dispute that -to make general rules of exceptions, to create imaginary laws, and to -take these pretended laws for the basis of argument, belongs only to the -aberrations of the Middle Age, profoundly disdained by men of earnest -thought and severe reason. Let us apply these data unsparingly to the two -principal affirmations of M. Michelet. - -It is a principle in biology that _no physiological condition is a morbid -condition_; consequently, the monthly crisis peculiar to woman is not a -disease, but a normal phenomenon, the derangement of which causes -disturbance in the general health. Woman, therefore, is not an invalid -because her sex is subject to a peculiar law. Can it be said that woman -is wounded because she is subjected to a periodical fracture, the -cicatrice of which is almost imperceptible? By no means. It would be -absurd to call a man perpetually wounded who should take a fancy to -scratch the end of his finger every month. - -Michelet is too well informed to render it necessary for me to tell him -that the normal hemorrhage does not proceed from this wound of the ovary, -about which he makes so much ado, but from a congestion of the gestative -organ. - -Are women ill on the recurrence of the law peculiar to their sex? - -_Very exceptionally, yes_; but in the indolent classes, in which -transgressions in diet, the lack of an intelligent physical education, -and a thousand causes which I need not point out here, render women -valetudinarians. - -_Generally, no._ All our vigorous peasant women, our robust laundresses, -who stand the whole time with their feet in water, our workwomen, our -tradeswomen, our teachers, our servant-maids, who attend with alacrity to -their business and pleasures, experience no uncomfortableness, or at -most, very little. - -Michelet, therefore, has not only erred in erecting a physiological law -into a morbid condition, but he has also sinned against rational method -by making general rules of a few exceptions, and by proceeding from this -generalization, contradicted by the great majority of facts, to construct -a system of subjection. - -If it is of the faculty of abstracting and generalizing that Michelet, as -he employs it, robs woman, we can only congratulate her on the -deprivation. - -Not only is woman diseased, says Michelet, in consequence of a biological -law, but she is always diseased; she has uterine affections, hereditary -tendencies, which may assume a terrible form in her sex, etc. - -We would ask Michelet whether he considers his own sex as always diseased -because it is corroded by cancer, disfigured by eruptions, tortured as -much as ours by hereditary tendencies; for hereditary tendencies torture -it as much as ours, and it is decimated and enfeebled far more fearfully -by shameful diseases, the fruits of its excesses. - -Of what, then, is Michelet thinking, in laying such stress on the -diseases of women in the face of the quite as numerous diseases of men? - -The wife should never be divorced or re-marry, because she has become the -property of the husband. This is proved by the fact that the children of -the lover or of the second husband resemble the first husband. - -If this is true, there are no children that resemble their mother. - -There are no children that resemble the progenitors or collateral -relatives of their parents. - -_Every child_ resembles the first that knew his mother. - -Can you explain, then, why it is that so often he does _not_ resemble -him? - -Why he resembles a grandfather, an uncle, an aunt, a brother, a sister of -one of the parents? - -Why, in certain cities in the south of France, the inhabitants have -preserved the Greek type, ascribed to the women, instead of that of their -barbaric fathers? - -Why negresses who conceive from a white, bring into the world a mulatto, -oftenest with thick lips, a flat nose, and woolly hair? - -Why many children resemble portraits which had attracted the attention of -the mother? - -Why, in fine, physiologists, impressed by numerous facts, have thought -themselves justified in declaring woman _the preserver of the type_? - -In the face of these undeniable facts, I ask you, yourself, what becomes -of your theory? - -It returns to the domain of chimeras. - -Some think that woman possesses a plastic force, which makes her mould -her fruit after the model which love, hate, or fear has impressed within -her brain; so that the child thus becomes merely a sort of photograph of -a cerebral image of the mother. - -By the aid of this theory, we might explain the resemblance of the child -to the father, to the first husband, to beloved relatives or to friends, -either living or dead; but it would be impossible, thereby, to explain -how a woman can reproduce in her child the features of a progenitor of -her husband or of herself, whose portrait, even, she has never seen; or -how, in spite of her wishes, the child resembles no one that she loves, -etc. Let us keep a discreet silence; the laws of generation and of -resemblance are unknown. If we succeed in discovering them, it will be -only by long and patient observation, with the aid of judicious -criticism, and an honorable determination to be impartial. Laws are not -created, but discovered; ignorance is more healthful for the mind than -error; to make general rules of _a few_ facts, without taking into -account facts more numerous by thousands which contradict them, is not to -form a science, but a system of poetical metaphysics; and these -metaphysics, however gracefully draped they may be, are opposed to -reason, to science, and to truth. - -Michelet will pardon me this short lesson in method. I should not presume -to give it to him, were not men repeating, like well-trained parrots, -after him and Proudhon, that woman is destitute of high intellectual -faculties, that she is unsuited to science, that she has no comprehension -of method, and other absurdities of like weight. - -Allegations such as these place women in a wholly exceptional position, -with respect to courtesy and reserve: they owe no consideration to those -who deny them these; their most important business at the present time is -to prove to men that they deceive themselves, and that they are deceived; -that a woman is fully capable of teaching the chief among them how a law -is discovered, how its reality is verified, how, and on what conditions -we have a right to believe, and to style ourselves, rational, and -rationalists. - -Before concluding, let us dwell on a few passages of the book on Love. I -am curious to know what woman Michelet addresses when he says: - -"Spare me your elaborate discussions on the equality of the sexes. Woman -is not only our equal, but in many points our superior. Sooner or later -she will know everything. The question to decide here is, whether she -should know all in her first season of love. - -Oh, how much she would lose by it! Youth, freshness, poetry--does she -wish, at the first blow, to abandon all these? Is she in such haste to -grow old?" - -Pardon me, sir; you have already decreed that _there are no longer any -old women_; nothing, therefore, can make woman grow old. - -"There is knowledge of all kinds," you say; "likewise, at all ages, the -knowledge of woman should be different from that of man. It is less -science that she needs, than the essence of science, and its living -elixir." - -What is this _essence_, and this _living elixir_ of science? Poetry -aside, can you, in exact and definite terms, explain to me what they -mean? - -Can you prove to me, a woman, that I desire to possess knowledge -differently from you? - -Take care! disciple of liberty, you have not the right to think and to -wish in my place. I have, like you, an intellect and a free will, to -which you are bound, by your principles, to pay sovereign respect. Now I -forbid you to speak for any woman; I forbid you in the name of what you -call _the rights of the soul_. - -"You by no means deny," you say, "that, strictly speaking, a young woman -can read everything, and inform herself of everything; can pass through -all the ordeals to which the mind of man is subjected, and still remain -pure. You only maintain," you add, "that her soul, withered by reading, -palled by novels, living habitually on the stimulus of play-houses, on -the aqua-fortis of criminal courts, will become, not corrupted, perhaps, -but vulgar, common, trivial, like the curb-stone in the street. This -curb-stone is a good stone; you have only to break it to see that it is -white within. This does not hinder it from being sadly soiled outside, in -every respect as dirty as the street gutter from which it has been -splashed. - -"Is this, madam, the ideal to which you lay claim for her who should -remain the temple of man, the altar of his heart, whence he daily -rekindles the flame of pure love?" - -A truce to imagery and oratorical outbursts; none of us demand for woman -any degradation whatever. There would be no need for us to demand what -you censure, since it is thoroughly authorized and practised. I by no -means wish to accuse you of bad faith, of want of reflection, and of too -much moral tolerance; yet let us strip off your poetic mantle, and -translate your thought into prose; the drapery will no longer make us -forget the idea. - -When instruction has been demanded for the people, has any one ever taken -it into his head to fancy that the point in question was to make them -read novels, to swell the attendance on criminal courts, and to multiply -theatres? - -No, you will say. - -What authorizes you, then, to believe that those who demand a solid -education for woman, are seeking that of of which you, on your part, do -not dream for the people? - -On the other hand, do you cultivate the intellect of man by novels, -theatres, and spectacles of criminal courts? Is it in these things that -his knowledge consists? No, you will say. What is there, then, in common -between that which you censure, and the knowledge that we desire for -woman; and why attribute to us absurd ideas, that you may have the -pleasure of wrangling with phantoms? - -All your fine ladies are nurtured on novels, plays, and judicial -excitements; yet they are neither vulgar, nor trivial, nor comparable to -curb-stones sullied by the mud of the streets; what you tell them, -therefore, is no more true than kind. - -But if you pay them doubtful compliments, which they do not deserve, you -absolve them too easily, in turn. Listen to our principles, that you may -not run the risk of appearing unjust with respect to us. - -Corruption in our eyes, is not merely the want of chastity, or the -shameful suit of gallantry, but all habitual improper sentiment, all -weakening of the moral sense, and we absolutely condemn everything which -has power to lessen the sensibility of the soul, and to turn it aside -from the practice of justice, of virtue, and of self-respect. - -In consequence, we profess that the spectacles of criminal courts -habituate the heart to insensibility, and should be avoided as much as -executions. - -We profess that the modern drama is generally evil, because it excites -interest for adulterers, robbers, seducers and prostitutes; that the -intellect is subjected in theatres to an unhealthy and enervating -atmosphere. - -We profess, lastly, that novels should be read with great moderation, -because, in general, when they do not corrupt the morals, they pervert -the judgment and waste precious time. - -Though we love and esteem Art, we are indignant at the bad use which is -made of it, and we have little esteem for those who avail themselves of -it to lead the heart astray, and to pervert the moral sense. - -We say to woman: Educate yourselves, be worthy and chaste; life is -earnest, employ it earnestly. - -You see that _woman in the image of the stained curb-stone_, is by no -means the ideal of which we dream. - -Can you, a man of heart, can you treat women as wretched and corrupt -because they are willing no longer to be slaves? - -And besides, do you think that liberty, which in man engenders -individuality and virtue, would produce in woman moral degradation? - -Ah! leave these calumnies to those who have no heart; they ill befit you, -who may deceive yourself through the lofty poetry of your soul, but who -can wish for evil only because you believe it to be good. - -The women who ask to be free, great, mistaken poet, are those who are -conscious of their dignity, of the true rôle of their sex in humanity; -those who desire that the women who follow them in the career of labor -should no longer be obliged _to live by man_, because to live by him is -at least to prostitute their dignity, and almost always, their whole -person. They wish that woman should be the equal of man, in order to love -him holily, to devote herself without calculation, to cease to deceive -him or to rule him by artifice, and to become to him a useful auxiliary, -instead of a servant or a toy. They know our influence over you; slaves, -we can only debase you; at present, we render you cowardly, selfish, and -dishonest; we send you out every morning, like vultures, upon society, to -provide for our foolish expenses or to endow our children; we, women of -emancipation, are unwilling that our sex should longer play this odious -rôle, and be, through its slavery, an instrument of demoralization and of -social degradation,--and this you impute to us as a crime! - -Ah! I do not believe it; you yourself will say that I ought not to -believe it. - -Looking from a deplorably narrow stand point, you fancied that you saw -all woman-kind in a few valetudinarians, your kind heart was moved for -them, and you sought to protect them. Had you looked far and high, you -would have seen the workers of thought and muscle; you would have -comprehended that inequality is to them a source of corruption and -suffering. - -Then, in your lofty and glowing style, you would have written, not this -book of Love which repels all intelligent and reflective women, but a -great and beautiful work to demand the right of half the human race. - -The misfortune, the irreparable misfortune, is that instead of climbing -to the mountain top to look at every moving thing under the vast horizon, -you have shut yourself up in a narrow valley, where, seeing nothing but -pale violets, you have concluded that every flower must be also a pale -violet; whilst Nature has created a thousand other species, on the -contrary, strong and vigorous, with a right, like you, to earth, air, -water and sunshine. - -Whatever may be your love, your kindness and your good intentions towards -woman, your book would be immensely dangerous to the cause of her -liberty, if men were in a mood to relish your ethics: but they will -remain as they are; and the dignity of woman, kept waking by their -brutality, their despotism, their desertion, their foul morals, will not -be lulled to sleep under the fresh, verdant, alluring and treacherously -perfumed foliage of this manchineel tree, called the book of _Love_. - -In Michelet's later work, "Woman," by the side of many beautiful pages -full of heart and poetry are found things that we regret to point out, -for the sake of the author. - -M. Michelet has evidently amended, as we shall press on him; but as a -spice of vengeance, he pretends that their language has been dictated by -directors, _philosophers and others_. We know some of these ladies -personally, and can assure him that they have had no director of any -kind--quite the contrary. - -Is it also in consequence of rancor that the author pretends that woman -loves man, not for his real worth, but because he pleases her, and that -she makes God in her own image, "a God of partiality and caprice, who -saves those who please him?" "In feminine theology," adds Michelet, "God -would say: I love thee because thou art a sinner, because thou hast no -merit; I have no reason to love thee, but it is sweet to me to forgive." - -Very well, your sex loves woman _for her real worth_; we never hear a -man, enamored of some unworthy creature, say: "What matters it, I love -her!" Your love is always wise, and given reasonably; none but deserving -women can please you. I ask why so many honest women are abandoned and -unhappy, while so many that are impure and vicious, yet sought and -adored, are in possession of the art of charming, of ruining and of -perverting men? - -Michelet deplores the state of divorce which is established between the -sexes; we deplore it likewise; but our complaints do not remedy it. Men -shun marriage from motives that do them no credit: they have at their -pleasure the poor girls whom want places at their mercy; they shun -marriage because they do not wish a real, that is, an autonomous wife at -their side; for themselves, they wish liberty, for their wife, slavery. - -On their side, women tend to enfranchisement, which is well for them as -it is for men: they should not suffer themselves to be turned aside from -their pursuit; on the other hand, as men are attracted by a costly -toilette, and neglect plainly dressed women, if the latter, in the wish -to please and retain them, imitate public women, whose is the fault? Is -it ours, who desire to please you and to be loved by you, or yours, who -can only be attracted by dress? If you loved us _for our real worth_, and -not because our dresses and jewels please your eye, we would not ruin -you. - -Let us point out in a few lines the contradictions and differences that -are found between Michelet's first and second works. - -In both, woman is the flame of love and of the fireside religion, -harmony, poetry, the guardian of the domestic hearth, a housewife whose -cares are ennobled by love: civilization is due to her grace, she should -be the representative of grace if not of beauty. - -In both books, the household must be isolated; the wife must have no -intimate friendship; mother, brothers and sisters prevent her from -becoming absorbed as she ought to be in her husband. What we think of -this absorption is already known; we will only say here that if the -friends and relatives of the wife should be expelled, those of the -husband should be none the less so; the mother and friends of the husband -have more power to injure the wife than those of the wife to injure the -husband; numerous sad facts prove this. - -In "Love," woman is a receptive power, incapable of comprehending -conscientious works; she must receive everything from her husband in the -intellectual and moral point of view. - -In "Woman," she is half of the couple, in the same ratio as man is -capable of the most lofty speculations, and thoroughly understands -administration. She gives the child the education that before all else -will influence the rest of his life. "So long as woman is not the partner -of labor and of _action_," says the author, "we are serfs, we can do -nothing--she may even be the equal of man in medical science; she is a -school, she is sole educatress, etc." - -Very well, thus far; and doubtless Michelet would have been consistent, -had he not got into his head a masculine and a feminine ideal which -spoils everything; he reasoned to himself: "Man is a creator, woman a -harmony whose end and destination is love;" and, consequently, he marks -out for the latter a plan of education different from that by which man -should be developed; the natural sciences are suited to woman, history -should only be taught her to form in her a firm moral and religious -faith. As love is her vocation, to each season of the life of woman -should correspond an object of love; flowers, the doll, poor children, -next the lover, then the husband and children, then the care of young -orphans, prisoners, etc. - -In "Love," the wife alone seems bound to confess to the husband. In -"Woman," the obligation is mutual. - -The widow, in "Love," should not marry again, in "Woman," she may espouse -a friend of the husband, or still better, the one whom he may choose on -his deathbed; if she is too old, she may watch over a young man; but she -will do better to protect young girls, to make peace in families, to -facilitate marriages, to superintend prisons, etc. - -We will carry the analysis no further; our objections to the author's -doctrine will be found in the article on Proudhon, and in the sequel of -the work. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -PROUDHON. - - -The tenth and eleventh studies of the last work of M. Proudhon, "Justice -in the Revolution and in the Church," comprise the author's whole -doctrine concerning Woman, Love, and Marriage. - -Before analyzing it and criticising its chief points, I must acquaint my -readers with the polemical commencement which _appears_ to have given -rise to the publication of the strange doctrines of our great critic. In -the _Revue Philosophique_ of December, 1856, the following article by me -was published under the title, _Proudhon and the Woman Question_:-- - -"Women have a weakness for soldiers, it is said. It is true, but they -should not be reproached for it; they love even the show of courage, -which is a glorious and holy thing. I am a woman, Proudhon is a great -soldier of thought. I cannot therefore prevent myself from regarding him -with esteem and sympathy; sentiments to which he will owe the moderation -of my attack on his opinions concerning the rôle of woman in humanity. In -his first "Memoir on Property," note on page 265, edition of 1841, we -read the following paradox in the style of the Koran: - -"Between man and woman may exist love, passion, the bond of habit, -whatever you like; there is not _true society_. _Man and woman are not -companions._ The difference of sex gives rise between them to a -separation _of the same nature as that which the difference of races -places between animals_. Thus, far from applauding what is now called the -emancipation of woman, I should be much more inclined, were it necessary -to go to this extremity, _to put woman in seclusion_." - -In the third "Memoir on Property," we read: - -"This signifies that woman, _by nature and by destination_, is neither -_associate, nor citizen, nor public functionary_." - -I open the "Creation of Order in Humanity," and read there: - -"It is in treating of education that we must determine the part of woman -in society. Woman, until she becomes a wife, is _apprentice_, at most -_under-superintendent_, in the work-shop, as in the family, she _remains -a minor, and does not form a part of the commonwealth_. Woman is not, as -is commonly affirmed, _the half nor the equal of man_, but the living and -sympathetic _complement_ that is lacking to make him an individual." - -In the "Economical Contradictions," we read: - -"For my part, the more I reflect on the destiny of woman outside of the -family and the household, the less I can account for it: _courtesan or -housewife_, (housewife, I say, not servant,) I see no medium." - -I had always laughed at these paradoxes; they had no more doctrinal value -in my eyes than the thousand other freaks so common to this celebrated -critic. A short time since, an obscure journal pretended that Proudhon, -in private conversations, had drawn up a formula of an entire system -based on masculine omnipotence, and published this system in its columns. -One of two things is certain, said I to myself; either the journalist -speaks falsely, or he tells the truth; if he speaks falsely, his evident -aim is to destroy Proudhon in the confidence of the friends of progress, -and to make him lose his lawful share of influence, in which case, he -must be warned of it; if he tells the truth, Proudhon must still be -warned of the fact, since it is impossible that, being the father of -_several daughters_, paternal feeling should not have set him on the road -to reason. At all events, I must know about it. I wrote to Proudhon, who, -the next day, returned me an answer which I transcribe _verbatim_: - - "MADAM: - - "I know nothing of the article published by M. Charles Robin in - the _Telegraphe_ of yesterday. In order to inform myself with - regard to this paraphrase, as you entitle the article of M. - Robin, I examined my first "Memoir on Property," page 265, - Garnier edition, (I have no other,) and found no note there. I - examined the same page in my other pamphlet, and discovered no - note anywhere. It is therefore impossible for me to reply to your - first question. - - "I do not exactly know what you call _my opinions_ on woman, - marriage and the family; for I believe I have given no one a - right to speak of my opinions on these subjects, any more than on - that of property. - - "I have written economical and social criticisms; in making these - criticisms (I take the word in its highest signification), I may - have indeed expressed judgments to a greater or less degree - relative, concerning a truth. I have no where that I know of, - framed a dogma, a theory, a collection of principles; in a word, - a system. All that I can tell you is, in the first place, as far - as concerns myself, that my opinions have been formed - progressively and in an unvarying direction; that, at the time at - which I write, I have not deviated from this direction; and that, - with this reserve, my existing opinions accord perfectly with - what they were seventeen years ago when I published my first - memoirs. - - "In the second place, with regard to you, Madam, who, in - interrogating me do not leave me in ignorance of your sentiments, - I will tell you with all the frankness which your letter exacts, - and which you expect from a compatriot, that I do not regard the - question of marriage, of woman, and of the family in the same - light as yourself, or any of the innovating authors whose ideas - have come to my knowledge; that I do not admit, for instance, - that woman has the right at the present time to separate her - cause from that of man, and to demand for herself special - legislation, as though her chief tyrant and enemy were man; that - further, I do not admit that, whatever reparation may be due to - woman, of joint thirds with her husband (or father) and her - children, the most rigorous justice can ever make her the EQUAL - of man; that neither do I admit that this inferiority of the - female sex constitutes for it either servitude, or humiliation, - or a diminution of dignity, liberty, or happiness. I maintain - that the contrary is true. - - "I consider, therefore, the sort of crusade that is being carried - on at this time by a few estimable ladies in both hemispheres in - behalf of the prerogatives of their sex, as a symptom of the - general renovation that is being wrought; but nevertheless, as - an exaggerated symptom, _an infatuation that proceeds precisely - from the infirmity of the sex and its incapacity to understand - and to govern itself_. - - "I have read, Madam, a few of your articles. I find that your - wit, capacity and knowledge place you certainly above an infinity - of males who have nothing of their sex but the proletary faculty. - In this respect, were it necessary to decide on your thesis by - comparisons of this kind, you would doubtless gain the cause. - - "But you have too much good sense not to comprehend that the - question here is by no means to compare individual with - individual, but the whole feminine sex in its aggregate with the - whole masculine sex, in order to know whether these two halves, - the complements of each other, are or are not equals in the human - androgynus. - - "In accordance with this principle, I do not believe that your - system, which is, I think, that of equality or equivalence, can - be sustained, and I regard it as a weakness of our epoch. - - "You have interrogated me, Madam, with Franche-Comtois - abruptness. I wish you to take my words in good part, and, since - I doubtless do not agree at all with you, not to see in me an - enemy of woman, a detractor of your sex, worthy of the - animadversions of maidens, wives and mothers. The rules of fair - discussion oblige you to admit at least that you may be deceived, - that I may be right, that in such case it is I who am truly the - defender and friend of woman; I ask nothing more. - - "You and your companions have raised a very great question, which - I think that you have hitherto treated quite superficially. But - the indifferent manner in which this subject has been treated - should not be considered as conclusive reason for not receiving - it; on the contrary, I regard it as another reason for the - advocates of the equality of the two sexes to make greater - efforts. In this respect, Madam, I doubt not that you will - signalize yourself anew, and await with impatience the volume - that you announce, which I promise to read with all the attention - of which I am capable." - - -On reading this letter, I transcribed the note which M. Proudhon had not -succeeded in finding, and sent it to him, with the article of M. Charles -Robin. As he did not reply, his silence authorizes me to believe the -journalist. - -Ah! you persist in maintaining that woman is inferior, minor! you believe -that women will bow devoutly before the high decree of your autocracy! -No, no; it will not, it cannot be so. To battle, M. Proudhon! But let us -first dispose of the question of my personality. - -You consider me as an exception, by telling me that, if it were necessary -to decide on my thesis by comparison between a host of men and myself, -the decision would be, doubtless, in favor of my opinions. Mark my reply: - -"_Every true law is absolute._ The ignorance or folly of grammarians, -moralists, jurisconsults, and other philosophers, alone invented the -proverb: There is no rule without an exception. _The mania of imposing -laws on Nature, instead of studying Nature's own laws, afterwards -confirmed this aphorism of ignorance._" Who said this? You, in the -"Creation of Order in Humanity." Why is your letter in contradiction with -this doctrine? - -Have you changed your opinion? Then I entreat you to tell me whether men -of worth are not quite as exceptional in their sex, as women of merit in -theirs. You have said: "Whatever may be the differences existing between -men, they are equal, because they are human beings." Under penalty of -inconsistency, you must add: Whatever may be the differences existing -between the sexes, they are equal, because they form a part of the human -species--unless you prove that women are not a part of humanity. -Individual worth, not being the basis of right between men, cannot become -so between the sexes. Your compliment is, therefore, a contradiction. - -I add, lastly, that I feel myself linked with my sex by too close a -solidarity ever to be content to see myself abstracted from it by an -illogical process. I am a woman--I glory in it; I rejoice if any value is -set upon me, not for myself, indeed, but because this contributes to -modify the opinion of men with respect to my sex. A woman who is happy in -hearing it said: "_You are a man_," is, in my eyes, a simpleton, an -unworthy creature, avowing the superiority of the masculine sex; and the -men who think that they compliment her in this manner, are vainglorious -and impertinent boasters. If I acquire any desert, I thus pay honor to -women, I reveal their aptitudes, I do not pass into the other sex any -more than Proudhon abandons his own, because he is elevated by his -intellect above the level of foolish and ignorant men; and if the -ignorance of the mass of men prejudges nothing against their right, no -more does the ignorance of the mass of women prejudge anything against -theirs. - -You affirm that man and woman do not form _true society_. - -Tell us, then, what is marriage, what is society. - -You affirm that the difference of sex places between man and woman a -separation of the same nature _as that which the difference of races -places between animals_. Then prove: - -That the race is not essentially formed of two sexes; - -That man and woman can be reproduced separately; - -That their common product is a mixed breed, or a mule; - -That their characteristics are dissimilar, apart from sexuality. - -And if you come off with honor from this great feat of strength, you will -still have to prove: - -That to difference of race corresponds difference _of right_; - -That the black, the yellow, the copper-colored persons belonging to races -inferior to the Caucasian cannot truly associate with the latter; that -they are minors. - -Come, sir, study anthropology, physiology, and phrenology, and employ -your serial dialectics to prove all this to us. - -You are inclined to seclude woman, instead of emancipating her? - -Prove to men that they have the right to do so; to women, that it is -their duty to suffer themselves to be placed under lock and key. I -declare, for my part, that I would not submit to it. Does Proudhon -remember how he threatens the priest who shall lay his hand on his -children? Well, the majority of women would not confine themselves to -threats against those who might have the Mussulmanic inclination of -Proudhon. - -You affirm that by _nature_, and by _destination_, woman is neither -_associate_, nor _citizen_, nor _functionary_. Tell us, in the first -place, _what nature_ it is necessary to have to be all these. - -Reveal to us the _nature_ of woman, since you claim to know it better -than she does herself. - -Reveal to us her _destination_, which apparently is not that which we -see, nor which she believes to be such. - -You affirm that woman, until her marriage, is nothing more than -_apprentice_, at most, under-superintendent in the social workshop; that -she is _minor_ in the family, and _does not form a part of the -commonwealth_. - -Prove, then, that she does not execute in the social workshop and in the -family works _equivalent_, or equal, to those of man. - -Prove that she is less useful than man. - -Prove that the qualities that give to man the right of citizenship, do -not exist in woman. - -I shall be severe with you on this head. To subordinate woman in a social -order in which she must _work in order to live_ is to _desire -prostitution_; for disdain of the producer extends to the value of the -product; and when such a doctrine is contrary to science, good sense, and -progress, to sustain it is _cruelty_, is _moral monstrosity_. The woman -who cannot live by working, can only do so by prostituting herself; the -equal of man or a courtesan, such is the alternative. He is blind who -does not see it. - -You see no other fate for woman than to be courtesan or housewife. Open -your eyes wider, and dream less, and tell me whether all those useful and -courageous women are only housewives or courtesans, who support -themselves honorably by arts, literature, instruction; - -Who found numerous and prosperous manufactures; - -Who superintend commercial establishments; - -Who are such good managers, that many among them conceal or repair the -faults resulting from the carelessness or dissipation of their husbands. - -Prove to us, therefore, that all this is wrong; - -Prove to us that it is not the result of human progress; - -Prove to us that labor, the stamp of the human species--that labor, which -you consider as the great emancipator--that labor, which makes men equal -and free, has not virtue to make women equal and free. If you prove this -to us, we shall have to register one contradiction more. - -You do not admit that woman should have the right of claiming for herself -special legislation, as though man were her chief enemy and tyrant. - -You, sir, are the one that legislates specially for woman; she herself -desires nothing but the common law. - -Yes; until now, man, in subordinating woman, has been her tyrant and -enemy. I am of your opinion when, in your first "Memoir on Property," you -say that, so long as the strong and the weak are not _equals_, they are -_strangers_, they cannot form an alliance, _they are enemies_. Yes, -thrice yes, so long as man and woman are not equals, woman is in the -right in considering man as her _tyrant_ and _enemy_. - -"The most rigorous justice cannot make woman the EQUAL of man." And it is -to a woman whom you set in your opinion above a host of men, that you -affirm such a thing! What a contradiction! - -"It is _an infatuation_ for women to demand their right!" _An -infatuation_ like that of slaves, pretending that they were created -freemen; of the citizens of '89, proving that men are equal before the -law. Do you know who were, who are the infatuated? The masters, the -nobles, the whites, the men who have denied, who do deny, and who will -deny, that slaves, citizens, blacks, and women, are born for liberty and -equality. - -"The sex to which I belong is incapable of understanding and governing -itself," say you! - -Prove that it is destitute of intellect; - -Prove that great empresses and great queens have not governed as well as -great emperors and great kings; - -Prove against all the facts patent that women are not in general good -observers and good managers; - -Then prove that all men understand themselves perfectly and govern -themselves admirably, and that progress moves as if on wheels. - -"Woman is neither the _half_ nor the _equal_ of man; she is _the -complement that finally makes him an individual_; the two sexes form _the -human androgynus_." Come; seriously, what means this jingle of empty -words? They are metaphors, unworthy to figure in scientific language, -when our own and the other higher zoölogical species are in question. The -lioness, the she-wolf and the tigress are no more the halves or the -complement of their species than woman is the complement of man. Or -Nature has established two _exteriorities_, two wills, she affirms two -unities, two entireties not one, or _two halves_; the arithmetic of -Nature cannot be destroyed by the freaks of the imagination. - -Is equality before the law based upon _individual_ qualities? Proudhon -replies in the "Creation of Order in Humanity": - -"Neither birth, nor figure, _nor faculties_, nor fortune, nor rank, nor -profession, nor talent, nor anything that distinguishes individuals -establishes between them a difference of species; all being men, and _the -law regulating only human relations, it is the same for all_; so that to -establish exceptions, it would be necessary to prove that the individuals -excepted are _above_ or _beneath_ the human species." - -Prove to us that women are _above_ or _beneath_ the human species, that -they do not form a part of it, or, _under penalty of contradiction_, -submit to the consequences of your doctrine. - -You say in the "Social Revolution;" - -"Neither conscience, nor reason, nor liberty, nor labor, pure forces, -_primary and creative faculties_, can be made mechanical without being -destroyed. Their reason of existence is in themselves; in their works -they should find their reason of action. In this consists the human -person, a sacred person, etc." - -Prove that women have neither conscience, nor reason, nor moral liberty, -and that they do not labor. If it is demonstrated that they possess the -_primary and creative faculties_, respect their human person, for it is -sacred. - -In the "Creation of Order in Humanity," you say: - -"Specifically, labor satisfies the desire of our personality, which tends -invincibly to make a difference between itself and others, _to render -itself independent_, _to conquer its liberty_ and its character." - -Prove then that women have no special work, and, if facts contradict you, -acknowledge that, it inevitably tends to _independence_, to _liberty_. - -Do you deny that they are your equals because they are less intelligent -as a whole than men? In the first place, I contest it; but I need not do -so, you yourself resolve this difficulty in the "Creation of Order in -Humanity:" - -"The inequality of capacities, when not caused by constitutional vices, -mutilation or want, results from general ignorance, insufficient method, -lack or falsity of education, and divergence of intuition through lack of -sequence, whence arises dispersion and confusion of ideas. Now, all these -facts productive of inequality are essentially abnormal, therefore the -inequality of capacities is abnormal." - -Unless you prove that women are mutilated by Nature, I do not exactly see -how you can escape the consequences of your syllogism: not only has -feminine inferiority the same sources as masculine ignorance, but public -education is refused to women, the great professional schools are closed -to them, those who through their intellect equal the most intelligent -among you have had twenty times as many difficulties and prejudices to -overcome. - -You wish to subordinate women because in general they have less muscular -force than you; but at this rate the weak men ought not to be the equals -of the strong, and you combat this consequence yourself in your first -"Memoir on Property," where you say: - -"Social equilibrium is the equalization of the strong and the weak." - -If I have treated you with consideration, it is because you are an -intelligent and progressive man, and because it is impossible that you -should remain under the influence of the doctors of the Middle Age on one -question, while you are in advance of the majority of your cotemporaries -on so many others. You will cease to sustain an illogical series that is -without foundation, remembering, as you have said so well in the -"Creation of Order in Humanity:" - -"That the greater part of philosophical aberrations and chimeras have -arisen from attributing to logical series a reality that they do not -possess, and endeavoring to explain the nature of man by abstractions." - -You will acknowledge that all the higher animal species are composed of -two sexes; - -That in none is the female the inferior of the male, except sometimes -through force, which cannot be the basis of human right; - -You will renounce the androgynus, which is only a dream. - -Woman, a distinct individual, endowed with consciousness, intellect, will -and activity like man, will be no longer separated from him before the -laws. - -You will say of all, both men and women, as in your first "Memoir on -Property:" - -"Liberty is an absolute right, because it is to man what impenetrability -is to matter, a condition _sine qua non_ of existence. Equality is an -_absolute right_, because without equality, there is no society." - -And you will thus show the second degree of sociability, which you -yourself define, "the recognition in another of a personality _equal_ to -our own." - -I appeal therefore from Proudhon drunk with theology to Proudhon sobered -by facts and science, moved by the sorrows and disorders resulting from -his own systems. - -I hope I shall not encounter his Herculean club raised against the holy -banner of truth and right; against woman,--that being physically so weak, -morally so strong, who, bleeding, and steeped in gall beneath her crown -of roses, is just on the point of reaching the top of the rough mountain -where progress will shortly give her her lawful place by the side of man. -But if my hopes are deceitful, mark me well, M. Proudhon, you will find -me standing firmly in the breach, and, whatever may be your strength, I -vow that you shall not overthrow me. I will courageously defend the right -and dignity of your daughters against the despotism and logical error of -their father, and the victory will remain mine, for, definitively, it -always belongs to truth." - -Proudhon replied by the following letter in the _Revue Philosophique_: - - "TO MADAME d'HÉRICOURT. - - "Well, Madam, what did I tell you in my last letter? - - "I consider the sort of crusade that is being carried on at this - time by some estimable ladies in both hemispheres in behalf of - their sex, as a symptom of the general revolution that is being - wrought; but nevertheless as an exaggerated symptom, an - infatuation that proceeds precisely from the inferiority of the - sex and its incapacity to understand and to govern itself. - - "I begin by withdrawing the word _infatuation_, which may have - wounded you, but which was not, as you know, intended for - publicity. - - "This point adjusted, I will tell you, Madam, with all the - respect that I owe you as a woman, that I did not expect to see - you confirm my judgment so speedily by your petulant appeal. - - "I was at first at a loss to know whence came the discontent that - impelled the bravest, the most distinguished among you, to an - assault on paternal and marital supremacy. I said to myself, not - without disquietude, What is the matter? What is it that troubles - them? With what do they reproach us? To which of our faculties, - our virtues, our prerogatives; or else of our failings, our - perfidies, our calamities, do they aspire? Is this the cry of - their outraged nature, or an aberration of their understanding? - - "Your attack, joined to the studies which I immediately commenced - on the subject, came at last to solve the question. - - "No, Madam, you know nothing of your sex; you do not know the - first word of the question that you and your honorable - confederates are agitating with so much noise and so little - success. And, if you do not comprehend this question; if, in your - eight pages of reply to my letter, there are forty paralogisms, - it results precisely, as I have told you, from your _sexual - infirmity_. I mean by this word, the exactness of which is not, - perhaps, irreproachable, the quality of your understanding, which - permits you to seize the relation of things only as far as we, - men, place your finger upon them. You have in the brain, as in - the body, a certain organ incapable by itself of overcoming its - native inertia, and which the masculine spirit alone is capable - of setting in motion; and even this does not always succeed. - Such, Madam, is the result of my direct and positive - observations; I make them over to your obstetrical sagacity, and - leave you to calculate therefrom the incalculable consequences to - your thesis. - - "I will willingly enter into an elaborate discussion with you, - Madam, on this obscure subject, in the _Revue Philosophique_. - But--as you will comprehend as well as I--the broader the - question, the more it affects our most sacred, social, and - domestic interests, the more important is it that we should - approach it with seriousness and prudence. - - "The following course, therefore, appears to me indispensable: - In the first place, you have promised us a book, and I await it. - I need this work to complete my documents and to finish my - demonstration. Since I had the honor of receiving and replying to - your letter, I have made earnest and interesting studies on - woman, which I ask only to rectify if they are erroneous; as I - also desire to set a seal on them if, as I have every reason to - presume, your publication brings me but one confirmation more. - - "I have verified by facts and documents the truth of all the - assertions which you call on me to retract, namely: - - "That the difference of sex raises up between man and woman a - separation ANALOGOUS--I did not say equal--to that which the - difference of races and species establishes between animals; - - "That by reason of this separation or difference, man and woman - are not _associates_; I did not say that they could not be - anything else; - - "That, consequently, woman can only be a _citizen_ in so far as - she is the wife of a citizen; as we say _Madame la Presidente_ to - the wife of a President: which does not imply that no other rôle - exists for her. - - "In two words, I am in a position to establish, by observation - and reasoning, the facts, that woman, being weaker than man with - respect to _muscular force_, as you yourself acknowledge, is not - less inferior to him with respect to INDUSTRIAL, ARTISTIC, - PHILOSOPHICAL and MORAL POWER; so that if the condition of woman - in society be regulated, as you demand for her, by the same - justice as the condition of man, it is all over with her, she is - a slave. - - "To which I add, immediately, that this system is precisely what - I reject: the principle of pure, rigorous right, of that terrible - right which the Roman compared to an unsheathed sword, _jus - strictum_, and which rules individuals of the same sex among - themselves, being different from that which governs the relations - between individuals of different sexes. - - "What is this principle, differing from justice, and which, - notwithstanding, would not exist without justice; which all men - feel in the depth of their souls, and of which you women alone - have no idea? Is it love? nothing more? I leave it to you to - divine. And if your penetration succeeds in clearing up this - mystery, I consent, Madam, to sign you a certificate of genius; - _Et eris mihi magnus Apollo_. But then you will have given me the - cause. - - "Such, Madam, in a few words, are the conclusions to which I have - arrived, and which the reading of your book surely will not - modify. Notwithstanding, as it is absolutely possible that your - personal observations may have led you to diametrically opposite - results, good faith in the discussion and respect for our readers - and ourselves exact that, before entering upon the controversy, a - reciprocal interchange of all the documents that we have - collected should be made between us. You may take cognizance of - mine. - - "One other condition, which I entreat you, Madam, to take in good - part, and from which I shall not depart under any pretext, is - that you shall choose yourself a male sponsor. - - "You, who have declared yourself so energetically on this point, - would not wish your adversary to make the least sacrifice to - gallantry in so serious a discussion; and you are right. But I, - Madam, who am so far from admitting your pretensions, cannot - thus release myself from the obligations which manly and - honorable civility prescribes towards ladies; and as I propose, - besides, to make you serve as a subject of experiment; as, after - having made the autopsy of five or six women of the greatest - merit for the instruction of my readers, I count also on making - yours, you will conceive that it is quite impossible for me to - argue from you, of you, and with you, without exposing myself at - every word to a violation of all the rules of conventionality. - - "I know, Madam, that such a condition will annoy you; it is one - of the disadvantages of your position to which you must submit - courageously. You are a plaintiff, and, as a woman, you affirm - that you are oppressed. Appear, then, before the judgment seat of - incorruptible public opinion with this tyrannous chain which - rouses your ire, and which, according to me, exists only in your - disordered imagination. You will be but the more interesting for - it. Besides, you would deride me if, while sustaining the - superiority of man, I should begin by according to you the - equality of woman by disputing with you on an equal footing of - companionship. You have not counted, I imagine, upon my falling - into this inconsistency. - - "You will not lack for champions, besides. I expect of your - courtesy, Madam, that he whom you shall select as my antagonist, - who will sign and affirm all your articles, and assume the - responsibility of your affirmations and replies, shall be worthy - of both you and me; so that, in fine, I shall not have a right to - complain that you have pitted me against a man of straw. - - "What has most surprised me, since this hypothesis of the - equality of the sexes, renewed by the Greeks as well as by many - others, has become known among us, has been to see that it - numbered among its partisans almost as many men as women. I - sought a long time for the reason of this strange fact, which I - at first attributed to chivalric zeal; I think now that I have - found it. It is not to the advantage of the knights. I shall be - glad, Madam, for their sake and yours, if this serious - examination should prove that the new emancipators of woman are - the most lofty, the broadest, and the most progressive, if not - the most masculine minds of the age. - - "You say, Madam, that women have a weakness for soldiers. It is - doubtless on this account that you have lashed me soundly. _He - who loveth, chasteneth._ When I was three years and a half old, - my mother, to get rid of me, sent me to a school-mistress of the - neighborhood, an excellent woman, called Madelon. One day she - threatened to whip me for some piece of mischief. It made me - furious. I snatched her switch from her hand, and flung it in her - face. I was always a disobedient subject. I shall be glad, - therefore, to find that you do not assume towards me castigating - airs, which it does not belong to a man to return; but I leave - this to your discretion. Strike, redouble the blows, do not spare - me; and if I should chance to grow restive under the rod, believe - me none the less, Madam, your affectionate servant and - compatriot, - - "PROUDHON." - - -Taking up the discussion in turn, I replied as follows, in the ensuing -February number:-- - - I am forbidden, sir, to answer your letter in the indecorous - style which you have deemed proper to assume towards me: - - By respect for the gravity of my subject; - - By respect for our readers; - - By respect for myself. - - You find yourself ill at ease in the Popilian circle that has - been traced around you by the hand of a woman; all understand - this, I among the rest. Ill-armed for defence, worse armed, - perhaps, for attack, you would like to escape; but your skill as - a tactician will avail you nothing; you shall not quit the fatal - circle till vanquished, either by me, or by yourself, if you - confess your weakness on the point in litigation, by continuing - to refuse a discussion under flimsy pretexts, or, lastly, by - public opinion, which will award to you the quality of - inconsistency, the least desirable of all to a dialectician. - - This being understood, I must tell you that, personally, I am - satisfied that you should attack, in _the rights of woman_, the - cause of justice and progress. It is an augury of success to this - cause; you have always been fatal to all that you have sought to - sustain. - - It is true that your attitude in this question makes you _the - ally of the dogmatism of the Middle Age_; it is true that the - _official representatives_ of this dogmatism avail themselves, at - the present time, of your arguments and your name to maintain - their influence over women, and through them over men and - children; and this in order to revive the past, to stifle the - future. Is this your intention? I do not believe it. You are, in - my eyes, a subverter, a destroyer, in whom instinct sometimes - gets the better of intellect, and from whom it shuts out a clear - view of the consequences of his writings. Formed for strife, you - must have adversaries; and, in default of enemies, you cruelly - fall on those who are fighting in the same ranks with yourself. - In all your writings, one feels that the second part of - education--that which inspires respect and love of woman--is - completely wanting in you. - - Let us come to your letter. - - You reproach me with having made _forty paralogisms_; it was your - duty at least to have cited one of these. However, let us see. - - You say: between man and woman there is a separation of _the same - nature as that which the difference of race establishes between - animals_. - - Woman, by nature and destination, is _neither associate, nor - citizen, nor functionary_. - - She is, until marriage, only _apprentice_, at most, - _under-superintendent_ in the social workshop; she is a _minor_ - in the family, and _does not form a part of the commonwealth_. - - You conceive of no destiny for her outside of the household: she - can be only _housewife_ or _courtesan_. - - She is incapable _of understanding and of governing herself_. - - To make a paralogism is to draw a conclusion from false premises; - now did I conclude from such in saying: - - In order that all these paradoxes may become truths, you have to - prove: - - That man and woman are not of the same race; - - That they can be reproduced separately; - - That their common product is a mixed breed or a mule; - - That difference of races corresponds to difference of rights. - - You have to define for us an association, and also the nature of - a citizen or a functionary. - - You have to prove that woman is less useful than man in society; - - That, at the present time, she is necessarily a housewife, when - she is not a courtesan; - - That she is destitute of intellect, that she knows nothing of - government. - - You pretend that woman has not a right _to demand for herself - special legislation_. - - Was I guilty of a paralogism in pointing out to you that it is - not she, _but you_, who demand this, since you lay down as a - principle the inequality of the sexes before human law? - - All that you say relatively to the _pretended_ inferiority of - woman and the conclusions which you draw from it applying to - human races inferior to our own, it would be easy for me to - demonstrate that the consequence of your principles is the - _re-establishment of slavery_. The nearest perfect has the right - to take advantage of the weakest, instead of becoming his - educator. An admirable doctrine, full of the spirit of progress, - full of generosity! I compliment you most sincerely on it. - - You say that labor specialized is the great emancipator of man; - that labor, conscience, liberty, and reason, find only in - themselves their right to exist and to act; that these pure - forces constitute the human person, _which is sacred_. - - You lay down the principle that the law is the same for all; so - that, to establish exceptions, it would be necessary to prove - that the individuals excepted are _above_ or _beneath_ the human - species. - - You say that social equilibrium is the equalization of the strong - and the weak; that all have the same rights, not through that - which distinguishes them from each other, but through _that - which is common to them_,--_the quality of human beings_. - - Was I guilty of paralogisms in saying to you: - - Then you cannot, by reason of her weakness or even of a supposed - inferiority, exclude woman from equality of right: your - principles interdict it, unless you prove: - - _That she is superior or inferior to the human species, and that - she does not form a part of it;_ - - _That she is destitute of conscience, of justice, and of reason; - that she does not labor, that she does not execute specialties of - labor._ - - It is evident, that your doctrine concerning general right is in - contradiction to your doctrine concerning the right of women; it - is evident that you are very inconsequent, and that, however - skillful you may be, you cannot extricate yourself from this - embarrassment. - - In what you call an answer, there are a few passages that are - worth the trouble of pausing to consider. - - You ask _what impels the bravest, the most distinguished among us - to an assault on paternal and marital supremacy_. - - You do not comprehend the movement, or you would have said - _masculine supremacy_. - - In my turn, I ask you: - - What would have impelled Proudhon, a Roman slave, to play the - part of Spartacus? - - What would have impelled Proudhon, a feudal serf, to organize a - Jacquerie? - - What would have impelled Proudhon, a black slave, to become a - Toussaint L'Ouverture? - - What would have impelled Proudhon, a Russian serf, to take the - character of Poutgachef? - - What would have impelled Proudhon, a citizen of '89, to - overthrow the privileges of the nobility and the clergy? - - What would impel Proudhon ... but I will not touch on reality. - - What would Proudhon have replied to all the holders of - _prerogatives_ and _supremacy_, who would not have failed on - their part to have put to him the naïve question: "Ah! what does - this vile slave, this unworthy serf, this audacious and stupid - citizen want of us, then? _To which of our faculties, our - virtues, our prerogatives does he aspire? Is this the cry of his - outraged nature, or an aberration of his understanding?_" - - The answer that Proudhon would make, is that which will be made - to him by all women who have attained majority. - - There is in the brain of woman, say you, an organ which the - masculine mind alone is capable of setting in motion. Render the - service then to science of pointing it out and demonstrating its - manner of working. As to the other organ of which you speak, it - is its inertia, doubtless, that has caused it to be defined by - some, _parvum animal furibondum, octo ligamentis alligatum_. - Before choosing anatomical and physiological facts as proofs of - your assertions, consult some learned physician; such is the - counsel given you, not only by my _obstetrical, but also by my - medical sagacity_. - - You offer to acquaint me with your _direct_ and _positive_ - observations. What, Sir! has it been possible for you in a few - weeks to delve into the depths of the healthy and the diseased - organization! to go through the whole labyrinth of functions - implicated in the questions. It is more than miraculous; despite - my good will, I cannot believe it, unless you prove that you are - a _prophet_ in communication with some deity. Shall I tell you - what I really think? It is that you have studied these matters - neither _directly_ nor _indirectly_, and that it belongs to me to - tell you _that you do not understand woman; that you do not know - the first word of the question_. Your five or six _purely_ moral - and intellectual autopsies prove only one thing; namely, your - inexperience in physiology. You have naïvely mistaken the scalpel - of your imagination for that of science. - - With regard to autopsies, you tell me that you are awaiting my - promised work, in order to make mine. It would be doubtless a - great honor to be stretched on your dissecting table in such good - company as you promise me, but the instruction of my future - readers does not permit me to enjoy this satisfaction. I shall - not send my book to press until your own shall have appeared, for - I, too, intend to make your autopsy; dissect me therefore now; I - promise you on my side that I will perform my duty - conscientiously, properly and delicately. - - "Woman," you say, "being weaker than man with respect to - _muscular force_, is not less inferior to him with respect to - INDUSTRIAL, ARTISTIC, PHILOSOPHICAL AND MORAL POWER; so that if - the condition of woman in society be regulated, as you demand for - her, _by the same justice as the condition of man_, it is all - over with her; she is a slave." - - Terrible man, you will be then always inconsistent, you will - always contradict yourself and facts! - - What do you hold as the basis of right? _The simple quality of - being human_; everything that distinguishes individuals - disappears before right. Well! even though it were true that - women were inferior to men, would it follow that their rights - were not the same? According to you, by no means, if they form a - part of the human species. There are not two kinds of justice, - there is but one; there are not two kinds of right, there is but - one in the absolute sense. The recognition and respect of - individual autonomy in the lowest of human beings as well as in - the man and woman of genius is the law which should preside over - social relations; must a woman tell you this! - - Let us now examine the value of your series of _man and woman_. - - With respect to the reproduction of the species, they form a - series; this is beyond dispute. - - As to the rest, do they form a series? No. - - _If it were a law_ that woman is _muscularly_ weaker than man, - the strongest woman would be weaker than the weakest man; facts - demonstrate the contrary daily. - - _If it were a law_ that women are inferior to men in _industrial - power_, the most skillful woman would be inferior in industrial - pursuits to the least skillful man; now facts demonstrate daily - that there are women who are excellent manufacturers and - excellent managers; men who are unskilled in and unsuited to this - kind of pursuits. - - _If it were a law_ that women are inferior to men in _artistic - power_, the best female artist would be inferior to the most - indifferent male artist; now facts daily demonstrate the - contrary; there are more great female than male tragedians; many - men are mediocre in music and painting, and many women, on the - other hand, remarkable in both respects, etc., etc. - - What follows from all this? That your series is false, since - facts destroy it. How did you form it? The process is a curious - study. You chose a few remarkable men, in whom, by a convenient - process of abstraction, you beheld _all_ men, even to cretins; - you here took a few women, without taking into account in the - slightest degree any differences of culture, instruction, and - surroundings, and compared them with these eminent men, taking - care to forget those that might have embarrassed you; then, - deducing generals from particulars, creating two entities, you - drew your conclusions. A strange manner of reasoning, truly! You - have fallen into the mania of _imposing rules on Nature, instead - of studying Nature's rules_, and deserve that I should apply your - own words to you: "The greatest part of the philosophical - aberrations and chimeras have arisen from attributing to logical - series _a reality that they do not possess, and endeavoring to - explain the nature of man by abstractions_." - - Still, if this were to strengthen your doctrines concerning the - _basis_ of right, it might be comprehended; but it is to - overthrow them! - - You transform yourself into a Sphinx, to propose to me a riddle. - "What is that right," you say, "_which is not justice, and which, - notwithstanding, would not exist without it_, which presides over - the relations of both sexes, the _jus strictum_ governing only - individuals of the same sex. If you divine it, you will have - given me the cause." - - It is not necessary to be _the great Apollo_, to divine that it - is the _right of grace, of mercy_, towards an inferior that is - not armed with strict right. - - If I have divined rightly, you have simply begged the question by - supposing _that resolved which I dispute_. I maintain that there - is only one _right_, that _one single_ _right presides over the - rights of individuals and of sexes_, and that the right of mercy - belongs to the domain of sentiment. - - You wish it proved that the new emancipators of woman are the - most elevated, the broadest, and the most progressive minds of - the age. Rejoice, your wish is accomplished: a simple comparison - between them and their adversaries will prove it to you. - - The emancipators, taking woman in the cradle of humanity, see her - marching slowly towards civil emancipation. The intelligent - disciples of progress, they wish, by extending a fraternal hand - to her, to aid her in fulfilling her destiny. - - The non-emancipators, denying the historical law, regardless of - the progressive and parallel movement of the populace, woman, and - the industrial arts towards affranchisement, wish to thrust her - back far beyond the Middle Age, to the days of Romulus and the - Hebrew patriarchs. - - The emancipators, believing in individual autonomy, respecting - it, and recognizing it in woman, wish to aid her to conquer it. - Judging of the need that a free being has of liberty by the need - that they have of it themselves, they are consistent. - - The non-emancipators, blinded by pride, perverted by a love of - dominion as unbridled as unintelligent, desire liberty only _for - themselves_. These egotists, so suspicious of those that menace - their own freedom, wish half the human species to be in their - chains. - - The emancipators have enough heart and ideality to desire a - companion with whom they can exchange sentiment and thought, and - who can improve them in some respects and be improved by them in - others; they love and respect woman. - - The non-emancipators, without ideality, without love, chained to - their senses and their pride, despise woman; and wish to have in - her only a _female, a servant, a machine to produce young ones_. - They are _males, they are not yet men_. - - The emancipators desire perfection of the species, in a - three-fold point of view: physical, moral, and intellectual. They - know that races cannot be improved without selecting and - perfecting the mothers. - - The non-emancipators are bent upon something quite different from - the improvement of the species: let their children be lacking in - intelligence, malicious, ugly, or deformed; they think much less - of this than of being _masters_. Do they know enough of - physiology to have reflected that the faculties _depend on - organization_, that organization is capable of modification, that - modifications are transmitted, that woman has a great share in - this transmission, a greater share, perhaps, than that of man? It - is therefore _essential_ to place her in a condition to perform - this great function in the manner most useful to humanity. - - The emancipators desire humanity to go forward, to vibrate no - longer between the past and the future; they know the influence - that women possess, first over children, then over men; they know - that woman cannot serve progress _unless she finds it to her - interest to do so_; that she will find it so only through - liberty; that she will love it only if her intellect is elevated - by study, and her heart purified from the petty selfishness of - home by the predominating love of the great human family. As they - desire the end sincerely, they sincerely desire the means; so - long as half the human race shall labor as it is doing to destroy - the edifice constructed by _a few_ _members_ of the other half; - so long as half the human race, _the one that secretly governs - the other_, shall have its face turned towards the past, the - landmarks that point to the future will be threatened with being - torn up. Do you consider it a crime in the emancipators to - comprehend this, to seek to conjure down the peril; and do you - consider a virtue in the non-emancipators the foolish pride that - places a cataract over their eyes? - - A few words more, and I shall have done. You would rather, you - say, that I should not assume castigating airs with you. But have - you really the right to complain of it, you who have constituted - yourself the chief whipper-in of the economists and the - socialists? I shall never go so far towards you as you have gone - towards them. You must resign yourself to my abrupt, sometimes - harsh style. I am implacable towards whatever appears to me false - and unjust; and were you my brother, I should not war against you - less sharply; before all ties of affection and family, should - come the love of justice and humanity. - - I owe now to my readers and to you, sir, the exposition of the - thesis that I undertake to sustain; for the phrase, _the - emancipation of women_ has been, and is, quite variously - interpreted. - - With respect to _right_, man and woman are equal, whether the - equality of faculties be admitted or rejected. - - But for a truth to be useful, it must be adapted to the - surroundings into which we seek to introduce it. - - Absolute right being recognized, the practice of it remains. In - practice, I see two kinds of rights: woman is ripe for the - exercise of one of them; but I acknowledge that the practice of - the second would be at present dangerous, by reason of the - education that the majority of them have received. You - comprehend me, without making it necessary for me to explain - myself more clearly in a Review in which social and political - subjects are interdicted. - - - The directors of the _Revue_ having informed me that my adversary - refused to continue the discussion, I made the following - recapitulation of his creed, concerning the rights and nature of - woman. - - - To the editors of the _Revue Philosophique et Religieuse_: - - You inform me that M. Proudhon will not reply to the questions - that I have put to him; I have neither the means nor the wish to - constrain him to do so. I shall not inquire into the motives of - his determination; my business now is only to make an exposition - of his creed, which may be summed up in this wise: - - "I believe that between man and woman, there is a separation of - the same nature as that which the difference of race places - between animals; - - "I believe that, by nature and by destination, woman is neither - associate, nor functionary, nor citizen; - - "I believe that, in the social workshop, she is, until her - marriage, only apprentice, at most under-superintendent; - - "I believe that she is a minor in the family, art, science, - manufactures, and philosophy, and that she is _nothing_ in the - commonwealth; - - "I believe that she can only be housewife or courtesan; - - "I believe that she is incapable of understanding and of - governing herself; - - "I believe firmly that the basis of the equality of rights is in - the simple quality of being human; now, woman being unable to - have rights equal to those of man, I affirm that she does not - belong to the human species." - -Is Proudhon conscious how far his creed is in opposition to science, to -facts, to the law of progress, to the tendencies of our own age, and does -he dare to attempt to justify it by proofs? - -Does he feel that this creed classes him among the abettors of the -dogmatism of the Middle Age, and does he recoil before such a -responsibility? - -If this were the case, I should praise him for his prudent silence, and -it would be my warmest desire that he should keep it forever on the -question that divides us. To treat a subject, it is necessary to love and -understand it; I dare not say that Proudhon does not love woman, but I do -affirm that he does not understand her; he sees in her nothing more than -the female of man; his peculiar organization seems to render him unfit -for the investigation of such a subject. He promises, in the work that he -is preparing, to treat of the sphere and the rights of women; if his -doctrine has for its basis the paradoxical affirmations of his creed, I -hope that he will this time take pains to rest them at least upon the -semblances of proofs, which I shall examine with all the attention of -which I am capable. - -By shrinking from discussion, he cannot escape my criticism. - - -The two studies of Proudhon are simply the development of this creed. - -I promised to dissect the author; therefore, I shall do so. - -Let me not be reproached with being pitiless; Proudhon has deserved it. - -Let me not be reproached with being a reasoning machine; with such an -adversary, one should be nothing else. - -Let me not be reproached with being harsh; Proudhon has shown a harshness -and injustice with respect to women, even the most illustrious, that -exceed all bounds. If I am harsh, I will endeavor on my part not to be -unjust. - - -I. - -Well, M. Proudhon, you have sought war with women! War you shall have. - -You have said, not without reason, that the Comtois are an obstinate -race; now, I am your countrywoman; and as woman generally carries virtues -and failings farther than man, I intend to outdo you in obstinacy. - -I have raised the banner under which your daughters will one day take -shelter if they are worthy of the name they bear; I will hold it with a -firm hand and will never suffer it to be struck down; against such as -you, I have the heart and claws of a lioness. - -You begin by saying that you by no means desired to treat of the -inequality of the sexes, but that half a dozen insurgent women with -ink-stained fingers having defied you to discuss the question, you will -establish by facts and documents the _physical, intellectual and moral -inferiority of woman_; that you will prove that her emancipation is the -same thing as her prostitution, and will take her defence in hand against -the rambling talk of a few impure women whom sin has rendered -mad.--(_Vol._ III., p. 337.) - -I alone, by shutting you up in a circle of contradictions, have dared -defy you to discuss the question; I sum up, therefore, in my own person, -the few impure women whom sin has rendered mad. - -Insults of this sort cannot touch me; the esteem, the regard, the -precious friendship of eminently respectable men and women suffice to -reduce unworthy insinuations to naught. I should not notice them, with -such contempt do they inspire me, were it not necessary to tell you that -the time has gone by when one might hope to stifle the voice of a woman -by attacking her purity. - -If you do not ask the man who demands his rights and seeks to prove their -legitimacy, whether he is upright, chaste, etc., no more have you the -right to ask the question of the woman who makes the same claim. - -Were I therefore so unfortunate as to be the vilest of mortals as regards -chastity, this would not at all lessen the value of my claim. - -I greatly dislike any justification, but I owe it to the sacred cause -that I defend, I owe it to my friends, to tell you that the moral -education which my sainted, lamented mother gave me, together with -scientific studies, serious philosophy, and continual occupation, have -kept me in what is commonly called the right path, and have strengthened -the horror that I feel for all tyranny, whether it be styled man or -temperament. - -You accuse your biographer of having committed an indignity in directing -an accusation against a woman, because this woman was your wife; do you -not commit an indignity yourself in insulting many others? - -And if you blame those who calumniate the morals of Proudhon because he -is not of their opinion, in what light do you think that men will regard -your calumnious insinuations against women, because they do not think -like you? - -You claim that we have no morality, because we lack respect towards the -dignity of others; who has set us this detestable example more than you? -You, who style yourself the champion of the principles of '89--who are -the men and women whom you attack? - -They who are in different degrees, and from different stand points, in -favor of these principles. - -Your anger has no bounds against George Sand, our great prose writer, the -author of the bulletins of the republic of '48. You depreciate Madame de -Stäel, whom you have not read, and who was in advance of most of the -masculine writers of her epoch. - -Two scaffolds are erected, two women mount thereon: Madame Roland and -Marie Antoinette. I, a woman, will not cast insult on the decapitated -queen, dying with dignity and courage; no, I bow before the block, -whatever head may lay on it, and wipe away my tears. But, Marie -Antoinette died the victim of the faults that her princely education had -caused her to commit against the modern principles; while Madame Roland, -the chaste and noble wife, died for the revolution, and died blessing it. - -Whence comes it that you greet the queen with your sympathies, while you -have nought but words of blame and contempt for the revolutionist? And -the men that belong to the great party of the future, how do you style -them? - -The Girondins, _effeminate_; - -Robespierre and his adherents, _eunuchs_; - -The gentle Bernardin de St. Pierre, _effeminate_; - -M. Legouvé and those who think like him concerning the emancipation of -women, _effeminate_; - -M. de Girardin, _absurd_; - -_Béranger, a pitiable author, and effeminate_; Jean Jacques, not only the -prince of _effeminates_, but _the greatest enemy of the people and the -revolution_--he who was evidently the chief author of our "French -Revolution." - -Are we not justified in asking you, whether you are for or against the -Revolution? - -M. Proudhon, you have forfeited your right to all consideration, since -you have none for those who have neither offended you or offered you -provocation, those who have never pretended to reduce you to servitude; -men have lacked courage; they ought to have stopped you when you began to -descend to insulting personalities; what they have not done, I, a woman, -will do, fearing nothing, or no one, except my own conscience. - -Proudhon, the greatest enemy of the people, is the writer who, treading -under foot reason and conscience, science and facts, calls to his aid all -the ignorance, all the despotism of the past, to mislead the spirit of -the people with respect to the rights of half the human species. - -Proudhon, the greatest enemy of the revolution, is he who shows it to -women as a toy; who detaches them from its holy cause by confounding it -with the negation of their rights; who attacks and vilifies the advocates -of progress; who dares, in fine, in the name of the principles of general -emancipation, to proclaim the social annihilation and the conjugal -servitude of one entire half of humanity. - -Behold the enemy of the people and of the revolution! - - -II. - -I had proceeded thus far in my reply when, pausing to take breath and to -reflect, I grew calm. - -What! said I to myself, have I then no more sense than to take in earnest -that shapeless thing honored by the name of theory by the good people who -are so bewildered by the noise of Proudhon's drum and tam-tam that they -see stars at noon-day and the sun at midnight? Let me be calm, let me not -give to the affair more importance than it possesses; and since I must -set forth this thing to my readers, let me do it in a fitting tone. We -will leave Proudhon to explain himself in his own words. - -No sooner had I taken this good resolution, than I evoked M. Proudhon, -and said to him in all humility: Master, I come to you that you may -define for me the nature of woman, and also something of the nature of -man. - -PROUDHON. You do well, for I alone am capable of instructing you; listen -then to me. - -"The complete human being, _adequate to his destiny_, I speak of the -physical, is the male, who, through his virility, attains the highest -degree of muscular and nervous tension comporting with his nature and -end, and thence, the maximum of action in labor and in battle. - -"Woman is a DIMINUTIVE of man, lacking one organ to become a pubescent -youth. - -"She is a _receptacle for the germs that man alone produces_, a place of -_incubation_, like the earth for the seed of the wheat; an _organ inert_ -in itself, and purposeless with respect to the woman. Such an -organization--_presupposes the subordination of the subject_. - -"In herself, I speak still of the physical, woman has no reason to exist; -_she is an instrument of reproduction_ which it has pleased nature to -choose in preference to any other. - -"Woman, in this first count, is inferior to man: _a sort of mean term -between him and the rest of the animal kingdom_."--_Justice_, Vol. III., -etc. - -And remark that I am not alone in my opinion: - -"Woman is not only different from man," says Paracelsus, "she is -different because she is lesser, because her sex constitutes for her one -faculty less. Wherever virility is wanting, the subject is imperfect; -wherever it is taken away, the subject deteriorates. Woman lacks nothing -in the physical point of view except _to produce germs_. - -"Likewise, in the intellectual point of view, woman possesses -perceptions, memory and imagination, she is capable of attention, -reflection, and judgment; what does she lack? - -"The power of producing germs, that is, ideas.--_Id._ - -Now, follow my reasoning closely: It being admitted that _strength has -some weight in the establishment of right_; it being admitted, on the -other hand, that woman is one third weaker than man, she will then be to -man, in physical respects, as two is to three. Consequently, in the -social workshop, the value of the products of woman will be one third -less than that of the products of man; therefore, in the division of -social advantages, the proportion will be the same: _thus says justice_. - -"Man will always be stronger and will always produce more," _which -signifies that man will be the master, and that woman will obey, dura -lex, sed lex_."--_Id._ - -Besides, reflect that woman falls to the charge of man during gestation; -her physical weakness, her infirmities, her maternity, exclude her -_inevitably_ and _judicially_ from all political, doctrinal and -industrial direction.--_Id._ - -We will now proceed to the second point. But first, mark well that woman, -like all else, is autonomic; woman, considered apart from the influence -of man, is the thesis; woman, considered under the influence of man, is -the antithesis; it is the thesis that we are now examining. Let us -therefore approach the _thetic_ woman in the intellectual relation. - -We will first admit the principle that _thought is proportional to -force_; whence we have a right to conclude that man possesses a stronger -intellect than woman. Thus we see man alone possessing genius. As to -woman, she is nothing in science; we owe to her no invention, _not even -her distaff and spindle_. She never _generalizes_, never _synthetizes_; -her mind is anti-metaphysical; _she cannot produce any regular work, not -even a romance_; _she composes nothing but medleys, monsters_; "she makes -epigrams, satire; does not know how to express a judgment in set terms, -nor assign its causes; it was not she who created abstract words, such as -cause, time, space, quantity, relation. _Woman is a true table rapping -medium._"--_Id._ - -I have already told you that woman does not produce intellectual germs -any more than physical germs; her intellectual inferiority tells upon the -quality of the product as much as upon the intensity and duration of the -action and, as in this feeble nature, the defect of the idea results from -the lack of energy of the thought, it may be truly said that woman -possesses a mind _essentially_ false, of irremediable _falsity_. - -"Disconnected ideas, contradictory reasonings, chimeras taken for -realities, unreal analogies erected into principles, a tendency of mind -inclining inevitably towards annihilation: such is the intellect of -woman." - -Yes, woman "_is a passive, enervating being, whose conversation exhausts -like her embraces. He who wishes to preserve entire the strength of his -mind and body will flee her._"--_Id._ - -"_Without man, who is to her prophet and word, she would not emerge from -the bestial condition._" - -AUTHOR. Calm yourself, Master, and tell me whether it is true that you -have dealt harshly with literary women. - -PROUDHON. Literary women! As if there were any! "The woman author does -not exist; she is a contradiction. The part of woman in literature is the -same as in manufactures; she is useful where genius is no longer of -service, like a needle or a bobbin. - -"By cutting out of a woman's book all that is borrowed, imitated, -gleaned, and common-place, we reduce it to a few pretty sayings; -philosophy on nothing. To the community of ideas, woman brings nothing of -her own, any more than to generation." - -AUTHOR. Ah! I understand: you mean that, in the character of author, the -woman of genius does not exist. But in this respect, among the number of -men that write how many are there who have genius, and who never borrow -from any one? - -PROUDHON. I grant that there are many effeminate men; which does not -alter the fact that woman would do better _to go and iron her collars_ -than to meddle with writing; for, "it may be affirmed without fear of -calumny, that the woman who dabbles with philosophy and writing destroys -her progeny by the labor of her brain and her kisses which savor of man; -the safest and most honorable way for her is to renounce home life and -maternity; destiny has branded her on the forehead; made only for love, -the title of concubine if not of courtesan suffices her."--_Id._ - -Let us now consider the _thetic_ woman in the moral point of view. We -will admit in the first place the principle _that virtue exists in the -ratio of strength and intellect_, whence we have a right to conclude that -man is more virtuous than woman. Do not laugh; it disturbs my ideas. I go -further; man alone is virtuous; man alone has the sense of justice; man -alone has the comprehension of right. Tell me, I pray you, "what produces -in man this energy of will, this confidence in himself, this frankness, -this daring, all these powerful qualities that we have agreed to -designate by the single word, morality. What inspires him with the -sentiment of his dignity, the scorn of falsehood, the hatred of -injustice, the abhorence of all tyranny? Nothing else than the -consciousness of his strength and reason." - -AUTHOR. But then, Master, if man is all this, why do you reproach the men -of our times with lack of courage, of dignity, of justice, of reason, of -good faith? When I take up in minute detail the terrible charges which -you have fulminated against the masculine race, I can make nothing of the -meaning of the tirade you have just uttered. - -PROUDHON. Consider what you irreverently name a tirade, as the necessary -check to feminine immorality. - -It is only to set forth the truth that of all the differences that -separate her mind from ours, the conscience of woman is the most -trifling, her morality is of a different nature; what she regards as -right and wrong is not identically the same as what man himself regards -as right and wrong, so that, relatively to us, _woman may be styled an -immoral being_. - -"_By her nature she is in a state of constant demoralization_, always on -this side or that of justice.... Justice is insupportable to her.... Her -conscience is anti-judicial." - -She is aristocratic, loves privileges and distinctions; "in all -revolutions that have liberty and equality for their object, women make -the most resistance. They did more harm in the revolution of February -than all the powers of the masculine reaction combined. - -"Women have so little judicial sense that the legislator who fixed the -age of moral responsibility at sixteen for both sexes, might have delayed -it till forty-five, for women. Woman's conscience is _decidedly of no -value till this age_." - -In herself, woman is _immodest_. - -It is from man therefore that she receives modesty, "which is the product -of manly dignity, the corollary of justice. - -"Woman has no other inclination, no other aptitude than love. - -"In affairs of love, the initiative belongs truly to woman."--_Justice_, -_Vol._ III., pp. 364, 366. - -AUTHOR. How many persons you will astonish, Master, by revealing to them -that _modesty comes from man_; that consequently all the young girls who -have been seduced, all the little girls whose corruptors and violators -are punished by the courts, are but jades, who, through their initiative, -have caused men to forget their character as inspirers of chastity! - -You enlighten me, illustrious Master; and I shall at once draw up a -memorial to demand that all seduced and violated women and girls shall be -punished as they deserve; and that, to console the seducers, suborners, -corruptors and violators, poor innocent victims of feminine ferocity, for -having sinned against the _corollary of justice and the product of manly -dignity_, rose-trees shall be forced to blossom, in order that the -_maires_ of the forty thousand communes of France and Algeria may crown -them winners of the roses. - -PROUDHON. Jest as you please; woman is nevertheless so perverse in her -nature, that, through inclination, she seeks men who are ugly, old, and -wicked. - -AUTHOR. Is not this somewhat exaggerated, Master? - -PROUDHON. (Forgetting what he has just said,) - -"Woman always prefers a pretty, finical puppet to an honest man; a beau, -a knave can obtain from her all that he desires; she has nothing but -disdain for the man who is capable of sacrificing his love to his -conscience." - -You see what woman is: "_unproductive by nature, inert, without industry -or understanding, without justice, and without modesty_, she needs that a -father, a brother, a lover, a husband, a master, a man, in fine, should -give her that magnetic influence, if I may thus term it, which will -render her capable of manly virtues, of social and intellectual -faculties."--_Id._ - -And as "all her philosophy, her religion, her politics, her economy, her -industry are resolved in one word: Love; - -"Now shall we make of this being belonging wholly to love, an overseer, -an engineer, a captain, a merchant, a financier, an economist, an -administrator, a scholar, an artist, a professor, a philosopher, a -legislator, a judge, an orator, the general of an army, the head of a -State? - -"The question carries its answer within itself."--_Id._ - -I have laid down and proved my thesis, I am about to draw my conclusions. - -"Since in economical, political and social action, the strength of the -body and that of the mind concur and are multiplied, the one by the -other, the physical and intellectual value of the man will be to the -physical and intellectual value of woman as 3 × 3 is to 2 × 2, or as 9 to -4. - -"In the moral, as in the physical and intellectual point of view, her -value (that of woman,) is also as 2 to 3. - -"Their share of influence, compared together, will be as 3 × 3 × 3 is to -2 × 2 × 2 or as 27 to 8. - -"According to these conditions, woman cannot pretend to counterbalance -the virile power; her subordination is inevitable. Both by nature, and -before justice, she does not weigh the third of man."--_Id._ - -Do you understand clearly? - -AUTHOR. Very clearly. Your theory, if theory there be, is only a tissue -of paradoxes; your pretended principles _are contradicted by facts_, your -conclusions _are equally contradicted by facts_; you _affirm_ like a -revelator, but you _never prove_, as a philosopher should do. There is so -much ignorance and senseless metaphysics in all that you say, that I -should rather give you credit for bad faith than be compelled to despise -you. - -I have listened to you patiently while you have said to me, in saying it -of all women: - -You are inert, passive, you possess the germ of nothing; - -You are a mean term between man and beast, you have no right to exist; - -You are immoral, immodest, imbecile, aristocratic, the enemy of liberty, -equality and justice. - -In your turn, endeavor to listen to me calmly, while I refute your -allegations by facts, by science and by reason. - - -III. - -There is, by your own confession, but one good method of demonstration; -that of basing every affirmation _upon well established facts, not -contradicted by others, legitimately deduced_. - -Let us see how you have followed this method. - -In order to prove that the _thetic_ woman, or woman considered apart from -the influence of man, is such as you depict her, it is necessary that you -should bring us face to face with an assemblage of such women, and -afterwards, with another assemblage composed of men who have never been -subjected to the influence of women, that we may verify for ourselves the -native activity of the latter and the native inertness of the former. -Have you had at your disposal, can you place at ours these proofs _de -facto_? - -No; and if you neither have them nor can procure them, what is your -thesis, if not the illusion of a brain sick with pride and with hatred of -woman? - -1. You say: man alone produces physical germs. Anatomy answers: _It is -woman that produces the germ_; the organ that performs this function in -her, as in all other females, is the ovary. - -2. You say: woman is a diminutive of the man; she is an imperfect male; -anatomy says: _man and woman are two distinct beings, each one -complete_, each one furnished with a special organism, the one as -necessary as the other. - -3. You say with Paracelsus, of whom this is not the only absurdity: -_where virility is wanting, the subject is imperfect; where it is taken -away, the subject deteriorates_. Mere good sense replies: the being can -only be incomplete or deteriorate _when it differs from its type_; now -the type of woman is feminity not _masculinity_.... If, like you, I were -a lover of paradox, I would say: _man is an imperfect woman_, since it is -the woman that produces the germ; his part in reproduction is very -doubtful, and science may even learn some day to dispense with it. This -is Auguste Comte's paradox; it is worth as much as yours. - -To prove that woman is only an imperfect male, it is necessary to -establish by facts that man on being deprived of virility, finds the -organs developed in him peculiar to woman, becomes qualified for -conception, gestation, delivery, and giving suck. Now I have never -learned that any keeper of a seraglio had been transformed into an -odahlic; have you? - -4. You say: the organs peculiar to woman are inert, and purposeless with -respect to herself; physiology answers: the labor that these organs -accomplish is immense; pregnancy and the crisis that terminates it are -incontestable proofs of this. The influence of these organs makes itself -felt, not only on the general health, but in the intellectual and moral -order. Pathology, no less eloquent, depicts to us the grave disorders -produced among women by forced continence, incontinence, the excessive or -perverted vitality of these organs which you pretend are inert. - -5. You say: woman is the soil, the place of incubation for the germ. -Anatomy has told you in reply that the woman alone produces the germ. -Read my reply to your friend Michelet on the subject of the resemblance -of children and you will know what facts add to the answer of science. -Your affirmation is no less absurd in the presence of these facts than -that of a simpleton who should pretend that the soil in which the seed of -the carnation or the oak is deposited, has the property of causing -rosebushes or palm trees to spring up. - -From this _false_ supposition that woman has not physical germs, you -conclude that she is destitute of intellectual and moral germs.... And do -you really dare accuse woman of thus _taking false analogies for -principles_? - -Grant that when a man indulges in them thus wantonly, and mistakes them -for principles, we ought to be more inclined to laugh than to be vexed. - -6. You say that intellectually and morally, woman is in herself, nothing. - -Now, if I am not mistaken, you admit that our functions have our organs -for their basis, and you place the functions of intellect and morality in -the brain, according to Gall, or similarly. - -Well, Anatomy tells you: in both sexes, the cerebral mass is similar in -composition and, adds Phrenology, in the number of organs. Biology adds: -the law of development of our organs is _exercise_, which supposes action -and reaction, the result of which is the augmentation of the volume, -consistency and vitality of the organ exercised. - -The point in question then, to convince your readers of the truth of -your affirmations, is to prove that _the two sexes are subjected to the -same exercise of the brain and to the same stimulus_, and that despite -this identity of education, woman constantly remains inferior. Have you -proved this? Have you ever thought of doing so? No. For if you had, your -theory would have fallen to to the ground, since you would have been -forced to acknowledge that man and woman cannot be alike, for we say to -man from his infancy: resist, struggle; - -To woman: yield, always submit. - -To man: be yourself, speak your thoughts boldly, ambition is a virtue; -you can aspire to everything. - -To woman: dissemble, calculate your slightest word, respect prejudices; -modesty, abnegation, such is your lot; you can attain to naught. - -To man: knowledge, talent, courage will open every career of life to you, -will make you honored by all. - -To woman: knowledge is useless to you; if you have it, you will pass for -a pedant, and if you have courage, you will be disdainfully called -_virago_. - -To man: for you are instituted lyceums, universities, special schools, -high prizes; all the institutions through which your intellect can be -developed; all the libraries in which is accumulated the knowledge of the -past. - -To woman: for you is history in madrigals, the reading of prayer-books -and novels. You have nothing to do with lyceums, special schools, high -prizes, anything that would elevate your mind and enlarge your views; a -learned woman is ridiculous! - -Man must display the knowledge that he often possesses but superficially, -woman must hide what she really possesses. - -Man must appear courageous when he is often but a coward; woman must -feign timidity when in reality she is not afraid. - -For where man is reputed great and sublime, woman is found ridiculous, -sometimes odious. - -If you had verified as you should have done, these diametrically opposite -systems of training, the one tending to develop and ennoble the being, -the other to degrade it and render it imbecile, instead of writing such -absurdities, you would have said to yourself: woman must really have the -initiative to resist the iniquitous system of repression that weighs upon -her; she must have great elasticity to show herself so often superior to -the majority of men in intellect, and _always in morality_. - -I am curious to know what you males would be if subjected to the same -system as we. Look at those who have not studied like you, and tell me -whether they are not in general beneath uncultivated women. Look then at -the men who have received a feminine education; have they not all the -affectation, all the narrowness of mind of silly women? - -Look, on the contrary, at those women who, through the wish of their -teachers or their own energy, have been subjected to masculine -discipline, and tell me, on your conscience, whether they do not equal -the most intelligent, the firmest among you? - -7. You say: intellectual force is in proportion to physical force. -_Facts_ reply: great thoughts, useful works, date from the period when -the physical forces began to decline. _Facts_ say also: the athletic -temperament, which is the most vigorous, is _the least intellectual_: -statuaries fully comprehend this, and sculpture Hercules with a large -body and a small head. - -8. You say that morality is in a direct ratio to physical and -intellectual force combined. This pleasantry we will not refute; every -one knows too well that these things have no relation, and that facts -contradict your assertion. - -9. You say: woman being one third weaker, should have in social labor one -third the privileges of man. - -Upon what elements do you base this proportion? In order to establish it, -did you carry a dynamometer about through our districts and measure the -strength of each man and of each woman? - -But were your affirmation true, is naught but _strength_ employed in -labor? Then, great economist, what do we do with _skill_? What Samsonian -muscles are needed to keep books, dispense justice, measure cloth, cut -and sew garments, etc.! - -And what is the end of civilization if not to shift the employ of our -strength from ourselves to machinery that we may be at liberty to use -only our intellect and skill? - -10. You say: the infirmities, the weaknesses, the maternity of woman, and -her aptitude for love, exclude her from all functions; she is _judicially -and absolutely_ excluded from all political, industrial and doctrinal -direction. - -She cannot be a political leader.... Yet history shows us numerous -empresses, queens, regents and sovereign princesses who have governed -with wisdom and glory, and have shown themselves far superior to many -male sovereigns, unless Maria Theresa, Catherine II, Isabella and Blanche -of Castile, and many others, are but myths. - -Woman cannot be a legislator.... All the women whom I have just cited -have been so, and many more beside. - -Women can be neither philosophers nor professors. - -Hypatia, massacred by the Christians, taught Philosophy with luster; in -the Middle Age and later, Italian women filled chairs of Philosophy, Law -and Mathematics, and excited admiration and enthusiasm; in France, at the -present time, the Polytechnists are making great account of _the -geometrician_, Sophie Germain, who has taken it into her head to study -Kant. - -Woman cannot be a merchant or an administratrix... Yet a great portion of -the feminine population devote themselves to trade, or fill commercial -positions. It is even admitted that the prosperity of commercial -establishments is almost always due to the administrative genius of -woman. - -Woman cannot be an overseer, a foreman of a workshop... Yet a host of -women superintend workshops, invent, improve, carry on manufactures -alone, and contribute, by their taste and activity, to the increase of -the national wealth and the industrial reputation of France. - -Woman cannot be artist... Yet every one knows that the greatest literary -artist of our age is a woman, George Sand; yet every one bows before -Duchesnois, Mars, Georges, Maxime, Ristori, Rachel, Dorval; yet every one -pauses before the beautiful paintings of Rosa Bonheur; yet since the -revival of the fine arts, every century has registered many celebrated -women. - -We meet women everywhere, working everywhere, competing with man.... Yet -Proudhon pretends that she can be nowhere, that she is excluded from -every place absolutely and _judicially_; that if she governs and -legislates like Maria Theresa, it is a contradiction; - -That if she philosophises like Hypatia, it is a contradiction; - -That if she commands an army and wins victories like the wife of the -conqueror of Calais; if she fights like Jeanne d'Arc, Jeanne Hachette, -Madame Garibaldi and thousands of others, it is a contradiction; - -That if she is merchant, administratrix, superintendent of a workshop, -like thousands of women, it is a contradiction; - -That if she is learned like Dr. Boivin, Sophie Germain, and many others, -if she is a professor as are many among us, it is a contradiction. - -The thesis sustained by Proudhon is, as we have just seen, contradicted -by _science_ and by _facts_. We ask ourselves whether it is possible that -he is ignorant of the simplest notions of Anatomy and Biology; we ask -ourselves whether it is possible that he is so far blind as not to see -that woman _is in reality_ all that he pretends that she _absolutely and -judicially_ cannot be in his absurd and insulting theory; and we conclude -that the author is struck with ignorance and voluntary blindness. - -Your reproaches are pleasant; from the origin of society, man has been -the master; now, the ancient world sunk beneath the weight of slavery, -usury, and the most shameless vices; the modern world seems doomed to -perish through inequality and its sad consequences, you yourself -acknowledge that injustice _caused by your sex_ exists every where in the -world, and you say that man has judicial sense! - -And, in the face of the inequality and oppression created by men, of -their love of puerile distinctions, of the base deeds which they commit -for a bit of ribbon, you accuse women of loving inequality and -privileges! - -They may love them, _like you_, but they are better than you, if not more -just; they pray for the vanquished, you kill him! - -I do not deny that women did much harm to the Revolution of February, for -they are as intelligent as men, and have great influence over them. But -what did this Revolution do for them, I pray? - -Mark me well, you and all those who are blind enough, proud enough, -despotic enough to resemble you, and remember what I say. - -Woman is like the people: she desires no more of your revolutions, which -decimate us for the benefit of a few ambitious babblers. - -She will have liberty and equality for all men and women, or she will -take care that no one shall have them. - -We, Women of Progress, openly declare ourselves adversaries of whoever -shall deny the right of woman to liberty. - -Our sisters of the people, indignant at their exclusion from the popular -assemblies, say to you: you have lured us long enough, it is time that -this should end. We will no longer suffer ourselves to be ensnared by -your high-sounding words of Justice, Liberty, and Equality, which are -only false coin so long as they are applied to but half the human -species. Do you wish to save the perishing world? Call woman to your -side. If you will not do this, let us alone, insipid phraseologists; you -are naught but ambitious hypocrites; we do not wish our husbands to -follow you, and they will not. - - -IV. - -PROUDHON. Let us consider woman in the antithesis. I have said that -woman, considered apart from masculine influence, is _nothing_. - -AUTHOR. Yes, Master, because this is a pure creation of your thought. - -PROUDHON. But woman, considered under the influence of man, is half of -the human being, and _I sing litanies in her praise_. - -AUTHOR. Then you make woman re-enter humanity through the door of -Androgyny, in order to restore to her her share of rights.... This is -absurd; no matter. - -PROUDHON. Not so! not so! Women have rights! Never, so long as I am -Proudhon! She is indeed the complement of man, who, without her, would be -only a brute. - -AUTHOR. Ah! my learned Master, how do these things harmonize in your -brain? You have said hitherto that _woman owes everything to man_, you -tell me now that, without woman, man would be only a brute. Is he not -then, _adequate to his destiny_, as you have affirmed? And if woman is -nothing without him, and he nothing without woman, I can see no longer -upon what you rest in making him the guide of this poor unfortunate. - -PROUDHON. I need not explain myself, such is my idea. I am simply -comparing the respective qualities of the sexes, and, as I find, they are -_incommutable_. - -AUTHOR. Ah! I catch a glimpse of your meaning; then you do not weigh them -in the balance since they are not alike, and, being unable to prejudice -the rights of woman, you leave her free. - -PROUDHON. What! what! Woman free! Horrible! Are you resolved to throw me -into convulsions? Woman, however eminent may be her talents, should serve -man in silence and in all humility. - -AUTHOR. Frankly, Master, all this appears to me nonsense, which, satanic -as you are, you cannot yourself understand in the least. - -PROUDHON. Listen without interrupting me further, if you wish to -comprehend me. - -"Without feminine grace, _man would not have emerged from the brutality -of the early ages; he would violate his female, smother his little ones, -and give chase to his fellows in order to devour them_. - -"_Woman is the conscience of man personified_, the incarnation of his -youth, _his reason and his justice, of all within him that is purest, -most sacred, most sublime_.--_Justice_, _Vol._ III., etc. - -"The ideality of his being, she becomes to him a _principle of -animation_, a gift of strength, of prudence, of justice, of patience, of -courage, of sanctity, of hope, of consolation, without which he would be -incapable of sustaining the burden of life, of preserving his dignity, of -enduring himself, _of fulfilling his destiny_. - -"It is through her, through the grace of her divine word, that man gives -life and reality to his ideas, by bringing them back unceasingly from the -abstract to the concrete. - -"_The auxiliary on the side of justice_, she is the angel of patience, of -resignation, of tolerance, the guardian of his faith, the mirror of his -conscience, the source of his devotion. Vanquished, guilty, it is still -in the bosom of woman that he finds consolation and pardon." - -Man has strength, woman beauty. Through her beauty, she should be the -expression of Justice, "and the attraction that draws us to it.... _She -will be better than man_.... She will be the motor of all justice, all -knowledge, all industry, all virtue."--_Id._ - -Also, "beauty is the true destination of the sex; it is its natural -condition, its state."--_Id._ - -Woman is the soul of everything; "without her, all beauty fades; nature -is sad, precious stones lose their luster, all our arts, children of -love, become insipid, half of our labor is without value. - -"If, with respect to vigor, man is to woman as 3 to 2, woman, with -respect to beauty, is to man as 3 to 2. - -"If, from the body, we pass to the mind and conscience, woman, through -her beauty, will be revealed with new advantages."--_Id._ - -The mind of woman is _more intuitive, more concrete, finer than that of -man_; "it seems to man, and is in fact, more circumspect, more _prudent_, -more reserved, _wiser_, more equable; it was _Minerva_, the protectress -of Achilles and Ulysses, who appeased the fury of the one, _and shamed -the other of his paradoxes and profligacies_; it is the Virgin whom the -Christian litany calls _the seat of wisdom_. - -"The quality of the feminine mind has the effect of serving the genius of -man as a radiator, by reflecting his thoughts at an angle which makes -them appear more beautiful if they are correct, more absurd if they are -false; consequently, of simplifying our knowledge and condensing it into -simple propositions, easy to seize upon as simple facts, and the -intuitive, aphoristic, imaged comprehension of which, _while giving woman -a share in the philosophy and the speculations of man_, makes their -memory clearer to him, their digestion more easy... _There is not a man -among the most learned, the most inventive, the most profound, who does -not feel a sort of refreshment from conversation with women_.... - -"Popularizers are generally minds of the feminine type; but man does not -like to be subservient to the glory of man, and provident Nature has -assigned this part to woman. - -"Let her speak, then, _let her write, even, I authorize and invite her to -do so_; but let her do it according to the measure of her feminine -intelligence, since it is on this condition that she can serve us, and -_please_ us, _otherwise I withdraw the permission_. - -"Man has strength; but that constancy of which he boasts overmuch, he -derives especially from woman.... Through her he endures, and learns true -heroism. _Upon occasion, she can set him the example of it_; she will be, -then, _more sublime than he_. - -"Woman will render the law kind, and will convert this two-edged sword -into an olive branch.... There is no justice without tolerance; now, it -is in the exercise of tolerance that woman excels; by the sensibility of -her heart and the delicacy of her impressions, by the tenderness of her -soul, by her love, in fine, she will blunt the sharp angles of justice, -destroy its asperities, of a divinity of terror make a divinity of peace. -Justice, the mother of Peace, would be only a cause of disunion to -humanity, were it not for this tempering which she receives especially -from woman."--_Id._ - -And what chastity does woman possess! With what constancy she awaits her -betrothed! What continence she observes during the absence or sickness of -her husband! Ah! "woman alone knows how to be modest.... Through this -modesty, which is her most precious prerogative, she triumphs over the -transports of man, and ravishes his heart."--_Id._ - -And what wisdom in her choice of the companion of her life! - -"She desires man to be strong, valiant, ingenious; she turns from him if -he is mincing and delicate."--_Id._ - -Now, my unloved, indocile, and very irreverent disciple, let us -recapitulate. - -Woman, with respect to physical, intellectual and moral beauty, is to man -as 3 to 2; "thus it may be said, indeed, that between man and woman there -exists a certain equivalence, arising from their respective comparison, -in the two-fold point of view of strength and beauty; if, by labor, -genius, and justice, man is to woman as 27 to 8, in her turn, by graces -of form and mind, by amenity of character and tenderness of heart, she is -to man as 27 to 8.... But these respective qualities are incommutable, -cannot be the subject of any contract.... - -"Now, as every question of preponderance in the government of human life -is within the jurisdiction either of the economical order, or of the -philosophical or judicial order, it is evident that superiority of -beauty, even of that which is intellectual and moral, cannot create a -compensation for woman, whose condition is thus made fatally -subordinate."--_Id._ - -Do you understand me now? - -AUTHOR. I understand that this is pure sophistry, a thing easily -demonstrated; that if your _thesis_ is absurd, your _antithesis_, however -complimentary it may be, is quite as much so; that you have piled -contradictions upon contradictions, and that it is a sad spectacle to me -to see so strong and fine an intellect as yours abandon itself to such -practices. - -You shall judge for yourself whether my reproaches and regrets are well -founded. - -In the _Thesis_ you say: man alone is in himself intelligent and just, he -alone is adequate to his destiny. Woman has no reason for existing; -without man, she _would not emerge from the bestial condition_. - -In the _Antithesis_: without woman, who is the principle of animation of -man, the motive power of all science, of all art, of all industry, of all -virtue--without woman, who renders justice possible, thought -comprehensible and applicable, man, far from being in himself just, -intelligent, a worker, would be but a brute, _who would violate his -female, strangle his little ones, and pursue his fellow men in order to -devour them_. - -What follows from these divergent affirmations? That if woman alone is -inadequate to her destiny, man alone is inadequate to his, and that the -adequateness of both is caused by the synthesis of their respective -qualities. - -It also follows, by your own admission, that man receives as much from -woman as she receives from him, since, if he rescues her from the bestial -state, she rescues him from the state of brute ferocity. - -It follows, lastly, by your own admission, that there is equivalence -between the respective qualities of the two sexes. Only you pretend that -these qualities cannot be measured by each other, and cannot therefore be -subject for contract, and that the qualities of man being more important -to the social state than those of woman, the latter should be -subordinated to the former. - -Tell me, is there commutability between the qualities that distinguish -men from each other? - -Between the man of genius and the humble rag-picker? - -Between the philosopher who elevates the human mind and the porter who -does not even know how to read? - -Between the brain that discovers a great natural law and the one that -reflects on nothing? - -To answer affirmatively is impossible: for we only compare things of the -same nature. - -Now, if there can be no commutability between individuals so different, -is there not, according to your system, subject for social contract -between them? - -Why then do you claim that these men should be _equal socially_? - -Why then do you admit that they may associate things in a private -contract which cannot be subjected to a common measure? - -There is no need to be learned in philosophy or economy to know _that any -contract whatsoever is an admission of personal insufficiency_; that we -would not enter into partnership with others if we could dispense with -them; and that in general the design of the contracting parties is _to -establish commutability where it has not been established by the nature -of things_. - -To a common work, one brings his idea, another his hands, a third, his -money, a fourth, custom: if each of the parties had had all these -combined, no one would have thought of forming a partnership: a happy -insufficiency brought them together, and caused them to establish -equivalence between the shares of capital which could not be subjected to -a common measure. - -Were it true, therefore, that the qualities of the sexes differ as you -pretend, then, as through this same difference, they are _equally_ -necessary to the collective work, they are _essentially_ subject to -contract, and _equivalent_. - -But do they differ as you say? You know the answer of _science_ and -_facts_. We will not return to it. All your distinctions of beauty and -strength are only imaginary classifications. We all know that of eighteen -millions of Frenchmen, at the present time, we have a few men of genius, -absorbed in specialties, a few more men of talent, perhaps not four -philosophers, mediocrities in abundance, and an immense host of cyphers. -It is mockery, therefore, to establish the right of prepotency of a sex -from qualities which, on the one hand, do not exist in each of its -members, and, on the other, are often found in the highest degree in the -sex which it is claimed to reduce to subjection. - -Besides, did your sex possess the qualities which you ascribe to it, to -the exclusion of mine; since, by your admission, there would be neither -civilization, nor science, nor art, nor justice, without the qualities -you term peculiar to woman; and since, without these qualities, man would -be only a brute and an anthropophagus, it thence follows that woman is -_at least_ the equivalent of man, if not his superior. - -Let us now notice a few of your contradictions. - -1st _Thesis_. Woman is a sort of mean term between man and the rest of -the animal kingdom. - -_Antithesis._ No; woman is the idealisation of man, in that which is -purest and most sublime in him. - -2d _Thesis_. Woman is an inert creature, devoid of understanding, that -has no reason for existing. - -_Antithesis._ No; woman is the animating principle of man; without her, -he could not fulfil his destiny; she is the motive power of all justice, -all science, all industry, all civilization, all virtue. - -3d _Thesis_. Woman does not know how to express an opinion in set terms, -or to assign reasons for it; she has only disconnected ideas, erroneous -reasonings; she mistakes chimeras for realities, composes nothing but -medleys, monsters. - -_Antithesis._ No; the intellect of woman is finer than that of man; she -has a wiser, more prudent, more reserved mind; she is the foil of -masculine ideas. She is Minerva shaming Ulysses for his paradoxes and -profligacies; she is the seat of wisdom. - -4th _Thesis_. Without the magnetic influence of man, woman would not -emerge from the bestial state. - -_Antithesis._ Without the magnetic influence of woman, man would be but a -ferocious beast. - -5th _Thesis_. The woman who philosophises and writes, destroys her -progeny; she had better go iron her collars; she is good for nothing but -to be concubine or courtesan. - -_Antithesis._ Woman should participate in the philosophy and speculations -of man, and popularize them by her writings. - -6th _Thesis_. The conversation of woman exhausts, enervates; he who -wishes to preserve intact the force of his mind and body, will flee her. - -_Antithesis._ The conversation of woman refreshes the most eminent men. - -7th _Thesis_. Woman has an infirm conscience; she is immoral, -anti-judicial; she is worth nothing as to moral responsibility until -forty-five years of age. - -_Antithesis._ Woman is the mirror of the conscience of man, the -incarnation of this conscience; through her alone justice becomes -possible; she is the guardian of morals; she is superior to man in moral -beauty. - -8th _Thesis_. Woman is without virtue. - -_Antithesis._ Woman excels in tolerance; through her, man learns -constancy and true heroism. - -9th _Thesis_. Woman is immodest: she takes the initiative in affairs of -love. - -_Antithesis._ Woman alone knows how to be modest; in principle, there are -no impure women; woman calms the sensual passions of man. - -10th _Thesis_. Woman prefers an ugly, old, and wicked man. - -No; woman prefers a pretty, mincing puppet, a beau. - -_Antithesis._ No; woman wishes man strong, valiant, ingenious; she turns -from him when he is but a pretty, mincing puppet, a beau. - -I might go on thus to a hundred, and then make a cross to begin another -hundred. Can it be possible that you trifle in this manner with your -readers? - -PROUDHON. The contradiction is not in my thought, but only in the terms. -The woman of my thesis is she who has not been subjected to masculine -magnetism, to which the woman of my antithesis, on the contrary, has been -subjected. - -AUTHOR. You would have reason to laugh at us, should we take such an -answer in earnest. What! have you seen women outside of society, who -would have taken men for monkeys? - -Have you proved that in this menagerie, they think falsely, they write -badly, they are worth nothing as to conscience until forty-five years of -age? - -That there, in the absence of men, the women take the initiative in -affairs of love? - -That the conversation of these women exhausts, enervates the men who are -not there? - -That these women prefer the old, ugly and wicked men, or the pretty, -mincing puppets, who are not at their disposal? - -If the woman of your thesis is the one who has not been subjected to -masculine influence, why do you take the women whom you attack from among -those who have been subjected to it? - -Your contradictions, Master, are genuine and fair contradictions. For you -as for us, there is but one woman: she who lives in the society of man, -who has, like him, faults and vices, and who influences him as much as -she is influenced by him: the other has never existed except in the brain -of mystics and of victims of hallucination. - -But we will leave this. - -I have been told that you have spoken of love: it would seem to me -impossible, did I not know your audacity. - -PROUDHON. I have spoken of it, as well as of Marriage. - -AUTHOR. Well! let us make a little excursion into these two territories. -We will first speak of Love. - - -V. - -PROUDHON. Love!... It wearies and annoys me greatly. I have never yet -been able to make my ideas agree on this subject. - -I at first defined love: "the attraction of the two sexes towards each -other with a view to reproduction," adding that this attraction becomes -purified by the adjunction of the Ideal. I even made a most beautiful -discovery with respect to this, namely: that there is a sexual division -because it is impossible to idealize anything but the objective.--_Vol._ -III. - -AUTHOR. How you run on! Then all of the animal and vegetable species in -which the sexes are separated have an ideal in love? An ideal in the -brain of a horse or a mare may pass, since there is a brain; but where -will you lodge that of the male and female flower? - -PROUDHON. On my honor, I never thought of asking myself that question. We -will return, if you please, to the definition of human love. I say, then, -that love is an attraction given with a view to reproduction; -notwithstanding, I think, also, that to love, properly called, progeny is -odious.--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. But this is a contradiction... - -PROUDHON. Am I to blame for that! You know, that in my eyes, man and -woman form _the organ of justice, the humanitary Androgynus_. Now I -affirm that love is the moving power of justice, because it is this that -attracts towards each other the two halves of the couple. It is through -love, therefore, that the conscience of man and woman is opened to the -knowledge of justice, which does not hinder it from being "the most -powerful fatality by which nature could have found the secret of -obscuring reason within us, of afflicting the conscience, and of chaining -the free will."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. The moving power of justice, the sentiment which opens the -conscience of the sexes to justice, and which forms the judicial organ, -disturbs the reason and afflicts the conscience! But this is a -contradiction. - -PROUDHON. Once more, am I to blame for it? Love, sought for itself, -renders man unworthy, and woman vile; and stop! "love, even when -sanctioned by justice, I do not like."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. Have you not said that without the love inspired in man by the -beauty of woman, there would be neither art, nor science, nor industry, -nor justice; that man would be only a brute? - -PROUDHON. Ah! I have said much more!... This love, the motor of justice, -the father of civilization, is, notwithstanding, _the abolition of -justice_, which exacts that it should be cast aside as soon as its office -of motor is performed. The impulse, the movement given, it must be -dispensed with. In marriage, it should play the smallest part possible; -"all amorous conversation, even between betrothed lovers, even between -husband and wife, is indecorous, destructive of domestic respect, of the -love of labor and the practice of social duty." A marriage of pure -inclination is nearly allied to shame, and "the father that gives his -consent to it is deserving of censure."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. A father deserving of censure because he unites those who yield -to the motive power of justice! - -PROUDHON. Let young people marry without repugnance, that is right.... -But "when a son, a daughter, to satisfy inclination, tramples under foot -the wishes of the father, disinheritance is his first right and most -sacred duty."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. Thus love, the motor of justice, the cause of civilization, the -necessity for reproduction, is at the same time a thing of shame which -should be feared and banished from marriage, and that, in certain cases, -deserves disinheritance!... May the gods bless your contradictions, and -posterity pass lightly over them! - -PROUDHON. I can say nothing more satisfactory on the subject; but, let us -talk of marriage; I am strong indeed on that point. - -Every function supposes an organ; man is the organ of liberty; but -justice exacts an organ composed of two terms: the couple. It is -necessary that the two persons that compose it should be dissimilar and -unequal, "because, if they were alike, they would not be completed by -each other; they would be two beings wholly independent, without -reciprocal action, incapable, through this cause, to produce justice.... -In principle, there is no difference between man and woman, except a -simple diminution of energy in their faculties. - -"Man is stronger, woman is weaker, that is all.... Man is the power of -that of which woman is the ideal, and reciprocally, woman is the ideal of -that of which man is the power."--_Id._ - -Androgyny laid down, I define marriage to be: "the sacrament of justice, -the living mystery of universal harmony; the form given by nature itself -to the religion of the human race. In a lower sphere, marriage is the act -by which man and woman, elevating themselves above love and the senses, -declare their wish to be united according to the law, and, as far as in -them lies, to pursue the social destiny, by laboring for the Progress of -Justice. - -"In this family religion, it may be said that the father is the priest, -the wife the god, the children the people.... _All are in the hands of -the father_, fed by his labor, protected by his sword, subjected to his -government, _within the jurisdiction of his court_, heirs and continuers -of his thought.... _Woman remains subordinate to man_, because she is an -object of worship, and because there is no common measure between the -force and the ideal.... Man will die for her, as he dies for his faith -and his gods, but he will keep for himself the command and the -responsibility."--_Id._ - -In result, the spouses are equal, since there is community of fortune, -of honor, of absolute devotion; "_in principle and practice_ ... this -equality does not exist, _cannot exist_.... The equality of rights -supposing an equilibrium between the advantages with which Nature has -endowed woman and the more powerful faculties of man, the result would be -that woman, instead of being elevated by this equilibrium, would be -denaturalized, debased. By the ideality of her being, woman is, so to -speak, beyond price.... That she may preserve this inestimable charm, -which is not a positive faculty in her, but a quality, a manner, a state, -she must accept the law of marital power: _equality would render her -odious_, would be the dissolution of marriage, the death of love, _the -destruction of the human race_. - -"And the glory of man consists in reigning over this admirable creature, -in being able to say: she is myself idealized, she is more than I, and, -notwithstanding, would be nothing without me.... In spite of this or on -account of this, I am and ought to remain the head of the community; if I -yield the command to her, she becomes debased and we perish."--_Id._ - -Marriage should be monogamous, "because conscience is common between the -spouses, and because it cannot, without being dissolved, admit a third -participant."--_Id._ - -It should be indissoluble, because conscience is immutable, and the -spouses could not procure an exchange _without being guilty of -sacrilege_. If they are obliged to separate, "the deserving one needs -only to heal the wounds made in his heart and conscience, the other has -no longer the right to aspire to marriage, but must be content with -concubinage."--_Id._ - -What do you think of this theory? - -AUTHOR. Hitherto I have refused to believe in the god Proteus; but on -contemplating you, Master, I abjure my incredulity. - -You appear to us first under the garb and form of Manou, and we discuss -his physiology; - -You appear to us next, successively, in the shape and vestments of Moses, -St. Thomas Aquinas, and St. Bonaventure; you are incarnated for a moment -in Paracelsus; - -Lastly, you put on the Roman toga, over which you wrap the ungraceful -robe of Auguste Comte. - -All this is too old, too unsightly for our age.... Have you really -nothing better to give us than the resurrection of the Roman law at the -glorious time when Cincinnatus ate his dish of lentils stark naked? - -PROUDHON. What! do you dispute that marriage by _confarreation is not the -masterpiece of the human conscience_? - -AUTHOR. Do I dispute it? Yes, indeed, and many other things beside. But -tell me, what meaning do you give to the words _sacrament_ and _mystery_, -that sound so hollow and false from your lips? - -PROUDHON. Despite all my explanations concerning marriage, there -nevertheless remains a mystery with respect to it. This is all I can tell -you in elucidation. You must comprehend that "marriage is an institution -_sui generis_, formed at the same time at the tribunal of human justice -by contract, and at the spiritual tribunal by sacrament, and which -perishes as soon as the one or the other of these two elements -disappears."--_Id._ - -You must also comprehend that "marriage is a function of humanity, -outside of which love becomes a scourge, the distinction of the sexes has -no longer any meaning, the perpetuation of the species becomes a real -injury to the living, _justice is contrary to nature and the plan of the -creation is absurd_."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. The plan of the creation absurd, and justice contrary to nature -without marriage! What does this mean in plain language? - -PROUDHON. What! Is your intellect so feeble that it does not comprehend -that, without marriage, there is not, there cannot be justice? - -AUTHOR. Then marriage is necessary to all? - -PROUDHON. No; but "all participate in it and receive its influence -through filiation, consanguinity, adoption which, universal in its -essence, in order to act, has no need of cohabitation.... In the animic -or spiritual point of view, marriage is to each of us a condition of -felicity.... Every adult, healthy in mind and body, whom solitude or -abstraction has not sequestered from the rest of mankind, loves, and by -virtue of this love, contracts marriage in his heart.... Justice, which -is the end of love, and which can be obtained either by domestic -initiation, by civic communion, or, lastly, by mystical love," suffices -"for happiness in every condition of age and fortune."--_Id._ - -And do not confound marriage with any other union, with concubinage, for -example, "which is the mark of a feeble conscience." I do not however -condemn the concubinary, for "society is not the work of a day, virtue is -difficult to practise, without speaking of those to whom marriage is -_inaccessible_."--_Id._ - -In my opinion, it is for the interest of woman, of children, and of -morals, that concubinage should be regulated by legislation. Every child -should bear the name of the concubinary father, who should provide for -his subsistence and for the expenses of his education; "the forsaken -concubine should also have a right to an indemnity, unless she has been -the first to enter into another concubinage."--_Id._ - -But it is not from concubinage, but from marriage that all justice, all -right proceeds. This is so true, that if you "take away marriage, the -mother is left with her tenderness, but without authority, without -rights: _she can no longer do justice to her son_; there is illegitimacy, -a first step backward, a return to immorality."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. All that you have just said concerning love, marriage, justice -and right, contains so many equivocations, errors, sophisms, and so much -pathos, that nothing less than a huge volume would suffice to refute, -after first explaining you. We will content ourselves, therefore, with -dwelling on the principal points. - - -VI. - -1. The Androgynus, by definition, is a being combining the two sexes. Now -marriage does not make of man and woman _a single being_; each preserves -his individuality; your humanitary Androgynus is not therefore worth the -trouble of discussion; it is only a fantasy. - -2. Every organ supposes a function, it is true, but what _facts_ -authorize you to say that the married couple is the organ of justice? -Especially when you take the trouble to contradict yourself, in admitting -that justice is produced outside of marriage; that there is no need of -being married to be just? - -The organ of justice, like all other organs, is in each of us; it is the -moral sense which comes into action when the point in question is the -appreciation of the moral value of an act, or to apply to our own -conduct the moral science accepted by the reason of the age. - -3. According to you, equilibrium is _equality_; _equality is justice_: -there is, therefore, a contradiction on your part in exacting of two -beings, endowed each with liberty, will and intellect, that they should -acknowledge themselves _unequal_ to produce _equality_. - -4. To affirm, as you have done, that progress is the realization of the -ideal through free will; that, consequently, the ideal is superior to the -reality, and that man progresses because he suffers himself to be guided -by it; then to affirm that woman is the ideal of man and that, -notwithstanding, she is _less_ and should _obey_, is a double -contradiction. If the point from which you start be admitted, logic would -exact that man should permit himself to be guided by woman. But what is -the use of discussing a thing that is devoid of meaning to the intellect? -If man, according to you, represents in reality strength, reason, -justice, woman being the idealization of man, would therefore represent -the greatest strength, the loftiest reason, the most sublime justice.... -Do you pretend to say this, you who affirm the contrary? - -5. To say that marriage is an institution _sui generis_, a _sacrament_, a -_mystery_, is to affirm what? And what enlightenment do you fancy that -you have given us? Are you fully sure of comprehending yourself better -than we comprehend you? I doubt it. - -6. Can you demonstrate why, in an association between strong, intelligent -men, and weak, narrow-minded men, justice exacts _equality_, respect for -the dignity of all, and declares the slave _debased_ who submits; whilst -in the association of man and woman, _identical in species_ according to -you, the woman who is always, according to you, the weak and -narrow-minded being, would be _debased_ and would become _odious_ by -equality? - -7. Can you explain also how, in a couple which stands for the producer of -justice or equality, this equality _would be the death of love and the -destruction of the human race_? - -Grant that such a farrago of nonsense and contradictions presents as many -unfathomable _mysteries_ as your marriage. - -We will say nothing of divorce: we leave it to modern reason and -conscience whether the dissolution of morals and of the family, due in a -great measure to the indissolubility of marriage, does not give cause -that it should be granted. What reasons do you give, besides, to support -your opinions? An absurdity: that the rupture of marriage is _sacrilege_; -an affirmation contradicted by facts: that conscience is immutable. - -8. Between the bastard and his mother, there is no justice, say you. Your -conscience is younger by two thousand and some hundred years than the -modern conscience. In the work of reproduction, the task to be performed -with reference to the new being, is divided between the parents. On the -woman, as the more vital, more elastic, and more resisting, devolves the -more perilous part of this task. You shall risk your life to form -humanity from your own substance, says Nature to her. To the man it -belongs to pay his debt to his children by erecting the roof under which -they take shelter, by bringing the food which you elaborate or prepare -for them. To him it belongs to accomplish his duty towards his sons by -the use of his strength, as you accomplish yours by supplying them with -your blood and your milk. - -Your rights over the child arise, adds conscience, from his incapacity to -take care of himself, from the duties which you fulfil towards him, from -the obligation under which you are placed to form his reason and -conscience, and to make him a useful and moral citizen. - -Well, what happens most of the time, in cases of illegitimacy? That the -father having weakly, cruelly, contrary to all justice, deserted his -task, the mother performs double duty towards her children: _she is at -once father and mother_. - -And it is when this mother has a _double_ right that you dare to say that -she has _none_! that between her and her son there is no justice! In -truth, I should rather live among savages than in a society that thinks -and _feels_ like you. - -A mother has an incontestable right over her child, for she has risked -her own life to give it birth: the father acquires rights over it only -when ever he fulfils his duty; when he does not fulfil it, he has no -right; thus says reason. In this question, marriage signifies nothing. If -I were illegitimate, and my father had basely abandoned me, I should -despise and hate him as the executioner of my mother; as a man without -heart and conscience, a vile egotist; and I should doubly love and -respect her who had been at once my mother and my father. Such are the -dictates of my conscience, my reason, and my heart. - -9. What is your marriage, _the first form given by Nature to the religion -of the human race_, in which woman is an idol who does the cooking and -mends the stockings of her priest? - -What is this institution, in which man is reputed to defend his wife and -children with his sword, whom the law defends, even against him? - -In which man is reputed to support by his labor those who often labor -more than he, or who bring him a dowry? - -_The wife and children are under the jurisdiction of the tribunal of -man!_ May the gods preserve us from this frightful return to the manners -and customs of the patriarchs and Romans. Women and children are under -the jurisdiction of the social tribunal, and it is safer for them: the -French wife has not at least to fear that her Abraham will sacrifice her -little Isaac, nor that her domestic despot, leaving the child on the -ground, like the ancient Roman, will thus condemn it to death. Society -has a heart and generous proctors who, happily, no longer see the family -tribunal in the same light as Proudhon. It is true that our author is an -Epimenides, awaking after a sleep of more than two thousand years. - -I have finished, Master; have you anything more to say? - -PROUDHON. Certainly. I have to speak of the sphere of woman. This sphere -is "the care of the household, the education of childhood, the -instruction of young girls under the superintendence of the magistrates, -the service of public charity. We dare not add the national festivals and -spectacles, which might be considered as the seed-time of love. - -"Man is the worker, woman the housewife. - -"The household is the full manifestation of woman. - -"For woman, the household is an honorable necessity. - -"As all her literary productions are always reduced to a domestic novel, -the whole value of which is to serve, through love and sentiment, to the -popularization of justice, so her industrial production is brought back -in conclusion, to the labors of the household; she will never depart from -this circle."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. Pardon my astonishment, Master, that woman, whose mind is -_irremediably false_, who is _immoral_, who composes nothing but -_medleys_, _monsters_, who _takes chimeras for realities, who does not -even know how to write a novel_, knows how, notwithstanding, by your own -admission, to write a novel in order to popularize justice through -sentiment and love. She therefore comprehends, feels, and loves justice? - -I remark next, that the cares of the household are _labor_; - -That education is _labor_; - -That the service of public charity is _labor_; - -That the arrangement and superintendence of festivals and spectacles -presume varied _labors_; - -That to popularize justice through a domestic novel is _labor_; - -Whence it follows that woman is a _worker_, that is, a useful producer; -she differs from man, therefore, merely in the kind of production; and we -have only to ascertain whether the labor of woman is as useful to society -as that of man. I charge myself, when you like, with establishing this -_equivalence_ by _facts_. - -I remark, in the second place, that the education of childhood, the -instruction of young girls, the service of public charity, the -arrangement of festivals and spectacles, the popularization of justice by -literature, do not form a part of the labors of the household; and that -woman, therefore, is not _merely housewife_. - -I remark, thirdly, that our female superintendents, merchants, artists, -accountants, clerks, and professors, are no more housewives than your -male superintendents, merchants, artists, book keepers, clerks, and -professors; that our female cooks and waiting-maids are no more -housewives, than your male cooks, bakers, confectioners, and footmen; -that, in all these functions, and in many others, women equal men, which -proves that they are not less fitted than you for employments that do not -pertain to the household, and that you are not less adapted than they to -those that do pertain to it. Rude facts thus stifle your affirmations, -and show us that woman may be _something else than housewife or -courtesan_. - -Lastly, Master, what is the position of all women relatively to all men? - -PROUDHON. Inferiority; for the entire feminine sex fills the place with -regard to the other sex, in certain respects, of the wife with regard to -the husband: this proceeds from the sum total of the respective -faculties. - -AUTHOR. So there is neither liberty nor equality even for the woman who -has not a father or husband? - -PROUDHON. "The truly free woman is the woman who is chaste; the chaste -woman is she who experiences no amorous emotion for any one, _not even -for her husband_."--_Vol._ III. - -AUTHOR. Such a woman is not chaste: she is a statue. Chastity being a -_virtue_, supposes the dominion of the reason and the moral sense over an -instinct: the chaste woman, therefore, is she who controls a certain -instinct, not she who is destitute of it. I add that the woman who yields -herself to her husband without attraction, plays the part of a -prostitute. I knew well that you understood nothing either of love or of -woman! - -Shall we, in conclusion, compare your doctrine concerning the right of -woman with that which you profess concerning right in general? - -PROUDHON. Willingly ... since I cannot do otherwise. - -AUTHOR. Do you admit that woman is identical in species with man? - -PROUDHON. Yes, only her faculties are less energetic. - -AUTHOR. I grant you this for the sake of discussion. Expound your general -theory concerning right, I will apply it to woman, and you shall draw the -conclusion. - - -VII. - -PROUDHON. "The law regulating only human relations, _it is the same for -all_; so that, to establish exceptions, it will be necessary to prove -that the individuals excepted are of superior order, or inferior to the -human species."--_Creation of Order in Humanity._ - -AUTHOR. Now you admit that woman is neither superior nor inferior to the -human species, but is identical in species with man; the law is therefore -the same for her as for man. - -PROUDHON. I draw the contrary conclusion, _because man is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "Neither figure, nor birth, nor _the faculties_, nor fortune, -nor rank, nor profession, nor talent, _nor anything which distinguishes -individuals apart_, establishes between them a difference of species: all -being men, and the law only regulating human relations, it is the same -for all."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. Now, woman is in essence identical with man; she differs from him -only in manners and qualities which, according to you, by no means make -her differ in essence; once more, therefore, the law is the same for her -as for man. - -PROUDHON. It is logical; but I conclude the contrary, _because man is the -stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "Social equilibrium is the equalization of the strong and the -weak. So long as the strong and the weak are not equal, they are -_strangers_, they cannot form an alliance, they are _enemies_."--1st -_Memoir on Property_. - -AUTHOR. Now, according to you, man is the strong and woman the weak of an -identical species; social equilibrium ought therefore to _equalize_ them, -that they may be neither strangers nor enemies. - -PROUDHON. It is logical; but I claim that they should be _made unequal_ -in society and in marriage. Man should have the prepotence, _because he -is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "From the identity of reason in all men, and the sentiment of -respect which leads them to maintain their mutual dignity at any cost, -follows equality before justice."--(_Justice_, _Vol._ III, etc.) All are -born free: between individual liberties there is no other judge than -equilibrium, _which is equality_; the identity of essence does not permit -the creation of a hierarchy.--_Vol._ II, the whole of the 8th _Study_. - -AUTHOR. Now, woman is in essence identical with man. She is born free; -between her and man there is, therefore, no other judge than equality; it -is not permissible, therefore, to establish a hierarchy between them. - -PROUDHON. It is logical. But I conclude, on the contrary, that it is -necessary to create a hierarchy between the sexes, and to give the -prepotence to man, _because he is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "The dignity of the human soul consists in being unwilling to -suffer any one of its powers _to subordinate_ the others, to require all -to be at the service of the collective whole; this is morality, this is -virtue. Whoever speaks of harmony or agreement, in fact, necessarily -supposes terms in opposition. Attempt a hierarchy, a prepotence! _you -think to create order, you create nothing but absolutism._"--_Justice_, -_Vol._ II. - -AUTHOR. Woman, according to you, forms with man an organism, that of -justice. Now, according to you, the two halves of the androgynus have -different qualities, which are required to harmonize with each other in -equality under pain of creating absolutism instead of order; the feminine -faculty is therefore required to form an equipoise with the masculine -faculty. - -PROUDHON. It is logical; but I conclude that the dignity of the -humanitary androgynus lies in subjugating the feminine faculty and -creating despotism, _because man is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "Justice is the respect spontaneously felt for and -_reciprocally guarantied_ to human dignity, in _whatever person_ and -whatever circumstance it may be found compromised."--_Justice_, _Vol._ I. - -AUTHOR. Now, woman is a human being, possessing a dignity which should be -respected and guarantied by the law of reciprocity; therefore one cannot -be wanting in respect to feminine dignity without being wanting in -justice. - -PROUDHON. It is logical; but although woman is a human being, identical -in species with man, and although I believe that there is no other basis -of right than equality, I nevertheless affirm that the dignity of woman -is inferior to that of man, _because he is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "Right is to each the faculty of exacting from others respect -for human dignity in his person," duty is "the obligation of each to -respect this dignity in another."--_Justice_, _Vol._ I. - -AUTHOR. Now, woman being identical in species, man possesses a dignity -_equal_ to hers; therefore she should be respected in her dignity, that -is, in her person, her liberty, her property, her affections; this is her -right as a human being, and man cannot deny it without failing in justice -and in his duty. - -PROUDHON. It is logical. But I claim that woman has not the right which -my principles attribute to her; that man alone has rights, _because man -is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "Liberty is an _absolute_ right, because it is to man what -impenetrability is to matter, a condition _sine qua non_ of -existence."--1st _Memoir on Property_. - -AUTHOR. Now, woman is a human being, she has therefore an _absolute_ -right to liberty, which is her condition _sine qua non_ of existence. - -PROUDHON. It is logical. But I conclude, on the contrary, that woman has -no need of liberty; that this condition _sine qua non_ of existence for -our species, does not regard one half of the species; that man alone -cannot exist without liberty, _because he is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. A contradiction, Master. - -PROUDHON. "Equality is an absolute right, _because without equality, -there is no society_."--_Id._ - -AUTHOR. Now, woman is a human and social being; she has an absolute -right, therefore, to this equality, without which she would be but a -Pariah in society. - -PROUDHON. It is logical. But I nevertheless conclude from this that woman -has no more right to equality than to liberty. That, although of the same -species as man, and consequently amenable to the law of equality, -nevertheless she is not amenable to it, and should be unequal and in -subjection to man, _because he is the stronger_. - -AUTHOR. Fie, Master! To contradict yourself thus is disgraceful to your -reputation. It would be better to maintain that woman has not the same -rights as man, because she is of a different species. - -PROUDHON. Woman is bound to feel that she does not possess a dignity -equal to that of man; in the association formed between them to produce -justice, _the notions of right and duty shall be no longer correlative_. -Man shall have all rights, and shall accept only such duties as it shall -please him to recognize. - -AUTHOR. Reflect that man, after having denied the dignity and the right -of woman, will labor to stultify her more and more in the interest of his -despotism! - -PROUDHON. That does not concern me: the family should be immured: the -husband is priest and king therein. If, as in the case with all liberty -oppressed, the woman grows restive, we will tell her _that she does not -know herself, that she is incapable of judging and ruling herself_; that -she is a cypher; we will outrage her in her moral worth; we will deny her -intellect and activity: and by dint of intimidating her, we will succeed -in forcing her to be silent: for man must remain master, _since he is -the stronger_! - -AUTHOR. Deny and insult us, Master, this does us no harm: the lords of -the Middle Age employed this method with their serfs, your sires ... we -are now indignant at them. Slaveholders employed and still employ this -method with the blacks, and the civilized world is indignant at them, -slavery is restricted, and is on the way to disappear. - -Meanwhile, I point out your contradictions to my readers; your authority -over minds will be thereby lessened, I hope. - -Those who claim, in accordance with the major of the preceding -syllogisms, that you found right upon identity of species, an abstraction -of individual qualities; that you believe right and duty correlative; -that you desire equality and liberty, will be quite as nearly right as -those who claim, in accordance with the conclusion of the same -syllogisms, that you base right upon force, superiority of faculties; -that you accept inequality and despotism, deny individual liberty and -social equality, and do not believe in the correlation of right and duty. - -If it is painful to you to have fallen into contradictions so monstrous, -believe that it is not less painful to me to be forced, in the interest -of my cause, to point them out to the world. - -Having taken in hand the cause of my sex, I was under obligations to -parry your attacks by turning against yourself your allegations against -us. - -It was necessary to do this, not by denials and declamations which prove -nothing, or by affirmations without proofs, according to your method of -proceeding; but by opposing to you science and facts; by making use only -of the rational method which you extol without employing it, by charging -you often with contradicting yourself when proofs _de facto_ would have -demanded too much detail and time. - -You accuse women of _taking chimeras for realities_. I have proved to you -that you deserve this reproach, since your theory is in contradiction to -science and facts. - -You accuse women of _erecting unreal analogies into principles_.... I -have proved that you have done so as well, in deducing from the -_pretended_ absence of physical germs in woman, the absence of -intellectual and moral germs. - -You accuse woman of _reasoning wrongly_.... I have brought you face to -face with your own principles, that you might draw from them -contradictory conclusions. - -You accuse woman of creating nothing but _medleys, monsters_.... The -anatomy of your theory proves that you know how to do so quite as well. - -You accuse woman of lacking intellect, of want of justice, virtue, -chastity.... I appeal from you to yourself, and you say positively the -contrary. - -Where you are fantastic, contradictory, I, _a woman_, appeal to logic. - -Where you are wanting in method, I, _a woman_, employ scientific and -rational method. - -Where you contradict your own principles, I appeal to these same -principles to judge and condemn you. - -Which of us two is the more reasonable and more rational? - -My modesty suffers, I acknowledge, at the thought that I have played the -part of _Minerva shaming Ulysses_ _of his paradoxes and his -profligacies_. At last, this tiresome part is ended! - -I have addressed so many harsh things to you in so firm and resolute a -tone, that I should be sorry to quit you without a few friendly words -coming from my heart. You ought to be fully convinced of my sincerity, -for you see that you have to deal with a woman who shrinks from no one; -who is never intimidated, however great may be her opponent, or whatever -name he may bear. You may be my adversary: I shall never be your enemy, -for I regard you as an honest man, a vigorous thinker, one of the glories -of France, one of the great men of our Comté, always so dear to the heart -of her children; lastly, one of the admirations of my youth. You and I -belong to the great army that is assaulting the citadel of abuse, and -endeavoring to mine and sap it; I do not shun this solidarity. Is it so -necessary that we should fight? Let us live in peace; I can entreat it of -you without stooping, since I do not fear you. Understand one thing that -I tell you without bitterness: that you are incapable of understanding -woman, and that by continuing the struggle, you will inevitably range her -under the banner of the anti-revolutionists. - -Your pride has set enmity between you and woman, and you have bruised her -heel: no one would be more sorry than I to see her crush your head. - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -COMTE. - - -What thought Auguste Comte, who died in September, 1857. - -To solve this question, it is necessary first to divide the man into two -parts; not as the wise king Solomon designed to divide the child disputed -for by two mothers, but in thought, by making of him two distinct men; a -philosopher and a revealer. - -M. Comte, who denied and insulted his master, Saint Simon, is only the -popularizer of his recently edited works: so much for the rational phase. - -What belongs to him exclusively is a socio-religious organization, which -cannot be the work of a healthy mind. - -What belongs to him exclusively, is a heavy, dry, insulting style, -arrogant to the point of being revolting, loaded and overloaded with -adjectives and adverbs. - -What belongs to him exclusively, are a few ideas that he has submerged in -volumes, containing not less than from seven hundred and fifty to eight -hundred pages, in small type. I do not advise you to peruse them, -readers, unless in your heart and soul you believe yourself deserving of -many years of purgatory, which you prefer to expiate on the earth ... I -do not know whether I ought to say above or below, since astronomy has -reversed the positions of the material and spiritual worlds. - -The disciples of Comte are divided into two schools: that of the -Positivist Philosophers, and that of the Priesthood. - -The first reject the religious organization of Comte, and are in reality -nothing but the children of modern Philosophy, and very estimable -adversaries of that nebulous thing which is called Metaphysics. We could -not therefore have them in sight in this article; so, let not M. Littré -and his honorable friends frown in reading us: we are about to find fault -only with the high priest and his priesthood. - -The doctrine of Comte concerning woman being connected with the whole of -his religious system, let us first say a word about this system. - -_There is no God; there is no soul_: the object of our adoration should -be Humanity, represented by the best of our species.... - -There are three social elements: woman, priest, and man. - -Woman is the moral providence, the guardian of morals. - -Had it not been for the wholly mystical love, I willingly believe, that -Comte had for Madame Clotilde de Vaux, it is probable that woman would -not have been the _moral Providence_; thanks to this love, she is nothing -less than this. We will see that neither is she anything more. - -Of a nature superior to that of man (in the opinion of Comte), she is -nevertheless subject to him, in consequence of a philosophical paradox -which we need not refute here. - -The function of woman is to render man _moral_; a task which she can -perform well only in private life; all social and sacerdotal functions -are therefore interdicted her. - -She should be _preserved from labor_, should renounce dowry and -inheritance; man is charged with maintaining her; daughter, she is -supported by her father or her brothers; wife, by her husband; widow, by -her sons. In default of her natural maintainers, the state, _on the -requisition of the priesthood_, provides for her wants. - -Marriage is instituted for the perfecting of the married couple, above -all, for that of the man: the reproduction of the species has so little -to do with its end, that the progress of science permits us to hope that, -some day, woman will be able _alone_ to reproduce humanity, so as to -realize and to generalize the hypothesis of the Virgin Mother. Then it -will be possible to regulate human production, by entrusting to none but -the most deserving women the task of conceiving children and bringing -them into the world, especially members of the priesthood. - -Divorce is not permitted, and widowhood is eternal for both sexes. - -Such, in brief, is the Comtist doctrine concerning woman, marriage and -procreation. As the reader might suspect us of malicious exaggeration, we -entreat him to read attentively the following pages, emanating from the -pen of the originator of the system. - -According to him, women have never demanded their emancipation; the men -who claim it for them are, after Comte's usual courteous style, nothing -but _utopists corrupted by retrogression_. "All transitional ages,' he -says, "have given rise, like our own, to sophistical aberrations -concerning the social condition of woman. But the natural law which -assigns to the effective sex an existence essentially domestic, has never -been materially altered.... Women were then (in antiquity) too low to -reject worthily, even by their silence, the doctoral aberrations of their -pretended defenders.... But among the moderns, the happy liberty of the -western women permits them to manifest a decisive repugnance which is -sufficient, in default of rational ratification, to neutralize these -wanderings of the mind, _inspired by the intemperance of the heart_. - -"Without discussing unreal retrograde utopias, it is of importance to -feel, the better to appreciate real order, that if women should ever -obtain this temporal equality demanded, without their consent, by their -pretended defenders, their social guaranties would suffer thereby as much -as their moral character. For they would find themselves thus subjected, -in the majority of occupations, to an active daily competition which they -could not sustain, while at the same time the practical rivalry would -corrupt the principal sources of mutual affection. Man should support -woman, such is the natural law of our species."--_Politique Positive_, t. -I. - -"It is necessary to consider the just independence of the affective sex -as founded upon two connected conditions, its universal affranchisement -from labor outside the household, and its free renunciation of all -wealth.... - -"Domestic priestesses of humanity, born to modify by affection the -necessary reign of force, they should shun, as radically degrading, all -participation in command."--_Id._ t. IV. - -"The moral degradation appears to me still greater when woman enriches -herself by her own labor. The continued eagerness of gain makes her then -lose even that spontaneous kindness which preserves the other type in the -midst of its dissipations. - -"No worse industrial chiefs can exist than women."--_Caté._ _Pos._ - -So ladies, ye who prefer labor to prostitution, who pass days and nights -in providing for the wants of your family, it is understood of course -that you _are degraded_; a woman ought not to do anything; respect and -honor belong to idleness. - -You, Victoria of England, Isabella of Spain,--you command, therefore you -_are radically degraded_. - -M. Comte pretends that masculine superiority is incontestable in all that -concerns the properly called "source of command ... that the intellect of -man is stronger, more extended than that of woman. - -"A healthy appreciation of the universal order will make the affective -sex comprehend how important _submission_ is to dignity. - -"The priesthood will make women feel the merit of _submission_, by -developing this _admirable_ maxim of Aristotle: _the chief strength of -woman consists in surmounting the difficulty of obeying_; their education -will have prepared them to comprehend that all dominion, far from really -elevating, necessarily degrades them, by depreciating their chief worth -so as to expect from strength the ascendancy which is due to love -alone."--_Ibid._ - -Here are a few pages from the system of Politique Positive, t. IV., which -are too curious not to interest the reader. - -"The better to characterize feminine independence, I think it best to -introduce a bold hypothesis, which human progress perhaps will realize, -although it is my business neither to examine when nor how. - -"If the masculine apparatus contributes to our generation only after a -simple excitement, derived from its organic destination, the possibility -may be conceived of replacing this stimulant _by another or several -others, of which the woman would dispose at will_. The absence of such a -faculty among the neighboring species cannot be sufficient to interdict -it to the most eminent and most modifiable race.... - -"If feminine independence can ever reach this limit, in accordance with -the sum total of moral, intellectual, and even material progress, the -social function of the affective sex will be found notably improved. Then -all fluctuation between the animal appreciation which still prevails, and -the noble doctrine systematized by positivism, would cease. The most -essential production (that of our species) would become independent of -the caprices of a perturbating instinct, the normal repression of which -has hitherto constituted the principal obstacle to human discipline. Such -a privilege would be naturally found transferred, with full -responsibility, to the organs best fitted to its use, alone capable of -guarding themselves from vicious impulses, so as to realize all the -advantages that it permits." - -Which means in good English, my female readers, that perhaps the time -will come when you will create children without the co-operation of these -gentlemen; that this function will be confided to those among you who -shall be most worthy of it, and that they will be held responsible for -the imperfection of the product. - -"Thenceforth," resumes the author, "the utopia of the Virgin Mother will -become to the purest and most eminent an ideal goal, directly suited to -sum up human perfection, thus carried even to systematizing procreation, -while ennobling it.... Success depends most of all on the general -development of the relations between the soul and the body, its continued -search (that of the problem of fruitful virginity) will worthily -institute the systematic study of vital harmony, by procuring to it at -once the noblest aim and the best organs."--_Ibid._ - -Translated: the study of the relations of the brain with the body will -lead us to discover the means of procreating children without the -co-operation of man; this is the noblest aim of this study, as the -faculty of being a virgin mother should be the ideal which the purest and -most eminent women should seek to attain. - -"Thus," continues M. Comte, "I am led to represent the utopia of the -Virgin Mother as the synthetic résume of positive religion, all the -phases of which it combines."--_Ibid._ - -Translation: To procreate children without the concurrence of man, _sums -up positive religion, and combines all its phases_. - -This may be very fine, but as to being _rational_ and _positive_--what do -you think, readers? - -"The rationality of the problem," adds the author, "is founded upon the -determination of the true office of the masculine apparatus, designed -especially to supply to the blood an excitative fluid, capable of -strengthening all the vital operations, whether animal or organic. In -comparison with this general service, the special use of the fecundative -stimulus becomes more and more secondary in proportion as the organism is -elevated. It may thus be conceived that in the noblest species, this -liquid ceases to be indispensable to the awakening of the germ, which may -result artificially from several other, and even from material sources, -especially from a better reaction of the nervous upon the vascular -system."--_Ibid._ - -All this would be possible, I grant, _if_ the fluid of which you speak, -High Priest, had, above all, the general function which you attribute to -it; - -_If_ the reproduction of our species by the co-operation of the two sexes -were not a _law_; - -_If_ we could preserve a species while destroying its law; - -_If_ facts did not contradict the possibility of the hypothesis. - -Now, to place an _if_ before a natural law and the phenomena which are -its expression, is only a gross absurdity: we explain laws, we do not -reform them without profoundly modifying the being that they govern; we -do not destroy without destroying this being: for the individual being is -_the law in form_. - -The author dwells as follows on the consequences of the absurd -hypothesis. - -"Thence it may be conceived that civilization not only disposes man -better to appreciate woman, but augments the participation of this sex in -human reproduction, which ought, finally, _to emanate from it alone_. - -"Regarded individually, such a modification ought to improve the cerebral -and corporal constitution of both sexes, by developing therein continued -chastity, the importance of which has been felt more and more by -universal instinct, even during irregularities.--p. 277. - -"Considered domestically, this transformation would render the -constitution of the human family more in conformity with the general -spirit of sociocracy, by completing the just emancipation of woman, thus -made, even physically, independent of man. The normal ascendancy of the -affective sex would be no longer contestable with respect to children -_emanated from it exclusively_. - -"But the principal result would consist in perfecting the fundamental -institution of marriage (the improvement of the married couple without -sexual motive), the positive theory of which would then become -unexceptionable. Thus purified, the conjugal tie would experience an -amelioration as marked as when Polygamy was replaced by Monogamy: for we -should generalize the utopia of the Middle Age, in which Maternity was -reconciled with Virginity. - -"Regarded civilly, this institution alone permits the regulation of the -most important of productions, which can never become sufficiently -susceptible of systematization, so long as it shall be accomplished in -delirium and without responsibility. - -"Reserved to its best organs, this function would perfect the human race -by better determining the transmission of ameliorations due to external -influences, both social and personal.... Systematic procreation coming to -remain more or less concentrated among the better types, the comparison -of the two cases would give rise not only to valuable enlightenment, but -also to an important institution which would procure to sociocracy the -principal advantage of theocracy. For the development of the new mode -would soon cause a non-hereditary caste to spring up, better adapted than -the common populace _for the recruital of spiritual and even temporal -chiefs_, whose authority would then rest on a truly _superior_ origin, -which would not shun investigation. - -All these indications will suffice to show the value of the utopia of the -Virgin Mother, destined to procure to Positivism a synthetic résume, -equivalent to that which the institution of the Eucharist furnishes to -Catholicism."--_Ibid._ - -It is much to be feared, alas! that the disciples of this great man, -however ardent seekers of _vital harmony_ they may be, will never find -the _synthetic résume_ of Positivism, the _equivalent_ of the Eucharist: -and it will be a great pity: to order children as we order shoes, and -leave them on the mother's hands when they do not suit, would be very -convenient. - -And what, I ask you, will the future leaders of humanity do, if they can -only obtain respect and obedience on the condition of proving that they -are _sons of virgins_? - -But we will not jest with so grave a personage as the High Priest of -Humanity: we will only say in passing, that never was atheist seen to -show himself more profoundly a Christian through contempt for works of -the flesh. Hear what he says on page 286 of the work before cited: - -"Useless to individual conservation, the sexual instinct co-operates only -in an _accessory and even equivocal_ manner to the propagation of the -species. Philosophers truly freed from superstition should regard it more -and more as tending above all to disturb the principal design of the -vivifying fluid. But without waiting for the feminine utopia to be -realized, we may determine, _if not the atrophy, at least the inertia of -this cerebral superfoetation_, with more facility than is indicated by -the insufficient efforts of theologism. While positive education will -make the vices of such an instinct everywhere felt, and _will raise up -the continued hope of its desuetude_, the whole final system ought -naturally to institute a revulsive treatment with respect to it, more -efficacious than Catholic austerities. For the universal aspiration of -domestic existence and of public life will develop the sympathetic -faculties to such a degree, that sentiment, intellect, and activity will -always concur to stigmatize and repress the most perturbing of selfish -propensities." - -Despite all this _aspiration_, and all these stigmas, do not trust to it, -High Priest! Be advised by me, use camphor, and plenty of it; scatter it -everywhere as a certain Amphitryon scattered nutmeg. - -It is in prevision of the excommunications hurled by you against this -_vile_, this _useless_ instinct, that Nature has been prodigal of -camphor. - -Upon the whole, you see, my female readers, that if M. Comte believes us -weaker than man in body, mind, and character, in return, he believes us -better. - -We are moral providence, guardian angels: he dreams of affranchisement -for us through the subversion of a natural law. - -But meanwhile he places us under the yoke of man by exempting us from -labor; - -He rivets our chains by persuading us cajolingly to despoil ourselves of -our property; - -He says to us in the gentlest voice imaginable: never command: it would -degrade you; - -Your great strength is in obeying him whom _it is your destiny to -direct_. - -You will be naught in the temple, naught in the state. - -In the family, you are domestic priestesses, the auxiliaries of the -priesthood. - -Three sacraments out of nine are refused you: that of destiny, because, -for you, it is confounded with that of marriage; that of retirement, -because you have no profession; lastly, that of incorporation, because a -woman cannot, in herself, merit a personal and public apotheosis. - -If you have been worthy auxiliaries, you shall be interred near those -whom you shall have influenced, like their other useful auxiliaries: the -horse, the dog, the cow, and the ass; and mention shall be made of you -when honors shall be paid to the member of humanity to whom you shall -have belonged. - -Shall we refute such doctrines? No. Our answer to them finds a fitter -place in the article devoted to M. Proudhon, who has drawn largely from -the doctrine of M. Comte. - -As to the priests who continue the teachings of their master, it suffices -to refer them to what I said to M. Comte in the _Revue Philosophique_ of -December, 1855. - -The women of the present time are in general intelligent, because they -receive an education superior to that of their mothers. The majority of -them devote themselves to an active life either in the arts or the -trades; men acknowledge them as their competitors in these, and even -confess that they are superior in management. No man, worthy of the name, -would dare contest that woman is his equal, and that the day of her civil -emancipation is close at hand. - -Women, on their side, more independent and more deserving, without having -lost anything of their grace and gentleness, no longer accept the famous -axiom: _man should support woman_; still less do they accept the -_admirable_ maxim of Aristotle, fit for the slaves of the gyneceum. Be -sure that every _true_ woman will laugh at the raiment of clouds which -you pretend to give her, at the incense with which you wish to asphyxiate -her; for she cares no longer for adoration. She wishes to carry her -intellect and activity unfettered into spheres suited to her aptitudes; -she wishes to aid her brother, man, in clearing up the field of theory, -the domain of practice; she claims that every human being is the judge of -his own aptitudes; she does not recognize in any man or in any doctrine -the right of fixing her place, and of marking out her road. Through the -labor of war was the patriciate constituted; through peaceful labor was -servitude emancipated; _through labor_, also, does woman claim to conquer -her civil rights. - -Such is what many women are, what they wish to be to-day; see if it is -not madness to seek to revive the gyneceum and the atrium for these -women, impregnated with the ideas of the eighteenth century, wrought upon -by the ideas of '89 and of the modern reformers. To say to such women -that they shall have no place in the state, nor in marriage, nor in -science, nor in art, nor in the trades, nor even in your subjective -paradise, is something so monstrous that I cannot conceive, for my part, -how aberration could go so far. - -You will no longer find an interlocutress to say: "that a woman can -scarcely ever deserve a personal and public apotheosis ... that views -involving the fullest experience and the profoundest reflection are -_naturally interdicted_ to the sex whose contemplations can scarcely go -beyond the circle of private life _with success_ ... that _the moral -degradation of woman is_ _still greater when she enriches herself by her -own labor_ ... that there are no worse industrial chiefs than women...." -And if any woman behind the times should be so imbecile and immodest as -to hold such language, all men of any worth whatever would regard her -only with disdain. - -But you, who wish to annihilate woman, from what principle do you draw -such a consequence? That she is an affective power, you say ... yes, but, -as to that, man is such, likewise; and is not woman, as well as he, alike -intellect and activity? By reason of a purely accidental predominance, -can one half of the human species be banished beyond the clouds of -sentimentality? And ought not all serious discipline to tend to develop, -not one phase of the being, but the ponderation, the harmony of all its -phases? Want of harmony is the source of disorder and deformity. The -woman who is solely sentimental commits irreparable errors; the man who -is solely rational is a species of monster, and the person in whom -activity predominates is but a brute. Since you believe in Gall and -Spurzheim, you know that the encephalon of the two sexes is alike, that -it is modifiable in both, that all education is founded on this -modificability; why has it never occurred to you that if man _en masse_ -is more rational than woman, it is because education, laws and custom -have developed in him the anterior lobes of the brain; while in woman, -education, laws and custom develop especially the posterior lobes of this -organ; and why, having established these facts, have you not been led to -conclude that, since organs are developed only in consequence of the -excitants applied to them, it is probable that man and woman, subjected -to the same cerebral excitants, would be developed in the same manner, -with the shades of difference peculiar to each individuality; and that -for woman to be developed harmoniously under her three aspects, she must -manifest herself socially under three aspects? Be sure, sir, your -principle is thrice false, thrice in contradiction to science and reason; -in the presence of the physiology of the brain, all theories of -classification fall to the ground: before the nervous system, women are -the equals of men: they can be their inferiors only before muscular -supremacy, attacked by the invention of powder, and about to be reduced -to dust by the triumph of mechanism. - -I should say many more things to you, sir, were not this critical sketch -too long already; but imperfect though it may be, having to my mind only -the meaning of a woman's protest against your doctrines, I shall pause -here. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -LEGOUVÉ. - - -The inheritor of a name which commands respect, Ernest Legouvé, an -elegant, eloquent, and impassioned author, has written a Moral History of -Women, whence exhales a perfume of purity and love which refreshes the -heart and calms the soul. - -In every page of this book, we detect the impulse of an upright heart and -lofty mind, indignant at injustice, oppression, and moral deformity. The -author has deserved well of women, and it is with pleasure that I seize -the opportunity of thanking him in the name of those who, at the present -time, are struggling in various countries for the emancipation of half -the human race. - -What is the object of Legouvé's work? We will let him tell it himself. - -"The object of this book is summed up in these words: to lay claim to -feminine liberty in the name of the two very principles of the -adversaries of this liberty: tradition and difference (of the sexes), -that is to say, to show in tradition progress, and in difference -equality. - -God created the human species double, we utilize but half of it; Nature -says two, we say one; we must agree with Nature. Unity itself, instead of -perishing thereby, would only then be true unity; that is, not the -sterile absorption of one of two terms for the benefit of the other, but -the living fusion of two fraternal individualities, increasing the common -power with all the force of their individual development. - -"The feminine spirit is stifled, but not dead.... We cannot annihilate at -our pleasure a force created by God, or extinguish a torch lighted by his -hand; but turned aside from its purpose, this force, instead of creating, -destroys; this torch consumes instead of giving light. - -"Let us then open wide the gates of the world to this new element: we -have need of it." - -Then, examining the position of women, the author adds: "No history -presents, we believe, more iniquitous prejudices to combat, more secret -wounds to heal. - -"Shall we speak of the present? As daughters, no public education for -them, no professional instruction, no possible life without marriage, no -marriage without a dowry. Wives--they do not legally possess their -property, they do not possess their persons, they cannot give, they -cannot receive, they are under the ban of an eternal interdict. -Mothers--they have not the legal right to direct the education of their -children, they can neither marry them, nor prevent them from marrying, -nor banish them from the paternal house nor retain them there. Members of -the commonwealth, they can neither be the guardians of other orphans than -their sons or their grand-sons, nor take part in a family council, nor -witness a will; they have not the right of testifying in the state to the -birth of a child! Among the working people, what class is most wretched? -Women. Who are they that earn from sixteen to eighteen sous for twelve -hours of labor? Women. Upon whom falls all the expense of illegitimate -children? Upon women. Who bear all the disgrace of faults committed -through passion? Women." - -Then, after showing the position of rich women, he continues: "And thus, -slaves everywhere, slaves of want, slaves of wealth, slaves of ignorance, -they can only maintain themselves great and pure by force of native -nobleness and almost superhuman virtue. Can such domination endure? -Evidently not. It necessarily falls before the principle of natural -equity; and the moment has come to claim for women their share of rights -and, above all, of duties; to demonstrate what subjection takes away from -them, and what true liberty will restore to them; to show, in short, the -good that they do not and the good they might do." - -The history of the past shows us woman more and more oppressed in -proportion as we trace back the course of centuries. "The French -Revolution (itself), which renewed the whole order of things in order to -affranchise men, did nothing, we may say, for the affranchisement of -women.... '91 respected almost all of the feminine disabilities of '88, -and the Consulate confirmed them in the civil code." - -This, in Legouvé's opinion was the fault of the philosophy of the -eighteenth century, for "woman is, according to Diderot, a courtesan; -according to Montesquieu, an attractive child; according to Rousseau, an -object of pleasure to man; according to Voltaire, nothing.... Condorcet -and Sieyès demanded even the political emancipation of woman; but their -protests were stifled by the powerful voices of the three great -continuers of the eighteenth century, Mirabeau, Danton, and Robespierre." - - -Under the Consulate, "feminine liberty had no more decided enemy (than -Bonaparte:) a southerner, the spirituality of woman was lost on him; a -warrior, he saw in the family a camp, and there required, before all -else, discipline; a despot, he saw in it a state, and there required, -before all else, obedience. He it was who concluded a discussion in -council with these words: _There is one thing that is not French; that a -woman can do as she pleases_.... Always man (in the thought of -Bonaparte), always the honor of man! As to the happiness of woman, it is -not a single time in question (in the civil code.)" - -It is in behalf of the weakness of women, it is in behalf of tradition -which shows them constantly subordinate, it is in behalf of their -household functions, that the adversaries of the emancipation of women -oppose it. "To educate them is to deform them; and they do not want their -playthings spoiled," says M. Legouvé, ironically. He then continues in a -serious strain: "What matters tradition to us? What matters history to -us? There is an authority more powerful than the consent of the human -race: _it is the Right_. Though a thousand more centuries of servitude -should be added to those which have already passed, their accord could -not banish the primordial right which rules over everything, the absolute -right of perfecting one's self which every being has received from the -sole fact that he has been created." - -To those who base their opposition on the domestic functions of woman, he -answers: "If there (in the household) is their kingdom, then there they -should be queens; their own faculties assure them there of authority, and -their adversaries are forced, by their own principles, to emancipate -them as daughters, as wives, as mothers. Or, on the contrary, it is -sought to extend their influence, to give them a rôle in the state, _and -we believe that they should have one_: well; it is also in this -dissimilarity (between the two sexes), that it is fitting to seek it. -When two beings are of value to each other, it is almost always because -they differ from, not because they resemble each other. Far from -dispossessing men, the mission of women therefore would be to do what men -leave undone, to aspire to empty places, in short, to represent in the -commonwealth the spirit of woman." - -As is evident, Legouvé demands the civil emancipation of woman in the -name of the eternal Right, in the name of the happiness of the family, in -the name of the commonwealth; their long standing oppression is an -iniquitous fact, and he casts blame on all who have perpetuated it. This -blame from a man of heart and justice may perhaps have some weight with -those women who are so much accustomed to bondage that they do not blush -at it--that they even no longer feel it! - -In his first book, "The Daughter," which is divided into seven chapters, -Legouvé takes the child from her birth; he shows her made inferior in the -ancient religions and systems of legislation by Menu, by Moses, at Rome, -at Sparta, at Athens, and under the feudal régime; and he asks why, even -in our days, the birth of a daughter is received with a sort of disfavor. -It is because she will neither continue the name nor the works of her -father, says he; it is because her future gives rise to a thousand -anxieties. "Life is so rude and so uncertain for a girl! Poor, how many -chances of misery! Rich, how many chances of moral suffering! If she is -to have only her labor for a maintenance, how shall we give her an -occupation that will support her in a state of society in which women -scarcely earn wherewith not to die? If she has no dowry, how can she -marry in this world in which woman, never representing anything but a -passive being, is forced to buy a husband?... From this _début_, and in -this child's cradle, we have found and caught a glimpse of all the chains -that await women: insufficiency of education for the rich girl; -insufficiency of wages for the poor girl; exclusion from the greater part -of the professions; subordination in the conjugal abode." - -In the second chapter, the author shows by what gradations the daughter, -deprived of the right of inheritance, has come in our times to share -equally with her brothers; then, passing to the right of education, he -answers those who pretend that to give a solid education to woman would -be to corrupt her and to injure the family: "The diversity of their -nature (man and woman) being developed by the identity of their studies, -it may be said that women would become so much the more fully women in -proportion as they received a masculine education. - -"Well! it is in the name of the family, in the name of the salvation of -the family, in the name of maternity, of marriage, of the household, that -a solid and earnest education must be demanded for girls.... Without -knowledge, no mother is completely a mother, without knowledge no wife is -truly a wife. The question is not, in revealing to the feminine intellect -the laws of nature, to make all our girls astronomers or physicians; do -we see all men become Latinists by spending ten years of their life in -the study of Latin? The question is to strengthen their minds by -acquaintance with science; and to prepare them to participate in all the -thoughts of their husbands, all the studies of their children.... -Ignorance leads to a thousand faults, a thousand errors in the wife. The -husband who scoffs at science might have been saved by it from dishonor." - -Insisting upon the rights of woman, the author adds: "As such (the work -of God) she has the right to the most complete development of her mind -and heart. Away then with these vain objections, drawn from the laws of a -day! It is in the name of eternity that you owe her enlightenment." -Further on, he exclaims indignantly: "What! the state maintains a -university for men, a polytechnic school for men, academies of art and -trades for men, agricultural schools for men--and for woman, what has it -established? Primary schools! And even these were not founded by the -State, but by the Commune. No inequality could be more humiliating. There -are courts and prisons for women, there should be public education for -women; you have not the right to punish those whom you do not instruct!" -M. Legouvé demands, in consequence, public education for girls in -athenæums, "which, by thorough instruction with respect to France, her -laws, her annals, and her poetry, shall make her women French women in -truth. The country alone can teach love of country." - -Ancient religions and systems of legislation punished misdemeanors and -crimes against the purity of women severely (says M. Legouvé in his -fourth chapter). Our code, profoundly immoral, does not punish seduction, -and punishes corruption only derisively, and violation insufficiently. To -declare void the promise of marriage is fearful immorality; to permit no -investigation of paternity and to admit that of maternity, is as cruel -as it is immoral. If the solicitude of the legislator for property be -compared with his solicitude for purity, we shall soon see how little the -law cares for the latter. "The law recognizes as criminal only a single -kind of robbery of honor, _violation_, but it defines, pursues and -punishes two kinds of robbery of money, _larceny_ and _fraud_; there are -thieves of coin, there are no sharpers in chastity." - -When a man has seduced a girl fifteen years old under promise of -marriage, he has "a right to come before a magistrate and say: This is my -signature, it is true; but I refuse to acknowledge it; a debt of love is -void in law." - -The indignant author exclaims, further on: "Thus, therefore, on every -side, in practice and in theory, in the world and in the law, for the -rich as for the poor, we see abandonment of public purity, and a loose -rein to all ungoverned or depraved desires.... Manufacturers seduce their -workwomen, foremen of workshops discharge young girls who will not yield -to them, masters corrupt their servant maids. Of 5083 lost women, -enumerated by the grave Parent-Duchâtelet at Paris in 1830, 285 were -servants, seduced by their masters, and discarded. Clerks, merchants, -officers, students deprave poor country girls and bring them to Paris, -where they abandon them, and prostitution gathers them up.... At Rheims, -at Lille, in all the great centres of industry, are found organized -companies for the recruital of the houses of debauchery of Paris." - -With the indignation of an upright man, M. Legouvé adds: "Punish the -guilty woman if you will, but punish also the man! She is already -punished; punished by abandonment, punished by dishonor, punished by -remorse, punished by nine months of suffering, punished by the burden of -rearing a child: let him then be smitten in turn; or else, it is not -public decency that you are protecting, as you say, it is masculine -sovereignty, in its vilest form: seigniorial right! - -"Impunity assured to men doubles the number of illegitimate children. -Impunity fosters libertinism; libertinism enervates the race, wastes -fortunes and blights offspring. Impunity fosters prostitution; -prostitution destroys the public health, and makes a profession of -idleness and license. Impunity, in short, surrenders half the human race -as a prey to the vices of the other half: behold its condemnation in a -single word." - -In the fifth chapter, the author finding, with reason, that girls are -married too young, desires that they should not enter upon family duties -until twenty-two years old; works of charity, solid studies, innocent -pleasures, and the ideal of pure love will suffice to keep them pure till -this age. "If the young maiden learns that nothing is more fatal to this -divine sentiment (love) than the ephemeral fancies which dare call -themselves by its name; if she perceives in it one of those rare -treasures which we win only by conquering them, which we keep only by -deserving them; if she knows that the heart which would be worthy to -receive it must be purified like a sanctuary and enlarged like a temple; -then be sure that this sublime ideal, engraven within her, will disgust -her, by its beauty alone, with the vain images that profane or parody it; -idols are not worshipped when God is known." - -"What is marriage?" asks M. Legouvé. - -"The union of two free beings, forming an alliance in order to perfect -themselves through love." Neither antiquity nor the Middle Age considered -it in this light. The father, in ancient times, transmitted to the -husband his right of property in his daughter in consideration of a -certain sum. At Athens, the daughter, even when married, formed part of -the paternal inheritance, and was bound to leave her husband to espouse -the heir. At Rome, the father, after having given his daughter in -marriage, had the power to take her back and to espouse her to another. -Among the barbarians, she belonged to him who paid the _mundium_ to her -father. Under the feudal system, the law disposed also of the daughter -without her consent. The French Revolution emancipated her in this -respect; she is required now to consent to her marriage; but the customs -of the age take from her the benefit of this emancipation; she is married -too young to know what she is doing, and interest almost always -determines her parents to give her in marriage. For woman to profit by -her legal emancipation, she should be at least twenty-two years old when -she marries; she should make her choice freely; and her relatives should -content themselves with keeping her apart from those whom she ought not -to choose, and should only enlighten and counsel her; for on the love -between the married couple depends the happiness and virtue of the wife. - -Examining next the origin of the dower, the transferral of the dowry, the -betrothal and the marriage, he shows the _mundium_ paid at first to the -father or the brother; then later, to the maiden, becoming, with the rest -of the nuptial gifts, the origin of the dower, which he wishes to see -made obligatory in modern times. Passing to the dowry, he proves that, -becoming by degrees a custom among the Romans, it was at first the -property of the husband; then, as the world progressed, it became the -property of the wife. Our code fully protects the dowry; but the law -should oblige wealthy parents to endow their daughters so that they can -marry. In olden times, a maiden was betrothed by pledges exchanged by the -father and the man who asked her in marriage; at a later date the pledge -was given to the maiden instead of the father, and the law intervened to -render obligatory promises of marriage. At the present day, in France, -there are no longer betrothed, but future spouses. - -In his second book, the author distinguishes the beloved one from the -mistress, the adoration of pure from that of sensual love; the first -produces goodness, patriotism, and respect for woman; the second regards -her only as an object of pleasure and of disdain. Antiquity had no -knowledge of pure love; the Middle Age, which comprehended it, was -divided equally between it and sensual love; to-day, we have learned to -comprehend that the two loves should be united; that the beloved and the -mistress should make one in the person of the wife. - -The third book, "The Wife," is divided into seven chapters. - -The subordination of woman in marriage, with contempt for the mother, -arose from two erroneous ideas: the inferiority of her nature; her -passivity in the reproduction of the species, in which she performed the -part of the earth with respect to the reception of germs. Modern science -has destroyed these bases of inferiority by demonstrating: 1st, that the -human germ, before taking its definitive form, passes, in the bosom of -its mother, through progressive degrees of animal life; 2d, that in all -species, both animal and vegetable, the females are the conservers of the -race, which they bring to their own type. - -Among the Romans, two forms of marriage placed the wife, soul, body and -estate, _in the hands_ of her husband; in a third form, which left her in -her father's family, she received a dowry, inherited, and administered -her property. Barbarism and feudality made the wife a ward, the husband -an administrator, and a step was taken towards the equality of the -spouses by the institution of _acquêts_, or property belonging to both, -though obtained by but one. To-day, the maiden is married sometimes under -the dotal system, occasionally under that of the separation of property, -and chiefly under that of communion of goods. This last, which is the -rule, permits the husband to dispose of the property of his partner, to -sell the household furniture, to take possession of the very jewels of -his wife to adorn his mistress. "Thus, this law respects no dignity, no -delicacy, nothing whatever," says M. Legouvé. The omnipotence of the -husband is a crime of the law in every point of view; it is in manifest -violation of the modern principle, which exacts that all authority shall -be limited and placed under surveillance. "To surrender to the husband -the fortune of the wife is to condemn her to an eternal moral minority, -to create him absolute master of the actions and almost of the soul of -his companion." The author next addresses himself to those who pretend to -justify marital omnipotence by the incapacity of woman: "In vain do facts -protest against this alleged incapacity; in vain does reality say: To -whom is the prosperity of most of our commercial houses due? To women. -Who establish, who superintend the thousands of establishments of -millinery and objects of taste? Women. By whom are the boarding-schools, -the farms, often even, the manufactories, sustained? By women. It matters -not, the Code denies to the wife the foresight to preserve, the judgment -to administer, even the maternal tenderness to economize, and the -marriage certificate becomes the expression of this disdainful phrase: -the most reasonable woman never attains the good sense of a boy fourteen -years of age." How shall we set to work to remedy this iniquitous and -shameful state of affairs? The property of the partners should be divided -into three shares: one for the wife, to be placed at her disposal five -years after marriage, one for the husband, and a third common to both, to -be administered by the husband under the direction of a family council, -which council, in case of incapacity or waste, shall have the right -provisionally to take away the management from him, to entrust it to his -wife. - -If anything is iniquitous and revolting, it is the power of the husband -over the person and the actions of his wife; the right over her of -correction, still tolerated in our days. There must be a directing power -in the household; the husband must be the depositary of this power, which -should be limited, and controlled by the family council. Legal -omnipotence demoralizes the husband, who believes in the end in the -lawfulness of his despotism. It is said that custom establishes precisely -the contrary of what the laws prescribe: this is generally true, but it -is at the expense of the moral character of the wife, thus forced to have -recourse to artifice. "Restore liberty to women, since liberty is truth!" -exclaims Legouvé. "This will be, at the same time, to affranchise man. -Servitude always creates two slaves: he who holds the chain and he who -wears it." - -Antiquity, the Middle Age, and the centuries nearer our own, punished the -adultery of the wife severely, even cruelly, yet did not admit that a man -could become guilty of this offence with respect to his spouse. Our -present code acknowledges, indeed, that the husband can commit adultery, -but only in case he maintains his mistress under the conjugal roof; the -wife is an adulteress everywhere, and is punished severely; as to the -husband, his punishment is a farce. "Such impunity," says M. Legouvé, "is -not only injurious to order, it is an insult to public morals, _it is a -lesson of debauchery, given by the law itself_." If, by adultery, the -wife wounds the heart of an honorable man, introduces false heirs into -the family, she at least can abstract nothing from the common fortune; -while the husband, in the same case, can ruin the family, while -increasing the number of natural children and provoking his wife to wrong -by his neglect and brutality. The husband, besides, is more criminal than -the wife, for he seeks adultery, while, on the contrary, it comes to the -wife under a thousand attractive forms. Notwithstanding, the adultery of -the woman deserves greater punishment than that of the man.... Ah! M. -Legouvé, is this logic? - -The Oriental wife was and is still, a slave, a generatrix; the Roman wife -was something more than this; the wife of the Middle Age owed her body to -her husband, but the Courts of Love had decided that her affections -could, nay, should belong to another. To-day, the ideal of marriage is -enlarged; we comprehend that it is the fusion of two souls, a school for -mutual perfection, and that the two spouses should belong wholly to each -other. - -We have been led to this new ideal of the conjugal union by the -civilizing struggles of the church against divorce and repudiation. In -its nature, marriage is indissoluble, but in the existing state of things -in which the ideal is but very exceptionally realized, the legislator has -deemed it right to render possible the separation of the spouses: this -measure is immoral and unfortunate both for the partners and for their -children. The only remedy for family difficulties is _divorce_, a -question with which the church has nothing to do. - -The whole of the last chapter of the third book is a condemnation of -fickleness in love, and an affirmation of the indissolubility of marriage -and of the sanctity of the conjugal tie. - -The fourth book, "The Mother," comprises six chapters. - -Until a late day, it was believed that woman was only the soil in which -man, the creator of the species, deposited the human germ. Modern science -has overthrown this false doctrine, and elevated woman by demonstrating -these three incontestable facts: 1st, that, dating from the moment of -conception, the human germ passes through successive degrees of animal -life until it acquires its proper form; 2d, that the female sex is the -conserver of the race, since it always brings them to its own type, as -well in the human as in the animal and vegetable species; 3d, that woman -is physiologically of a nature superior to man, since it is now -demonstrated that the higher the respiratory apparatus is placed in the -organism, the more elevated is the species in the scale of beings; and -that woman breathes from the upper, and man from the lower part of the -lungs. - -Maternity does not give to women rights over their children, but -contributes, notwithstanding, to their emancipation; thus, in India, a -woman who had borne sons could not be repudiated, and at Rome, a woman -emerged from tutelage at maternity. - -It is iniquitous to give the paternal authority to the father alone; the -mother should have an equal right with him over her children. Supremacy -of direction belongs indeed to the father, but this direction should be -limited and superintended by a family council, and transferred to the -mother in case of the unworthiness of her spouse. - -The education of the children belongs of right to the mother, because she -understands them best, and because it is necessary that she should -acquire that entire influence over her sons which she will need -afterwards to counsel and to console them. Public education is not fit -for boys until they have attained their twelfth year; younger, it is -injurious in its results to their character. The author demands that the -maternal grand-parents shall not be made inferior in guardianship, as is -the case now in the law; and he considers it as sacrilege not to give to -the mother an equal right with respect to consent to the marriage of -their children. - -Legitimate maternity is happiness to the rich woman; want, often grief, -to the poor woman. Illegitimate maternity is to women of all ranks a -source of sorrow, shame and crime. To the rich girl it is dishonor, an -eternal bar to marriage; to the poor girl it is poverty, shame if she -keeps her child; crime, if she destroys it. Yet the law dares grant -impunity to the corrupter, to the seducer, to the man who has not -hesitated to sacrifice to a moment of passion the whole future of a -woman, the whole future of a child! The State ought to come to the aid of -all poor mothers, because it is for its interest that the race should be -strong and vigorous, and because mothers are the preservers of the race. -Let the genius of women be set to work; let infant schools and infant -asylums be founded in every quarter of France. - -The Hindoo widow was burned; the Jewish widow was bound to re-marry -certain men designated by the law; the Grecian and the Gothic widow -passed under the guardianship of her son, and the latter could not even -re-marry without his permission; the Christian widow was condemned to -seclusion; none of these women had any rights over their children. The -French code restores full liberty to the widow, renders to her the right -of majority, appoints her the guardian and directress of her children; it -is a preliminary step to liberty in marriage. - -The fifth book, _Woman_, is divided into five chapters. - -All antiquity oppressed woman, although it recognized in her something -superior, and made her a priestess or a prophetess. The Christian woman -of the early ages, who alone could dethrone the Pagan woman, not only -endured martyrdom as courageously as man, but was distinguished for her -great charity, for the purity and lucidity of doctrine which rendered her -the counsellor of learned men. We do not know, in reality, to what -heights woman can attain; we cannot judge her by what she is to-day, -since she is the work of the eternal oppression of man. "Who can say -whether many of the ills that rend society, and of the insoluble -problems that trouble it, may not be caused in part by the annihilation -of one of the two forces of creation, the ban placed on female genius? -Have we a right to say to half the human kind: you shall not have your -share in life and in the state? Is it not to deny to them (to women) -their title of human beings? Is it not to disinherit the state itself? -Yes, woman should have her place in civil life," concludes Legouvé. - -Woman and man are equal, but different. To man, belong synthesis, -superiority in all that demands comprehensive views, genius, muscular -force; to woman, belong the spirit of analysis, the comprehension of -details, imagination, tenderness, grace. Man has more strength of reason -and body, woman more strength of heart, with a marvelous perspicacity to -which man will never attain. The division thus fixed, what ought woman to -do? - -In the family, the task of the wife is the management of domestic -affairs, the education of the children, and the comfort of the husband, -of whom she should be the inspiration. By the side of the eminent man, -yet in the shade, there is always a woman; this career of hidden utility -and of modest devotion is the one best suited to woman. In civil life -there are several fields of occupation which they may enter with success: -art, literature, instruction, _administration_, medicine. "Modesty itself -demands that we should call in women as physicians, not to men, but to -women; for it is an abiding outrage upon all purity that their ignorance -should forcibly expose to masculine curiosity the sufferings of their -sisters.... Nervous diseases, especially, would find in feminine genius -the only adversary able to understand and combat them." The author says -that it is the duty of society to see that poor women do not work for -one-third or one-fourth the wages of men; and that, in manufactures, they -have not the most dangerous and least remunerative labors. -"Parent-Duchâtelet," says he, "attests that of three thousand lost women, -_only thirty-five had an occupation that could support them_, and that -fourteen hundred had been precipitated into this horrible life by -destitution. One of them, when she resolved on this course, _had eaten -nothing for three days_." M. Legouvé thinks it shameful that men should -enter into competition with women in the manufacture of articles of dress -and taste. - -In the fifth and last chapter, the author recognizes the remarkable -capacity of women in administration, of which he cites numerous examples. -He demands that they should have the superintendence of prisons for -women, hospitals, charitable institutions, the legal guardianship of -foundlings, the management, in short, of all that concerns social -charity, because they will acquit themselves in it infinitely better than -men. But he refuses to them all participation in political acts and in -all that concerns the government, because they have no aptitude for -things of this nature. Finally, he concludes thus: "Our task is finished; -we have examined the principal phases of the life of women, in the -character of daughters, wives, mothers, and women, comparing the present -with the past, and endeavoring to indicate the future; that is, by -pointing out the bad, verifying the better, seeking the best. - -"What principle has served us in this as a guide? Equality in difference. - -"In the name of this principle, what ameliorations have we demanded in -the laws and customs? - -"For daughters: - -"Reform in education. - -"Laws against seduction. - -"The postponement of the marriageable age. - -"The actual participation of the betrothed parties in the execution of -their contract. - -"Abolition of the formal request to the father of consent to marriage, -which is an insult to the father and an injustice to the child. - -"For wives: - -"An age of legal majority. - -"Administration, and the right of disposing of a portion of their private -property. - -"The right to appear in law without the consent of their husbands. - -"The limitation of the power of the husband over the person of the wife. - -"The creation of a family council, charged with controlling this part of -the power. - -"For mothers: - -"The right of government. - -"The right of direction. - -"The right of education. - -"The right of consent to the marriage of their children. - -"A law requiring the investigation of paternity. - -"The creation of a family council to decide on serious disagreements -between father and mother. - -"For women: - -"Admission to guardianship and the family council. - -"Admission to all professions. - -"Admission within the bounds of their capabilities and duties to public -offices." - -It is evident that Legouvé has but one end, that of advancing the -emancipation of women a single step; he does not demand all that he -believes just, but all that seems to him mature and possible. - -We should thank him for his prudence: he has brought over many men to our -cause, and has prepared them to hear the voice of woman, speaking loudly -and firmly by her right as a wife and a human being, as a worker and a -member of the social body. - -By the side of Legouvé, outside the social schools, are a phalanx of just -and generous men who have written in our favor. We thank them all for -their good words. - - - - -CHAPTER V. - -DE GIRARDIN. - - -On page 42 of his pamphlet, "Liberty in Marriage," De Girardin says, with -great reason: "Man is born of woman. Everything, therefore, that benefits -woman will benefit man." - -"To fight and conquer for her is to fight and conquer for himself." - -Inspired by these excellent sentiments, the celebrated publicist has -investigated the causes of the slavery and degradation of woman, and the -means of paralyzing them. - -_Every child has for its father the husband of its mother_: this, -according to M. de Girardin, is the principle of two great wrongs: the -servitude of the married woman; the inequality of children before the -law, which classes them as legitimate and illegitimate. - -That children may become equal, that woman may be affranchised from the -yoke of man, it is necessary, says the author, to substitute the system -of maternity for that of paternity; to modify Marriage, and to render -woman independent through the institution and universalizing of the -dower. - -We will let M. de Girardin expound the rest of his doctrine himself. "We -must choose," says he, "between these two systems: - -"Between the system of _presumed_ paternity, _which is the system of the -law_, and the system of maternity, _bearing its proof within itself, -which is the system of Nature_; the latter is in conformity with -incontestable truth, the former is condemned by undisputed statistics. -The system of paternity is _inequality of children before the mother and -before the law; it is woman possessed and not possessing_; ... it is no -longer the legal slavery of woman, _but is still conjugal -servitude_."--_Liberty in Marriage._ - -"Without equality of children before the mother, equality of citizens -before the law _is only an imposture_, for evidently and incontestably, -this equality does not exist for 2,800,000 children, who, arbitrarily -entitled illegitimate, are placed outside of common right in violation of -natural law."--_Id._ - -According to De Girardin, the logical consequences of the system of -maternity would be: - -The abolition of civil marriage; - -The mother's name alone given to the child; - -The inheritance placed solely in the maternal line. - -"Marriage," says he, "is a purely individual act, and, as regards its -celebration, a purely religious act.-- - -"Marriage is an act of faith, not of law: it is for faith to govern it, -_not for law to make rules for it_. - -"As soon as the law intervenes, it intervenes _without right_, without -necessity, _without utility_. - -"For one abuse that it pretends to avert, it gives rise to innumerable -others which are worse, and from which society afterwards suffers -seriously, without taking into account the cause that produced them. - -"Legal liberty in marriage is durable love in the household; -indissolubility of marriage is habitual love outside of the -household."--_Id._ - -With respect to inheritance and dowry, the author expresses himself thus: - -"To inherit at the death of the mother, because maternity and certitude -are two equipollent terms, and to receive a support from the father, -because paternity and doubt are two inseparable terms; such is the true -law of Nature."--_Id._ - -In De Girardin's opinion, woman has the same rights as man to liberty and -equality; the sexes are equal, not through _similitude_ but _equivalence_ -of faculties and functions; man produces, acquires, woman administers, -economizes; it belongs therefore to man to provide for the expenses of -the household. It is his duty, on uniting himself to a woman, to settle -on her an inalienable dower that will permit her to perform her maternal -functions properly, and to escape from the vices that frequently result -from want and abandonment. - -To the objection that the wages of the working people are insufficient to -satisfy this duty, the generous publicist replies: Well, raise the rate -of wages by excluding from industrial occupations the women and children -that lower it by competition with men. And if this measure be not -sufficient to balance receipts and expenses, increase the wages, for -"there is no consideration weighty enough to make me admit that, in order -not to diminish the profits of some men, others shall be eternally -condemned to insufficient wages; and that to shelter some women from -violation, others shall be necessarily devoted to prostitution."--_Id._ - -In comparing the lot of the wife under the two systems, De Girardin -expresses himself thus: - -"Under the system of paternity, the wife, loaded with the gifts of -fortune, sinks under the weight of an idleness which most frequently -inflames and disorders her imagination. She does not know what to do to -employ her time. Woman does nothing because man does everything. - -"The wife who has brought no dowry and received no dower, sinks under the -weight of a toil contrary to nature which obliges her, through economy, -to separate herself from her child a few days after giving it birth, and -to put it away from her to nurse, for the consideration of five or six -francs a month; to go to work in one direction while her husband works in -the other, and not to rejoin him till evening, when each returns from the -workshop which has kept them absent from their household all day: if this -is what is called the family, _is it indeed worth all the stir that is -made about it_? - -"Under the system of maternity, on the contrary, the richer a woman is, -the further she is removed from idleness; for not only has she her -children to nurse, to rear, to instruct, and to watch over, but she has -also to administer her fortune which will one day be theirs. - -"To preserve this fortune, to increase it still more: here is wherewith -to occupy her leisure, to calm her imagination, to place her under curb. -It is wrong to suppose women not qualified for the management of -business; they excel in it, however little may have been their practice -or application. - -"Long enough has man been the personification of war, of slavery, of -conquest; it is the turn of woman to be the personification of peace, of -liberty, of civilization. - -"In this new system (_that of maternity_), each of the two has his part: -to man labor, the genius of enterprise; to woman economy and the spirit -of foresight. - -"Man speculates, woman administers; - -"Man acquires, woman preserves; - -"Man brings in, woman transmits; - -"The dowry remains the attribute of the father, the inheritance becomes -the privilege of the mother; - -"Each of the two thus exercises the function that is _natural_ to him, -and in conformity with the essence of things."--_Id._ - -A number of women have asked whether De Girardin recognizes political -right for women. He says nothing about it, either in his work "Liberty in -Marriage," or in his "Universal Politics." But when a man writes that: - -"Woman, belonging to herself, and being dependent only on her reason, has -the same rights as man to liberty and equality." - -That "universal suffrage should be _individual_ and _direct_." - -That "every holder of a general insurance has a right to be a party to -it." - -It is evident that we may deduce, without any great stretch of logic, -that, woman being _free and equal to man_, - -Woman being comprised in universality, - -Woman holding, like man, her policy of insurance, has a right, like man, -to be elector, to be eligible to office, and to vote _individually and -directly_. - -Now, as M. de Girardin is not one of those who recoil from the -consequences of their principles, we are led to believe that he admits to -woman the exercise of political right for woman. - -I have been told that, in 1848, one of those pitiable individuals who -have neither intellect enough to be logical, nor justice enough to -comprehend the oppressed, was haranguing before M. de Girardin against -the claims of certain women to enter political life. "Why not?" asked M. -de Girardin. "Do you believe that Madame de Girardin would deposit a less -intelligent vote in the electoral urn than that of her footman?" - -If this anecdote be true, the opinion of the publicist concerning the -political right of woman is not doubtful. - -_La liberté dans le mariage_ has raised a tempest of indignation, to a -greater or less degree feigned, among the prudes; and for some time it -required courage openly to proclaim one's self the (feminine) champion of -the author. - -Abolish marriage! cry some, veiling their faces with an air of offended -modesty. - -Make a speculation of love! exclaim others who, apparently, have -preserved their holy innocence and baptismal ignorance. - -Come, ladies, we might say,--a truce to conventional delicacy and -sentimentality. Let men suffer themselves to be deceived by our mask, -nothing is more natural; but what is the use of playing the farce among -women? - -M. de Girardin does not really suppress marriage; he changes it in some -respects, but leaves it intact in a religious point of view. If his -system should be adopted, therefore, you might be married in the presence -of the clergymen of your respective faiths, precisely as was done some -seventy years ago, and you would have no fewer scruples than your -grandmothers, who believed themselves then sufficiently married. - -On the other hand, in suppressing civil marriage, the author does not -interdict such and such particular stipulations; if therefore you hold in -any degree to the religion of the Code, it will be lawful for you to -stipulate in your notarial contract: - -1. That you will be submissive to your husbands; - -2. That you will permit them to manage your fortune, even contrary to -your interests and to those of your children; - -3. That without authority from them, you will neither go to law, nor -undertake anything, nor sell anything, nor receive anything, nor give -anything away; - -4. That, so long as they shall live, you renounce all authority over your -children; that they can, if they please, take them from you, banish you -from them, have them reared by whoever they choose, even by their -mistress, finally, give them in marriage contrary to your will; - -5. That you recognise their right to carry elsewhere their love, their -attentions, their fortune and your own; provided that this does not -happen under your roof; - -6. That, lastly, you grant their right, if, abandoned by them, you attach -yourself to another, to drag you before the bar, to dishonor you, to -imprison you with thieves and prostitutes; that even in such case you -declare them excusable in killing you. - -Yes, ladies, you might stipulate all this, for M. de Girardin disputes no -one the rights of lacking dignity and being imbecile; of what then do you -complain? - -You reproach M. de Girardin with wishing to make a speculation of love! -Be good enough to tell me what you call the greater part of the marriages -of the present time, in which men have the heartlessness to speculate -even on death!--in which they ask how much a young girl has, what are her -expectations, and _how old are her parents_. - -Answer, women: - -Is it true that the great majority of seduced women are incapacitated, -through shame and poverty, from rearing their children? - -That what you call a first fault, drives the greater part of them to make -a traffic of their charms? - -That the great majority of men forget, after satisfying their passion, -both the woman whom they have led astray, and the innocent creature that -owes its life to them? - -Is it true that the horrible and cruel selfishness of men and the insane -confidence of women produces annually a fearful number of so called -illegitimate children, the greater part of which people the prisons, the -galleys, and the public brothels? - -Is it true, lastly, that this same selfishness and this same confidence -are the cause of thousands of human lives being criminally sacrificed? - -And if all this shame, all these griefs, all these crimes are true? - -If there are so many women seduced and heartbroken; - -If there are so many children abandoned; - -If there are so many infanticides; - -If the law does not protect the woman deceived and made a mother; - -If this law does not compel the seducer to any reparation; - -If public opinion leaves to the victim all the shame; - -Why do you reproach a man for reminding a young girl that from love may -proceed maternity? - -For telling her that she ought to provide in advance for the child that -may be born, in order that it may not be cast upon public charity, and -that she herself may not risk falling into those sinks of impurity that -are the shame and degradation of our sex? - -Do you reproach a man then for taking our part against the selfish and -animal passions of his sex, and against the impunity accorded them by the -laws? - -Do you reproach him for taking in hand the cause of morals and health, in -opposition to the degradation of soul and body? - -A young girl stipulate the sale of her person! say you? what essential -difference do you find between this kind of contract, and those that are -made to-day before the notary on the occasion of a marriage? - -Did not most among you, ladies, purchase your husbands with so much -dowry, so much income, so much _expectations_? And if these husbands of -yours did not think it shameful to be sold, and if you do not esteem them -less for it, be good enough to tell me from what principle you judge it -shameful for a young girl to do the same in order to rear her children, -and to live without prostituting herself? - -For my part, I do not see. - -Ladies, you are grown-up children: men feign to have contempt for the -woman who thinks of her interests in love ... because they wish, if -possible, to keep their money, that is all. - -Is this to say that I admit all the ideas of M. de Girardin? No. - -I admit with him, that woman can only be free and the equal of man, in -so far as she is a wife, through a change in marriage. - -That, in the state of insecurity in which she is placed with respect to -wages and to maternity outside of marriages, woman _does well_ to take -measures to prevent man from shifting the obligations of paternity from -himself to her. - -I would willingly admit that the child should bear the mother's name -only, if men did not object so strongly to it. The child, belonging to -both, should bear both names, and choose, at majority, the one that he -preferred; or else the daughters should bear the name of the mother and -the sons that of the father, from the time of majority. - -I readily admit the equality of children before the mother and the law; -for bastardy is meaningless in nature and is social iniquity. But what I -do not admit, is the ideal M. de Girardin has formed with regard to the -respective functions of each sex: - -The exclusion of woman from active occupations; - -The universalizing of the dower; - -Lastly, family education. - -To say that man represents labor, the genius of enterprise, that he -speculates, acquires, brings in,--that woman represents economy, the -spirit of foresight,--that she administers, preserves, transmits, is to -establish a series which does not appear to me at all in conformity with -the nature of things, since it is notorious that a great number of women -do what M. de Girardin attributes to the other sex, and _vice versâ_. - -Functions, to be properly performed, should be the result of aptitudes. -Now Nature, except in what concerns the reproduction of the species, does -not appear to have classed these according to the sexes. Since the -origin of society, we have attempted to do it, but history is at hand to -reveal to us that, in acting thus, we have only succeeded in tyrannizing -over the sturdy minorities that have given the lie to such pretensions. -Now, M. de Girardin, admitting a false series, _à priori_, is led without -perceiving it to forge chains for all women whom Nature has not made in -conformity with the conventional order which he wishes to see realized. - -To exclude woman from active occupations in order to confine her to the -cares of the household is to attempt an impossibility, to close the way -to progress, and to replace woman beneath the yoke of man. It is to -attempt an impossibility, because there are branches of manufactures that -can be executed only by women; because many women who would not marry, or -who would be left portionless widows without resources, could only remain -pure by devoting themselves to some active employment which, -notwithstanding, would be interdicted to them. To see woman in the -household alone, is to view her from a contracted stand point, which -retards the advent of her liberty. It is to close the way to progress, -because there are social functions which will never be well performed -until woman shall participate in them, and social questions that will -never be resolved until woman shall stand by the side of man to elucidate -them. It is to replace woman beneath the yoke of man, because it is in -human nature to rule and domineer over those whom we provide with their -daily bread. - -To wish to erect the dower into an institution, is to wish to restore one -of the most lamentable phases of the Past at the moment when Humanity is -marching towards the Future--that which shows us woman purchased by man. -The universalizing of the dower would be therefore a criminal attempt on -the liberty and moral dignity of woman. Lastly, to claim that every -mother ought to educate her children herself appears to us to propose as -great impossibility as social danger. - -If every well constituted woman is fit to bring children into the world -and to nourish them with her milk, very few are capable of developing -their intellect and heart, for education is a special function, requiring -a particular aptitude, with which all mothers cannot be endowed. - -Next, family education perpetuates divergence of opinions and sentiments, -maintains prejudices, favors the development of vanity and selfishness, -and tends, by this means, to paralyze the most noble, the most civilizing -sentiment--that of universal solidarity. Assuredly, at the present time, -many motives may justify family education, but for the good of humanity -it is to be desired that parents who sympathize in progressive ideas -should assemble their children together to form them for social life, -instead of rearing them each by himself. - -I submit this critical sketch to M. de Girardin in the name of the -principle that he has always defended:--_individual dignity and human -liberty_. - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - -MODERN COMMUNISTS. - - -The Communists hold as the principle of social organization, not _the -agrarian law_, as has been charged on them through ignorance or bad -faith, but the enjoyment _in common_ of the soil, of implements of labor, -and of products. _From each one according to his strength, to each one -according to his needs_, is the formula of most among them. - -It is not our business to examine the social value of this doctrine, but -only to show what Communism thinks of woman and her rights. - -The modern communists may be divided into two classes: the religious and -the political. - -Among the first are the Saint Simonians, the Fusionists and the -Philadelphians. - -Among the second, are the Equalitarians, the Unitarians, the Icarians, -etc. - -The first consider woman as the equal of man. To the others, she is free; -among some, with a shade of subordination. - -The Unitarians, who have drawn largely from Fourier, proclaim woman free, -and equal with man. - -We shall speak here of only a few of the communistic sects, reserving -for separate articles what relates to the Saint Simonians and the -Fusionists. - -The Philadelphians, admitting God and the immortality of the soul, lay -down these two principles: God is the chief of the social order; -Fraternity is the law that governs human relations. - -Religion, to the Philadelphians, is the practice of Fraternity; Progress -is a dogma, Community is the law of the individual before God and -conscience. - -Touching the relations of the sexes and the rights of woman, M. Pecqueur -thus expresses himself in his work _La République de Dieu_, pp. 194, 195: - -"Complete equality of the man and the woman." - -The Monogamic marriage, intentionally indissoluble as a normal condition; -such is the second practical consequence of the dogma of religious -fraternity. - - -1. EQUALITY. - -"We bring no proofs in evidence of this; _his reason is blotted out by -prejudice and his heart chilled by egotism_, who is not impressed at once -with the truth of equality. - -"In the state of society created by the religion of fraternity and -equality, women will find, from their earliest years, _the same means and -the same conditions of development of function and of remuneration_, in -short, THE SAME RIGHTS, the same social aim to pursue as men; and in -proportion as custom shall correspond with the religious and moral ends -of the union, will the living law deduce the practical consequences of -all order, contained in the germ in the dogma of the complete equality of -the sexes. - - -"4. MONOGAMY AND INDISSOLUBILITY. - -"To comprehend the lawfulness of the unlimited or indefinite monogamic -marriage, it suffices to consider: 1st. the exigencies of our inmost -nature, that is, the characteristics of love; its instinctive aspiration -to the union and the fusion of two beings, to duration and to perpetuity; -the necessity of possessing each other reciprocally and of having faith -in this possession _in order to love each other_; in short, instinct, -desire; the irresistible and universal affections, and the joys of -paternity and of the family; 2d. the physiological conditions of -generation, which exact monogamy in order to assure the reproduction and -the good and progressive conservation of the species; 3d. social and -religious exigencies, which require relations of all kinds to be -predetermined and regulated, that each one may be secure in his -expectation and his possession, and that there may be a possibility of -satisfying the fundamental propensities of our natures.... To claim to -introduce polygamy, promiscuousness, or union for a term of years into -such surroundings, (the Philadelphian society,) is evidently to decree -selfishness and mere carnal pleasure, while proclaiming duty and dignity. -It is inconceivable that two moral beings, once united by pure love, -should ever cease to love each other, to delight in each other, or at -least to endure each other, when they are presumed already to be devoted -and sacrificing without distinction in their love to their brothers and -sisters. - -"Still less is it conceivable that their brothers and sisters would dream -of diverting this reciprocal love of two members of the family to their -personal advantage; _for this would be infamy_." - -M. Pecqueur admits, notwithstanding, that in very rare cases, divorce may -be granted on account of incompatibility of temper. In such case the -offending party would be excluded from the republic, and the other would -be at liberty to remarry. - -According to M. Pecqueur, indissolubility of marriage does not relate to -the present antagonistic state of society, as he says: - -"Divorce is a great misfortune, not only to the parties concerned, but to -religion; notwithstanding, in the kingdom of Cæsar in which pure justice -is the question, it is the lesser evil, when the individuals are -determined on a separation in fact, and are lusting after other ties. -They do evil clandestinely; they are the cause or the occasion of the -temptation or the fall of others. Do what they will, the scandal is -known; so that neither society, nor the spouses, nor the children, nor -morality derive benefit from the consecration of absolute perpetuity. - -"It is not charitable, it is _impious_ to force two beings to remain -together, one of which, to say the least, maltreats, detests, takes -advantage of, or domineers over the other. It is equally wrong to grant -them a separation from bed and board without at the same time permitting -them to yield to chaste affections when they acknowledge these in purity -and liberty." - -So then, to the Philadelphians, expounded by M. Pecqueur, marriage is -monogamous, indissoluble by intention; divorce is a sad necessity of the -existing state of society, whilst separation is immorality. In short, -woman is _free and the equal of man_. - -Another communist sect, that of the Icarians, takes no notice either of -the nature or the rights of women. Its chief, M. Cabet, an -ex-attorney-general, was too fully imbued with the doctrines of the Civil -Code, that inelegant paraphrase of the Apostle Paul, not to be persuaded -that woman ought to remain outside the pale of political right, and that -she ought to be subordinate to man in general, and to her husband, good -or bad, in particular. - -Let us do justice however to M. Cabet's disciples; I have never found a -single one of them of his opinion on this great question. - -One evening in 1848, as M. Cabet was presiding over a well attended club, -he was requested by a woman to put the question: _Is woman the equal of -man before social and political rights?_ Almost every hand was raised in -the affirmative; in the negative, not a hand was raised, not a man -protested against the affirmation. A round of applause followed from the -galleries filled with women; and M. Cabet was somewhat disconcerted by -the result. He seemed to be ignorant that the people, always eminently -logical, are never guilty of quibbling to elude or to limit the -principles that they have adopted. - -This vote of the Cabet club was repeated in three others, in my presence. -The men in paletots laughed at the demands of brave Jeanne Deroin; the -men in blouses did not even smile at them. - -M. Dezamy representing another shade of communism, thus expresses himself -in the code of the Community; "Away with marital dominion! Freedom of -alliance! _perfect equality of both sexes!_ Freedom of divorce!" - -He adds, under the heading; Laws for the union of the sexes, designed to -prevent all discord and debauchery, page 266: - -"Art. I. Mutual love, inmost sympathy, purity of heart between two -beings, form and legalize their union. - -"Art. II. _There should be perfect equality between the two sexes._ - -"Art. III. No bond except that of mutual love can link the man and the -woman together. - -"Art. IV. Nothing shall prevent lovers who have separated from forming -new ties as often as they shall be attracted to another person." - -The ethics of M. Dezamy are not to our taste; we prefer those of the -Communist, Pecqueur; but we are glad to prove that modern communism, -divided on the questions of marriage, the family, and morals in relations -of the sexes, is unanimous with respect to the liberty of woman and the -equality of the sexes before the law and society. - -In this, modern communism is greatly superior to that of the ancient -school, practised among several nations, and taught by Plato, Morelly, -etc. We recognize a sign of the times in this juster appreciation of -woman, with the introduction of the principle of her rights into -doctrines which formerly never took them into account. - -The greater part of the Communists belong to the working class; which -proves that the people most of all feel the great truth, _that the -liberty of woman is identical with that of the masses_; and it will take -more than MM. Proudhon, Comte, Michelet and their adepts, to throw cold -water on their feelings and to make them retrace their steps. - - -SAINT SIMONIANS. - -My mother, a zealous Protestant and very austere in morals, disapproved -of St. Simonianism, and never permitted any one to speak of it in my -presence except to condemn it; she took great care that not a line of the -new doctrine should fall under my eyes. - -Whether from a natural spirit of opposition or from instinctive justice, -I know not, but I by no means shared in the censure that I heard -expressed about me; one thing alone resulted from it--curiosity to become -acquainted with what were called immoral dogmas. - -I was in this frame of mind when one day while with my mother in the -neighborhood of the _Palais du Justice_, I saw a company of men -advancing, clad in a graceful costume; they were the Saint Simonians -going in a body to defend their infant church against prosecution at the -bar. I was greatly moved by the sight; I felt in communion with these -youth who were about to bear testimony to their faith; they did not seem -like strangers, but as struggling for my own cause or for one that -deserved my sympathy, and tears sprang to my eyes. I could have heartily -embraced those whom I heard defending them, and as heartily have assailed -those who claimed that it would be just to condemn them. My mother being -too generous to join with the latter, we departed in silence. I knew, -without having any knowledge of the details, that the church of St. Simon -had been dispersed. - -It was not until some years after that, having made the acquaintance of a -St. Simonian lady, I was enabled to read the doctrinal writings and to -form an idea of the aspirations and the dogmas of the school of St. -Simon. If the nature of this work forbids me their analysis, it cannot -reproach me for expressing my sympathies for those who have had great and -generous aspirations; for those who, in a critical point of view, have -rendered real services to the cause of Progress; for those who have -brought to light the solution of the two capital problems of our epoch; -_the emancipation of woman and of the workman_. The St. Simonians have -been enough assailed, enough calumniated to justify a woman who is not a -St. Simonian in considering it a duty to render them justice, by -acknowledging the good which they have done. - -Yes, you have a right to be proud of your name of St. Simonians, you who -have proclaimed the obligation of laboring without respite for the -physical, moral and intellectual amelioration of the most numerous and -the poorest class; - -You who have proclaimed the _sanctity_ of science, art, manufactures, and -labor in every form; - -You who have proclaimed the equality of the sexes in the family, the -church, and the state; - -You who have preached of peace and fraternity to a world given over to -wars of cannon and competition. - -You who have criticised the ancient dogma, and all the evil institutions -that have thence arisen; - -Yes, I repeat, you have deserved well of Progress, you have deserved well -of Humanity; and you have a right to bear with pride your great -scholastic name; for it was noble to desire the emancipation of woman, of -labor, and of the laborer; it was generous to consecrate youth and -fortune to it, as so many among you have done. - -Through your aspirations, you have been the continuers of '89, since you -dreamed of realizing what was contained in the germ in the Declaration of -Rights: these are your titles of greatness; this is why your name will -not perish. But if, through your sentiments, you belonged to the great -era of '89, the social form in which you claimed to incarnate your -principles, belonged to the Middle Ages; the age therefore has done right -to leave you behind. Seduced by trinitarian mysticism, deluded by an -erroneous historical point of view, you claimed to resuscitate hierarchy -and theocracy in a system of humanity fashioned in conformity with the -opposing principle; the triumph of individual liberty in social equality. -This is the reason that the age could not follow you. No more could women -follow you, for they felt that they could only be affranchised through -labor and through purity of morals; by ruling over, not imitating -masculine passions. They felt that their power of moralization was due as -much to their chastity as to their intellect; they knew that those who -make use of the most liberty in love, neither love nor esteem the other -sex; that, in general, they employ their ascendancy over it to pervert it -to ruin and afflict their companions, and to dissolve the family and -civilization; that, in consequence, they are the most dangerous enemies -of the emancipation of their sex; for man, sobered of his passion, can -never desire to emancipate those by whom he has been deceived, ruined and -demoralized. - -The St. Simonian orthodoxy is therefore, in my opinion, greatly mistaken -with respect to the ways and means of realization. Shall we impute this -to it as a crime? No, indeed! social problems are not mathematical -problems; there is merit in propounding them; courage and devotion in -pursuing their solution, even when we fail completely to attain it. - -We all know the spirit of the St. Simonians who first brought before the -public mind of the age the question of female emancipation; it would be -ungrateful in the women who demand liberty and equality not to recognize -the debt of gratitude which they have contracted toward them. It is their -duty to say to their companions: the seal of St. Simonianism is the -safeguard of the liberty of woman; wherever therefore you meet a St. -Simonian, you may press his hand fraternally; you have in him a defender -of your right. - -Let us sketch the general outline of the St. Simonian doctrine, touching -woman and her rights. - -All of the St. Simonians admit that the sexes are equal; - -That the couple forms the social individual; - -That marriage is the sacred bond of generations; the association of a man -and a woman for the accomplishment of a sacerdotal, scientific, artistic, -or industrial work; - -All admit divorce, and transition to another union; but some are more -severe than others with respect to the conditions of divorce. - -There is a division among them on the question of morals. Olinde -Rodrigues and Bazard do not admit any _liaison_ of love outside of -marriage. M. Enfantine, on the contrary, claims the greatest liberty in -love. - -We should add that he gives to this opinion a fixed and provisional value -only, since he says that the law of the relations of sexes can only be -established in a sure and definitive manner by the concurrence of the -woman; and since, on the other hand, he prescribes continence to his -closest followers, until the coming of the Woman, of which he regards -himself the precursor. - -In addition, to give our readers a more precise idea of the sentiments of -the St. Simonians concerning woman, we will cite some passages of their -writings. - -"The use of woman by man still exists," says M. Enfantin; "_this it is -that constitutes the necessity of our apostleship_. This use, this -subalternation _contrary to nature_, with respect to the future, results -on the one hand, in falsehood and fraud; on the other, in violence and -animal passions; it is necessary to put an end to these -vices."--(_Religion St. Simonienne_, 1832, p. 5.) - -"Woman, as we have said, _is the equal of man_; She is now a slave; it -belongs to her master to affranchise her." (_Id._ p. 12.) - -"There will be no definitive law and morality until woman shall have -spoken." (_Id._ p. 18.) - -"In the name of God," exclaims M. Enfantin in his _Appel à la Femme_, "in -the name of God and of all the sufferings which Humanity, his loved -child, endures to-day in her flesh; in the name of the poorest and most -numerous class whose daughters are sold to Indolence and whose sons are -given up to War; in the name of all those men and of all those women, who -cast the glittering veil of falsehood or the filthy rays of debauchery -over their secret or public prostitution; in the name of St. Simon who -came to announce to man and woman _their moral, social and religious -equality_, I conjure woman to answer me!" (_Entretien du 7 Décembre_, -1831.) - -On his side, Bazard concludes a pamphlet, published in January, 1832, -with these words: - -"And we too have hastened the coming of woman; we too summon her with all -our might; but it is in the name of the pure love with which she has -imbued the heart of man, and which man is now ready to give her in -return; it is in the name of the dignity which is promised her in -marriage; it is lastly and above all, in the name of the most numerous -and poorest class, _whose servitudes and humiliations she has hitherto -shared_, and whom her enchanting voice can alone to-day have power -finally to release from the harsh imposition with which it is still -weighed down by the wrecks of the past." - -Ah! you are to a great extent right, Enfantin and Bazard! So long as -woman is not free and the equal of man; so long as she is not everywhere -at his side, sorrows, disorders, war, the exploitation of the weak, will -be the sad lot of humanity. - -Pierre Leroux, the gentlest, best and most simple man that I know, writes -in turn in the fourth volume of his _Encyclopédie Nouvelle_, article -_Egalité_, the following remarkable paragraphs: - -"There are not two different beings, man and woman, there is but a single -human being with two phases, which correspond and are united by love. - -"Man and woman exist to form the couple; they are the two parts of it. -_Outside of the couple, outside of love and marriage, there is no longer -any sex_; there are human beings of a common origin and of like -faculties. Man at every moment of his life is sensation, sentiment, -knowledge; so is woman. The definition is therefore the same." - -After having proved, according to his idea, that the type of woman -differs from that of man, he continues: - -"But this type does not separate them from the rest of humanity, and does -not make of them a separate race which must be distinguished -philosophically from man.... Love being absent, they manifest themselves -to man as human beings, and are ranked, like man, under the various -categories of civil society." - -After having observed that, however different men may be, they are -therefore none the less equal, since they all are sensation, sentiment -and knowledge, Pierre Leroux, applying this principle to the question of -the right of woman, adds: - -"From whatever side we look at this question, we are led to proclaim the -equality of man and woman. For, if we consider woman in the couple, woman -is the equal of man, since the couple itself is founded on equality, -since love is equality in itself, and since where justice, that is, -equality, does not reign, there love cannot reign, but the contrary of -love. - -"And if we consider woman outside of the couple, she is a being like unto -man, endowed with the same faculties in various degrees; one of those -varieties in unity which constitute the world and human society." - -The author says that woman should lay claim to equality only as a spouse -and a human being; that to acknowledge her as free because she has sex, -is to declare her at liberty not only to use but also to abuse love; and -that the abuse of love must not be the appanage and sign of liberty. - -He says that woman has sex only for him whom she loves and by whom she is -loved; that to all others she can be merely a human being. - -"From this point of view," continues he, "we must say to women: you have -a right to equality by two distinct titles; as human beings and as wives. -As wives, you are our equals, for love in itself is equality. As human -beings, your cause is that of all, _it is the same as that of the people; -it is allied to the great revolutionary cause_; that is, to the general -progress of the human kind. _You are our equals, not because you are -women but because there are no longer either slaves or serfs._ - -"This is the truth that must be spoken to men and women; but it would be -to pervert this truth and to transform it into error to say to women: You -are a sex apart, a sex in the possession of love. Emancipate yourselves; -that is, use and abuse love. Woman thus transformed into an unchaste -Venus, loses at once her dignity as a human being and as a woman; that -is, as a being capable of forming a human couple under the sacred law of -love." - -The excellent Leroux asks who does not feel, who does not admit at the -present day the equality of the sexes? - -Who would dare maintain that woman is an inferior being, of whom man is -the guide and beacon light? - -That woman is elevated by man, who is elevated only by himself and by -God? - -Who would dare maintain such absurdities to-day, brave and upright -Leroux? P. J. Proudhon, the man who called you _Theopompe_ and -_Pâlissier_--M. Michelet, who claims that woman was created to be the -most tiresome doll of her loving husband. - -But to return to yourself. - -You affirm that God is androgynous; that in him coexist the male and -female principles on the footing of equality: that consequently, man and -woman are equal in God. I assent to this willingly, although I know -absolutely nothing about it. But when you add that woman is deserving of -quite as much as man, because she has shared in all the agonizing crises -of the progressive education of the human race; - -That love, which cannot exist without the woman, has led us from the law -of slavery to that of equality; - -That consequently woman represents half in the work of the ages; - -In this there is no mystery; I join you therefore with all my heart in -repeating to men the invitations and the lessons which you give to these -ungrateful and stubborn males: - -"If we are free, it is in part by woman; let her then be made free by us. - -"But is she so? Is she treated by us as an equal? - -"A wife--does she find equality in love and marriage? - -"A human being, does she find equality in the State? - -"This is the question. - -"On the subject of woman, our civil law is a model of absurd -contradictions. According to the Roman law, woman lived perpetually under -tutelage; in this system of legislation, everything was at least in -perfect harmony; woman was always a minor. We, on our part, declare her -in a multitude of cases to be free as man. She is no longer under general -or fictitious tutelage; her age of majority is fixed; she is competent to -inherit in her own right; she inherits in equal proportion; she controls -and disposes of her property; more than this, in the system of communion -of goods between husband and wife, we admit the separation of property. -But let the marriage bond itself be in question, in which wealth is no -longer at stake, but ourselves and our mothers, ourselves and our -sisters, ourselves and our daughters; then we are found intractable in -our laws; we no longer admit equality; we require woman to declare -herself our inferior and servant, and to swear obedience to us. - -"Truly we cling more to money than to love; we have more consideration -for money-bags than for human dignity; for we emancipate women as soon as -they become freeholders; but as soon as they become wives the law -declares them our inferiors. Here notwithstanding, that bond is in -question in which the equality of man and woman is most evident; that -bond in which this equality breaks forth, as it were; that bond in which -it is so necessary to proclaim that without equality, the bond itself -exists no longer. Yet, by an absurd contradiction, our civil law chooses -this moment to proclaim the inferiority of woman; it condemns her to -obedience, makes her take a false oath, and takes advantage of love to -make it outrage itself. - -"I have no doubt that, to future ages, the characteristic symbol of our -moral condition will be that article of our laws which sanctions in set -terms inequality in love. It will be said of us: they had so little -comprehension of justice, that they did not comprehend love which is -justice in even its holiest type; they had so little comprehension of -love, that they did not even admit justice in it; and that in their -written law, their Code, the form of marriage, the only sacrament of -which they yet had any idea, instead of sanctioning equality, sanctions -inequality; instead of union, disunion; instead of the love that -equalizes and identifies its objects, some contradictory and monstrous -relation, founded at the same time upon identity, and upon inferiority -and slavery. Yes, like those forms of the law of the Twelve Tables, that -we quote now to prove the barbarity of the ancient Romans and their -ignorance of justice, this article of our Code will be some day cited to -characterize our grossness and ignorance, for the absence of an elevated -notion of justice is as marked in it as is the absence of an elevated -notion of love. - -"Thence follows everything relative to the condition of woman; or rather, -everything is connected with this point; for will we respect the -equality of woman as a human being when we are senseless enough to deny -her this quality as a wife? Is woman to-day, in so far as a human being, -really treated as the equal of man? I will not enter upon this broad -subject. I confine myself to a single question; what education do women -receive? You treat them as you treat the people. To these too you leave -the old religion that fits us no longer. They are children kept as long -as possible in swaddling clothes, as though this were not the true way to -deform them, to destroy at once the rectitude of their mind and the -candor of their soul. Besides, what does Society do for them? To what new -careers does she give them access? Yet, notwithstanding, it is evident to -every thinking mind that our arts, our sciences, our manufactures will -make as much new progress when women are called to take a part in them, -as they did a few years ago, when they were opened to the serfs. You -complain of the want and wretchedness that weighs down your systems of -society; _abolish the castes that are still subsisting; abolish the caste -in which you hold immured the half of the human race_." - -These few pages, my readers, give you the compass of the sentiments of -the St. Simonians, both orthodox and dissenters, and justify the sympathy -entertained by women who have attained _majority_ for those who have so -ardently pleaded their cause. - - -FUSIONISTS. - -Louis de Tourreil, the revealer of Fusionism, is a man whom it is -impossible to behold without sympathy or to hear without pleasure; he is -kindly, he speaks well, and his ideas are most logically deduced; his -principles once admitted, one is constrained to follow him to the end. - -Tourreil expresses himself in the _Revue Philosophique_ of May, 1856, on -the subject of woman and her rights, as follows: - -"Nature is reduced to three great co-eternal principles or productive -agents of all things. These principles are: - -"The female or passive principle, - -"The male or active principle, - -"And the mixed or unificative principle, participating in both, which is -called Love. - -"God is therefore Female, Male and Androgynous, in his trinary unity. - -"He is simultaneously from all eternity Mother, Father and Love, instead -of being, as the theologians say, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; three -agents of like sex, incapable of producing anything. - -"You will easily conceive, my dear brother, that if the masculine and the -feminine sex hold the same rank in the Divine Trinity, they will be also -found in the same rank in humanity. The part which the divine woman plays -in Heaven, the human woman will play on Earth.... - -"Were he (_God_) only of the masculine sex, men would say that the -masculine sex alone is noble, and that woman is created merely for the -service of man, as man is created for that of God. They would even -question whether she had a soul, and would think that they were doing her -a favor in admitting her as something in life." - -After quoting the teachings of the apostle Paul with respect to woman and -marriage, the author continues: - -"Behold, my dear brother, the part which Christianity assigns to woman. -If this doctrine therefore were followed in every point, and if it ought -to be replaced by no higher one, woman would find herself condemned in -perpetuity to a subalternization humiliating to her nature. - -"But Fusionism, which is the doctrine of Salvation for all, does not -permit any one to be sacrificed; for this reason, woman is the equal of -man and man the equal of woman, as in God, the eternal Mother is the -equal of the eternal Father, and the eternal Father is the equal of the -eternal Mother." - -De Tourreil believes that the Mother gives form and the Father life, two -things equally necessary to constitute the being. - -"Since woman is the equal of man in absolute principle," continues he, -"and since she is co-eternal with him, there is injustice in -subordinating her to man in the relative; and the book of _Genesis_ -commits a gross error in making her proceed from man: - -"If either of the two could be before the other, it would be the woman, -for strictly speaking, we could conceive of the being without the life, -but it would be quite impossible to conceive of the life without the -being: The being without the life would be a dead being, but what would -the life be without the being? It would be a life without existence, -negation, the absence of life, nothingness. Therefore, in logical order, -woman is first.... - -"Not only ought woman to be the equal of man, as we have seen, but in -enunciation and classification, she should be named and classed first. - -"Woman is the mould by which the species is perfected or depraved, -according as the mould is good or bad. The fate of humanity depends -therefore on woman, since she has all powerful influence on the fruit -that she bears in her bosom. - -"Pure, good, intelligent, she will produce healthy, intelligent and good -beings. - -"Impure, narrow, and wicked, she will produce unhealthy, unintelligent -and wicked beings. - -"In a word, the child will be what its mother is, for nothing can give -what it has not. - -"It is important therefore that woman should be developed like man, that -her education should be comprehensive, that her person should be honored, -respected, and tenderly cared for, in order that nothing in the social -surroundings may shape it to evil. - -"Destined by the Supreme Being to form the human being from her flesh, -her blood and her soul, destined to nourish it with her milk and to give -it its earliest education, the two acts which have the greatest influence -over the individual life, woman should be considered as the chief agent -of perfection. This _rôle_ classes her naturally in a very elevated rank -in society, and exacts of her superior perfections. - -"Thus in the future she will be the image of Divine Wisdom on earth, as -man will represent Divine Power. - -"To man more especially will belong action; to woman, counsel. - -"Man will take the initiative in difficult enterprises; woman will -moderate or excite ardor therein. - -"Man will rule the planet; woman will embellish it. - -"Man will symbolize science and manufactures; woman will symbolize poetry -and art. - -"The one will always have need of the other; they will walk together -side by side, and will find completeness reciprocally in each other. - -"Such, my dear friend, after a brief fashion, is the idea which should be -formed of woman. Man and woman are not two beings radically separated; -both together make but a single being. To subordinate woman to man or man -to woman is therefore to mutilate the human being, or to fail to -comprehend its interests. That humanity may be happy, neither of its -halves must suffer. And how can it help suffering if it is reduced to -servitude and oppressed by the other? - -"Our destiny on earth is to constitute the collective being in his own -consciousness. For this, it is necessary to realize the humanitary -androgynus. Now the humanitary androgynus necessitates first the -individual androgynus which can only be constituted by harmonious -marriage. - -"Marriage is therefore the great formative or deformative law of the -collective being, according as it is expressed by the legislator in a -manner conformably or contrary to human destiny. - -"It is in marriage that the sources of good and evil are found; would you -know why? - -"Because in the act that joins the man to the woman, and by which the -couple are made to form but one body, the two souls are fused by means of -a reciprocal donation, which unites the souls of the two for eternity. - -"So that, after the conjunction, the soul of the woman adheres to the -soul of the man and accompanies it everywhere, while the soul of the man -adheres to the woman and never more quits it. - -"Whence it follows that if the soul of the man be depraved, it depraves -the woman to whom it is united, by exercising over her a continued -action, even at a distance. So also does the depravity of the woman -united to the man deprave him without his knowing it by an occult and -permanent action. - -"The souls of two depraved beings may be therefore inseparably conjoined, -without thus constituting the individual androgynus, which is the divine -end of marriage or the union of the sexes. - -"The individual androgynus is only possible to the condition of unity. -But unity cannot be constituted by evil. - -"The good, the true and the perfect alone can combine the conditions of -unity. The evil, the false and the imperfect are essentially inharmonious -in their nature. - -"Two wicked, insincere and vicious beings will only produce by their -conjunction a still greater difference. They will be united, but only -reciprocally to torment each other. Unity will never be constituted by -them; and without the constitution of unity or the individual androgynus, -it will be impossible to realize the human destiny. - -"In order that the individual androgynus may exist in the couple, there -must be perfect spiritual communion between them; that is, communion of -thought, of feeling, and of will. But how can two individuals who, -instead of being ruled by truth, are ruled only by their misdirected -passions,--how can these two make but one? It is impossible. - -"You will comprehend, my dear brother, from these few words, how sacred -is marriage, and how important it is to contract none but harmonious -unions, for the unhappiness of a lifetime often depends on an -inconsiderate conjunction." - -Having had several opportunities of meeting M. de Tourreil, I asked him -for some exact details in respect to the liberty of woman and marriage. - -The following is an abstract of those that he has kindly given me; - -Education should be the same for both sexes; - -Woman should be at liberty to follow the vocation which comes to her from -God; and of which she alone is judge; - -"In all grades and employments in the republic of God, woman should be at -the side of man; - -After the age of fifty, all individuals of both sexes should be rulers -and priests; - -The reproduction of the species being the work of the love of persons -healthy in mind and in body, before marriage, the bride should be -required to make confession to a priestess and the bridegroom to a -priest, in order to be enlightened with respect to the opportuneness or -unsuitableness of the union. - -Dissolution of marriage should take place but in a single case,--when the -husband and wife have attained to complete fusion; that is, to feeling -and knowing reciprocally that they have no longer anything to exchange. -It then becomes necessary to form new ties, and, each one to labor to -fuse with a new consort. In the existing condition of humanity, this -fusion cannot take place; but in the future, when we shall be nearer -perfection, it will become possible several times in life. - -Fusionism is, as is evident, mystical socialism. - -Its votaries are gentle and good, and very tolerant towards those who do -not think like them. - - -PHALANSTERIANS. - -The motto of the Fourieristic, Societary or Phalansterian school is -_respect for individual liberty_, based on the following notions: - -All nature is good; it becomes perverted only when performing its -functions in evil surroundings. - -No person exactly resembling the rest, each one should be the sole judge -of his capacities, and should receive laws only from himself. - -Attractions are proportional to destinies. - -If the disciples of my compatriot, Charles Fourier, do not express -themselves exactly in this wise, all that have written bears the imprint -of these thoughts. - -Are Fourier and his disciples right in believing that the law of -passional attraction _alone_ is required to organize the industrial, -moral and social world? - -That the primordial element of a system of society should be the -Societary or Phalansterian association? - -That the most opposite, the most diverse passions are the conditions -_sine quâ non_ of harmony? - -That the compensation of labor and of competition should be regulated -according to Labor, Capital and Talent? - -We are not called on to examine this here. - -The only thing that need occupy us in this rapid review of -contemporaneous opinions is the investigation of the sentiments and ideas -of Fourier and his school in that which concerns the principal object of -this book. A few pages from the chief of the order, and a summary -analysis will suffice for this. - -In the _Théorie des quatre Mouvements_, M. Fourier writes; - -"That the ancient philosophers of Greece and Rome should have disdained -the interests of women is by no means surprising, since these -rhetoricians were all ultra partisans of the pederasty which they had -brought in high honor in _la belle antiquité_. They cast ridicule upon -the associating with women; this passion was considered dishonorable.... -These manners obtained the unanimous suffrage of the philosophers who, -from the virtuous Socrates to the delicate Anacreon, affected Sodomitish -love alone and contempt for women, who were banished to the upper -apartments, immured as in a seraglio, and exiled from the society of men. - -"These fantastic tastes not having found favor among the moderns, there -is reason for surprise that our philosophers should have inherited the -hatred that the ancient scholars bore to women, and that they should -continue to disparage the sex on account of a few wiles to which woman is -forced by the oppression which weighs upon her; for every word or thought -in conformity with the voice of nature is made in her a crime. - -"What can be more inconsistent than the opinion of Diderot, who pretends -that, to write to woman, one has only to dip his pen in the rainbow, and -sprinkle the writing with dust from butterflies' wings? Women might reply -to the philosopher: Your civilization persecutes us as soon as we obey -nature; we are obliged to assume a fictitious character and to listen to -impulses contrary to our desires. To give us a relish for this doctrine, -you are forced to bring in play deceitful illusions and language, as you -do with respect to the soldier whom you cradle in laurels and immortality -to divert his thoughts from his wretched condition. If he were truly -happy, he would welcome the plain and truthful language which you take -care not to address to him. It is the same with women; if they were free -and happy, they would be less eager for illusions and cajoleries, and it -would no longer be necessary in writing to them to place rainbows and -butterflies' wings under contribution. - -"When it (Philosophy) rails at the vices of women, it criticises itself; -this it is that produces these vices by a social system which, repressing -their faculties from their infancy and through the whole course of their -life, forces them to have recourse to fraud in order to yield to nature. - -"To attempt to judge of women by the vicious character which they display -in civilization is like attempting to judge of human nature by the -character of the Russian peasant, who is destitute of all ideas of honor -and liberty; or like judging the beaver by the stupidity which they show -when domesticated, whilst in a condition of liberty combined with labor, -they become the most intelligent of all quadrupeds. The same contrast -will reign between the women who are slaves of civilization and those who -are free in the combined order; they will surpass men in industrial -devotion, in loyalty, in nobleness; but outside of the free and combined -state, woman, like the domesticated beaver or the Russian peasant, -becomes a being so inferior to her destiny and talents that we are -inclined to despise her when judging her superficially according to -appearances. - -"It is a surprising thing that women should have always shown themselves -superior to men when they have had it in their power to display on the -throne their natural talents, of which the diadem assured them a free -use. Is it not certain that of eight queens, independent and unmarried, -seven will be found to have reigned with glory, while of eight kings, we -count habitually seven feeble sovereigns. - -... The Elizabeths and Catherines did not make war in person, but they -knew how to choose their generals; and it is enough that these are good. -In every other branch of administration, has not woman given lessons to -man? What prince has surpassed in firmness Maria Theresa who, in a -disastrous moment, when the fidelity of her subjects was tottering and -her ministers were struck with terror, undertook herself alone to inspire -all with new courage? She intimidated by her presence, the disaffected -Diet of Hungary; she harangued the Magnates in the Latin tongue, and -brought her very enemies to swear on their sabres to die for her. This is -an indication of the prodigies that would be wrought by feminine -emulation in a social order which would permit free scope to her -faculties. - -"And you, the oppressing sex,--would you not go beyond the faults imputed -to women if you, like them, had been moulded by a servile education to -believe yourselves automatons created to obey prejudices and to cringe -before the master whom chance had given you? Have we not seen your -pretensions to superiority confounded by Catharine, who trampled under -foot the masculine sex? In creating titled favorites, she trailed man in -the dust, and proved that it is possible for him in full liberty to abase -himself beneath woman, whose degradation is forced, and consequently, -excusable. It would be necessary, to confound the tyranny of man that, -for the space of a century, a third sex should exist, which should be -both male and female, and stronger than man. This new sex would prove by -dint of blows that men as well as women were made for its pleasures; then -we should hear men protest against the tyranny of the hermaphrodite sex, -and confess that force ought not to be the sole law of right. Now why -are these privileges, this independence, which they would reclaim from -this third sex, refused by them to women. - -"In singling out those women who have had power to soar, from the virago, -like Maria Theresia, to those of a gentler type, like the Ninons and the -Sévignés, I am authorized in saying that woman, in a state of liberty, -will surpass man in all functions of the mind and body which are not the -attributes of physical strength. - -"Man seems already to foresee this; he becomes indignant and alarmed when -women give the lie to the prejudice that accuses them of inferiority. -_Masculine jealousy has especially broken out against women authors; -philosophy has kept them out of academic honors, and has sent them back -ignominiously to the household._"... (p. 148.) - -"What is their existence to-day (that of women)? They exist in privations -alone, even in the trades, in which man has encroached on everything, -_even to the minutest occupations of the needle and the pen, while women -are seen employed in the toilsome labors of the field. Is it not -scandalous to see athletes thirty years old squatted before a desk, or -carrying a cup of coffee with muscular arms_, as if there were not women -and children enough to attend to the minor details of the counting-room -and the household. - -"What then are the means of subsistence for women destitute of fortune? -The distaff, or else their charms if they have any. _Yes, prostitution -more or less glossed over is their only resource_, which philosophy again -contests to them; this is the abject fate to which they are reduced by -this civilization, this conjugal slavery which they have not even thought -of attacking." (p. 150.) - -Fourier bitterly reproaches women authors for having neglected to seek -the means whereby to put an end to such a state of affairs, and adds with -great reason: - -"Their indolence in this respect is one of the causes that have accrued -from the contempt of man. _The slave is never more contemptible than by a -blind submission which persuades the oppressor that his victim was born -for slavery._, (p. 150)." - -Fourier is right, but ... to elevate others is to risk being lost one's -self in the crowd; and every one is not capable of this degree of -abnegation. - -To combat for the right of the weak when men have admitted you to their -ranks, is to prepare for yourself a rough way and a heavy cross. - -In the first place, you are exposed to the hatred and raillery of men, -then half-cultured women corroded by jealousy, invent a thousand -calumnies for your destruction; they feign to be scandalized that a woman -dare protest against the inferiority and use of her sex; they enter into -league with the masters, clamor louder than they and satirize you without -mercy. - -Now all women are not made to shrug their shoulders in the face of this -cohort of morbid minds ... they love peace too well, they lack courage, -and _they do not care enough for justice_; is it not so, ladies? - -Let us return to Fourier. It is known that he admits several social -periods. According to him, the pivot of each of them hinges on love and -the degree of liberty of woman. - -"As a general rule," he says, "_social progress and changes of the period -will be wrought in proportion to the progress of women towards liberty, -and the decay of the social order will be wrought in proportion to the -decline of the liberty of women_." - -In another place, he adds in speaking of philosophers: - -"If they treat of morals, they forget to recognize and to claim the -rights of the weaker sex, _the oppression of which destroys the basis of -justice_." - -He says again, elsewhere: - -"Now, God recognizes as liberty only that which is extended to both -sexes, and not to one alone; so he has prescribed that all the germs of -social evils, as the savage state, barbarism, civilization, should have -no other pivot than the enthrallment of women; and that all the germs of -social good, as the sixth, seventh and eighth period, should have no -other pivot, no other compass, than the progressive affranchisement of -the weaker sex." - -Fourier is reproached with having desired the emancipation of woman in -love; nothing is more true. But to impute this to him as immorality, men -must censure their own morals. Now, these gentlemen considering -themselves as wholly _pure_, though themselves representing the -_butterfly_ in love, infidelity and the simultaneous possession of -several women being only a pastime to them, I do not really see what they -can blame in Fourier. - -Either what they do is right, and therefore cannot be wrong in woman; - -Or what they do is wrong; then why do they do it? - -Fourier believed in the unity of the moral law and in the equality of the -sexes; he believed in the lawfulness of the morals of these gentlemen, -_minus perfidy and hypocrisy_; this is the reason that he claims -emancipation in love for woman: he is logical. - -Besides, he repeats continually that the ethics that he depicts would -cause disorder in the civilized period; and that they can only be -established progressively in subsequent periods. Many among the -Phalansterians reject Fourier's ethics with respect to love as well as -his Theodicy, and I myself have heard several discourses in which the -orator condemned, not only falsity in conjugal relations, but also -looseness of morals. - -Fourier and the Saint Simonian orthodoxy have both been guilty of the -same error with regard to the emancipation of woman; but, men, I repeat, -must be very audacious to impute it to them as a crime, since they -indulge themselves in worse; as to women, sustained and loved by these -reformers, let them imitate the pious conduct of Shem and Japhet; one -owes respect to his father, whatever may be the idea or the wine with -which he is drunken. - -Now that we have cited the master, let us enumerate the principal points -of the Fourierist doctrine, touching the liberty of woman and the -equality of the sexes: - -1. Man and woman are composed of the same physical, moral and -intellectual elements; there is, therefore, between the sexes, identity -of nature. - -2. The proportion of these elements differs in the two sexes, and -constitutes the difference that exists between them. - -3. This difference is so equalized that the value shall be equal. Where -man is the stronger, he takes precedence of woman; where woman is -stronger, she takes precedence of man. - -4. Man belongs to the _major mode_: he has the ascendency over woman in -intellect, in logic, in the larger manufactures, in friendship; it -belongs to him therefore to create positive science, to connect facts, to -regulate commercial relations, to bind together interests, and to -organize groups and series. To all these things, woman brings her -indispensable aid, but by reason of her aptitudes, her services are only -secondary therein. - -5. Woman belongs to the _minor mode_; she has the ascendency over man in -the kind of intellect that applies and adapts, in the intuition that puts -man on the track of the good to which masculine logic should attain; in -the sphere of maternity in which she presides over education, for she -comprehends the means to be employed to ameliorate the species in every -respect better than man; in the sphere of love in which she has the right -and the power to civilize and refine the relations of the sexes; and to -stimulate man to conquest of the intellect, to the amelioration of the -physical conditions of the globe, of industry, of art, of social -relations, etc. - -Woman intervenes to a certain point in the major mode, so does man enter -into the minor mode, in which his coöperation is indispensable. - -Thus, in general, in man the head predominates, in woman, the heart; but -as both have a heart and a head, man, through his heart, becomes an aid -in the minor mode, and woman, through her head, becomes an aid in the -major mode. - -6. There are men who are women both in head and in heart; women who are -men both in heart and in head; in humanity they form the eighth of an -exception. Full liberty and right are granted to them. - -7. Each member of the Phalanstery follows his vocation, obeys his -attractions, _for attractions are proportional to destinies_. Therefore -the eighth of an exception in both sexes, having an attraction towards -labors that belong more especially to the other sex, is at liberty to -yield to them. - -8. All major men and women have an equal vote. - -9. All matters are regulated by chiefs _of both sexes_, chosen by the -free vote of both sexes. - -10. All offices, from the presidency of the group to that of the globe, -are filled jointly by men and women, who divide between them the details -of this common function. - -11. The mother is the instructress of her children; they belong to her -alone; the father has no rights over them unless the mother chooses to -confer these on him. - -Such is the summary of the Fourierist doctrine on the subject of which we -treat. - -If the Societary School has not reached perfect truth, it must be at -least acknowledged that it has taken the right way to attain it. Whether -its theory of the classification and the predominance of faculties in -conformity with the sexes be exact or not, the error will not be -productive of mischievous results in practice. Woman being free to follow -her aptitudes, being half in rights and functions, could always place -herself in the exceptional eighth, without fear of encountering jealous -individuals, better fitted than herself to warble in the minor key, who -would send her back to the duties of the household. - -I remember, in this connection, a certain advocate, by no means -_feminine_, professing a superb disdain of the sex to which his mother -belonged, worthy in a word, to be the disciple of P. J. Proudhon; would -you know what this man had retained of all his lessons in law? The art of -sweeping a room properly, of polishing furniture, of hemming napkins and -pocket handkerchiefs neatly, and of compounding sauces. Do you not think, -illustrious Proudhon, that he might have been advised with more justice -to _go and iron his collars_, than certain women who write good articles -on Philosophy. - -But let us return to Fourier. - -Among the Socialist Schools, that of Fourier occupies a distinguished -place; it is the one most deserving of the gratitude of women through the -principles that it has laid down. Be it understood, we separate in this -connection the principles of Liberty and Equality from all that relates -to the question of ethics, which we cannot resolve in the same manner as -Fourier, _any more for woman than man_. - - - - -CHAPTER VII. - -SUMMARY. - - -Appear, all ye modern innovators, before your judge, the public. Sum up -your opinions. - -COMMUNIST. The two sexes differ, do not perform the same functions, but -_they are equal before the law_. - -For woman to be really emancipated, society must be remoulded -economically, and marriage suppressed. - -PHILADELPHIAN AND ICARIAN. We are of your opinion, brother, except in -what concerns marriage. - -ORTHODOX ST. SIMONIAN. If Christianity has despised and oppressed woman, -it has been because, in its sight, she represented matter, the world, -evil. We, who are come to give the true meaning of the Trinity, -rehabilitate or explain what our predecessors have condemned. Woman is -the equal of man, because in God, who comprises everything, matter is -equal to spirit. With man, woman forms the couple which is the social -individual, the functionary. As woman is very different from man, we do -not take the liberty of judging her; we content ourselves with -_summoning_ her that she may reveal herself. - -Notwithstanding we think that she can only be affranchised by being -emancipated in love. - -PIERRE LEROUX _agitated_. Take care! It is not so much in sex that woman -should be affranchised; it is only in her quality of _wife and human -being_. She has sex only for him she loves; to all other men she is what -they are themselves: sensation, sentiment, sense. She must be free in -marriage and in the commonwealth as man himself should be. - -FUSIONIST _interrupting him_. You are right, Pierre Leroux; yet neither -is the previous speaker wholly wrong; woman is free and the equal of man -in everything, because spirit and matter are equal in God; because the -man and the woman form together the human androgynus, the derivation of -the divine androgynus. It is not so, my dear sister? - -MYSELF. Excuse me, brothers, from joining in your theological discussion; -my wings are not strong enough to follow you into the bosom of God, in -order to assure myself whether he is spirit or matter, androgynus or not, -binary, trinary, quarternary, or nothing of all these. It is enough for -me that you all grant that woman should be free, and the equal of man. - -I permit myself only a single observation; that your notion of the couple -or of the androgynus, at the bottom one and the same thing, tends fatally -to the subjugation of my sex; if, by a metaphor, a fiction, we make of -two beings, endowed each with a separate will, free-will and intellect, a -single unity; _in social practice_, this unity is manifested by a single -will, a single free-will, a single intellect, and the individuality that -prevails in our society is that which is endowed with strength of arm; -the other is annihilated, and the right given to the couple is in reality -only the right of the stronger. The use that M. Proudhon has made of -androgyny ought to cure you of this fancy; as the use which your -predecessors made of the ternary ought to have preserved you from -trinitary metaphysics. Be it said without offence to you, gentlemen, I -have a decided antipathy to any trinities and androgynies whatsoever; I -am a sworn enemy to all metaphysics, whether profane or sacred,--a -constitutional vice, aggravated in me by Kant and his school. - -PHALANSTERIAN. For God's sake, gentlemen, let us quit this mysticism. Man -and woman are different, but the one is as necessary as the other to the -great work that should be accomplished by humanity; therefore they are -equal. As each individual has a right to develop himself integrally, to -manifest himself completely in order to perform the parcellary task which -his attractions assign to him, the liberty of one sex can no more be -called in question than can that of the other. Man modulates in major, -woman in minor, with an exceptional eighth; but, as in all the general -functions, the combination of the two modes is necessary, it is evident -that each of them ought to be double, and that woman ought everywhere to -be equal with man. - -M. DE GIRARDIN _somewhat abruptly_. Gentlemen, I agree with you that -woman ought to be free and equal with man; only I maintain that her -function is to manage, to economize, and to rear her children, while man -labors and brings into the household the product of his industry. - -As I wish woman to be freed from servitude and all children to be -rendered legitimate, I suppress civil marriage, and institute universal -dowry. - -M. LEGOUVE _smiling_. You go too fast and too far, my dear sir, you will -frighten everybody. At least, I believe like you in the equality of the -sexes through the equivalence of their functions, but I take good care -not to breathe a word of it. I content myself with claiming for woman -instruction, diminution of conjugal servitude, and offices of charity; -counting, between ourselves, that these victories obtained, women will be -in a position through their education and proved utility, to affranchise -themselves completely. Well! despite my reserve and moderation, you see -that some call me _effeminate_, others _sans culotte_. - -M. MICHELET, _rising with tears in his eyes_. Alas, gentlemen, you are -all in the wrong road; and I am very sorry, my beloved academician -Legouvé, to see you employ your elegant pen in leading woman in so -perilous and irrational a way. - -As to you, gentlemen, who lay claim to liberty and equality of rights for -woman, you are not authorized by her to do so; she demands no right, what -should she do with it--a being always feeble, always sick, always -wounded. Poor creature! What can be her rôle here below, if not to be -adored by her husband, whose duty it is to constitute himself her -instructor, her physician, her confessor, her sick nurse, her -waiting-maid; to keep her in a hot-house, and with all these multiplied -cares to earn beside the daily bread; for woman cannot, ought not to -work; she is the love and the altar of the heart of man. - -Some among you have dared utter the vile word: Divorce. - -No divorce! The woman who has given herself away, has received the -imprint of man. You should not abandon her, however guilty she may be. I -thought in the beginning that after your death she ought to wear mourning -to the tomb, beyond which, she and her husband would be fused into the -unity of love. But I have thought better of it; you may appoint a -successor. - -While Michelet is seating himself, wiping his eyes, the lid of a coffin -is seen to rise, and Comte exclaims in a sepulchral tone: - -_Worthily_ and _admirably_ spoken, illustrious professor! - -What! you here? exclaims the assembly. Then one does not perish entirely, -as you taught your disciples? - -COMTE. No, gentlemen, and I was very agreeably surprised to see myself -mistaken. But it is not to instruct you about the life beyond the tomb -that I return; that would not have been worth the trouble of disturbing -myself. It is to express to the great professor Michelet all the -satisfaction that I feel in seeing him so richly poetise the ideal that I -set up, and strew so many flowers over the _admirable_ maxim of Aristotle -and the _commandment_ of the great St. Paul. - -Yes, thrice illustrious Master, you have rightly said: woman is made for -man, she should obey him, be devoted to him; she is only a doll in -private life, absolutely nothing in public life. Yes, men should labor -for her; yes, marriage is indissoluble; all this is irreproachable. - -AUGUSTE COMTISM. I regret but one thing--that you have not preserved the -ejaculatory orisons of the wife to the husband, and of the husband to the -wife; it would have been a good example and have made a fine effect to -see them every morning kneeling face to face, with clasped hands and -closed eyes. I hope that this is only forgetfulness, and that you will -reëstablish this detail in your next edition. I congratulate you openly -on the happy thought that you have conceived of justifying the absorption -of woman by man by aid of a wound and the mysteries of impregnation; -this will have a great effect on the ignorant. - -Rebellious women, and the madmen _with corrupt hearts_ who sustain them, -say that you are a poetic and ingenuous egotist, that our beloved -Proudhon is a brutal egotist; that I am an egotist by A + B. Let them say -so; I approve and bless you." - -The apparition was preparing to lie down again in his coffin when, having -a passion for encountering phantoms, I seized a corner of his winding -sheet, and, notwithstanding an unequivocal sign from him of _vade retro_, -I had the courage to represent humbly to the defunct high priest that the -brow of M. Proudhon deserved quite as much to be blessed as that of M. -Michelet. The defunct gravely crossed his fleshless fore finger and thumb -over the haughty and irreverent head of the great critic, who neither -bowed nor seemed infinitely flattered. - -It being his turn to speak, Proudhon rose and said: "Gentlemen -Communists, Philadelphians, Fusionists, Phalansterians, Saint Simonians, -and you, MM. Girardin and Legouvé, as well as all of your adherents, you -are all _effeminate_, men _hardened in absurdity_. - -"If my friend Michelet has gilded, perfumed and sugared the pill for you, -I cannot imitate his address and moderation, for you know that in -temperament I, P. J. Proudhon, am neither tender nor poetical. Permit me -then roughly to tell you the truth concerning a question _of which you do -not understand the first word_. - -"The Church, St. Thomas d'Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, St. Paul, and Auguste -Comte, as well as the Romans, the Greeks, Manu and Mahomet teach that -woman is made for the pleasure and use of man, and that she should be -subjected to him; now I have sufficiently established these great truths -by affirmations without reply. It is demonstrated to-day, therefore, to -all who believe in me that woman is a passive being, having the germ of -nothing, who owes everything to man, and that, consequently, she belongs -to him as the work to the workman. Lest my solution might appear somewhat -harsh to you, or to savor too much of antiquity of the Middle Ages, I -have borrowed of the modern innovators their farce of Androgyny; I have -made the couple the organ of Justice; in this couple, woman, transformed -by man, becomes a triple deity, a domestic idol, subject in everything to -her priest. I shut her up in the household, and permit her to have only -the superintendence of festivals and spectacles, the education of -children and maidens, etc. - -"Is it not evident, gentlemen, that woman, because she is weaker than we, -is, _by justice_, condemned to obey us, and that _her liberty consists in -experiencing no amorous emotion, even for her husband_? Is it not -evident, in consequence, that you, who do not think as I, are -_effeminate, absurd_ men, and that the women who are no more willing to -be slaves than we were in '89 are _insurgents, impure women whom sin has -rendered mad_?" - -The majority of the assembly laugh; De Girardin shrugs his shoulders; -Legouvé bites his lip in order not to laugh; Michelet appears troubled at -this sally which may spoil everything. As, in uttering the word -_insurgent_, the orator glances at me with marked design, I cannot help -saying "yes, I deserve the name of _insurgent_ like our fathers of '89. -As to you, if you do not amend, I fear greatly that I shall see you die -duly confessed and blessed with extreme unction ... and you will have -well deserved it!" - -Now, gentlemen, let us ascertain the vote of your honorable assembly. - -Four schools,--the Communists, the St. Simonians, the Fusionians and the -Phalansterians,--with one publicist, M. de Girardin, who makes as much -noise by himself alone as a whole school, are for the liberty of woman -and the equality of the sexes. - -MM. Comte, Proudhon and Michelet are against the liberty of women and the -equality of the sexes. - -M. Legouvé and his innumerable adherents wish liberty for woman, and -desire that she should labor to become equal to man through equivalence -of functions. - -Which means that the great majority of those _who think_ are, in -different degrees, for our emancipation. - -Now that my readers are acquainted with your several opinions, gentlemen, -it belongs to me, a woman, to speak myself in behalf of my right, without -leaning on anything but Justice and Reason. - - - - -PART II. - -OBJECTIONS TO THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN. NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF WOMAN. -LOVE. MARRIAGE. LEGAL REFORMS. SUMMARY. - - - - -OBJECTIONS TO THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMEN. - - -I. - -What arguments do the adversaries of the emancipation of women use to -refute the equality of the rights of the sexes? - -Some, theosophists of the old school, claim that one half of humanity is -condemned by God himself to submit to the other half, because, they say, -the first woman sinned. - -Not wishing to depart from the firm ground of justice, reason and proved -facts, we will not argue with this class of adversaries. - -Others, who claim to be imbued with the modern spirit, and pretend to be -disciples of the doctrines of liberty, condemn woman to inferiority and -obedience because, they say, she is weaker physically and intellectually -than man; - -Because she performs functions of an inferior order; - -Because she produces less than man in an industrial point of view; - -Because her peculiar temperament prevents her from performing certain -functions; - -Because she is only fit for in-door life; because her vocation is to be -mother and housewife, to devote herself entirely to her husband and -children; - -Because man protects and supports her; - -Because man is her proxy, and exercises rights both for her and himself; - -Because woman has no more time than capacity to exercise certain rights. - -The rights of woman are in her beauty and our love, add some, gallantly. - -Woman does not claim her rights; many women themselves are scandalized by -the demands made by a few of their sex, continue other men. - -And they spare the courageous women who plead the cause of right, and the -men who sustain them neither calumnies, nor mockery, nor insult, hoping -to intimidate the former and disgust the latter. - -Vain hope! the time in which we could be intimidated has gone by. If it -is justifiable to fear the opinion of those whom we deem juster and more -intelligent than ourselves, it would be folly to be disturbed by those -whose irrationality and injustice we feel able to demonstrate. - -This double demonstration we are about to attempt, taking up one by one -the arguments of these gentlemen. - -1. Woman cannot have the same rights as man, because she is inferior to -him in intellectual faculties, you say. From this proposition, we have a -right to conclude that you consider the _human faculties as the basis of -right_; - -That, the law proclaiming equality of right for your sex, you are all -equal in qualities, all alike strong and alike intelligent. - -That, lastly, no woman is as strong and as intelligent as you; I cannot -say, as the least among you, since, if right is founded on qualities, as -it is equal, your qualities must be equal. - -Now gentlemen, what becomes of these pretensions in the presence of -_facts_ that show you all unequal in strength and in intellect? What -becomes of these pretensions in the presence of _facts_ that show us a -host of women stronger than many men; a host of women more intelligent -than the great mass of men? - -Being unequal in strength and in intellect, and notwithstanding declared -equal in right, it is evident therefore that you have not founded right -on qualities. - -And if you have not taken these qualities into account when your right -has been in question, why then do you talk so loudly of them when the -question is that of the right of woman. - -If the faculties were the basis of right, as the faculties are unequal, -the right would be unequal; and, to be just, it would be necessary to -accord right to those who made good their claims to the necessary -faculties and to exclude the rest; by this standard many women would be -chosen and an infinite number of men excluded. See where we end when we -have not the intellectual energy to take principles into consideration! -You have but one means of evicting us of equality; namely, to prove that -we do not belong to the same species as you. - -2. Woman, you add, cannot have the same rights as man because, as mother -and housewife, she performs only functions of an inferior order. - -From this second proposition, we have a right to conclude that _functions -are the basis of right_; - -That your functions are equivalent, since your right is equal! - -That the functions of woman are not equivalent to those of man. - -You have to prove then, gentlemen, that the functions _individually_ -performed by each of you are equivalent; that, for example, Cuvier, -Geoffroy St. Hilaire, Arago, Fulton, Jacquard, and other inventors and -scholars have not done more, are not doing more for humanity and -civilization than an equal number of manufacturers of pins' heads. - -You have to prove next that the labors of maternity, those of the -household to which the workman owes his life, his health, his strength, -the possibility of accomplishing his task--that these functions without -which there would be no humanity, are not equivalent; that is, as useful -to the social body as those of the manufacturer of jewels or of toys. - -You have to prove lastly that the functions of the female teacher, -merchant, book keeper, clerk, dressmaker, milliner, cook, waiting-maid, -etc., are not equivalent to those of the male teacher, merchant, -accountant, clerk, cook, tailor, hatter, footman, etc.; - -I grant that it is embarrassing to your triumphant argument to encounter -the thousands of _facts_ which show us the _real_ woman performing -numerous functions in competition with you; - -So it is, and these facts must be taken into account. But gentlemen, I -have you in a dilemma! if functions are the basis of right, as right is -equal, functions are equivalent; in which case those performed by woman -are not inferior, since none are so. The functions which she performs are -therefore equivalent to yours, and, by this equivalence, she again -becomes equal. - -Or else functions are not the basis of right; did you not take them into -account when the establishment of your right was in question; why then do -you speak of functions when the question is the right of woman? - -Extricate yourself from this as you can; I shall not help you. - - -II. - -3. Woman produces less than man industrially, you say. Admitting this to -be true, do you count as nothing the great maternal function--the risks -that woman runs in accomplishing it; - -Do you count as nothing the labors of the household, the cares that are -lavished upon you, and to which you owe cleanliness and health? - -If the quantity of the product be the origin of the equality of right, -why have those who produce little, those who produce nothing, and all of -you who produce unequally, equal right? - -Why are all those women who produce, while their husbands and sons enjoy -and dissipate, destitute of the rights which the latter possess? - -You do not admit the question of product into that of right when man is -in question, why then do you admit it when woman is in question? - -You see that this is inconsiderate, irrational, unjust. - -4. Woman cannot be the equal of man, because her peculiar temperament -interdicts to her certain functions. - -Well, then a legislator can, without being unreasonable, decree that all -men who are unfitted by temperament for the profession of arms, for -instance, are excluded from equality of right! - -Temperament, the source of right? - -If a woman had written anything so absurd, she would have been cried down -from one end of the world to the other. - -Why, gentlemen, do you not exclude from equality all men who are weak, -all those who are incapable of performing the functions that you -_prejudge_ woman incapable of performing? - -When you are in question, you admit indeed that the right to perform -every function supposes neither the faculty nor the inclination to make -use of it; why do you not reason in the same manner when the question -concerns us? What would you think of women if, having your rights while -you were in subjection, they should keep you in an inferior position -because you could not accomplish the great functions of gestation and -lactation. - -Man, they would say, being unable to be mother and nurse, shall not have -the right of being instructed like us; of having, like us, civil dignity. -His coarser temperament renders him incapable of being a witness to a -certificate of birth or death; it is evident that his clumsiness excludes -him judicially from diplomatic functions; we cannot therefore recognize -his right to solicit them, etc. - -Ah! gentlemen, you reason in the same manner in excluding woman from -equality under the pretext that, in general, she is of a temperament -weaker than your own; that is, you reason absurdly. - -5. Woman cannot be the equal of man in right because he protects and -maintains her. - -If it is because you protect and maintain us, that we ought not to have -our right, restore it then to unmarried women who are of age, and to -widows whom you neither protect nor maintain. - -Restore their right then to the wives who have no need of your -protection, since the law protects them, even against you; to the wives -whom you do not maintain, since they bring you either a dowry, or a -profession, or services which you would be obliged to recompense if any -other rendered them to you. - -And if to be maintained by another, suffices to deprive an individual of -his right, take it away from the host of men who are maintained by the -incomes or the labor of their wives. - -6. Man, in the exercise of certain rights, is the proxy of woman. - -Gentleman, a proxy is chosen freely, and is not imposed on an individual; -I do not accept you as proxies: I am intelligent enough to transact my -business myself, and I pray you to restore to me, as well as to all the -women who think as I do, an authority which you use unworthily. If -married women, to have peace, are willing to continue you as their -authority, it is their business; but none of you can legitimately retain -that of widows and unmarried women who have attained majority. - -7. Woman has not the same rights as man, because she has no more time -than capacity to exercise them. - -Has woman less time and capacity than your working men, pinned twelve -hours a day to their petty and stultifying tasks? Affirm it if you dare! - -Does it need less time and capacity to make a deposition in a criminal -suit, as woman does, than to witness a civil act or a notarial contract, -a right that woman has not. - -Does it need less time and capacity to be the guardian of sons and to -administer their fortune, as woman does, than to be the guardian of a -stranger or of a nephew, and administer their property, a right that -woman has not. - -Does it need less time and capacity to superintend a manufactory, a -commercial establishment, workmen, as do so many women, than to be at the -head of an office, or of a public administration, and to superintend its -officials, a right that woman has not? - -Does it need less time and capacity to devote one's self to instruction -in a large boarding school, as do so many women, than in the chair of a -professorship, as man alone has the right to do? - -Woman proves, _by her works_, that she lacks capacity and time no more -than you. Facts stifle affirmations for which you should blush. Fie! I am -glad that I am not a man, lest I might say like things and be led to -pretend that an instructress, a literary woman, a woman artist, an -experienced female merchant has not the capacity of a porter or a -rag-picker because she has not a beard on her chin. - -8. The rights of woman are in her beauty and in the love of man. - -Rights, based on beauty, and on that fragile thing styled man's love! -What are these worth, I ask you, gentlemen? - -Then woman shall have rights if she is beautiful, and as long as she -shall continue so; if she is beloved, and as long as she shall continue -so? Old, ugly and forsaken, she must be thrown into the car of the -condemned to be transported to the guillotine? - -If a woman should say such things, what a universal hue and cry would be -raised? - -Yet men pretend that they are rational! We congratulate woman on having -too much common sense ever to be so in this wise. - -After all these arguments, none of which will bear analysis, comes at -last the triumphant objection: women do not claim their rights, many -among them are even scandalized by the demand made by a few in the name -of all. Do not women demand them, gentlemen? - -What are a host of American women doing at the present time? - -What have a number of English women done already? - -What did Jean Deroin, Pauline Roland and many others, do here in 1848? - -What am I doing to-day, in the name of a legion of women of whom I am the -interpreter? - -_All_ women do not make reclamations, no; but do you not know that every -demand of right is made at first singly? - -That slaves accustomed to their chains, do not feel them until their -instigators to revolt show them the bruises on their flesh? - -A few only demand their rights, you say; but is it in accordance with -principle or with numbers that you judge of the justice of a cause? - -Did you wait until _all_ the male population demanded their right of -universal suffrage in order to decree it to them? - -Did you wait for the revendication of _all_ the slaves of your colonies -before emancipating them? - -Yes, it is true, gentlemen, that many women are opposed to the -emancipation of their sex. What does this prove? That there are human -beings abased enough to have lost all sentiment of dignity; but not that -right is not right. - -Among the blacks, there are many who hate, denounce, and deliver up to -the scourge and to death those among them who are meditating how to break -their chains; which is right, which has the sentiment of human dignity, -the latter or the former? - -We demand our place at your side, gentlemen, because identity of species -gives us the right to occupy it. - -We demand our right, because the inferiority inwhich we are kept is one -of the most active causes of the decay of morals. - -We demand our right, because we are persuaded that woman has to set her -stamp on Science, Philosophy, Justice and Politics. - -We demand our right, lastly, because we are convinced that the general -questions, the lack of solution of which threatens our modern -civilization with ruin, can only be resolved by the co-operation of woman -delivered from her fetters and left free in her genius. - -Is it not a great proof of our insanity, our _impurity_, gentlemen, that -we feel this ardent desire to check the corruption of morals, and to -labor for the triumph of Justice, the coming of the reign of Duty and -Reason, the establishment of an order of things in which humanity, -worthier and happier, shall pursue its glorious destinies without the -accompaniment of cannon or the shedding of blood? - -Is it not because the advocates of emancipation are _impure women whom -sin has rendered mad, beings incapable of comprehending Justice and -conscientious works_? - - -III. - -Gentlemen, we will conclude. - -Though that were true which I deny; that woman is inferior to you; -though that were true which _facts_ prove false; that she can perform -none of the functions which you perform, that she is fit only for -maternity and the household, she would be none the less your equal in -right, because right is based neither on superiority of faculties nor on -that of the functions which proceed from them, but on identity of -species. - -A human being, like you, having, like you, intellect, will, free will and -various aptitudes, woman has the right, like you, to be free and -autonomous, to develop her faculties freely, to exercise her activity -freely; to mark out her path, to reduce her to subjection, as you do, is -therefore a violation of Human Right in the person of woman--an odious -abuse of force. - -From the stand point of facts, this violation of right takes the form of -grievous inconsistency; for we find many women far superior to the -majority of men; whence it follows that right is granted to those who -ought not to have it, according to your doctrine, and refused to those -who ought to possess it, according to the same doctrine, since they make -good their claim to the qualities requisite. - -We find that you accord right to qualities and functions, _because the -individual is a man_, and that you cease to recognize it in the same -case, _because the individual is a woman_. - -Yet you boast of your lofty reason,--yet you boast of possessing the -sense of justice! - -Take care, gentlemen! Our rights have the same foundation as yours: in -denying the former, you deny the latter in principle. - -A word more to you, pretended disciples of the doctrines of '89, and we -have done. Do you know why so many women took part with our Revolution, -armed the men, and rocked their children to the song of the -_Marseillaise_! It was because they thought they saw under the -Declaration of the rights of men and citizens, the declaration of the -rights of women and female citizens. - -When the Assembly took it upon itself to undeceive them, by lacking logic -with respect to them, and closing their meetings, they abandoned the -Revolution, and you know what ensued. - -Do you know why, in 1848, so many women, especially among the people, -declared themselves for the Revolution? It was because they hoped that -this Revolution would be more consistent with respect to them than the -former had been. - -When, in their senseless arrogance and lack of intelligence, the -representatives not only forbid them to assemble, but _drove_ them from -the assemblies of men, the women abandoned the Revolution by detaching -their husbands and sons from it, and you know what ensued. - -Do you comprehend at last? - -I tell you truly; all your struggles are in vain, if woman does not go -with you. - -An order of things may be established by a _coup de main_, but it is only -maintained by the adhesion of majorities; and these majorities, -gentlemen, are formed by us women, through the influence that we possess -over men, through the education that we give them with our milk. - -We have it in our power to inspire them from their cradles with love, -hatred or indifference for certain principles; in this is our strength; -and you are blind not to comprehend that if man is on one side and woman -on the other, humanity is condemned to weave Penelope's web. - -Gentlemen, woman is ripe for civil liberty, and we declare to you that we -shall henceforth regard whoever shall rise against our lawful claim as an -enemy of progress and of the Revolution; while we shall rank among the -friends of progress and of the Revolution, those who declare themselves -in favor of our civil emancipation, SHOULD THEY BE YOUR ADVERSARIES? - -If you refuse to listen to our lawful demands, we shall accuse you before -posterity of the crime with which you reproach the holders of slaves. - -We shall accuse you before posterity of having denied the faculties of -woman, because you feared her competition. - -We shall accuse you before posterity of having refused her justice, -because you wished to make her your servant and plaything. We shall -accuse you before posterity of being enemies of right and progress. - -And our accusation will remain standing and living before future -generations who, more enlightened, more just, more moral than you, will -turn away their eyes with disdain and contempt from the tomb of their -fathers. - - - - -NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF WOMAN - - -I. - -I think that we have sufficiently though summarily proved to all honest -inquiries that social right is identical for both sexes since they are -identical in species. The question of right being placed beyond -discussion, we can now ask what use woman shall make of her right; in -other terms, what functions she is qualified to perform in accordance -with her whole nature. - -Let us first mark the profound difference that exists between right and -function, then define and divide the latter. - -_Right_ is the condition _sine qua non_ of the development and -manifestations of the human being: it is absolute, general for the whole -species, because the individuals who compose it should be able lawfully -to develop and manifest themselves. - -_Function_ is the use of the faculties of the individual with a view to a -purpose useful to himself and to others; function is therefore a -production of utility and, in conclusion, the manifestation of the -aptitudes predominating in each of us, whether naturally, or in -consequence of education and habit. - -Society, having needs of every kind, has functions of every nature and -various scope; these functions may be classified as follows: - - 1. Scientific and philosophic functions; - 2. Industrial functions; - 3. Artistic functions; - 4. Educational functions; - 5. Medical functions; - 6. Functions for the preservation of safety; - 7. Judicial functions; - 8. Functions of exchange and circulation; - 9. Administrative and governmental functions; - 10. Legislative functions; - 11. Functions of solidarity or of social benevolence and of - institutions for the prevention of crime. - -This classification, which would be very imperfect and insufficient, were -this a treatise on social organization, being all that is needed for the -use that we have to make of it, we shall adhere to it in this place. - -Men, and women after them, have deemed proper hitherto to class man and -woman separately; to define each type, and to deduce from this ideal the -functions suited to each sex. Neither have chosen to see that numerous -facts contradict their classification. - -What! exclaims the classifiers, do you deny that the sexes differ? Do you -deny that, if they differ, they should have different functions? - -If our classification does not seem good to you, criticise it, we ask -nothing more; but replace it by a better one. - -To criticise your classification, ladies and gentlemen, is what I intend -to do; but if the elements are wanting to establish a better, can you, -ought you even to require me to present you one. - -Do you think me a man, that you exact of me abuse of the _à priora_, and -a startling arbitrary course of reasoning. "Proudhon is right," murmur -these gentlemen; "woman is incapable of abstract reasoning, of -generalizing, of _knowing herself_".... - -Really, gentlemen, do you think that it is through incapacity that I am -unwilling to present to you a classification of the sexes, a theory of -the nature of woman?... Let us hasten then to prove the contrary: instead -of one theory, we will give you _four_. Man and woman form a series only -with respect to the reproduction of the species: all the other -characteristics by which it has been attempted to make a distinction -between them are only generalities contradicted by a multitude of facts; -now, as a generality is not a law, nothing can be therefore concluded -from these, nothing absolute deduced from them in a functional point of -view. - -On the other hand, the greatest radical difference of zoological species -lies in the nervous system, especially in the greater or lesser bulk and -complexity of the encephalus; now, Anatomy admits, after numerous -experiments, that, in proportion to the whole size of the body, the brain -of woman equals in volume that of man; that the composition of both is -the same, and Phrenology adds that the organs of the brain are the same -in both sexes. - -Lastly, it is a biological principle that organs are developed by -exercise and atrophied by continued repose; now, man and woman do not -exercise their encephalic organs in the same manner; educational -training, manners, prejudice, enforced habits tend to develop in the -masculine what becomes atrophied in the feminine head; whence it follows -that the differences empirically established are by no means the result -of Nature, but of the accidental causes by which they have been produced. - -Conclusion: the two sexes therefore, when reared alike become developed -alike, and are fit for the same functions, except those which concern the -reproduction of the species. - -Here, gentlemen, is a theory complete in all its parts, tenable in an -anatomo-biologic point of view, and which I challenge you to prove false, -for I shall find replies to all your objections. - - -II. - -We admit the principle that the sexes form series in physical, moral, -intellectual, consequently functional respects. - -We believe that they should become subordinate to each other in -proportion to their relative excellence; and we take the destiny of the -species as the touchstone of their respective value. - -If we compare the sexes with each other, we prove in a general way, that -man is merely woman on a coarser scale; we prove in the second place that -he is far more animal than woman, since his muscular system is more fully -developed and since he respires lower; so that he is most evidently a -medium between woman and the higher species of apes. - -Woman alone contains and develops the human germ; she is the creator and -preserver of the race. - -It is not quite certain that the co-operation of man is necessary for the -work of reproduction; _this is the means chosen by Nature_, but human -science will succeed, we hope, in delivering woman from this -insupportable subjection. - -Analogy authorises us to believe that woman, the sole depositary of the -human germ, is equally the sole depositary of all the moral and -intellectual germs, whence it follows that she is the inspirer of all -knowledge, all discoveries, all justice, the mother of all virtue. Our -analogous deductions are confirmed by facts; woman employs her intellect -in the concrete; she is an acute observer; man is only fit to construct -paradoxes and to lose himself in the abyss of metaphysics; science has -only emerged from the limbo of _à priora_ without confirmation, since the -advent into this domain of the form of the feminine mind; we shall -affirm, therefore, that true scholars are feminized minds. - -In moral respects, man and woman differ greatly; the former is harsh, -rough, without delicacy, devoid of sensibility and modesty; his habitual -relations with the other sex modify him only with great difficulty; woman -is naturally gentle, loving, feeling, equitable, modest; to her, man owes -justice and his other virtues, when he has any; whence it follows that it -is really to woman alone that social progress is due; hence it is that -every step made towards civilization is marked by an advance of woman -towards liberty. - -If we consider each of the sexes in their relation to human destiny, we -are forced to admit that, if there was reason for the predominance of man -in the necessity of hewing out this destiny, the pre-eminence of woman is -ensured in the future reign of right and peace. - -It was necessary to struggle and fight in order to establish justice and -to subject nature to humanity; this belonged of right to man, who -represents muscular force, the spirit of conflict; but as we already -foresee in the approaching future, the coming of peace, the substitution -of pacific labor and negotiations for war, it is clear that woman will -take rightfully the direction of human affairs, to which she will be -called by her faculties, found better adapted to the end henceforth to be -pursued. - -Woman should be the last to develop and manifest herself socially, for -the same reason that the human species is the last creation of our globe; -the perfect being always appears after those that have served to pave the -way. - -As it is demonstrated, on the other hand, that, in the scale of the -various organisms, the organ that is superadded to the others to -constitute a change of species, governs those which the individual -derives from inferior species, so woman, fully developed in a social body -organized for peace and pacific labor, will be the new organ that will -govern the social body. - -Does this signify that woman should oppress man? By no means; she would -thus be ungrateful for the services rendered her, and would trespass -against her gentle nature; but she will teach him to comprehend that _his -glory is to obey_, to become subordinate to the other sex, because he is -less perfect, and because his qualities are no longer necessary to the -general good. - -You laugh, gentlemen, at this second theory; you think it absurd.... So -it is; for it is the counterpart of the thetic woman of Proudhon. Let us -proceed then to the third theory. - - -III. - -Every classification of the human species is a pure subjective creation; -that is, one which exists only in the form given to the perception by -the intellect; the very conception of humanity with the enumeration of -the characteristics which are reputed to distinguish it from the other -species, is stamped with subjectivity. - -The truth is that not a single human being resembles his neighbor; that -there are as many different men and women as there are men and women -composing the species. - -Classifications, in all things, are illusions of the mind, for nature -hates identity and never repeats herself: there are not two grains of -sand, not two drops of water, not two leaves alike; and most probably the -sun, since the commencement of its existence, has not appeared twice -identically the same at its rising. Yet despite the evidence of these -truths, despite the conviction which we have attained of the illusion of -the senses, of the weakness of our intellect, which can know nothing of -the inmost nature of beings; which can only seize upon a few fleeting -traces of their personal characteristics; yet despite all these things we -dare establish series, attribute to them characteristics which are -speedily contradicted by facts, and torture and do violence to the only -beings that really exist; namely, individuals, in the name of that other -thing which exists only in our sick brain: kind, class! - -The bitter fruits that have been produced by our mania for classification -ought to cure us of this. Has not this malady, impelling theocratists and -legislators to divide humanity into castes and classes, caused most of -the calamities of our species? Have we not, thanks to these execrable -divisions, a hideous past, the echoes of which bring back to our -shrinking ears naught but sobs, cries of anger, rebellion, malediction -and vengeance, and sinister clanking of weapons and chains? - -Have we not also to thank them that, on the pages of our history, all -stained with blood and tears and exhaling an odor of the charnel house, -we read nought but tyranny, brutishness and demoralization? - -Have we not further to thank them that king and subject, master and serf, -white and black, man and woman become demoralized by oppression, -injustice and cruelty on one hand; and intrigue, baseness, and vengeance -on the other? - -Are not wrong and wretchedness found everywhere, because inequality, the -offspring of insane classifications, is found everywhere? - -Ah! who shall deliver us from our infatuation! - -Let us class animals, vegetables, minerals if we will! our errors do not -influence and cannot disturb them; but let us respect the human species -which will escape all classification, however reasonable the process may -be, because every human being is changeable, progressive, and differs far -more from his fellows than the most intelligent animal from the rest of -his species. - -Let us leave each one then to make his own autonomic law and to manifest -himself in conformity with his nature, and take care only that right -shall be equal for all; that the strong shall not oppress the weak; that -each function shall be entrusted to the one individual that is proved the -best qualified to perform it; this is all that we can do, all that we -should do, if we seek to show ourselves wise and just. - -Harmony exists in nature, because each being in it follows peaceably the -laws that govern his individuality; it will be the same in humanity, when -universal reason shall comprehend that human order is pre-established in -the co-operation of individual faculties left free in their -manifestations; and that to establish a factitious, wholly imaginary -order; that is, true disorder, is to retard the coming of order, peace -and happiness. - -Let us refrain then from all classification of faculties and functions -according to the sexes: besides being false, they will lead us to -cruelty; for we shall oppress those, whether men or women, who are -neither yielding enough to submit to it nor hypocritical enough to appear -to do so; and we shall do this without profit to human destiny, but, on -the contrary, to its detriment. - -Here, gentlemen, is a _nominalistic_ theory which I challenge you to -overthrow by sufficient reasons: for, as in the first, I shall have -answers to all your objections. - -We now come to our last theory, which is yours in the major and minor -terms, but the opposite in the conclusions. - - -IV. - -All the different parts of the same organism are modified by each other, -and in this manner the functions become mutually modified. - -Now, man and woman differ from each other in important organs. - -Each of the sexes must therefore differ from the other not only through -the organs that distinguish them, but through the modifications produced -by the presence of these organs. - -This, gentleman, is my first syllogism: I know that we shall not contest -this point--it is classical Biology. - -Let us investigate anatomically the organic differences to which -sexuality subjects man and woman. - -_Nervous System._ The so called nerves of feeling are more fully -developed in woman than in man, those of motion are less developed in the -former than in the latter; the cerebellum is more fully developed in the -head of man than in that of woman; in the latter, the antero-posterior -diameter of the brain preponderates over the bi-lateral, which is greater -in proportion in the masculine sex: it is also observed that the organs -of observation, circumspection, subtleness and philoprogenitiveness are -more prominent in the head of woman than in that of man, in which the -reasoning organs, with those of combativeness and destructiveness -predominate. - -_Locomotive System._ Man is larger than woman, he has more compact bones, -and larger and better developed muscles, his thorax is the reverse of -that of woman, in which, the greatest breadth is between the shoulders, -while, with him, it is at the base; the pelvis is larger and broader in -the female than the male sex. - -_Epidermic and cellular systems._ Man has a more hairy skin than woman; -what is called fat is less abundant in the masculine than in the feminine -organism; in general, the skin of man is rougher, and his form less -round; woman has longer and more silky hair. _Splanchnic organs._ The -cerebral mass is the same in proportion in both sexes, as well as the -organs of the brain, with the exception of the predominances which we -have pointed out; the respiratory systems differ somewhat; woman breaths -higher than man; in the latter, the circulation is more active and -energetic. - -To these physical differences correspond intellectual and moral -differences. - -Woman, having the nerves of feeling more fully developed, is more -impressionable and more mobile than man. - -Being weaker and as persistent, she obtains by address and stratagem what -she cannot obtain by force; her weakness gives her timidity, -circumspection, the necessity of feeling herself protected. - -The kinds of labor that require strength are repugnant to her. - -Her maternal destiny renders her an enemy of destruction, of war; and her -more delicate organization makes her dread and shun contention. This same -maternal destination impresses a peculiar stamp on her intellect; she -loves the concrete, and is always inclined to transform thought into -facts, to incarnate it, to give it a fixed form; her reasoning is -intuition or quick perception of a general relation, of a truth that man -elucidates only with great difficulty, by the aid of stilted logic. - -Woman is a better observer than man, and carries induction farther than -he; she is consequently more penetrating, and is a much better judge of -the moral and intellectual value of those about her. - -She has, more than man, sentiment of the beautiful, delicacy of heart, -love of good, respect for modesty, veneration for everything superior. - -More provident than he, she has more order and economy, and looks after -administrative details with a carefulness which is often carried to -puerility. - -Woman is adroit, sedulous; she excels in works of taste, and possesses -strong artistic tendencies. - -Gentler, more tender, more patient than man, she loves everything that is -weak, protects everything that suffers; every sorrow, every calamity -brings a tear to her eye and draws a sigh from her breast. - -This is woman, such as you paint her, gentlemen. - -You then add: - -The vocation of woman therefore is love, maternity, the household, -sedentary occupations. - -She is too weak for occupations that demand strength, and for those of -war. - -She is too impressionable and too feeling, too good, too gentle to be -legislator, judge or juror. - -Her taste for household details, a retired life, and the grave functions -of maternity indicate clearly that she is not made for public -employments. She is too variable to cultivate science with profit; too -feeble and too much occupied beside to pursue protracted experiments. - -Her kind of rationality renders her unsuited to the elaboration of -theories; and she is too fond of the concrete and of details to become -seriously interested in general ideas; which excludes her from all high -professional functions and from those requiring serious study. - -Her place is therefore at the fireside to make man better, to sustain -him, to care for him, to procure him the joys of paternity, and to fill -the place of a good housewife. - -Such are your conclusions: here are mine, admitting as a hypothesis, what -I affirm with you of woman. - - -V. - -1. Woman carrying into Philosophy and Science her subtleness of -observation, her love of the concrete, will correct the exaggerated -tendency of man for abstract reasoning, and demonstrate the falsity of -theories constructed, _à priori_, on a few facts alone. Then only will -ontology disappear, then will it be recognized that a hypothesis is -merely an interrogation point; that truth is always intelligible in its -nature, however unknown it may be; we shall generalize nothing but known -facts, we shall carefully avoid erecting simple generalities into laws, -and we shall thus have veritable philosophy, and true human science, -because they will bear the imprint of both sexes. - -2. Woman carrying her peculiar faculties into the arts and manufactures, -will increasingly introduce therein art, perfection in details. -Cultivated in the direction of her aptitudes, she will find ingenious -methods of application of scientific discoveries. - -3. Patient, gentle, good, more moral than man, she is the born educator -of childhood, the moralizer of the grown man; the majority of the -educational functions revert to her of right, and she has her assigned -place in special instruction. - -4. By her quick intuition and her acuteness of observation, woman alone -can discover the therapeutics of nervous affections; her dexterity will -render her valuable in all delicate surgical operations. On her should -devolve the care of treating the diseases of women and children, because -she alone is capable of fully comprehending them; she has her especial -place in hospitals, not only for the cure of disease, but also for the -execution and surveillance of the details of management and the care of -the patients. - -5. The presence of woman in judicial functions, as juror and arbiter, -will be a guarantee of veritable human justice to all; that is, of -equity. - -Woman alone through her gentleness, her mercy, her sympathetic -disposition, and her subtleness and observation, can comprehend that -society has its share of culpability in every fault committed; for it -should be organized to prevent wrong rather than to punish it. This point -of view, especially feminine, will transform the penitentiary system and -raise up numerous institutions. Then only will the world comprehend that -the punishment inflicted on the guilty should be a means of reparation -and regeneration; society will no longer slay its prisoners as if weak -and fearful: it will amend the assassin instead of imitating him; it will -force the thief to work to make restitution of what he has stolen; it -will no longer believe that it has the right by imprisoning a criminal to -deprive him of his reason, to drive him to despair, to suicide by -solitary confinement; to deprive him completely of marriage; to couple -him with those more corrupt than himself. Conscious of its own share of -culpability, society will repair in penitentiaries the fault of its -carelessness: it will be firm, yet kind and moralizing: it will give in -them the education which it ought to have given outside, and will prepare -work houses for the liberated convicts in order that the contempt and -horror often shown toward them by men worse than they may not drive them -to a second offence. - -7. Woman, carrying into the social household her spirit of order and -economy, her love of details and abhorrence of waste and foolish expense, -will reform government: she will simplify everything; will suppress -sinecures and the accumulation of offices, and will produce much from -little instead of, like man, producing little from much: the purse of the -tax-payers will not complain of the change. - -8. Under the direct influence of woman as legislator, we shall have a -reconstruction of all laws; first and before everything, we shall have -preventive measures, a compulsory education; then the form of legal -proceedings will be simplified, the civil code recast, and all laws -concerning illegitimate children and the inequality of the sexes banished -from it; the laws concerning morals will be more severe, and the penal -code more rational and equitable. - -By her administrative reforms born of the economical instinct of woman, -taxes will be diminished; her abhorrence of blood and war will greatly -reduce the fearful impost of blood-shed. Having a deliberative voice, and -knowing, by her griefs and love the value of a man, it will be only from -sheer necessity that she will consent to vote bevies of citizens for the -shambles called wars: she will do this only when her country is menaced -or when it is necessary to protect oppressed nationalities; in all other -cases, she will employ the system of conciliation. - -9. Woman, being much more economical and a better analyst than man, when -thoroughly instructed, will soon perceive that nations, like individuals, -differ in aptitudes, and that the end of these differences is union and -fraternity through exchange of products: she will therefore deter her -country from cultivating certain branches of the acts and manufactures in -which other nations excel and which they can produce to better advantage; -she will cure it of the foolish pretension of being sufficient unto -itself, and will prevent it from sacrificing the interest of the mass of -consumers to that of a few producers: thus the barriers and custom duties -that separate the different organs of humanity will fall by degrees; -there will be treaties of free trade, and all will be gainers by the -cheapness of products, and the suppression of the expenses of maintaining -a too often annoying department of customs. - -The qualities and faculties of woman not only make her an educator, but -assure her preponderance in all functions arising from social solidarity; -she alone knows how to console, to encourage, to moralize with -gentleness, to comfort with delicacy; she has the genius of charity; to -her therefore should revert the superintendence and direction of -hospitals and prisons for women, the management of charitable -institutions, the care of abandoned children, etc. She should create -institutions to furnish employment to workmen out of work, and to save -liberated convicts from indolence and relapse into crime. - -Thus, gentleman, without departing from the data of your theory, you -behold woman placed everywhere by the side of man, except in the hard -labor from which you yourselves will soon be released by machinery, and -in the military institutions which, in all probability, will some day -disappear. - -Hitherto institutions, laws, sciences, philosophy have chiefly borne the -masculine imprint; all of these things are only half human; in order that -they may become wholly so, woman must be associated in them ostensibly -and lawfully, consequently, she must be cultivated like you; culture will -not make her like you, do not fear it; the rose and the carnation growing -in the same soil, under the same sky, in the same sunshine, with the -cares of the same gardener, remain rose and carnation: they are more -beautiful in proportion as they are better cultivated, and as the -elements which they absorb are more abundant: if man and woman differ, a -similar education will only make them differ still more, because each -will employ it in the development of that which is peculiar to himself. - -For the interest of all things and people it is necessary that woman -should enter all the avocations of life, that she should have her -function in all the functions: _after_ the general interest of humanity, -comes that of the family; it cannot go _before_ it. - -Since woman now is generally mother and housewife while performing at the -same time a host of other functions, she will become none the less so in -taking upon herself a few more; besides, the time of life at which an -individual enters certain important functions is that at which woman has -finished her maternal task. A few women acting as public functionaries -will not hinder the great majority of their companions from remaining in -private life, any more than a few men in the same position hinder the -mass of men from continuing there. - - -VI. - -You admit a classification at last, you say, and still more you grant -that there are masculine and feminine functions. You are mistaken, -gentlemen: you accused me of being incapable of giving you a complete -theory, I have given you the outlines of four--outlines which it would be -easy for me to extend and perfect. But I do not admit a single one of -these theories as a whole. - -Are you eclectic, then? - -The gods forbid! I have as much repugnance to eclecticism, as to _mystic -trinitarianism_ and _androgyny_. - -I do not admit the theory of the identity of the sexes, because I believe -with Biology that an essential organic difference modifies the entire -being; that therefore woman must differ from man. - -I do not admit the theory of the superiority of either sex, because it is -absurd; humanity is man-woman or woman-man; we do not know what one sex -would be if it were not incessantly modified by its relations with the -other, and we know them only as thus modified: What we know to a -certainty is that they form together the existing condition of humanity; -that they are equally necessary and equally useful to each other and to -society. - -I do not admit my third theory because it is ultra-nominalism nominalism; -if it is really true that all the individuals of both sexes differ among -themselves in a far more remarkable manner than those of the other -species, it is none the less true that a classification, founded upon a -constant anatomical characteristic, is legitimate, and that the principle -of classification lies in the nature of things, for if things appear to -us classified, it is because they are so; the laws of the mind are the -same as those of Nature so far as knowledge is concerned; we must admit -this, unless we are sceptics or idealists, and I am neither the one nor -the other; neither am I a realist in the philosophic acceptation of the -word, for I do not believe that the species is something apart from the -individuals in which it is manifested; it is in them and through them; -this repeats the affirmation that there are individuals identical in one -or several respects, although different in all others. - -Lastly, I do not admit the fourth theory, although it may be true in -principle, because the numerous facts that contradict the distinguishing -characteristics, do not permit me to believe that these characteristics -are laws established by sexuality. - -In fact, there are brains of men in heads of women, and _vice versa_. - -Men mobile and impressionable; women firm and insensible. - -Women large, strong and muscular, lifting a man like a feather; men -small, frail, and of extreme delicacy of constitution. - -Women with a stentorian voice and abrupt manners; men with a soft voice -and graceful manners. - -Women with short, harsh hair, bearded, with rough skin and angular -figures; men with long, silky hair without beard, round and portly. - -Women with an energetic circulation of blood; men in whose veins it -courses feebly and slowly. - -Women frank, inconsiderate and daring; men strategic, dissembling and -timid. - -Women violent, loving strife, war and contention, and wont to storm on -every occasion; men gentle, patient, dreading strife, and exceedingly -timid. - -Women loving abstract reasoning, generalizing and synthetizing much, and -without intuition of any sort; men intuitive, acute observers, good -analysts, incapable of generalizing.... I know many such. - -Women insensible to works of art, and without the sentiment of the -beautiful; men full of enthusiasm for both. - -Women immoral, immodest, respecting nothing or no one; men moral, chaste -and reverential. - -Women extravagant and disorderly; men economical and parsimonious to -avarice. - -Women thoroughly selfish, rigid, disposed to take advantage of the -weakness, kindness, folly or misery of others; men full of generosity, -mansuetude, and self-sacrifice. - -What follows from these undeniable facts? that the law of sexual -differences is not manifested through the several characteristics which -have been laid down. - -That these characteristics may be only the result of education, of the -difference of prejudices, of that of occupations, etc. - -That, as these generalities may be the fruit of the difference of -training and surroundings, nothing can be legitimately deduced from them -as to the functions of woman; would it not be absurd, in fact, to pretend -that a woman who is organized for philosophy and the sciences _can not_, -ought not to occupy herself with them because she is a woman, while a -man, who is incapable of them but foolish and vain enough to be ignorant -of his incapacity, can and ought to engage in them because he is a man? - -Functions belong to those who prove their aptitude for them, and not to -an abstraction called sex, for, definitively, every function is -individual in its aggregate or in its elements. - - -VII. - -We have explained why we reject the theories that we have sketched; we -will now explain why we neither give nor wish to give a classification of -the sexes. - -We do not give a classification, because we neither have nor can have -one; the elements for its establishment are lacking. A biological -deduction permits us to affirm that such a one exists; but it is -impossible to disengage its law in the present surroundings; the -veritable feminine stamp will be known only after one or two centuries of -like education and equal rights: then there will be no need of a -classification, for the function will fall naturally to the proper -functionary under a system of equality in which the social elements -classify themselves. - -My belief and my hopes concerning the future, I shall not confess; for I -may be in error, since I have no facts to control my intuitions, and -everything that is purely Utopian has always a dangerous side. Besides -have I not said that, had I formed a classification, I should not give -it? Why not? Because, a detestable use would be made of it, as usual, if -it were adopted. - -Hitherto, have not men availed themselves of classifications based upon -characteristics afterwards recognized as purely imaginary to oppress, -distort and calumniate those banished to the inferior ranks? - -History is at hand to give us this salutary lesson. Where is now to-day -the _ville-pedaille_, the villains and base-tenants, fit only to drain -ditches and to be stripped to the skin? Inventing, governing, making laws -for, and gradually transforming our globe, devastated by the _superior -and only capable_ species, into a smiling and peaceful domain. - -Upon all classification of the human species, whether in castes, in -classes, or in sexes, are based three wrongs. - -The first is to make it a crime in the individual degraded into the lower -series, that he does not resemble the conventional type that has been -formed of this series, while the so called superior being is not required -to resemble his type; thus a weak, cowardly, unintelligent man, a _man -milliner_ or an _embroiderer_, is none the less a man, while a virago, a -firm and courageous woman, a great queen, a woman philosopher are not -women, but men whom none love and who are given over as a prey to wild -beasts, jealous, effeminate men, to devour. - -The second wrong is to take advantage of the conventional type to deform -the being classed in the inferior series in order to kill his energies -and to hinder his progress. Then, to attain this end, education, social -surroundings are organized, prejudices are invented; and so successfully -is this done in general that the oppressed, ignorant of himself, believes -himself really of an inferior nature, resigns himself to his chains, and -is even indignant at the rebellion of those of his series who are too -energetic and individual not to react against the part to which social -imbecility has condemned them. - -The third wrong is to take advantage of the state of debasement to which -the oppressed has been reduced, to calumniate him and deny his rights; -men exclaim, Look! See the serf! see the slave! see the negro! see the -workingman! see woman! What rights would you grant these inferior and -feeble natures? _They are incapable of knowing and ruling themselves_: we -must therefore think for them, wish for them, and govern them. - -Ah no, gentlemen, these are not men and women; they are the deplorable -results of your selfishness, of your frightful spirit of domination, of -your imbecility.... If there were infernal gods, I should devote you to -them relentlessly with all my heart. Instead of calumniating your fellows -that you may preserve your privileges, give them instruction and liberty; -then only will you have the right to pass judgment on their nature: for -we can only know the nature of a human being when it has become freely -developed in equality. - -I think that I have justified my repugnance to give a classification of -the sexes, both by the impossibility of actually establishing a -reasonable one, and by the very legitimate fear of the bad use that would -be made of it. - -But it will be objected, and not without reason, that a classification is -necessary for social practice. - -I consent to it with all my heart, since I have reserved my positions, -and proved the worthlessness of existing classifications. - -As it is my principle that the function should fall to the functionary -who proves his capacity, I say that at present, through the difference of -education, man and woman have distinct functions; and that we must give -to the latter the place that in general she deserves. - -I add that it is a violation of the natural right of woman to form her -with a view to certain functions to which she is destined; she should in -all respects enjoy the rights common to all; it cannot rightfully be said -to her any more than to man, "your sex cannot do that, cannot pretend to -that;" if it does it and pretends to it, it is because the sex can do it -and pretend to it; if it could not, it would not do it; the first right -is liberty, the first duty, the culture of one's aptitudes, the -development of his reason and his power of usefulness: if a god should -affirm the contrary, not conscience, but the god would speak falsely. - -Let woman take the place therefore that is suited to her present -development, but let her never cease to remember that this place is not a -fixed point, and that she should continually strive to mount upwards -until, her peculiar nature revealing itself through equality of -education, instruction, right and duty, she takes her rightful place by -the side of man and on a level with him. - -Let her laugh at all the utopian follies elaborated concerning her -nature, her functions determined for eternity, and remember that she is -not what nature, but what subjection, prejudice, ignorance has made her; -let her escape from all her chains, and no longer permit herself to be -intimidated and debased. - -Thus, gentlemen, all my ideas on the nature and functions of woman may be -summed up in these few propositions: - -I believe, because a physiological deduction authorizes me to do so, that -general humanity common to both sexes is stamped by sexuality. - -In _fact_, I know not, and you know no better than I, what are the true -characteristics arising from the distinction of the sexes, and I believe -that they can be revealed only by liberty in equality, parity of -instruction and of education. - -In social practice, functions should belong to those who can perform -them: woman therefore should perform those functions for which she shows -herself qualified, and society should become so organized that this may -be possible. - -What are these functions relative to her degree of present development? I -will tell you directly. - - - - -LOVE; ITS FUNCTION IN HUMANITY. - - -I. - -You tell the child that lies, "it is wrong to deceive; you would not wish -others to deceive you." - -You tell the child that pilfers, "it is wrong to steal; you would not -wish others to steal from you." - -You tell the child that takes advantage of his strength and knowledge to -torment his younger companion; "you would not wish others to do these -things to you; you are wicked and cowardly." - -These are good lessons. Why then, when the child has become a young man, -do you say: _Young men must sow their wild oats_? - -_To sow their wild oats_ is to deceive young girls, to destroy their -future, to practice adultery, to keep mistresses, to visit brothels. - -Yet mothers, women thus consent to the profanation of their sex! - -Those who forbade their child to steal a toy, permit him to steal the -honor and repose of human beings! - -Those who shamed their son for falsehood, permit him to deceive poor -young girls! - -Those who made it a crime in their son to oppress those weaker than -themselves, permit him to be oppressive and perfidious toward women! - -Then they complain later that their sons treat them ill; that they -dishonor and ruin themselves; - -That they desire the death of their parents, in order to enrich the -usurers from whom they have borrowed money to maintain their mistresses -in luxury. - -They complain that they destroy their health, and give their mothers puny -grandchildren, for whose existence they are in continual anxiety. - -Ah! ladies, you have only what you deserve; bear the weight of a joint -responsibility which you cannot escape. You authorized your sons to sow -their wild oats; endure the consequences. - -But a mother cannot be the confident of her son, it is said. - -Why not, madam, if you have brought him up in such a way as to have no -dishonorable confidence to make to you. - -He would have none to make, if you had accustomed him to conquer himself, -to respect every woman as though she were his mother, every young girl as -though she were his sister; to treat others as he would think it right to -be treated by them; if you had fully inculcated on him that there is but -one system of morality, which both sexes are equally bound to obey; if -you had caused him to honor, love and practice labor; if you had told him -that we live to improve ourselves, to practise justice and kindness, and -to render back to humanity what it does for us in protecting us, -enlightening us, rendering us moral, surrounding us with security and -comfort; that in fine our glory lies in subjecting ourselves to the great -law of Duty. - -If you had reared him in this manner, madam, on surprising in your son -the first signs of the ardent attraction that man feels toward the other -sex, far from abandoning the education of this instinct to the chances of -inexperience, you would do for it what you did for the others; you would -teach the young man to subject it to a wise discipline. - -Instead of repeating the stupidly atrocious phrase; _young men must sow -their wild oats_, you would have taken your son's hand affectionately in -your own, and, looking in his face, would have said: "My child, Nature -decrees that a woman should henceforth attract you more strongly than I, -and should maintain or destroy what I have so laboriously built up: I do -not murmur at this; it must be so. But my affection and duty require me -to enlighten you in this grave juncture. Tell me, if a young man, to -satisfy the instinct which is now awakening in you, should corrupt your -sister, should sacrifice her life, what would you think of him? what -would you do?" - -The young man, accustomed from childhood to practise Justice, would not -fail to reply: "I should think him depraved and cowardly. Would he not be -punished?" - -"No, my son, the seducer is not punished by the law." - -"Well! I would kill him, for my right of justice reverts to me when the -law makes no provision." - -"Right, my child. Then you will be neither depraved nor cowardly with -respect to any young girl; you will not deserve the sentence which you -have pronounced; namely, death. You will respect all young girls and -women as you would wish your sister, your daughter to be respected. - -"Another question: what would you think of a man who should persuade me -to betray your father; who should rob him of my heart and cares; who -should draw me aside from the grave duties of maternity? What would you -think of the man who should act thus with respect to your own companion?" - -"I would judge him like the former and would treat him no better." - -"Right again. Then you will respect all married women as you would wish -your mother and your wife to be respected; and if you should meet any one -towards whom you should feel attracted, or who should be disloyal enough -to seek to attract you, you will shun her: for flight is the sole remedy -for passion. - -"A multitude of women, innocent at first, have been turned aside from the -right path by men who do not think as you do. They now avenge themselves -upon your sex for the evil it has done them. They corrupt and ruin men -who, in their company, lose all sense of morality, who learn to laugh at -what you believe and venerate, and undermine and destroy their health. Do -you feel the deplorable courage to expose yourself to such risks?" - -The young man, practised from childhood to subject his inclinations to -reason and justice, would reply: "No, mother, I will not do what I would -not wish my companion to do; I will neither degrade myself morally, nor -destroy my health, nor contribute my share towards perpetuating a state -of things which degrades the sex to which belongs my mother, my sister, -my wife and my daughters, should I be so happy as to possess them. - -"I acknowledge frankly that I foresee a violent struggle with myself, -but, thanks to the moral training to which you have accustomed me, thanks -to the ideal of destiny which you have given me, which I have accepted in -the plenitude of my reason, and which my duty marks out for me, I do not -despair of subduing myself."--"This victory will be less difficult to -obtain, if you employ yourself usefully and seriously; for you will thus -attract your vitality to the superior regions of the brain. You will do -wisely to add to this, much physical exercise; to abstain from too -substantial a diet, and especially from stimulating drinks! you know the -reaction of the physical upon the moral system. Carefully avoid -licentious reading and improper conversation; give a place in your mind -to the virgin who will be united to you; think and act as if in her -presence; it will guard you and keep you pure. This sweet ideal will -strengthen you against temptation, and contribute greatly to render you -insensible towards those women who should have no place in your heart." - -"Love, my child, is a thing most serious in its results; for the beings -whom it unites become modified by each other; it leaves its traces, -however short may be its duration. - -"Its end is Marriage, one of the ends of which is the continuity of the -species. Now, you know the effects of solidarity of blood; it is most -important therefore that you should choose for your companion a woman -whose character, morals and principles are in unison with your own; not -only for your happiness, but for the _organization_ of your children, the -harmony of their nature and conduct. - -"If passion does not leave you sufficiently free in your judgment, come -to me: I will see for you, and if I say: my son, this woman will debase -you, will cause you to commit faults; be sure that your children will -have evil propensities; she is not adapted to rear them according to your -ideal, which she will never accept, because she is vain and selfish; if -I tell you this, I know, my son, that whatever may be your suffering, you -will renounce a woman whom you would cease to love after a few months' -union, and will prefer a transient sadness to a life of unhappiness." - - -II. - -The mother who has just shown her son why love should be subjected to -Reason and Justice, and has pointed out to him what he should do to -subdue its animal phase, perceives also the awakening of this instinct in -her daughter. She wins her attention and gains her confidence by -revealing to her what is passing within her heart, telling her that, at -her age, she felt the same. - -"Hitherto," continues she, "you have been but a child; your career as a -woman is now commencing. You desire the affection of a man, and your -heart is moved at the sweet thought of becoming a mother. Do not blush, -my daughter; it is lawful, on condition that your desires are made -subject to Reason and the law of Duty. - -"Many snares will be spread before your steps; for men of all ages -address to a young girl innumerable flattering speeches, and surround her -with homage which renders her vain and coquettish if she has the weakness -to suffer herself to be intoxicated thereby. Persuade yourself fully that -all this adoration is not addressed to you individually, but to your -youth, to the brightness of your eyes, to the freshness of your -complexion, and that, were you far better than you are and far superior -in intellect, these men would be ceremoniously and frigidly polite, were -you thirty years older. This thought present in your mind will make you -smile at their frivolous and common-place jargon, and will preserve you -from many weaknesses, such as rivalry of dress, petty jealousies, and the -ridiculous blunder of playing the young girl at fifty. - -"As you can espouse but one man, it is sufficient to be loved by one in -the manner that you wish. A woman who comports herself voluntarily so as -to captivate the hearts of many men, and leaves each to believe that she -prefers him above all, is an unworthy coquette, who sins against Justice -and Kindness: against Justice, inasmuch as she demands a sentiment for -which she can make no return; as she acts towards others as she would -think it unjust that others should act towards her; against Kindness, -inasmuch as she risks causing suffering to sincere hearts and sacrificing -their repose to a pleasurable impulse of vanity: such a woman, my child, -is contemptible; she is a dangerous enemy of her sex; first, because she -gives a bad opinion of it; next, because she is an enemy to the repose of -other women; I know that you are too ingenuous, too true and too worthy -to fear that you will fall into such errors. - -"You have acknowledged to me that your young imagination had pictured to -itself a man. Far from banishing this ideal, let it be always present to -your mind, much less in its physical aspect than in that of intellect, -morality and industry. This image will do more to keep you safe than all -my counsels, than all the surveillance that I might, but never would -exercise over you, because this would be unworthy of us both. - -"Do not forget however that an ideal is absolute; that the reality is -always defective; do not therefore seek in the man to whom you shall give -your heart, a realization of the ideal, but the qualities and faculties -which, with your aid, will permit him to approximate to what you wish to -see him. You yourself are the ideal of a man, not such as you are, but -such as he will aid you to become. - -"I dwell upon this point, my daughter, because nothing is more dangerous -than to insist on finding the ideal in the reality; this makes us over -difficult and lacking in indulgence; and, if we have a lively imagination -and little reason, renders us unhappy and involves us in innumerable -errors. - -You know and feel that the end of love is Marriage; now one of your -duties as lover and spouse is the improvement of the one to whom you -shall be united. You will stand with him in two different relations! -first as his betrothed, afterwards as his wife. Your modifying power -will, in the first case, be exercised in a direct proportion to his -desire to please and to be worthy of you; in the second, in proportion to -his confidence, esteem and affection for you. In the first case, he will -_wish_ to modify himself; in the second, he will do so without knowing -it." - -"What, mother, will he not always love me the same?" - -"Love, my child, undergoes transformations which we should expect and to -which we should submit; in the beginning it is a fever of the soul; but -fever is a condition which cannot last without destroying life. Your -husband, while loving you perhaps more deeply, will love you less -ardently than before Marriage. Your love will become transformed, why -shall not his be the same? - -"You cannot imagine how much trouble results from the ignorance of women -on this point, and from the vain pursuit of the ideal in love. Many -women, believing that their husband loves them no longer because he -loves them in a different manner, become detached from him, suffer, and -betray their duties; others, dreaming of perfection in the loved one, -fancy that they have found it, and becoming disabused after the fever has -past, quit him, accusing him of having deceived them; they love others -with the same illusion, followed by the same disenchantment, until age -creeps on without curing them of the chimera. Lastly, there are others -who, comprehending only the first period of love, cease to love the man -who has passed beyond it, and pursue another love which will bring them -the same fever; these, as you comprehend, have not the slightest idea of -woman's grave duties in Love. - -"What I have just said of women is equally true of men. You will avoid -these dangers, my daughter, you who have been accustomed from childhood -to submit to reason; who know that all reality is imperfect, that habit -weakens sentiment, you will therefore take the man who suits you, as he -is, designing to improve him and to render him happy, knowing in advance -that his love will change without becoming extinguished, if you succeed -in gaining his affection, confidence and esteem, so that he will find in -you good counsel, peace, assistance and security. You are too pure, my -daughter, to foresee all the snares that will be spread for you. It -belongs to me therefore to arm your youthful prudence: You will perhaps -encounter men married or betrothed who, according to the common -expression, _will pay court to you_, and will utter innumerable sophisms -to justify their conduct." - -"Their sophisms would fall to the ground before the simple answer: Sir, -as I should be driven to despair if another woman should rob me of him -whom I loved, as I should despise and hate her, all your compliments -cannot persuade me that it is right for me to do what I would not that -others should do to me. If you return to the subject, I shall inform the -person interested. - -"Right, my child: but if a young man who was free should speak of love, -and urge you to write to him in secret?" - -"Might he not have good reason for acting in this manner?" - -"None, my child. You must know that men are exceedingly corrupt; that -many among them eschew marriage, flit from one woman to another, take -advantage of our credulity, and make use of the most impassioned language -to lead us in the way of shame and perdition. Now, my child, know besides -that we bear the weight of men's faults as well as of our own; the verbal -and written promises of a man bind him to nothing. If, suffering yourself -to be led astray, you should become a mother, the child would remain your -charge; and you could no longer hope for marriage; I say nothing of our -grief and shame, nor of the terrible risks to which you would expose your -brother, who might perish in punishing the vile seducer whom the law does -not touch. If a man seeks you therefore unknown to us, be sure that it is -because his intentions are evil; that he considers you as a toy which he -purposes to break when it ceases to amuse him. Now, my daughter, you know -that woman is created to be the worthy companion of man; that she is not -born to be sacrificed to him as an object of pleasure. Instead therefore -of suffering yourself to be seduced, profit by the influence over men -which is given you by your beauty and grace, to recall them to their -duties: in this manner, you may be the means of saving many women; you -will give a favorable opinion of your sex, and will prepare a good -example for your daughter by setting one to your companions, many of whom -will follow it in order to share in the esteem that will surround you; -always remember that our acts not only injure ourselves, but we have a -joint responsibility with others, and consequently no one can be lost or -saved alone. - -"One word more, my child. In your uncertainties, do not hesitate to -confide your troubles to me; do not say, My mother is too reasonable to -understand me in this. Was it not by becoming a child again in order to -comprehend you, that I fulfilled my sacred task of instructor? be -persuaded that it will not be more difficult for me to become a young -girl again in order to comprehend, while remaining a tender and -experienced mother to advise you. - -"You are free: I am not your censor, but your elder sister, who loves you -with devotion and desires your happiness before all things. As a -recompense for my love and my long-continued cares, I only ask to be your -best friend; that is, the one in whose presence you will think and speak -aloud. Is this asking too much of you, who are my joy and crown." - -This is the way, ladies, in which the woman who has attained majority, -strives to educate the world in Love. - - -III. - -The young girl and young man enter into society. The prudent mother knows -that it is gently insinuated to her son that she is a _prude_, a _dotard_ -who knows nothing of the passions; who does not suspect that _everything -in nature is good_, and should be respected; and who has read the -history of our species to so little purpose that she has not perceived -that humanity has love in all forms: the _polygamic_ and _polyandric_, -and even ... the _ambiguous_. - -She knows also, that he is told that the satisfaction of the animal -instinct is necessary to the _health_ of man, and that brothels are -places of public utility. - -She knows, lastly, that young and giddy girls, with lax principles, make -dangerous confidences to her daughter. - -It is time, in opposition to these lax doctrines and pernicious examples, -to give to her children the philosophy of Love. According to her method, -she suffers is to elucidate itself. - -My son, says she, what is the end of the attraction of mineral molecules -towards each other? - -SON. The _production_ of a body having a determined form. - -MOTHER. What is the end of the attraction of the plant for heat, light, -air, the elements which it absorbs? - -SON. The _production_ of its own body, the development of its organs, and -of its properties, its preservation. - -MOTHER. And do you know, my daughter, what is the end of the attraction -of the pistil and stamens of the flower. - -DAUGHTER. The _production_ of a being resembling its parents. - -MOTHER. Why do we as well as the animals experience an inclination or -attraction for certain kinds of food? - -SON. It is evidently in order to incite to action the organs which -procure to the organism the elements adapted to _produce_ blood. - -MOTHER. Why do both sexes of the same species experience an attraction -towards each other? - -DAUGHTER. For the _production_ of young to perpetuate the species. - -MOTHER. Why do the females, and often males among animals experience an -inclination or attraction to take care of the young? - -DAUGHTER. In order to preserve them and to educate them as far as is in -their power, that they may be able to provide for themselves. - -MOTHER. Are you quite sure, my children, that the end of these -attractions is not the attraction itself, the procurement of a pleasure? - -SON. The pleasure seems to me only the means of impelling the being to -fulfill a necessary or useful function. Thus the end of our scientific, -artistic and industrial inclinations or attractions is not the pleasure -which we take in their satisfaction, but the _production_ of science, art -and industry. - -DAUGHTER. That is, the increase and progress of our intellect through the -knowledge of the laws of Nature, in order to modify this nature with a -view to our wants and pleasures. - -MOTHER. To what inclination or attraction is Society due? - -SON. To our attraction for our fellow beings. - -DAUGHTER. This attraction is the father of Justice and of Goodness: it -_produces_ them. - -MOTHER. Will you generalize the character of this inclination or -attraction in accordance with what we have just said? - -SON. The end of all attraction or inclination is the _production_, -_progress_ and _preservation_ of beings. - -MOTHER. Are all instincts good which are merely inclinations or -attractions? - -SON. For animals, which are subject to fatality, they are; because they -tend directly to their end, without ever appearing to deviate from it. In -our species, they are good in principle, if we regard their end; but they -may become evil through the deviation to which our liberty subjects them. - -MOTHER. By what token can we know that our instinct has a right tendency? - -DAUGHTER. By comparing its use with its end; by assuring ourselves that -this use is not prejudicial to the practice of justice, that it does not -detract from the right of any of our faculties; that is, that it disturbs -neither our individual harmony nor that of others; for it is on these -conditions alone that it can coöperate in the realization of the social -ideal. - -MOTHER. Very well. Now apply this general doctrine to human love, my -children. - -SON. Since love is one of the forms of attraction, and since the general -end of attraction is the production, progress and preservation of beings -and species, it is evident that human love should possess these -characteristics. Its principal function appears to me to be the -reproduction of the species. - -DAUGHTER. It seems to me, brother, that this is not enough; since true -husbands and wives do not cease to love each other after this end has -been fulfilled, and since persons may love without having children. - -MOTHER. You are right, my daughter; our faculties being more numerous and -more fully developed than those of the animals, our love cannot be -incomplete like theirs; it cannot be of the same nature in our -progressive species as in those species fatal and unprogressive of -themselves. In us, each faculty, properly employed, aids in the -improvement of all the rest, wrongly employed, it interrupts our harmony -and lowers us; it is the same with our love. Or rather this passion is -the one that most of all causes us to grow or to decline. - -You know, my children, that humanity advances only by forming itself an -ideal and endeavoring to realize it. Every passion has its ideal, which -is modified by that of the whole. In the beginning, man, in the animal -state, made the end of love the pleasure resulting from the satisfaction -of a wholly physical want: he cared nothing for the most evident -aim--progeny. A little later, man less gross, loved woman for her beauty -and fruitfulness; this was the patriarchal age of love. Later still, the -Northern races wrought a change in this instinct; love became decomposed, -as it were; the lover possessed the love of the soul; the woman was loved -not only for her beauty, but as the inspirer of lofty deeds; the husband -was the possessor of the body alone and the children were the fruit of -marriage; this was the chivalrous age of love. Since pacific labor has -been organized and has gained a place in public opinion, love has entered -a new phase; many among the moderns consider it as the initiative of -labor. Some regard the attraction of pleasure as playing the chief part -in industrial production, and leave full liberty to the attraction, -however inconsistent it may be; others preserve the couple, and transform -woman into the moving power of action; the love that she inspires excites -the efforts of the worker. - -The progress hitherto made by humanity is therefore that love has now -for its end the perpetuation of the species, the modification of man by -woman, and the production of labor. - -In a higher ideal of Justice, the sexes being equal in rights, love will -have a higher end; the spouses will unite on account of conformity of -principles, union of hearts, wedding of intellects, common labor: love -will join them to double their strength, to modify them by each other, -from the friction of their hearts will be struck out sentiments which -neither would have had alone; from the union of their intellects will be -born thoughts which neither would have had alone; from the aid that they -will lend each other in their common labor will proceed works that -neither would have accomplished alone, as from the union of their whole -being, will be born new generations more perfect than the preceding -because they will be the product of the greatest possible harmony. It -will be only when woman shall take her lawful place that humanity will -see love in all its splendor, and that this passion, subversive to-day in -inequality and incoherence, will become what it should be; one of the -great instruments of Progress. - -We, my children, who are too rational to mistake the means by which -Nature impels us to accomplish her designs for the designs themselves, -will take care not to fancy that the end of love is pleasure; on the -other hand, we have too much respect for equality to imagine that it is -for the benefit of one sex alone. We will remain faithful to the ideal of -our lofty destinies, in defining love as the reciprocal attraction of man -and woman with the end of perpetuating the species, of improving the -partners mutually with respect to intellect and feeling, and of advancing -science, art and industry by the labor of the pair. - - -IV. - -Sophists have told you, my son, that all our inclinations are in Nature; -that they are good and should be respected. - -You asked them doubtless whether the inclinations to theft, to -assassination, to violation, to anthropophagy, which are in Nature, are -good, and why, instead of respecting them, society punishes their -manifestation. - -You demonstrated to them, I hope, that there is nothing commendable in -the exaggeration or the perversion of instincts. - -You demonstrated to them, I hope, that Nature is brutal fatality against -which we are bound to struggle both within and without ourselves; that -our Justice and virtue are composed only of conquests made over it in us, -as all that constitutes our physical well-being is only the result of -conquests made over it outside of us. - -These sophists have told you that love comes and goes without our knowing -how or wherefore; and that we can no more command it to spring up than to -endure. - -This is true, my son, of the brutal desires of the flesh, which is the -passion of animals alone, and is extinguished by possession. - -This is also true of that complex passion which has its seat in the -imagination and the senses, and ends with the illusion that is always of -short duration. - -But it is not true of genuine love; this sees both the faults and the -virtues of the loved one; but softens the first and exalts the last, and -hopes by degrees to put an end to that which wounds it. - -This sentiment which takes possession of the heart, is patient; it bears -lest it become effaced, it surrounds itself with precautions in order to -remain constant; if it becomes extinct, it is not unconsciously: for we -suffer cruel tortures before resolving to cease to love. - -You have been told that love is irrepressible; are we then beings of -fatality? This sophism renders man cowardly and depraves him; for what is -the use of struggling against what we know to be unconquerable, and why -not sacrifice to it the best of our tendencies? Examine the conduct of -the partisans of such a doctrine. - -The human ideal requires that they shall not do to others what they would -not think it just that others should do to them; yet they seduce maidens, -make them mothers, and abandon them without caring about the children -born of these unions; without caring whether the young mother commits -suicide, dies of grief, or becomes depraved; without caring whether the -parents go down to the grave. - -Like deadly reptiles, they glide to the domestic fireside of others, rob -their friend of the affection of his wife, and force him to labor for the -children of adultery. - -The woman who believes in irrepressible love breaks her pledges to her -husband; lives a life of deceit; brings trouble and sorrow into the -houses of other women, whose lives are blighted by her. - -It is in this way that those who practice this sophistry fulfil their -duty to be just, not to afflict their fellows, to labor for the happiness -and improvement of those about them, to preserve the weak from oppression -and wrong. To this pretended irrepressibility of love, they sacrifice -Justice, goodness, the happiness, repose and honor of others; lead them -into the path of dissipation; bring dissolution into the family and -society; in a word, offer up as a sacrifice to animal instinct, moral -sense and reason. - -You have also been told that every species of love is found in Nature; -the polyamic and polygandric, as well as that of the constant pair. - -Yes, my child, every species of love is found in Nature, as is every -species of vice and every species of virtue. But you know that it is not -enough that a thing exists within us to prove it to be good; it must be -in conformity with the ideal of our destiny, with our harmony: it is -wrong in the opposite case. - -Love, such as we have defined it, needs duration and equality; duration, -because we do not become modified in a few months; because we do not -accomplish great works in a few months; because we do not rear children -in a few months; duration is so truly an aspiration of love, that it -imagines that eternity will hardly suffice for it. It must have equality; -division is hateful to it; it will therefore have a unit for a unit, both -male and female. Now polygamy and polyandria are the negation of -equality, of dignity in love. - -Let us consider the effects of these two deviations of instinct. - -Oriental polygamy renders human beings profoundly unequal, transforms -women into cattle, mutilates thousands of men to guard the harems, -depraves the possessor of women by despotism and cruelty, concentrates -all his vitality upon a single instinct at the expense of intellect, -reason and activity; whence it follows that he is lost to science, art, -industry, society according to right: that he submits without repugnance -to despotism, and passively extends his neck to the halter. There, no -influence is wielded by woman, who is subjected to designed enervation, -who is depraved in as hideous a manner as the eunuch, her keeper. Thus, -inequality in love and in right, abandonment of art, science and -industry, intellectual and physical enervation, debasement of the moral -sense--such are vices inherent to the polygamy of the East. You see that -this is far from the ideal of our destinies. - -In our West, polygamy _de facto_ produces the cattle of the brothel, -legions of courtesans who ruin families. As many of these women are -diseased, they infect those who associate with them with fearful maladies -which undermine their constitutions, and thus pave the way for puny -offspring, consequently, for weak minds and feeble intellects. I appeal -for proof to the conscription; never were so many exemptions seen as now -on account of under size, although the standard has been lowered, never -were so many exemptions seen as now for constitutional imperfections and -acquired disease. - -To vitiate the generation in its germ is not the only crime of our -polygamy; it enervates those who practice it, for nothing leads to -excess, consequently to enervation, so much as the change of relations. -On the other hand, our polygamists become transformed into machines of -sensation; then intellect grows weak; they become stupid and selfish. -Look at the pitiable young men of the present time, emaciated by their -vices and by those of their sires; scoffers, faithless, jesting at the -most sacred things, despising, not only the corrupt women, their worthy -companions, but also the whole sex to which their mothers belong; look at -them; so gross as to sicken the observer, nothing longer commands their -respect; they thrust aside gray haired women from the sidewalk into the -gutter; they are impertinent to old men; they put young girls to the -blush with their cynical speeches; polygamy has rendered them ignoble, -and has destroyed our native urbanity as well as all dignity. - -They will tell you that women are but little better than they. But this -result becomes inevitable in a country in which women are not kept in -seclusion. Polyandria becomes the necessary companion of polygamy; for -since men consider themselves at liberty to have more than one woman, why -should women consider themselves forbidden to have more than one man? - -Finally, my son, the results of irrepressible love, Polygamy and -Polyandria in our Western country are: - -The seduction and corruption of women; - -Adultery, debasement of character; the moral and intellectual enfeebling -of both sexes; - -The enervation and degeneracy of the race; - -Falsehood, deceit, cruelty, injustice of every kind, the use of woman by -man for her beauty, that of man by woman for his money or position; - -The dissolution and ruin of the family; - -Several thousand illegitimate children annually, without counting -abortions; - -Such is the value of these theories put in practice. - -Is this in conformity with our ideal of human love? Is it in conformity -with our ideal of human destiny, which requires that we shall progress -and cause others to progress in good; that we shall practice Justice and -Goodness? - -A word more, and we have done. - -When Rome had ceased to believe in chastity, in the sacredness of oaths; -when she wallowed in polygamic and polyandric customs; when she took -pleasure for her end, tyranny appeared. Nothing was more natural: man -binds captive those only who have first suffered themselves to be bound -under the yoke of bestial instinct: he who knows how to govern himself -does not yield obedience to man; he bows only before the law when it is -the expression of Reason. - -Remember, my son, that we are powerful only through chastity; only thus -can we produce great works in science, art and industry; only thus can we -practice Justice, be worthy of liberty. Outside of chastity, there is -nothing but degradation, injustice, impotence, slavery; and every nation -that forsakes it falls from the arms of despotism into the grave. - -Do not suffer yourself therefore to be moved by modern sophisms, have -always before your thoughts your obligations as a moral and a free being, -your duties as a member of humanity; subject all that is within you to -Reason, to Justice, to the sentiment of your dignity, and live like a -man, not like a brute. - - - - -MARRIAGE, A DIALOGUE. - - -READER. We are about to speak of Marriage from the stand point of the -modern ideal--how do you define it? - -AUTHOR. Love, sanctioned by Society. - -READER. Do you consider Marriage as indissoluble? - -AUTHOR. Before the law, I do not; but at the moment of their union, the -spouses should have full confidence that the bond will never be -dissolved. - -I believe that Marriage becomes indissoluble by the will alone of the -spouses; that it can be so only in this manner. - -READER. What part do you assign to Society in Marriage? - -AUTHOR. You shall fix it yourself after recalling our principles. - -If man and woman are free beings at any period of their life, they cannot -_legally and validly_ lose their liberty. - -If man and woman are beings socially equal in any of their relations, the -one cannot _legally, validly_ be subordinated to the other. - -If the continual end of the human being is to become perfected through -liberty, and to seek happiness, no law can legitimately, _validly_ turn -him aside from its pursuit. - -If the end of society should be to render individuals _equal_ it cannot, -under penalty of forfeiting its mission, constitute inequality of persons -and of rights. - -If Society cannot without iniquity enter the domain of individual -liberty, it cannot _lawfully, validly_ prescribe duties that pertain only -to the jurisdiction of the conscience, and annul moral liberty. - -Now draw your conclusions. - -READER. From these principles, it follows that man and woman should -remain free and equal in Marriage; that Society has no right to intervene -in their association except to render them equal; that it has no right to -prescribe to them duties which proceed only from love, nor consequently -to punish their violation, that it cannot in principle grant or refuse -divorce, because it belongs to the husband and wife alone to know whether -it is useful for their happiness and progress to be separated from each -other. - -AUTHOR. Your conclusions are right, but if Society has no right over the -body or the soul of the husband and wife in their capacity of spouses, if -it cannot without abuse of power interfere in any of their intimate -relations, it is its right and duty to intervene in Marriage as regards -interests and children. - -READER. In fact, in the union of the sexes, there is not merely an -association of two free and equal persons, but also a partnership of -capital and labor; then, from the marriage, children are born for whose -education, occupation and subsistence it is necessary to provide. - -AUTHOR. Now, the general protection of material interests and of the -rising generation devolves of right upon Society. In the sight of the -law, the husband and wife ought to be regarded only as partners, engaging -to employ a certain share of capital, together with their labor, for a -definite purpose. Society takes note only of a contract of interests, the -execution of which it guarantees like that of any other contract, and the -breach of which it makes public, should it take place by the wish of the -parties interested. On the other hand, the education of the rising -generation is a question of life and death to Society. The children being -free with respect to development, and liable to be useful or injurious to -their fellow citizens according to the training which they have received, -society has a right to watch over them, to secure their material support, -their moral future, to fix the age of marriage, to entrust the children -to the more deserving parent in case of separation, and if both are -unworthy, to take them away entirely. - -READER. Do you not go a little too far; on the one hand, do not children -belong to their parents, on the other, may not Society err with respect -to the choice of the principles to be instilled in them? - -AUTHOR. Children do not belong to their parents because they are not -THINGS: to those who obstinately persist in believing them _property_, we -say that Society has the right of dispossession for the public good. Then -the social right over children is limited so far as principles are -concerned to those of morality. Society has no right over religious -beliefs which belong to the domain of spiritual jurisdiction. The power -that should take away children from their parents because they were not -of a certain religious faith would be guilty of despotism, and would -merit universal execration. If you say that Society has no right to -impose a dogma upon children, you speak truly; but I cannot conceive how -you can entertain the thought of forbidding it the right to teach them, -even against the will of their parents, enlightening science, purifying -morality. Is it not the duty of society to secure the progress of its -members, and can any one have a right to keep a human being in ignorance -and evil? - -READER. You are right, and I condemn myself. Let us return to Marriage. I -see with pleasure that you differ in opinion from a number of modern -innovators who deny the lawfulness of social interference in the union of -the sexes. - -AUTHOR. If the union were without protection, who would suffer by it? Not -men, but rather women and children. - -No one can compel a man to live with a woman whom he has ceased to love; -but he must be constrained to fulfill his duties with respect to the -children born of this union, and to keep his business engagements: in -wronging his companion and escaping from the burdens of paternity, he -takes advantage of his liberty to the detriment of others: Society has a -right to prevent this. - -READER. So you do not grant to Society the right of binding souls or -bodies; but that of guaranteeing the contract of Marriage, and the -obligations of the spouses towards their future children; of forcing -them, in case of separation, to fulfill this last obligation? - -AUTHOR. Yes; thus in case of the rupture of the marriage tie, society has -only to state publicly the responsibilities of the spouses, the number of -children, and the name of the parent on whom their guardianship devolves, -either by mutual consent or by social authority. And in confining itself -to this part, Society would do more to prevent the separation of married -couples than by all that it has hitherto foolishly invented for the -purpose. The parties would be free to marry again; but what woman would -be willing to unite herself to a man who was burdened with several -children, or who had treated his first companion unkindly? What man would -consent to wed a woman in the same position? - -Do you not think that the difficulty that would be experienced in -contracting a new marriage would be a curb on the inconstancy and bad -conduct that lead to a rupture? - -READER. I believe indeed that marriage, as you understand it, would have -more chances of duration than ours: first, because it is our nature to -cling most closely to that which we may lose. I have often asked myself -why many men remain faithful to their mistresses and treat them kindly, -while they are disrespectful and unfaithful to their wives; I have asked -myself also why many couples who had long lived happily together when -voluntarily united, were unhappy and often driven to a legal separation -when they had finally married; and the only reason that I have been able -to find is that we set the most value on that which we know may escape -us. Man has more respect for a woman who is not his legal property, his -inferior, than for her who is thus transformed by the law. -Notwithstanding, it must be acknowledged that your ideas appear -eccentric. - -AUTHOR. Yet they are nothing more than an application of our laws; -indeed, do they not decree that covenants can have _things_ only, not -_persons_ for their object. That Society _does not recognize vows_, and -that proceedings cannot be instituted against their violation? - -Now the existing law of marriage _alienates_ one of the partners in favor -of the other; the wife _belongs_ to the husband; she is in his _power_. -What is such a contract, if not the violation of the principle which -affirms that no covenant can be made involving persons? can it be more -lawful to alienate one's person by a contract of slavery? - -Some say that we are at liberty to dispose of our freedom as we choose, -even though it be to renounce it. Indeed, we may do this, as we may -commit suicide, but to make use of our liberty to renounce it or to -commit suicide is much less to use aright than to violate the laws of -moral or physical nature; these are acts of insanity which we should -pity, but which we are not at liberty to erect into a law. - -Why does Society refuse to recognize vows and to punish their violation, -if not because it admits that it is forbidden to penetrate into the -jurisdiction of the conscience? if not because it does not admit that an -individual may alienate his moral and intellectual being any more than -his body, and devote himself to immobility when it is his duty, on the -contrary, to go forward? - -I ask then if this same Society is not inconsistent in exacting perpetual -vows from the husband and wife, in exacting from the wife a vow of -obedience, a tacit vow to deliver up her person to the desires of the -husband? - -Is not the moral liberty of the spouses as worthy of respect as that of -nuns, priests and monks? - -Have married persons more right in Nature and Reason, to alienate their -moral and intellectual being, their liberty and their person than the -celibates of the Church? - -Another inconsistency of the law is that it declares Marriage an -association; the contract of Marriage is therefore a contract of -partnership. Now I ask whether, in a single contract of this kind, it is -enjoined by law on one of the partners to _obey_, to be subjected to a -_perpetual minority_, to be _absorbed_? - -I doubt not that the law would declare such a contract between -independent partners void; why then does it legalize such a monstrosity -in the partnership of husband and wife? It is a relic of barbarism, as -you will see if you reflect on it. - -READER. I hope that, through reason and necessity, the law will be -reformed sooner or later: but a reformation which will not take place is -that of the forms of religious marriage, which prescribe to the spouses -the same oaths as the code, and like it, subject the wife to the husband. - -AUTHOR. Well, what matters it to us, since, thanks to liberty, the -religious marriage is merely a benediction with which we can dispense. -Those who have a disposition to go to the Church, the Temple, or the -Synagogue should have full liberty to receive the blessing of their -respective priests! this does not concern Society. What we need is that, -if afterward their vows should not seem to them binding, social authority -should not make them obligatory; they have a right to be absurd, but -society has no right to impose absurdity on them. Its duty is, on the -contrary, to enlighten them, and to render them free. - - -IV. - -READER. Those who subordinate woman in marriage rest on the assertion -that unity of direction, consequently a ruling power, is needed in the -family; now, your theory evidently destroys this ruling power. - -AUTHOR. What is the ruling power? Practically, it is manifested through -the function of government. Formerly, it was based upon two principles, -now recognized as radically false: _Divine right_ and _inequality_. It -was the _right_ of those who exercised it to call themselves kings, -autocrats, priests, men; it was the _duty_ therefore of the people, the -church, woman to obey the elect of God, their superiors by the grace of -right delegated from on high. - -But in modern opinion, the ruling power is nothing more than a function -delegated by the parties interested in order to execute their will. - -It is not our business to inquire here whether this modern interpretation -has become incarnated in facts; whether the old principle is not still -struggling with the new; whether the holders of political and familial -authority are not still making insane pretensions to divine right; we -have only to show what the notion of the ruling power has become in the -present state of thought and feeling. - -What will be the ruling power in marriage, in accordance with modern -opinion, if not the delegation by one spouse to the other of the -management of business and of the family--a delegation of function; no -longer a right? - -And if man and woman are socially equal in principle, if the aptitudes, -upon which all functions are based, are not dependent on sex, by what -right does society interfere to give the authority either to the husband -or the wife? - -If there is need of a ruling power in the household, are not the parties -themselves best capable of bestowing it on the one who can best and most -usefully exercise it? - -But among partners, is there really room for a ruling power? No, there is -room only for division of labor, mutual understanding with respect to -common interests. To consult each other, to come to an agreement, to -divide the tasks, to remain master each of his own department; this is -what the spouses should do, and what they do in general. - -The law has so little part in our customs that to-day things happen in -this wise: many rich women translate two articles of the Code as follows; -_the husband shall obey his wife, and shall follow her wherever she sees -fit to dwell or sojourn_. And the husbands obey, because it would not do -to offend a wife with a large dowry; because it would make a scandal to -thwart their wife; because they need her, being unable, without -dishonoring themselves, to keep a mistress. - -Husbands in the great centres of population escape obedience through love -outside of marriage; they lay no restrictions on their part; Madame is -free. - -Among the working classes of the citizens and the people, it is -practically admitted that neither shall command, and that the husband -shall do nothing without consulting his wife and obtaining her consent. - -In all classes, if any husband is simple enough to take his pretended -right in earnest, he is cited as a bad man, an intolerable despot whom -his wife may hate and deceive with a safe conscience; and it is a curious -fact that the greater part of the legal separations are for no other -cause at the bottom than the exercise of the rights and prerogatives -conceded to the husbands by law. - -I ask you now, what is the use of maintaining against reason and custom, -an authority which does not exist, or which is transferred to the spouse -condemned to subjection. - -READER. On this point, I am wholly of your opinion; not a single woman of -modern times takes the rights of her husband in earnest. But your theory -not only attacks his authority; it also wages war against the -indissolubility of marriage, which it is affirmed, is necessary to the -dignity of this tie; to the happiness and future of the children, to the -morality of the family. - -AUTHOR. I claim, on the contrary, that my theory secures, as far as is -humanly possible, the perpetuity and purity of marriage. At present, when -the knot is tied, the spouses, no longer fearing to lose each other, find -in the absence of this fear the germ of a mutual coolness; they may -quarrel, be discourteous or unfaithful to each other; there will be -scandal, a legal separation perhaps, but they are riveted together; they -can never become strangers. Contrast with this picture a household in -which the bond is dissoluble; all is changed; the despotic or brutal -husband represses his evil propensities, because he knows that his -companion, whom after all he loves, would quit him and transfer to -another the attentions she lavishes on him; and that no honest woman -would be willing to take her place. - -The husband disposed to be unfaithful would continue in the path of duty, -because his abandonment and offences would alienate his wife, blast his -reputation, and prevent him from forming an honorable alliance. - -The worn out profligate would no longer espouse the dowry of a young -girl, because he would know that, promptly disenchanted, the young wife, -instead of having recourse to adultery, would break the ill assorted -union. - -The woman who should take advantage of her dowry, of the necessity of her -husband to remain faithful, to tyrannise over him, would fear a divorce -which would throw the blame on her and condemn her to a life of solitude. - -A shrewish wife would no longer dare to inflict suffering on her husband, -or a coquette to deceive or torment him; who would marry them after a -separation? - -Do you not see that free marriages are happier and more lasting than any -others? - -Have you not yourself admitted that to separate the parties in these -unions, it often suffices to join them legally? - -I know myself of a voluntary union that was very happy during -_twenty-two_ years, and was dissolved by separation at the end of three -years of legal marriage; I have known of many others of a shorter -duration which legality contributed to dissolve instead of rendering -eternal. - -You would hardly believe how many married couples reformed in their -treatment of each other in 1848, when they feared that the law of divorce -might be accepted. If the simple expedient of divorce has power to -produce good results, what may not be expected from a rational law. - -We need only to reflect in order to comprehend that voluntary -dissolubility, without social intervention, would render unions better -assorted, for it would be for one's interest, for his own reputation, to -enter into them only with the moral conviction of being able to preserve -them; then only would no excuse be found for infidelity; loyalty would -make part of the relations of the spouses. The law of perpetuity has -perverted everything, corrupted everything; on the side of the woman, it -favors, yes, necessitates stratagem; on the side of the man, it favors -brutality and despotism; it provokes on both sides adultery, poisoning -and assassination; and leads to those separations which are daily -increasing in number, and which, by giving the lie to the indissolubility -of marriage, place the partners in a painful and perilous situation, and -bring in their train a host of irregularities. - -In fact, if the spouses are separated while young, concubinage is their -refuge. The man in this false position finds many to excuse him; but the -woman is forced to conceal herself, to tremble at the thought of a -pregnancy and to make it disappear. Legal separation leads the spouses -not only to concubinage, to mutual hatred, but causes the birth of -thousands of children whose future is compromised, destroyed by the fact -of their illegitimacy. Let the spouses be free in accordance with their -right, and all will fall into its proper order, for all will be done -openly and truly. - -READER. But the future of the children? - -AUTHOR. The morality of the children is better insured under the system -of liberty than under that of indissolubility, for they will not be -witnesses for years of the bitter contention and licentiousness which now -render them deceitful and vicious, and inspire them with contempt or -hatred for one of the authors of their being, sometimes of both, when -they do not take them for models; if life in common becomes impossible to -the parents, which will be more rare under the law of liberty, the -children will not be subjected to the power of those who violate the law -of received morality; they may see these parents contract a new alliance -_as now_, but this alliance will be honored by all. - -From these unions children may be born _as now_, but these children, -instead of being cast into the hospital, will share with the first the -affection and inheritance of their father or mother. The so-styled -legitimate children will lose in fortune, it is true; but they will gain -in good examples; many children who are now in the category of the -illegitimate will be ranked among the former, and will be no longer -condemned by desertion to die young, or else to grovel in ignorance, vice -and misery; to see their brow branded with the fault of their parents as -of their own by a host of imbeciles and men without heart, who have no -other guarantee for what they call their legitimacy than the presumption -accorded them by the law. - - -III. - -READER. It will be long yet, perhaps, before collective Reason -comprehends liberty in the union of the sexes as you do, and men will -ascribe to themselves the right not only of binding the interests, but -the souls and bodies of the spouses. - -AUTHOR. As far as we can foresee, Society must necessarily? pass through -two stages to realize our opinion; it must first grant divorce _for a -declared cause_; later it will grant divorce decreed in private on the -petition of one or both of the spouses. We will not take up this last -form of the rupture of the conjugal tie, but that which is nearest -us--divorce for a declared cause. - -What are the reasons which you would consider valid for a petition for -divorce? - -READER. First, those which now give rise to separation from bed and -board: adultery of the wife, cruelty, grave abuses, condemnation of one -of the spouses to punishment affecting the liberty or person, the -fraudulent management of the property by the husband; next, infidelity of -the husband, qualified adultery, incompatibility of temper, notable -vices, such as drunkenness, gaming, etc. - -AUTHOR. Very well; these causes suffice. - -READER. During the proceedings for divorce, the wife should be as free as -the husband. The child that should be born to her after more than ten -months' separation should be reputed natural, even though the divorce had -not been pronounced; and should bear her name and inherit from her like -one of her legitimate children. - -AUTHOR. Who should take custody of the children and the property during -the proceedings? - -READER. The court should decide who should have the care of the children, -in accordance with the causes for the petition for divorce and the -testimony of the parents, friends and neighbors. - -AUTHOR. But if the spouses ask to be divorced only on account of -incompatibility of temper, and are both honorable? - -READER. They should be requested to agree mutually either to share the -children, or to entrust them to one of the two, or to give the younger -children to the mother, leaving the sons over fifteen to the father. The -court, besides, should appoint from the family of the mother, a guardian -to watch over the conduct of the father towards the children left in his -care; and from the family of the father, a similar guardian to the mother -and the children remaining with her. This guardianship, which should be -strictly moral, should continue till the children had attained majority. - -AUTHOR. And in case the parents should be alike unworthy? - -READER. In such a case, which would seldom happen, the judge, in behalf -of society, should deprive them of the custody of the children, and -entrust it to a member of the family of one of the parents, appointing a -guardian to watch over his conduct and protect the interests of his ward -from the family of the other. - -AUTHOR. Very well; I see with pleasure that you are cured of the -erroneous belief that the children _belong_ to the parents, and that you -comprehend the high function of society as the protector of minors. - -During the suit for divorce, who shall have the control of the property? - -READER. If the contract has been made under the system of separation of -property, and for paraphernalia, there is no need of putting the -question; each one will manage his own. - -But I am somewhat puzzled how to answer you in case of communion of -goods, or in case the capital is embarked in a common business, carried -on solely by one of the parties. The present law does not seem to me -sufficiently to protect the interests of the wife in case of separation. - -AUTHOR. Without entangling ourselves in a host of individual cases which -modify or contradict each other, let us provide that in case of communion -of goods, the administration of the property shall be taken from the -spouse holding it if the petition for divorce be based on his bad -management, his dissipated habits, or his condemnation to a penalty -affecting his liberty or person; that in all other cases, he shall make -an inventory of the property and the condition of the business; and a -person shall be appointed from the family of the spouse excluded from the -management to watch over the conduct of the spouse to whom it is -entrusted, who shall be bound to pay alimony to the other until the -divorce shall be decreed. - -READER. And if there is no fortune? - -AUTHOR. Until the spouses become strangers, they owe assistance to each -other: the court should therefore require the spouse that earns the more -to aid the other. - -READER. How long a time should elapse between the admission of the -petition and the judgment of divorce? - -AUTHOR. A year, in order that the parties may have time for reflection. - -READER. The divorce being granted, and the ex-partners restored to -liberty, would you permit them to marry others? - -AUTHOR. Most assuredly; else what signifies our arguments against -separation? - -READER. What! the adulterous and brutal spouse, he who has inflicted -suffering on his partner, who has been wholly in the wrong, should enjoy -like the other the privilege of marrying again? I confess that this -shocks me. - -AUTHOR. Because you are not sufficiently imbued with the doctrines of -liberty and the sentiment of right. Marriage is the natural right of -every adult; society has no right therefore to prohibit it or to make it -a privilege; on the other hand, in every divorce, there is wrong or the -lack of something on either side with respect to the other; the man or -woman who commits adultery may be a model of fidelity to a partner -better suited to his or her temperament and disposition; he who has been -brutal and violent may be wholly different with a wife possessing a -different character; in short, we repeat, to prohibit marriage is to -permit libertinism, and it is not the interest of society to pervert -itself. Both partners therefore should have a right to marry, but the law -should take care that all should be informed of the burdens resting upon -them by reason of their first marriage, and know that they are divorced. -Consequently, society has a right to publish the bill of divorce, and to -require that the parties divorced should provide for the necessities of -their minor children, and that the bill of divorce, joined to the one -setting forth this obligation, should accompany the publication of the -bans of a new marriage; in this, there is neither injustice nor abuse of -power; for each one will submit to the consequence of what he has done in -perfect freedom. - -READER. And would you not fix the number of times that a divorced person -might re-marry? - -AUTHOR. Why fix it? do you fix the number of times that a widow or -widower may marry again? - -READER. But a libertine, a bad man might marry ten times, and thus render -ten women unhappy. - -AUTHOR. What are you talking of! do you seriously believe that there -would be a woman insane enough to marry a man _nine times_ divorced, a -man obliged to accompany the publication of his bans with nine bills of -divorce, with nine judgements compelling him to pay so much yearly for -the support of seven, eight or nine children. Do you seriously believe -that a woman would consent to become the companion of such a man! This -man might indeed marry twice--but three times! do you think that it would -be possible? - -READER. You are right, and on reflection, the measures which you advocate -appear perhaps severe. - -AUTHOR. I know it; but our aim is not to favor divorces nor subsequent -unions; but, on the contrary, to prevent the former as far as possible by -the difficulties of forming the latter. Now for this it is not necessary -to restrict the liberty of the individual, but to render him responsible -for his acts, and to rivet the chain that he has forged for himself in -such a manner that he can neither cast it aside nor lay the burden of it -on others unless they are duly warned of it and consent thereto. - - -IV. - -READER. Ought society to permit unions disproportioned in age? Is it not -to expose a woman to adultery, to marry her at seventeen or eighteen to a -man of thirty, forty or even fifty years of age? What harmony of -sentiments and views can exist at that time between the spouses? The wife -sees in her husband a sort of father, whom notwithstanding she can -neither love nor respect like a father, and she remains a minor all her -life. - -AUTHOR. These unions are very prejudicial to woman and the race, and they -would be for the most part averted, if the law should fix the -marriageable age at twenty-four or twenty-five for both sexes. At -seventeen, we marry to be called Madame, and to wear a bridal dress and a -wreath of orange flowers; we certainly should not do this at twenty-five. - -If the flower is not called on to form its fruit until it is fully -matured, neither should man and woman: now, in our climate the -organization of neither is complete until twenty-four or twenty-five. - -Woman gives more to the great work of reproduction and wears out faster -in it; to render her liable to become a mother prematurely is therefore -to expose her to greater sufferings. - -In the first place, she is forced to share between herself and her -offspring the elements necessary to her own nutrition, which weakens both -her and the child. - -Her development is checked, her constitution is changed, she becomes -predisposed to uterine affections, and runs the risk of becoming an -invalid at the age when she ought to enjoy robust health. - -The enervation of the body brings with it that of the mind: the woman -becomes nervous, irritable, and often capricious; she cannot nurse her -children; she will not be capable of rearing them properly, she will make -dolls of them, and will favor the development of faults which afterwards -becoming vices, will afflict the family and society. - -This woman, a mother before her time, not only will never become the -thoughtful companion and counsellor of her husband who, being much older -than she, will amuse himself with her as with a child, but will be his -ward for her whole life, and will have recourse to artifice to have her -own way. Thus to weaken woman in every respect, to shorten her life, to -put her under guardianship, to prepare the way for puny and badly reared -offspring,--such are the most obvious results of her precocious marriage. - -To hold women in voluntary subjection and to organize the harem among us, -we need only take advantage of the permission of the law authorising -their marriage at the age of fifteen. - -That woman may not be in subjection; that she may be able to become a -mother without detriment to her health and under circumstances favorable -to the good organization of her children; that she may be a worthy and -earnest wife, prepared to fulfill all her duties, she must not be -married, I repeat, before twenty-four or twenty-five; and she must not -marry a man older than herself. - -READER. But it is claimed that the husband ought to be ten years older -than the wife, because the latter grows old faster, and because it is -necessary that the husband should have had experience in life in order to -appreciate his wife and to render her happy. - -AUTHOR. Errors and prejudices all. Woman grows old sooner than man only -through premature marriage and maternity; a well preserved man and woman -are alike old at the same age. But the woman consents to grow old while -the man is much less willing to do so, since he does not blush when gray -haired, to marry a young girl, and to set up the ridiculous pretention of -being loved by her for love. Men must be broken of the habit of believing -themselves perpetually at the age of pleasing; of imagining that they are -quite as agreeable to our eyes when they are old and ugly as if they were -Adonises. They must be told unceasingly that what is unbecoming in us is -equally so in them; and that an old woman would be no more ridiculous in -seeking the love of a young man, than an old man in pretending to that of -a young girl. - -The husband and wife should be nearly of the same age; first, to treat -each other more easily as equals; next, because there will be more -harmony in their feelings and views, as well as in their temperaments, -all things very necessary to the organization of children. - -It is necessary besides, in order that the woman may not be tempted to -infidelity; you know how many troubles arise from unions disproportioned -in age. - -The husband must have _seen life_, it is said; this is the opinion of -those who permit their sons to _sow their wild oats_; who believe that -man is at liberty to wallow in the mire of dens of infamy, and that there -are two kinds of morality. We do not belong to this class. You would not -give your daughter to a man who had _seen life_, because he would be -_blasé_, because he would pervert her or expose her, through the -disenchantment that would follow, to seek in another what she did not -find in her husband. - -What we have said as regards your daughter applies also to your son; he -must not marry a woman younger than himself; for you would no more desire -a disadvantageous position for your daughter-in-law than for your -daughter; both are dear to you and worthy of respect before the -solidarity of sex. - -READER. I shall educate my son to comprehend that the form of marriage -prescribed by the Code is merely a relic of barbarism, that his wife owes -obedience only to Duty, that she is a free being and his equal; and that -he has no rights over her person but those which she herself accords to -him. I shall tell him that love is a tender plant which must be tended -carefully to keep it alive; that it is blighted by unceremoniousness and -slovenliness; that he should therefore be as careful of his personal -appearance after marriage as he was to be pleasing to the eyes of his -betrothed. I shall say to him: ask nothing except from the love of your -wife; remember that more than one husband has excited repulsion by the -brutality of the wedding night. Marriage, my son, is a grave and holy -thing; purity is its choicest jewel; know that many men have owed the -adultery of their wife to the deplorable pains that they have taken to -deprave her imagination. Far from using your influence over her who will -be the half of yourself in order to render her docile to your wishes, and -to make her your echo, develop reason and character in her; in elevating -her, you will become better, and will prepare for yourself a counsel and -stay. I have married you under the system of separation of goods in order -that your wife may be protected against you, should you depart from your -principles; and should you ever grieve me by straying from them, your -wife will became doubly my daughter. I shall be her companion and -consoler, and shall close my arms and my doors on you. - -AUTHOR. Right, and you will do well to add: interest your wife in your -occupation; take care that she is always busy, for labor is the preserver -of chastity. - -READER. To my daughter I will say: the social order in which we live -requires, my child, that you shall superintend your house; the state of -Society is still far distant in which our sex will be relieved from this -function. Do not forget that the prosperity of the family depends on the -spirit of order and economy of the wife. What your fortune or special -business exempts you from executing, superintend and direct. Extravagance -of dress and furniture now surpasses all bounds. Luxury is not wrong in -itself, but in the existing state of things, it is a great relative evil, -for we have not yet resolved the problem of increasing and varying -products without at the same time increasing the wretchedness and -debasement of their producers. Be simple therefore: this does not exclude -elegance, but only those piles of silks and laces which trail in the dust -of the streets, those diamonds and precious stones which make the fortune -of the few at the expense of the morality of the many, and which are only -dead capital, the liberation of which would be productive of great good. -Do not suffer yourself to be ensnared by the sophism that honest women -must adorn themselves to hinder men from passing their time with -courtesans. Would you not be ashamed to compete in dress with women whom -you do not esteem, and would the man who could be retained by such means -be worth the trouble? - -I have instructed you in your legal position as wife, mother and property -holder; I marry you under the system of separation of goods in order to -spare your husband the temptation of regarding himself as your master; in -order that he may be obliged to take your advice and to look upon you as -his partner. Despite these precautions, you will be a minor, since the -law thus decrees. But our law is not Reason: never forget that you are a -human being; that is, a being endowed like your husband with intellect, -sentiments, free will, and inclination; that you owe submission only to -Reason and your conscience; that if it is your duty to make sacrifices to -the peace in little things, and to tolerate the faults of your husband as -he should tolerate yours, it is none the less your duty resolutely to -resist a brutal--_I will have it so_. - -You will be a mother, I hope; nurse your children yourself, rear them in -the principles of Right and Duty which I have instilled into your -intellect and heart, in order to make of them, not only just, good, -chaste men and women, but laborers in the great work of Progress. - -You understand the great destiny of our species; you understand your -rights and duties; I need not therefore repeat to you that woman is no -more made for man than man for woman; that consequently woman cannot, -without failing in her duty, become lost and absorbed in man; for with -him, she should love her children, her country, humanity; she owes more -to her children than she does to him; and if forced to choose between -family interests and generous sentiments of a higher order woman should -no more hesitate than should man to sacrifice the former to justice. - -AUTHOR. It will be said that you instruct your daughter in a very manly -way. - -READER. Since in our days men play the mandolin, is it not necessary that -women should speak seriously? Since men, in the name of their naïve -selfishness, claim the right to confiscate woman to their use, to extol -to her the charms of the gyneceum, to suppress her rights, and to preach -to her the sweets of absorption, must not women re-act against these -soporific doctrines, and recall their daughters to the sentiment of -dignity and individuality. - -AUTHOR. I endorse you with all my heart! - -Now that we are nearly agreed on all points, we have only to sum up what -we have said, and to give an outline of the principal reforms necessary -to be wrought in order that woman my be placed in a position more in -conformity with Right and Justice. - - - - -SUMMARY OF PROPOSED REFORMS. - - -I. - -AUTHOR. Identity of right being based on identity of species, and woman -being of the same species as man, what ought she to be before civil -dignity, in the employment of her activity and in marriage? - -READER. The equal of man. - -AUTHOR. How will she become the equal of man in civil dignity? - -READER. When she shall hold a place on the jury and by the side of all -civil functionaries; shall be a member of boards of trade and mercantile -associations; and shall be a witness in all cases in which the testimony -of man is required. - -AUTHOR. Why ought the testimony of woman to be admitted in all cases in -which that of man is required? - -READER. Because woman is as credible as man; because she is, like him, a -civil personage. - -AUTHOR. Why ought woman to have a place on the jury? - -READER. Because the Code declaring her the equal of man as regards -culpability, misdemeanor, crime and punishment, she is thus declared -capable like him of comprehending wrong in others; - -Because the jury being a guarantee for the male culprit, the female -culprit should have a similar guarantee; - -Because if the _male_ criminal is better comprehended by men, the -_female_ criminal will be better comprehended by women; - -Because society in its aggregate being offended by the crime, it is -necessary that this society, composed of two sexes, should be represented -by both to judge and to condemn it. Because, lastly, where the moral -sense is concerned, the feminine element is the more necessary inasmuch -as men claim that our sex is in general more moral and more merciful than -their own. - -AUTHOR. Why ought woman to hold a place among civil functionaries? - -READER. Because society, represented by these functionaries, is composed -of two sexes; - -Because even now in a number of public functions, there is a department -more especially belonging to woman; - -Because, in the ceremony of the marriage celebration for instance, if -woman does not appear as magistrate, not only is society insufficiently -represented, but the wife may regard herself as delivered up to the power -of a man by all the men of the country. - -AUTHOR. Why ought woman to have her place in boards of trade and -mercantile associations? - -READER. Because she shares equally in industrial production; - -Because she shares equally in commerce; - -Because she understands business transactions and contracts as well if -not better than man; - -Because, in all questions of interests, she should be her own -representative. - -AUTHOR. When will woman become the equal of man in the employment of her -activity and of her other faculties? - -READER. When she shall have colleges, academies and schools for special -instruction, and when all vocations shall be accessible to her. - -AUTHOR. Why ought women to receive the same national education as men? - -READER. Because they exercise a vast influence over the ideas, sentiments -and conduct of men, and because it is for the interest of society that -this influence should be salutary; - -Because it is for the interest of all to enlarge the views and elevate -the sentiments of women, in order that they may use their natural -ascendency for the advancement of progress, of truth, of good, of moral -beauty; - -Because woman has a right, like man, to cultivate her intellect, and to -acquire the knowledge bestowed by the state; - -Because, lastly, as she pays her part of the expenses of national -education, it is robbery to prohibit her from participating in it. - -AUTHOR. Why ought woman to be admitted to academies and professional -schools? - -READER. Because Society, not having a right to deny the existence of any -aptitude among its members, has consequently no right to prevent those -who claim to possess them from cultivating them, nor to lock up from them -the treasures of science and practice which are at its disposal. - -Because there are women who are born chemists, physicians, -mathematicians, etc., and because these women have a right to find in -social institutions the same resources as man for the cultivation of -their aptitudes; - -Because there are professions practised by women who need the instruction -that is interdicted them. - -AUTHOR. Why ought every field of occupation to be accessible to woman? - -READER. Because woman is a free being, whose vocation no one has a right -to contest or to restrict; - -Because she, no more than man, will enter vocations forbidden her by -temperament, lack of aptitude or want of time; and it is therefore quite -as unnecessary to interdict them to her as to those men who are unfit to -enter them. - -AUTHOR. Do you not even interdict to her those vocations in which -strength is needed, or which are attended with danger? - -READER. Women are not forbidden to be carpenters or tilers, yet they do -not become such, because their nature opposes it; it is precisely because -nature does oppose it, that I think society unreasonable in meddling with -the nature. There is no need to prohibit what is impossible; and if what -has been declared impossible is done, it is because it is possible: now -society has no right to prohibit what is possible to any of its members; -this appears even absurd where vocation is in question. - -AUTHOR. Let each one follow his private occupation at his own risk and -peril, then; but are there not certain public functions which are not -suitable for women? - -READER. No one knows this, since they are not open for her admission; -and, were it so, the prohibition would be useless: competition would show -the falsity of ill-founded pretentions. - -AUTHOR. When will woman become the equal of man in marriage? - -READER. When the person of the wife is not pledged in marriage; when the -engagements are reciprocal, and when the wife is not treated as a minor -and absorbed in the husband. And this should be so: - -Because it is not allowable to alienate one's personality, such an -alienation, being _immoral_ and _void_ of itself; - -Because the wife being a distinct individual, cannot be actually absorbed -by the husband, and a law is absurd when it rests on a fiction and -supposes an impossibility; - -Because, in fine, woman, being the equal of man before Society, cannot, -under any pretext, lose this equality by reason of a closer association -with him. - -AUTHOR. There are two questions in marriage, aside from that of the -person--property and children. Do you not think that the married woman -ought, like the unmarried woman who has attained majority, to be mistress -of her property, to be free to exercise any profession that suits her, -and to be at liberty to sell, to buy, to give, to receive, and to -institute suits at law? - -READER. The married man having all these rights, it is evident that the -married woman ought to have them under the law of equality. Are you not -of the same opinion? - -AUTHOR. In all partnerships, we pledge a portion of our liberty on -certain points agreed upon. Now the husband and wife are partners; they -cannot therefore be as perfectly free with respect to each other as -though they were strangers; but it is necessary, we repeat, that their -position should be the same and their pledges mutual. If the wife can -neither sell, nor alienate, nor give, nor receive, nor appear in court -without the consent of the husband, it is not allowable for the husband -to do these things without the consent of the wife; if the wife is not -permitted to practise a profession without the consent of the husband, -the husband is not at liberty to do so without the consent of the wife; -if the wife cannot pledge the common property without authority from the -husband, the husband cannot pledge it without the consent of the wife. I -go further; I would not willingly permit the wife, before the age of -twenty-five, to give her husband authority to alienate anything belonging -to one of the two; the husband has too much influence over her for her to -be really free before this age. - -READER. But what if one of the parties through caprice or evil motives is -unwilling that the other should do something that is proper and -advantageous? - -AUTHOR. Arbiters are frequently chosen in the differences that arise -between partners in business; society, represented by the judicial power, -is the general arbiter between the husband and wife; still we think that -it would be well to establish between them a perpetual arbiter, holding -the first degree of jurisdiction: this might be the family council, -organized differently from the present. Before this confidential -tribunal, better fitted than any other to understand the case, the -husband and wife should carry, not only the differences arising between -them concerning questions of interests, but those relating to the -education, profession and marriage of the children. This tribunal should -give the first judgment, and much scandal would be avoided by its -decisions, from which besides one could always appeal to the social -court. - -I need not add that the right of the father and the mother over the -children is absolutely equal, and that, if the right of either could be -contested, it would not be that of the mother, who alone can say, I -_know_, I am _certain_ that these children are mine. - -READER. In fact, it is odious that the plenitude of right should be found -on the side of the mere legal presumption, the act of faith, uncertainty. - -Regarding marriage as a partnership of equals, do you not think that it -would be well to mark this equality and the distinction of personalities -in the name borne by the spouses and their children? - -AUTHOR. Certainly, on the day of marriage each of the spouses should join -his partner's name to his own; this is done already in certain cantons of -Switzerland, and even in France, among a few individuals. - -The children should bear the double name of their parents until marriage, -when the daughters should keep the mother's name, and the sons the -father's; or else, if we wish to bring into the question the system of -liberty, it might be decreed that, on attaining majority, the child -himself should choose which of the two names he would bear and transmit. - - -II. - -READER. Now, let us take up the political right. - -AUTHOR. A nation is an association of free and equal individuals, -co-operating, by their labor and contributions, to the maintenance of the -common work; they have an incontestible right to do whatever is necessary -to protect their persons, their rights and their property from injury. -Man has political rights because he is free and the equal of his -co-partners; according to others, because he is a producer and a -tax-payer; now, woman being, through identity of species, free and the -equal of man; being in point of fact, a producer and a tax-payer; and -having the same general instincts as man, it is evident that she has the -same political rights as he. Such are the principles, let us proceed to -the application. - -We have said elsewhere, that it is not enough that a thing should be true -in an absolute sense; it is necessary under penalty of transforming good -into evil, to take into account the surroundings into which we seek to -introduce it; this men too often forget, the _practical_ truth in our -question is that it is profitable to recognize political rights _only to -the extent to which it is demanded_, because those who do not demand it -are intellectually incapable of making use of it, and because if they -should exercise it, in a majority of cases, it would be against their own -interests; Prudence exacts that we should be sure that the possessor of a -right is really emancipated, and that he will not be the blind tool of a -man or a party. - -Now, in the existing state of affairs, women not only do not demand their -political rights, but laugh at those who address them on the subject; -they pride themselves on being thought unfit for that which regards -general interests; they recognize themselves therefore as incapable. - -On the other hand, they are minors civilly, slaves of prejudice, deprived -of general education, submissive for the most part to the influence of -their husbands, lovers or confessors, clinging as a majority to the ways -of the past. If therefore they should enter without preparation into -political life, they would either duplicate men or cause humanity to -retrograde. - -You comprehend now why many women who are more capable than an infinite -number of men of coöperating in great political acts, choose rather to -renounce them than to compromise the cause of progress by the extension -of political right to all women. - -READER. Personally, I am of your opinion; but it is necessary to foresee -and to refute the objections that may be made to you by very intelligent -women; these women will say, Reflect, the negation of right is -iniquitous, for it is the negation of equality and of human nature. It is -as false as dangerous to lay down the principle of the recognition of -right only to the extent in which it is claimed; for it is notorious that -slaves are not the ones in general to demand their own rights; your -affirmation therefore condemns the emancipation of slaves and serfs, and -universal suffrage. - -The objection that you raise against the right on account of the -incapacity of women and the low use which they would make of it, might -apply quite as well to men who are scarcely more fully emancipated than -they; who are often the duplicate of their wife or confessor, or who have -no other opinion than that of their electoral committee. - -In right, as in everything else, an apprenticeship is necessary: woman -will make use of it at first badly, then better, then well; for we learn -to play on an instrument much more quickly by using it than by learning -its theory. - -The exercise of right gives elevation and dignity, elevates the -individual in his own esteem, and causes him to study questions which he -would have neglected had he not been obliged to examine them in order to -concur in and resolve them. Do you wish women to take to heart matters of -general interest? Then give them political right. - -These objections, may be raised against you. - -AUTHOR. They were raised against me in 1848 by a number of eminent women, -and by many men devoted to the triumph of the new principles. - -I answered them then and I answer them again to-day: We should speedily -agree, if our modern society were not the scene of conflict between two -diametrically opposite principles. - -The question is not to decide whether political right belongs to woman, -whether she would develop it, enlarge it, etc., but rather whether she -would use it to ensure the triumph of the principle that says to -humanity, Advance! or of that which gives as the word of command, -Retreat! - -What is the end of political right? Evidently, to accomplish a great duty -in the direction of progress. Well, is it not dangerous to accord it to -those who would employ it against this end? - -What! you struggle for right, in order to obtain the triumph of a holy -cause, yet feel no hesitation in according it to those who would -certainly make use of right to kill right! - -You reproach me for acting like the Jesuits, who value justice much less -than expediency. Well, gentlemen, if you had had half their ability, you -would have been successful long ago. Like true savages, you would think -yourselves dishonored by possessing prudence and practical sense, by -offering yourselves to battle otherwise than with naked bodies; this may -be very fine, very courageous--but as to being sensible, that is another -thing. - -I am not guilty of the crime of denying right, since I do not deny it; I -only desire that it shall not be demanded since this would be suicidal, I -do not lay down the principle that _every kind_ of right should be -recognized only to the extent in which it is claimed, since I speak to -you of political rights alone; there are rights which make their own -demand, such as those of living, of development, of enjoyment, of the -fruit of one's labor, and it is shameful for society not to recognize -them to their full extent. But we awaken later to the sentiment of civil -right, and still later to that of political right; take the logical -advance of humanity into account therefore and do not remain in the -absolute. - -I know that my objection on the score of the incapacity of women is quite -as applicable to that of men; but is it a reason, because you have -admitted the right of the ignorant masses of men who had not demanded it, -to show yourselves equally unwise with respect to women who are in the -same position? I will correct myself, gentlemen, of what you term my -_aristocratic_ spirit, when I see your political freedmen comprehending -the tendencies of civilization, and making use of their right to drive -the abettors of the past to despair by promoting the triumph of liberty -and equality. Until then, permit me to keep my opinion. - -And I have kept my opinion, which is this: the exercise of political -right is a means of reform and progress, only if those who enjoy it -believe in progress and are anxious for reforms: in the opposite case, -the popular vote can be nothing but the expression of prejudices, errors -and passions--instead of learning to exercise it through the use of it, -as it is urged, they employ it simply to cut their own fingers. - -READER. May it not be objected that, in accordance with your theory of -right, all being equal, no one can arrogate to himself the function of -distributing rights? - -AUTHOR. Theory is the ideal towards which practice should tend; if we had -not this ideal, we could not know by what principle to guide ourselves; -but in social _reality_, there are individuals who have attained -majority, and others who, being minors, are destined to attain it. - -If I should assert that those who have attained majority can rightfully -accord or refuse right to the minors, I should depart essentially from my -principles; it is by the _law_, which is the expression of the conscience -of those most advanced, while waiting till it shall be the conscience of -all, that political majority is decreed and that its conditions are -established. The right is virtual in each of us; no one therefore has the -right to give it, to take it away, or to contest it; it is recognized -when we are in a condition to exercise and to demand it; and we prove -that we are in a condition to exercise it when we satisfy the conditions -fixed by the law. - -READER. What should be these conditions for the enjoyment of political -right, in your opinion? - -AUTHOR. Twenty-five years of age; and a certificate attesting that the -individual knows how to read, write and reckon, that he possesses an -elementary knowledge of the history and geography of his country; -together with a correct theory with respect to Right and Duty, and the -destiny of humanity upon earth. The knowledge of a small volume would be -sufficient, as you see, to enable every man and woman, twenty-five years -of age and healthy in mind, to enjoy political rights, after having been -subjected to an initiation by the enjoyment of civil rights. But, I ask -you, what could those do with political right who confound liberty with -license, who scarcely know the meaning of the words Right and Duty, and -who are even incapable of writing their own vote! Men have their rights, -let them keep them! a right once admitted cannot be taken away: let them -render themselves fit to exercise them. As to women, let them first -emancipate themselves civilly and become educated: their turn will come. - -READER. It is very important that men should comprehend that you do not -deny, but merely postpone the political rights of our sex. - -AUTHOR. Be easy; they will comprehend it rightly; they will not mistake -counsel dictated by prudence for an acknowledgement of inferiority and a -resignation of functions. - - -III. - -READER. Will you now state the legal reforms which we should demand -successively. - -AUTHOR. So far as civil life is concerned, we should ask: - -That a woman who is a foreigner may be able to become naturalized in a -country otherwise than by marriage. - -That woman shall not lose her nationality by the same sacrament. - -That woman be admitted to sign, as a witness, all certificates of social -condition, with all others that have been hitherto interdicted to her. - -You know that already, in derogation of the law, midwives sign -certificates of birth of unacknowledged natural children, and that, in -certain notarial documents, drawn up by justices of the peace, to attest -to a fact in the absence of written evidence, the testimony of women is -admitted. - -We demand that tradeswomen and merchant women shall form a part of the -boards of trade; that in every criminal trial, women shall be placed on -the jury: that to women shall be entrusted the management and -superintendence of hospitals, prisons for women, and charitable -associations. - -That in every district, a woman shall be appointed to superintend girls' -schools, infant asylums, and nurses. - -You know that women are already filling public employments in derogation -of the law, since the teaching and inspection of girls' schools, and -other asylums, are entrusted to them, and since women keep post-offices, -stamp offices, etc. - -READER. This regards civil Right in general; what reforms shall we demand -concerning married women? - -AUTHOR. That the conjugal abode shall be that which is inhabited by the -husband and wife _together_, no longer by the man alone. - -That the articles shall be suppressed which command the wife to obey her -husband, and to follow him wherever he sees fit to reside. - -That the prohibition to sell, mortgage, receive, give, appear in law, -etc., without the consent of the husband or court, shall be extended to -the husband as far as to the wife. - -That marriage under the system of separation of goods shall become the -public law. - -READER. What reforms do you demand with respect to the family council and -guardianship? - -AUTHOR. We demand that the family council shall be composed of twenty -persons; ten men and ten women, parents, relatives and friends, chosen by -the spouses. - -That the powers of this council, presided over by the justice of the -peace, shall be so determined that it shall give the first judgment in -differences arising between the spouses as to children, property, -guardianship, etc. - -We demand that every woman may be qualified to be appointed guardian or -to watch over the conduct of the guardian towards the ward. - -That the guardianship of the spouse interdicted shall be always confessed -by the family council. - -That the wife like the husband, may name a definitive guardian and a -council of guardianship for her surviving spouse. - -That the spouses may name during their lifetime, the father, a male -inspecting guardian from his family, the mother, a female inspecting -guardian from hers, that in case of pre-decease, the children may be -always under the influence of both sexes. - -That this superior guardianship, in the absence of any expressed desire, -belongs of right to a member of the family of the defunct, who must be of -the same sex. - -That in case of a second marriage, if the child is maltreated or unhappy, -the inspecting guardian, whether male or female, can have it adjudged to -him by the family council, without excluding the appeal of the guardian -to the courts. - -That in case of the death of the father or mother, the guardianship -belongs of right to the nearest ancestor, and the inspecting guardianship -to the nearest ancestor of the other line. - -If there be competition between the two lines, the family councils shall -choose the guardian from one family and the inspecting guardian from the -other, and of opposite sex. - -That the duties of guardianship and inspecting guardianship shall -comprehend, not only the material, but also the moral and intellectual -interests of the wards. - -That the father who is guardian, shall lose the right of guardianship -over the children if he re-marries without first having had it continued -to him by the family council. - -That lastly, the State shall so organize a board of guardianship for -abandoned children that the boys shall be under the superintendence of -the men and the girls under that of the women; this board will form a -great family council. - -READER. I like your system better than that of the law, not only because -woman is the equal of man therein, but because wards will be better -protected by it; I have known men to cause their wives, over-excited by -their ill treatment, to be placed under interdict, in order to remain -masters of their property; on the other hand, you know how many children -are wronged or made unhappy by the second marriage of their father. A -step-mother has full power to inflict suffering on the little -unfortunates. - -But you have said nothing of the authority of parents over their -children. - -AUTHOR. The authority of the parents over the children is the same; the -expression, paternal authority, is incomplete; the true phrase would be -_parental_ authority. On this head, we demand that if there be dissension -between the father and mother with regard to the children, the family -council shall decide in the first instance. - -That neither the father nor the mother shall have power to shut up the -child unless _both are agreed_. - -That the father or the mother acting as guardian shall not have power to -have recourse to this measure except with the concurrence of the -inspecting guardian, or, in case of difference, with the approbation of -the family council, always reserving the right of appeal to the court. - -That the marriageable age shall be fixed at twenty-five for both sexes. - -READER. Shall we demand the suppression of separation from bed and board? - -AUTHOR. No; but we must demand that _divorce shall be established_. - -That divorce may be obtained for the adultery of one of the parties, -cruelty, grave abuses, condemnation to punishment affecting the liberty -or person, notorious vices, incompatibility of temper, mutual consent. - -That, during the suit for separation or for divorce, the guardianship of -the children shall be given to the most deserving parent; and that, if -both are alike unworthy, a guardian and inspecting guardian of different -sexes shall be appointed. - -That, if both are deserving, they shall settle it amicably between -themselves before the family council. - -That parties married under the dotal system or under that of the -separation of goods, shall have control of their own property. - -That if the petition for divorce be on account of the bad management of -the common property, the administration shall be taken away from the -husband and entrusted to the wife. - -That if the petition be on account of the condemnation of one of the -parties to punishment affecting the liberty or person, the other shall -remain administrator. - -That, in all other cases, an inventory shall be made and the spouse best -fitted to the task be appointed guardian under the surveillance of one or -two members of the family of the other spouse, with the obligation of -furnishing estovers to the other. - -That the decree granting the divorce or separation shall bear the number, -name and age of the children born of the marriage, together with the -annual sum that each party is bound to furnish for their maintenance and -education. - -That this decree shall state to whose custody the children are entrusted, -whether by natural consent or by familial or judicial authority. - -That it shall be placarded publicly in the courts, and inserted in the -leading journals of the vicinity. - -That this instrument shall accompany the publication of the bans of a -subsequent marriage, under pain of heavy penalties. - -READER. These measures are severe; if it would be easy to become -divorced, it would not be easy to marry afterwards. - -AUTHOR. I do not deny it; but it is better to prevent divorce by the -difficulty of marrying afterwards, than by placing restrictions upon it; -in the first case, the difficulty comes from the fetters which the -individual has forged for himself; he makes his own destiny; in the -second, individual liberty is infringed upon by social authority, which -is an abuse of power. - -READER. Let us enter upon the legal reforms concerning morals. - -AUTHOR. We demand that every promise of marriage which is not fulfilled -shall be punished with a fine and damages. - -That every man whom an unmarried mother can prove by witnesses or -letters, to be the father of her child, shall be subject to the burdens -of paternity. - -That the investigation of paternity shall be authorized like that of -maternity. - -That the seduction of an unmarried woman under twenty-five shall be -severely punished. - -That no unmarried woman can be registered among the public women before -twenty-five years old, and that she shall be put into the house of -correction if she abandons herself to prostitution before this age. - -That every abandoned woman who receives a man under twenty-five years of -age shall be punished with fine and imprisonment, and that the penalty -shall be terrible if she is diseased. - -READER. It will be said that paternity cannot be proved. - -AUTHOR. I do not deny that it may be possible that the father attributed -to the natural child will not be the true one; but it will be necessary -to establish by proofs that he has rendered himself liable to be reputed -such: it is the probability of paternity in marriage extended to -paternity out of marriage. So much the worse for men who suffer -themselves to be caught! it is shameful to attach impunity to the most -disorderly and subversive of selfish desires; women must no longer bear -alone the burden of natural children, and no longer be tempted to abandon -them. - -READER. But what if it be proved that a married man has rendered himself -liable to become a father outside his household. - -AUTHOR. This should be first a case of divorce; next, of punishment for -him and his accomplice. As to the child, the man should bear the charge -of it in concert with the mother. - -READER. These are indeed Draconian laws! - -AUTHOR. Do you not see that corruption is shutting us in, body and soul; -and that if we do not create a vigorous reaction against it by the -severity of the laws, the reform of education, and the awakening of the -ideal, our society will be, ere long, only an immense brothel? - -READER. Alas! it is but too true. - -AUTHOR. Let us demand then, not only a rational reform of the national -education, but also that the number of lyceums shall be doubled for -girls. - -That all the institutions of higher instruction dependent on the state -shall be open to them as to boys. - -That they shall be admitted to receive the same university degrees, and -the same diplomas of capacity as men. - -That every field of occupation shall be opened to them as to men; - -So that, elevated in public opinion by equality, their activity shall no -longer be nominally compensated; that they may live by their labor, and -that want, discouragement and suicide may no longer terminate their life -when they do not make choice of the sad part of elements of -demoralization. - - - - -I. - -APPEAL TO WOMEN. - - -Progressive women, to you, I address my last words, Listen in the name of -the general good, in the name of your sons and your daughters. - -You say: the manners of our time are corrupt; the laws concerning our sex -need reform. - -It is true; but do you think that to verify the evil suffices to cure it? - -You say: so long as woman shall be a minor in the city, the state and -marriage, she will be so in social labor; she will be forced to be -supported by man; that is to debase him while humbling herself. - -It is true; but do you believe that to verify these things suffices to -remedy our abasement? - -You say: the education that both sexes receive is deplorable in view of -the destiny of humanity. - -It is true; but do you believe that to affirm this suffices to improve, -to transform the method of education? - -Will words, complaints and protestations have power to change any of -these things? - -It is not to lament over them that is needed; it is to act. - -It is not merely to demand justice and reform that is needed; it is to -labor ourselves for reform; it is to prove _by our works_ that we are -worthy to obtain justice; it is to take possession resolutely of the -contested place; it is, in a word, to have intellect, courage and -activity. - -Upon whom then will you have a right to count, if you abandon yourselves? - -Upon men? Your carelessness and silence have in part discouraged those -who maintained your right; it is much if they defend you against those -who, to oppress you, call to their aid every species of ignorance, every -species of despotism, every selfish passion, all the paradoxes which they -despise when their own sex is in question. - -You are insulted, you are outraged, you are denied or you are blamed in -order that you may be reduced to subjection, and it is much if your -indignation is roused thereby! - -When will you be ashamed of the part to which you are condemned? - -When will you respond to the appeal that generous and intelligent men -have made to you? - -When will you cease to be masculine photographs, and resolve to complete -the revolution of humanity by finally making the word of woman heard in -Religion, in Justice, in Politics and in Science? - -What are we to do, you say? - -What are you to do, ladies? Well! what is done by women believing. Look -at those who have given their soul to a dogma; they form organizations, -teach, write, act on their surroundings and on the rising generation in -order to secure the triumph of the faith that has the support of their -conscience. Why do not you do as much as they? - -Your rivals write books stamped with supernaturalism and individualistic -morality, why do you not write those that bear the stamp of rationalism, -of solidary morality and of a holy faith in Progress? - -Your rivals found educational institutions and train up professors in -order to gain over the new generation to their dogmas and their -practices, why do not you do as much for the benefit of the new ideas? - -Your rivals organize industrial associations, why do not you imitate -them? - -Would not what is lawful to them be so to you. - -Could a government which professes to revive the principles of '89, and -which is the offspring of Revolutionary right, entertain the thought of -fettering the direct heirs of the principles laid down by '89, while -leaving those free to act who are more or less their enemies? Can any one -of you admit such a possibility? - -What are we to do? - -You are to establish a journal to maintain your claims. - -You are to appoint an encyclopedic committee to draw up a series of -treatises on the principal branches of human knowledge for the -enlightenment of women and the people. - -You are to found a Polytechnic Institute for women. - -You are to aid your sisters of the laboring classes to organize -themselves in trades associations on economical principles more equitable -than those of the present time. - -You are to facilitate the return to virtue of the lost women who ask you -for aid and counsel. - -You are to labor with all your might for the reform of educational -methods. - -Yet, in the face of a task so complicated, you ask: what are we to do? - -Ah, ye women who have attained majority, arise, if ye have heart and -courage! - -Arise, and let those among you who are the most intelligent, the most -instructed, and who have the most time and liberty constitute an -_Apostleship of women_. - -Around this Apostleship, let all the women of Progress be ranged, that -each one may serve the common cause according to her means. - -And remember, remember above all things, that _Union is strength_. - - -THE END. - - - - -NEW BOOKS - -And New Editions Recently Issued by CARLETON, PUBLISHER, NEW YORK. - -_418 BROADWAY, CORNER OF LISPENARD STREET._ - -N.B.--THE PUBLISHER, upon receipt of the price in advance, will send any -of the following Books, by mail, POSTAGE FREE, to any part of the United -States. This convenient and very safe mode may be adopted when the -neighboring Booksellers are not supplied with the desired work. State -name and address in full. - - -Victor Hugo. - - LES MISERABLES.--The only unabridged English translation of "the - grandest and best Novel ever written." One large octavo vol., - paper covers, $1.00, or cloth $1.50 - - LES MISERABLES.--A superior edition of the same Novel, in five - octavo vols.--"Fantine," "Cosette," "Marius," "St. Denis," and - "Valjean." Cloth, each vol., $1.00 - - THE LIFE OF VICTOR HUGO.--(Understood to be an Autobiography.) - "As charming and interesting as a Novel." octavo, cloth $1.50 - - -By the Author of "Rutledge." - - RUTLEDGE.--A deeply interesting novel. 12mo. cloth, $1.50 - THE SUTHERLANDS.-- $1.50 - FRANK WARRINGTON.-- $1.50 - LOUIE'S LAST TERM AT ST. MARY'S.-- $1.50 - A NEW NOVEL.--_In press._ - - -Hand-Books of Good Society. - - THE HABITS OF GOOD SOCIETY; with Thoughts, Hints, and Anecdotes, - concerning nice points of taste, good manners, and the art of - making oneself agreeable. Reprinted from the London Edition. The - best and most entertaining work of the kind ever published. - 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - THE ART OF CONVERSATION.--With directions for self-culture. A - sensible and instructive work, that ought to be in the hands of - every one who wishes to be either an agreeable talker or - listener. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - - -Mrs. Mary J. Holmes' Works. - - DARKNESS AND DAYLIGHT.--_Just published._ 12mo. cl. $ 1.50 - 'LENA RIVERS.-- A Novel. $ 1.50 - TEMPEST AND SUNSHINE.-- $ 1.50 - MARIAN GREY.-- $ 1.50 - MEADOW BROOK.-- $ 1.50 - ENGLISH ORPHANS.-- $ 1.50 - DORA DEANE.-- $ 1.50 - COUSIN MAUDE.-- $ 1.50 - HOMESTEAD ON THE HILLSIDE.-- $ 1.50 - - -Artemus Ward. - - HIS BOOK.--An irresistibly funny volume of writings by the - immortal American humorist and showman; with plenty of comic - illustrations. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - - -Miss Muloch. - - JOHN HALIFAX, Gentleman. A novel. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - A LIFE FOR A LIFE.-- $ 1.50 - - -Charlotte Bronte (Currer Bell). - - JANE EYRE.--A novel. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - SHIRLEY.-- $ 1.50 - VILLETTE.-- $ 1.50 - - -Edmund Kirke. - - AMONG THE PINES.--A thrilling work. 12mo. cloth, - MY SOUTHERN FRIENDS.-- - DOWN IN TENNESSEE.--_Just published._ - - -Cuthbert Bede. - - VERDANT GREEN.--A rollicking, humorous novel of student life in - an English University; with more than 200 comic illustrations. - 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - -Richard B. Kimball. - - WAS HE SUCCESSFUL?-- A novel. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - UNDERCURRENTS.-- $ 1.50 - SAINT LEGER.-- $ 1.50 - ROMANCE OF STUDENT LIFE.-- $ 1.50 - IN THE TROPICS.--Edited by R. B. Kimball. $ 1.50 - - -Epes Sargent. - - PECULIAR.--One of the most remarkable and successful novels - published in this country. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Miss Augusta J. Evans. - - BEULAH.--A novel of great power. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -A. S. Roe's Works. - - A LONG LOOK AHEAD.-- A novel. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - TO LOVE AND TO BE LOVED.-- $ 1.50 - TIME AND TIDE.-- $ 1.50 - I'VE BEEN THINKING.-- $ 1.50 - THE STAR AND THE CLOUD.-- $ 1.50 - TRUE TO THE LAST.-- $ 1.50 - HOW COULD HE HELP IT.-- $ 1.50 - LIKE AND UNLIKE.-- $ 1.50 - A NEW NOVEL.--_In Press._ $ 1.50 - - -Walter Barrett, Clerk. - - OLD MERCHANTS OF NEW YORK.--Being personal incidents, interesting - sketches, bits of biography, and gossipy events in the life of - nearly every leading merchant in New York City. Two series. - 12mo. cloth, each, $ 1.50 - - -T. S. Arthur's New Works. - - LIGHT ON SHADOWED PATHS.-- A novel. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - OUT IN THE WORLD.--_In press._ $ 1.50 - NOTHING BUT GOLD.-- $ 1.50 - - -The Orpheus C. Kerr Papers. - - A COLLECTION of exquisitely satirical and humorous military - criticisms. Two series. 12mo. cloth, each, $ 1.25 - - -M. Michelet's Works. - - LOVE (L'AMOUR).--From the French. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - WOMAN (LA FEMME).-- $ 1.25 - WOMAN MADE FREE.--French of D'Hericourt, $ 1.50 - - -Novels by Ruffini. - - DR. ANTONIO.--A love story of Italy. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - LAVINIA; OR, THE ITALIAN ARTIST.-- $ 1.50 - VINCENZO; OR, SUNKEN ROCKS.-- 8vo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Rev. John Cumming, D.D., of London. - - THE GREAT TRIBULATION.--Two series. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - THE GREAT PREPARATION.-- $ 1.25 - THE GREAT CONSUMMATION.-- $ 1.25 - TEACH US TO PRAY.-- $ 1.25 - - -Ernest Renan. - - THE LIFE OF JESUS.--Translated by C. E. Wilbour from the - celebrated French work. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - RELIGIOUS HISTORY AND CRITICISM.-- 8vo. cloth, $ 2.50 - - -Charles Reade. - - THE CLOISTER AND THE HEARTH.--A magnificent new novel, by the - author of "Hard Cash," etc. 8vo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -The Opera. - - TALES FROM THE OPERAS.--A collection of clever stories, based - upon the plots of all the famous operas. 12mo. cl., $ 1.25 - - -J. C. Jeaffreson. - - A BOOK ABOUT DOCTORS.--An exceedingly humorous and entertaining - volume of sketches, stories, and facts, about famous physicians - and surgeons. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Fred. S. Cozzens. - - THE SPARROWGRASS PAPERS.--A capital humorous work, with - illustrations by Darley. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - - -F. D. Guerrazzi - - BEATRICE CENCI.--A great historical novel. Translated from the - Italian; with a portrait of the Cenci, from Guido's famous - picture in Rome. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Private Miles O'Reilly. - - HIS BOOK.--Rich with his songs, services, and speeches, and - comically illustrated. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - - -The New York Central Park. - - A SUPERB GIFT BOOK.--The Central Park pleasantly described, and - magnificently embellished with more than 50 exquisite photographs - of the principal views and objects of interest. A large quarto - volume, sumptuously bound in Turkey morocco, $25.00 - - -Joseph Rodman Drake. - - THE CULPRIT FAY.--The most charming faery poem in the English - language. Beautifully printed. 12mo. cloth, $ 0.75 - - -Mother Goose for Grown Folks. - - HUMOROUS RHYMES for grown people; based upon the famous "Mother - Goose Melodies." 12mo. cloth, $ 1.00 - - -Stephen Massett. - - DRIFTING ABOUT.--A comic illustrated book of the life and travels - of "Jeems Pipes." 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - - -A New Sporting Work. - - THE GAME FISH OF THE NORTH.--One of the best books on fish and - fishing ever published. Entertaining as well as instructive, and - full of illustrations. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Balzac's Novels. - - CESAR BIROTTEAU.--From the French. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - THE ALCHEMIST.-- $ 1.25 - EUGENIE GRANDET.-- $ 1.25 - PETTY ANNOYANCES OF MARRIED LIFE.-- $ 1.25 - - -Thomas Bailey Aldrich. - - BABIE BELL, AND OTHER POEMS.--Blue and gold binding, $ 1.00 - OUT OF HIS HEAD.--A new romance. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.00 - - -Richard H. Stoddard. - - THE KING'S BELL.--A new poem. 12mo. cloth, $ 0.75 - THE MORGESONS.--A novel. By Mrs. R. H. Stoddard. $ 1.00 - - -Edmund C. Stedman. - - ALICE OF MONMOUTH.--A new poem. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.00 - LYRICS AND IDYLS.-- $ 0.75 - - -M. T. Walworth. - - LULU.--A new novel. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - HOTSPUR.-- _in press_. - -Author of "Olie." - - NEPENTHE.--A new novel. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - TOGETHER.-- _in press_. - - -Quest. - - A NEW ROMANCE.--_In press._ 12mo. cloth, - - -Victoire. - - A NEW NOVEL.--_In Press._ 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Red-Tape. - - AND PIGEON-HOLE GENERALS, as seen by a citizen-soldier - in the Army of the Potomac. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.25 - - -Author "Green Mountain Boys." - - CENTEOLA.--A new work, _in press_. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -C. French Richards. - - JOHN GUILDERSTRING'S SIN.--A novel. 12mo. cloth, - - -J. R. Beckwith. - - THE WINTHROPS.--A novel, _in press_. 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Jas. H. Hackett. - - NOTES AND COMMENTS ON SHAKSPEARE.-- 12mo. cloth, $ 1.50 - - -Miscellaneous Works. - - ALEXANDER VON HUMBOLDT.--Life and travels. 12mo. cl., $ 1.50 - LIFE OF HUGH MILLER, the Geologist. $ 1.50 - ADAM GUROWSKI.--Diary for 1863. $ 1.25 - DOESTICKS.--The Elephant Club, illustrated. $ 1.50 - HUSBAND AND WIFE, or human development. $ 1.25 - ROCKFORD.--A novel by Mrs. L. D. Umsted. $ 1.00 - THE PRISONER OF STATE.--By D. A. Mahony. $ 1.25 - THE PARTISAN LEADER.--By Beverly Tucker. $ 1.25 - SPREES AND SPLASHES.--By Henry Morford. $ 1.00 - AROUND THE PYRAMIDS.--By Gen. Aaron Ward. $ 1.50 - CHINA AND THE CHINESE.--By W. L. G. Smith. $ 1.00 - WANDERINGS OF A BEAUTY.--Mrs. Edwin James. $ 1.00 - THE U. S. TAX LAW.--"Government Edition." $ 0.75 - TREATISE ON DEAFNESS.--By Dr. E. B. Lighthill. $ 1.00 - LYRICS OF A DAY.--or newspaper poetry. $ 1.00 - GARRET VAN HORN.--A novel by J. S. Sauzade. $ 1.25 - THE NATIONAL SCHOOL FOR THE SOLDIER.-- $ 0.50 - FORT LAFAYETTE.--A novel by Benjamin Wood. $ 1.00 - THE YACHTMAN'S PRIMER.--By T. R. Warren. $ 0.50 - GEN. NATHANIEL LYON.--Life and Writings. $ 1.00 - PHILIP THAXTER.--A novel. $ 1.00 - LITERARY ESSAYS.--By George Brimley. $ 1.50 - HAYING TIME TO HOPPING.--A novel. $ 1.25 - THE VAGABOND.--Essays by Adam Badeau. $ 1.00 - EDGAR POE AND HIS CRITICS.--By Mrs. Whitman. $ 0.75 - TACTICS; or, Cupid in Shoulder-Straps. $ 1.00 - JOHN DOE AND RICHARD ROE.--A novel. $ 1.25 - LOLA MONTEZ.--Her life and lectures. $ 1.50 - DEBT AND GRACE.--By Rev. C. F. Hudson. $ 1.50 - HUSBAND _vs._ WIFE.--A comic - illustrated poem. $ 0.50 - TRANSITION.--Edited by Rev. H. S. Carpenter. $ 1.00 - ROUMANIA.--By Dr. Jas. O. Noyes, illustrated. $ 1.50 - VERNON GROVE.--A novel. $ 1.25 - ANSWER TO HUGH MILLER.--By T. A. Davies. $ 1.25 - COSMOGONY.--By Thomas A. Davies. 8vo. cl., $ 1.50 - NATIONAL HYMNS.--By Richard Grant White. $ 1.50 - TWENTY YEARS Around the World.--J. Guy Vassar. $ 3.50 - SPIRIT OF HEBREW POETRY.--By Isaac Taylor. $ 2.50 - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Woman's Philosophy of Woman, by -Jenny P. d'Héricourt - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A WOMAN'S PHILOSOPHY OF WOMAN *** - -***** This file should be named 53937-8.txt or 53937-8.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/3/9/3/53937/ - -Produced by Clarity, Héléne de Mink; and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - diff --git a/old/53937-8.zip b/old/53937-8.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e249bf7..0000000 --- a/old/53937-8.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53937-h.zip b/old/53937-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index bb36099..0000000 --- a/old/53937-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53937-h/53937-h.htm b/old/53937-h/53937-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 25ef459..0000000 --- a/old/53937-h/53937-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,13515 +0,0 @@ - <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> - <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" - content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg's eBook of A woman's philosophy of woman, by d'Héricourt, Jenny P.</title> - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - <style type="text/css"> - - h2 {text-align: center; - clear: both;} - - h2 {margin-top: 4em; margin-bottom: 1em;} - - h2.normal {margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; - page-break-after: avoid;} - - .subh {font-weight: bold; margin-top: 2em; text-align: center;} - - div.titlepage, - div.frontmatter - { - text-align: center; - page-break-before: always; - page-break-after: always; - } - - div.titlepage p - { - text-align: center; - font-weight: bold; - line-height: 1.3em; - } - - div.frontmatter p - { - text-align: center; - margin-top: 4em; - } - - .titlepage p - { - text-align: center; - font-weight: bold; - line-height: 1.3em; - } - - div.chapter - {page-break-before: always; margin-top: 4em; margin-bottom: 2em; text-align: center;} - - div.topspace {margin-top: 4em;} - - div.section - {page-break-before: always; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 1em; text-align: center;} - - .space {margin-top: 1em;} - - .end - { - text-align: center; - font-size: small; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 4em; - } - - hr.deco {width: 5%;} - hr.tb {width: 5%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;} - hr.chap {width: 15%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;} - - table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} - .tdl {text-align: left; vertical-align: top; - padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -1em;} - .tdr {text-align: right; vertical-align: bottom;} - .tdc {text-align: center;} - th {padding-top: 2em; padding-bottom: 1em;} - .td.border {border: 2px solid;} - - #ToC - .tdr {padding-left: 2em;} - .tdls {padding-left: 4em;} - - #ad {width: 75%;} - - .pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - /* visibility: hidden; */ - position: absolute; - right: 5%; - font-size: 0.6em; - font-variant: normal; - font-style: normal; - text-align: right; - background-color: #FFFACD; - border: 1px solid; - padding: 0.3em; - text-indent: 0em; - } /* page numbers */ - - .pagenumh { display: none; } - - - .blockquote {font-size: 95%; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 10%;} - - .tnote {margin: auto; - margin-top: 2em; - border: 1px solid; - padding: 1em; - background-color: #F0FFFF; - width: 25em;} - - sup {font-size: 0.7em; font-variant: normal; vertical-align: top;} - - ul {list-style-type: none;} - li {margin-left: 3em; text-indent: -2em;} - - .indent {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 5%; font-size: 100%;} - .hanging {margin-left: 2em; text-indent: -1em;} - - .extra {font-size: 130%; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; - line-height: 1.5em;} - .smcap {font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 90%;} - - .smallc {font-size: 85%; text-transform: uppercase;} - .center {text-align: center;} - .date {font-size: 85%; margin-left: 5%;} - - .signature {margin-left: 65%;} - .quote {font-size: 95%; margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 10%;} - .ad {text-align: center;} - .titre {text-align: center; font-size: small; font-weight: bold;} - .titel {margin-left: 5%;} - .cap {font-size: 110%;} - - .sper {font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: .2em; padding-left: .2em;} - - .figcenter {margin: auto; text-align: center;} - - .i1 {margin-left: 1em;} - .i2 {margin-left: 2em;} - .i3 {margin-left: 2em;} - .i4 {margin-left: 4em;} - .i5 {margin-left: 5em;} - .i6 {margin-left: 6em;} - .i9 {margin-left: 9em;} - - - .xs {font-size: x-small;} - .small {font-size: small;} - .medium {font-size: medium;} - .large {font-size: large;} - .xlarge {font-size: x-large;} - .xxlarge {font-size: xx-large;} - -@media screen -{ - body - { - width: 90%; - max-width: 45em; - margin: auto; - } - - p - { - margin-top: .75em; - margin-bottom: .75em; - text-align: justify; - } -} - -@media print, handheld -{ - p - { - margin-top: .75em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .75em; - } - - .smcap - { - text-transform: uppercase; - font-size: 90%; - } - - hr.deco - { - width: 5%; - margin-left: 47.5%; - } -} - -@media handheld -{ - body - { - margin: 0; - padding: 0; - width: 90%; - } - - #ToC, - .tnote, - #ad - { - width: auto; - } - .signature - { - margin-left: 3%; - } -} - - </style> - </head> -<body> - - -<pre> - -Project Gutenberg's A Woman's Philosophy of Woman, by Jenny P. d'Héricourt - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: A Woman's Philosophy of Woman - or, Woman affranchised. An answer to Michelet, Proudhon, - Girardin, Legouvé, Comte, and other modern innovators - -Author: Jenny P. d'Héricourt - -Release Date: January 10, 2017 [EBook #53937] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A WOMAN'S PHILOSOPHY OF WOMAN *** - - - - -Produced by Clarity, Héléne de Mink; and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - - -</pre> - - -<div class="tnote"> -<p>Transcriber's note: Obvious printer errors have been repaired, but spelling has not -been standardized. Any missing page numbers are those that are not shown in the -original text.</p> -</div> - -<div class="topspace titlepage"> -<p><span class="xxlarge">A WOMAN'S PHILOSOPHY OF WOMAN;</span><br /> -<span class="xs">OR</span><br /> -<span class="large">WOMAN AFFRANCHISED.</span></p> - -<p class="small">AN ANSWER TO MICHELET, PROUDHON, GIRARDIN, LEGOUVÉ,<br /> -COMTE, AND OTHER MODERN INNOVATORS.</p> - -<p class="medium">By MADAME D'HÉRICOURT.</p> - -<p><span class="xs">Translated from the last Paris Edition</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<img src="images/logo.jpg" width="60" height="44" alt="" /> -</div> - -<p><span class="large">NEW YORK:</span><br /> -<span class="medium"><i>CARLETON, PUBLISHER, 413 BROADWAY.</i></span><br /> -<span class="small">M DCCC LXIV.</span></p> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_IV"> IV</a></span></p> - - -<div class="frontmatter"> -<p>Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1864, by<br /> -G. W. CARLETON,<br /> -In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Southern District of<br /> -New York.</p> - -<hr class="deco" /> - -<p>R. CRAIGHEAD,<br /> -Printer, Stereotyper, and Electrotyper,<br /> -Carton Building,<br /> -<i>81, 83, and 85 Centre Street</i>.</p> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_V"> V</a></span></p> - -<h2 class="normal">CONTENTS</h2> - -<table id="ToC" summary="contents"> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">INTRODUCTION</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_VII"> VII</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">PREFACE</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_IX"> IX</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="i1">CHAP.</span></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdls"> I. MICHELET</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_17"> 17</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdls">II. PROUDHON</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_33"> 33</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdls">III. COMTE</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_119"> 119</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdls">IV. LEGOUVE</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_134"> 134</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdls"> V. DE GIRARDIN</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_155"> 155</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdls">VI. MODERN COMMUNISTS</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_167"> 167</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdls">VII. SUMMARY</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_201"> 201</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">PART II.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">OBJECTIONS TO THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_211"> 211</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF WOMAN</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_224"> 224</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">LOVE; ITS FUNCTIONS IN HUMANITY</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_248"> 248</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">MARRIAGE</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_270"> 270</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">SUMMARY OF PROPOSED REFORMS</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_294"> 294</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl">APPEAL TO WOMEN</td> -<td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_314"> 314</a></td> -</tr> -</table> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenumh"><a id="Page_VI"> VI</a></span></p> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_VII"> VII</a></span> -<h2 class="normal">INTRODUCTION<br /> -<span class="medium">TO THE AMERICAN EDITION.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>The general interest evinced in the theories of Michelet -and other philosophers concerning the functions and province -of woman, and the lively opposition to these theories -manifested in many quarters, have called forth an American -translation of the present work. This remarkable -book of Madame d'Héricourt on woman is conceded to be -the best reply to these philosophers extant. The work, -intended by the author as "a refutation of the coarse indecency -of Proudhon, and of the perfumed pruriency of -Michelet, and the other false friends and would-be champions -of woman," has had a remarkable history. Published -first at Brussels, it was interdicted in France, and notice -was given that all copies found would be seized. -Madame d'Héricourt appealed to the censorship to know -the reason of this interdiction, and was informed in reply -that the reason for such proceedings never was given. -Not content with this, she wrote to Napoleon III, enclosing -a copy of the work, and called his attention to the -fact that a book by a French author could be suppressed -in France without any reason being given for it, and -without any chance being offered to the author to clear -herself of the implied charge of immorality. Immediately -upon the reception of the letter, the Emperor withdrew -the interdiction.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_VIII"> VIII</a></span> -Madame d'Héricourt is well known in France as an -able contributor to various philosophic journals, and also -as a member of the medical profession, in which she holds -a high and respected position. Her opinions are entitled -to great weight, and will be welcomed as throwing much -light on the practical question of the sphere of woman, -which is becoming one of increasing interest. The better -to adapt the book to the American public, it has been -slightly abbreviated in portions of local interest, referring -chiefly to French legislation. It has been well received -in England, as is testified by the following extract from -the <i>London Critic</i>, one of the ablest of the English -critical journals:</p> - -<p class="blockquote">"The work is calculated to do an immense service to French -society at the present time—just when the literature of the -country is on the verge of decay from the rottenness which is -eating to its very core. 'La Femme Affranchie' points out -the remedy to the social cancer which has gnawed away the -vital principle of domestic life in France, and caused that antagonism -between the sexes which foreigners behold with the -most profound amazement. Madame d'Héricourt's bold and -nervous arguments completely destroy the brutal commonplaces -of Proudhon as regards the moral and intellectual capacity of -women. She takes him on his own ground, and to his medical -propositions returns medical objections of far greater weight -and power, being more competent to judge the question, as she -has passed examinations as 'Maitresse sage femme' of 'La -Clinique,' and received her diploma as medical practitioner many -years ago."</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_IX"> IX</a></span></p> -<h2 class="normal">AUTHOR'S PREFACE.<br /> -<span class="medium">TO MY READERS.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>Readers, male and female, I am about to tell you the end of -this book, and the motives which caused me to undertake it, -that you may not waste your time in reading it, if its contents -are not suited to your intellectual and moral temperament.</p> - -<p>My end is to prove that woman has the same rights as man.</p> - -<p>To claim, in consequence, her emancipation;</p> - -<p>Lastly, to point out to the women who share my views, the -principal measures that they must take to obtain justice.</p> - -<p>The word emancipation giving room for equivocation, let us -in the first place establish its meaning.</p> - -<p>To emancipate woman is not to acknowledge her right to use -and abuse love; such an emancipation is only the slavery of -the passions; the use of the beauty and youth of woman by -man; the use of man by woman for his fortune or credit.</p> - -<p>To emancipate woman is to acknowledge and declare her -free, the equal of man in the social and the moral law, and in -labor.</p> - -<p>At present, over the whole surface of the globe, woman, in -certain respects, is not subjected to the same moral law as man; -her chastity is given over almost without restriction to the brutal -passions of the other sex, and she often endures alone the -consequences of a fault committed by both.</p> - -<p>In marriage, woman is a serf.</p> - -<p>In public instruction, she is sacrificed.</p> - -<p>In labor, she is made inferior.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_X"> X</a></span> -Civilly, she is <i>a</i> minor.</p> - -<p>Politically, she has no existence.</p> - -<p><i>She is the equal of man only when punishment and the -payment of taxes are in question.</i></p> - -<p>I claim the rights of woman, because it is time to make the -nineteenth century ashamed of its culpable denial of justice to -half the human species;</p> - -<p>Because the state of inferiority in which we are held corrupts -morals, dissolves society, deteriorates and enfeebles the race;</p> - -<p>Because the progress of enlightenment, in which woman participates, -has transformed her in social power, and because this -new power produces evil in default of the good which it is not -permitted to do;</p> - -<p>Because the time for according reforms has come, since women -are protesting against the order which oppresses them; -some by disdain of laws and prejudices; others by taking possession -of contested positions, and by organizing themselves -into societies to claim their share of human rights, as is done in -America;</p> - -<p>Lastly, because it seems to me useful to reply, <i>no longer -with sentimentality</i>, but with vigor, to those men who, terrified -by the emancipating movement, call to their aid false science to -prove that woman is outside the pale of right; and carry indecorum -and the opposite of courage, even to insult, even to the -most revolting outrages.</p> - -<p>Readers, male and female, several of the adversaries of the -cause which I defend, have carried the discussion into the -domain of science, and have not shrunk before the nudity -of biological laws and anatomical details. I praise them for -it; the body being respectable, there is no indecency in -speaking of the laws which govern it; but as it would be an -inconsistency on my part to believe that blamable in myself -which I approve in them, you will not be surprised that I follow -them on the ground which they have chosen, persuaded -that Science, the chaste daughter of Thought, can no more lose -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_XI"> XI</a></span> -her chastity under the pen of a pure woman than under that of -a pure man.</p> - -<p>Readers, male and female, I have but one request to make; -namely, that you will pardon my simplicity of style. It would -have cost me too much pains to write in the approved fashion; -it is probable, besides, that I should not have succeeded. My -work is one of conscience. If I enlighten some, if I make -others reflect; if I awaken in the heart of men the sentiment of -justice, in that of women the sentiment of their dignity; if I -am clear to all, fully comprehended by all, useful to all, even -to my adversaries, it will satisfy me and will console me for -displeasing those who love ideas only as they love women: in -full dress.</p> - -<p class="subh">TO MY ADVERSARIES.</p> - -<p>Many among you, gentlemen, adversaries of the great and -holy cause which I defend, have cited me, evidently without -having read me, without even knowing how to write my name. -To such as these I have nothing to say, unless that their opinion -matters little to me. Others, who have taken the trouble to -read my preceding works in the <i>Revue Philosophique</i> and the -<i>Ragione</i>, accuse me of <i>not writing like a woman</i>, of being -harsh, unsparing to my adversaries, nothing but a <i>reasoning -machine, lacking heart</i>.</p> - -<p>Gentlemen, I cannot write otherwise than as a woman, since -I have the honor to be a woman.</p> - -<p>If am I harsh and unsparing to my adversaries, it is because -they appear to me to be those of reason and of justice; it is -because they, the strong and well armed, attack harshly and -unsparingly a sex which they have taken care to render timid -and to disarm; it is, in short, because I believe it perfectly -lawful to defend weakness against tyranny which has the -audacity and insolence to erect itself into right.</p> - -<p>If I appear to you in the unattractive aspect of a <i>reasoning</i> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_XII"> XII</a></span> -<i>machine</i>, is, in the first place, because Nature has made me -so, and I see no good reason for modifying her work; secondly, -because it is not amiss for a woman that has attained majority -to prove to you that her sex, when not fearing your judgment, -reasons as well, and, often, better than you.</p> - -<p>I have no heart, you say. I am lacking in it, perhaps, towards -tyrants, but the conflict that I undertake proves that I -am not lacking in it towards their victims; I have therefore -a sufficient quantity of it, the more, inasmuch as I neither desire -to please you, nor care to be loved by any among you.</p> - -<p>Be advised by me, gentlemen; break yourselves of the habit -of confounding heart with nerves; cease to create an imaginary -type of woman to make it the standard of your judgment of -real women; it is thus that you pervert your reason and become, -without wishing it, the thing of all others the most hateful -and least estimable—tyrants.</p> - -<p class="subh">TO MY FRIENDS.</p> - -<p>Now to you, my friends, known and unknown, a few lines -of thanks.</p> - -<p>You all comprehend that woman, as a human being, has the -right to develop herself, and to manifest, like man, her spontaneity;</p> - -<p>That she has the right, like man, to employ her activity; -that she has the right, like man, to be respected in her dignity -and in the use which she sees fit to make of her free will.</p> - -<p>That as half in the social order, a producer, a tax-payer, -amenable to the laws, she has the right to count as half in -society.</p> - -<p>You all comprehend that it is in the enjoyment of these various -rights that her emancipation consists; not in the faculty of -making use of love outside a moral law based on justice and -self respect.</p> - -<p>Thanks first to you, Ausonio Franchi, the representative of -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_XIII"> XIII</a></span> -Critical Philosophy in Italy, a man as eminent for the profundity -of your ideas as for the impartiality and elevation of -your character; and who so generously and so long lent the -columns of your <i>Ragione</i> to my first labors.</p> - -<p>Thanks to you, my beloved co-laborers of the <i>Revue Philosophique</i> -of Paris, Charles Lemonnier, Massol, Guepin, Brothier, -etc., who have not hesitated to bring to light the question -of the emancipation of my sex; who have welcomed the works -of a woman to your columns with so much impartiality, and -have on all occasions expressed for me interest and sympathy.</p> - -<p>Thanks to you, in particular, my oldest friend, Charles Fauvety, -the indefatigable searcher after truth, whose elegant, -refined and limpid style is solely and constantly at the service -of progressive ideas and generous aspirations, as your rich -library and your counsels are at the service of those who are -seeking to enlighten humanity. Why, alas! do you join to so -many talents and noble qualities the fault of always remaining -in the background to give place to others!</p> - -<p>Thanks to you, Charles Renouvier, the most learned representative -of Critical Philosophy in France, who join to such -profound doctrine, such acute perception and such sureness of -judgment; I would add, such modesty and unpretending virtue, -did I not know that it displeases you to bring you before -the public.</p> - -<p>It is from your encouragement and approbation, my friends -and former co-laborers, that I have drawn the strength necessary -to the work I am undertaking; it is just, therefore, that I -should thank you in the presence of all.</p> - -<p>It is equally just that I should publicly express my gratitude -to the Italian, English, Dutch, American and German journals -that have translated many of my articles; and to the men -and women of these different countries as well as of France, -who have kindly expressed sympathy for me, and encouraged -me in the struggle which I have undertaken against the adversaries -of the rights of my sex.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_XIV"> XIV</a></span> -To you all, my friends, both Frenchmen and foreigners, I -dedicate this work. May it be useful <i>everywhere</i> in the triumph -of the liberty of woman, and of the equality of all before -the law; this is the sole wish that a Frenchwoman can make -who believes in the unity of the human family, as well as in -the legitimacy of national autonomies, and who loves all nations, -since all are the organs of a single great body,—Humanity.</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_17"> 17</a></span></p> -<h2>CHAPTER I.<br /> -<span class="medium">MICHELET.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>Several women have sharply criticised Michelet's -"Love."</p> - -<p>Why are intelligent women thus dissatisfied with so -upright a man as Michelet?</p> - -<p>Because to him woman is a perpetual invalid, who -should be shut up in a gynæceum in company with a -dairy maid, as fit company only for chickens and turkeys.</p> - -<p>Now we, women of the west, have the audacity to -contend that we are not invalids, and that we have a -holy horror of the harem and the gynæceum.</p> - -<p>Woman, <i>according to Michelet</i>, is a being of a nature -opposite to that of man; a creature weak, <i>always -wounded, exceedingly barometrical</i>, and, consequently, -unfit for labor.</p> - -<p>She is incapable of abstracting, of generalizing, of -comprehending conscientious labors. She does not like -to occupy herself with business, and she is destitute, in -part, of judicial sense. But, in return, she is revealed -all gentleness, all love, all grace, all devotion.</p> - -<p><i>Created for man</i>, she is the altar of his heart, his refreshment, -his consolation. In her presence he gains -new vigor, becomes inspirited, draws the strength necessary -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_18"> 18</a></span> -to the accomplishment of his high mission as worker, -creator, organizer.</p> - -<p>He should love her, watch over her, maintain her; -be at once her father, her lover, her instructor, her priest, -her physician, her nurse, and her waiting-maid.</p> - -<p>When, at eighteen, a virgin in reason, heart and body, -she is given to this husband, who should be twenty-eight, -neither more nor less, he confines her in the country in -a charming cottage, at a distance from her parents and -friends, with the rustic maid that we just mentioned.</p> - -<p>Why this sequestration in the midst of the nineteenth -century, do you ask?</p> - -<p>Because the husband can have no power over his wife -in society, and can have full power over her in solitude. -Now, it is necessary that he should have this full power -over her, since it belongs to him to form her heart, to -give her ideas, to sketch within her the incarnation of -himself. For know, readers, that woman is destined to -reflect her husband, more and more, until the last shade -of difference, namely, that which is maintained by the -separation of the sexes, shall be at last effaced by death, -and unity in love be thus effected.</p> - -<p>At the end of half a score years of housekeeping, the -wife is permitted to cross the threshold of the gynæceum, -and to enter the world, or <i>the great Battle of -Life</i>. Here she will meet more than one danger; but -she will escape them all if she keeps the oath she has -taken <i>to make her husband her confessor</i>.... It -is evident that Michelet respects the rights of the soul. -The husband, who at this epoch has become absorbed -in his profession, has necessarily degenerated, hence -there is danger that the wife may love another; may -become enamored, for instance, of her young nephew. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_19"> 19</a></span> -In the book, she does not succumb, because she confesses -everything to her husband; still it may happen that she -succumbs, then repents, and solicits correction from her -lord and master. The latter should at first refuse, but, -if she insists, rather than drive her to despair, Michelet—who -would on no account drive a woman to despair—counsels -the husband to administer to his wife <i>the -chastisement that mothers infliction inflict on their darlings</i>.</p> - -<p>There must be no separation between the husband -and wife; when the latter has given herself away, she -is no longer her own property. She becomes more and -more the incarnation of the man who has espoused her; -fecundation transforms her into him, so that the children -of the lover or of the second husband resemble the first -impregnator. The husband, being ten years older than -the wife, dies first; the woman must preserve her widowhood; -her rôle henceforth until death is to fructify within -her and about her the ideas which her husband has bequeathed, -to remain the center of his friendships, to -raise up to him posthumous disciples, and thus remain -his property until she rejoins him in death.</p> - -<p>In case the husband survives, which may happen, the -author does not tell us whether he should re-marry. -Probably not, since love exists only between two; unless -Michelet, who reproves polygamy in this world, admits -it as morality in the life to come.</p> - -<p>You see, my readers, that in Michelet's book, woman -is created for man; without him she would be nothing; -he it is who pronounces the <i>fiat lux</i> in her intellect; he -it is who makes her in his image, as God made man in -his own.</p> - -<p>Accepting the Biblical Genesis, we women can appeal -from Adam to God; for it was not Adam, but God, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_20"> 20</a></span> -who created Eve. Admitting the Genesis of Michelet, -there is no pretext, no excuse for disobedience; woman -must be subordinate to man and must yield to him, for -she belongs to him as the work to the workman, as the -vessel to the potter.</p> - -<p>The book of Michelet and the two studies of Proudhon -on woman, are but two forms of the same thought. -The sole difference that exists between these gentlemen -is, that the first is as sweet as honey, and the second as -bitter as wormwood.</p> - -<p>Nevertheless, I prefer the rude assailant to the poet; -for insults and blows rouse us to rebel and to clamor for -liberty, while compliments lull us to sleep and make us -weakly endure our chains.</p> - -<p>It would be somewhat cruel to be harsh to Michelet, -who piques himself on love and poetry, and, consequently, -is thin skinned; we will therefore castigate him -only over the shoulders of M. Proudhon, who may be -cannonaded with red-hot shot; and we will content -ourselves with criticising in his book what is not found -in that of Proudhon.</p> - -<p>The two chief pillars of the book on Love are,</p> - -<p>First, that woman is a wounded, weak, barometrical, -constantly diseased being;</p> - -<p>Second, that the woman belongs to the man who has -fructified and incarnated himself in her; a proposition -proved by the resemblance of the children of the wife -to the husband, whoever may be the father.</p> - -<p>Michelet and his admirers and disciples do not dispute -that the only good method of proving the truth of a -principle, or the legitimateness of a generalization, is -<i>verification by facts</i>; neither do they dispute that to -make general rules of exceptions, to create imaginary -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_21"> 21</a></span> -laws, and to take these pretended laws for the basis of -argument, belongs only to the aberrations of the Middle -Age, profoundly disdained by men of earnest thought -and severe reason. Let us apply these data unsparingly -to the two principal affirmations of M. Michelet.</p> - -<p>It is a principle in biology that <i>no physiological condition -is a morbid condition</i>; consequently, the monthly -crisis peculiar to woman is not a disease, but a normal -phenomenon, the derangement of which causes disturbance -in the general health. Woman, therefore, is not -an invalid because her sex is subject to a peculiar law. -Can it be said that woman is wounded because she is -subjected to a periodical fracture, the cicatrice of which -is almost imperceptible? By no means. It would be -absurd to call a man perpetually wounded who should -take a fancy to scratch the end of his finger every month.</p> - -<p>Michelet is too well informed to render it necessary -for me to tell him that the normal hemorrhage does not -proceed from this wound of the ovary, about which he -makes so much ado, but from a congestion of the gestative -organ.</p> - -<p>Are women ill on the recurrence of the law peculiar -to their sex?</p> - -<p><i>Very exceptionally, yes</i>; but in the indolent classes, -in which transgressions in diet, the lack of an intelligent -physical education, and a thousand causes which I need -not point out here, render women valetudinarians.</p> - -<p><i>Generally, no.</i> All our vigorous peasant women, our -robust laundresses, who stand the whole time with their -feet in water, our workwomen, our tradeswomen, our -teachers, our servant-maids, who attend with alacrity -to their business and pleasures, experience no uncomfortableness, -or at most, very little.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_22"> 22</a></span> -Michelet, therefore, has not only erred in erecting a -physiological law into a morbid condition, but he has -also sinned against rational method by making general -rules of a few exceptions, and by proceeding from this -generalization, contradicted by the great majority of -facts, to construct a system of subjection.</p> - -<p>If it is of the faculty of abstracting and generalizing -that Michelet, as he employs it, robs woman, we can -only congratulate her on the deprivation.</p> - -<p>Not only is woman diseased, says Michelet, in consequence -of a biological law, but she is always diseased; -she has uterine affections, hereditary tendencies, which -may assume a terrible form in her sex, etc.</p> - -<p>We would ask Michelet whether he considers his own -sex as always diseased because it is corroded by cancer, -disfigured by eruptions, tortured as much as ours by -hereditary tendencies; for hereditary tendencies torture -it as much as ours, and it is decimated and enfeebled -far more fearfully by shameful diseases, the fruits of its -excesses.</p> - -<p>Of what, then, is Michelet thinking, in laying such -stress on the diseases of women in the face of the quite -as numerous diseases of men?</p> - -<p>The wife should never be divorced or re-marry, because -she has become the property of the husband. -This is proved by the fact that the children of the lover -or of the second husband resemble the first husband.</p> - -<p>If this is true, there are no children that resemble -their mother.</p> - -<p>There are no children that resemble the progenitors -or collateral relatives of their parents.</p> - -<p><i>Every child</i> resembles the first that knew his mother.</p> - -<p>Can you explain, then, why it is that so often he does -<i>not</i> resemble him?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_23"> 23</a></span> -Why he resembles a grandfather, an uncle, an aunt, -a brother, a sister of one of the parents?</p> - -<p>Why, in certain cities in the south of France, the -inhabitants have preserved the Greek type, ascribed to -the women, instead of that of their barbaric fathers?</p> - -<p>Why negresses who conceive from a white, bring into -the world a mulatto, oftenest with thick lips, a flat nose, -and woolly hair?</p> - -<p>Why many children resemble portraits which had -attracted the attention of the mother?</p> - -<p>Why, in fine, physiologists, impressed by numerous -facts, have thought themselves justified in declaring woman -<i>the preserver of the type</i>?</p> - -<p>In the face of these undeniable facts, I ask you, -yourself, what becomes of your theory?</p> - -<p>It returns to the domain of chimeras.</p> - -<p>Some think that woman possesses a plastic force, -which makes her mould her fruit after the model which -love, hate, or fear has impressed within her brain; so -that the child thus becomes merely a sort of photograph -of a cerebral image of the mother.</p> - -<p>By the aid of this theory, we might explain the resemblance -of the child to the father, to the first husband, -to beloved relatives or to friends, either living or -dead; but it would be impossible, thereby, to explain -how a woman can reproduce in her child the features -of a progenitor of her husband or of herself, whose portrait, -even, she has never seen; or how, in spite of -her wishes, the child resembles no one that she loves, etc. -Let us keep a discreet silence; the laws of generation -and of resemblance are unknown. If we succeed in discovering -them, it will be only by long and patient observation, -with the aid of judicious criticism, and an honorable -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_24"> 24</a></span> -determination to be impartial. Laws are not -created, but discovered; ignorance is more healthful for -the mind than error; to make general rules of <i>a few</i> -facts, without taking into account facts more numerous -by thousands which contradict them, is not to form a -science, but a system of poetical metaphysics; and these -metaphysics, however gracefully draped they may be, -are opposed to reason, to science, and to truth.</p> - -<p>Michelet will pardon me this short lesson in method. -I should not presume to give it to him, were not men -repeating, like well-trained parrots, after him and Proudhon, -that woman is destitute of high intellectual faculties, -that she is unsuited to science, that she has no comprehension -of method, and other absurdities of like -weight.</p> - -<p>Allegations such as these place women in a wholly -exceptional position, with respect to courtesy and reserve: -they owe no consideration to those who deny them these; -their most important business at the present time is to -prove to men that they deceive themselves, and that -they are deceived; that a woman is fully capable of -teaching the chief among them how a law is discovered, -how its reality is verified, how, and on what conditions -we have a right to believe, and to style ourselves, rational, -and rationalists.</p> - -<p>Before concluding, let us dwell on a few passages of -the book on Love. I am curious to know what woman -Michelet addresses when he says:</p> - -<p>"Spare me your elaborate discussions on the equality -of the sexes. Woman is not only our equal, but in -many points our superior. Sooner or later she will -know everything. The question to decide here is, whether -she should know all in her first season of love.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_25"> 25</a></span> -Oh, how much she would lose by it! Youth, -freshness, poetry—does she wish, at the first blow, to -abandon all these? Is she in such haste to grow old?"</p> - -<p>Pardon me, sir; you have already decreed that <i>there -are no longer any old women</i>; nothing, therefore, can -make woman grow old.</p> - -<p>"There is knowledge of all kinds," you say; "likewise, -at all ages, the knowledge of woman should be -different from that of man. It is less science that she -needs, than the essence of science, and its living elixir."</p> - -<p>What is this <i>essence</i>, and this <i>living elixir</i> of science? -Poetry aside, can you, in exact and definite terms, explain -to me what they mean?</p> - -<p>Can you prove to me, a woman, that I desire to possess -knowledge differently from you?</p> - -<p>Take care! disciple of liberty, you have not the right -to think and to wish in my place. I have, like you, an -intellect and a free will, to which you are bound, by -your principles, to pay sovereign respect. Now I forbid -you to speak for any woman; I forbid you in the -name of what you call <i>the rights of the soul</i>.</p> - -<p>"You by no means deny," you say, "that, strictly -speaking, a young woman can read everything, and inform -herself of everything; can pass through all the -ordeals to which the mind of man is subjected, and still -remain pure. You only maintain," you add, "that her -soul, withered by reading, palled by novels, living habitually -on the stimulus of play-houses, on the aqua-fortis -of criminal courts, will become, not corrupted, perhaps, -but vulgar, common, trivial, like the curb-stone in -the street. This curb-stone is a good stone; you have -only to break it to see that it is white within. This -does not hinder it from being sadly soiled outside, in -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_26"> 26</a></span> -every respect as dirty as the street gutter from which it -has been splashed.</p> - -<p>"Is this, madam, the ideal to which you lay claim for -her who should remain the temple of man, the altar of -his heart, whence he daily rekindles the flame of pure -love?"</p> - -<p>A truce to imagery and oratorical outbursts; none of -us demand for woman any degradation whatever. There -would be no need for us to demand what you censure, -since it is thoroughly authorized and practised. I by no -means wish to accuse you of bad faith, of want of reflection, -and of too much moral tolerance; yet let us -strip off your poetic mantle, and translate your thought -into prose; the drapery will no longer make us forget -the idea.</p> - -<p>When instruction has been demanded for the people, -has any one ever taken it into his head to fancy that -the point in question was to make them read novels, to -swell the attendance on criminal courts, and to multiply -theatres?</p> - -<p>No, you will say.</p> - -<p>What authorizes you, then, to believe that those who -demand a solid education for woman, are seeking that of -of which you, on your part, do not dream for the people?</p> - -<p>On the other hand, do you cultivate the intellect of -man by novels, theatres, and spectacles of criminal -courts? Is it in these things that his knowledge consists? -No, you will say. What is there, then, in common -between that which you censure, and the knowledge -that we desire for woman; and why attribute to -us absurd ideas, that you may have the pleasure of -wrangling with phantoms?</p> - -<p>All your fine ladies are nurtured on novels, plays, and -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_27"> 27</a></span> -judicial excitements; yet they are neither vulgar, nor -trivial, nor comparable to curb-stones sullied by the mud -of the streets; what you tell them, therefore, is no -more true than kind.</p> - -<p>But if you pay them doubtful compliments, which -they do not deserve, you absolve them too easily, in -turn. Listen to our principles, that you may not run -the risk of appearing unjust with respect to us.</p> - -<p>Corruption in our eyes, is not merely the want of -chastity, or the shameful suit of gallantry, but all -habitual improper sentiment, all weakening of the moral -sense, and we absolutely condemn everything which -has power to lessen the sensibility of the soul, and to -turn it aside from the practice of justice, of virtue, and -of self-respect.</p> - -<p>In consequence, we profess that the spectacles of -criminal courts habituate the heart to insensibility, and -should be avoided as much as executions.</p> - -<p>We profess that the modern drama is generally evil, -because it excites interest for adulterers, robbers, seducers -and prostitutes; that the intellect is subjected in -theatres to an unhealthy and enervating atmosphere.</p> - -<p>We profess, lastly, that novels should be read with -great moderation, because, in general, when they do not -corrupt the morals, they pervert the judgment and waste -precious time.</p> - -<p>Though we love and esteem Art, we are indignant -at the bad use which is made of it, and we have little -esteem for those who avail themselves of it to lead the -heart astray, and to pervert the moral sense.</p> - -<p>We say to woman: Educate yourselves, be worthy -and chaste; life is earnest, employ it earnestly.</p> - -<p>You see that <i>woman in the image of the stained curb-stone</i>, -is by no means the ideal of which we dream.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_28"> 28</a></span> -Can you, a man of heart, can you treat women as -wretched and corrupt because they are willing no longer -to be slaves?</p> - -<p>And besides, do you think that liberty, which in -man engenders individuality and virtue, would produce -in woman moral degradation?</p> - -<p>Ah! leave these calumnies to those who have no -heart; they ill befit you, who may deceive yourself -through the lofty poetry of your soul, but who can -wish for evil only because you believe it to be good.</p> - -<p>The women who ask to be free, great, mistaken poet, -are those who are conscious of their dignity, of the true -rôle of their sex in humanity; those who desire that -the women who follow them in the career of labor should -no longer be obliged <i>to live by man</i>, because to live by -him is at least to prostitute their dignity, and almost -always, their whole person. They wish that woman -should be the equal of man, in order to love him holily, -to devote herself without calculation, to cease to deceive -him or to rule him by artifice, and to become to him a -useful auxiliary, instead of a servant or a toy. They -know our influence over you; slaves, we can only debase -you; at present, we render you cowardly, selfish, -and dishonest; we send you out every morning, like -vultures, upon society, to provide for our foolish expenses -or to endow our children; we, women of emancipation, -are unwilling that our sex should longer play -this odious rôle, and be, through its slavery, an instrument -of demoralization and of social degradation,—and -this you impute to us as a crime!</p> - -<p>Ah! I do not believe it; you yourself will say that -I ought not to believe it.</p> - -<p>Looking from a deplorably narrow stand point, you -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_29"> 29</a></span> -fancied that you saw all woman-kind in a few valetudinarians, -your kind heart was moved for them, and you -sought to protect them. Had you looked far and high, -you would have seen the workers of thought and muscle; -you would have comprehended that inequality is to -them a source of corruption and suffering.</p> - -<p>Then, in your lofty and glowing style, you would -have written, not this book of Love which repels all intelligent -and reflective women, but a great and beautiful -work to demand the right of half the human race.</p> - -<p>The misfortune, the irreparable misfortune, is that instead -of climbing to the mountain top to look at every -moving thing under the vast horizon, you have shut -yourself up in a narrow valley, where, seeing nothing -but pale violets, you have concluded that every flower -must be also a pale violet; whilst Nature has created a -thousand other species, on the contrary, strong and vigorous, -with a right, like you, to earth, air, water and -sunshine.</p> - -<p>Whatever may be your love, your kindness and your -good intentions towards woman, your book would be -immensely dangerous to the cause of her liberty, if men -were in a mood to relish your ethics: but they will remain -as they are; and the dignity of woman, kept waking -by their brutality, their despotism, their desertion, -their foul morals, will not be lulled to sleep under the -fresh, verdant, alluring and treacherously perfumed foliage -of this manchineel tree, called the book of <i>Love</i>.</p> - -<p>In Michelet's later work, "Woman," by the side of -many beautiful pages full of heart and poetry are found -things that we regret to point out, for the sake of the -author.</p> - -<p>M. Michelet has evidently amended, as we shall press -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_30"> 30</a></span> -on him; but as a spice of vengeance, he pretends that -their language has been dictated by directors, <i>philosophers -and others</i>. We know some of these ladies personally, -and can assure him that they have had no director -of any kind—quite the contrary.</p> - -<p>Is it also in consequence of rancor that the author -pretends that woman loves man, not for his real -worth, but because he pleases her, and that she makes -God in her own image, "a God of partiality and caprice, -who saves those who please him?" "In feminine -theology," adds Michelet, "God would say: I love -thee because thou art a sinner, because thou hast no -merit; I have no reason to love thee, but it is sweet to -me to forgive."</p> - -<p>Very well, your sex loves woman <i>for her real worth</i>; -we never hear a man, enamored of some unworthy -creature, say: "What matters it, I love her!" Your -love is always wise, and given reasonably; none but deserving -women can please you. I ask why so many -honest women are abandoned and unhappy, while so -many that are impure and vicious, yet sought and adored, -are in possession of the art of charming, of ruining -and of perverting men?</p> - -<p>Michelet deplores the state of divorce which is established -between the sexes; we deplore it likewise; but -our complaints do not remedy it. Men shun marriage -from motives that do them no credit: they have at -their pleasure the poor girls whom want places at their -mercy; they shun marriage because they do not wish -a real, that is, an autonomous wife at their side; for -themselves, they wish liberty, for their wife, slavery.</p> - -<p>On their side, women tend to enfranchisement, which -is well for them as it is for men: they should not suffer -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_31"> 31</a></span> -themselves to be turned aside from their pursuit; on the -other hand, as men are attracted by a costly toilette, and -neglect plainly dressed women, if the latter, in the wish -to please and retain them, imitate public women, whose -is the fault? Is it ours, who desire to please you and to -be loved by you, or yours, who can only be attracted by -dress? If you loved us <i>for our real worth</i>, and not because -our dresses and jewels please your eye, we would -not ruin you.</p> - -<p>Let us point out in a few lines the contradictions and -differences that are found between Michelet's first and -second works.</p> - -<p>In both, woman is the flame of love and of the fireside -religion, harmony, poetry, the guardian of the domestic -hearth, a housewife whose cares are ennobled by -love: civilization is due to her grace, she should be the -representative of grace if not of beauty.</p> - -<p>In both books, the household must be isolated; the -wife must have no intimate friendship; mother, brothers -and sisters prevent her from becoming absorbed as -she ought to be in her husband. What we think of this -absorption is already known; we will only say here that -if the friends and relatives of the wife should be expelled, -those of the husband should be none the less so; the -mother and friends of the husband have more power to -injure the wife than those of the wife to injure the husband; -numerous sad facts prove this.</p> - -<p>In "Love," woman is a receptive power, incapable -of comprehending conscientious works; she must receive -everything from her husband in the intellectual and -moral point of view.</p> - -<p>In "Woman," she is half of the couple, in the same -ratio as man is capable of the most lofty speculations, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_32"> 32</a></span> -and thoroughly understands administration. She gives -the child the education that before all else will influence -the rest of his life. "So long as woman is not the -partner of labor and of <i>action</i>," says the author, "we -are serfs, we can do nothing—she may even be the -equal of man in medical science; she is a school, she -is sole educatress, etc."</p> - -<p>Very well, thus far; and doubtless Michelet would -have been consistent, had he not got into his head a -masculine and a feminine ideal which spoils everything; -he reasoned to himself: "Man is a creator, woman a -harmony whose end and destination is love;" and, consequently, -he marks out for the latter a plan of education -different from that by which man should be developed; -the natural sciences are suited to woman, history should -only be taught her to form in her a firm moral and religious -faith. As love is her vocation, to each season of -the life of woman should correspond an object of love; -flowers, the doll, poor children, next the lover, then the -husband and children, then the care of young orphans, -prisoners, etc.</p> - -<p>In "Love," the wife alone seems bound to confess to -the husband. In "Woman," the obligation is mutual.</p> - -<p>The widow, in "Love," should not marry again, in -"Woman," she may espouse a friend of the husband, or -still better, the one whom he may choose on his deathbed; -if she is too old, she may watch over a young -man; but she will do better to protect young girls, to -make peace in families, to facilitate marriages, to superintend -prisons, etc.</p> - -<p>We will carry the analysis no further; our objections -to the author's doctrine will be found in the article on -Proudhon, and in the sequel of the work.</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_33"> 33</a></span></p> -<h2 class="normal">CHAPTER II.<br /> -<span class="medium">PROUDHON.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>The tenth and eleventh studies of the last work of -M. Proudhon, "Justice in the Revolution and in the -Church," comprise the author's whole doctrine concerning -Woman, Love, and Marriage.</p> - -<p>Before analyzing it and criticising its chief points, I -must acquaint my readers with the polemical commencement -which <i>appears</i> to have given rise to the publication -of the strange doctrines of our great critic. In the -<i>Revue Philosophique</i> of December, 1856, the following -article by me was published under the title, <i>Proudhon -and the Woman Question</i>:—</p> - -<p>"Women have a weakness for soldiers, it is said. It is -true, but they should not be reproached for it; they love -even the show of courage, which is a glorious and holy -thing. I am a woman, Proudhon is a great soldier of -thought. I cannot therefore prevent myself from regarding -him with esteem and sympathy; sentiments to -which he will owe the moderation of my attack on his -opinions concerning the rôle of woman in humanity. -In his first "Memoir on Property," note on page 265, -edition of 1841, we read the following paradox in the -style of the Koran:</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_34"> 34</a></span> -"Between man and woman may exist love, passion, -the bond of habit, whatever you like; there is not <i>true -society</i>. <i>Man and woman are not companions.</i> The -difference of sex gives rise between them to a separation -<i>of the same nature as that which the difference of races -places between animals</i>. Thus, far from applauding -what is now called the emancipation of woman, I should -be much more inclined, were it necessary to go to this -extremity, <i>to put woman in seclusion</i>."</p> - -<p>In the third "Memoir on Property," we read:</p> - -<p>"This signifies that woman, <i>by nature and by destination</i>, -is neither <i>associate, nor citizen, nor public functionary</i>."</p> - -<p>I open the "Creation of Order in Humanity," and -read there:</p> - -<p>"It is in treating of education that we must determine -the part of woman in society. Woman, until she -becomes a wife, is <i>apprentice</i>, at most <i>under-superintendent</i>, -in the work-shop, as in the family, she <i>remains a -minor, and does not form a part of the commonwealth</i>. -Woman is not, as is commonly affirmed, <i>the half nor the -equal of man</i>, but the living and sympathetic <i>complement</i> -that is lacking to make him an individual."</p> - -<p>In the "Economical Contradictions," we read:</p> - -<p>"For my part, the more I reflect on the destiny of -woman outside of the family and the household, the less -I can account for it: <i>courtesan or housewife</i>, (housewife, -I say, not servant,) I see no medium."</p> - -<p>I had always laughed at these paradoxes; they had -no more doctrinal value in my eyes than the thousand -other freaks so common to this celebrated critic. A -short time since, an obscure journal pretended that -Proudhon, in private conversations, had drawn up a -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_35"> 35</a></span> -formula of an entire system based on masculine omnipotence, -and published this system in its columns. One -of two things is certain, said I to myself; either the journalist -speaks falsely, or he tells the truth; if he speaks -falsely, his evident aim is to destroy Proudhon in the -confidence of the friends of progress, and to make him -lose his lawful share of influence, in which case, he must -be warned of it; if he tells the truth, Proudhon must -still be warned of the fact, since it is impossible that, being -the father of <i>several daughters</i>, paternal feeling -should not have set him on the road to reason. At all -events, I must know about it. I wrote to Proudhon, -who, the next day, returned me an answer which I -transcribe <i>verbatim</i>:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> -<p class="titel">"<span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">ADAM</span>:</p> - -<p>"I know nothing of the article published by -M. Charles Robin in the <i>Telegraphe</i> of yesterday. In -order to inform myself with regard to this paraphrase, -as you entitle the article of M. Robin, I examined my -first "Memoir on Property," page 265, Garnier edition, -(I have no other,) and found no note there. I examined -the same page in my other pamphlet, and discovered -no note anywhere. It is therefore impossible for me to -reply to your first question.</p> - -<p>"I do not exactly know what you call <i>my opinions</i> -on woman, marriage and the family; for I believe I -have given no one a right to speak of my opinions on -these subjects, any more than on that of property.</p> - -<p>"I have written economical and social criticisms; in -making these criticisms (I take the word in its highest -signification), I may have indeed expressed judgments -to a greater or less degree relative, concerning a truth. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_36"> 36</a></span> -I have no where that I know of, framed a dogma, a -theory, a collection of principles; in a word, a system. -All that I can tell you is, in the first place, as far as -concerns myself, that my opinions have been formed -progressively and in an unvarying direction; that, at the -time at which I write, I have not deviated from this direction; -and that, with this reserve, my existing opinions -accord perfectly with what they were seventeen -years ago when I published my first memoirs.</p> - -<p>"In the second place, with regard to you, Madam, -who, in interrogating me do not leave me in ignorance -of your sentiments, I will tell you with all the -frankness which your letter exacts, and which you expect -from a compatriot, that I do not regard the question -of marriage, of woman, and of the family in the -same light as yourself, or any of the innovating authors -whose ideas have come to my knowledge; that I do not -admit, for instance, that woman has the right at the -present time to separate her cause from that of man, and -to demand for herself special legislation, as though her -chief tyrant and enemy were man; that further, I do -not admit that, whatever reparation may be due to woman, -of joint thirds with her husband (or father) and -her children, the most rigorous justice can ever make -her the <span class="smallc">EQUAL</span> of man; that neither do I admit that -this inferiority of the female sex constitutes for it either -servitude, or humiliation, or a diminution of dignity, -liberty, or happiness. I maintain that the contrary is -true.</p> - -<p>"I consider, therefore, the sort of crusade that is being -carried on at this time by a few estimable ladies in -both hemispheres in behalf of the prerogatives of their -sex, as a symptom of the general renovation that is being -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_37"> 37</a></span> -wrought; but nevertheless, as an exaggerated symptom, -<i>an infatuation that proceeds precisely from the infirmity -of the sex and its incapacity to understand and -to govern itself</i>.</p> - -<p>"I have read, Madam, a few of your articles. I find -that your wit, capacity and knowledge place you certainly -above an infinity of males who have nothing of -their sex but the proletary faculty. In this respect, -were it necessary to decide on your thesis by comparisons -of this kind, you would doubtless gain the cause.</p> - -<p>"But you have too much good sense not to comprehend -that the question here is by no means to compare -individual with individual, but the whole feminine sex -in its aggregate with the whole masculine sex, in order -to know whether these two halves, the complements -of each other, are or are not equals in the human androgynus.</p> - -<p>"In accordance with this principle, I do not believe -that your system, which is, I think, that of equality or -equivalence, can be sustained, and I regard it as a weakness -of our epoch.</p> - -<p>"You have interrogated me, Madam, with Franche-Comtois -abruptness. I wish you to take my words in -good part, and, since I doubtless do not agree at all with -you, not to see in me an enemy of woman, a detractor -of your sex, worthy of the animadversions of maidens, -wives and mothers. The rules of fair discussion oblige -you to admit at least that you may be deceived, that I -may be right, that in such case it is I who am truly the -defender and friend of woman; I ask nothing more.</p> - -<p>"You and your companions have raised a very great -question, which I think that you have hitherto treated -quite superficially. But the indifferent manner in which -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_38"> 38</a></span> -this subject has been treated should not be considered as -conclusive reason for not receiving it; on the contrary, -I regard it as another reason for the advocates of the -equality of the two sexes to make greater efforts. In -this respect, Madam, I doubt not that you will signalize -yourself anew, and await with impatience the volume -that you announce, which I promise to read with all the -attention of which I am capable."</p> -</div> - -<p class="space">On reading this letter, I transcribed the note which -M. Proudhon had not succeeded in finding, and sent it -to him, with the article of M. Charles Robin. As he -did not reply, his silence authorizes me to believe the -journalist.</p> - -<p>Ah! you persist in maintaining that woman is inferior, -minor! you believe that women will bow devoutly -before the high decree of your autocracy! No, no; it -will not, it cannot be so. To battle, M. Proudhon! -But let us first dispose of the question of my personality.</p> - -<p>You consider me as an exception, by telling me that, -if it were necessary to decide on my thesis by comparison -between a host of men and myself, the decision would -be, doubtless, in favor of my opinions. Mark my reply:</p> - -<p>"<i>Every true law is absolute.</i> The ignorance or folly -of grammarians, moralists, jurisconsults, and other philosophers, -alone invented the proverb: There is no rule -without an exception. <i>The mania of imposing laws on -Nature, instead of studying Nature's own laws, afterwards -confirmed this aphorism of ignorance.</i>" Who -said this? You, in the "Creation of Order in Humanity." -Why is your letter in contradiction with this -doctrine?</p> - -<p>Have you changed your opinion? Then I entreat -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_39"> 39</a></span> -you to tell me whether men of worth are not quite as -exceptional in their sex, as women of merit in theirs. -You have said: "Whatever may be the differences existing -between men, they are equal, because they are -human beings." Under penalty of inconsistency, you -must add: Whatever may be the differences existing -between the sexes, they are equal, because they form a -part of the human species—unless you prove that women -are not a part of humanity. Individual worth, not -being the basis of right between men, cannot become so -between the sexes. Your compliment is, therefore, a -contradiction.</p> - -<p>I add, lastly, that I feel myself linked with my sex -by too close a solidarity ever to be content to see myself -abstracted from it by an illogical process. I am a woman—I -glory in it; I rejoice if any value is set upon -me, not for myself, indeed, but because this contributes -to modify the opinion of men with respect to my sex. -A woman who is happy in hearing it said: "<i>You are -a man</i>," is, in my eyes, a simpleton, an unworthy creature, -avowing the superiority of the masculine sex; and -the men who think that they compliment her in this -manner, are vainglorious and impertinent boasters. If -I acquire any desert, I thus pay honor to women, I reveal -their aptitudes, I do not pass into the other sex -any more than Proudhon abandons his own, because he -is elevated by his intellect above the level of foolish and -ignorant men; and if the ignorance of the mass of men -prejudges nothing against their right, no more does the -ignorance of the mass of women prejudge anything -against theirs.</p> - -<p>You affirm that man and woman do not form <i>true -society</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_40"> 40</a></span> -Tell us, then, what is marriage, what is society.</p> - -<p>You affirm that the difference of sex places between -man and woman a separation of the same nature <i>as -that which the difference of races places between animals</i>. -Then prove:</p> - -<p>That the race is not essentially formed of two sexes;</p> - -<p>That man and woman can be reproduced separately;</p> - -<p>That their common product is a mixed breed, or a -mule;</p> - -<p>That their characteristics are dissimilar, apart from -sexuality.</p> - -<p>And if you come off with honor from this great feat -of strength, you will still have to prove:</p> - -<p>That to difference of race corresponds difference <i>of -right</i>;</p> - -<p>That the black, the yellow, the copper-colored persons -belonging to races inferior to the Caucasian cannot truly -associate with the latter; that they are minors.</p> - -<p>Come, sir, study anthropology, physiology, and phrenology, -and employ your serial dialectics to prove all -this to us.</p> - -<p>You are inclined to seclude woman, instead of emancipating -her?</p> - -<p>Prove to men that they have the right to do so; to -women, that it is their duty to suffer themselves to be -placed under lock and key. I declare, for my part, that -I would not submit to it. Does Proudhon remember -how he threatens the priest who shall lay his hand on -his children? Well, the majority of women would not -confine themselves to threats against those who might -have the Mussulmanic inclination of Proudhon.</p> - -<p>You affirm that by <i>nature</i>, and by <i>destination</i>, woman -is neither <i>associate</i>, nor <i>citizen</i>, nor <i>functionary</i>. Tell -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_41"> 41</a></span> -us, in the first place, <i>what nature</i> it is necessary to have -to be all these.</p> - -<p>Reveal to us the <i>nature</i> of woman, since you claim -to know it better than she does herself.</p> - -<p>Reveal to us her <i>destination</i>, which apparently is not -that which we see, nor which she believes to be such.</p> - -<p>You affirm that woman, until her marriage, is nothing -more than <i>apprentice</i>, at most, under-superintendent -in the social workshop; that she is <i>minor</i> in the family, -and <i>does not form a part of the commonwealth</i>.</p> - -<p>Prove, then, that she does not execute in the social -workshop and in the family works <i>equivalent</i>, or equal, -to those of man.</p> - -<p>Prove that she is less useful than man.</p> - -<p>Prove that the qualities that give to man the right of -citizenship, do not exist in woman.</p> - -<p>I shall be severe with you on this head. To subordinate -woman in a social order in which she must <i>work -in order to live</i> is to <i>desire prostitution</i>; for disdain of -the producer extends to the value of the product; and -when such a doctrine is contrary to science, good sense, -and progress, to sustain it is <i>cruelty</i>, is <i>moral monstrosity</i>. -The woman who cannot live by working, can only -do so by prostituting herself; the equal of man or a -courtesan, such is the alternative. He is blind who -does not see it.</p> - -<p>You see no other fate for woman than to be courtesan -or housewife. Open your eyes wider, and dream less, -and tell me whether all those useful and courageous -women are only housewives or courtesans, who support -themselves honorably by arts, literature, instruction;</p> - -<p>Who found numerous and prosperous manufactures;</p> - -<p>Who superintend commercial establishments;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_42"> 42</a></span> -Who are such good managers, that many among them -conceal or repair the faults resulting from the carelessness -or dissipation of their husbands.</p> - -<p>Prove to us, therefore, that all this is wrong;</p> - -<p>Prove to us that it is not the result of human progress;</p> - -<p>Prove to us that labor, the stamp of the human species—that -labor, which you consider as the great emancipator—that -labor, which makes men equal and free, -has not virtue to make women equal and free. If you -prove this to us, we shall have to register one contradiction -more.</p> - -<p>You do not admit that woman should have the right -of claiming for herself special legislation, as though man -were her chief enemy and tyrant.</p> - -<p>You, sir, are the one that legislates specially for woman; -she herself desires nothing but the common law.</p> - -<p>Yes; until now, man, in subordinating woman, has -been her tyrant and enemy. I am of your opinion -when, in your first "Memoir on Property," you say -that, so long as the strong and the weak are not <i>equals</i>, -they are <i>strangers</i>, they cannot form an alliance, <i>they -are enemies</i>. Yes, thrice yes, so long as man and woman -are not equals, woman is in the right in considering -man as her <i>tyrant</i> and <i>enemy</i>.</p> - -<p>"The most rigorous justice cannot make woman the -<span class="smallc">EQUAL</span> of man." And it is to a woman whom you set -in your opinion above a host of men, that you affirm -such a thing! What a contradiction!</p> - -<p>"It is <i>an infatuation</i> for women to demand their -right!" <i>An infatuation</i> like that of slaves, pretending -that they were created freemen; of the citizens of '89, -proving that men are equal before the law. Do you -know who were, who are the infatuated? The masters, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_43"> 43</a></span> -the nobles, the whites, the men who have denied, who -do deny, and who will deny, that slaves, citizens, blacks, -and women, are born for liberty and equality.</p> - -<p>"The sex to which I belong is incapable of understanding -and governing itself," say you!</p> - -<p>Prove that it is destitute of intellect;</p> - -<p>Prove that great empresses and great queens have not -governed as well as great emperors and great kings;</p> - -<p>Prove against all the facts patent that women are not -in general good observers and good managers;</p> - -<p>Then prove that all men understand themselves perfectly -and govern themselves admirably, and that progress -moves as if on wheels.</p> - -<p>"Woman is neither the <i>half</i> nor the <i>equal</i> of man; -she is <i>the complement that finally makes him an individual</i>; -the two sexes form <i>the human androgynus</i>." -Come; seriously, what means this jingle of empty words? -They are metaphors, unworthy to figure in scientific -language, when our own and the other higher zoölogical -species are in question. The lioness, the she-wolf -and the tigress are no more the halves or the complement -of their species than woman is the complement of -man. Or Nature has established two <i>exteriorities</i>, two -wills, she affirms two unities, two entireties not one, -or <i>two halves</i>; the arithmetic of Nature cannot be destroyed -by the freaks of the imagination.</p> - -<p>Is equality before the law based upon <i>individual</i> qualities? -Proudhon replies in the "Creation of Order in -Humanity":</p> - -<p>"Neither birth, nor figure, <i>nor faculties</i>, nor fortune, -nor rank, nor profession, nor talent, nor anything that -distinguishes individuals establishes between them a difference -of species; all being men, and <i>the law regulating -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_44"> 44</a></span> -only human relations, it is the same for all</i>; so that -to establish exceptions, it would be necessary to prove -that the individuals excepted are <i>above</i> or <i>beneath</i> the -human species."</p> - -<p>Prove to us that women are <i>above</i> or <i>beneath</i> the human -species, that they do not form a part of it, or, <i>under -penalty of contradiction</i>, submit to the consequences of -your doctrine.</p> - -<p>You say in the "Social Revolution;"</p> - -<p>"Neither conscience, nor reason, nor liberty, nor labor, -pure forces, <i>primary and creative faculties</i>, can be -made mechanical without being destroyed. Their reason -of existence is in themselves; in their works they -should find their reason of action. In this consists the -human person, a sacred person, etc."</p> - -<p>Prove that women have neither conscience, nor reason, -nor moral liberty, and that they do not labor. If it is -demonstrated that they possess the <i>primary and creative -faculties</i>, respect their human person, for it is sacred.</p> - -<p>In the "Creation of Order in Humanity," you say:</p> - -<p>"Specifically, labor satisfies the desire of our personality, -which tends invincibly to make a difference between -itself and others, <i>to render itself independent</i>, <i>to -conquer its liberty</i> and its character."</p> - -<p>Prove then that women have no special work, and, if -facts contradict you, acknowledge that, it inevitably -tends to <i>independence</i>, to <i>liberty</i>.</p> - -<p>Do you deny that they are your equals because they -are less intelligent as a whole than men? In the first -place, I contest it; but I need not do so, you yourself resolve -this difficulty in the "Creation of Order in Humanity:"</p> - -<p>"The inequality of capacities, when not caused by -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_45"> 45</a></span> -constitutional vices, mutilation or want, results from -general ignorance, insufficient method, lack or falsity of -education, and divergence of intuition through lack of -sequence, whence arises dispersion and confusion of ideas. -Now, all these facts productive of inequality are essentially -abnormal, therefore the inequality of capacities is -abnormal."</p> - -<p>Unless you prove that women are mutilated by Nature, -I do not exactly see how you can escape the consequences -of your syllogism: not only has feminine inferiority -the same sources as masculine ignorance, but -public education is refused to women, the great professional -schools are closed to them, those who through -their intellect equal the most intelligent among you have -had twenty times as many difficulties and prejudices to -overcome.</p> - -<p>You wish to subordinate women because in general -they have less muscular force than you; but at this rate -the weak men ought not to be the equals of the strong, -and you combat this consequence yourself in your first -"Memoir on Property," where you say:</p> - -<p>"Social equilibrium is the equalization of the strong -and the weak."</p> - -<p>If I have treated you with consideration, it is because -you are an intelligent and progressive man, and -because it is impossible that you should remain under -the influence of the doctors of the Middle Age on one -question, while you are in advance of the majority of -your cotemporaries on so many others. You will cease -to sustain an illogical series that is without foundation, -remembering, as you have said so well in the "Creation -of Order in Humanity:"</p> - -<p>"That the greater part of philosophical aberrations -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_46"> 46</a></span> -and chimeras have arisen from attributing to logical series -a reality that they do not possess, and endeavoring -to explain the nature of man by abstractions."</p> - -<p>You will acknowledge that all the higher animal species -are composed of two sexes;</p> - -<p>That in none is the female the inferior of the male, -except sometimes through force, which cannot be the basis -of human right;</p> - -<p>You will renounce the androgynus, which is only a -dream.</p> - -<p>Woman, a distinct individual, endowed with consciousness, -intellect, will and activity like man, will be -no longer separated from him before the laws.</p> - -<p>You will say of all, both men and women, as in your -first "Memoir on Property:"</p> - -<p>"Liberty is an absolute right, because it is to man -what impenetrability is to matter, a condition <i>sine qua -non</i> of existence. Equality is an <i>absolute right</i>, because -without equality, there is no society."</p> - -<p>And you will thus show the second degree of sociability, -which you yourself define, "the recognition in -another of a personality <i>equal</i> to our own."</p> - -<p>I appeal therefore from Proudhon drunk with theology -to Proudhon sobered by facts and science, moved by the -sorrows and disorders resulting from his own systems.</p> - -<p>I hope I shall not encounter his Herculean club raised -against the holy banner of truth and right; against woman,—that -being physically so weak, morally so strong, -who, bleeding, and steeped in gall beneath her crown of -roses, is just on the point of reaching the top of the -rough mountain where progress will shortly give her -her lawful place by the side of man. But if my hopes -are deceitful, mark me well, M. Proudhon, you will find -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_47"> 47</a></span> -me standing firmly in the breach, and, whatever may be -your strength, I vow that you shall not overthrow me. -I will courageously defend the right and dignity of your -daughters against the despotism and logical error of -their father, and the victory will remain mine, for, definitively, -it always belongs to truth."</p> - -<p>Proudhon replied by the following letter in the <i>Revue -Philosophique</i>:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> -<p class="titel">"<span class="cap">T</span><span class="smallc">O</span> <span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">ADAME d'</span><span class="cap">H</span><span class="smallc">ÉRICOURT</span>.</p> - -<p class="i2">"Well, Madam, what did I tell you in my -last letter?</p> - -<p>"I consider the sort of crusade that is being carried -on at this time by some estimable ladies in both hemispheres -in behalf of their sex, as a symptom of the general -revolution that is being wrought; but nevertheless -as an exaggerated symptom, an infatuation that proceeds -precisely from the inferiority of the sex and its incapacity -to understand and to govern itself.</p> - -<p>"I begin by withdrawing the word <i>infatuation</i>, which -may have wounded you, but which was not, as you -know, intended for publicity.</p> - -<p>"This point adjusted, I will tell you, Madam, with -all the respect that I owe you as a woman, that I did -not expect to see you confirm my judgment so speedily -by your petulant appeal.</p> - -<p>"I was at first at a loss to know whence came the -discontent that impelled the bravest, the most distinguished -among you, to an assault on paternal and marital -supremacy. I said to myself, not without disquietude, -What is the matter? What is it that troubles -them? With what do they reproach us? To which -of our faculties, our virtues, our prerogatives; or else of -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_48"> 48</a></span> -our failings, our perfidies, our calamities, do they aspire? -Is this the cry of their outraged nature, or an -aberration of their understanding?</p> - -<p>"Your attack, joined to the studies which I immediately -commenced on the subject, came at last to solve -the question.</p> - -<p>"No, Madam, you know nothing of your sex; you -do not know the first word of the question that you and -your honorable confederates are agitating with so much -noise and so little success. And, if you do not comprehend -this question; if, in your eight pages of reply to -my letter, there are forty paralogisms, it results precisely, -as I have told you, from your <i>sexual infirmity</i>. I mean -by this word, the exactness of which is not, perhaps, irreproachable, -the quality of your understanding, which -permits you to seize the relation of things only as far as -we, men, place your finger upon them. You have in -the brain, as in the body, a certain organ incapable by -itself of overcoming its native inertia, and which the -masculine spirit alone is capable of setting in motion; -and even this does not always succeed. Such, Madam, -is the result of my direct and positive observations; I -make them over to your obstetrical sagacity, and leave -you to calculate therefrom the incalculable consequences -to your thesis.</p> - -<p>"I will willingly enter into an elaborate discussion -with you, Madam, on this obscure subject, in the <i>Revue -Philosophique</i>. But—as you will comprehend as well as -I—the broader the question, the more it affects our most -sacred, social, and domestic interests, the more important -is it that we should approach it with seriousness -and prudence.</p> - -<p>"The following course, therefore, appears to me indispensable: -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_49"> 49</a></span> -In the first place, you have promised us a -book, and I await it. I need this work to complete my -documents and to finish my demonstration. Since I -had the honor of receiving and replying to your letter, -I have made earnest and interesting studies on woman, -which I ask only to rectify if they are erroneous; as I -also desire to set a seal on them if, as I have every reason -to presume, your publication brings me but one confirmation -more.</p> - -<p>"I have verified by facts and documents the truth of -all the assertions which you call on me to retract, -namely:</p> - -<p>"That the difference of sex raises up between man and -woman a separation <span class="smallc">ANALOGOUS</span>—I did not say equal—to -that which the difference of races and species establishes -between animals;</p> - -<p>"That by reason of this separation or difference, man -and woman are not <i>associates</i>; I did not say that they -could not be anything else;</p> - -<p>"That, consequently, woman can only be a <i>citizen</i> -in so far as she is the wife of a citizen; as we say <i>Madame -la Presidente</i> to the wife of a President: which -does not imply that no other rôle exists for her.</p> - -<p>"In two words, I am in a position to establish, by -observation and reasoning, the facts, that woman, being -weaker than man with respect to <i>muscular force</i>, as you -yourself acknowledge, is not less inferior to him with -respect to <span class="smallc">INDUSTRIAL</span>, <span class="smallc">ARTISTIC</span>, <span class="smallc">PHILOSOPHICAL</span> and -<span class="smallc">MORAL POWER</span>; so that if the condition of woman in -society be regulated, as you demand for her, by the -same justice as the condition of man, it is all over with -her, she is a slave.</p> - -<p>"To which I add, immediately, that this system is -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_50"> 50</a></span> -precisely what I reject: the principle of pure, rigorous -right, of that terrible right which the Roman compared -to an unsheathed sword, <i>jus strictum</i>, and which rules -individuals of the same sex among themselves, being -different from that which governs the relations between -individuals of different sexes.</p> - -<p>"What is this principle, differing from justice, and -which, notwithstanding, would not exist without justice; -which all men feel in the depth of their souls, and -of which you women alone have no idea? Is it love? -nothing more? I leave it to you to divine. And if -your penetration succeeds in clearing up this mystery, -I consent, Madam, to sign you a certificate of genius; -<i>Et eris mihi magnus Apollo</i>. But then you will have -given me the cause.</p> - -<p>"Such, Madam, in a few words, are the conclusions -to which I have arrived, and which the reading of your -book surely will not modify. Notwithstanding, as it is -absolutely possible that your personal observations may -have led you to diametrically opposite results, good faith -in the discussion and respect for our readers and ourselves -exact that, before entering upon the controversy, -a reciprocal interchange of all the documents that we -have collected should be made between us. You may -take cognizance of mine.</p> - -<p>"One other condition, which I entreat you, Madam, -to take in good part, and from which I shall not depart -under any pretext, is that you shall choose yourself a -male sponsor.</p> - -<p>"You, who have declared yourself so energetically -on this point, would not wish your adversary to make -the least sacrifice to gallantry in so serious a discussion; -and you are right. But I, Madam, who am so far from -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_51"> 51</a></span> -admitting your pretensions, cannot thus release myself -from the obligations which manly and honorable civility -prescribes towards ladies; and as I propose, besides, to -make you serve as a subject of experiment; as, after -having made the autopsy of five or six women of the -greatest merit for the instruction of my readers, I count -also on making yours, you will conceive that it is quite -impossible for me to argue from you, of you, and with -you, without exposing myself at every word to a violation -of all the rules of conventionality.</p> - -<p>"I know, Madam, that such a condition will annoy -you; it is one of the disadvantages of your position to -which you must submit courageously. You are a plaintiff, -and, as a woman, you affirm that you are oppressed. -Appear, then, before the judgment seat of incorruptible -public opinion with this tyrannous chain which rouses -your ire, and which, according to me, exists only in -your disordered imagination. You will be but the more -interesting for it. Besides, you would deride me if, -while sustaining the superiority of man, I should begin -by according to you the equality of woman by disputing -with you on an equal footing of companionship. You -have not counted, I imagine, upon my falling into this -inconsistency.</p> - -<p>"You will not lack for champions, besides. I expect -of your courtesy, Madam, that he whom you shall select -as my antagonist, who will sign and affirm all your articles, -and assume the responsibility of your affirmations -and replies, shall be worthy of both you and me; so -that, in fine, I shall not have a right to complain that -you have pitted me against a man of straw.</p> - -<p>"What has most surprised me, since this hypothesis -of the equality of the sexes, renewed by the Greeks as -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_52"> 52</a></span> -well as by many others, has become known among us, -has been to see that it numbered among its partisans -almost as many men as women. I sought a long time -for the reason of this strange fact, which I at first attributed -to chivalric zeal; I think now that I have -found it. It is not to the advantage of the knights. I -shall be glad, Madam, for their sake and yours, if this -serious examination should prove that the new emancipators -of woman are the most lofty, the broadest, and -the most progressive, if not the most masculine minds -of the age.</p> - -<p>"You say, Madam, that women have a weakness for -soldiers. It is doubtless on this account that you have -lashed me soundly. <i>He who loveth, chasteneth.</i> When -I was three years and a half old, my mother, to get rid -of me, sent me to a school-mistress of the neighborhood, -an excellent woman, called Madelon. One day she -threatened to whip me for some piece of mischief. It -made me furious. I snatched her switch from her hand, -and flung it in her face. I was always a disobedient -subject. I shall be glad, therefore, to find that you do -not assume towards me castigating airs, which it does -not belong to a man to return; but I leave this to your -discretion. Strike, redouble the blows, do not spare me; -and if I should chance to grow restive under the rod, -believe me none the less, Madam, your affectionate servant -and compatriot,</p> - -<p class="signature">"<span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON</span>."</p> -</div> - -<p class="space">Taking up the discussion in turn, I replied as follows, -in the ensuing February number:—</p> - -<p class="space">I am forbidden, sir, to answer your letter in the indecorous -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_53"> 53</a></span> -style which you have deemed proper to assume -towards me:</p> - -<p>By respect for the gravity of my subject;</p> - -<p>By respect for our readers;</p> - -<p>By respect for myself.</p> - -<p>You find yourself ill at ease in the Popilian circle -that has been traced around you by the hand of a woman; -all understand this, I among the rest. Ill-armed -for defence, worse armed, perhaps, for attack, you would -like to escape; but your skill as a tactician will avail -you nothing; you shall not quit the fatal circle till vanquished, -either by me, or by yourself, if you confess -your weakness on the point in litigation, by continuing -to refuse a discussion under flimsy pretexts, or, lastly, -by public opinion, which will award to you the quality -of inconsistency, the least desirable of all to a dialectician.</p> - -<p>This being understood, I must tell you that, personally, -I am satisfied that you should attack, in <i>the rights -of woman</i>, the cause of justice and progress. It is an -augury of success to this cause; you have always been -fatal to all that you have sought to sustain.</p> - -<p>It is true that your attitude in this question makes -you <i>the ally of the dogmatism of the Middle Age</i>; it -is true that the <i>official representatives</i> of this dogmatism -avail themselves, at the present time, of your arguments -and your name to maintain their influence over -women, and through them over men and children; and -this in order to revive the past, to stifle the future. Is -this your intention? I do not believe it. You are, in -my eyes, a subverter, a destroyer, in whom instinct -sometimes gets the better of intellect, and from whom -it shuts out a clear view of the consequences of his -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_54"> 54</a></span> -writings. Formed for strife, you must have adversaries; -and, in default of enemies, you cruelly fall on those who -are fighting in the same ranks with yourself. In all -your writings, one feels that the second part of education—that -which inspires respect and love of woman—is -completely wanting in you.</p> - -<p>Let us come to your letter.</p> - -<p>You reproach me with having made <i>forty paralogisms</i>; -it was your duty at least to have cited one of -these. However, let us see.</p> - -<p>You say: between man and woman there is a separation -of <i>the same nature as that which the difference of -race establishes between animals</i>.</p> - -<p>Woman, by nature and destination, is <i>neither associate, -nor citizen, nor functionary</i>.</p> - -<p>She is, until marriage, only <i>apprentice</i>, at most, <i>under-superintendent</i> -in the social workshop; she is a <i>minor</i> -in the family, and <i>does not form a part of the commonwealth</i>.</p> - -<p>You conceive of no destiny for her outside of the -household: she can be only <i>housewife</i> or <i>courtesan</i>.</p> - -<p>She is incapable <i>of understanding and of governing -herself</i>.</p> - -<p>To make a paralogism is to draw a conclusion from -false premises; now did I conclude from such in saying:</p> - -<p>In order that all these paradoxes may become truths, -you have to prove:</p> - -<p>That man and woman are not of the same race;</p> - -<p>That they can be reproduced separately;</p> - -<p>That their common product is a mixed breed or a mule;</p> - -<p>That difference of races corresponds to difference of -rights.</p> - -<p>You have to define for us an association, and also the -nature of a citizen or a functionary.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_55"> 55</a></span> -You have to prove that woman is less useful than man -in society;</p> - -<p>That, at the present time, she is necessarily a housewife, -when she is not a courtesan;</p> - -<p>That she is destitute of intellect, that she knows nothing -of government.</p> - -<p>You pretend that woman has not a right <i>to demand -for herself special legislation</i>.</p> - -<p>Was I guilty of a paralogism in pointing out to you -that it is not she, <i>but you</i>, who demand this, since -you lay down as a principle the inequality of the sexes -before human law?</p> - -<p>All that you say relatively to the <i>pretended</i> inferiority -of woman and the conclusions which you draw from -it applying to human races inferior to our own, it would -be easy for me to demonstrate that the consequence of -your principles is the <i>re-establishment of slavery</i>. The -nearest perfect has the right to take advantage of the -weakest, instead of becoming his educator. An admirable -doctrine, full of the spirit of progress, full of generosity! -I compliment you most sincerely on it.</p> - -<p>You say that labor specialized is the great emancipator -of man; that labor, conscience, liberty, and reason, -find only in themselves their right to exist and to act; -that these pure forces constitute the human person, -<i>which is sacred</i>.</p> - -<p>You lay down the principle that the law is the same -for all; so that, to establish exceptions, it would be necessary -to prove that the individuals excepted are <i>above</i> -or <i>beneath</i> the human species.</p> - -<p>You say that social equilibrium is the equalization of -the strong and the weak; that all have the same rights, -not through that which distinguishes them from each -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_56"> 56</a></span> -other, but through <i>that which is common to them</i>,—<i>the -quality of human beings</i>.</p> - -<p>Was I guilty of paralogisms in saying to you:</p> - -<p>Then you cannot, by reason of her weakness or even -of a supposed inferiority, exclude woman from equality -of right: your principles interdict it, unless you prove:</p> - -<p><i>That she is superior or inferior to the human species, -and that she does not form a part of it;</i></p> - -<p><i>That she is destitute of conscience, of justice, and of -reason; that she does not labor, that she does not execute -specialties of labor.</i></p> - -<p>It is evident, that your doctrine concerning general -right is in contradiction to your doctrine concerning the -right of women; it is evident that you are very inconsequent, -and that, however skillful you may be, you -cannot extricate yourself from this embarrassment.</p> - -<p>In what you call an answer, there are a few passages -that are worth the trouble of pausing to consider.</p> - -<p>You ask <i>what impels the bravest, the most distinguished -among us to an assault on paternal and marital -supremacy</i>.</p> - -<p>You do not comprehend the movement, or you would -have said <i>masculine supremacy</i>.</p> - -<p>In my turn, I ask you:</p> - -<p>What would have impelled Proudhon, a Roman slave, -to play the part of Spartacus?</p> - -<p>What would have impelled Proudhon, a feudal serf, -to organize a Jacquerie?</p> - -<p>What would have impelled Proudhon, a black slave, -to become a Toussaint L'Ouverture?</p> - -<p>What would have impelled Proudhon, a Russian serf, -to take the character of Poutgachef?</p> - -<p>What would have impelled Proudhon, a citizen of '89, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_57"> 57</a></span> -to overthrow the privileges of the nobility and the -clergy?</p> - -<p>What would impel Proudhon ... but I will not -touch on reality.</p> - -<p>What would Proudhon have replied to all the holders -of <i>prerogatives</i> and <i>supremacy</i>, who would not have -failed on their part to have put to him the naïve question: -"Ah! what does this vile slave, this unworthy serf, -this audacious and stupid citizen want of us, then? <i>To -which of our faculties, our virtues, our prerogatives does -he aspire? Is this the cry of his outraged nature, or an -aberration of his understanding?</i>"</p> - -<p>The answer that Proudhon would make, is that which -will be made to him by all women who have attained -majority.</p> - -<p>There is in the brain of woman, say you, an organ -which the masculine mind alone is capable of setting in -motion. Render the service then to science of pointing -it out and demonstrating its manner of working. As -to the other organ of which you speak, it is its inertia, -doubtless, that has caused it to be defined by some, <i>parvum -animal furibondum, octo ligamentis alligatum</i>. -Before choosing anatomical and physiological facts as -proofs of your assertions, consult some learned physician; -such is the counsel given you, not only by my <i>obstetrical, -but also by my medical sagacity</i>.</p> - -<p>You offer to acquaint me with your <i>direct</i> and <i>positive</i> -observations. What, Sir! has it been possible for -you in a few weeks to delve into the depths of the -healthy and the diseased organization! to go through -the whole labyrinth of functions implicated in the questions. -It is more than miraculous; despite my good -will, I cannot believe it, unless you prove that you are -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_58"> 58</a></span> -a <i>prophet</i> in communication with some deity. Shall I -tell you what I really think? It is that you have studied -these matters neither <i>directly</i> nor <i>indirectly</i>, and -that it belongs to me to tell you <i>that you do not understand -woman; that you do not know the first word of -the question</i>. Your five or six <i>purely</i> moral and intellectual -autopsies prove only one thing; namely, your -inexperience in physiology. You have naïvely mistaken -the scalpel of your imagination for that of science.</p> - -<p>With regard to autopsies, you tell me that you are -awaiting my promised work, in order to make mine. It -would be doubtless a great honor to be stretched on -your dissecting table in such good company as you -promise me, but the instruction of my future readers -does not permit me to enjoy this satisfaction. I shall -not send my book to press until your own shall have appeared, -for I, too, intend to make your autopsy; dissect -me therefore now; I promise you on my side that I -will perform my duty conscientiously, properly and delicately.</p> - -<p>"Woman," you say, "being weaker than man with -respect to <i>muscular force</i>, is not less inferior to him with -respect to <span class="smallc">INDUSTRIAL, ARTISTIC, PHILOSOPHICAL AND -MORAL POWER</span>; so that if the condition of woman in -society be regulated, as you demand for her, <i>by the -same justice as the condition of man</i>, it is all over with -her; she is a slave."</p> - -<p>Terrible man, you will be then always inconsistent, -you will always contradict yourself and facts!</p> - -<p>What do you hold as the basis of right? <i>The simple -quality of being human</i>; everything that distinguishes -individuals disappears before right. Well! even though -it were true that women were inferior to men, would -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_59"> 59</a></span> -it follow that their rights were not the same? According -to you, by no means, if they form a part of the -human species. There are not two kinds of justice, -there is but one; there are not two kinds of right, there -is but one in the absolute sense. The recognition and -respect of individual autonomy in the lowest of human -beings as well as in the man and woman of genius is -the law which should preside over social relations; must -a woman tell you this!</p> - -<p>Let us now examine the value of your series of <i>man -and woman</i>.</p> - -<p>With respect to the reproduction of the species, they -form a series; this is beyond dispute.</p> - -<p>As to the rest, do they form a series? No.</p> - -<p><i>If it were a law</i> that woman is <i>muscularly</i> weaker -than man, the strongest woman would be weaker than -the weakest man; facts demonstrate the contrary daily.</p> - -<p><i>If it were a law</i> that women are inferior to men in -<i>industrial power</i>, the most skillful woman would be inferior -in industrial pursuits to the least skillful man; -now facts demonstrate daily that there are women who -are excellent manufacturers and excellent managers; -men who are unskilled in and unsuited to this kind of -pursuits.</p> - -<p><i>If it were a law</i> that women are inferior to men in -<i>artistic power</i>, the best female artist would be inferior -to the most indifferent male artist; now facts daily demonstrate -the contrary; there are more great female -than male tragedians; many men are mediocre in music -and painting, and many women, on the other hand, remarkable -in both respects, etc., etc.</p> - -<p>What follows from all this? That your series is false, -since facts destroy it. How did you form it? The process -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_60"> 60</a></span> -is a curious study. You chose a few remarkable -men, in whom, by a convenient process of abstraction, -you beheld <i>all</i> men, even to cretins; you here took a -few women, without taking into account in the slightest -degree any differences of culture, instruction, and surroundings, -and compared them with these eminent men, -taking care to forget those that might have embarrassed -you; then, deducing generals from particulars, creating -two entities, you drew your conclusions. A strange -manner of reasoning, truly! You have fallen into the -mania of <i>imposing rules on Nature, instead of studying -Nature's rules</i>, and deserve that I should apply your -own words to you: "The greatest part of the philosophical -aberrations and chimeras have arisen from attributing -to logical series <i>a reality that they do not possess, -and endeavoring to explain the nature of man by -abstractions</i>."</p> - -<p>Still, if this were to strengthen your doctrines concerning -the <i>basis</i> of right, it might be comprehended; -but it is to overthrow them!</p> - -<p>You transform yourself into a Sphinx, to propose to -me a riddle. "What is that right," you say, "<i>which -is not justice, and which, notwithstanding, would not -exist without it</i>, which presides over the relations of -both sexes, the <i>jus strictum</i> governing only individuals -of the same sex. If you divine it, you will have given -me the cause."</p> - -<p>It is not necessary to be <i>the great Apollo</i>, to divine -that it is the <i>right of grace, of mercy</i>, towards an inferior -that is not armed with strict right.</p> - -<p>If I have divined rightly, you have simply begged -the question by supposing <i>that resolved which I dispute</i>. -I maintain that there is only one <i>right</i>, that <i>one single</i> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_61"> 61</a></span> -<i>right presides over the rights of individuals and of -sexes</i>, and that the right of mercy belongs to the domain -of sentiment.</p> - -<p>You wish it proved that the new emancipators of woman -are the most elevated, the broadest, and the most -progressive minds of the age. Rejoice, your wish is accomplished: -a simple comparison between them and -their adversaries will prove it to you.</p> - -<p>The emancipators, taking woman in the cradle of -humanity, see her marching slowly towards civil emancipation. -The intelligent disciples of progress, they -wish, by extending a fraternal hand to her, to aid her -in fulfilling her destiny.</p> - -<p>The non-emancipators, denying the historical law, regardless -of the progressive and parallel movement of -the populace, woman, and the industrial arts towards -affranchisement, wish to thrust her back far beyond the -Middle Age, to the days of Romulus and the Hebrew -patriarchs.</p> - -<p>The emancipators, believing in individual autonomy, -respecting it, and recognizing it in woman, wish to aid -her to conquer it. Judging of the need that a free -being has of liberty by the need that they have of it -themselves, they are consistent.</p> - -<p>The non-emancipators, blinded by pride, perverted -by a love of dominion as unbridled as unintelligent, desire -liberty only <i>for themselves</i>. These egotists, so suspicious -of those that menace their own freedom, wish -half the human species to be in their chains.</p> - -<p>The emancipators have enough heart and ideality to -desire a companion with whom they can exchange sentiment -and thought, and who can improve them in -some respects and be improved by them in others; -they love and respect woman.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_62"> 62</a></span> -The non-emancipators, without ideality, without love, -chained to their senses and their pride, despise woman; -and wish to have in her only a <i>female, a servant, a machine -to produce young ones</i>. They are <i>males, they are -not yet men</i>.</p> - -<p>The emancipators desire perfection of the species, in -a three-fold point of view: physical, moral, and intellectual. -They know that races cannot be improved -without selecting and perfecting the mothers.</p> - -<p>The non-emancipators are bent upon something quite -different from the improvement of the species: let their -children be lacking in intelligence, malicious, ugly, or -deformed; they think much less of this than of being -<i>masters</i>. Do they know enough of physiology to have -reflected that the faculties <i>depend on organization</i>, that -organization is capable of modification, that modifications -are transmitted, that woman has a great share in -this transmission, a greater share, perhaps, than that of -man? It is therefore <i>essential</i> to place her in a condition -to perform this great function in the manner most -useful to humanity.</p> - -<p>The emancipators desire humanity to go forward, to -vibrate no longer between the past and the future; they -know the influence that women possess, first over children, -then over men; they know that woman cannot -serve progress <i>unless she finds it to her interest to do -so</i>; that she will find it so only through liberty; that -she will love it only if her intellect is elevated by study, -and her heart purified from the petty selfishness of home -by the predominating love of the great human family. -As they desire the end sincerely, they sincerely desire -the means; so long as half the human race shall labor -as it is doing to destroy the edifice constructed by <i>a few</i> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_63"> 63</a></span> -<i>members</i> of the other half; so long as half the human -race, <i>the one that secretly governs the other</i>, shall have -its face turned towards the past, the landmarks that -point to the future will be threatened with being torn -up. Do you consider it a crime in the emancipators to -comprehend this, to seek to conjure down the peril; and -do you consider a virtue in the non-emancipators the -foolish pride that places a cataract over their eyes?</p> - -<p>A few words more, and I shall have done. You -would rather, you say, that I should not assume castigating -airs with you. But have you really the right to -complain of it, you who have constituted yourself the -chief whipper-in of the economists and the socialists? -I shall never go so far towards you as you have gone -towards them. You must resign yourself to my abrupt, -sometimes harsh style. I am implacable towards -whatever appears to me false and unjust; and were you -my brother, I should not war against you less sharply; -before all ties of affection and family, should come the -love of justice and humanity.</p> - -<p>I owe now to my readers and to you, sir, the exposition -of the thesis that I undertake to sustain; for the -phrase, <i>the emancipation of women</i> has been, and is, -quite variously interpreted.</p> - -<p>With respect to <i>right</i>, man and woman are equal, -whether the equality of faculties be admitted or rejected.</p> - -<p>But for a truth to be useful, it must be adapted to -the surroundings into which we seek to introduce it.</p> - -<p>Absolute right being recognized, the practice of it -remains. In practice, I see two kinds of rights: woman -is ripe for the exercise of one of them; but I acknowledge -that the practice of the second would be at present -dangerous, by reason of the education that the majority -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_64"> 64</a></span> -of them have received. You comprehend me, without -making it necessary for me to explain myself more -clearly in a Review in which social and political subjects -are interdicted.</p> - -<p>The directors of the <i>Revue</i> having informed me that -my adversary refused to continue the discussion, I made -the following recapitulation of his creed, concerning the -rights and nature of woman.</p> - -<p>To the editors of the <i>Revue Philosophique et Religieuse</i>:</p> - -<p>You inform me that M. Proudhon will not reply -to the questions that I have put to him; I have neither -the means nor the wish to constrain him to do -so. I shall not inquire into the motives of his determination; -my business now is only to make an exposition -of his creed, which may be summed up in this wise:</p> - -<p>"I believe that between man and woman, there is a -separation of the same nature as that which the difference -of race places between animals;</p> - -<p>"I believe that, by nature and by destination, woman -is neither associate, nor functionary, nor citizen;</p> - -<p>"I believe that, in the social workshop, she is, until -her marriage, only apprentice, at most under-superintendent;</p> - -<p>"I believe that she is a minor in the family, art, -science, manufactures, and philosophy, and that she is -<i>nothing</i> in the commonwealth;</p> - -<p>"I believe that she can only be housewife or courtesan;</p> - -<p>"I believe that she is incapable of understanding -and of governing herself;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_65"> 65</a></span> -"I believe firmly that the basis of the equality of -rights is in the simple quality of being human; now, woman -being unable to have rights equal to those of man, I -affirm that she does not belong to the human species."</p> - -<p>Is Proudhon conscious how far his creed is in opposition -to science, to facts, to the law of progress, to -the tendencies of our own age, and does he dare to attempt -to justify it by proofs?</p> - -<p>Does he feel that this creed classes him among the -abettors of the dogmatism of the Middle Age, and does -he recoil before such a responsibility?</p> - -<p>If this were the case, I should praise him for his -prudent silence, and it would be my warmest desire that -he should keep it forever on the question that divides us. -To treat a subject, it is necessary to love and understand -it; I dare not say that Proudhon does not love woman, -but I do affirm that he does not understand her; he -sees in her nothing more than the female of man; his -peculiar organization seems to render him unfit for the -investigation of such a subject. He promises, in the -work that he is preparing, to treat of the sphere and the -rights of women; if his doctrine has for its basis the -paradoxical affirmations of his creed, I hope that he will -this time take pains to rest them at least upon the semblances -of proofs, which I shall examine with all the attention -of which I am capable.</p> - -<p>By shrinking from discussion, he cannot escape my -criticism.</p> - -<p class="space">The two studies of Proudhon are simply the development -of this creed.</p> - -<p>I promised to dissect the author; therefore, I shall -do so.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_66"> 66</a></span> -Let me not be reproached with being pitiless; Proudhon -has deserved it.</p> - -<p>Let me not be reproached with being a reasoning -machine; with such an adversary, one should be nothing -else.</p> - -<p>Let me not be reproached with being harsh; Proudhon -has shown a harshness and injustice with respect -to women, even the most illustrious, that exceed all -bounds. If I am harsh, I will endeavor on my part -not to be unjust.</p> - -<p class="subh">I.</p> - -<p>Well, M. Proudhon, you have sought war with women! -War you shall have.</p> - -<p>You have said, not without reason, that the Comtois -are an obstinate race; now, I am your countrywoman; -and as woman generally carries virtues and failings farther -than man, I intend to outdo you in obstinacy.</p> - -<p>I have raised the banner under which your daughters -will one day take shelter if they are worthy of the name -they bear; I will hold it with a firm hand and will never -suffer it to be struck down; against such as you, I -have the heart and claws of a lioness.</p> - -<p>You begin by saying that you by no means desired to -treat of the inequality of the sexes, but that half a dozen -insurgent women with ink-stained fingers having defied -you to discuss the question, you will establish by facts -and documents the <i>physical, intellectual and moral inferiority -of woman</i>; that you will prove that her emancipation -is the same thing as her prostitution, and will -take her defence in hand against the rambling talk of a -few impure women whom sin has rendered mad.—(<i>Vol.</i> -III., p. 337.)</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_67"> 67</a></span> -I alone, by shutting you up in a circle of contradictions, -have dared defy you to discuss the question; I -sum up, therefore, in my own person, the few impure -women whom sin has rendered mad.</p> - -<p>Insults of this sort cannot touch me; the esteem, the -regard, the precious friendship of eminently respectable -men and women suffice to reduce unworthy insinuations -to naught. I should not notice them, with such contempt -do they inspire me, were it not necessary to tell -you that the time has gone by when one might hope to -stifle the voice of a woman by attacking her purity.</p> - -<p>If you do not ask the man who demands his rights -and seeks to prove their legitimacy, whether he is upright, -chaste, etc., no more have you the right to ask -the question of the woman who makes the same claim.</p> - -<p>Were I therefore so unfortunate as to be the vilest of -mortals as regards chastity, this would not at all lessen -the value of my claim.</p> - -<p>I greatly dislike any justification, but I owe it to the -sacred cause that I defend, I owe it to my friends, to -tell you that the moral education which my sainted, lamented -mother gave me, together with scientific studies, -serious philosophy, and continual occupation, have kept -me in what is commonly called the right path, and have -strengthened the horror that I feel for all tyranny, -whether it be styled man or temperament.</p> - -<p>You accuse your biographer of having committed an -indignity in directing an accusation against a woman, -because this woman was your wife; do you not commit -an indignity yourself in insulting many others?</p> - -<p>And if you blame those who calumniate the morals -of Proudhon because he is not of their opinion, in what -light do you think that men will regard your calumnious -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_68"> 68</a></span> -insinuations against women, because they do not -think like you?</p> - -<p>You claim that we have no morality, because we lack -respect towards the dignity of others; who has set us -this detestable example more than you? You, who style -yourself the champion of the principles of '89—who -are the men and women whom you attack?</p> - -<p>They who are in different degrees, and from different -stand points, in favor of these principles.</p> - -<p>Your anger has no bounds against George Sand, our -great prose writer, the author of the bulletins of the republic -of '48. You depreciate Madame de Stäel, whom -you have not read, and who was in advance of most of -the masculine writers of her epoch.</p> - -<p>Two scaffolds are erected, two women mount thereon: -Madame Roland and Marie Antoinette. I, a woman, -will not cast insult on the decapitated queen, dying -with dignity and courage; no, I bow before the -block, whatever head may lay on it, and wipe away my -tears. But, Marie Antoinette died the victim of the -faults that her princely education had caused her to commit -against the modern principles; while Madame Roland, -the chaste and noble wife, died for the revolution, -and died blessing it.</p> - -<p>Whence comes it that you greet the queen with your -sympathies, while you have nought but words of blame -and contempt for the revolutionist? And the men that -belong to the great party of the future, how do you -style them?</p> - -<p>The Girondins, <i>effeminate</i>;</p> - -<p>Robespierre and his adherents, <i>eunuchs</i>;</p> - -<p>The gentle Bernardin de St. Pierre, <i>effeminate</i>;</p> - -<p>M. Legouvé and those who think like him concerning -the emancipation of women, <i>effeminate</i>;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_69"> 69</a></span> -M. de Girardin, <i>absurd</i>;</p> - -<p><i>Béranger, a pitiable author, and effeminate</i>; Jean -Jacques, not only the prince of <i>effeminates</i>, but <i>the -greatest enemy of the people and the revolution</i>—he -who was evidently the chief author of our "French -Revolution."</p> - -<p>Are we not justified in asking you, whether you are -for or against the Revolution?</p> - -<p>M. Proudhon, you have forfeited your right to all -consideration, since you have none for those who have -neither offended you or offered you provocation, those -who have never pretended to reduce you to servitude; -men have lacked courage; they ought to have stopped -you when you began to descend to insulting personalities; -what they have not done, I, a woman, will do, -fearing nothing, or no one, except my own conscience.</p> - -<p>Proudhon, the greatest enemy of the people, is the -writer who, treading under foot reason and conscience, -science and facts, calls to his aid all the ignorance, all -the despotism of the past, to mislead the spirit of the -people with respect to the rights of half the human -species.</p> - -<p>Proudhon, the greatest enemy of the revolution, is he -who shows it to women as a toy; who detaches them -from its holy cause by confounding it with the negation -of their rights; who attacks and vilifies the advocates -of progress; who dares, in fine, in the name of the -principles of general emancipation, to proclaim the social -annihilation and the conjugal servitude of one entire -half of humanity.</p> - -<p>Behold the enemy of the people and of the revolution!</p> - -<p class="subh"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_70"> 70</a></span> -II.</p> - -<p>I had proceeded thus far in my reply when, pausing -to take breath and to reflect, I grew calm.</p> - -<p>What! said I to myself, have I then no more sense -than to take in earnest that shapeless thing honored by -the name of theory by the good people who are so bewildered -by the noise of Proudhon's drum and tam-tam -that they see stars at noon-day and the sun at midnight? -Let me be calm, let me not give to the affair -more importance than it possesses; and since I must set -forth this thing to my readers, let me do it in a fitting -tone. We will leave Proudhon to explain himself in -his own words.</p> - -<p>No sooner had I taken this good resolution, than I -evoked M. Proudhon, and said to him in all humility: -Master, I come to you that you may define for me the -nature of woman, and also something of the nature of -man.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> You do well, for I alone am capable of -instructing you; listen then to me.</p> - -<p>"The complete human being, <i>adequate to his destiny</i>, -I speak of the physical, is the male, who, through -his virility, attains the highest degree of muscular and -nervous tension comporting with his nature and end, and -thence, the maximum of action in labor and in battle.</p> - -<p>"Woman is a <span class="smallc">DIMINUTIVE</span> of man, lacking one organ -to become a pubescent youth.</p> - -<p>"She is a <i>receptacle for the germs that man alone -produces</i>, a place of <i>incubation</i>, like the earth for the -seed of the wheat; an <i>organ inert</i> in itself, and purposeless -with respect to the woman. Such an organization—<i>presupposes -the subordination of the subject</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_71"> 71</a></span> -"In herself, I speak still of the physical, woman has -no reason to exist; <i>she is an instrument of reproduction</i> -which it has pleased nature to choose in preference to -any other.</p> - -<p>"Woman, in this first count, is inferior to man: <i>a -sort of mean term between him and the rest of the animal -kingdom</i>."—<i>Justice</i>, Vol. III., etc.</p> - -<p>And remark that I am not alone in my opinion:</p> - -<p>"Woman is not only different from man," says Paracelsus, -"she is different because she is lesser, because -her sex constitutes for her one faculty less. Wherever -virility is wanting, the subject is imperfect; wherever it -is taken away, the subject deteriorates. Woman lacks -nothing in the physical point of view except <i>to produce -germs</i>.</p> - -<p>"Likewise, in the intellectual point of view, woman -possesses perceptions, memory and imagination, she is -capable of attention, reflection, and judgment; what -does she lack?</p> - -<p>"The power of producing germs, that is, ideas.—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Now, follow my reasoning closely: It being admitted -that <i>strength has some weight in the establishment of -right</i>; it being admitted, on the other hand, that woman -is one third weaker than man, she will then be to -man, in physical respects, as two is to three. Consequently, -in the social workshop, the value of the products -of woman will be one third less than that of the -products of man; therefore, in the division of social advantages, -the proportion will be the same: <i>thus says -justice</i>.</p> - -<p>"Man will always be stronger and will always produce -more," <i>which signifies that man will be the master, -and that woman will obey, dura lex, sed lex</i>."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_72"> 72</a></span> -Besides, reflect that woman falls to the charge of man -during gestation; her physical weakness, her infirmities, -her maternity, exclude her <i>inevitably</i> and <i>judicially</i> from -all political, doctrinal and industrial direction.—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>We will now proceed to the second point. But first, -mark well that woman, like all else, is autonomic; woman, -considered apart from the influence of man, is the -thesis; woman, considered under the influence of man, -is the antithesis; it is the thesis that we are now examining. -Let us therefore approach the <i>thetic</i> woman in -the intellectual relation.</p> - -<p>We will first admit the principle that <i>thought is proportional -to force</i>; whence we have a right to conclude -that man possesses a stronger intellect than woman. Thus -we see man alone possessing genius. As to woman, she -is nothing in science; we owe to her no invention, <i>not -even her distaff and spindle</i>. She never <i>generalizes</i>, -never <i>synthetizes</i>; her mind is anti-metaphysical; <i>she -cannot produce any regular work, not even a romance</i>; -<i>she composes nothing but medleys, monsters</i>; "she -makes epigrams, satire; does not know how to express a -judgment in set terms, nor assign its causes; it was not -she who created abstract words, such as cause, time, -space, quantity, relation. <i>Woman is a true table rapping -medium.</i>"—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>I have already told you that woman does not produce -intellectual germs any more than physical germs; her -intellectual inferiority tells upon the quality of the product -as much as upon the intensity and duration of the -action and, as in this feeble nature, the defect of the -idea results from the lack of energy of the thought, it -may be truly said that woman possesses a mind <i>essentially</i> -false, of irremediable <i>falsity</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_73"> 73</a></span> -"Disconnected ideas, contradictory reasonings, chimeras -taken for realities, unreal analogies erected into -principles, a tendency of mind inclining inevitably -towards annihilation: such is the intellect of woman."</p> - -<p>Yes, woman "<i>is a passive, enervating being, whose -conversation exhausts like her embraces. He who -wishes to preserve entire the strength of his mind and -body will flee her.</i>"—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>"<i>Without man, who is to her prophet and word, -she would not emerge from the bestial condition.</i>"</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Calm yourself, Master, and tell me whether -it is true that you have dealt harshly with literary -women.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Literary women! As if there were -any! "The woman author does not exist; she is a -contradiction. The part of woman in literature is the -same as in manufactures; she is useful where genius is -no longer of service, like a needle or a bobbin.</p> - -<p>"By cutting out of a woman's book all that is borrowed, -imitated, gleaned, and common-place, we reduce -it to a few pretty sayings; philosophy on nothing. To -the community of ideas, woman brings nothing of her -own, any more than to generation."</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Ah! I understand: you mean that, in -the character of author, the woman of genius does not -exist. But in this respect, among the number of men -that write how many are there who have genius, and -who never borrow from any one?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> -I grant that there are many effeminate -men; which does not alter the fact that woman would -do better <i>to go and iron her collars</i> than to meddle with -writing; for, "it may be affirmed without fear of calumny, -that the woman who dabbles with philosophy -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_74"> 74</a></span> -and writing destroys her progeny by the labor of her -brain and her kisses which savor of man; the safest -and most honorable way for her is to renounce home -life and maternity; destiny has branded her on the -forehead; made only for love, the title of concubine if -not of courtesan suffices her."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Let us now consider the <i>thetic</i> woman in the moral -point of view. We will admit in the first place the -principle <i>that virtue exists in the ratio of strength and -intellect</i>, whence we have a right to conclude that man -is more virtuous than woman. Do not laugh; it disturbs -my ideas. I go further; man alone is virtuous; -man alone has the sense of justice; man alone has the -comprehension of right. Tell me, I pray you, "what -produces in man this energy of will, this confidence in -himself, this frankness, this daring, all these powerful -qualities that we have agreed to designate by the single -word, morality. What inspires him with the sentiment -of his dignity, the scorn of falsehood, the hatred of injustice, -the abhorence of all tyranny? Nothing else -than the consciousness of his strength and reason."</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> But then, Master, if man is all this, why -do you reproach the men of our times with lack of courage, -of dignity, of justice, of reason, of good faith? -When I take up in minute detail the terrible charges -which you have fulminated against the masculine race, -I can make nothing of the meaning of the tirade you -have just uttered.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Consider what you irreverently name a -tirade, as the necessary check to feminine immorality.</p> - -<p>It is only to set forth the truth that of all the differences -that separate her mind from ours, the conscience -of woman is the most trifling, her morality is of a different -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_75"> 75</a></span> -nature; what she regards as right and wrong is -not identically the same as what man himself regards as -right and wrong, so that, relatively to us, <i>woman may -be styled an immoral being</i>.</p> - -<p>"<i>By her nature she is in a state of constant demoralization</i>, -always on this side or that of justice.... -Justice is insupportable to her.... Her conscience is -anti-judicial."</p> - -<p>She is aristocratic, loves privileges and distinctions; -"in all revolutions that have liberty and equality for -their object, women make the most resistance. They -did more harm in the revolution of February than all -the powers of the masculine reaction combined.</p> - -<p>"Women have so little judicial sense that the legislator -who fixed the age of moral responsibility at sixteen -for both sexes, might have delayed it till forty-five, -for women. Woman's conscience is <i>decidedly of no value -till this age</i>."</p> - -<p>In herself, woman is <i>immodest</i>.</p> - -<p>It is from man therefore that she receives modesty, -"which is the product of manly dignity, the corollary -of justice.</p> - -<p>"Woman has no other inclination, no other aptitude -than love.</p> - -<p>"In affairs of love, the initiative belongs truly to woman."—<i>Justice</i>, -<i>Vol.</i> III., pp. 364, 366.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> How many persons you will astonish, -Master, by revealing to them that <i>modesty comes from -man</i>; that consequently all the young girls who have -been seduced, all the little girls whose corruptors and -violators are punished by the courts, are but jades, -who, through their initiative, have caused men to forget -their character as inspirers of chastity!</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_76"> 76</a></span> -You enlighten me, illustrious Master; and I shall at -once draw up a memorial to demand that all seduced -and violated women and girls shall be punished as they -deserve; and that, to console the seducers, suborners, -corruptors and violators, poor innocent victims of feminine -ferocity, for having sinned against the <i>corollary of -justice and the product of manly dignity</i>, rose-trees -shall be forced to blossom, in order that the <i>maires</i> of -the forty thousand communes of France and Algeria -may crown them winners of the roses.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Jest as you please; woman is nevertheless -so perverse in her nature, that, through inclination, -she seeks men who are ugly, old, and wicked.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Is not this somewhat exaggerated, Master?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> (Forgetting what he has just said,)</p> - -<p>"Woman always prefers a pretty, finical puppet to -an honest man; a beau, a knave can obtain from her all -that he desires; she has nothing but disdain for the man -who is capable of sacrificing his love to his conscience."</p> - -<p>You see what woman is: "<i>unproductive by nature, -inert, without industry or understanding, without justice, -and without modesty</i>, she needs that a father, a -brother, a lover, a husband, a master, a man, in fine, -should give her that magnetic influence, if I may thus -term it, which will render her capable of manly virtues, -of social and intellectual faculties."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>And as "all her philosophy, her religion, her politics, -her economy, her industry are resolved in one word: -Love;</p> - -<p>"Now shall we make of this being belonging wholly -to love, an overseer, an engineer, a captain, a merchant, -a financier, an economist, an administrator, a scholar, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_77"> 77</a></span> -an artist, a professor, a philosopher, a legislator, a judge, -an orator, the general of an army, the head of a State?</p> - -<p>"The question carries its answer within itself."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>I have laid down and proved my thesis, I am about to -draw my conclusions.</p> - -<p>"Since in economical, political and social action, the -strength of the body and that of the mind concur and -are multiplied, the one by the other, the physical and -intellectual value of the man will be to the physical and -intellectual value of woman as 3 ☓ 3 is to 2 ☓ 2, or as -9 to 4.</p> - -<p>"In the moral, as in the physical and intellectual -point of view, her value (that of woman,) is also as 2 -to 3.</p> - -<p>"Their share of influence, compared together, will be -as 3 ☓ 3 ☓ 3 is to 2 ☓ 2 ☓ 2 or as 27 to 8.</p> - -<p>"According to these conditions, woman cannot pretend -to counterbalance the virile power; her subordination -is inevitable. Both by nature, and before justice, -she does not weigh the third of man."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Do you understand clearly?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Very clearly. Your theory, if theory -there be, is only a tissue of paradoxes; your pretended -principles <i>are contradicted by facts</i>, your conclusions -<i>are equally contradicted by facts</i>; you <i>affirm</i> like a revelator, -but you <i>never prove</i>, as a philosopher should do. -There is so much ignorance and senseless metaphysics -in all that you say, that I should rather give you credit -for bad faith than be compelled to despise you.</p> - -<p>I have listened to you patiently while you have said -to me, in saying it of all women:</p> - -<p>You are inert, passive, you possess the germ of nothing;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_78"> 78</a></span> -You are a mean term between man and beast, you -have no right to exist;</p> - -<p>You are immoral, immodest, imbecile, aristocratic, -the enemy of liberty, equality and justice.</p> - -<p>In your turn, endeavor to listen to me calmly, while -I refute your allegations by facts, by science and by reason.</p> - -<p class="subh">III.</p> - -<p>There is, by your own confession, but one good method -of demonstration; that of basing every affirmation -<i>upon well established facts, not contradicted by others, -legitimately deduced</i>.</p> - -<p>Let us see how you have followed this method.</p> - -<p>In order to prove that the <i>thetic</i> woman, or woman -considered apart from the influence of man, is such as -you depict her, it is necessary that you should bring us -face to face with an assemblage of such women, and afterwards, -with another assemblage composed of men -who have never been subjected to the influence of women, -that we may verify for ourselves the native activity -of the latter and the native inertness of the former. -Have you had at your disposal, can you place at ours -these proofs <i>de facto</i>?</p> - -<p>No; and if you neither have them nor can procure -them, what is your thesis, if not the illusion of a brain -sick with pride and with hatred of woman?</p> - -<p>1. You say: man alone produces physical germs. -Anatomy answers: <i>It is woman that produces the germ</i>; -the organ that performs this function in her, as in all -other females, is the ovary.</p> - -<p>2. You say: woman is a diminutive of the man; -she is an imperfect male; anatomy says: <i>man and woman -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_79"> 79</a></span> -are two distinct beings, each one complete</i>, each -one furnished with a special organism, the one as necessary -as the other.</p> - -<p>3. You say with Paracelsus, of whom this is not -the only absurdity: <i>where virility is wanting, the subject -is imperfect; where it is taken away, the subject -deteriorates</i>. Mere good sense replies: the being can -only be incomplete or deteriorate <i>when it differs from its -type</i>; now the type of woman is feminity not <i>masculinity</i>.... -If, like you, I were a lover of paradox, I -would say: <i>man is an imperfect woman</i>, since it is the -woman that produces the germ; his part in reproduction -is very doubtful, and science may even learn some -day to dispense with it. This is Auguste Comte's paradox; -it is worth as much as yours.</p> - -<p>To prove that woman is only an imperfect male, it is -necessary to establish by facts that man on being deprived -of virility, finds the organs developed in him peculiar -to woman, becomes qualified for conception, gestation, -delivery, and giving suck. Now I have never -learned that any keeper of a seraglio had been transformed -into an odahlic; have you?</p> - -<p>4. You say: the organs peculiar to woman are inert, -and purposeless with respect to herself; physiology -answers: the labor that these organs accomplish is immense; -pregnancy and the crisis that terminates it are -incontestable proofs of this. The influence of these organs -makes itself felt, not only on the general health, -but in the intellectual and moral order. Pathology, no -less eloquent, depicts to us the grave disorders produced -among women by forced continence, incontinence, the -excessive or perverted vitality of these organs which you -pretend are inert.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_80"> 80</a></span> -5. You say: woman is the soil, the place of incubation -for the germ. Anatomy has told you in reply -that the woman alone produces the germ. Read my reply -to your friend Michelet on the subject of the resemblance -of children and you will know what facts add to -the answer of science. Your affirmation is no less absurd -in the presence of these facts than that of a simpleton -who should pretend that the soil in which the -seed of the carnation or the oak is deposited, has the -property of causing rosebushes or palm trees to spring -up.</p> - -<p>From this <i>false</i> supposition that woman has not physical -germs, you conclude that she is destitute of intellectual -and moral germs.... And do you really -dare accuse woman of thus <i>taking false analogies for -principles</i>?</p> - -<p>Grant that when a man indulges in them thus wantonly, -and mistakes them for principles, we ought to be -more inclined to laugh than to be vexed.</p> - -<p>6. You say that intellectually and morally, woman -is in herself, nothing.</p> - -<p>Now, if I am not mistaken, you admit that our functions -have our organs for their basis, and you place the -functions of intellect and morality in the brain, according -to Gall, or similarly.</p> - -<p>Well, Anatomy tells you: in both sexes, the cerebral -mass is similar in composition and, adds Phrenology, in -the number of organs. Biology adds: the law of development -of our organs is <i>exercise</i>, which supposes action -and reaction, the result of which is the augmentation -of the volume, consistency and vitality of the -organ exercised.</p> - -<p>The point in question then, to convince your readers -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_81"> 81</a></span> -of the truth of your affirmations, is to prove that <i>the -two sexes are subjected to the same exercise of the brain -and to the same stimulus</i>, and that despite this identity -of education, woman constantly remains inferior. Have -you proved this? Have you ever thought of doing so? -No. For if you had, your theory would have fallen to -to the ground, since you would have been forced to acknowledge -that man and woman cannot be alike, for we -say to man from his infancy: resist, struggle;</p> - -<p>To woman: yield, always submit.</p> - -<p>To man: be yourself, speak your thoughts boldly, -ambition is a virtue; you can aspire to everything.</p> - -<p>To woman: dissemble, calculate your slightest word, -respect prejudices; modesty, abnegation, such is your -lot; you can attain to naught.</p> - -<p>To man: knowledge, talent, courage will open every -career of life to you, will make you honored by all.</p> - -<p>To woman: knowledge is useless to you; if you -have it, you will pass for a pedant, and if you have -courage, you will be disdainfully called <i>virago</i>.</p> - -<p>To man: for you are instituted lyceums, universities, -special schools, high prizes; all the institutions through -which your intellect can be developed; all the libraries -in which is accumulated the knowledge of the past.</p> - -<p>To woman: for you is history in madrigals, the -reading of prayer-books and novels. You have nothing -to do with lyceums, special schools, high prizes, anything -that would elevate your mind and enlarge your -views; a learned woman is ridiculous!</p> - -<p>Man must display the knowledge that he often possesses -but superficially, woman must hide what she -really possesses.</p> - -<p>Man must appear courageous when he is often but a -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_82"> 82</a></span> -coward; woman must feign timidity when in reality -she is not afraid.</p> - -<p>For where man is reputed great and sublime, woman -is found ridiculous, sometimes odious.</p> - -<p>If you had verified as you should have done, these -diametrically opposite systems of training, the one tending -to develop and ennoble the being, the other to degrade -it and render it imbecile, instead of writing such -absurdities, you would have said to yourself: woman -must really have the initiative to resist the iniquitous -system of repression that weighs upon her; she must -have great elasticity to show herself so often superior to -the majority of men in intellect, and <i>always in morality</i>.</p> - -<p>I am curious to know what you males would be if -subjected to the same system as we. Look at those who -have not studied like you, and tell me whether they are -not in general beneath uncultivated women. Look then -at the men who have received a feminine education; -have they not all the affectation, all the narrowness of -mind of silly women?</p> - -<p>Look, on the contrary, at those women who, through -the wish of their teachers or their own energy, have -been subjected to masculine discipline, and tell me, on -your conscience, whether they do not equal the most intelligent, -the firmest among you?</p> - -<p>7. You say: intellectual force is in proportion to -physical force. <i>Facts</i> reply: great thoughts, useful -works, date from the period when the physical forces began -to decline. <i>Facts</i> say also: the athletic temperament, -which is the most vigorous, is <i>the least intellectual</i>: -statuaries fully comprehend this, and sculpture Hercules -with a large body and a small head.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_83"> 83</a></span> -8. You say that morality is in a direct ratio to physical -and intellectual force combined. This pleasantry -we will not refute; every one knows too well that these -things have no relation, and that facts contradict your -assertion.</p> - -<p>9. You say: woman being one third weaker, should -have in social labor one third the privileges of man.</p> - -<p>Upon what elements do you base this proportion? -In order to establish it, did you carry a dynamometer -about through our districts and measure the strength of -each man and of each woman?</p> - -<p>But were your affirmation true, is naught but <i>strength</i> -employed in labor? Then, great economist, what do -we do with <i>skill</i>? What Samsonian muscles are needed -to keep books, dispense justice, measure cloth, cut -and sew garments, etc.!</p> - -<p>And what is the end of civilization if not to shift the -employ of our strength from ourselves to machinery that -we may be at liberty to use only our intellect and skill?</p> - -<p>10. You say: the infirmities, the weaknesses, the -maternity of woman, and her aptitude for love, exclude -her from all functions; she is <i>judicially and absolutely</i> -excluded from all political, industrial and doctrinal direction.</p> - -<p>She cannot be a political leader.... Yet history -shows us numerous empresses, queens, regents and sovereign -princesses who have governed with wisdom and -glory, and have shown themselves far superior to many -male sovereigns, unless Maria Theresa, Catherine II, -Isabella and Blanche of Castile, and many others, are -but myths.</p> - -<p>Woman cannot be a legislator.... All the women -whom I have just cited have been so, and many more -beside.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_84"> 84</a></span> -Women can be neither philosophers nor professors.</p> - -<p>Hypatia, massacred by the Christians, taught Philosophy -with luster; in the Middle Age and later, Italian -women filled chairs of Philosophy, Law and Mathematics, -and excited admiration and enthusiasm; in -France, at the present time, the Polytechnists are making -great account of <i>the geometrician</i>, Sophie Germain, -who has taken it into her head to study Kant.</p> - -<p>Woman cannot be a merchant or an administratrix... -Yet a great portion of the feminine population devote -themselves to trade, or fill commercial positions. It is -even admitted that the prosperity of commercial establishments -is almost always due to the administrative genius -of woman.</p> - -<p>Woman cannot be an overseer, a foreman of a workshop... -Yet a host of women superintend workshops, -invent, improve, carry on manufactures alone, -and contribute, by their taste and activity, to the increase -of the national wealth and the industrial reputation -of France.</p> - -<p>Woman cannot be artist... Yet every one knows -that the greatest literary artist of our age is a woman, -George Sand; yet every one bows before Duchesnois, -Mars, Georges, Maxime, Ristori, Rachel, Dorval; yet -every one pauses before the beautiful paintings of Rosa -Bonheur; yet since the revival of the fine arts, every -century has registered many celebrated women.</p> - -<p>We meet women everywhere, working everywhere, -competing with man.... Yet Proudhon pretends -that she can be nowhere, that she is excluded from -every place absolutely and <i>judicially</i>; that if she governs -and legislates like Maria Theresa, it is a contradiction;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_85"> 85</a></span> -That if she philosophises like Hypatia, it is a contradiction;</p> - -<p>That if she commands an army and wins victories -like the wife of the conqueror of Calais; if she fights -like Jeanne d'Arc, Jeanne Hachette, Madame Garibaldi -and thousands of others, it is a contradiction;</p> - -<p>That if she is merchant, administratrix, superintendent -of a workshop, like thousands of women, it is a -contradiction;</p> - -<p>That if she is learned like Dr. Boivin, Sophie Germain, -and many others, if she is a professor as are many -among us, it is a contradiction.</p> - -<p>The thesis sustained by Proudhon is, as we have just -seen, contradicted by <i>science</i> and by <i>facts</i>. We ask -ourselves whether it is possible that he is ignorant of the -simplest notions of Anatomy and Biology; we ask ourselves -whether it is possible that he is so far blind as not -to see that woman <i>is in reality</i> all that he pretends that -she <i>absolutely and judicially</i> cannot be in his absurd -and insulting theory; and we conclude that the author -is struck with ignorance and voluntary blindness.</p> - -<p>Your reproaches are pleasant; from the origin of society, -man has been the master; now, the ancient world -sunk beneath the weight of slavery, usury, and the most -shameless vices; the modern world seems doomed to -perish through inequality and its sad consequences, you -yourself acknowledge that injustice <i>caused by your sex</i> -exists every where in the world, and you say that man -has judicial sense!</p> - -<p>And, in the face of the inequality and oppression -created by men, of their love of puerile distinctions, of -the base deeds which they commit for a bit of ribbon, -you accuse women of loving inequality and privileges!</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_86"> 86</a></span> -They may love them, <i>like you</i>, but they are better -than you, if not more just; they pray for the vanquished, -you kill him!</p> - -<p>I do not deny that women did much harm to the -Revolution of February, for they are as intelligent as -men, and have great influence over them. But what -did this Revolution do for them, I pray?</p> - -<p>Mark me well, you and all those who are blind -enough, proud enough, despotic enough to resemble you, -and remember what I say.</p> - -<p>Woman is like the people: she desires no more of -your revolutions, which decimate us for the benefit of a -few ambitious babblers.</p> - -<p>She will have liberty and equality for all men and -women, or she will take care that no one shall have -them.</p> - -<p>We, Women of Progress, openly declare ourselves -adversaries of whoever shall deny the right of woman -to liberty.</p> - -<p>Our sisters of the people, indignant at their exclusion -from the popular assemblies, say to you: you have lured -us long enough, it is time that this should end. We -will no longer suffer ourselves to be ensnared by your -high-sounding words of Justice, Liberty, and Equality, -which are only false coin so long as they are applied to -but half the human species. Do you wish to save the -perishing world? Call woman to your side. If you -will not do this, let us alone, insipid phraseologists; -you are naught but ambitious hypocrites; we do not -wish our husbands to follow you, and they will not.</p> - -<p class="subh"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_87"> 87</a></span> -IV.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Let us consider woman in the antithesis. -I have said that woman, considered apart from -masculine influence, is <i>nothing</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Yes, Master, because this is a pure creation -of your thought.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> But woman, considered under the influence -of man, is half of the human being, and <i>I sing litanies -in her praise</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Then you make woman re-enter humanity -through the door of Androgyny, in order to restore to -her her share of rights.... This is absurd; no matter.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Not so! not so! Women have rights! -Never, so long as I am Proudhon! She is indeed the -complement of man, who, without her, would be only -a brute.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Ah! my learned Master, how do these -things harmonize in your brain? You have said hitherto -that <i>woman owes everything to man</i>, you tell me -now that, without woman, man would be only a brute. -Is he not then, <i>adequate to his destiny</i>, as you have affirmed? -And if woman is nothing without him, and he -nothing without woman, I can see no longer upon what -you rest in making him the guide of this poor unfortunate.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> I need not explain myself, such is my -idea. I am simply comparing the respective qualities of -the sexes, and, as I find, they are <i>incommutable</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Ah! I catch a glimpse of your meaning; -then you do not weigh them in the balance since -they are not alike, and, being unable to prejudice the -rights of woman, you leave her free.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_88"> 88</a></span> -<span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span>What! what! Woman free! Horrible! -Are you resolved to throw me into convulsions? -Woman, however eminent may be her talents, should -serve man in silence and in all humility.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Frankly, Master, all this appears to me -nonsense, which, satanic as you are, you cannot yourself -understand in the least.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Listen without interrupting me further, -if you wish to comprehend me.</p> - -<p>"Without feminine grace, <i>man would not have -emerged from the brutality of the early ages; he would -violate his female, smother his little ones, and give -chase to his fellows in order to devour them</i>.</p> - -<p>"<i>Woman is the conscience of man personified</i>, the -incarnation of his youth, <i>his reason and his justice, of -all within him that is purest, most sacred, most sublime</i>.—<i>Justice</i>, -<i>Vol.</i> III., etc.</p> - -<p>"The ideality of his being, she becomes to him a -<i>principle of animation</i>, a gift of strength, of prudence, -of justice, of patience, of courage, of sanctity, of hope, -of consolation, without which he would be incapable of -sustaining the burden of life, of preserving his dignity, -of enduring himself, <i>of fulfilling his destiny</i>.</p> - -<p>"It is through her, through the grace of her divine -word, that man gives life and reality to his ideas, by -bringing them back unceasingly from the abstract to the -concrete.</p> - -<p>"<i>The auxiliary on the side of justice</i>, she is the angel -of patience, of resignation, of tolerance, the guardian -of his faith, the mirror of his conscience, the source -of his devotion. Vanquished, guilty, it is still in the -bosom of woman that he finds consolation and pardon."</p> - -<p>Man has strength, woman beauty. Through her -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_89"> 89</a></span> -beauty, she should be the expression of Justice, "and -the attraction that draws us to it.... <i>She will be -better than man</i>.... She will be the motor of all -justice, all knowledge, all industry, all virtue."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Also, "beauty is the true destination of the sex; it -is its natural condition, its state."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Woman is the soul of everything; "without her, all -beauty fades; nature is sad, precious stones lose their -luster, all our arts, children of love, become insipid, -half of our labor is without value.</p> - -<p>"If, with respect to vigor, man is to woman as 3 to -2, woman, with respect to beauty, is to man as 3 to 2.</p> - -<p>"If, from the body, we pass to the mind and conscience, -woman, through her beauty, will be revealed -with new advantages."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>The mind of woman is <i>more intuitive, more concrete, -finer than that of man</i>; "it seems to man, and is in fact, -more circumspect, more <i>prudent</i>, more reserved, <i>wiser</i>, -more equable; it was <i>Minerva</i>, the protectress of Achilles -and Ulysses, who appeased the fury of the one, <i>and -shamed the other of his paradoxes and profligacies</i>; it -is the Virgin whom the Christian litany calls <i>the seat -of wisdom</i>.</p> - -<p>"The quality of the feminine mind has the effect of -serving the genius of man as a radiator, by reflecting -his thoughts at an angle which makes them appear more -beautiful if they are correct, more absurd if they are -false; consequently, of simplifying our knowledge and -condensing it into simple propositions, easy to seize upon -as simple facts, and the intuitive, aphoristic, imaged -comprehension of which, <i>while giving woman a share -in the philosophy and the speculations of man</i>, makes -their memory clearer to him, their digestion more easy... -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_90"> 90</a></span> -<i>There is not a man among the most learned, the -most inventive, the most profound, who does not feel a -sort of refreshment from conversation with women</i>....</p> - -<p>"Popularizers are generally minds of the feminine -type; but man does not like to be subservient to the -glory of man, and provident Nature has assigned this -part to woman.</p> - -<p>"Let her speak, then, <i>let her write, even, I authorize -and invite her to do so</i>; but let her do it according to -the measure of her feminine intelligence, since it is on -this condition that she can serve us, and <i>please</i> us, -<i>otherwise I withdraw the permission</i>.</p> - -<p>"Man has strength; but that constancy of which he -boasts overmuch, he derives especially from woman.... -Through her he endures, and learns true heroism. -<i>Upon occasion, she can set him the example of it</i>; -she will be, then, <i>more sublime than he</i>.</p> - -<p>"Woman will render the law kind, and will convert -this two-edged sword into an olive branch.... There -is no justice without tolerance; now, it is in the exercise -of tolerance that woman excels; by the sensibility -of her heart and the delicacy of her impressions, by the -tenderness of her soul, by her love, in fine, she will -blunt the sharp angles of justice, destroy its asperities, -of a divinity of terror make a divinity of peace. Justice, -the mother of Peace, would be only a cause of disunion -to humanity, were it not for this tempering which -she receives especially from woman."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>And what chastity does woman possess! With what -constancy she awaits her betrothed! What continence -she observes during the absence or sickness of her husband! -Ah! "woman alone knows how to be modest.... -Through this modesty, which is her most precious -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_91"> 91</a></span> -prerogative, she triumphs over the transports of man, -and ravishes his heart."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>And what wisdom in her choice of the companion of -her life!</p> - -<p>"She desires man to be strong, valiant, ingenious; -she turns from him if he is mincing and delicate."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Now, my unloved, indocile, and very irreverent disciple, -let us recapitulate.</p> - -<p>Woman, with respect to physical, intellectual and -moral beauty, is to man as 3 to 2; "thus it may be -said, indeed, that between man and woman there exists -a certain equivalence, arising from their respective comparison, -in the two-fold point of view of strength and -beauty; if, by labor, genius, and justice, man is to woman -as 27 to 8, in her turn, by graces of form and -mind, by amenity of character and tenderness of heart, -she is to man as 27 to 8.... But these respective -qualities are incommutable, cannot be the subject of -any contract....</p> - -<p>"Now, as every question of preponderance in the -government of human life is within the jurisdiction -either of the economical order, or of the philosophical or -judicial order, it is evident that superiority of beauty, -even of that which is intellectual and moral, cannot create -a compensation for woman, whose condition is thus -made fatally subordinate."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Do you understand me now?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> I understand that this is pure sophistry, a -thing easily demonstrated; that if your <i>thesis</i> is absurd, -your <i>antithesis</i>, however complimentary it may be, is -quite as much so; that you have piled contradictions -upon contradictions, and that it is a sad spectacle to me -to see so strong and fine an intellect as yours abandon -itself to such practices.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_92"> 92</a></span> -You shall judge for yourself whether my reproaches -and regrets are well founded.</p> - -<p>In the <i>Thesis</i> you say: man alone is in himself intelligent -and just, he alone is adequate to his destiny. -Woman has no reason for existing; without man, she -<i>would not emerge from the bestial condition</i>.</p> - -<p>In the <i>Antithesis</i>: without woman, who is the principle -of animation of man, the motive power of all science, -of all art, of all industry, of all virtue—without -woman, who renders justice possible, thought comprehensible -and applicable, man, far from being in himself -just, intelligent, a worker, would be but a brute, <i>who -would violate his female, strangle his little ones, and -pursue his fellow men in order to devour them</i>.</p> - -<p>What follows from these divergent affirmations? -That if woman alone is inadequate to her destiny, man -alone is inadequate to his, and that the adequateness of -both is caused by the synthesis of their respective qualities.</p> - -<p>It also follows, by your own admission, that man -receives as much from woman as she receives from him, -since, if he rescues her from the bestial state, she rescues -him from the state of brute ferocity.</p> - -<p>It follows, lastly, by your own admission, that there -is equivalence between the respective qualities of the -two sexes. Only you pretend that these qualities cannot -be measured by each other, and cannot therefore -be subject for contract, and that the qualities of -man being more important to the social state than those -of woman, the latter should be subordinated to the -former.</p> - -<p>Tell me, is there commutability between the qualities -that distinguish men from each other?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_93"> 93</a></span> -Between the man of genius and the humble rag-picker?</p> - -<p>Between the philosopher who elevates the human -mind and the porter who does not even know how to -read?</p> - -<p>Between the brain that discovers a great natural -law and the one that reflects on nothing?</p> - -<p>To answer affirmatively is impossible: for we only -compare things of the same nature.</p> - -<p>Now, if there can be no commutability between individuals -so different, is there not, according to your system, -subject for social contract between them?</p> - -<p>Why then do you claim that these men should be -<i>equal socially</i>?</p> - -<p>Why then do you admit that they may associate -things in a private contract which cannot be subjected -to a common measure?</p> - -<p>There is no need to be learned in philosophy or economy -to know <i>that any contract whatsoever is an admission -of personal insufficiency</i>; that we would not enter -into partnership with others if we could dispense with -them; and that in general the design of the contracting -parties is <i>to establish commutability where it has not -been established by the nature of things</i>.</p> - -<p>To a common work, one brings his idea, another his -hands, a third, his money, a fourth, custom: if each of -the parties had had all these combined, no one would -have thought of forming a partnership: a happy insufficiency -brought them together, and caused them to -establish equivalence between the shares of capital which -could not be subjected to a common measure.</p> - -<p>Were it true, therefore, that the qualities of the sexes -differ as you pretend, then, as through this same difference, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_94"> 94</a></span> -they are <i>equally</i> necessary to the collective work, -they are <i>essentially</i> subject to contract, and <i>equivalent</i>.</p> - -<p>But do they differ as you say? You know the answer -of <i>science</i> and <i>facts</i>. We will not return to it. -All your distinctions of beauty and strength are only -imaginary classifications. We all know that of eighteen -millions of Frenchmen, at the present time, we have a -few men of genius, absorbed in specialties, a few more -men of talent, perhaps not four philosophers, mediocrities -in abundance, and an immense host of cyphers. It -is mockery, therefore, to establish the right of prepotency -of a sex from qualities which, on the one hand, -do not exist in each of its members, and, on the other, -are often found in the highest degree in the sex which -it is claimed to reduce to subjection.</p> - -<p>Besides, did your sex possess the qualities which you -ascribe to it, to the exclusion of mine; since, by your -admission, there would be neither civilization, nor science, -nor art, nor justice, without the qualities you -term peculiar to woman; and since, without these qualities, -man would be only a brute and an anthropophagus, -it thence follows that woman is <i>at least</i> the equivalent of -man, if not his superior.</p> - -<p>Let us now notice a few of your contradictions.</p> - -<p>1st <i>Thesis</i>. Woman is a sort of mean term between -man and the rest of the animal kingdom.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> No; woman is the idealisation of man, -in that which is purest and most sublime in him.</p> - -<p>2d <i>Thesis</i>. Woman is an inert creature, devoid of -understanding, that has no reason for existing.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> No; woman is the animating principle -of man; without her, he could not fulfil his destiny; -she is the motive power of all justice, all science, all -industry, all civilization, all virtue.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_95"> 95</a></span> -3d <i>Thesis</i>. Woman does not know how to express -an opinion in set terms, or to assign reasons for it; she -has only disconnected ideas, erroneous reasonings; she -mistakes chimeras for realities, composes nothing but -medleys, monsters.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> No; the intellect of woman is finer than -that of man; she has a wiser, more prudent, more reserved -mind; she is the foil of masculine ideas. She is -Minerva shaming Ulysses for his paradoxes and profligacies; -she is the seat of wisdom.</p> - -<p>4th <i>Thesis</i>. Without the magnetic influence of man, -woman would not emerge from the bestial state.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> Without the magnetic influence of woman, -man would be but a ferocious beast.</p> - -<p>5th <i>Thesis</i>. The woman who philosophises and -writes, destroys her progeny; she had better go iron -her collars; she is good for nothing but to be concubine -or courtesan.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> Woman should participate in the philosophy -and speculations of man, and popularize them by -her writings.</p> - -<p>6th <i>Thesis</i>. The conversation of woman exhausts, -enervates; he who wishes to preserve intact the force -of his mind and body, will flee her.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> The conversation of woman refreshes -the most eminent men.</p> - -<p>7th <i>Thesis</i>. Woman has an infirm conscience; she -is immoral, anti-judicial; she is worth nothing as to -moral responsibility until forty-five years of age.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> Woman is the mirror of the conscience -of man, the incarnation of this conscience; through her -alone justice becomes possible; she is the guardian of -morals; she is superior to man in moral beauty.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_96"> 96</a></span> -8th <i>Thesis</i>. Woman is without virtue.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> Woman excels in tolerance; through -her, man learns constancy and true heroism.</p> - -<p>9th <i>Thesis</i>. Woman is immodest: she takes the -initiative in affairs of love.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> Woman alone knows how to be modest; -in principle, there are no impure women; woman calms -the sensual passions of man.</p> - -<p>10th <i>Thesis</i>. Woman prefers an ugly, old, and -wicked man.</p> - -<p>No; woman prefers a pretty, mincing puppet, a beau.</p> - -<p><i>Antithesis.</i> No; woman wishes man strong, valiant, -ingenious; she turns from him when he is but a pretty, -mincing puppet, a beau.</p> - -<p>I might go on thus to a hundred, and then make a -cross to begin another hundred. Can it be possible -that you trifle in this manner with your readers?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> The contradiction is not in my thought, -but only in the terms. The woman of my thesis is she -who has not been subjected to masculine magnetism, to -which the woman of my antithesis, on the contrary, has -been subjected.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> You would have reason to laugh at us, -should we take such an answer in earnest. What! have -you seen women outside of society, who would have -taken men for monkeys?</p> - -<p>Have you proved that in this menagerie, they think -falsely, they write badly, they are worth nothing as to -conscience until forty-five years of age?</p> - -<p>That there, in the absence of men, the women take -the initiative in affairs of love?</p> - -<p>That the conversation of these women exhausts, enervates -the men who are not there?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_97"> 97</a></span> -That these women prefer the old, ugly and wicked -men, or the pretty, mincing puppets, who are not at -their disposal?</p> - -<p>If the woman of your thesis is the one who has not -been subjected to masculine influence, why do you take -the women whom you attack from among those who -have been subjected to it?</p> - -<p>Your contradictions, Master, are genuine and fair -contradictions. For you as for us, there is but one woman: -she who lives in the society of man, who has, -like him, faults and vices, and who influences him as -much as she is influenced by him: the other has never -existed except in the brain of mystics and of victims of -hallucination.</p> - -<p>But we will leave this.</p> - -<p>I have been told that you have spoken of love: it -would seem to me impossible, did I not know your -audacity.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> I have spoken of it, as well as of Marriage.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Well! let us make a little excursion into -these two territories. We will first speak of Love.</p> - -<p class="subh">V.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Love!... It wearies and annoys me -greatly. I have never yet been able to make my ideas -agree on this subject.</p> - -<p>I at first defined love: "the attraction of the two -sexes towards each other with a view to reproduction," -adding that this attraction becomes purified by the adjunction -of the Ideal. I even made a most beautiful -discovery with respect to this, namely: that there is a -sexual division because it is impossible to idealize anything -but the objective.—<i>Vol.</i> III.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_98"> 98</a></span> -<span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> How you run on! Then all of the animal -and vegetable species in which the sexes are separated -have an ideal in love? An ideal in the brain of -a horse or a mare may pass, since there is a brain; but -where will you lodge that of the male and female flower?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> On my honor, I never thought of asking -myself that question. We will return, if you -please, to the definition of human love. I say, then, -that love is an attraction given with a view to reproduction; -notwithstanding, I think, also, that to love, -properly called, progeny is odious.—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> But this is a contradiction...</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Am I to blame for that! You know, -that in my eyes, man and woman form <i>the organ of -justice, the humanitary Androgynus</i>. Now I affirm -that love is the moving power of justice, because it is -this that attracts towards each other the two halves of -the couple. It is through love, therefore, that the conscience -of man and woman is opened to the knowledge -of justice, which does not hinder it from being "the -most powerful fatality by which nature could have -found the secret of obscuring reason within us, of afflicting -the conscience, and of chaining the free will."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> The moving power of justice, the sentiment -which opens the conscience of the sexes to justice, -and which forms the judicial organ, disturbs the reason -and afflicts the conscience! But this is a contradiction.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Once more, am I to blame for it? -Love, sought for itself, renders man unworthy, and woman -vile; and stop! "love, even when sanctioned by -justice, I do not like."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Have you not said that without the love -inspired in man by the beauty of woman, there would -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_99"> 99</a></span> -be neither art, nor science, nor industry, nor justice; -that man would be only a brute?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Ah! I have said much more!... -This love, the motor of justice, the father of civilization, -is, notwithstanding, <i>the abolition of justice</i>, which -exacts that it should be cast aside as soon as its office of -motor is performed. The impulse, the movement given, -it must be dispensed with. In marriage, it should play -the smallest part possible; "all amorous conversation, -even between betrothed lovers, even between husband -and wife, is indecorous, destructive of domestic respect, -of the love of labor and the practice of social duty." A -marriage of pure inclination is nearly allied to shame, -and "the father that gives his consent to it is deserving -of censure."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A father deserving of censure because he -unites those who yield to the motive power of justice!</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Let young people marry without repugnance, -that is right.... But "when a son, a daughter, -to satisfy inclination, tramples under foot the wishes -of the father, disinheritance is his first right and most -sacred duty."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Thus love, the motor of justice, the cause -of civilization, the necessity for reproduction, is at the -same time a thing of shame which should be feared and -banished from marriage, and that, in certain cases, deserves -disinheritance!... May the gods bless your -contradictions, and posterity pass lightly over them!</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> I can say nothing more satisfactory on -the subject; but, let us talk of marriage; I am strong -indeed on that point.</p> - -<p>Every function supposes an organ; man is the organ -of liberty; but justice exacts an organ composed of two -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_100"> 100</a></span> -terms: the couple. It is necessary that the two persons -that compose it should be dissimilar and unequal, "because, -if they were alike, they would not be completed -by each other; they would be two beings wholly independent, -without reciprocal action, incapable, through -this cause, to produce justice.... In principle, there -is no difference between man and woman, except a simple -diminution of energy in their faculties.</p> - -<p>"Man is stronger, woman is weaker, that is all.... -Man is the power of that of which woman is the ideal, -and reciprocally, woman is the ideal of that of which -man is the power."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Androgyny laid down, I define marriage to be: "the -sacrament of justice, the living mystery of universal -harmony; the form given by nature itself to the religion -of the human race. In a lower sphere, marriage -is the act by which man and woman, elevating themselves -above love and the senses, declare their wish to -be united according to the law, and, as far as in them -lies, to pursue the social destiny, by laboring for the -Progress of Justice.</p> - -<p>"In this family religion, it may be said that the father -is the priest, the wife the god, the children the people.... -<i>All are in the hands of the father</i>, fed by his -labor, protected by his sword, subjected to his government, -<i>within the jurisdiction of his court</i>, heirs and -continuers of his thought.... <i>Woman remains subordinate -to man</i>, because she is an object of worship, and -because there is no common measure between the force -and the ideal.... Man will die for her, as he dies for -his faith and his gods, but he will keep for himself the -command and the responsibility."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>In result, the spouses are equal, since there is community -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_101"> 101</a></span> -of fortune, of honor, of absolute devotion; "<i>in -principle and practice</i> ... this equality does not exist, -<i>cannot exist</i>.... The equality of rights supposing an -equilibrium between the advantages with which Nature -has endowed woman and the more powerful faculties of -man, the result would be that woman, instead of being -elevated by this equilibrium, would be denaturalized, -debased. By the ideality of her being, woman is, so to -speak, beyond price.... That she may preserve this -inestimable charm, which is not a positive faculty in her, -but a quality, a manner, a state, she must accept the -law of marital power: <i>equality would render her odious</i>, -would be the dissolution of marriage, the death of -love, <i>the destruction of the human race</i>.</p> - -<p>"And the glory of man consists in reigning over this -admirable creature, in being able to say: she is myself -idealized, she is more than I, and, notwithstanding, -would be nothing without me.... In spite of this or -on account of this, I am and ought to remain the head -of the community; if I yield the command to her, she -becomes debased and we perish."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>Marriage should be monogamous, "because conscience -is common between the spouses, and because it -cannot, without being dissolved, admit a third participant."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>It should be indissoluble, because conscience is immutable, -and the spouses could not procure an exchange -<i>without being guilty of sacrilege</i>. If they are obliged -to separate, "the deserving one needs only to heal the -wounds made in his heart and conscience, the other has -no longer the right to aspire to marriage, but must be -content with concubinage."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>What do you think of this theory?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_102"> 102</a></span> -<span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Hitherto I have refused to believe in the -god Proteus; but on contemplating you, Master, I abjure -my incredulity.</p> - -<p>You appear to us first under the garb and form of -Manou, and we discuss his physiology;</p> - -<p>You appear to us next, successively, in the shape and -vestments of Moses, St. Thomas Aquinas, and St. Bonaventure; -you are incarnated for a moment in Paracelsus;</p> - -<p>Lastly, you put on the Roman toga, over which you -wrap the ungraceful robe of Auguste Comte.</p> - -<p>All this is too old, too unsightly for our age.... -Have you really nothing better to give us than the -resurrection of the Roman law at the glorious time when -Cincinnatus ate his dish of lentils stark naked?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> What! do you dispute that marriage -by <i>confarreation is not the masterpiece of the human -conscience</i>?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Do I dispute it? Yes, indeed, and many -other things beside. But tell me, what meaning do you -give to the words <i>sacrament</i> and <i>mystery</i>, that sound so -hollow and false from your lips?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Despite all my explanations concerning -marriage, there nevertheless remains a mystery with -respect to it. This is all I can tell you in elucidation. -You must comprehend that "marriage is an institution -<i>sui generis</i>, formed at the same time at the tribunal of -human justice by contract, and at the spiritual tribunal -by sacrament, and which perishes as soon as the one or -the other of these two elements disappears."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>You must also comprehend that "marriage is a function -of humanity, outside of which love becomes a -scourge, the distinction of the sexes has no longer any -meaning, the perpetuation of the species becomes a real -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_103"> 103</a></span> -injury to the living, <i>justice is contrary to nature and -the plan of the creation is absurd</i>."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> The plan of the creation absurd, and justice -contrary to nature without marriage! What does -this mean in plain language?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> What! Is your intellect so feeble that -it does not comprehend that, without marriage, there is -not, there cannot be justice?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Then marriage is necessary to all?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> No; but "all participate in it and receive -its influence through filiation, consanguinity, adoption -which, universal in its essence, in order to act, has -no need of cohabitation.... In the animic or spiritual -point of view, marriage is to each of us a condition of -felicity.... Every adult, healthy in mind and body, -whom solitude or abstraction has not sequestered from -the rest of mankind, loves, and by virtue of this love, -contracts marriage in his heart.... Justice, which is -the end of love, and which can be obtained either by -domestic initiation, by civic communion, or, lastly, by -mystical love," suffices "for happiness in every condition -of age and fortune."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>And do not confound marriage with any other union, -with concubinage, for example, "which is the mark of -a feeble conscience." I do not however condemn the -concubinary, for "society is not the work of a day, virtue -is difficult to practise, without speaking of those to -whom marriage is <i>inaccessible</i>."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>In my opinion, it is for the interest of woman, of -children, and of morals, that concubinage should be -regulated by legislation. Every child should bear the -name of the concubinary father, who should provide for -his subsistence and for the expenses of his education; -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_104"> 104</a></span> -"the forsaken concubine should also have a right to an -indemnity, unless she has been the first to enter into -another concubinage."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>But it is not from concubinage, but from marriage -that all justice, all right proceeds. This is so true, -that if you "take away marriage, the mother is left -with her tenderness, but without authority, without -rights: <i>she can no longer do justice to her son</i>; there -is illegitimacy, a first step backward, a return to immorality."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> All that you have just said concerning -love, marriage, justice and right, contains so many -equivocations, errors, sophisms, and so much pathos, -that nothing less than a huge volume would suffice to -refute, after first explaining you. We will content -ourselves, therefore, with dwelling on the principal -points.</p> - -<p class="subh">VI.</p> - -<p>1. The Androgynus, by definition, is a being combining -the two sexes. Now marriage does not make of -man and woman <i>a single being</i>; each preserves his individuality; -your humanitary Androgynus is not therefore -worth the trouble of discussion; it is only a fantasy.</p> - -<p>2. Every organ supposes a function, it is true, but -what <i>facts</i> authorize you to say that the married couple -is the organ of justice? Especially when you take the -trouble to contradict yourself, in admitting that justice -is produced outside of marriage; that there is no need -of being married to be just?</p> - -<p>The organ of justice, like all other organs, is in -each of us; it is the moral sense which comes into action -when the point in question is the appreciation of the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_105"> 105</a></span> -moral value of an act, or to apply to our own conduct -the moral science accepted by the reason of the age.</p> - -<p>3. According to you, equilibrium is <i>equality</i>; <i>equality -is justice</i>: there is, therefore, a contradiction on your -part in exacting of two beings, endowed each with liberty, -will and intellect, that they should acknowledge -themselves <i>unequal</i> to produce <i>equality</i>.</p> - -<p>4. To affirm, as you have done, that progress is the -realization of the ideal through free will; that, consequently, -the ideal is superior to the reality, and that -man progresses because he suffers himself to be guided -by it; then to affirm that woman is the ideal of man -and that, notwithstanding, she is <i>less</i> and should <i>obey</i>, -is a double contradiction. If the point from which you -start be admitted, logic would exact that man should -permit himself to be guided by woman. But what is -the use of discussing a thing that is devoid of meaning -to the intellect? If man, according to you, represents -in reality strength, reason, justice, woman being the -idealization of man, would therefore represent the greatest -strength, the loftiest reason, the most sublime justice.... -Do you pretend to say this, you who affirm the -contrary?</p> - -<p>5. To say that marriage is an institution <i>sui generis</i>, -a <i>sacrament</i>, a <i>mystery</i>, is to affirm what? And what -enlightenment do you fancy that you have given us? -Are you fully sure of comprehending yourself better -than we comprehend you? I doubt it.</p> - -<p>6. Can you demonstrate why, in an association between -strong, intelligent men, and weak, narrow-minded -men, justice exacts <i>equality</i>, respect for the dignity of -all, and declares the slave <i>debased</i> who submits; whilst -in the association of man and woman, <i>identical in species</i> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_106"> 106</a></span> -according to you, the woman who is always, according -to you, the weak and narrow-minded being, -would be <i>debased</i> and would become <i>odious</i> by equality?</p> - -<p>7. Can you explain also how, in a couple which stands -for the producer of justice or equality, this equality -<i>would be the death of love and the destruction of the -human race</i>?</p> - -<p>Grant that such a farrago of nonsense and contradictions -presents as many unfathomable <i>mysteries</i> as your -marriage.</p> - -<p>We will say nothing of divorce: we leave it to modern -reason and conscience whether the dissolution of -morals and of the family, due in a great measure to the -indissolubility of marriage, does not give cause that it -should be granted. What reasons do you give, besides, -to support your opinions? An absurdity: that the rupture -of marriage is <i>sacrilege</i>; an affirmation contradicted -by facts: that conscience is immutable.</p> - -<p>8. Between the bastard and his mother, there is no -justice, say you. Your conscience is younger by two -thousand and some hundred years than the modern conscience. -In the work of reproduction, the task to be -performed with reference to the new being, is divided -between the parents. On the woman, as the more vital, -more elastic, and more resisting, devolves the more perilous -part of this task. You shall risk your life to form -humanity from your own substance, says Nature to her. -To the man it belongs to pay his debt to his children -by erecting the roof under which they take shelter, by -bringing the food which you elaborate or prepare for -them. To him it belongs to accomplish his duty towards -his sons by the use of his strength, as you accomplish -yours by supplying them with your blood and your milk.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_107"> 107</a></span> -Your rights over the child arise, adds conscience, -from his incapacity to take care of himself, from the -duties which you fulfil towards him, from the obligation -under which you are placed to form his reason -and conscience, and to make him a useful and moral -citizen.</p> - -<p>Well, what happens most of the time, in cases of illegitimacy? -That the father having weakly, cruelly, contrary -to all justice, deserted his task, the mother performs -double duty towards her children: <i>she is at once -father and mother</i>.</p> - -<p>And it is when this mother has a <i>double</i> right that -you dare to say that she has <i>none</i>! that between her -and her son there is no justice! In truth, I should -rather live among savages than in a society that thinks -and <i>feels</i> like you.</p> - -<p>A mother has an incontestable right over her child, -for she has risked her own life to give it birth: the -father acquires rights over it only when ever he fulfils -his duty; when he does not fulfil it, he has no right; -thus says reason. In this question, marriage signifies -nothing. If I were illegitimate, and my father had -basely abandoned me, I should despise and hate him as -the executioner of my mother; as a man without heart -and conscience, a vile egotist; and I should doubly love -and respect her who had been at once my mother and -my father. Such are the dictates of my conscience, my -reason, and my heart.</p> - -<p>9. What is your marriage, <i>the first form given by -Nature to the religion of the human race</i>, in which woman -is an idol who does the cooking and mends the -stockings of her priest?</p> - -<p>What is this institution, in which man is reputed to -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_108"> 108</a></span> -defend his wife and children with his sword, whom the -law defends, even against him?</p> - -<p>In which man is reputed to support by his labor those -who often labor more than he, or who bring him a -dowry?</p> - -<p><i>The wife and children are under the jurisdiction of -the tribunal of man!</i> May the gods preserve us from -this frightful return to the manners and customs of the -patriarchs and Romans. Women and children are under -the jurisdiction of the social tribunal, and it is safer -for them: the French wife has not at least to fear that -her Abraham will sacrifice her little Isaac, nor that her -domestic despot, leaving the child on the ground, like -the ancient Roman, will thus condemn it to death. Society -has a heart and generous proctors who, happily, -no longer see the family tribunal in the same light as -Proudhon. It is true that our author is an Epimenides, -awaking after a sleep of more than two thousand years.</p> - -<p>I have finished, Master; have you anything more to -say?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Certainly. I have to speak of the sphere -of woman. This sphere is "the care of the household, -the education of childhood, the instruction of young -girls under the superintendence of the magistrates, the -service of public charity. We dare not add the national -festivals and spectacles, which might be considered as -the seed-time of love.</p> - -<p>"Man is the worker, woman the housewife.</p> - -<p>"The household is the full manifestation of woman.</p> - -<p>"For woman, the household is an honorable necessity.</p> - -<p>"As all her literary productions are always reduced -to a domestic novel, the whole value of which is to -serve, through love and sentiment, to the popularization -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_109"> 109</a></span> -of justice, so her industrial production is brought back -in conclusion, to the labors of the household; she will -never depart from this circle."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Pardon my astonishment, Master, that -woman, whose mind is <i>irremediably false</i>, who is <i>immoral</i>, -who composes nothing but <i>medleys</i>, <i>monsters</i>, -who <i>takes chimeras for realities, who does not even -know how to write a novel</i>, knows how, notwithstanding, -by your own admission, to write a novel in order -to popularize justice through sentiment and love. She -therefore comprehends, feels, and loves justice?</p> - -<p>I remark next, that the cares of the household are -<i>labor</i>;</p> - -<p>That education is <i>labor</i>;</p> - -<p>That the service of public charity is <i>labor</i>;</p> - -<p>That the arrangement and superintendence of festivals -and spectacles presume varied <i>labors</i>;</p> - -<p>That to popularize justice through a domestic novel -is <i>labor</i>;</p> - -<p>Whence it follows that woman is a <i>worker</i>, that is, a -useful producer; she differs from man, therefore, merely -in the kind of production; and we have only to ascertain -whether the labor of woman is as useful to society -as that of man. I charge myself, when you like, with -establishing this <i>equivalence</i> by <i>facts</i>.</p> - -<p>I remark, in the second place, that the education of -childhood, the instruction of young girls, the service of -public charity, the arrangement of festivals and spectacles, -the popularization of justice by literature, do not -form a part of the labors of the household; and that -woman, therefore, is not <i>merely housewife</i>.</p> - -<p>I remark, thirdly, that our female superintendents, -merchants, artists, accountants, clerks, and professors, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_110"> 110</a></span> -are no more housewives than your male superintendents, -merchants, artists, book keepers, clerks, and professors; -that our female cooks and waiting-maids are no -more housewives, than your male cooks, bakers, confectioners, -and footmen; that, in all these functions, and -in many others, women equal men, which proves that -they are not less fitted than you for employments that -do not pertain to the household, and that you are not -less adapted than they to those that do pertain to it. -Rude facts thus stifle your affirmations, and show us -that woman may be <i>something else than housewife or -courtesan</i>.</p> - -<p>Lastly, Master, what is the position of all women -relatively to all men?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Inferiority; for the entire feminine sex -fills the place with regard to the other sex, in certain -respects, of the wife with regard to the husband: this -proceeds from the sum total of the respective faculties.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> So there is neither liberty nor equality -even for the woman who has not a father or husband?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "The truly free woman is the woman -who is chaste; the chaste woman is she who experiences -no amorous emotion for any one, <i>not even for her -husband</i>."—<i>Vol.</i> III.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Such a woman is not chaste: she is a -statue. Chastity being a <i>virtue</i>, supposes the dominion -of the reason and the moral sense over an instinct: -the chaste woman, therefore, is she who controls a certain -instinct, not she who is destitute of it. I add that -the woman who yields herself to her husband without -attraction, plays the part of a prostitute. I knew well -that you understood nothing either of love or of woman!</p> - -<p>Shall we, in conclusion, compare your doctrine concerning -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_111"> 111</a></span> -the right of woman with that which you profess -concerning right in general?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Willingly ... since I cannot do otherwise.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Do you admit that woman is identical in -species with man?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Yes, only her faculties are less energetic.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> I grant you this for the sake of discussion. -Expound your general theory concerning right, I will -apply it to woman, and you shall draw the conclusion.</p> - - -<p class="subh">VII.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "The law regulating only human relations, -<i>it is the same for all</i>; so that, to establish exceptions, -it will be necessary to prove that the individuals -excepted are of superior order, or inferior to the human -species."—<i>Creation of Order in Humanity.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now you admit that woman is neither -superior nor inferior to the human species, but is identical -in species with man; the law is therefore the same -for her as for man.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> I draw the contrary conclusion, <i>because -man is the stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "Neither figure, nor birth, nor <i>the -faculties</i>, nor fortune, nor rank, nor profession, nor talent, -<i>nor anything which distinguishes individuals apart</i>, -establishes between them a difference of species: all being -men, and the law only regulating human relations, -it is the same for all."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, woman is in essence identical with -man; she differs from him only in manners and qualities -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_112"> 112</a></span> -which, according to you, by no means make her -differ in essence; once more, therefore, the law is the -same for her as for man.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical; but I conclude the contrary, -<i>because man is the stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "Social equilibrium is the equalization -of the strong and the weak. So long as the strong and -the weak are not equal, they are <i>strangers</i>, they cannot -form an alliance, they are <i>enemies</i>."—1st <i>Memoir -on Property</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, according to you, man is the strong -and woman the weak of an identical species; social -equilibrium ought therefore to <i>equalize</i> them, that they -may be neither strangers nor enemies.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical; but I claim that they -should be <i>made unequal</i> in society and in marriage. -Man should have the prepotence, <i>because he is the -stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "From the identity of reason in all -men, and the sentiment of respect which leads them to -maintain their mutual dignity at any cost, follows equality -before justice."—(<i>Justice</i>, <i>Vol.</i> III, etc.) All are -born free: between individual liberties there is no other -judge than equilibrium, <i>which is equality</i>; the identity -of essence does not permit the creation of a hierarchy.—<i>Vol.</i> II, -the whole of the 8th <i>Study</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, woman is in essence identical with -man. She is born free; between her and man there is, -therefore, no other judge than equality; it is not permissible, -therefore, to establish a hierarchy between -them.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_113"> 113</a></span> -<span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical. But I conclude, on the -contrary, that it is necessary to create a hierarchy between -the sexes, and to give the prepotence to man, -<i>because he is the stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "The dignity of the human soul consists -in being unwilling to suffer any one of its powers -<i>to subordinate</i> the others, to require all to be at the service -of the collective whole; this is morality, this is -virtue. Whoever speaks of harmony or agreement, in -fact, necessarily supposes terms in opposition. Attempt -a hierarchy, a prepotence! <i>you think to create order, -you create nothing but absolutism.</i>"—<i>Justice</i>, <i>Vol.</i> II.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Woman, according to you, forms with -man an organism, that of justice. Now, according to -you, the two halves of the androgynus have different -qualities, which are required to harmonize with each -other in equality under pain of creating absolutism instead -of order; the feminine faculty is therefore required -to form an equipoise with the masculine faculty.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical; but I conclude that the -dignity of the humanitary androgynus lies in subjugating -the feminine faculty and creating despotism, <i>because -man is the stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "Justice is the respect spontaneously -felt for and <i>reciprocally guarantied</i> to human dignity, -in <i>whatever person</i> and whatever circumstance it may -be found compromised."—<i>Justice</i>, <i>Vol.</i> I.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, woman is a human being, possessing -a dignity which should be respected and guarantied by -the law of reciprocity; therefore one cannot be wanting -in respect to feminine dignity without being wanting in -justice.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_114"> 114</a></span> -<span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical; but although woman is a -human being, identical in species with man, and although -I believe that there is no other basis of right -than equality, I nevertheless affirm that the dignity of -woman is inferior to that of man, <i>because he is the -stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "Right is to each the faculty of exacting -from others respect for human dignity in his person," -duty is "the obligation of each to respect this -dignity in another."—<i>Justice</i>, <i>Vol.</i> I.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, woman being identical in species, -man possesses a dignity <i>equal</i> to hers; therefore she -should be respected in her dignity, that is, in her person, -her liberty, her property, her affections; this is her -right as a human being, and man cannot deny it without -failing in justice and in his duty.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical. But I claim that woman -has not the right which my principles attribute to her; -that man alone has rights, <i>because man is the stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "Liberty is an <i>absolute</i> right, because it -is to man what impenetrability is to matter, a condition -<i>sine qua non</i> of existence."—1st <i>Memoir on Property</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, woman is a human being, she has -therefore an <i>absolute</i> right to liberty, which is her condition -<i>sine qua non</i> of existence.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical. But I conclude, on the -contrary, that woman has no need of liberty; that this -condition <i>sine qua non</i> of existence for our species, does -not regard one half of the species; that man alone cannot -exist without liberty, <i>because he is the stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A contradiction, Master.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_115"> 115</a></span> -<span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> "Equality is an absolute right, <i>because -without equality, there is no society</i>."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, woman is a human and social being; -she has an absolute right, therefore, to this equality, -without which she would be but a Pariah in society.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> It is logical. But I nevertheless conclude -from this that woman has no more right to equality -than to liberty. That, although of the same species -as man, and consequently amenable to the law of equality, -nevertheless she is not amenable to it, and should -be unequal and in subjection to man, <i>because he is the -stronger</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Fie, Master! To contradict yourself thus -is disgraceful to your reputation. It would be better to -maintain that woman has not the same rights as man, -because she is of a different species.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> Woman is bound to feel that she does -not possess a dignity equal to that of man; in the association -formed between them to produce justice, <i>the -notions of right and duty shall be no longer correlative</i>. -Man shall have all rights, and shall accept only such -duties as it shall please him to recognize. -</p> -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Reflect that man, after having denied the -dignity and the right of woman, will labor to stultify -her more and more in the interest of his despotism!</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">ROUDHON.</span> That does not concern me: the family -should be immured: the husband is priest and king -therein. If, as in the case with all liberty oppressed, -the woman grows restive, we will tell her <i>that she does -not know herself, that she is incapable of judging and -ruling herself</i>; that she is a cypher; we will outrage -her in her moral worth; we will deny her intellect and -activity: and by dint of intimidating her, we will succeed -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_116"> 116</a></span> -in forcing her to be silent: for man must remain -master, <i>since he is the stronger</i>!</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Deny and insult us, Master, this does us -no harm: the lords of the Middle Age employed this -method with their serfs, your sires ... we are now -indignant at them. Slaveholders employed and still -employ this method with the blacks, and the civilized -world is indignant at them, slavery is restricted, and is -on the way to disappear.</p> - -<p>Meanwhile, I point out your contradictions to my -readers; your authority over minds will be thereby lessened, -I hope.</p> - -<p>Those who claim, in accordance with the major of -the preceding syllogisms, that you found right upon -identity of species, an abstraction of individual qualities; -that you believe right and duty correlative; that you -desire equality and liberty, will be quite as nearly right -as those who claim, in accordance with the conclusion -of the same syllogisms, that you base right upon force, -superiority of faculties; that you accept inequality and -despotism, deny individual liberty and social equality, -and do not believe in the correlation of right and duty.</p> - -<p>If it is painful to you to have fallen into contradictions -so monstrous, believe that it is not less painful to -me to be forced, in the interest of my cause, to point -them out to the world.</p> - -<p>Having taken in hand the cause of my sex, I was -under obligations to parry your attacks by turning -against yourself your allegations against us.</p> - -<p>It was necessary to do this, not by denials and declamations -which prove nothing, or by affirmations without -proofs, according to your method of proceeding; but by -opposing to you science and facts; by making use only -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_117"> 117</a></span> -of the rational method which you extol without employing -it, by charging you often with contradicting yourself -when proofs <i>de facto</i> would have demanded too -much detail and time.</p> - -<p>You accuse women of <i>taking chimeras for realities</i>. -I have proved to you that you deserve this reproach, -since your theory is in contradiction to science and -facts.</p> - -<p>You accuse women of <i>erecting unreal analogies into -principles</i>.... I have proved that you have done so -as well, in deducing from the <i>pretended</i> absence of physical -germs in woman, the absence of intellectual and -moral germs.</p> - -<p>You accuse woman of <i>reasoning wrongly</i>.... I -have brought you face to face with your own principles, -that you might draw from them contradictory conclusions.</p> - -<p>You accuse woman of creating nothing but <i>medleys, -monsters</i>.... The anatomy of your theory proves -that you know how to do so quite as well.</p> - -<p>You accuse woman of lacking intellect, of want of -justice, virtue, chastity.... I appeal from you to -yourself, and you say positively the contrary.</p> - -<p>Where you are fantastic, contradictory, I, <i>a woman</i>, -appeal to logic.</p> - -<p>Where you are wanting in method, I, <i>a woman</i>, employ -scientific and rational method.</p> - -<p>Where you contradict your own principles, I appeal -to these same principles to judge and condemn you.</p> - -<p>Which of us two is the more reasonable and more -rational?</p> - -<p>My modesty suffers, I acknowledge, at the thought -that I have played the part of <i>Minerva shaming Ulysses</i> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_118"> 118</a></span> -<i>of his paradoxes and his profligacies</i>. At last, this -tiresome part is ended!</p> - -<p>I have addressed so many harsh things to you in so -firm and resolute a tone, that I should be sorry to quit -you without a few friendly words coming from my -heart. You ought to be fully convinced of my sincerity, -for you see that you have to deal with a woman -who shrinks from no one; who is never intimidated, -however great may be her opponent, or whatever name -he may bear. You may be my adversary: I shall -never be your enemy, for I regard you as an honest -man, a vigorous thinker, one of the glories of France, -one of the great men of our Comté, always so dear to -the heart of her children; lastly, one of the admirations -of my youth. You and I belong to the great -army that is assaulting the citadel of abuse, and endeavoring -to mine and sap it; I do not shun this solidarity. -Is it so necessary that we should fight? Let -us live in peace; I can entreat it of you without stooping, -since I do not fear you. Understand one thing -that I tell you without bitterness: that you are incapable -of understanding woman, and that by continuing -the struggle, you will inevitably range her under the -banner of the anti-revolutionists.</p> - -<p>Your pride has set enmity between you and woman, -and you have bruised her heel: no one would be more -sorry than I to see her crush your head.</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_119"> 119</a></span></p> -<h2 class="normal">CHAPTER III.<br /> -<span class="medium">COMTE.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>What thought Auguste Comte, who died in September, -1857.</p> - -<p>To solve this question, it is necessary first to divide -the man into two parts; not as the wise king Solomon -designed to divide the child disputed for by two mothers, -but in thought, by making of him two distinct men; a -philosopher and a revealer.</p> - -<p>M. Comte, who denied and insulted his master, Saint -Simon, is only the popularizer of his recently edited -works: so much for the rational phase.</p> - -<p>What belongs to him exclusively is a socio-religious -organization, which cannot be the work of a healthy -mind.</p> - -<p>What belongs to him exclusively, is a heavy, dry, -insulting style, arrogant to the point of being revolting, -loaded and overloaded with adjectives and adverbs.</p> - -<p>What belongs to him exclusively, are a few ideas that -he has submerged in volumes, containing not less than -from seven hundred and fifty to eight hundred pages, in -small type. I do not advise you to peruse them, readers, -unless in your heart and soul you believe yourself -deserving of many years of purgatory, which you prefer -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_120"> 120</a></span> -to expiate on the earth ... I do not know -whether I ought to say above or below, since astronomy -has reversed the positions of the material and spiritual -worlds.</p> - -<p>The disciples of Comte are divided into two schools: -that of the Positivist Philosophers, and that of the -Priesthood.</p> - -<p>The first reject the religious organization of Comte, -and are in reality nothing but the children of modern -Philosophy, and very estimable adversaries of that nebulous -thing which is called Metaphysics. We could not -therefore have them in sight in this article; so, let not -M. Littré and his honorable friends frown in reading us: -we are about to find fault only with the high priest and -his priesthood.</p> - -<p>The doctrine of Comte concerning woman being -connected with the whole of his religious system, let us -first say a word about this system.</p> - -<p><i>There is no God; there is no soul</i>: the object of our -adoration should be Humanity, represented by the best -of our species....</p> - -<p>There are three social elements: woman, priest, and -man.</p> - -<p>Woman is the moral providence, the guardian of -morals.</p> - -<p>Had it not been for the wholly mystical love, I willingly -believe, that Comte had for Madame Clotilde -de Vaux, it is probable that woman would not have -been the <i>moral Providence</i>; thanks to this love, she is -nothing less than this. We will see that neither is she -anything more.</p> - -<p>Of a nature superior to that of man (in the opinion -of Comte), she is nevertheless subject to him, in -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_121"> 121</a></span> -consequence of a philosophical paradox which we need -not refute here.</p> - -<p>The function of woman is to render man <i>moral</i>; a -task which she can perform well only in private life; all -social and sacerdotal functions are therefore interdicted -her.</p> - -<p>She should be <i>preserved from labor</i>, should renounce -dowry and inheritance; man is charged with maintaining -her; daughter, she is supported by her father or -her brothers; wife, by her husband; widow, by her -sons. In default of her natural maintainers, the state, -<i>on the requisition of the priesthood</i>, provides for her -wants.</p> - -<p>Marriage is instituted for the perfecting of the married -couple, above all, for that of the man: the reproduction -of the species has so little to do with its end, -that the progress of science permits us to hope that, some -day, woman will be able <i>alone</i> to reproduce humanity, so -as to realize and to generalize the hypothesis of the Virgin -Mother. Then it will be possible to regulate human -production, by entrusting to none but the most deserving -women the task of conceiving children and bringing -them into the world, especially members of the priesthood.</p> - -<p>Divorce is not permitted, and widowhood is eternal -for both sexes.</p> - -<p>Such, in brief, is the Comtist doctrine concerning woman, -marriage and procreation. As the reader might -suspect us of malicious exaggeration, we entreat him to -read attentively the following pages, emanating from the -pen of the originator of the system.</p> - -<p>According to him, women have never demanded their -emancipation; the men who claim it for them are, after -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_122"> 122</a></span> -Comte's usual courteous style, nothing but <i>utopists -corrupted by retrogression</i>. "All transitional ages,' -he says, "have given rise, like our own, to sophistical -aberrations concerning the social condition of woman. -But the natural law which assigns to the effective sex -an existence essentially domestic, has never been materially -altered.... Women were then (in antiquity) -too low to reject worthily, even by their silence, the doctoral -aberrations of their pretended defenders.... But -among the moderns, the happy liberty of the western -women permits them to manifest a decisive repugnance -which is sufficient, in default of rational ratification, to -neutralize these wanderings of the mind, <i>inspired by the -intemperance of the heart</i>.</p> - -<p>"Without discussing unreal retrograde utopias, it is -of importance to feel, the better to appreciate real order, -that if women should ever obtain this temporal equality -demanded, without their consent, by their pretended -defenders, their social guaranties would suffer thereby -as much as their moral character. For they would find -themselves thus subjected, in the majority of occupations, -to an active daily competition which they could -not sustain, while at the same time the practical rivalry -would corrupt the principal sources of mutual affection. -Man should support woman, such is the natural law of -our species."—<i>Politique Positive</i>, t. I.</p> - -<p>"It is necessary to consider the just independence -of the affective sex as founded upon two connected conditions, -its universal affranchisement from labor outside -the household, and its free renunciation of all wealth....</p> - -<p>"Domestic priestesses of humanity, born to modify -by affection the necessary reign of force, they should -shun, as radically degrading, all participation in command."—<i>Id.</i> -t. IV.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_123"> 123</a></span> -"The moral degradation appears to me still greater -when woman enriches herself by her own labor. The -continued eagerness of gain makes her then lose even -that spontaneous kindness which preserves the other -type in the midst of its dissipations.</p> - -<p>"No worse industrial chiefs can exist than women."—<i>Caté.</i> -<i>Pos.</i></p> - -<p>So ladies, ye who prefer labor to prostitution, who -pass days and nights in providing for the wants of your -family, it is understood of course that you <i>are degraded</i>; -a woman ought not to do anything; respect and -honor belong to idleness.</p> - -<p>You, Victoria of England, Isabella of Spain,—you -command, therefore you <i>are radically degraded</i>.</p> - -<p>M. Comte pretends that masculine superiority is incontestable -in all that concerns the properly called -"source of command ... that the intellect of man is -stronger, more extended than that of woman.</p> - -<p>"A healthy appreciation of the universal order will -make the affective sex comprehend how important <i>submission</i> -is to dignity.</p> - -<p>"The priesthood will make women feel the merit of -<i>submission</i>, by developing this <i>admirable</i> maxim of -Aristotle: <i>the chief strength of woman consists in surmounting -the difficulty of obeying</i>; their education will -have prepared them to comprehend that all dominion, -far from really elevating, necessarily degrades them, by -depreciating their chief worth so as to expect from -strength the ascendancy which is due to love alone."—<i>Ibid.</i></p> - -<p>Here are a few pages from the system of Politique -Positive, t. IV., which are too curious not to interest -the reader.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_124"> 124</a></span> -"The better to characterize feminine independence, -I think it best to introduce a bold hypothesis, which human -progress perhaps will realize, although it is my -business neither to examine when nor how.</p> - -<p>"If the masculine apparatus contributes to our generation -only after a simple excitement, derived from its -organic destination, the possibility may be conceived of -replacing this stimulant <i>by another or several others, of -which the woman would dispose at will</i>. The absence -of such a faculty among the neighboring species cannot -be sufficient to interdict it to the most eminent and most -modifiable race....</p> - -<p>"If feminine independence can ever reach this limit, -in accordance with the sum total of moral, intellectual, -and even material progress, the social function of the -affective sex will be found notably improved. Then all -fluctuation between the animal appreciation which still -prevails, and the noble doctrine systematized by positivism, -would cease. The most essential production (that -of our species) would become independent of the -caprices of a perturbating instinct, the normal repression -of which has hitherto constituted the principal obstacle -to human discipline. Such a privilege would be naturally -found transferred, with full responsibility, to the -organs best fitted to its use, alone capable of guarding -themselves from vicious impulses, so as to realize all the -advantages that it permits."</p> - -<p>Which means in good English, my female readers, -that perhaps the time will come when you will create -children without the co-operation of these gentlemen; -that this function will be confided to those among you -who shall be most worthy of it, and that they will be -held responsible for the imperfection of the product.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_125"> 125</a></span> -"Thenceforth," resumes the author, "the utopia of -the Virgin Mother will become to the purest and most -eminent an ideal goal, directly suited to sum up human -perfection, thus carried even to systematizing procreation, -while ennobling it.... Success depends most of -all on the general development of the relations between -the soul and the body, its continued search (that of the -problem of fruitful virginity) will worthily institute the -systematic study of vital harmony, by procuring to it at -once the noblest aim and the best organs."—<i>Ibid.</i></p> - -<p>Translated: the study of the relations of the brain -with the body will lead us to discover the means of procreating -children without the co-operation of man; this -is the noblest aim of this study, as the faculty of being -a virgin mother should be the ideal which the purest -and most eminent women should seek to attain.</p> - -<p>"Thus," continues M. Comte, "I am led to represent -the utopia of the Virgin Mother as the synthetic -résume of positive religion, all the phases of which it -combines."—<i>Ibid.</i></p> - -<p>Translation: To procreate children without the concurrence -of man, <i>sums up positive religion, and combines -all its phases</i>.</p> - -<p>This may be very fine, but as to being <i>rational</i> and -<i>positive</i>—what do you think, readers?</p> - -<p>"The rationality of the problem," adds the author, -"is founded upon the determination of the true office -of the masculine apparatus, designed especially to supply -to the blood an excitative fluid, capable of strengthening -all the vital operations, whether animal or organic. -In comparison with this general service, the special use -of the fecundative stimulus becomes more and more -secondary in proportion as the organism is elevated. It -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_126"> 126</a></span> -may thus be conceived that in the noblest species, this -liquid ceases to be indispensable to the awakening of the -germ, which may result artificially from several other, -and even from material sources, especially from a better -reaction of the nervous upon the vascular system."—<i>Ibid.</i></p> - -<p>All this would be possible, I grant, <i>if</i> the fluid of -which you speak, High Priest, had, above all, the general -function which you attribute to it;</p> - -<p><i>If</i> the reproduction of our species by the co-operation -of the two sexes were not a <i>law</i>;</p> - -<p><i>If</i> we could preserve a species while destroying its -law;</p> - -<p><i>If</i> facts did not contradict the possibility of the hypothesis.</p> - -<p>Now, to place an <i>if</i> before a natural law and the phenomena -which are its expression, is only a gross absurdity: -we explain laws, we do not reform them without -profoundly modifying the being that they govern; we -do not destroy without destroying this being: for the -individual being is <i>the law in form</i>.</p> - -<p>The author dwells as follows on the consequences of -the absurd hypothesis.</p> - -<p>"Thence it may be conceived that civilization not -only disposes man better to appreciate woman, but augments -the participation of this sex in human reproduction, -which ought, finally, <i>to emanate from it alone</i>.</p> - -<p>"Regarded individually, such a modification ought to -improve the cerebral and corporal constitution of both -sexes, by developing therein continued chastity, the importance -of which has been felt more and more by universal -instinct, even during irregularities.—p. 277.</p> - -<p>"Considered domestically, this transformation would -render the constitution of the human family more in -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_127"> 127</a></span> -conformity with the general spirit of sociocracy, by -completing the just emancipation of woman, thus made, -even physically, independent of man. The normal -ascendancy of the affective sex would be no longer contestable -with respect to children <i>emanated from it exclusively</i>.</p> - -<p>"But the principal result would consist in perfecting -the fundamental institution of marriage (the improvement -of the married couple without sexual motive), the -positive theory of which would then become unexceptionable. -Thus purified, the conjugal tie would experience -an amelioration as marked as when Polygamy was -replaced by Monogamy: for we should generalize the -utopia of the Middle Age, in which Maternity was -reconciled with Virginity.</p> - -<p>"Regarded civilly, this institution alone permits the -regulation of the most important of productions, which -can never become sufficiently susceptible of systematization, -so long as it shall be accomplished in delirium and -without responsibility.</p> - -<p>"Reserved to its best organs, this function would perfect -the human race by better determining the transmission -of ameliorations due to external influences, -both social and personal.... Systematic procreation -coming to remain more or less concentrated -among the better types, the comparison of the two -cases would give rise not only to valuable enlightenment, -but also to an important institution which -would procure to sociocracy the principal advantage of -theocracy. For the development of the new mode -would soon cause a non-hereditary caste to spring up, -better adapted than the common populace <i>for the recruital -of spiritual and even temporal chiefs</i>, whose -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_128"> 128</a></span> -authority would then rest on a truly <i>superior</i> origin, -which would not shun investigation.</p> - -<p>All these indications will suffice to show the value -of the utopia of the Virgin Mother, destined to procure -to Positivism a synthetic résume, equivalent to -that which the institution of the Eucharist furnishes to -Catholicism."—<i>Ibid.</i></p> - -<p>It is much to be feared, alas! that the disciples of -this great man, however ardent seekers of <i>vital harmony</i> -they may be, will never find the <i>synthetic résume</i> -of Positivism, the <i>equivalent</i> of the Eucharist: and it -will be a great pity: to order children as we order shoes, -and leave them on the mother's hands when they do not -suit, would be very convenient.</p> - -<p>And what, I ask you, will the future leaders of humanity -do, if they can only obtain respect and obedience -on the condition of proving that they are <i>sons of -virgins</i>?</p> - -<p>But we will not jest with so grave a personage as the -High Priest of Humanity: we will only say in passing, -that never was atheist seen to show himself more profoundly -a Christian through contempt for works of the -flesh. Hear what he says on page 286 of the work -before cited:</p> - -<p>"Useless to individual conservation, the sexual instinct -co-operates only in an <i>accessory and even equivocal</i> -manner to the propagation of the species. Philosophers -truly freed from superstition should regard it more -and more as tending above all to disturb the principal -design of the vivifying fluid. But without waiting for -the feminine utopia to be realized, we may determine, -<i>if not the atrophy, at least the inertia of this cerebral -superfœtation</i>, with more facility than is indicated by the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_129"> 129</a></span> -insufficient efforts of theologism. While positive education -will make the vices of such an instinct everywhere -felt, and <i>will raise up the continued hope of its desuetude</i>, -the whole final system ought naturally to institute -a revulsive treatment with respect to it, more -efficacious than Catholic austerities. For the universal -aspiration of domestic existence and of public life will -develop the sympathetic faculties to such a degree, that -sentiment, intellect, and activity will always concur to -stigmatize and repress the most perturbing of selfish -propensities."</p> - -<p>Despite all this <i>aspiration</i>, and all these stigmas, do not -trust to it, High Priest! Be advised by me, use camphor, -and plenty of it; scatter it everywhere as a certain -Amphitryon scattered nutmeg.</p> - -<p>It is in prevision of the excommunications hurled by -you against this <i>vile</i>, this <i>useless</i> instinct, that Nature -has been prodigal of camphor.</p> - -<p>Upon the whole, you see, my female readers, that if -M. Comte believes us weaker than man in body, mind, -and character, in return, he believes us better.</p> - -<p>We are moral providence, guardian angels: he dreams -of affranchisement for us through the subversion of a -natural law.</p> - -<p>But meanwhile he places us under the yoke of man -by exempting us from labor;</p> - -<p>He rivets our chains by persuading us cajolingly to -despoil ourselves of our property;</p> - -<p>He says to us in the gentlest voice imaginable: never -command: it would degrade you;</p> - -<p>Your great strength is in obeying him whom <i>it is -your destiny to direct</i>.</p> - -<p>You will be naught in the temple, naught in the state.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_130"> 130</a></span> -In the family, you are domestic priestesses, the auxiliaries -of the priesthood.</p> - -<p>Three sacraments out of nine are refused you: that -of destiny, because, for you, it is confounded with that -of marriage; that of retirement, because you have no -profession; lastly, that of incorporation, because a woman -cannot, in herself, merit a personal and public apotheosis.</p> - -<p>If you have been worthy auxiliaries, you shall be interred -near those whom you shall have influenced, like -their other useful auxiliaries: the horse, the dog, the -cow, and the ass; and mention shall be made of you -when honors shall be paid to the member of humanity -to whom you shall have belonged.</p> - -<p>Shall we refute such doctrines? No. Our answer -to them finds a fitter place in the article devoted to M. -Proudhon, who has drawn largely from the doctrine -of M. Comte.</p> - -<p>As to the priests who continue the teachings of their -master, it suffices to refer them to what I said to M. -Comte in the <i>Revue Philosophique</i> of December, 1855.</p> - -<p>The women of the present time are in general intelligent, -because they receive an education superior to -that of their mothers. The majority of them devote -themselves to an active life either in the arts or the -trades; men acknowledge them as their competitors in -these, and even confess that they are superior in management. -No man, worthy of the name, would dare -contest that woman is his equal, and that the day of -her civil emancipation is close at hand.</p> - -<p>Women, on their side, more independent and more -deserving, without having lost anything of their grace -and gentleness, no longer accept the famous axiom: -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_131"> 131</a></span> -<i>man should support woman</i>; still less do they accept -the <i>admirable</i> maxim of Aristotle, fit for the slaves -of the gyneceum. Be sure that every <i>true</i> woman -will laugh at the raiment of clouds which you pretend -to give her, at the incense with which you wish -to asphyxiate her; for she cares no longer for adoration. -She wishes to carry her intellect and activity unfettered -into spheres suited to her aptitudes; she wishes to aid -her brother, man, in clearing up the field of theory, the -domain of practice; she claims that every human being -is the judge of his own aptitudes; she does not recognize -in any man or in any doctrine the right of fixing -her place, and of marking out her road. Through the -labor of war was the patriciate constituted; through -peaceful labor was servitude emancipated; <i>through labor</i>, -also, does woman claim to conquer her civil rights.</p> - -<p>Such is what many women are, what they wish to be -to-day; see if it is not madness to seek to revive the -gyneceum and the atrium for these women, impregnated -with the ideas of the eighteenth century, wrought upon -by the ideas of '89 and of the modern reformers. To -say to such women that they shall have no place in the -state, nor in marriage, nor in science, nor in art, nor in -the trades, nor even in your subjective paradise, is something -so monstrous that I cannot conceive, for my part, -how aberration could go so far.</p> - -<p>You will no longer find an interlocutress to say: -"that a woman can scarcely ever deserve a personal -and public apotheosis ... that views involving the -fullest experience and the profoundest reflection are -<i>naturally interdicted</i> to the sex whose contemplations -can scarcely go beyond the circle of private life <i>with -success</i> ... that <i>the moral degradation of woman is</i> -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_132"> 132</a></span> -<i>still greater when she enriches herself by her own -labor</i> ... that there are no worse industrial chiefs -than women...." And if any woman behind the -times should be so imbecile and immodest as to hold -such language, all men of any worth whatever would -regard her only with disdain.</p> - -<p>But you, who wish to annihilate woman, from what -principle do you draw such a consequence? That she -is an affective power, you say ... yes, but, as to that, -man is such, likewise; and is not woman, as well as he, -alike intellect and activity? By reason of a purely accidental -predominance, can one half of the human species -be banished beyond the clouds of sentimentality? -And ought not all serious discipline to tend to develop, -not one phase of the being, but the ponderation, the -harmony of all its phases? Want of harmony is the -source of disorder and deformity. The woman who is -solely sentimental commits irreparable errors; the man -who is solely rational is a species of monster, and the -person in whom activity predominates is but a brute. -Since you believe in Gall and Spurzheim, you know -that the encephalon of the two sexes is alike, that it is -modifiable in both, that all education is founded on this -modificability; why has it never occurred to you that -if man <i>en masse</i> is more rational than woman, it is because -education, laws and custom have developed in him -the anterior lobes of the brain; while in woman, education, -laws and custom develop especially the posterior -lobes of this organ; and why, having established these -facts, have you not been led to conclude that, since -organs are developed only in consequence of the excitants -applied to them, it is probable that man and woman, -subjected to the same cerebral excitants, would be developed -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_133"> 133</a></span> -in the same manner, with the shades of difference -peculiar to each individuality; and that for woman -to be developed harmoniously under her three aspects, -she must manifest herself socially under three aspects? -Be sure, sir, your principle is thrice false, thrice in -contradiction to science and reason; in the presence of -the physiology of the brain, all theories of classification -fall to the ground: before the nervous system, women -are the equals of men: they can be their inferiors only -before muscular supremacy, attacked by the invention -of powder, and about to be reduced to dust by the triumph -of mechanism.</p> - -<p>I should say many more things to you, sir, were not -this critical sketch too long already; but imperfect -though it may be, having to my mind only the meaning -of a woman's protest against your doctrines, I shall -pause here.</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_134"> 134</a></span></p> -<h2 class="normal">CHAPTER IV.<br /> -<span class="medium">LEGOUVÉ.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>The inheritor of a name which commands respect, -Ernest Legouvé, an elegant, eloquent, and impassioned -author, has written a Moral History of Women, whence -exhales a perfume of purity and love which refreshes -the heart and calms the soul.</p> - -<p>In every page of this book, we detect the impulse of -an upright heart and lofty mind, indignant at injustice, -oppression, and moral deformity. The author has deserved -well of women, and it is with pleasure that I -seize the opportunity of thanking him in the name of -those who, at the present time, are struggling in various -countries for the emancipation of half the human race.</p> - -<p>What is the object of Legouvé's work? We will let -him tell it himself.</p> - -<p>"The object of this book is summed up in these -words: to lay claim to feminine liberty in the name of -the two very principles of the adversaries of this liberty: -tradition and difference (of the sexes), that is to say, to -show in tradition progress, and in difference equality.</p> - -<p>God created the human species double, we utilize but -half of it; Nature says two, we say one; we must -agree with Nature. Unity itself, instead of perishing -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_135"> 135</a></span> -thereby, would only then be true unity; that is, not the -sterile absorption of one of two terms for the benefit of -the other, but the living fusion of two fraternal individualities, -increasing the common power with all the force -of their individual development.</p> - -<p>"The feminine spirit is stifled, but not dead.... -We cannot annihilate at our pleasure a force created by -God, or extinguish a torch lighted by his hand; but -turned aside from its purpose, this force, instead of creating, -destroys; this torch consumes instead of giving -light.</p> - -<p>"Let us then open wide the gates of the world to -this new element: we have need of it."</p> - -<p>Then, examining the position of women, the author -adds: "No history presents, we believe, more iniquitous -prejudices to combat, more secret wounds to heal.</p> - -<p>"Shall we speak of the present? As daughters, no -public education for them, no professional instruction, -no possible life without marriage, no marriage without a -dowry. Wives—they do not legally possess their property, -they do not possess their persons, they cannot -give, they cannot receive, they are under the ban of an -eternal interdict. Mothers—they have not the legal -right to direct the education of their children, they can -neither marry them, nor prevent them from marrying, -nor banish them from the paternal house nor retain them -there. Members of the commonwealth, they can -neither be the guardians of other orphans than their -sons or their grand-sons, nor take part in a family council, -nor witness a will; they have not the right of testifying -in the state to the birth of a child! Among -the working people, what class is most wretched? -Women. Who are they that earn from sixteen to -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_136"> 136</a></span> -eighteen sous for twelve hours of labor? Women. -Upon whom falls all the expense of illegitimate children? -Upon women. Who bear all the disgrace of -faults committed through passion? Women."</p> - -<p>Then, after showing the position of rich women, he -continues: "And thus, slaves everywhere, slaves of -want, slaves of wealth, slaves of ignorance, they can -only maintain themselves great and pure by force of -native nobleness and almost superhuman virtue. Can -such domination endure? Evidently not. It necessarily -falls before the principle of natural equity; and the -moment has come to claim for women their share of -rights and, above all, of duties; to demonstrate what -subjection takes away from them, and what true liberty -will restore to them; to show, in short, the good that -they do not and the good they might do."</p> - -<p>The history of the past shows us woman more and -more oppressed in proportion as we trace back the -course of centuries. "The French Revolution (itself), -which renewed the whole order of things in order to -affranchise men, did nothing, we may say, for the affranchisement -of women.... '91 respected almost all of -the feminine disabilities of '88, and the Consulate confirmed -them in the civil code."</p> - -<p>This, in Legouvé's opinion was the fault of the philosophy -of the eighteenth century, for "woman is, according -to Diderot, a courtesan; according to Montesquieu, -an attractive child; according to Rousseau, an -object of pleasure to man; according to Voltaire, nothing.... -Condorcet and Sieyès demanded even the -political emancipation of woman; but their protests -were stifled by the powerful voices of the three great -continuers of the eighteenth century, Mirabeau, Danton, -and Robespierre."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_137"> 137</a></span> -Under the Consulate, "feminine liberty had no more -decided enemy (than Bonaparte:) a southerner, the -spirituality of woman was lost on him; a warrior, he -saw in the family a camp, and there required, before all -else, discipline; a despot, he saw in it a state, and there -required, before all else, obedience. He it was who concluded -a discussion in council with these words: <i>There -is one thing that is not French; that a woman can do -as she pleases</i>.... Always man (in the thought of -Bonaparte), always the honor of man! As to the happiness -of woman, it is not a single time in question (in -the civil code.)"</p> - -<p>It is in behalf of the weakness of women, it is in behalf -of tradition which shows them constantly subordinate, -it is in behalf of their household functions, that -the adversaries of the emancipation of women oppose it. -"To educate them is to deform them; and they do not -want their playthings spoiled," says M. Legouvé, ironically. -He then continues in a serious strain: "What -matters tradition to us? What matters history to us? -There is an authority more powerful than the consent -of the human race: <i>it is the Right</i>. Though a thousand -more centuries of servitude should be added to -those which have already passed, their accord could not -banish the primordial right which rules over everything, -the absolute right of perfecting one's self which every -being has received from the sole fact that he has been -created."</p> - -<p>To those who base their opposition on the domestic -functions of woman, he answers: "If there (in the -household) is their kingdom, then there they should be -queens; their own faculties assure them there of authority, -and their adversaries are forced, by their own principles, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_138"> 138</a></span> -to emancipate them as daughters, as wives, as -mothers. Or, on the contrary, it is sought to extend -their influence, to give them a rôle in the state, <i>and we -believe that they should have one</i>: well; it is also in -this dissimilarity (between the two sexes), that it is -fitting to seek it. When two beings are of value to each -other, it is almost always because they differ from, not -because they resemble each other. Far from dispossessing -men, the mission of women therefore would be to -do what men leave undone, to aspire to empty places, -in short, to represent in the commonwealth the spirit of -woman."</p> - -<p>As is evident, Legouvé demands the civil emancipation -of woman in the name of the eternal Right, in the name -of the happiness of the family, in the name of the commonwealth; -their long standing oppression is an iniquitous -fact, and he casts blame on all who have perpetuated it. -This blame from a man of heart and justice may perhaps -have some weight with those women who are so -much accustomed to bondage that they do not blush at -it—that they even no longer feel it!</p> - -<p>In his first book, "The Daughter," which is divided -into seven chapters, Legouvé takes the child from her -birth; he shows her made inferior in the ancient religions -and systems of legislation by Menu, by Moses, -at Rome, at Sparta, at Athens, and under the feudal -régime; and he asks why, even in our days, the birth -of a daughter is received with a sort of disfavor. It is -because she will neither continue the name nor the -works of her father, says he; it is because her future -gives rise to a thousand anxieties. "Life is so rude and -so uncertain for a girl! Poor, how many chances of -misery! Rich, how many chances of moral suffering! -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_139"> 139</a></span> -If she is to have only her labor for a maintenance, how -shall we give her an occupation that will support her in -a state of society in which women scarcely earn wherewith -not to die? If she has no dowry, how can she -marry in this world in which woman, never representing -anything but a passive being, is forced to buy a husband?... -From this <i>début</i>, and in this child's cradle, -we have found and caught a glimpse of all the chains -that await women: insufficiency of education for the -rich girl; insufficiency of wages for the poor girl; exclusion -from the greater part of the professions; subordination -in the conjugal abode."</p> - -<p>In the second chapter, the author shows by what -gradations the daughter, deprived of the right of inheritance, -has come in our times to share equally with her -brothers; then, passing to the right of education, he -answers those who pretend that to give a solid education -to woman would be to corrupt her and to injure the -family: "The diversity of their nature (man and woman) -being developed by the identity of their studies, it -may be said that women would become so much the -more fully women in proportion as they received a masculine -education.</p> - -<p>"Well! it is in the name of the family, in the name -of the salvation of the family, in the name of maternity, -of marriage, of the household, that a solid and earnest -education must be demanded for girls.... Without -knowledge, no mother is completely a mother, without -knowledge no wife is truly a wife. The question is not, -in revealing to the feminine intellect the laws of nature, -to make all our girls astronomers or physicians; do we -see all men become Latinists by spending ten years of -their life in the study of Latin? The question is to -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_140"> 140</a></span> -strengthen their minds by acquaintance with science; -and to prepare them to participate in all the thoughts of -their husbands, all the studies of their children.... -Ignorance leads to a thousand faults, a thousand errors -in the wife. The husband who scoffs at science might -have been saved by it from dishonor."</p> - -<p>Insisting upon the rights of woman, the author adds: -"As such (the work of God) she has the right to the -most complete development of her mind and heart. -Away then with these vain objections, drawn from the -laws of a day! It is in the name of eternity that you -owe her enlightenment." Further on, he exclaims indignantly: -"What! the state maintains a university -for men, a polytechnic school for men, academies of art -and trades for men, agricultural schools for men—and -for woman, what has it established? Primary schools! -And even these were not founded by the State, but by -the Commune. No inequality could be more humiliating. -There are courts and prisons for women, there -should be public education for women; you have not -the right to punish those whom you do not instruct!" -M. Legouvé demands, in consequence, public education -for girls in athenæums, "which, by thorough instruction -with respect to France, her laws, her annals, and her -poetry, shall make her women French women in -truth. The country alone can teach love of country."</p> - -<p>Ancient religions and systems of legislation punished -misdemeanors and crimes against the purity of women -severely (says M. Legouvé in his fourth chapter). Our -code, profoundly immoral, does not punish seduction, -and punishes corruption only derisively, and violation -insufficiently. To declare void the promise of marriage -is fearful immorality; to permit no investigation of paternity -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_141"> 141</a></span> -and to admit that of maternity, is as cruel as it -is immoral. If the solicitude of the legislator for property -be compared with his solicitude for purity, we -shall soon see how little the law cares for the latter. -"The law recognizes as criminal only a single kind of -robbery of honor, <i>violation</i>, but it defines, pursues and -punishes two kinds of robbery of money, <i>larceny</i> and -<i>fraud</i>; there are thieves of coin, there are no sharpers -in chastity."</p> - -<p>When a man has seduced a girl fifteen years old -under promise of marriage, he has "a right to come -before a magistrate and say: This is my signature, it is -true; but I refuse to acknowledge it; a debt of love is -void in law."</p> - -<p>The indignant author exclaims, further on: "Thus, -therefore, on every side, in practice and in theory, in -the world and in the law, for the rich as for the poor, -we see abandonment of public purity, and a loose rein -to all ungoverned or depraved desires.... Manufacturers -seduce their workwomen, foremen of workshops -discharge young girls who will not yield to them, masters -corrupt their servant maids. Of 5083 lost women, -enumerated by the grave Parent-Duchâtelet at Paris in -1830, 285 were servants, seduced by their masters, and -discarded. Clerks, merchants, officers, students deprave -poor country girls and bring them to Paris, where they -abandon them, and prostitution gathers them up.... -At Rheims, at Lille, in all the great centres of industry, -are found organized companies for the recruital of the -houses of debauchery of Paris."</p> - -<p>With the indignation of an upright man, M. Legouvé -adds: "Punish the guilty woman if you will, but punish -also the man! She is already punished; punished -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_142"> 142</a></span> -by abandonment, punished by dishonor, punished by -remorse, punished by nine months of suffering, punished -by the burden of rearing a child: let him then be smitten -in turn; or else, it is not public decency that you -are protecting, as you say, it is masculine sovereignty, -in its vilest form: seigniorial right!</p> - -<p>"Impunity assured to men doubles the number of -illegitimate children. Impunity fosters libertinism; -libertinism enervates the race, wastes fortunes and -blights offspring. Impunity fosters prostitution; prostitution -destroys the public health, and makes a profession -of idleness and license. Impunity, in short, surrenders -half the human race as a prey to the vices of -the other half: behold its condemnation in a single -word."</p> - -<p>In the fifth chapter, the author finding, with reason, -that girls are married too young, desires that they -should not enter upon family duties until twenty-two -years old; works of charity, solid studies, innocent -pleasures, and the ideal of pure love will suffice to keep -them pure till this age. "If the young maiden learns -that nothing is more fatal to this divine sentiment (love) -than the ephemeral fancies which dare call themselves -by its name; if she perceives in it one of those rare -treasures which we win only by conquering them, which -we keep only by deserving them; if she knows that the -heart which would be worthy to receive it must be purified -like a sanctuary and enlarged like a temple; then -be sure that this sublime ideal, engraven within her, -will disgust her, by its beauty alone, with the vain -images that profane or parody it; idols are not worshipped -when God is known."</p> - -<p>"What is marriage?" asks M. Legouvé.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_143"> 143</a></span> -"The union of two free beings, forming an alliance -in order to perfect themselves through love." Neither -antiquity nor the Middle Age considered it in this light. -The father, in ancient times, transmitted to the husband -his right of property in his daughter in consideration of -a certain sum. At Athens, the daughter, even when -married, formed part of the paternal inheritance, and -was bound to leave her husband to espouse the heir. -At Rome, the father, after having given his daughter -in marriage, had the power to take her back and to -espouse her to another. Among the barbarians, she -belonged to him who paid the <i>mundium</i> to her father. -Under the feudal system, the law disposed also of the -daughter without her consent. The French Revolution -emancipated her in this respect; she is required now to -consent to her marriage; but the customs of the age -take from her the benefit of this emancipation; she is -married too young to know what she is doing, and interest -almost always determines her parents to give her in -marriage. For woman to profit by her legal emancipation, -she should be at least twenty-two years old when -she marries; she should make her choice freely; and -her relatives should content themselves with keeping -her apart from those whom she ought not to choose, and -should only enlighten and counsel her; for on the love -between the married couple depends the happiness and -virtue of the wife.</p> - -<p>Examining next the origin of the dower, the transferral -of the dowry, the betrothal and the marriage, he -shows the <i>mundium</i> paid at first to the father or the -brother; then later, to the maiden, becoming, with the -rest of the nuptial gifts, the origin of the dower, which -he wishes to see made obligatory in modern times. Passing -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_144"> 144</a></span> -to the dowry, he proves that, becoming by degrees -a custom among the Romans, it was at first the property -of the husband; then, as the world progressed, it became -the property of the wife. Our code fully protects -the dowry; but the law should oblige wealthy parents -to endow their daughters so that they can marry. In -olden times, a maiden was betrothed by pledges exchanged -by the father and the man who asked her in -marriage; at a later date the pledge was given to the -maiden instead of the father, and the law intervened to -render obligatory promises of marriage. At the present -day, in France, there are no longer betrothed, but future -spouses.</p> - -<p>In his second book, the author distinguishes the beloved -one from the mistress, the adoration of pure from -that of sensual love; the first produces goodness, patriotism, -and respect for woman; the second regards her -only as an object of pleasure and of disdain. Antiquity -had no knowledge of pure love; the Middle Age, -which comprehended it, was divided equally between it -and sensual love; to-day, we have learned to comprehend -that the two loves should be united; that the -beloved and the mistress should make one in the person -of the wife.</p> - -<p>The third book, "The Wife," is divided into seven -chapters.</p> - -<p>The subordination of woman in marriage, with contempt -for the mother, arose from two erroneous ideas: -the inferiority of her nature; her passivity in the reproduction -of the species, in which she performed the part -of the earth with respect to the reception of germs. -Modern science has destroyed these bases of inferiority -by demonstrating: 1st, that the human germ, before -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_145"> 145</a></span> -taking its definitive form, passes, in the bosom of its -mother, through progressive degrees of animal life; -2d, that in all species, both animal and vegetable, the -females are the conservers of the race, which they bring -to their own type.</p> - -<p>Among the Romans, two forms of marriage placed -the wife, soul, body and estate, <i>in the hands</i> of her husband; -in a third form, which left her in her father's -family, she received a dowry, inherited, and administered -her property. Barbarism and feudality made the wife -a ward, the husband an administrator, and a step was -taken towards the equality of the spouses by the institution -of <i>acquêts</i>, or property belonging to both, though -obtained by but one. To-day, the maiden is married -sometimes under the dotal system, occasionally under -that of the separation of property, and chiefly under -that of communion of goods. This last, which is the -rule, permits the husband to dispose of the property of -his partner, to sell the household furniture, to take possession -of the very jewels of his wife to adorn his mistress. -"Thus, this law respects no dignity, no delicacy, -nothing whatever," says M. Legouvé. The omnipotence -of the husband is a crime of the law in every -point of view; it is in manifest violation of the modern -principle, which exacts that all authority shall be limited -and placed under surveillance. "To surrender to the -husband the fortune of the wife is to condemn her to an -eternal moral minority, to create him absolute master of -the actions and almost of the soul of his companion." -The author next addresses himself to those who pretend -to justify marital omnipotence by the incapacity of woman: -"In vain do facts protest against this alleged incapacity; -in vain does reality say: To whom is the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_146"> 146</a></span> -prosperity of most of our commercial houses due? To -women. Who establish, who superintend the thousands -of establishments of millinery and objects of taste? -Women. By whom are the boarding-schools, the farms, -often even, the manufactories, sustained? By women. -It matters not, the Code denies to the wife the foresight -to preserve, the judgment to administer, even the maternal -tenderness to economize, and the marriage certificate -becomes the expression of this disdainful phrase: -the most reasonable woman never attains the good sense -of a boy fourteen years of age." How shall we set to -work to remedy this iniquitous and shameful state of -affairs? The property of the partners should be divided -into three shares: one for the wife, to be placed at her -disposal five years after marriage, one for the husband, -and a third common to both, to be administered by the -husband under the direction of a family council, which -council, in case of incapacity or waste, shall have the -right provisionally to take away the management from -him, to entrust it to his wife.</p> - -<p>If anything is iniquitous and revolting, it is the power -of the husband over the person and the actions of his -wife; the right over her of correction, still tolerated in -our days. There must be a directing power in the -household; the husband must be the depositary of this -power, which should be limited, and controlled by the -family council. Legal omnipotence demoralizes the -husband, who believes in the end in the lawfulness of his -despotism. It is said that custom establishes precisely -the contrary of what the laws prescribe: this is generally -true, but it is at the expense of the moral character -of the wife, thus forced to have recourse to artifice. -"Restore liberty to women, since liberty is truth!" -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_147"> 147</a></span> -exclaims Legouvé. "This will be, at the same time, to -affranchise man. Servitude always creates two slaves: -he who holds the chain and he who wears it."</p> - -<p>Antiquity, the Middle Age, and the centuries nearer -our own, punished the adultery of the wife severely, -even cruelly, yet did not admit that a man could become -guilty of this offence with respect to his spouse. Our -present code acknowledges, indeed, that the husband -can commit adultery, but only in case he maintains his -mistress under the conjugal roof; the wife is an adulteress -everywhere, and is punished severely; as to the -husband, his punishment is a farce. "Such impunity," -says M. Legouvé, "is not only injurious to order, it is -an insult to public morals, <i>it is a lesson of debauchery, -given by the law itself</i>." If, by adultery, the wife -wounds the heart of an honorable man, introduces false -heirs into the family, she at least can abstract nothing -from the common fortune; while the husband, in the -same case, can ruin the family, while increasing the -number of natural children and provoking his wife to -wrong by his neglect and brutality. The husband, besides, -is more criminal than the wife, for he seeks adultery, -while, on the contrary, it comes to the wife under -a thousand attractive forms. Notwithstanding, the -adultery of the woman deserves greater punishment -than that of the man.... Ah! M. Legouvé, is this -logic?</p> - -<p>The Oriental wife was and is still, a slave, a generatrix; -the Roman wife was something more than this; -the wife of the Middle Age owed her body to her husband, -but the Courts of Love had decided that her affections -could, nay, should belong to another. To-day, -the ideal of marriage is enlarged; we comprehend that -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_148"> 148</a></span> -it is the fusion of two souls, a school for mutual perfection, -and that the two spouses should belong wholly to -each other.</p> - -<p>We have been led to this new ideal of the conjugal -union by the civilizing struggles of the church against -divorce and repudiation. In its nature, marriage is indissoluble, -but in the existing state of things in which -the ideal is but very exceptionally realized, the legislator -has deemed it right to render possible the separation -of the spouses: this measure is immoral and unfortunate -both for the partners and for their children. The -only remedy for family difficulties is <i>divorce</i>, a question -with which the church has nothing to do.</p> - -<p>The whole of the last chapter of the third book is a -condemnation of fickleness in love, and an affirmation -of the indissolubility of marriage and of the sanctity of -the conjugal tie.</p> - -<p>The fourth book, "The Mother," comprises six chapters.</p> - -<p>Until a late day, it was believed that woman was only -the soil in which man, the creator of the species, deposited -the human germ. Modern science has overthrown -this false doctrine, and elevated woman by demonstrating -these three incontestable facts: 1st, that, dating from -the moment of conception, the human germ passes -through successive degrees of animal life until it acquires -its proper form; 2d, that the female sex is the conserver -of the race, since it always brings them to its own type, -as well in the human as in the animal and vegetable -species; 3d, that woman is physiologically of a nature -superior to man, since it is now demonstrated that the -higher the respiratory apparatus is placed in the organism, -the more elevated is the species in the scale of beings; -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_149"> 149</a></span> -and that woman breathes from the upper, and -man from the lower part of the lungs.</p> - -<p>Maternity does not give to women rights over their -children, but contributes, notwithstanding, to their emancipation; -thus, in India, a woman who had borne -sons could not be repudiated, and at Rome, a woman -emerged from tutelage at maternity.</p> - -<p>It is iniquitous to give the paternal authority to the -father alone; the mother should have an equal right -with him over her children. Supremacy of direction -belongs indeed to the father, but this direction should be -limited and superintended by a family council, and transferred -to the mother in case of the unworthiness of her -spouse.</p> - -<p>The education of the children belongs of right to the -mother, because she understands them best, and because -it is necessary that she should acquire that entire influence -over her sons which she will need afterwards to -counsel and to console them. Public education is not fit -for boys until they have attained their twelfth year; -younger, it is injurious in its results to their character. -The author demands that the maternal grand-parents -shall not be made inferior in guardianship, as is the case -now in the law; and he considers it as sacrilege not to -give to the mother an equal right with respect to consent -to the marriage of their children.</p> - -<p>Legitimate maternity is happiness to the rich woman; -want, often grief, to the poor woman. Illegitimate maternity -is to women of all ranks a source of sorrow, -shame and crime. To the rich girl it is dishonor, an -eternal bar to marriage; to the poor girl it is poverty, -shame if she keeps her child; crime, if she destroys it. -Yet the law dares grant impunity to the corrupter, to -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_150"> 150</a></span> -the seducer, to the man who has not hesitated to sacrifice -to a moment of passion the whole future of a woman, -the whole future of a child! The State ought to -come to the aid of all poor mothers, because it is for its -interest that the race should be strong and vigorous, and -because mothers are the preservers of the race. Let -the genius of women be set to work; let infant schools -and infant asylums be founded in every quarter of -France.</p> - -<p>The Hindoo widow was burned; the Jewish widow -was bound to re-marry certain men designated by the -law; the Grecian and the Gothic widow passed under -the guardianship of her son, and the latter could not -even re-marry without his permission; the Christian -widow was condemned to seclusion; none of these women -had any rights over their children. The French -code restores full liberty to the widow, renders to her -the right of majority, appoints her the guardian and -directress of her children; it is a preliminary step to -liberty in marriage.</p> - -<p>The fifth book, <i>Woman</i>, is divided into five chapters.</p> - -<p>All antiquity oppressed woman, although it recognized -in her something superior, and made her a priestess -or a prophetess. The Christian woman of the early -ages, who alone could dethrone the Pagan woman, not -only endured martyrdom as courageously as man, but -was distinguished for her great charity, for the purity -and lucidity of doctrine which rendered her the counsellor -of learned men. We do not know, in reality, to -what heights woman can attain; we cannot judge her -by what she is to-day, since she is the work of the eternal -oppression of man. "Who can say whether many -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_151"> 151</a></span> -of the ills that rend society, and of the insoluble problems -that trouble it, may not be caused in part by the -annihilation of one of the two forces of creation, the -ban placed on female genius? Have we a right to say -to half the human kind: you shall not have your share -in life and in the state? Is it not to deny to them (to -women) their title of human beings? Is it not to disinherit -the state itself? Yes, woman should have her -place in civil life," concludes Legouvé.</p> - -<p>Woman and man are equal, but different. To man, -belong synthesis, superiority in all that demands comprehensive -views, genius, muscular force; to woman, belong -the spirit of analysis, the comprehension of details, imagination, -tenderness, grace. Man has more strength of -reason and body, woman more strength of heart, with a -marvelous perspicacity to which man will never attain. -The division thus fixed, what ought woman to do?</p> - -<p>In the family, the task of the wife is the management -of domestic affairs, the education of the children, and -the comfort of the husband, of whom she should be the -inspiration. By the side of the eminent man, yet in -the shade, there is always a woman; this career of hidden -utility and of modest devotion is the one best suited -to woman. In civil life there are several fields of occupation -which they may enter with success: art, literature, -instruction, <i>administration</i>, medicine. "Modesty -itself demands that we should call in women as physicians, -not to men, but to women; for it is an abiding outrage -upon all purity that their ignorance should forcibly -expose to masculine curiosity the sufferings of their sisters.... -Nervous diseases, especially, would find in -feminine genius the only adversary able to understand -and combat them." The author says that it is the duty -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_152"> 152</a></span> -of society to see that poor women do not work for one-third -or one-fourth the wages of men; and that, in -manufactures, they have not the most dangerous and -least remunerative labors. "Parent-Duchâtelet," says -he, "attests that of three thousand lost women, <i>only -thirty-five had an occupation that could support them</i>, -and that fourteen hundred had been precipitated into -this horrible life by destitution. One of them, when -she resolved on this course, <i>had eaten nothing for three -days</i>." M. Legouvé thinks it shameful that men should -enter into competition with women in the manufacture -of articles of dress and taste.</p> - -<p>In the fifth and last chapter, the author recognizes -the remarkable capacity of women in administration, of -which he cites numerous examples. He demands that -they should have the superintendence of prisons for -women, hospitals, charitable institutions, the legal guardianship -of foundlings, the management, in short, of all -that concerns social charity, because they will acquit -themselves in it infinitely better than men. But he -refuses to them all participation in political acts and in -all that concerns the government, because they have no -aptitude for things of this nature. Finally, he concludes -thus: "Our task is finished; we have examined the -principal phases of the life of women, in the character -of daughters, wives, mothers, and women, comparing -the present with the past, and endeavoring to indicate -the future; that is, by pointing out the bad, verifying -the better, seeking the best.</p> - -<p>"What principle has served us in this as a guide? -Equality in difference.</p> - -<p>"In the name of this principle, what ameliorations -have we demanded in the laws and customs?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_153"> 153</a></span> -"For daughters:</p> - -<p>"Reform in education.</p> - -<p>"Laws against seduction.</p> - -<p>"The postponement of the marriageable age.</p> - -<p>"The actual participation of the betrothed parties in -the execution of their contract.</p> - -<p>"Abolition of the formal request to the father of consent -to marriage, which is an insult to the father and an -injustice to the child.</p> - -<p>"For wives:</p> - -<p>"An age of legal majority.</p> - -<p>"Administration, and the right of disposing of a -portion of their private property.</p> - -<p>"The right to appear in law without the consent of -their husbands.</p> - -<p>"The limitation of the power of the husband over -the person of the wife.</p> - -<p>"The creation of a family council, charged with controlling -this part of the power.</p> - -<p>"For mothers:</p> - -<p>"The right of government.</p> - -<p>"The right of direction.</p> - -<p>"The right of education.</p> - -<p>"The right of consent to the marriage of their -children.</p> - -<p>"A law requiring the investigation of paternity.</p> - -<p>"The creation of a family council to decide on serious -disagreements between father and mother.</p> - -<p>"For women:</p> - -<p>"Admission to guardianship and the family council.</p> - -<p>"Admission to all professions.</p> - -<p>"Admission within the bounds of their capabilities -and duties to public offices."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_154"> 154</a></span> -It is evident that Legouvé has but one end, that of -advancing the emancipation of women a single step; -he does not demand all that he believes just, but all that -seems to him mature and possible.</p> - -<p>We should thank him for his prudence: he has -brought over many men to our cause, and has prepared -them to hear the voice of woman, speaking loudly and -firmly by her right as a wife and a human being, as a -worker and a member of the social body.</p> - -<p>By the side of Legouvé, outside the social schools, -are a phalanx of just and generous men who have -written in our favor. We thank them all for their good -words.</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_155"> 155</a></span></p> -<h2 class="normal">CHAPTER V.<br /> -<span class="medium">DE GIRARDIN.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>On page 42 of his pamphlet, "Liberty in Marriage," -De Girardin says, with great reason: "Man is born of -woman. Everything, therefore, that benefits woman -will benefit man."</p> - -<p>"To fight and conquer for her is to fight and conquer -for himself."</p> - -<p>Inspired by these excellent sentiments, the celebrated -publicist has investigated the causes of the slavery and -degradation of woman, and the means of paralyzing -them.</p> - -<p><i>Every child has for its father the husband of its -mother</i>: this, according to M. de Girardin, is the principle -of two great wrongs: the servitude of the married -woman; the inequality of children before the law, -which classes them as legitimate and illegitimate.</p> - -<p>That children may become equal, that woman may -be affranchised from the yoke of man, it is necessary, -says the author, to substitute the system of maternity -for that of paternity; to modify Marriage, and to render -woman independent through the institution and -universalizing of the dower.</p> - -<p>We will let M. de Girardin expound the rest of his -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_156"> 156</a></span> -doctrine himself. "We must choose," says he, "between -these two systems:</p> - -<p>"Between the system of <i>presumed</i> paternity, <i>which -is the system of the law</i>, and the system of maternity, -<i>bearing its proof within itself, which is the system of -Nature</i>; the latter is in conformity with incontestable -truth, the former is condemned by undisputed statistics. -The system of paternity is <i>inequality of children before -the mother and before the law; it is woman possessed -and not possessing</i>; ... it is no longer the legal slavery -of woman, <i>but is still conjugal servitude</i>."—<i>Liberty -in Marriage.</i></p> - -<p>"Without equality of children before the mother, -equality of citizens before the law <i>is only an imposture</i>, -for evidently and incontestably, this equality does not -exist for 2,800,000 children, who, arbitrarily entitled -illegitimate, are placed outside of common right in violation -of natural law."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>According to De Girardin, the logical consequences -of the system of maternity would be:</p> - -<p>The abolition of civil marriage;</p> - -<p>The mother's name alone given to the child;</p> - -<p>The inheritance placed solely in the maternal line.</p> - -<p>"Marriage," says he, "is a purely individual act, -and, as regards its celebration, a purely religious act.—</p> - -<p>"Marriage is an act of faith, not of law: it is for -faith to govern it, <i>not for law to make rules for it</i>.</p> - -<p>"As soon as the law intervenes, it intervenes <i>without -right</i>, without necessity, <i>without utility</i>.</p> - -<p>"For one abuse that it pretends to avert, it gives rise -to innumerable others which are worse, and from which -society afterwards suffers seriously, without taking into -account the cause that produced them.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_157"> 157</a></span> -"Legal liberty in marriage is durable love in the -household; indissolubility of marriage is habitual love -outside of the household."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>With respect to inheritance and dowry, the author -expresses himself thus:</p> - -<p>"To inherit at the death of the mother, because maternity -and certitude are two equipollent terms, and to -receive a support from the father, because paternity and -doubt are two inseparable terms; such is the true law -of Nature."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>In De Girardin's opinion, woman has the same rights -as man to liberty and equality; the sexes are equal, not -through <i>similitude</i> but <i>equivalence</i> of faculties and functions; -man produces, acquires, woman administers, -economizes; it belongs therefore to man to provide for -the expenses of the household. It is his duty, on uniting -himself to a woman, to settle on her an inalienable -dower that will permit her to perform her maternal -functions properly, and to escape from the vices that -frequently result from want and abandonment.</p> - -<p>To the objection that the wages of the working people -are insufficient to satisfy this duty, the generous publicist -replies: Well, raise the rate of wages by excluding -from industrial occupations the women and children -that lower it by competition with men. And if this -measure be not sufficient to balance receipts and expenses, -increase the wages, for "there is no consideration -weighty enough to make me admit that, in order -not to diminish the profits of some men, others shall be -eternally condemned to insufficient wages; and that to -shelter some women from violation, others shall be -necessarily devoted to prostitution."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>In comparing the lot of the wife under the two systems, -De Girardin expresses himself thus:</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_158"> 158</a></span> -"Under the system of paternity, the wife, loaded -with the gifts of fortune, sinks under the weight of an -idleness which most frequently inflames and disorders -her imagination. She does not know what to do to -employ her time. Woman does nothing because man -does everything.</p> - -<p>"The wife who has brought no dowry and received -no dower, sinks under the weight of a toil contrary to -nature which obliges her, through economy, to separate -herself from her child a few days after giving it birth, -and to put it away from her to nurse, for the consideration -of five or six francs a month; to go to work in one -direction while her husband works in the other, and not -to rejoin him till evening, when each returns from the -workshop which has kept them absent from their household -all day: if this is what is called the family, <i>is it -indeed worth all the stir that is made about it</i>?</p> - -<p>"Under the system of maternity, on the contrary, -the richer a woman is, the further she is removed from -idleness; for not only has she her children to nurse, to -rear, to instruct, and to watch over, but she has also to -administer her fortune which will one day be theirs.</p> - -<p>"To preserve this fortune, to increase it still more: -here is wherewith to occupy her leisure, to calm her -imagination, to place her under curb. It is wrong to -suppose women not qualified for the management of -business; they excel in it, however little may have been -their practice or application.</p> - -<p>"Long enough has man been the personification of -war, of slavery, of conquest; it is the turn of woman -to be the personification of peace, of liberty, of civilization.</p> - -<p>"In this new system (<i>that of maternity</i>), each of the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_159"> 159</a></span> -two has his part: to man labor, the genius of enterprise; -to woman economy and the spirit of foresight.</p> - -<p>"Man speculates, woman administers;</p> - -<p>"Man acquires, woman preserves;</p> - -<p>"Man brings in, woman transmits;</p> - -<p>"The dowry remains the attribute of the father, the -inheritance becomes the privilege of the mother;</p> - -<p>"Each of the two thus exercises the function that is -<i>natural</i> to him, and in conformity with the essence of -things."—<i>Id.</i></p> - -<p>A number of women have asked whether De Girardin -recognizes political right for women. He says -nothing about it, either in his work "Liberty in Marriage," -or in his "Universal Politics." But when a man -writes that:</p> - -<p>"Woman, belonging to herself, and being dependent -only on her reason, has the same rights as man to liberty -and equality."</p> - -<p>That "universal suffrage should be <i>individual</i> and -<i>direct</i>."</p> - -<p>That "every holder of a general insurance has a -right to be a party to it."</p> - -<p>It is evident that we may deduce, without any great -stretch of logic, that, woman being <i>free and equal to -man</i>,</p> - -<p>Woman being comprised in universality,</p> - -<p>Woman holding, like man, her policy of insurance, -has a right, like man, to be elector, to be eligible to office, -and to vote <i>individually and directly</i>.</p> - -<p>Now, as M. de Girardin is not one of those who -recoil from the consequences of their principles, we are -led to believe that he admits to woman the exercise -of political right for woman.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_160"> 160</a></span> -I have been told that, in 1848, one of those pitiable -individuals who have neither intellect enough to be logical, -nor justice enough to comprehend the oppressed, -was haranguing before M. de Girardin against the -claims of certain women to enter political life. "Why -not?" asked M. de Girardin. "Do you believe that -Madame de Girardin would deposit a less intelligent -vote in the electoral urn than that of her footman?"</p> - -<p>If this anecdote be true, the opinion of the publicist -concerning the political right of woman is not doubtful.</p> - -<p><i>La liberté dans le mariage</i> has raised a tempest of -indignation, to a greater or less degree feigned, among -the prudes; and for some time it required courage openly -to proclaim one's self the (feminine) champion of the -author.</p> - -<p>Abolish marriage! cry some, veiling their faces with -an air of offended modesty.</p> - -<p>Make a speculation of love! exclaim others who, -apparently, have preserved their holy innocence and baptismal -ignorance.</p> - -<p>Come, ladies, we might say,—a truce to conventional -delicacy and sentimentality. Let men suffer -themselves to be deceived by our mask, nothing is more -natural; but what is the use of playing the farce among -women?</p> - -<p>M. de Girardin does not really suppress marriage; -he changes it in some respects, but leaves it intact in a -religious point of view. If his system should be adopted, -therefore, you might be married in the presence of -the clergymen of your respective faiths, precisely as -was done some seventy years ago, and you would have -no fewer scruples than your grandmothers, who believed -themselves then sufficiently married.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_161"> 161</a></span> -On the other hand, in suppressing civil marriage, the -author does not interdict such and such particular stipulations; -if therefore you hold in any degree to the -religion of the Code, it will be lawful for you to stipulate -in your notarial contract:</p> - -<p>1. That you will be submissive to your husbands;</p> - -<p>2. That you will permit them to manage your fortune, -even contrary to your interests and to those of -your children;</p> - -<p>3. That without authority from them, you will neither -go to law, nor undertake anything, nor sell anything, -nor receive anything, nor give anything away;</p> - -<p>4. That, so long as they shall live, you renounce all -authority over your children; that they can, if they -please, take them from you, banish you from them, -have them reared by whoever they choose, even by -their mistress, finally, give them in marriage contrary -to your will;</p> - -<p>5. That you recognise their right to carry elsewhere -their love, their attentions, their fortune and -your own; provided that this does not happen under -your roof;</p> - -<p>6. That, lastly, you grant their right, if, abandoned -by them, you attach yourself to another, to drag you before -the bar, to dishonor you, to imprison you with thieves -and prostitutes; that even in such case you declare -them excusable in killing you.</p> - -<p>Yes, ladies, you might stipulate all this, for M. de -Girardin disputes no one the rights of lacking dignity -and being imbecile; of what then do you complain?</p> - -<p>You reproach M. de Girardin with wishing to make -a speculation of love! Be good enough to tell me -what you call the greater part of the marriages of the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_162"> 162</a></span> -present time, in which men have the heartlessness to -speculate even on death!—in which they ask how much -a young girl has, what are her expectations, and <i>how -old are her parents</i>.</p> - -<p>Answer, women:</p> - -<p>Is it true that the great majority of seduced women -are incapacitated, through shame and poverty, from -rearing their children?</p> - -<p>That what you call a first fault, drives the greater -part of them to make a traffic of their charms?</p> - -<p>That the great majority of men forget, after satisfying -their passion, both the woman whom they have -led astray, and the innocent creature that owes its life -to them?</p> - -<p>Is it true that the horrible and cruel selfishness of -men and the insane confidence of women produces annually -a fearful number of so called illegitimate children, -the greater part of which people the prisons, the -galleys, and the public brothels?</p> - -<p>Is it true, lastly, that this same selfishness and this -same confidence are the cause of thousands of human -lives being criminally sacrificed?</p> - -<p>And if all this shame, all these griefs, all these crimes -are true?</p> - -<p>If there are so many women seduced and heartbroken;</p> - -<p>If there are so many children abandoned;</p> - -<p>If there are so many infanticides;</p> - -<p>If the law does not protect the woman deceived and -made a mother;</p> - -<p>If this law does not compel the seducer to any reparation;</p> - -<p>If public opinion leaves to the victim all the shame;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_163"> 163</a></span> -Why do you reproach a man for reminding a young -girl that from love may proceed maternity?</p> - -<p>For telling her that she ought to provide in advance -for the child that may be born, in order that it may not -be cast upon public charity, and that she herself may -not risk falling into those sinks of impurity that are the -shame and degradation of our sex?</p> - -<p>Do you reproach a man then for taking our part -against the selfish and animal passions of his sex, and -against the impunity accorded them by the laws?</p> - -<p>Do you reproach him for taking in hand the cause -of morals and health, in opposition to the degradation -of soul and body?</p> - -<p>A young girl stipulate the sale of her person! say -you? what essential difference do you find between -this kind of contract, and those that are made to-day -before the notary on the occasion of a marriage?</p> - -<p>Did not most among you, ladies, purchase your husbands -with so much dowry, so much income, so much -<i>expectations</i>? And if these husbands of yours did not -think it shameful to be sold, and if you do not esteem -them less for it, be good enough to tell me from what -principle you judge it shameful for a young girl to do -the same in order to rear her children, and to live without -prostituting herself?</p> - -<p>For my part, I do not see.</p> - -<p>Ladies, you are grown-up children: men feign to -have contempt for the woman who thinks of her interests -in love ... because they wish, if possible, to -keep their money, that is all.</p> - -<p>Is this to say that I admit all the ideas of M. de Girardin? -No.</p> - -<p>I admit with him, that woman can only be free and -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_164"> 164</a></span> -the equal of man, in so far as she is a wife, through a -change in marriage.</p> - -<p>That, in the state of insecurity in which she is placed -with respect to wages and to maternity outside of marriages, -woman <i>does well</i> to take measures to prevent -man from shifting the obligations of paternity from -himself to her.</p> - -<p>I would willingly admit that the child should bear -the mother's name only, if men did not object so strongly -to it. The child, belonging to both, should bear -both names, and choose, at majority, the one that he -preferred; or else the daughters should bear the name -of the mother and the sons that of the father, from the -time of majority.</p> - -<p>I readily admit the equality of children before the -mother and the law; for bastardy is meaningless in nature -and is social iniquity. But what I do not admit, is the -ideal M. de Girardin has formed with regard to the -respective functions of each sex:</p> - -<p>The exclusion of woman from active occupations;</p> - -<p>The universalizing of the dower;</p> - -<p>Lastly, family education.</p> - -<p>To say that man represents labor, the genius of enterprise, -that he speculates, acquires, brings in,—that -woman represents economy, the spirit of foresight,—that -she administers, preserves, transmits, is to establish -a series which does not appear to me at all in conformity -with the nature of things, since it is notorious that -a great number of women do what M. de Girardin attributes -to the other sex, and <i>vice versâ</i>.</p> - -<p>Functions, to be properly performed, should be the -result of aptitudes. Now Nature, except in what concerns -the reproduction of the species, does not appear to -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_165"> 165</a></span> -have classed these according to the sexes. Since the -origin of society, we have attempted to do it, but history -is at hand to reveal to us that, in acting thus, we -have only succeeded in tyrannizing over the sturdy minorities -that have given the lie to such pretensions. -Now, M. de Girardin, admitting a false series, <i>à priori</i>, -is led without perceiving it to forge chains for all women -whom Nature has not made in conformity with the conventional -order which he wishes to see realized.</p> - -<p>To exclude woman from active occupations in order -to confine her to the cares of the household is to attempt -an impossibility, to close the way to progress, and -to replace woman beneath the yoke of man. It is to -attempt an impossibility, because there are branches of -manufactures that can be executed only by women; -because many women who would not marry, or who -would be left portionless widows without resources, -could only remain pure by devoting themselves to some -active employment which, notwithstanding, would be -interdicted to them. To see woman in the household -alone, is to view her from a contracted stand point, -which retards the advent of her liberty. It is to close -the way to progress, because there are social functions -which will never be well performed until woman shall -participate in them, and social questions that will never -be resolved until woman shall stand by the side of man -to elucidate them. It is to replace woman beneath the -yoke of man, because it is in human nature to rule and -domineer over those whom we provide with their daily -bread.</p> - -<p>To wish to erect the dower into an institution, is to -wish to restore one of the most lamentable phases of the -Past at the moment when Humanity is marching towards -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_166"> 166</a></span> -the Future—that which shows us woman purchased -by man. The universalizing of the dower -would be therefore a criminal attempt on the liberty -and moral dignity of woman. Lastly, to claim that -every mother ought to educate her children herself appears -to us to propose as great impossibility as social -danger.</p> - -<p>If every well constituted woman is fit to bring children -into the world and to nourish them with her milk, -very few are capable of developing their intellect and -heart, for education is a special function, requiring a -particular aptitude, with which all mothers cannot be -endowed.</p> - -<p>Next, family education perpetuates divergence of -opinions and sentiments, maintains prejudices, favors -the development of vanity and selfishness, and tends, by -this means, to paralyze the most noble, the most civilizing -sentiment—that of universal solidarity. Assuredly, -at the present time, many motives may justify -family education, but for the good of humanity it is to -be desired that parents who sympathize in progressive -ideas should assemble their children together to form -them for social life, instead of rearing them each by -himself.</p> - -<p>I submit this critical sketch to M. de Girardin in the -name of the principle that he has always defended:—<i>individual -dignity and human liberty</i>.</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_167"> 167</a></span></p> -<h2 class="normal">CHAPTER VI.<br /> -<span class="medium">MODERN COMMUNISTS.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p>The Communists hold as the principle of social organization, -not <i>the agrarian law</i>, as has been charged -on them through ignorance or bad faith, but the enjoyment -<i>in common</i> of the soil, of implements of labor, -and of products. <i>From each one according to his -strength, to each one according to his needs</i>, is the formula -of most among them.</p> - -<p>It is not our business to examine the social value of -this doctrine, but only to show what Communism thinks -of woman and her rights.</p> - -<p>The modern communists may be divided into two -classes: the religious and the political.</p> - -<p>Among the first are the Saint Simonians, the Fusionists -and the Philadelphians.</p> - -<p>Among the second, are the Equalitarians, the Unitarians, -the Icarians, etc.</p> - -<p>The first consider woman as the equal of man. To -the others, she is free; among some, with a shade of subordination.</p> - -<p>The Unitarians, who have drawn largely from Fourier, -proclaim woman free, and equal with man.</p> - -<p>We shall speak here of only a few of the communistic -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_168"> 168</a></span> -sects, reserving for separate articles what relates to -the Saint Simonians and the Fusionists.</p> - -<p>The Philadelphians, admitting God and the immortality -of the soul, lay down these two principles: God -is the chief of the social order; Fraternity is the law -that governs human relations.</p> - -<p>Religion, to the Philadelphians, is the practice of Fraternity; -Progress is a dogma, Community is the law of -the individual before God and conscience.</p> - -<p>Touching the relations of the sexes and the rights of -woman, M. Pecqueur thus expresses himself in his -work <i>La République de Dieu</i>, pp. 194, 195:</p> - -<p>"Complete equality of the man and the woman."</p> - -<p>The Monogamic marriage, intentionally indissoluble -as a normal condition; such is the second practical consequence -of the dogma of religious fraternity.</p> - -<p class="subh">1. <span class="smallc">EQUALITY.</span></p> - -<p>"We bring no proofs in evidence of this; <i>his reason -is blotted out by prejudice and his heart chilled by -egotism</i>, who is not impressed at once with the truth of -equality.</p> - -<p>"In the state of society created by the religion of -fraternity and equality, women will find, from their earliest -years, <i>the same means and the same conditions of -development of function and of remuneration</i>, in short, -<span class="smallc">THE SAME RIGHTS</span>, the same social aim to pursue as men; -and in proportion as custom shall correspond with the -religious and moral ends of the union, will the living -law deduce the practical consequences of all order, contained -in the germ in the dogma of the complete equality -of the sexes.</p> - -<p class="subh"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_169"> 169</a></span> -"4. <span class="small">MONOGAMY AND INDISSOLUBILITY.</span></p> - -<p>"To comprehend the lawfulness of the unlimited or -indefinite monogamic marriage, it suffices to consider: -1st. the exigencies of our inmost nature, that is, the characteristics -of love; its instinctive aspiration to the union -and the fusion of two beings, to duration and to perpetuity; -the necessity of possessing each other reciprocally -and of having faith in this possession <i>in order to love -each other</i>; in short, instinct, desire; the irresistible and -universal affections, and the joys of paternity and of the -family; 2d. the physiological conditions of generation, -which exact monogamy in order to assure the reproduction -and the good and progressive conservation of the -species; 3d. social and religious exigencies, which require -relations of all kinds to be predetermined and regulated, -that each one may be secure in his expectation and his -possession, and that there may be a possibility of satisfying -the fundamental propensities of our natures.... To -claim to introduce polygamy, promiscuousness, or union -for a term of years into such surroundings, (the Philadelphian -society,) is evidently to decree selfishness and -mere carnal pleasure, while proclaiming duty and dignity. -It is inconceivable that two moral beings, once -united by pure love, should ever cease to love each other, -to delight in each other, or at least to endure each -other, when they are presumed already to be devoted -and sacrificing without distinction in their love to their -brothers and sisters.</p> - -<p>"Still less is it conceivable that their brothers and -sisters would dream of diverting this reciprocal love of -two members of the family to their personal advantage; -<i>for this would be infamy</i>."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_170"> 170</a></span> -M. Pecqueur admits, notwithstanding, that in very -rare cases, divorce may be granted on account of incompatibility -of temper. In such case the offending -party would be excluded from the republic, and the other -would be at liberty to remarry.</p> - -<p>According to M. Pecqueur, indissolubility of marriage -does not relate to the present antagonistic state of -society, as he says:</p> - -<p>"Divorce is a great misfortune, not only to the parties -concerned, but to religion; notwithstanding, in the -kingdom of Cæsar in which pure justice is the question, -it is the lesser evil, when the individuals are determined -on a separation in fact, and are lusting after other -ties. They do evil clandestinely; they are the cause -or the occasion of the temptation or the fall of others. -Do what they will, the scandal is known; so that neither -society, nor the spouses, nor the children, nor morality -derive benefit from the consecration of absolute -perpetuity.</p> - -<p>"It is not charitable, it is <i>impious</i> to force two beings -to remain together, one of which, to say the least, maltreats, -detests, takes advantage of, or domineers over -the other. It is equally wrong to grant them a separation -from bed and board without at the same time permitting -them to yield to chaste affections when they acknowledge -these in purity and liberty."</p> - -<p>So then, to the Philadelphians, expounded by M. -Pecqueur, marriage is monogamous, indissoluble by intention; -divorce is a sad necessity of the existing state -of society, whilst separation is immorality. In short, -woman is <i>free and the equal of man</i>.</p> - -<p>Another communist sect, that of the Icarians, takes -no notice either of the nature or the rights of women. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_171"> 171</a></span> -Its chief, M. Cabet, an ex-attorney-general, was too -fully imbued with the doctrines of the Civil Code, that -inelegant paraphrase of the Apostle Paul, not to be persuaded -that woman ought to remain outside the pale of -political right, and that she ought to be subordinate to -man in general, and to her husband, good or bad, in -particular.</p> - -<p>Let us do justice however to M. Cabet's disciples; I -have never found a single one of them of his opinion -on this great question.</p> - -<p>One evening in 1848, as M. Cabet was presiding over -a well attended club, he was requested by a woman to -put the question: <i>Is woman the equal of man before -social and political rights?</i> Almost every hand was -raised in the affirmative; in the negative, not a hand was -raised, not a man protested against the affirmation. A -round of applause followed from the galleries filled with -women; and M. Cabet was somewhat disconcerted by the -result. He seemed to be ignorant that the people, always -eminently logical, are never guilty of quibbling to elude -or to limit the principles that they have adopted.</p> - -<p>This vote of the Cabet club was repeated in three -others, in my presence. The men in paletots laughed at -the demands of brave Jeanne Deroin; the men in blouses -did not even smile at them.</p> - -<p>M. Dezamy representing another shade of communism, -thus expresses himself in the code of the Community; -"Away with marital dominion! Freedom of alliance! -<i>perfect equality of both sexes!</i> Freedom of divorce!"</p> - -<p>He adds, under the heading; Laws for the union of -the sexes, designed to prevent all discord and debauchery, -page 266:</p> - -<p>"Art. I. Mutual love, inmost sympathy, purity of -heart between two beings, form and legalize their union.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_172"> 172</a></span> -"Art. II. <i>There should be perfect equality between -the two sexes.</i></p> - -<p>"Art. III. No bond except that of mutual love can -link the man and the woman together.</p> - -<p>"Art. IV. Nothing shall prevent lovers who have -separated from forming new ties as often as they shall -be attracted to another person."</p> - -<p>The ethics of M. Dezamy are not to our taste; we -prefer those of the Communist, Pecqueur; but we are -glad to prove that modern communism, divided on the -questions of marriage, the family, and morals in relations -of the sexes, is unanimous with respect to the liberty of -woman and the equality of the sexes before the law and -society.</p> - -<p>In this, modern communism is greatly superior to -that of the ancient school, practised among several nations, -and taught by Plato, Morelly, etc. We recognize -a sign of the times in this juster appreciation of -woman, with the introduction of the principle of her -rights into doctrines which formerly never took them -into account.</p> - -<p>The greater part of the Communists belong to the working -class; which proves that the people most of all -feel the great truth, <i>that the liberty of woman is identical -with that of the masses</i>; and it will take more than -MM. Proudhon, Comte, Michelet and their adepts, to -throw cold water on their feelings and to make them retrace -their steps.</p> - -<p class="subh">SAINT SIMONIANS.</p> - -<p>My mother, a zealous Protestant and very austere in -morals, disapproved of St. Simonianism, and never permitted -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_173"> 173</a></span> -any one to speak of it in my presence except to -condemn it; she took great care that not a line of the -new doctrine should fall under my eyes.</p> - -<p>Whether from a natural spirit of opposition or from -instinctive justice, I know not, but I by no means -shared in the censure that I heard expressed about me; -one thing alone resulted from it—curiosity to become -acquainted with what were called immoral dogmas.</p> - -<p>I was in this frame of mind when one day while with -my mother in the neighborhood of the <i>Palais du Justice</i>, I -saw a company of men advancing, clad in a graceful -costume; they were the Saint Simonians going in a -body to defend their infant church against prosecution -at the bar. I was greatly moved by the sight; I felt -in communion with these youth who were about to bear -testimony to their faith; they did not seem like strangers, -but as struggling for my own cause or for one that -deserved my sympathy, and tears sprang to my eyes. I -could have heartily embraced those whom I heard defending -them, and as heartily have assailed those who -claimed that it would be just to condemn them. My -mother being too generous to join with the latter, we departed -in silence. I knew, without having any knowledge -of the details, that the church of St. Simon had -been dispersed.</p> - -<p>It was not until some years after that, having made -the acquaintance of a St. Simonian lady, I was enabled -to read the doctrinal writings and to form an idea -of the aspirations and the dogmas of the school of -St. Simon. If the nature of this work forbids me their -analysis, it cannot reproach me for expressing my sympathies -for those who have had great and generous aspirations; -for those who, in a critical point of view, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_174"> 174</a></span> -have rendered real services to the cause of Progress; for -those who have brought to light the solution of the two -capital problems of our epoch; <i>the emancipation of woman -and of the workman</i>. The St. Simonians have been -enough assailed, enough calumniated to justify a woman -who is not a St. Simonian in considering it a duty to -render them justice, by acknowledging the good which -they have done.</p> - -<p>Yes, you have a right to be proud of your name of -St. Simonians, you who have proclaimed the obligation -of laboring without respite for the physical, moral and -intellectual amelioration of the most numerous and the -poorest class;</p> - -<p>You who have proclaimed the <i>sanctity</i> of science, -art, manufactures, and labor in every form;</p> - -<p>You who have proclaimed the equality of the sexes -in the family, the church, and the state;</p> - -<p>You who have preached of peace and fraternity to a -world given over to wars of cannon and competition.</p> - -<p>You who have criticised the ancient dogma, and all -the evil institutions that have thence arisen;</p> - -<p>Yes, I repeat, you have deserved well of Progress, -you have deserved well of Humanity; and you have a -right to bear with pride your great scholastic name; for -it was noble to desire the emancipation of woman, of labor, -and of the laborer; it was generous to consecrate -youth and fortune to it, as so many among you have -done.</p> - -<p>Through your aspirations, you have been the continuers -of '89, since you dreamed of realizing what was -contained in the germ in the Declaration of Rights: -these are your titles of greatness; this is why your -name will not perish. But if, through your sentiments, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_175"> 175</a></span> -you belonged to the great era of '89, the social form in -which you claimed to incarnate your principles, belonged -to the Middle Ages; the age therefore has done right -to leave you behind. Seduced by trinitarian mysticism, -deluded by an erroneous historical point of view, you -claimed to resuscitate hierarchy and theocracy in a system -of humanity fashioned in conformity with the opposing -principle; the triumph of individual liberty in -social equality. This is the reason that the age could -not follow you. No more could women follow you, for -they felt that they could only be affranchised through -labor and through purity of morals; by ruling over, -not imitating masculine passions. They felt that their -power of moralization was due as much to their chastity -as to their intellect; they knew that those who make -use of the most liberty in love, neither love nor esteem -the other sex; that, in general, they employ their ascendancy -over it to pervert it to ruin and afflict their -companions, and to dissolve the family and civilization; -that, in consequence, they are the most dangerous enemies -of the emancipation of their sex; for man, sobered -of his passion, can never desire to emancipate those by -whom he has been deceived, ruined and demoralized.</p> - -<p>The St. Simonian orthodoxy is therefore, in my opinion, -greatly mistaken with respect to the ways and -means of realization. Shall we impute this to it as a -crime? No, indeed! social problems are not mathematical -problems; there is merit in propounding them; -courage and devotion in pursuing their solution, even -when we fail completely to attain it.</p> - -<p>We all know the spirit of the St. Simonians who first -brought before the public mind of the age the question -of female emancipation; it would be ungrateful in -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_176"> 176</a></span> -the women who demand liberty and equality not to recognize -the debt of gratitude which they have contracted -toward them. It is their duty to say to their companions: -the seal of St. Simonianism is the safeguard of the -liberty of woman; wherever therefore you meet a -St. Simonian, you may press his hand fraternally; you -have in him a defender of your right.</p> - -<p>Let us sketch the general outline of the St. Simonian -doctrine, touching woman and her rights.</p> - -<p>All of the St. Simonians admit that the sexes are -equal;</p> - -<p>That the couple forms the social individual;</p> - -<p>That marriage is the sacred bond of generations; the -association of a man and a woman for the accomplishment -of a sacerdotal, scientific, artistic, or industrial -work;</p> - -<p>All admit divorce, and transition to another union; -but some are more severe than others with respect to -the conditions of divorce.</p> - -<p>There is a division among them on the question of -morals. Olinde Rodrigues and Bazard do not admit -any <i>liaison</i> of love outside of marriage. M. Enfantine, -on the contrary, claims the greatest liberty in love.</p> - -<p>We should add that he gives to this opinion a fixed -and provisional value only, since he says that the law -of the relations of sexes can only be established in a -sure and definitive manner by the concurrence of the woman; -and since, on the other hand, he prescribes continence -to his closest followers, until the coming of the -Woman, of which he regards himself the precursor.</p> - -<p>In addition, to give our readers a more precise idea -of the sentiments of the St. Simonians concerning woman, -we will cite some passages of their writings.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_177"> 177</a></span> -"The use of woman by man still exists," says M. -Enfantin; "<i>this it is that constitutes the necessity of our -apostleship</i>. This use, this subalternation <i>contrary to -nature</i>, with respect to the future, results on the one -hand, in falsehood and fraud; on the other, in violence -and animal passions; it is necessary to put an end to -these vices."—(<i>Religion St. Simonienne</i>, 1832, p. 5.)</p> - -<p>"Woman, as we have said, <i>is the equal of man</i>; -She is now a slave; it belongs to her master to affranchise -her." (<i>Id.</i> p. 12.)</p> - -<p>"There will be no definitive law and morality until -woman shall have spoken." (<i>Id.</i> p. 18.)</p> - -<p>"In the name of God," exclaims M. Enfantin in his -<i>Appel à la Femme</i>, "in the name of God and of all the -sufferings which Humanity, his loved child, endures to-day -in her flesh; in the name of the poorest and most -numerous class whose daughters are sold to Indolence -and whose sons are given up to War; in the name of -all those men and of all those women, who cast the glittering -veil of falsehood or the filthy rays of debauchery -over their secret or public prostitution; in the name -of St. Simon who came to announce to man and woman -<i>their moral, social and religious equality</i>, I conjure -woman to answer me!" (<i>Entretien du 7 Décembre</i>, -1831.)</p> - -<p>On his side, Bazard concludes a pamphlet, published -in January, 1832, with these words:</p> - -<p>"And we too have hastened the coming of woman; -we too summon her with all our might; but it is in the -name of the pure love with which she has imbued the -heart of man, and which man is now ready to give her -in return; it is in the name of the dignity which is -promised her in marriage; it is lastly and above all, in -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_178"> 178</a></span> -the name of the most numerous and poorest class, <i>whose -servitudes and humiliations she has hitherto shared</i>, and -whom her enchanting voice can alone to-day have -power finally to release from the harsh imposition with -which it is still weighed down by the wrecks of the -past."</p> - -<p>Ah! you are to a great extent right, Enfantin and -Bazard! So long as woman is not free and the equal -of man; so long as she is not everywhere at his side, -sorrows, disorders, war, the exploitation of the weak, -will be the sad lot of humanity.</p> - -<p>Pierre Leroux, the gentlest, best and most simple man -that I know, writes in turn in the fourth volume of his -<i>Encyclopédie Nouvelle</i>, article <i>Egalité</i>, the following -remarkable paragraphs:</p> - -<p>"There are not two different beings, man and woman, -there is but a single human being with two phases, -which correspond and are united by love.</p> - -<p>"Man and woman exist to form the couple; they are -the two parts of it. <i>Outside of the couple, outside of -love and marriage, there is no longer any sex</i>; there -are human beings of a common origin and of like faculties. -Man at every moment of his life is sensation, -sentiment, knowledge; so is woman. The definition -is therefore the same."</p> - -<p>After having proved, according to his idea, that the -type of woman differs from that of man, he continues:</p> - -<p>"But this type does not separate them from the rest -of humanity, and does not make of them a separate -race which must be distinguished philosophically from -man.... Love being absent, they manifest themselves -to man as human beings, and are ranked, like -man, under the various categories of civil society."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_179"> 179</a></span> -After having observed that, however different men -may be, they are therefore none the less equal, since -they all are sensation, sentiment and knowledge, Pierre -Leroux, applying this principle to the question of the -right of woman, adds:</p> - -<p>"From whatever side we look at this question, we -are led to proclaim the equality of man and woman. -For, if we consider woman in the couple, woman is the -equal of man, since the couple itself is founded on -equality, since love is equality in itself, and since where -justice, that is, equality, does not reign, there love cannot -reign, but the contrary of love.</p> - -<p>"And if we consider woman outside of the couple, -she is a being like unto man, endowed with the same faculties -in various degrees; one of those varieties in unity -which constitute the world and human society."</p> - -<p>The author says that woman should lay claim to -equality only as a spouse and a human being; that to -acknowledge her as free because she has sex, is to declare -her at liberty not only to use but also to abuse -love; and that the abuse of love must not be the appanage -and sign of liberty.</p> - -<p>He says that woman has sex only for him whom -she loves and by whom she is loved; that to all others -she can be merely a human being.</p> - -<p>"From this point of view," continues he, "we must -say to women: you have a right to equality by two -distinct titles; as human beings and as wives. As wives, -you are our equals, for love in itself is equality. As -human beings, your cause is that of all, <i>it is the same as -that of the people; it is allied to the great revolutionary -cause</i>; that is, to the general progress of the human -kind. <i>You are our equals, not because you are women -but because there are no longer either slaves or serfs.</i></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_180"> 180</a></span> -"This is the truth that must be spoken to men and -women; but it would be to pervert this truth and to -transform it into error to say to women: You are a sex -apart, a sex in the possession of love. Emancipate -yourselves; that is, use and abuse love. Woman thus -transformed into an unchaste Venus, loses at once her -dignity as a human being and as a woman; that is, as a -being capable of forming a human couple under the sacred -law of love."</p> - -<p>The excellent Leroux asks who does not feel, who -does not admit at the present day the equality of the sexes?</p> - -<p>Who would dare maintain that woman is an inferior -being, of whom man is the guide and beacon light?</p> - -<p>That woman is elevated by man, who is elevated only -by himself and by God?</p> - -<p>Who would dare maintain such absurdities to-day, -brave and upright Leroux? P. J. Proudhon, the man -who called you <i>Theopompe</i> and <i>Pâlissier</i>—M. Michelet, -who claims that woman was created to be the most tiresome -doll of her loving husband.</p> - -<p>But to return to yourself.</p> - -<p>You affirm that God is androgynous; that in him coexist -the male and female principles on the footing of -equality: that consequently, man and woman are equal -in God. I assent to this willingly, although I know absolutely -nothing about it. But when you add that woman -is deserving of quite as much as man, because she -has shared in all the agonizing crises of the progressive -education of the human race;</p> - -<p>That love, which cannot exist without the woman, -has led us from the law of slavery to that of equality;</p> - -<p>That consequently woman represents half in the work -of the ages;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_181"> 181</a></span> -In this there is no mystery; I join you therefore with -all my heart in repeating to men the invitations and the -lessons which you give to these ungrateful and stubborn -males:</p> - -<p>"If we are free, it is in part by woman; let her -then be made free by us.</p> - -<p>"But is she so? Is she treated by us as an equal?</p> - -<p>"A wife—does she find equality in love and marriage?</p> - -<p>"A human being, does she find equality in the State?</p> - -<p>"This is the question.</p> - -<p>"On the subject of woman, our civil law is a model -of absurd contradictions. According to the Roman -law, woman lived perpetually under tutelage; in this -system of legislation, everything was at least in perfect -harmony; woman was always a minor. We, on our -part, declare her in a multitude of cases to be free as -man. She is no longer under general or fictitious tutelage; -her age of majority is fixed; she is competent to -inherit in her own right; she inherits in equal proportion; -she controls and disposes of her property; more -than this, in the system of communion of goods between -husband and wife, we admit the separation of property. -But let the marriage bond itself be in question, in -which wealth is no longer at stake, but ourselves and -our mothers, ourselves and our sisters, ourselves and our -daughters; then we are found intractable in our laws; -we no longer admit equality; we require woman to declare -herself our inferior and servant, and to swear obedience -to us.</p> - -<p>"Truly we cling more to money than to love; we -have more consideration for money-bags than for human -dignity; for we emancipate women as soon as they become -freeholders; but as soon as they become wives -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_182"> 182</a></span> -the law declares them our inferiors. Here notwithstanding, -that bond is in question in which the equality of -man and woman is most evident; that bond in which -this equality breaks forth, as it were; that bond in which -it is so necessary to proclaim that without equality, the -bond itself exists no longer. Yet, by an absurd contradiction, -our civil law chooses this moment to proclaim -the inferiority of woman; it condemns her to obedience, -makes her take a false oath, and takes advantage of love -to make it outrage itself.</p> - -<p>"I have no doubt that, to future ages, the characteristic -symbol of our moral condition will be that article -of our laws which sanctions in set terms inequality in -love. It will be said of us: they had so little comprehension -of justice, that they did not comprehend love -which is justice in even its holiest type; they had so little -comprehension of love, that they did not even admit -justice in it; and that in their written law, their Code, -the form of marriage, the only sacrament of which they -yet had any idea, instead of sanctioning equality, -sanctions inequality; instead of union, disunion; instead -of the love that equalizes and identifies its objects, some -contradictory and monstrous relation, founded at the -same time upon identity, and upon inferiority and slavery. -Yes, like those forms of the law of the Twelve -Tables, that we quote now to prove the barbarity of the -ancient Romans and their ignorance of justice, this article -of our Code will be some day cited to characterize -our grossness and ignorance, for the absence of an elevated -notion of justice is as marked in it as is the absence -of an elevated notion of love.</p> - -<p>"Thence follows everything relative to the condition -of woman; or rather, everything is connected with this -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_183"> 183</a></span> -point; for will we respect the equality of woman as a -human being when we are senseless enough to deny her -this quality as a wife? Is woman to-day, in so far as a -human being, really treated as the equal of man? I -will not enter upon this broad subject. I confine myself -to a single question; what education do women receive? -You treat them as you treat the people. To -these too you leave the old religion that fits us no longer. -They are children kept as long as possible in swaddling -clothes, as though this were not the true way to -deform them, to destroy at once the rectitude of their -mind and the candor of their soul. Besides, what does -Society do for them? To what new careers does she -give them access? Yet, notwithstanding, it is evident -to every thinking mind that our arts, our sciences, our -manufactures will make as much new progress when -women are called to take a part in them, as they did a -few years ago, when they were opened to the serfs. -You complain of the want and wretchedness that -weighs down your systems of society; <i>abolish the castes -that are still subsisting; abolish the caste in which you -hold immured the half of the human race</i>."</p> - -<p>These few pages, my readers, give you the compass -of the sentiments of the St. Simonians, both orthodox -and dissenters, and justify the sympathy entertained by -women who have attained <i>majority</i> for those who have -so ardently pleaded their cause.</p> - - -<p class="subh">FUSIONISTS.</p> - -<p>Louis de Tourreil, the revealer of Fusionism, is a -man whom it is impossible to behold without sympathy -or to hear without pleasure; he is kindly, he speaks -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_184"> 184</a></span> -well, and his ideas are most logically deduced; his principles -once admitted, one is constrained to follow him to -the end.</p> - -<p>Tourreil expresses himself in the <i>Revue Philosophique</i> -of May, 1856, on the subject of woman and her -rights, as follows:</p> - -<p>"Nature is reduced to three great co-eternal principles -or productive agents of all things. These principles -are:</p> - -<p>"The female or passive principle,</p> - -<p>"The male or active principle,</p> - -<p>"And the mixed or unificative principle, participating -in both, which is called Love.</p> - -<p>"God is therefore Female, Male and Androgynous, -in his trinary unity.</p> - -<p>"He is simultaneously from all eternity Mother, Father -and Love, instead of being, as the theologians say, -Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; three agents of like sex, -incapable of producing anything.</p> - -<p>"You will easily conceive, my dear brother, that if -the masculine and the feminine sex hold the same rank -in the Divine Trinity, they will be also found in the -same rank in humanity. The part which the divine -woman plays in Heaven, the human woman will play -on Earth....</p> - -<p>"Were he (<i>God</i>) only of the masculine sex, men -would say that the masculine sex alone is noble, and -that woman is created merely for the service of man, -as man is created for that of God. They would even -question whether she had a soul, and would think that -they were doing her a favor in admitting her as something -in life."</p> - -<p>After quoting the teachings of the apostle Paul with -respect to woman and marriage, the author continues:</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_185"> 185</a></span> -"Behold, my dear brother, the part which Christianity -assigns to woman. If this doctrine therefore were -followed in every point, and if it ought to be replaced -by no higher one, woman would find herself condemned -in perpetuity to a subalternization humiliating to her nature.</p> - -<p>"But Fusionism, which is the doctrine of Salvation for -all, does not permit any one to be sacrificed; for this -reason, woman is the equal of man and man the equal -of woman, as in God, the eternal Mother is the equal -of the eternal Father, and the eternal Father is the -equal of the eternal Mother."</p> - -<p>De Tourreil believes that the Mother gives form and -the Father life, two things equally necessary to constitute -the being.</p> - -<p>"Since woman is the equal of man in absolute principle," -continues he, "and since she is co-eternal with -him, there is injustice in subordinating her to man in -the relative; and the book of <i>Genesis</i> commits a gross -error in making her proceed from man:</p> - -<p>"If either of the two could be before the other, it -would be the woman, for strictly speaking, we could -conceive of the being without the life, but it would be -quite impossible to conceive of the life without the being: -The being without the life would be a dead being, but -what would the life be without the being? It would -be a life without existence, negation, the absence of life, -nothingness. Therefore, in logical order, woman is -first....</p> - -<p>"Not only ought woman to be the equal of man, as -we have seen, but in enunciation and classification, -she should be named and classed first.</p> - -<p>"Woman is the mould by which the species is perfected -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_186"> 186</a></span> -or depraved, according as the mould is good or -bad. The fate of humanity depends therefore on woman, -since she has all powerful influence on the fruit -that she bears in her bosom.</p> - -<p>"Pure, good, intelligent, she will produce healthy, -intelligent and good beings.</p> - -<p>"Impure, narrow, and wicked, she will produce unhealthy, -unintelligent and wicked beings.</p> - -<p>"In a word, the child will be what its mother is, for -nothing can give what it has not.</p> - -<p>"It is important therefore that woman should be developed -like man, that her education should be comprehensive, -that her person should be honored, respected, -and tenderly cared for, in order that nothing in the social -surroundings may shape it to evil.</p> - -<p>"Destined by the Supreme Being to form the human -being from her flesh, her blood and her soul, destined to -nourish it with her milk and to give it its earliest education, -the two acts which have the greatest influence -over the individual life, woman should be considered as -the chief agent of perfection. This <i>rôle</i> classes her -naturally in a very elevated rank in society, and exacts -of her superior perfections.</p> - -<p>"Thus in the future she will be the image of Divine -Wisdom on earth, as man will represent Divine Power.</p> - -<p>"To man more especially will belong action; to woman, -counsel.</p> - -<p>"Man will take the initiative in difficult enterprises; -woman will moderate or excite ardor therein.</p> - -<p>"Man will rule the planet; woman will embellish it.</p> - -<p>"Man will symbolize science and manufactures; woman -will symbolize poetry and art.</p> - -<p>"The one will always have need of the other; they -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_187"> 187</a></span> -will walk together side by side, and will find completeness -reciprocally in each other.</p> - -<p>"Such, my dear friend, after a brief fashion, is the -idea which should be formed of woman. Man and woman -are not two beings radically separated; both together -make but a single being. To subordinate woman -to man or man to woman is therefore to mutilate the -human being, or to fail to comprehend its interests. -That humanity may be happy, neither of its halves -must suffer. And how can it help suffering if it is reduced -to servitude and oppressed by the other?</p> - -<p>"Our destiny on earth is to constitute the collective -being in his own consciousness. For this, it is necessary -to realize the humanitary androgynus. Now the -humanitary androgynus necessitates first the individual -androgynus which can only be constituted by harmonious -marriage.</p> - -<p>"Marriage is therefore the great formative or deformative -law of the collective being, according as it is expressed -by the legislator in a manner conformably or -contrary to human destiny.</p> - -<p>"It is in marriage that the sources of good and evil -are found; would you know why?</p> - -<p>"Because in the act that joins the man to the woman, -and by which the couple are made to form but one -body, the two souls are fused by means of a reciprocal -donation, which unites the souls of the two for eternity.</p> - -<p>"So that, after the conjunction, the soul of the woman -adheres to the soul of the man and accompanies it -everywhere, while the soul of the man adheres to the -woman and never more quits it.</p> - -<p>"Whence it follows that if the soul of the man be depraved, -it depraves the woman to whom it is united, by -exercising over her a continued action, even at a distance. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_188"> 188</a></span> -So also does the depravity of the woman united -to the man deprave him without his knowing it by an -occult and permanent action.</p> - -<p>"The souls of two depraved beings may be therefore -inseparably conjoined, without thus constituting the -individual androgynus, which is the divine end of marriage -or the union of the sexes.</p> - -<p>"The individual androgynus is only possible to the -condition of unity. But unity cannot be constituted by -evil.</p> - -<p>"The good, the true and the perfect alone can combine -the conditions of unity. The evil, the false and -the imperfect are essentially inharmonious in their nature.</p> - -<p>"Two wicked, insincere and vicious beings will only -produce by their conjunction a still greater difference. -They will be united, but only reciprocally to torment -each other. Unity will never be constituted by them; -and without the constitution of unity or the individual -androgynus, it will be impossible to realize the human -destiny.</p> - -<p>"In order that the individual androgynus may exist in -the couple, there must be perfect spiritual communion -between them; that is, communion of thought, of feeling, -and of will. But how can two individuals who, instead -of being ruled by truth, are ruled only by their -misdirected passions,—how can these two make but -one? It is impossible.</p> - -<p>"You will comprehend, my dear brother, from these -few words, how sacred is marriage, and how important -it is to contract none but harmonious unions, for the unhappiness -of a lifetime often depends on an inconsiderate -conjunction."</p> - -<p>Having had several opportunities of meeting M. de -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_189"> 189</a></span> -Tourreil, I asked him for some exact details in respect -to the liberty of woman and marriage.</p> - -<p>The following is an abstract of those that he has -kindly given me;</p> - -<p>Education should be the same for both sexes;</p> - -<p>Woman should be at liberty to follow the vocation -which comes to her from God; and of which she alone -is judge;</p> - -<p>"In all grades and employments in the republic of -God, woman should be at the side of man;</p> - -<p>After the age of fifty, all individuals of both sexes -should be rulers and priests;</p> - -<p>The reproduction of the species being the work of -the love of persons healthy in mind and in body, before -marriage, the bride should be required to make confession -to a priestess and the bridegroom to a priest, in -order to be enlightened with respect to the opportuneness -or unsuitableness of the union.</p> - -<p>Dissolution of marriage should take place but in a -single case,—when the husband and wife have attained -to complete fusion; that is, to feeling and knowing reciprocally -that they have no longer anything to exchange. -It then becomes necessary to form new ties, -and, each one to labor to fuse with a new consort. In -the existing condition of humanity, this fusion cannot -take place; but in the future, when we shall be nearer -perfection, it will become possible several times in life.</p> - -<p>Fusionism is, as is evident, mystical socialism.</p> - -<p>Its votaries are gentle and good, and very tolerant -towards those who do not think like them.</p> - -<p class="subh">PHALANSTERIANS.</p> - -<p>The motto of the Fourieristic, Societary or Phalansterian -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_190"> 190</a></span> -school is <i>respect for individual liberty</i>, based on the -following notions:</p> - -<p>All nature is good; it becomes perverted only when -performing its functions in evil surroundings.</p> - -<p>No person exactly resembling the rest, each one should -be the sole judge of his capacities, and should receive -laws only from himself.</p> - -<p>Attractions are proportional to destinies.</p> - -<p>If the disciples of my compatriot, Charles Fourier, -do not express themselves exactly in this wise, all that -have written bears the imprint of these thoughts.</p> - -<p>Are Fourier and his disciples right in believing that -the law of passional attraction <i>alone</i> is required to organize -the industrial, moral and social world?</p> - -<p>That the primordial element of a system of society -should be the Societary or Phalansterian association?</p> - -<p>That the most opposite, the most diverse passions are -the conditions <i>sine quâ non</i> of harmony?</p> - -<p>That the compensation of labor and of competition -should be regulated according to Labor, Capital -and Talent?</p> - -<p>We are not called on to examine this here.</p> - -<p>The only thing that need occupy us in this rapid review -of contemporaneous opinions is the investigation -of the sentiments and ideas of Fourier and his school -in that which concerns the principal object of this book. -A few pages from the chief of the order, and a summary -analysis will suffice for this.</p> - -<p>In the <i>Théorie des quatre Mouvements</i>, M. Fourier -writes;</p> - -<p>"That the ancient philosophers of Greece and Rome -should have disdained the interests of women is by no -means surprising, since these rhetoricians were all ultra -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_191"> 191</a></span> -partisans of the pederasty which they had brought in -high honor in <i>la belle antiquité</i>. They cast ridicule -upon the associating with women; this passion was -considered dishonorable.... These manners obtained -the unanimous suffrage of the philosophers who, from -the virtuous Socrates to the delicate Anacreon, affected -Sodomitish love alone and contempt for women, -who were banished to the upper apartments, immured -as in a seraglio, and exiled from the society of men.</p> - -<p>"These fantastic tastes not having found favor among -the moderns, there is reason for surprise that our philosophers -should have inherited the hatred that the ancient -scholars bore to women, and that they should continue -to disparage the sex on account of a few wiles to -which woman is forced by the oppression which weighs -upon her; for every word or thought in conformity with -the voice of nature is made in her a crime.</p> - -<p>"What can be more inconsistent than the opinion of -Diderot, who pretends that, to write to woman, one -has only to dip his pen in the rainbow, and sprinkle the -writing with dust from butterflies' wings? Women -might reply to the philosopher: Your civilization persecutes -us as soon as we obey nature; we are obliged -to assume a fictitious character and to listen to impulses -contrary to our desires. To give us a relish for this -doctrine, you are forced to bring in play deceitful illusions -and language, as you do with respect to the soldier -whom you cradle in laurels and immortality to divert -his thoughts from his wretched condition. If he -were truly happy, he would welcome the plain and -truthful language which you take care not to address -to him. It is the same with women; if they were -free and happy, they would be less eager for illusions -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_192"> 192</a></span> -and cajoleries, and it would no longer be necessary -in writing to them to place rainbows and butterflies' -wings under contribution.</p> - -<p>"When it (Philosophy) rails at the vices of women, -it criticises itself; this it is that produces these vices by -a social system which, repressing their faculties from -their infancy and through the whole course of their life, -forces them to have recourse to fraud in order to yield -to nature.</p> - -<p>"To attempt to judge of women by the vicious character -which they display in civilization is like attempting -to judge of human nature by the character of the -Russian peasant, who is destitute of all ideas of honor -and liberty; or like judging the beaver by the stupidity -which they show when domesticated, whilst in a condition -of liberty combined with labor, they become the -most intelligent of all quadrupeds. The same contrast -will reign between the women who are slaves of civilization -and those who are free in the combined order; -they will surpass men in industrial devotion, in loyalty, -in nobleness; but outside of the free and combined -state, woman, like the domesticated beaver or the Russian -peasant, becomes a being so inferior to her destiny -and talents that we are inclined to despise her when -judging her superficially according to appearances.</p> - -<p>"It is a surprising thing that women should have always -shown themselves superior to men when they have -had it in their power to display on the throne their natural -talents, of which the diadem assured them a free -use. Is it not certain that of eight queens, independent -and unmarried, seven will be found to have reigned -with glory, while of eight kings, we count habitually -seven feeble sovereigns.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_193"> 193</a></span> -... The Elizabeths and Catherines did not -make war in person, but they knew how to choose their -generals; and it is enough that these are good. In -every other branch of administration, has not woman -given lessons to man? What prince has surpassed in -firmness Maria Theresa who, in a disastrous moment, -when the fidelity of her subjects was tottering and her -ministers were struck with terror, undertook herself -alone to inspire all with new courage? She intimidated -by her presence, the disaffected Diet of Hungary; -she harangued the Magnates in the Latin tongue, and -brought her very enemies to swear on their sabres to die -for her. This is an indication of the prodigies that -would be wrought by feminine emulation in a social order -which would permit free scope to her faculties.</p> - -<p>"And you, the oppressing sex,—would you not go beyond -the faults imputed to women if you, like them, -had been moulded by a servile education to believe -yourselves automatons created to obey prejudices and to -cringe before the master whom chance had given you? -Have we not seen your pretensions to superiority confounded -by Catharine, who trampled under foot the -masculine sex? In creating titled favorites, she trailed -man in the dust, and proved that it is possible for him -in full liberty to abase himself beneath woman, whose -degradation is forced, and consequently, excusable. -It would be necessary, to confound the tyranny of man -that, for the space of a century, a third sex should exist, -which should be both male and female, and stronger -than man. This new sex would prove by dint of blows -that men as well as women were made for its pleasures; -then we should hear men protest against the tyranny of -the hermaphrodite sex, and confess that force ought not -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_194"> 194</a></span> -to be the sole law of right. Now why are these privileges, -this independence, which they would reclaim -from this third sex, refused by them to women.</p> - -<p>"In singling out those women who have had power to -soar, from the virago, like Maria Theresia, to those of a -gentler type, like the Ninons and the Sévignés, I am authorized -in saying that woman, in a state of liberty, will -surpass man in all functions of the mind and body -which are not the attributes of physical strength.</p> - -<p>"Man seems already to foresee this; he becomes indignant -and alarmed when women give the lie to the -prejudice that accuses them of inferiority. <i>Masculine -jealousy has especially broken out against women authors; -philosophy has kept them out of academic honors, -and has sent them back ignominiously to the household.</i>"... -(p. 148.)</p> - -<p>"What is their existence to-day (that of women)? -They exist in privations alone, even in the trades, in -which man has encroached on everything, <i>even to the -minutest occupations of the needle and the pen, while -women are seen employed in the toilsome labors of the -field. Is it not scandalous to see athletes thirty years -old squatted before a desk, or carrying a cup of coffee -with muscular arms</i>, as if there were not women and -children enough to attend to the minor details of the -counting-room and the household.</p> - -<p>"What then are the means of subsistence for women -destitute of fortune? The distaff, or else their charms -if they have any. <i>Yes, prostitution more or less glossed -over is their only resource</i>, which philosophy -again contests to them; this is the abject fate to which -they are reduced by this civilization, this conjugal slavery -which they have not even thought of attacking." -(p. 150.)</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_195"> 195</a></span> -Fourier bitterly reproaches women authors for having -neglected to seek the means whereby to put an end to -such a state of affairs, and adds with great reason:</p> - -<p>"Their indolence in this respect is one of the causes -that have accrued from the contempt of man. <i>The -slave is never more contemptible than by a blind submission -which persuades the oppressor that his victim -was born for slavery.</i>, (p. 150)."</p> - -<p>Fourier is right, but ... to elevate others is to risk -being lost one's self in the crowd; and every one is not -capable of this degree of abnegation.</p> - -<p>To combat for the right of the weak when men have -admitted you to their ranks, is to prepare for yourself a -rough way and a heavy cross.</p> - -<p>In the first place, you are exposed to the hatred and -raillery of men, then half-cultured women corroded by -jealousy, invent a thousand calumnies for your destruction; -they feign to be scandalized that a woman dare -protest against the inferiority and use of her sex; they -enter into league with the masters, clamor louder than -they and satirize you without mercy.</p> - -<p>Now all women are not made to shrug their shoulders -in the face of this cohort of morbid minds ... they love -peace too well, they lack courage, and <i>they do not care -enough for justice</i>; is it not so, ladies?</p> - -<p>Let us return to Fourier. It is known that he admits -several social periods. According to him, the -pivot of each of them hinges on love and the degree -of liberty of woman.</p> - -<p>"As a general rule," he says, "<i>social progress and -changes of the period will be wrought in proportion to -the progress of women towards liberty, and the decay -of the social order will be wrought in proportion to the -decline of the liberty of women</i>."</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_196"> 196</a></span> -In another place, he adds in speaking of philosophers:</p> - -<p>"If they treat of morals, they forget to recognize -and to claim the rights of the weaker sex, <i>the oppression -of which destroys the basis of justice</i>."</p> - -<p>He says again, elsewhere:</p> - -<p>"Now, God recognizes as liberty only that which is -extended to both sexes, and not to one alone; so he has -prescribed that all the germs of social evils, as the -savage state, barbarism, civilization, should have no -other pivot than the enthrallment of women; and that -all the germs of social good, as the sixth, seventh and -eighth period, should have no other pivot, no other compass, -than the progressive affranchisement of the weaker -sex."</p> - -<p>Fourier is reproached with having desired the emancipation -of woman in love; nothing is more true. But -to impute this to him as immorality, men must censure -their own morals. Now, these gentlemen considering -themselves as wholly <i>pure</i>, though themselves representing -the <i>butterfly</i> in love, infidelity and the simultaneous -possession of several women being only a pastime -to them, I do not really see what they can blame in -Fourier.</p> - -<p>Either what they do is right, and therefore cannot be -wrong in woman;</p> - -<p>Or what they do is wrong; then why do they do it?</p> - -<p>Fourier believed in the unity of the moral law and -in the equality of the sexes; he believed in the lawfulness -of the morals of these gentlemen, <i>minus perfidy -and hypocrisy</i>; this is the reason that he claims emancipation -in love for woman: he is logical.</p> - -<p>Besides, he repeats continually that the ethics that he -depicts would cause disorder in the civilized period; -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_197"> 197</a></span> -and that they can only be established progressively in -subsequent periods. Many among the Phalansterians -reject Fourier's ethics with respect to love as well as his -Theodicy, and I myself have heard several discourses -in which the orator condemned, not only falsity in conjugal -relations, but also looseness of morals.</p> - -<p>Fourier and the Saint Simonian orthodoxy have both -been guilty of the same error with regard to the emancipation -of woman; but, men, I repeat, must be very -audacious to impute it to them as a crime, since they -indulge themselves in worse; as to women, sustained -and loved by these reformers, let them imitate the pious -conduct of Shem and Japhet; one owes respect to his -father, whatever may be the idea or the wine with -which he is drunken.</p> - -<p>Now that we have cited the master, let us enumerate -the principal points of the Fourierist doctrine, touching -the liberty of woman and the equality of the sexes:</p> - -<p>1. Man and woman are composed of the same physical, -moral and intellectual elements; there is, therefore, -between the sexes, identity of nature.</p> - -<p>2. The proportion of these elements differs in the -two sexes, and constitutes the difference that exists between -them.</p> - -<p>3. This difference is so equalized that the value -shall be equal. Where man is the stronger, he takes -precedence of woman; where woman is stronger, she -takes precedence of man.</p> - -<p>4. Man belongs to the <i>major mode</i>: he has the ascendency -over woman in intellect, in logic, in the larger -manufactures, in friendship; it belongs to him therefore -to create positive science, to connect facts, to regulate -commercial relations, to bind together interests, and -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_198"> 198</a></span> -to organize groups and series. To all these things, woman -brings her indispensable aid, but by reason of her -aptitudes, her services are only secondary therein.</p> - -<p>5. Woman belongs to the <i>minor mode</i>; she has the -ascendency over man in the kind of intellect that applies -and adapts, in the intuition that puts man on the -track of the good to which masculine logic should attain; -in the sphere of maternity in which she presides -over education, for she comprehends the means to be -employed to ameliorate the species in every respect better -than man; in the sphere of love in which she has -the right and the power to civilize and refine the relations -of the sexes; and to stimulate man to conquest of -the intellect, to the amelioration of the physical conditions -of the globe, of industry, of art, of social relations, -etc.</p> - -<p>Woman intervenes to a certain point in the major -mode, so does man enter into the minor mode, in which -his coöperation is indispensable.</p> - -<p>Thus, in general, in man the head predominates, in -woman, the heart; but as both have a heart and a head, -man, through his heart, becomes an aid in the minor -mode, and woman, through her head, becomes an aid in -the major mode.</p> - -<p>6. There are men who are women both in head and -in heart; women who are men both in heart and in head; -in humanity they form the eighth of an exception. Full -liberty and right are granted to them.</p> - -<p>7. Each member of the Phalanstery follows his vocation, -obeys his attractions, <i>for attractions are proportional -to destinies</i>. Therefore the eighth of an exception -in both sexes, having an attraction towards labors -that belong more especially to the other sex, is at liberty -to yield to them.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_199"> 199</a></span> -8. All major men and women have an equal vote.</p> - -<p>9. All matters are regulated by chiefs <i>of both sexes</i>, -chosen by the free vote of both sexes.</p> - -<p>10. All offices, from the presidency of the group to -that of the globe, are filled jointly by men and women, -who divide between them the details of this common -function.</p> - -<p>11. The mother is the instructress of her children; -they belong to her alone; the father has no rights over -them unless the mother chooses to confer these on him.</p> - -<p>Such is the summary of the Fourierist doctrine on the -subject of which we treat.</p> - -<p>If the Societary School has not reached perfect truth, -it must be at least acknowledged that it has taken the -right way to attain it. Whether its theory of the classification -and the predominance of faculties in conformity -with the sexes be exact or not, the error will not be -productive of mischievous results in practice. Woman -being free to follow her aptitudes, being half in rights -and functions, could always place herself in the exceptional -eighth, without fear of encountering jealous individuals, -better fitted than herself to warble in the minor -key, who would send her back to the duties of the -household.</p> - -<p>I remember, in this connection, a certain advocate, -by no means <i>feminine</i>, professing a superb disdain of -the sex to which his mother belonged, worthy in a -word, to be the disciple of P. J. Proudhon; would you -know what this man had retained of all his lessons in -law? The art of sweeping a room properly, of polishing -furniture, of hemming napkins and pocket handkerchiefs -neatly, and of compounding sauces. Do you not -think, illustrious Proudhon, that he might have been -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_200"> 200</a></span> -advised with more justice to <i>go and iron his collars</i>, than -certain women who write good articles on Philosophy.</p> - -<p>But let us return to Fourier.</p> - -<p>Among the Socialist Schools, that of Fourier occupies -a distinguished place; it is the one most deserving -of the gratitude of women through the principles that -it has laid down. Be it understood, we separate in this -connection the principles of Liberty and Equality from -all that relates to the question of ethics, which we cannot -resolve in the same manner as Fourier, <i>any more -for woman than man</i>.</p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_201"> 201</a></span></p> -<p class="titre">CHAPTER VII.<br /> -<span class="medium">SUMMARY.</span></p> -</div> - -<p>Appear, all ye modern innovators, before your judge, -the public. Sum up your opinions.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">C</span><span class="smallc">OMMUNIST.</span> The two sexes differ, do not perform -the same functions, but <i>they are equal before the law</i>.</p> - -<p>For woman to be really emancipated, society must be -remoulded economically, and marriage suppressed.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">HILADELPHIAN AND</span> <span class="cap">I</span><span class="smallc">CARIAN.</span> We are of your opinion, -brother, except in what concerns marriage.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">O</span><span class="smallc">RTHODOX</span> <span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">T.</span> <span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">IMONIAN.</span> If Christianity has despised -and oppressed woman, it has been because, in its sight, -she represented matter, the world, evil. We, who are -come to give the true meaning of the Trinity, rehabilitate -or explain what our predecessors have condemned. -Woman is the equal of man, because in God, who comprises -everything, matter is equal to spirit. With man, -woman forms the couple which is the social individual, -the functionary. As woman is very different from -man, we do not take the liberty of judging her; we -content ourselves with <i>summoning</i> her that she may reveal -herself.</p> - -<p>Notwithstanding we think that she can only be affranchised -by being emancipated in love.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_202"> 202</a></span> -<span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">IERRE</span> <span class="cap">L</span><span class="smallc">EROUX</span> <i>agitated</i>. Take care! It is not so -much in sex that woman should be affranchised; it is -only in her quality of <i>wife and human being</i>. She has -sex only for him she loves; to all other men she is what -they are themselves: sensation, sentiment, sense. She -must be free in marriage and in the commonwealth as -man himself should be.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">F</span><span class="smallc">USIONIST</span> <i>interrupting him</i>. You are right, Pierre -Leroux; yet neither is the previous speaker wholly -wrong; woman is free and the equal of man in -everything, because spirit and matter are equal in God; -because the man and the woman form together the human -androgynus, the derivation of the divine androgynus. -It is not so, my dear sister?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">YSELF.</span> Excuse me, brothers, from joining in your -theological discussion; my wings are not strong enough -to follow you into the bosom of God, in order to assure -myself whether he is spirit or matter, androgynus or -not, binary, trinary, quarternary, or nothing of all -these. It is enough for me that you all grant that woman -should be free, and the equal of man.</p> - -<p>I permit myself only a single observation; that your -notion of the couple or of the androgynus, at the bottom -one and the same thing, tends fatally to the subjugation -of my sex; if, by a metaphor, a fiction, we make of -two beings, endowed each with a separate will, free-will -and intellect, a single unity; <i>in social practice</i>, this -unity is manifested by a single will, a single free-will, a -single intellect, and the individuality that prevails in -our society is that which is endowed with strength of -arm; the other is annihilated, and the right given -to the couple is in reality only the right of the stronger. -The use that M. Proudhon has made of androgyny -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_203"> 203</a></span> -ought to cure you of this fancy; as the use which -your predecessors made of the ternary ought to have -preserved you from trinitary metaphysics. Be it said -without offence to you, gentlemen, I have a decided antipathy -to any trinities and androgynies whatsoever; I -am a sworn enemy to all metaphysics, whether profane -or sacred,—a constitutional vice, aggravated in me by -Kant and his school.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">HALANSTERIAN.</span> For God's sake, gentlemen, let us -quit this mysticism. Man and woman are different, but -the one is as necessary as the other to the great work that -should be accomplished by humanity; therefore they are -equal. As each individual has a right to develop himself -integrally, to manifest himself completely in order -to perform the parcellary task which his attractions assign -to him, the liberty of one sex can no more be called -in question than can that of the other. Man modulates -in major, woman in minor, with an exceptional eighth; -but, as in all the general functions, the combination of -the two modes is necessary, it is evident that each of -them ought to be double, and that woman ought everywhere -to be equal with man.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M.</span><span class="smallc">DE</span> <span class="cap">G</span><span class="smallc">IRARDIN</span> <i>somewhat abruptly</i>. Gentlemen, -I agree with you that woman ought to be free and -equal with man; only I maintain that her function is -to manage, to economize, and to rear her children, while -man labors and brings into the household the product -of his industry.</p> - -<p>As I wish woman to be freed from servitude and all -children to be rendered legitimate, I suppress civil marriage, -and institute universal dowry.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M. L</span><span class="smallc">EGOUVE</span> <i>smiling</i>. You go too fast and too far, -my dear sir, you will frighten everybody. At least, I -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_204"> 204</a></span> -believe like you in the equality of the sexes through -the equivalence of their functions, but I take good care -not to breathe a word of it. I content myself with -claiming for woman instruction, diminution of conjugal -servitude, and offices of charity; counting, between -ourselves, that these victories obtained, women will be -in a position through their education and proved utility, -to affranchise themselves completely. Well! despite -my reserve and moderation, you see that some call me -<i>effeminate</i>, others <i>sans culotte</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M. M</span><span class="smallc">ICHELET</span>, <i>rising with tears in his eyes</i>. Alas, -gentlemen, you are all in the wrong road; and I am -very sorry, my beloved academician Legouvé, to see -you employ your elegant pen in leading woman in so -perilous and irrational a way.</p> - -<p>As to you, gentlemen, who lay claim to liberty and -equality of rights for woman, you are not authorized by -her to do so; she demands no right, what should she do -with it—a being always feeble, always sick, always -wounded. Poor creature! What can be her rôle here -below, if not to be adored by her husband, whose duty it -is to constitute himself her instructor, her physician, her -confessor, her sick nurse, her waiting-maid; to keep her -in a hot-house, and with all these multiplied cares to earn -beside the daily bread; for woman cannot, ought not to -work; she is the love and the altar of the heart of man.</p> - -<p>Some among you have dared utter the vile word: -Divorce.</p> - -<p>No divorce! The woman who has given herself -away, has received the imprint of man. You should -not abandon her, however guilty she may be. I thought -in the beginning that after your death she ought to -wear mourning to the tomb, beyond which, she and her -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_205"> 205</a></span> -husband would be fused into the unity of love. But I -have thought better of it; you may appoint a successor.</p> - -<p>While Michelet is seating himself, wiping his eyes, -the lid of a coffin is seen to rise, and Comte exclaims -in a sepulchral tone:</p> - -<p><i>Worthily</i> and <i>admirably</i> spoken, illustrious professor!</p> - -<p>What! you here? exclaims the assembly. Then -one does not perish entirely, as you taught your disciples?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">C</span><span class="smallc">OMTE.</span> No, gentlemen, and I was very agreeably -surprised to see myself mistaken. But it is not to instruct -you about the life beyond the tomb that I return; -that would not have been worth the trouble of disturbing -myself. It is to express to the great professor -Michelet all the satisfaction that I feel in seeing him so -richly poetise the ideal that I set up, and strew so -many flowers over the <i>admirable</i> maxim of Aristotle -and the <i>commandment</i> of the great St. Paul.</p> - -<p>Yes, thrice illustrious Master, you have rightly said: -woman is made for man, she should obey him, be devoted -to him; she is only a doll in private life, absolutely nothing -in public life. Yes, men should labor for her; -yes, marriage is indissoluble; all this is irreproachable.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UGUSTE</span> <span class="cap">C</span><span class="smallc">OMTISM.</span> I regret but one thing—that you -have not preserved the ejaculatory orisons of the wife to -the husband, and of the husband to the wife; it would -have been a good example and have made a fine effect -to see them every morning kneeling face to face, with -clasped hands and closed eyes. I hope that this is only -forgetfulness, and that you will reëstablish this detail in -your next edition. I congratulate you openly on the -happy thought that you have conceived of justifying the -absorption of woman by man by aid of a wound and the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_206"> 206</a></span> -mysteries of impregnation; this will have a great effect -on the ignorant.</p> - -<p>Rebellious women, and the madmen <i>with corrupt -hearts</i> who sustain them, say that you are a poetic and -ingenuous egotist, that our beloved Proudhon is a brutal -egotist; that I am an egotist by A + B. Let them -say so; I approve and bless you."</p> - -<p>The apparition was preparing to lie down again in -his coffin when, having a passion for encountering phantoms, -I seized a corner of his winding sheet, and, notwithstanding -an unequivocal sign from him of <i>vade -retro</i>, I had the courage to represent humbly to the -defunct high priest that the brow of M. Proudhon deserved -quite as much to be blessed as that of M. Michelet. -The defunct gravely crossed his fleshless fore finger -and thumb over the haughty and irreverent head of -the great critic, who neither bowed nor seemed infinitely -flattered.</p> - -<p>It being his turn to speak, Proudhon rose and said: -"Gentlemen Communists, Philadelphians, Fusionists, -Phalansterians, Saint Simonians, and you, MM. Girardin -and Legouvé, as well as all of your adherents, you -are all <i>effeminate</i>, men <i>hardened in absurdity</i>.</p> - -<p>"If my friend Michelet has gilded, perfumed and sugared -the pill for you, I cannot imitate his address and -moderation, for you know that in temperament I, P. J. -Proudhon, am neither tender nor poetical. Permit me -then roughly to tell you the truth concerning a question -<i>of which you do not understand the first word</i>.</p> - -<p>"The Church, St. Thomas d'Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, -St. Paul, and Auguste Comte, as well as the Romans, -the Greeks, Manu and Mahomet teach that woman -is made for the pleasure and use of man, and that -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_207"> 207</a></span> -she should be subjected to him; now I have sufficiently -established these great truths by affirmations without -reply. It is demonstrated to-day, therefore, to all who -believe in me that woman is a passive being, having the -germ of nothing, who owes everything to man, and -that, consequently, she belongs to him as the work to -the workman. Lest my solution might appear somewhat -harsh to you, or to savor too much of antiquity of -the Middle Ages, I have borrowed of the modern innovators -their farce of Androgyny; I have made the -couple the organ of Justice; in this couple, woman, -transformed by man, becomes a triple deity, a domestic -idol, subject in everything to her priest. I shut her -up in the household, and permit her to have only the -superintendence of festivals and spectacles, the education -of children and maidens, etc.</p> - -<p>"Is it not evident, gentlemen, that woman, because -she is weaker than we, is, <i>by justice</i>, condemned to obey -us, and that <i>her liberty consists in experiencing no -amorous emotion, even for her husband</i>? Is it not evident, -in consequence, that you, who do not think as I, -are <i>effeminate, absurd</i> men, and that the women who are -no more willing to be slaves than we were in '89 are <i>insurgents, -impure women whom sin has rendered mad</i>?"</p> - -<p>The majority of the assembly laugh; De Girardin -shrugs his shoulders; Legouvé bites his lip in order -not to laugh; Michelet appears troubled at this sally -which may spoil everything. As, in uttering the -word <i>insurgent</i>, the orator glances at me with marked -design, I cannot help saying "yes, I deserve the name -of <i>insurgent</i> like our fathers of '89. As to you, if you -do not amend, I fear greatly that I shall see you die -duly confessed and blessed with extreme unction ... -and you will have well deserved it!"</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_208"> 208</a></span> -Now, gentlemen, let us ascertain the vote of your -honorable assembly.</p> - -<p>Four schools,—the Communists, the St. Simonians, -the Fusionians and the Phalansterians,—with one publicist, -M. de Girardin, who makes as much noise by -himself alone as a whole school, are for the liberty of -woman and the equality of the sexes.</p> - -<p>MM. Comte, Proudhon and Michelet are against the -liberty of women and the equality of the sexes.</p> - -<p>M. Legouvé and his innumerable adherents wish liberty -for woman, and desire that she should labor to become -equal to man through equivalence of functions.</p> - -<p>Which means that the great majority of those <i>who -think</i> are, in different degrees, for our emancipation.</p> - -<p>Now that my readers are acquainted with your several -opinions, gentlemen, it belongs to me, a woman, to -speak myself in behalf of my right, without leaning on -anything but Justice and Reason.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_209"> 209</a></span></p> - -<p class="extra">PART II.</p> - -<p class="extra"><span class="medium">OBJECTIONS TO THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN. NATURE -AND FUNCTIONS OF WOMAN. LOVE. MARRIAGE. -LEGAL REFORMS. SUMMARY.</span></p> - -<p><span class="pagenumh"><a id="Page_210"> 210</a></span></p> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_211"> 211</a></span></p> -<p class="titre">OBJECTIONS TO THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMEN.<br /> -<span class="medium">I.</span></p> -</div> - -<p>What arguments do the adversaries of the emancipation -of women use to refute the equality of the rights -of the sexes?</p> - -<p>Some, theosophists of the old school, claim that one -half of humanity is condemned by God himself to submit -to the other half, because, they say, the first woman -sinned.</p> - -<p>Not wishing to depart from the firm ground of justice, -reason and proved facts, we will not argue with -this class of adversaries.</p> - -<p>Others, who claim to be imbued with the modern -spirit, and pretend to be disciples of the doctrines of -liberty, condemn woman to inferiority and obedience -because, they say, she is weaker physically and intellectually -than man;</p> - -<p>Because she performs functions of an inferior order;</p> - -<p>Because she produces less than man in an industrial -point of view;</p> - -<p>Because her peculiar temperament prevents her from -performing certain functions;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_212"> 212</a></span> -Because she is only fit for in-door life; because her -vocation is to be mother and housewife, to devote herself -entirely to her husband and children;</p> - -<p>Because man protects and supports her;</p> - -<p>Because man is her proxy, and exercises rights both -for her and himself;</p> - -<p>Because woman has no more time than capacity to -exercise certain rights.</p> - -<p>The rights of woman are in her beauty and our love, -add some, gallantly.</p> - -<p>Woman does not claim her rights; many women -themselves are scandalized by the demands made by a -few of their sex, continue other men.</p> - -<p>And they spare the courageous women who plead -the cause of right, and the men who sustain them -neither calumnies, nor mockery, nor insult, hoping to -intimidate the former and disgust the latter.</p> - -<p>Vain hope! the time in which we could be intimidated -has gone by. If it is justifiable to fear the opinion -of those whom we deem juster and more intelligent than -ourselves, it would be folly to be disturbed by those -whose irrationality and injustice we feel able to demonstrate.</p> - -<p>This double demonstration we are about to attempt, -taking up one by one the arguments of these gentlemen.</p> - -<p>1. Woman cannot have the same rights as man, because -she is inferior to him in intellectual faculties, you -say. From this proposition, we have a right to conclude -that you consider the <i>human faculties as the basis -of right</i>;</p> - -<p>That, the law proclaiming equality of right for your -sex, you are all equal in qualities, all alike strong and -alike intelligent.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_213"> 213</a></span> -That, lastly, no woman is as strong and as intelligent -as you; I cannot say, as the least among you, since, if -right is founded on qualities, as it is equal, your qualities -must be equal.</p> - -<p>Now gentlemen, what becomes of these pretensions -in the presence of <i>facts</i> that show you all unequal in -strength and in intellect? What becomes of these pretensions -in the presence of <i>facts</i> that show us a host of women -stronger than many men; a host of women more -intelligent than the great mass of men?</p> - -<p>Being unequal in strength and in intellect, and notwithstanding -declared equal in right, it is evident therefore -that you have not founded right on qualities.</p> - -<p>And if you have not taken these qualities into account -when your right has been in question, why then do -you talk so loudly of them when the question is that of -the right of woman.</p> - -<p>If the faculties were the basis of right, as the faculties -are unequal, the right would be unequal; and, to -be just, it would be necessary to accord right to those -who made good their claims to the necessary faculties -and to exclude the rest; by this standard many women -would be chosen and an infinite number of men excluded. -See where we end when we have not the intellectual -energy to take principles into consideration! You -have but one means of evicting us of equality; namely, -to prove that we do not belong to the same species as -you.</p> - -<p>2. Woman, you add, cannot have the same rights as -man because, as mother and housewife, she performs -only functions of an inferior order.</p> - -<p>From this second proposition, we have a right to conclude -that <i>functions are the basis of right</i>;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_214"> 214</a></span> -That your functions are equivalent, since your right is -equal!</p> - -<p>That the functions of woman are not equivalent to -those of man.</p> - -<p>You have to prove then, gentlemen, that the functions -<i>individually</i> performed by each of you are equivalent; -that, for example, Cuvier, Geoffroy St. Hilaire, -Arago, Fulton, Jacquard, and other inventors and -scholars have not done more, are not doing more for humanity -and civilization than an equal number of manufacturers -of pins' heads.</p> - -<p>You have to prove next that the labors of maternity, -those of the household to which the workman owes his -life, his health, his strength, the possibility of accomplishing -his task—that these functions without which -there would be no humanity, are not equivalent; that is, -as useful to the social body as those of the manufacturer -of jewels or of toys.</p> - -<p>You have to prove lastly that the functions of the -female teacher, merchant, book keeper, clerk, dressmaker, -milliner, cook, waiting-maid, etc., are not -equivalent to those of the male teacher, merchant, accountant, -clerk, cook, tailor, hatter, footman, etc.;</p> - -<p>I grant that it is embarrassing to your triumphant -argument to encounter the thousands of <i>facts</i> which -show us the <i>real</i> woman performing numerous functions -in competition with you;</p> - -<p>So it is, and these facts must be taken into account. -But gentlemen, I have you in a dilemma! if functions -are the basis of right, as right is equal, functions are -equivalent; in which case those performed by woman are -not inferior, since none are so. The functions which -she performs are therefore equivalent to yours, and, by -this equivalence, she again becomes equal.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_215"> 215</a></span> -Or else functions are not the basis of right; did you -not take them into account when the establishment of -your right was in question; why then do you speak of -functions when the question is the right of woman?</p> - -<p>Extricate yourself from this as you can; I shall not -help you.</p> - -<p class="subh">II.</p> - -<p>3. Woman produces less than man industrially, you -say. Admitting this to be true, do you count as nothing -the great maternal function—the risks that woman -runs in accomplishing it;</p> - -<p>Do you count as nothing the labors of the household, -the cares that are lavished upon you, and to which you -owe cleanliness and health?</p> - -<p>If the quantity of the product be the origin of the -equality of right, why have those who produce little, -those who produce nothing, and all of you who produce -unequally, equal right?</p> - -<p>Why are all those women who produce, while their -husbands and sons enjoy and dissipate, destitute of the -rights which the latter possess?</p> - -<p>You do not admit the question of product into that -of right when man is in question, why then do you admit -it when woman is in question?</p> - -<p>You see that this is inconsiderate, irrational, unjust.</p> - -<p>4. Woman cannot be the equal of man, because her -peculiar temperament interdicts to her certain functions.</p> - -<p>Well, then a legislator can, without being unreasonable, -decree that all men who are unfitted by temperament -for the profession of arms, for instance, are excluded -from equality of right!</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_216"> 216</a></span> -Temperament, the source of right?</p> - -<p>If a woman had written anything so absurd, she -would have been cried down from one end of the world -to the other.</p> - -<p>Why, gentlemen, do you not exclude from equality -all men who are weak, all those who are incapable of -performing the functions that you <i>prejudge</i> woman incapable -of performing?</p> - -<p>When you are in question, you admit indeed that the -right to perform every function supposes neither the -faculty nor the inclination to make use of it; why do you -not reason in the same manner when the question concerns -us? What would you think of women if, having -your rights while you were in subjection, they should -keep you in an inferior position because you could not -accomplish the great functions of gestation and lactation.</p> - -<p>Man, they would say, being unable to be mother and -nurse, shall not have the right of being instructed like -us; of having, like us, civil dignity. His coarser temperament -renders him incapable of being a witness to a -certificate of birth or death; it is evident that his clumsiness -excludes him judicially from diplomatic functions; -we cannot therefore recognize his right to solicit them, -etc.</p> - -<p>Ah! gentlemen, you reason in the same manner in -excluding woman from equality under the pretext that, -in general, she is of a temperament weaker than your -own; that is, you reason absurdly.</p> - -<p>5. Woman cannot be the equal of man in right because -he protects and maintains her.</p> - -<p>If it is because you protect and maintain us, that we -ought not to have our right, restore it then to unmarried -women who are of age, and to widows whom you -neither protect nor maintain.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_217"> 217</a></span> -Restore their right then to the wives who have no -need of your protection, since the law protects them, -even against you; to the wives whom you do not maintain, -since they bring you either a dowry, or a profession, -or services which you would be obliged to recompense -if any other rendered them to you.</p> - -<p>And if to be maintained by another, suffices to deprive -an individual of his right, take it away from the -host of men who are maintained by the incomes or the -labor of their wives.</p> - -<p>6. Man, in the exercise of certain rights, is the -proxy of woman.</p> - -<p>Gentleman, a proxy is chosen freely, and is not imposed -on an individual; I do not accept you as proxies: I -am intelligent enough to transact my business myself, -and I pray you to restore to me, as well as to all the -women who think as I do, an authority which you use -unworthily. If married women, to have peace, are -willing to continue you as their authority, it is their -business; but none of you can legitimately retain that -of widows and unmarried women who have attained -majority.</p> - -<p>7. Woman has not the same rights as man, because -she has no more time than capacity to exercise them.</p> - -<p>Has woman less time and capacity than your working -men, pinned twelve hours a day to their petty and stultifying -tasks? Affirm it if you dare!</p> - -<p>Does it need less time and capacity to make a deposition -in a criminal suit, as woman does, than to witness -a civil act or a notarial contract, a right that woman has -not.</p> - -<p>Does it need less time and capacity to be the guardian -of sons and to administer their fortune, as woman does, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_218"> 218</a></span> -than to be the guardian of a stranger or of a nephew, -and administer their property, a right that woman has -not.</p> - -<p>Does it need less time and capacity to superintend a -manufactory, a commercial establishment, workmen, as -do so many women, than to be at the head of an office, -or of a public administration, and to superintend its -officials, a right that woman has not?</p> - -<p>Does it need less time and capacity to devote one's -self to instruction in a large boarding school, as do so -many women, than in the chair of a professorship, as -man alone has the right to do?</p> - -<p>Woman proves, <i>by her works</i>, that she lacks capacity -and time no more than you. Facts stifle affirmations for -which you should blush. Fie! I am glad that I am not -a man, lest I might say like things and be led to pretend -that an instructress, a literary woman, a woman artist, -an experienced female merchant has not the capacity of -a porter or a rag-picker because she has not a beard on -her chin.</p> - -<p>8. The rights of woman are in her beauty and in -the love of man.</p> - -<p>Rights, based on beauty, and on that fragile thing -styled man's love! What are these worth, I ask you, -gentlemen?</p> - -<p>Then woman shall have rights if she is beautiful, and -as long as she shall continue so; if she is beloved, and -as long as she shall continue so? Old, ugly and forsaken, -she must be thrown into the car of the condemned to be -transported to the guillotine?</p> - -<p>If a woman should say such things, what a universal -hue and cry would be raised?</p> - -<p>Yet men pretend that they are rational! We congratulate -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_219"> 219</a></span> -woman on having too much common sense ever to -be so in this wise.</p> - -<p>After all these arguments, none of which will bear -analysis, comes at last the triumphant objection: women -do not claim their rights, many among them are even -scandalized by the demand made by a few in the name -of all. Do not women demand them, gentlemen?</p> - -<p>What are a host of American women doing at the -present time?</p> - -<p>What have a number of English women done already?</p> - -<p>What did Jean Deroin, Pauline Roland and many -others, do here in 1848?</p> - -<p>What am I doing to-day, in the name of a legion of -women of whom I am the interpreter?</p> - -<p><i>All</i> women do not make reclamations, no; but do -you not know that every demand of right is made at -first singly?</p> - -<p>That slaves accustomed to their chains, do not feel -them until their instigators to revolt show them the -bruises on their flesh?</p> - -<p>A few only demand their rights, you say; but is it -in accordance with principle or with numbers that you -judge of the justice of a cause?</p> - -<p>Did you wait until <i>all</i> the male population demanded -their right of universal suffrage in order to decree it to -them?</p> - -<p>Did you wait for the revendication of <i>all</i> the slaves of -your colonies before emancipating them?</p> - -<p>Yes, it is true, gentlemen, that many women are -opposed to the emancipation of their sex. What does -this prove? That there are human beings abased -enough to have lost all sentiment of dignity; but not -that right is not right.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_220"> 220</a></span> -Among the blacks, there are many who hate, denounce, -and deliver up to the scourge and to death -those among them who are meditating how to break -their chains; which is right, which has the sentiment -of human dignity, the latter or the former?</p> - -<p>We demand our place at your side, gentlemen, because -identity of species gives us the right to occupy it.</p> - -<p>We demand our right, because the inferiority inwhich -we are kept is one of the most active causes of -the decay of morals.</p> - -<p>We demand our right, because we are persuaded -that woman has to set her stamp on Science, Philosophy, -Justice and Politics.</p> - -<p>We demand our right, lastly, because we are convinced -that the general questions, the lack of solution -of which threatens our modern civilization with ruin, -can only be resolved by the co-operation of woman delivered -from her fetters and left free in her genius.</p> - -<p>Is it not a great proof of our insanity, our <i>impurity</i>, -gentlemen, that we feel this ardent desire to check the -corruption of morals, and to labor for the triumph of -Justice, the coming of the reign of Duty and Reason, -the establishment of an order of things in which humanity, -worthier and happier, shall pursue its glorious destinies -without the accompaniment of cannon or the -shedding of blood?</p> - -<p>Is it not because the advocates of emancipation are -<i>impure women whom sin has rendered mad, beings incapable -of comprehending Justice and conscientious -works</i>?</p> - -<p class="subh">III.</p> - -<p>Gentlemen, we will conclude.</p> - -<p>Though that were true which I deny; that woman -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_221"> 221</a></span> -is inferior to you; though that were true which <i>facts</i> -prove false; that she can perform none of the functions -which you perform, that she is fit only for maternity -and the household, she would be none the less your -equal in right, because right is based neither on superiority -of faculties nor on that of the functions which -proceed from them, but on identity of species.</p> - -<p>A human being, like you, having, like you, intellect, -will, free will and various aptitudes, woman has the -right, like you, to be free and autonomous, to develop -her faculties freely, to exercise her activity freely; to -mark out her path, to reduce her to subjection, as you -do, is therefore a violation of Human Right in the person -of woman—an odious abuse of force.</p> - -<p>From the stand point of facts, this violation of right -takes the form of grievous inconsistency; for we find -many women far superior to the majority of men; whence -it follows that right is granted to those who ought not -to have it, according to your doctrine, and refused to -those who ought to possess it, according to the same -doctrine, since they make good their claim to the qualities -requisite.</p> - -<p>We find that you accord right to qualities and functions, -<i>because the individual is a man</i>, and that you -cease to recognize it in the same case, <i>because the individual -is a woman</i>.</p> - -<p>Yet you boast of your lofty reason,—yet you boast of -possessing the sense of justice!</p> - -<p>Take care, gentlemen! Our rights have the same -foundation as yours: in denying the former, you deny -the latter in principle.</p> - -<p>A word more to you, pretended disciples of the doctrines -of '89, and we have done. Do you know why -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_222"> 222</a></span> -so many women took part with our Revolution, armed -the men, and rocked their children to the song of the -<i>Marseillaise</i>! It was because they thought they saw -under the Declaration of the rights of men and citizens, -the declaration of the rights of women and female citizens.</p> - -<p>When the Assembly took it upon itself to undeceive -them, by lacking logic with respect to them, and closing -their meetings, they abandoned the Revolution, and -you know what ensued.</p> - -<p>Do you know why, in 1848, so many women, especially -among the people, declared themselves for the Revolution? -It was because they hoped that this Revolution -would be more consistent with respect to them -than the former had been.</p> - -<p>When, in their senseless arrogance and lack of intelligence, -the representatives not only forbid them to -assemble, but <i>drove</i> them from the assemblies of men, -the women abandoned the Revolution by detaching -their husbands and sons from it, and you know what -ensued.</p> - -<p>Do you comprehend at last?</p> - -<p>I tell you truly; all your struggles are in vain, if -woman does not go with you.</p> - -<p>An order of things may be established by a <i>coup de -main</i>, but it is only maintained by the adhesion of majorities; -and these majorities, gentlemen, are formed by -us women, through the influence that we possess over -men, through the education that we give them with our -milk.</p> - -<p>We have it in our power to inspire them from their -cradles with love, hatred or indifference for certain principles; -in this is our strength; and you are blind not -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_223"> 223</a></span> -to comprehend that if man is on one side and woman -on the other, humanity is condemned to weave Penelope's -web.</p> - -<p>Gentlemen, woman is ripe for civil liberty, and we -declare to you that we shall henceforth regard whoever -shall rise against our lawful claim as an enemy of progress -and of the Revolution; while we shall rank among -the friends of progress and of the Revolution, those -who declare themselves in favor of our civil emancipation, -<span class="smallc">SHOULD THEY BE YOUR ADVERSARIES</span>?</p> - -<p>If you refuse to listen to our lawful demands, we -shall accuse you before posterity of the crime with -which you reproach the holders of slaves.</p> - -<p>We shall accuse you before posterity of having denied -the faculties of woman, because you feared her -competition.</p> - -<p>We shall accuse you before posterity of having refused -her justice, because you wished to make her your servant -and plaything. We shall accuse you before posterity -of being enemies of right and progress.</p> - -<p>And our accusation will remain standing and living -before future generations who, more enlightened, more -just, more moral than you, will turn away their eyes -with disdain and contempt from the tomb of their -fathers.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_224"> 224</a></span></p> -<p class="titre">NATURE AND FUNCTIONS OF WOMAN<br /> -<span class="medium">I.</span></p> - -<p>I think that we have sufficiently though summarily -proved to all honest inquiries that social right is identical -for both sexes since they are identical in species. -The question of right being placed beyond discussion, -we can now ask what use woman shall make of -her right; in other terms, what functions she is qualified -to perform in accordance with her whole nature.</p> - -<p>Let us first mark the profound difference that exists -between right and function, then define and divide the -latter.</p> - -<p><i>Right</i> is the condition <i>sine qua non</i> of the development -and manifestations of the human being: it is absolute, -general for the whole species, because the individuals -who compose it should be able lawfully to develop -and manifest themselves.</p> - -<p><i>Function</i> is the use of the faculties of the individual -with a view to a purpose useful to himself and to others; -function is therefore a production of utility and, in conclusion, -the manifestation of the aptitudes predominating -in each of us, whether naturally, or in consequence -of education and habit.</p> - -<p>Society, having needs of every kind, has functions of -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_225"> 225</a></span> -every nature and various scope; these functions may -be classified as follows:</p> - -<ul> -<li> 1. Scientific and philosophic functions;</li> -<li> 2. Industrial functions;</li> -<li> 3. Artistic functions;</li> -<li> 4. Educational functions;</li> -<li> 5. Medical functions;</li> -<li> 6. Functions for the preservation of safety;</li> -<li> 7. Judicial functions;</li> -<li> 8. Functions of exchange and circulation;</li> -<li> 9. Administrative and governmental functions;</li> -<li> 10. Legislative functions;</li> -<li> 11. Functions of solidarity or of social benevolence and of institutions for the prevention of crime.</li> -</ul> - -<p>This classification, which would be very imperfect and -insufficient, were this a treatise on social organization, -being all that is needed for the use that we have to -make of it, we shall adhere to it in this place.</p> - -<p>Men, and women after them, have deemed proper -hitherto to class man and woman separately; to define -each type, and to deduce from this ideal the functions -suited to each sex. Neither have chosen to see that -numerous facts contradict their classification.</p> - -<p>What! exclaims the classifiers, do you deny that the -sexes differ? Do you deny that, if they differ, they -should have different functions?</p> - -<p>If our classification does not seem good to you, criticise -it, we ask nothing more; but replace it by a better -one.</p> - -<p>To criticise your classification, ladies and gentlemen, -is what I intend to do; but if the elements are wanting -to establish a better, can you, ought you even to require -me to present you one.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_226"> 226</a></span> -Do you think me a man, that you exact of me abuse -of the <i>à priora</i>, and a startling arbitrary course of reasoning. -"Proudhon is right," murmur these gentlemen; -"woman is incapable of abstract reasoning, of generalizing, -of <i>knowing herself</i>"....</p> - -<p>Really, gentlemen, do you think that it is through incapacity -that I am unwilling to present to you a classification -of the sexes, a theory of the nature of woman?... -Let us hasten then to prove the contrary: instead of -one theory, we will give you <i>four</i>. Man and woman -form a series only with respect to the reproduction of -the species: all the other characteristics by which it has -been attempted to make a distinction between them are -only generalities contradicted by a multitude of facts; -now, as a generality is not a law, nothing can be therefore -concluded from these, nothing absolute deduced from -them in a functional point of view.</p> - -<p>On the other hand, the greatest radical difference of -zoological species lies in the nervous system, especially -in the greater or lesser bulk and complexity of the encephalus; -now, Anatomy admits, after numerous experiments, -that, in proportion to the whole size of the -body, the brain of woman equals in volume that of man; -that the composition of both is the same, and Phrenology -adds that the organs of the brain are the same in -both sexes.</p> - -<p>Lastly, it is a biological principle that organs are developed -by exercise and atrophied by continued repose; -now, man and woman do not exercise their encephalic -organs in the same manner; educational training, manners, -prejudice, enforced habits tend to develop in the -masculine what becomes atrophied in the feminine head; -whence it follows that the differences empirically established -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_227"> 227</a></span> -are by no means the result of Nature, but of the -accidental causes by which they have been produced.</p> - -<p>Conclusion: the two sexes therefore, when reared -alike become developed alike, and are fit for the same -functions, except those which concern the reproduction -of the species.</p> - -<p>Here, gentlemen, is a theory complete in all its parts, -tenable in an anatomo-biologic point of view, and -which I challenge you to prove false, for I shall find replies -to all your objections.</p> - -<p class="subh">II.</p> - -<p>We admit the principle that the sexes form series in -physical, moral, intellectual, consequently functional -respects.</p> - -<p>We believe that they should become subordinate to -each other in proportion to their relative excellence; -and we take the destiny of the species as the touchstone -of their respective value.</p> - -<p>If we compare the sexes with each other, we prove -in a general way, that man is merely woman on a -coarser scale; we prove in the second place that he is -far more animal than woman, since his muscular system -is more fully developed and since he respires lower; so -that he is most evidently a medium between woman and -the higher species of apes.</p> - -<p>Woman alone contains and develops the human -germ; she is the creator and preserver of the race.</p> - -<p>It is not quite certain that the co-operation of man is -necessary for the work of reproduction; <i>this is the -means chosen by Nature</i>, but human science will succeed, -we hope, in delivering woman from this insupportable -subjection.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_228"> 228</a></span> -Analogy authorises us to believe that woman, the sole -depositary of the human germ, is equally the sole depositary -of all the moral and intellectual germs, whence -it follows that she is the inspirer of all knowledge, -all discoveries, all justice, the mother of all virtue. -Our analogous deductions are confirmed by facts; woman -employs her intellect in the concrete; she is an -acute observer; man is only fit to construct paradoxes -and to lose himself in the abyss of metaphysics; science -has only emerged from the limbo of <i>à priora</i> without -confirmation, since the advent into this domain of the -form of the feminine mind; we shall affirm, therefore, -that true scholars are feminized minds.</p> - -<p>In moral respects, man and woman differ greatly; the -former is harsh, rough, without delicacy, devoid of sensibility -and modesty; his habitual relations with the -other sex modify him only with great difficulty; woman -is naturally gentle, loving, feeling, equitable, modest; -to her, man owes justice and his other virtues, -when he has any; whence it follows that it is really to -woman alone that social progress is due; hence it is -that every step made towards civilization is marked by -an advance of woman towards liberty.</p> - -<p>If we consider each of the sexes in their relation to -human destiny, we are forced to admit that, if there -was reason for the predominance of man in the necessity -of hewing out this destiny, the pre-eminence of woman -is ensured in the future reign of right and peace.</p> - -<p>It was necessary to struggle and fight in order to establish -justice and to subject nature to humanity; this -belonged of right to man, who represents muscular -force, the spirit of conflict; but as we already foresee -in the approaching future, the coming of peace, the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_229"> 229</a></span> -substitution of pacific labor and negotiations for war, it -is clear that woman will take rightfully the direction of -human affairs, to which she will be called by her faculties, -found better adapted to the end henceforth to be -pursued.</p> - -<p>Woman should be the last to develop and manifest -herself socially, for the same reason that the human -species is the last creation of our globe; the perfect being -always appears after those that have served to pave -the way.</p> - -<p>As it is demonstrated, on the other hand, that, in the -scale of the various organisms, the organ that is superadded -to the others to constitute a change of species, -governs those which the individual derives from inferior -species, so woman, fully developed in a social body organized -for peace and pacific labor, will be the new organ -that will govern the social body.</p> - -<p>Does this signify that woman should oppress man? -By no means; she would thus be ungrateful for the services -rendered her, and would trespass against her gentle -nature; but she will teach him to comprehend that -<i>his glory is to obey</i>, to become subordinate to the other -sex, because he is less perfect, and because his qualities -are no longer necessary to the general good.</p> - -<p>You laugh, gentlemen, at this second theory; you -think it absurd.... So it is; for it is the counterpart -of the thetic woman of Proudhon. Let us proceed -then to the third theory.</p> - -<p class="subh">III.</p> - -<p>Every classification of the human species is a pure -subjective creation; that is, one which exists only in -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_230"> 230</a></span> -the form given to the perception by the intellect; the -very conception of humanity with the enumeration of -the characteristics which are reputed to distinguish it -from the other species, is stamped with subjectivity.</p> - -<p>The truth is that not a single human being resembles -his neighbor; that there are as many different men and -women as there are men and women composing the -species.</p> - -<p>Classifications, in all things, are illusions of the mind, -for nature hates identity and never repeats herself: there -are not two grains of sand, not two drops of water, not -two leaves alike; and most probably the sun, since the -commencement of its existence, has not appeared twice -identically the same at its rising. Yet despite the evidence -of these truths, despite the conviction which we -have attained of the illusion of the senses, of the weakness -of our intellect, which can know nothing of the -inmost nature of beings; which can only seize upon a -few fleeting traces of their personal characteristics; -yet despite all these things we dare establish series, attribute -to them characteristics which are speedily contradicted -by facts, and torture and do violence to the only -beings that really exist; namely, individuals, in the name -of that other thing which exists only in our sick brain: -kind, class!</p> - -<p>The bitter fruits that have been produced by our -mania for classification ought to cure us of this. Has -not this malady, impelling theocratists and legislators to -divide humanity into castes and classes, caused most -of the calamities of our species? Have we not, thanks -to these execrable divisions, a hideous past, the echoes -of which bring back to our shrinking ears naught -but sobs, cries of anger, rebellion, malediction and -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_231"> 231</a></span> -vengeance, and sinister clanking of weapons and -chains?</p> - -<p>Have we not also to thank them that, on the pages -of our history, all stained with blood and tears and exhaling -an odor of the charnel house, we read nought but -tyranny, brutishness and demoralization?</p> - -<p>Have we not further to thank them that king and -subject, master and serf, white and black, man and woman -become demoralized by oppression, injustice and -cruelty on one hand; and intrigue, baseness, and vengeance -on the other?</p> - -<p>Are not wrong and wretchedness found everywhere, -because inequality, the offspring of insane classifications, -is found everywhere?</p> - -<p>Ah! who shall deliver us from our infatuation!</p> - -<p>Let us class animals, vegetables, minerals if we will! -our errors do not influence and cannot disturb them; -but let us respect the human species which will escape -all classification, however reasonable the process may be, -because every human being is changeable, progressive, -and differs far more from his fellows than the most intelligent -animal from the rest of his species.</p> - -<p>Let us leave each one then to make his own autonomic -law and to manifest himself in conformity with -his nature, and take care only that right shall be equal -for all; that the strong shall not oppress the weak; -that each function shall be entrusted to the one individual -that is proved the best qualified to perform it; this -is all that we can do, all that we should do, if we seek -to show ourselves wise and just.</p> - -<p>Harmony exists in nature, because each being in it -follows peaceably the laws that govern his individuality; -it will be the same in humanity, when universal reason -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_232"> 232</a></span> -shall comprehend that human order is pre-established in -the co-operation of individual faculties left free in their -manifestations; and that to establish a factitious, wholly -imaginary order; that is, true disorder, is to retard the -coming of order, peace and happiness.</p> - -<p>Let us refrain then from all classification of faculties -and functions according to the sexes: besides being false, -they will lead us to cruelty; for we shall oppress those, -whether men or women, who are neither yielding -enough to submit to it nor hypocritical enough to appear -to do so; and we shall do this without profit to human -destiny, but, on the contrary, to its detriment.</p> - -<p>Here, gentlemen, is a <i>nominalistic</i> theory which I -challenge you to overthrow by sufficient reasons: for, -as in the first, I shall have answers to all your objections.</p> - -<p>We now come to our last theory, which is yours in -the major and minor terms, but the opposite in the conclusions.</p> - -<p class="subh">IV.</p> - -<p>All the different parts of the same organism are modified -by each other, and in this manner the functions -become mutually modified.</p> - -<p>Now, man and woman differ from each other in important -organs.</p> - -<p>Each of the sexes must therefore differ from the other -not only through the organs that distinguish them, but -through the modifications produced by the presence of -these organs.</p> - -<p>This, gentleman, is my first syllogism: I know that -we shall not contest this point—it is classical Biology.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_233"> 233</a></span> -Let us investigate anatomically the organic differences -to which sexuality subjects man and woman.</p> - -<p><i>Nervous System.</i> The so called nerves of feeling -are more fully developed in woman than in man, those -of motion are less developed in the former than in the -latter; the cerebellum is more fully developed in the -head of man than in that of woman; in the latter, the -antero-posterior diameter of the brain preponderates -over the bi-lateral, which is greater in proportion in the -masculine sex: it is also observed that the organs of -observation, circumspection, subtleness and philoprogenitiveness -are more prominent in the head of woman than -in that of man, in which the reasoning organs, with -those of combativeness and destructiveness predominate.</p> - -<p><i>Locomotive System.</i> Man is larger than woman, he -has more compact bones, and larger and better developed -muscles, his thorax is the reverse of that of woman, -in which, the greatest breadth is between the -shoulders, while, with him, it is at the base; the pelvis -is larger and broader in the female than the male sex.</p> - -<p><i>Epidermic and cellular systems.</i> Man has a more -hairy skin than woman; what is called fat is less abundant -in the masculine than in the feminine organism; -in general, the skin of man is rougher, and his form less -round; woman has longer and more silky hair. <i>Splanchnic -organs.</i> The cerebral mass is the same in proportion -in both sexes, as well as the organs of the brain, -with the exception of the predominances which we have -pointed out; the respiratory systems differ somewhat; -woman breaths higher than man; in the latter, the circulation -is more active and energetic.</p> - -<p>To these physical differences correspond intellectual -and moral differences.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_234"> 234</a></span> -Woman, having the nerves of feeling more fully developed, -is more impressionable and more mobile than -man.</p> - -<p>Being weaker and as persistent, she obtains by address -and stratagem what she cannot obtain by force; -her weakness gives her timidity, circumspection, the -necessity of feeling herself protected.</p> - -<p>The kinds of labor that require strength are repugnant -to her.</p> - -<p>Her maternal destiny renders her an enemy of destruction, -of war; and her more delicate organization -makes her dread and shun contention. This same maternal -destination impresses a peculiar stamp on her intellect; -she loves the concrete, and is always inclined -to transform thought into facts, to incarnate it, to give -it a fixed form; her reasoning is intuition or quick perception -of a general relation, of a truth that man elucidates -only with great difficulty, by the aid of stilted -logic.</p> - -<p>Woman is a better observer than man, and carries -induction farther than he; she is consequently more -penetrating, and is a much better judge of the moral and -intellectual value of those about her.</p> - -<p>She has, more than man, sentiment of the beautiful, -delicacy of heart, love of good, respect for modesty, -veneration for everything superior.</p> - -<p>More provident than he, she has more order and economy, -and looks after administrative details with a -carefulness which is often carried to puerility.</p> - -<p>Woman is adroit, sedulous; she excels in works of -taste, and possesses strong artistic tendencies.</p> - -<p>Gentler, more tender, more patient than man, she -loves everything that is weak, protects everything that -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_235"> 235</a></span> -suffers; every sorrow, every calamity brings a tear to -her eye and draws a sigh from her breast.</p> - -<p>This is woman, such as you paint her, gentlemen.</p> - -<p>You then add:</p> - -<p>The vocation of woman therefore is love, maternity, -the household, sedentary occupations.</p> - -<p>She is too weak for occupations that demand strength, -and for those of war.</p> - -<p>She is too impressionable and too feeling, too good, -too gentle to be legislator, judge or juror.</p> - -<p>Her taste for household details, a retired life, and the -grave functions of maternity indicate clearly that she -is not made for public employments. She is too variable -to cultivate science with profit; too feeble and too -much occupied beside to pursue protracted experiments.</p> - -<p>Her kind of rationality renders her unsuited to the -elaboration of theories; and she is too fond of the concrete -and of details to become seriously interested in -general ideas; which excludes her from all high professional -functions and from those requiring serious -study.</p> - -<p>Her place is therefore at the fireside to make man -better, to sustain him, to care for him, to procure him -the joys of paternity, and to fill the place of a good -housewife.</p> - -<p>Such are your conclusions: here are mine, admitting -as a hypothesis, what I affirm with you of woman.</p> - -<p class="subh">V.</p> - -<p>1. Woman carrying into Philosophy and Science her -subtleness of observation, her love of the concrete, will -correct the exaggerated tendency of man for abstract -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_236"> 236</a></span> -reasoning, and demonstrate the falsity of theories constructed, -<i>à priori</i>, on a few facts alone. Then only will -ontology disappear, then will it be recognized that a hypothesis -is merely an interrogation point; that truth is -always intelligible in its nature, however unknown it -may be; we shall generalize nothing but known facts, -we shall carefully avoid erecting simple generalities into -laws, and we shall thus have veritable philosophy, and -true human science, because they will bear the imprint -of both sexes.</p> - -<p>2. Woman carrying her peculiar faculties into the -arts and manufactures, will increasingly introduce therein -art, perfection in details. Cultivated in the direction -of her aptitudes, she will find ingenious methods of application -of scientific discoveries.</p> - -<p>3. Patient, gentle, good, more moral than man, she -is the born educator of childhood, the moralizer of the -grown man; the majority of the educational functions -revert to her of right, and she has her assigned place in -special instruction.</p> - -<p>4. By her quick intuition and her acuteness of observation, -woman alone can discover the therapeutics of -nervous affections; her dexterity will render her valuable -in all delicate surgical operations. On her should -devolve the care of treating the diseases of women and -children, because she alone is capable of fully comprehending -them; she has her especial place in hospitals, -not only for the cure of disease, but also for the execution -and surveillance of the details of management and -the care of the patients.</p> - -<p>5. The presence of woman in judicial functions, as -juror and arbiter, will be a guarantee of veritable human -justice to all; that is, of equity.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_237"> 237</a></span> -Woman alone through her gentleness, her mercy, her -sympathetic disposition, and her subtleness and observation, -can comprehend that society has its share of -culpability in every fault committed; for it should be -organized to prevent wrong rather than to punish it. -This point of view, especially feminine, will transform -the penitentiary system and raise up numerous institutions. -Then only will the world comprehend that the -punishment inflicted on the guilty should be a means of -reparation and regeneration; society will no longer slay -its prisoners as if weak and fearful: it will amend the -assassin instead of imitating him; it will force the thief -to work to make restitution of what he has stolen; it -will no longer believe that it has the right by imprisoning -a criminal to deprive him of his reason, to drive him -to despair, to suicide by solitary confinement; to deprive -him completely of marriage; to couple him with -those more corrupt than himself. Conscious of its own -share of culpability, society will repair in penitentiaries -the fault of its carelessness: it will be firm, yet kind -and moralizing: it will give in them the education -which it ought to have given outside, and will prepare -work houses for the liberated convicts in order that the -contempt and horror often shown toward them by men -worse than they may not drive them to a second offence.</p> - -<p>7. Woman, carrying into the social household her -spirit of order and economy, her love of details and abhorrence -of waste and foolish expense, will reform government: -she will simplify everything; will suppress -sinecures and the accumulation of offices, and will produce -much from little instead of, like man, producing -little from much: the purse of the tax-payers will not -complain of the change.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_238"> 238</a></span> -8. Under the direct influence of woman as legislator, -we shall have a reconstruction of all laws; first and -before everything, we shall have preventive measures, -a compulsory education; then the form of legal proceedings -will be simplified, the civil code recast, and all -laws concerning illegitimate children and the inequality -of the sexes banished from it; the laws concerning morals -will be more severe, and the penal code more rational -and equitable.</p> - -<p>By her administrative reforms born of the economical -instinct of woman, taxes will be diminished; her -abhorrence of blood and war will greatly reduce the -fearful impost of blood-shed. Having a deliberative -voice, and knowing, by her griefs and love the value of -a man, it will be only from sheer necessity that she will -consent to vote bevies of citizens for the shambles called -wars: she will do this only when her country is menaced -or when it is necessary to protect oppressed nationalities; -in all other cases, she will employ the system of -conciliation.</p> - -<p>9. Woman, being much more economical and a better -analyst than man, when thoroughly instructed, will -soon perceive that nations, like individuals, differ in -aptitudes, and that the end of these differences is union -and fraternity through exchange of products: she will -therefore deter her country from cultivating certain -branches of the acts and manufactures in which other -nations excel and which they can produce to better advantage; -she will cure it of the foolish pretension of -being sufficient unto itself, and will prevent it from sacrificing -the interest of the mass of consumers to that of a -few producers: thus the barriers and custom duties that -separate the different organs of humanity will fall by -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_239"> 239</a></span> -degrees; there will be treaties of free trade, and all -will be gainers by the cheapness of products, and the -suppression of the expenses of maintaining a too often -annoying department of customs.</p> - -<p>The qualities and faculties of woman not only make -her an educator, but assure her preponderance in all -functions arising from social solidarity; she alone knows -how to console, to encourage, to moralize with gentleness, -to comfort with delicacy; she has the genius of charity; -to her therefore should revert the superintendence and -direction of hospitals and prisons for women, the management -of charitable institutions, the care of abandoned -children, etc. She should create institutions to furnish -employment to workmen out of work, and to save liberated -convicts from indolence and relapse into crime.</p> - -<p>Thus, gentleman, without departing from the data of -your theory, you behold woman placed everywhere by -the side of man, except in the hard labor from which -you yourselves will soon be released by machinery, and -in the military institutions which, in all probability, will -some day disappear.</p> - -<p>Hitherto institutions, laws, sciences, philosophy have -chiefly borne the masculine imprint; all of these things -are only half human; in order that they may become -wholly so, woman must be associated in them ostensibly -and lawfully, consequently, she must be cultivated -like you; culture will not make her like you, do not -fear it; the rose and the carnation growing in the -same soil, under the same sky, in the same sunshine, -with the cares of the same gardener, remain rose and -carnation: they are more beautiful in proportion as -they are better cultivated, and as the elements which -they absorb are more abundant: if man and woman -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_240"> 240</a></span> -differ, a similar education will only make them differ -still more, because each will employ it in the development -of that which is peculiar to himself.</p> - -<p>For the interest of all things and people it is necessary -that woman should enter all the avocations of life, -that she should have her function in all the functions: -<i>after</i> the general interest of humanity, comes that of -the family; it cannot go <i>before</i> it.</p> - -<p>Since woman now is generally mother and housewife -while performing at the same time a host of other functions, -she will become none the less so in taking upon -herself a few more; besides, the time of life at which -an individual enters certain important functions is that -at which woman has finished her maternal task. A few -women acting as public functionaries will not hinder the -great majority of their companions from remaining in -private life, any more than a few men in the same position -hinder the mass of men from continuing there.</p> - -<p class="subh">VI.</p> - -<p>You admit a classification at last, you say, and still -more you grant that there are masculine and feminine -functions. You are mistaken, gentlemen: you accused -me of being incapable of giving you a complete theory, -I have given you the outlines of four—outlines which -it would be easy for me to extend and perfect. But I -do not admit a single one of these theories as a whole.</p> - -<p>Are you eclectic, then?</p> - -<p>The gods forbid! I have as much repugnance to -eclecticism, as to <i>mystic trinitarianism</i> and <i>androgyny</i>.</p> - -<p>I do not admit the theory of the identity of the sexes, -because I believe with Biology that an essential organic -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_241"> 241</a></span> -difference modifies the entire being; that therefore -woman must differ from man.</p> - -<p>I do not admit the theory of the superiority of either -sex, because it is absurd; humanity is man-woman -or woman-man; we do not know what one sex would -be if it were not incessantly modified by its relations -with the other, and we know them only as thus -modified: What we know to a certainty is that they -form together the existing condition of humanity; that -they are equally necessary and equally useful to each -other and to society.</p> - -<p>I do not admit my third theory because it is ultra-nominalism -nominalism; if it is really true that all the individuals of -both sexes differ among themselves in a far more remarkable -manner than those of the other species, it is none -the less true that a classification, founded upon a constant -anatomical characteristic, is legitimate, and that the -principle of classification lies in the nature of things, -for if things appear to us classified, it is because they -are so; the laws of the mind are the same as those of -Nature so far as knowledge is concerned; we must -admit this, unless we are sceptics or idealists, and I am -neither the one nor the other; neither am I a realist in -the philosophic acceptation of the word, for I do not believe -that the species is something apart from the individuals -in which it is manifested; it is in them and -through them; this repeats the affirmation that there -are individuals identical in one or several respects, although -different in all others.</p> - -<p>Lastly, I do not admit the fourth theory, although it -may be true in principle, because the numerous facts -that contradict the distinguishing characteristics, do not -permit me to believe that these characteristics are laws -established by sexuality.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_242"> 242</a></span> -In fact, there are brains of men in heads of women, -and <i>vice versa</i>.</p> - -<p>Men mobile and impressionable; women firm and -insensible.</p> - -<p>Women large, strong and muscular, lifting a man like -a feather; men small, frail, and of extreme delicacy of -constitution.</p> - -<p>Women with a stentorian voice and abrupt manners; -men with a soft voice and graceful manners.</p> - -<p>Women with short, harsh hair, bearded, with rough -skin and angular figures; men with long, silky hair -without beard, round and portly.</p> - -<p>Women with an energetic circulation of blood; men -in whose veins it courses feebly and slowly.</p> - -<p>Women frank, inconsiderate and daring; men strategic, -dissembling and timid.</p> - -<p>Women violent, loving strife, war and contention, and -wont to storm on every occasion; men gentle, patient, -dreading strife, and exceedingly timid.</p> - -<p>Women loving abstract reasoning, generalizing and -synthetizing much, and without intuition of any sort; -men intuitive, acute observers, good analysts, incapable -of generalizing.... I know many such.</p> - -<p>Women insensible to works of art, and without the -sentiment of the beautiful; men full of enthusiasm for -both.</p> - -<p>Women immoral, immodest, respecting nothing or -no one; men moral, chaste and reverential.</p> - -<p>Women extravagant and disorderly; men economical -and parsimonious to avarice.</p> - -<p>Women thoroughly selfish, rigid, disposed to take advantage -of the weakness, kindness, folly or misery of -others; men full of generosity, mansuetude, and self-sacrifice.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_243"> 243</a></span> -What follows from these undeniable facts? that the -law of sexual differences is not manifested through the -several characteristics which have been laid down.</p> - -<p>That these characteristics may be only the result of -education, of the difference of prejudices, of that of -occupations, etc.</p> - -<p>That, as these generalities may be the fruit of the difference -of training and surroundings, nothing can be legitimately -deduced from them as to the functions of woman; -would it not be absurd, in fact, to pretend that a woman -who is organized for philosophy and the sciences <i>can not</i>, -ought not to occupy herself with them because she is a -woman, while a man, who is incapable of them but -foolish and vain enough to be ignorant of his incapacity, -can and ought to engage in them because he is a man?</p> - -<p>Functions belong to those who prove their aptitude -for them, and not to an abstraction called sex, for, definitively, -every function is individual in its aggregate or -in its elements.</p> - -<p class="subh">VII.</p> - -<p>We have explained why we reject the theories that -we have sketched; we will now explain why we neither -give nor wish to give a classification of the sexes.</p> - -<p>We do not give a classification, because we neither -have nor can have one; the elements for its establishment -are lacking. A biological deduction permits us to -affirm that such a one exists; but it is impossible to -disengage its law in the present surroundings; the veritable -feminine stamp will be known only after one or two -centuries of like education and equal rights: then there -will be no need of a classification, for the function will -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_244"> 244</a></span> -fall naturally to the proper functionary under a system -of equality in which the social elements classify themselves.</p> - -<p>My belief and my hopes concerning the future, I -shall not confess; for I may be in error, since I have no -facts to control my intuitions, and everything that is -purely Utopian has always a dangerous side. Besides -have I not said that, had I formed a classification, I -should not give it? Why not? Because, a detestable -use would be made of it, as usual, if it were adopted.</p> - -<p>Hitherto, have not men availed themselves of classifications -based upon characteristics afterwards recognized -as purely imaginary to oppress, distort and calumniate -those banished to the inferior ranks?</p> - -<p>History is at hand to give us this salutary lesson. -Where is now to-day the <i>ville-pedaille</i>, the villains and -base-tenants, fit only to drain ditches and to be stripped to -the skin? Inventing, governing, making laws for, and -gradually transforming our globe, devastated by the -<i>superior and only capable</i> species, into a smiling and -peaceful domain.</p> - -<p>Upon all classification of the human species, whether -in castes, in classes, or in sexes, are based three wrongs.</p> - -<p>The first is to make it a crime in the individual degraded -into the lower series, that he does not resemble -the conventional type that has been formed of this -series, while the so called superior being is not required to -resemble his type; thus a weak, cowardly, unintelligent -man, a <i>man milliner</i> or an <i>embroiderer</i>, is none the less a -man, while a virago, a firm and courageous woman, a -great queen, a woman philosopher are not women, but -men whom none love and who are given over as a prey -to wild beasts, jealous, effeminate men, to devour.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_245"> 245</a></span> -The second wrong is to take advantage of the conventional -type to deform the being classed in the inferior -series in order to kill his energies and to hinder his -progress. Then, to attain this end, education, social -surroundings are organized, prejudices are invented; and -so successfully is this done in general that the oppressed, -ignorant of himself, believes himself really of an inferior -nature, resigns himself to his chains, and is even indignant -at the rebellion of those of his series who are too -energetic and individual not to react against the part -to which social imbecility has condemned them.</p> - -<p>The third wrong is to take advantage of the state of -debasement to which the oppressed has been reduced, -to calumniate him and deny his rights; men exclaim, -Look! See the serf! see the slave! see the negro! see -the workingman! see woman! What rights would you -grant these inferior and feeble natures? <i>They are incapable -of knowing and ruling themselves</i>: we must -therefore think for them, wish for them, and govern -them.</p> - -<p>Ah no, gentlemen, these are not men and women; -they are the deplorable results of your selfishness, of -your frightful spirit of domination, of your imbecility.... -If there were infernal gods, I should devote -you to them relentlessly with all my heart. Instead of -calumniating your fellows that you may preserve your -privileges, give them instruction and liberty; then only -will you have the right to pass judgment on their nature: -for we can only know the nature of a human -being when it has become freely developed in equality.</p> - -<p>I think that I have justified my repugnance to give a -classification of the sexes, both by the impossibility of -actually establishing a reasonable one, and by the very -legitimate fear of the bad use that would be made of it.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_246"> 246</a></span> -But it will be objected, and not without reason, that -a classification is necessary for social practice.</p> - -<p>I consent to it with all my heart, since I have reserved -my positions, and proved the worthlessness of -existing classifications.</p> - -<p>As it is my principle that the function should fall to -the functionary who proves his capacity, I say that at -present, through the difference of education, man and -woman have distinct functions; and that we must give -to the latter the place that in general she deserves.</p> - -<p>I add that it is a violation of the natural right of woman -to form her with a view to certain functions to -which she is destined; she should in all respects enjoy -the rights common to all; it cannot rightfully be said to -her any more than to man, "your sex cannot do that, cannot -pretend to that;" if it does it and pretends to it, it is -because the sex can do it and pretend to it; if it could -not, it would not do it; the first right is liberty, the -first duty, the culture of one's aptitudes, the development -of his reason and his power of usefulness: if a -god should affirm the contrary, not conscience, but the -god would speak falsely.</p> - -<p>Let woman take the place therefore that is suited to -her present development, but let her never cease to remember -that this place is not a fixed point, and that she -should continually strive to mount upwards until, her -peculiar nature revealing itself through equality of education, -instruction, right and duty, she takes her rightful -place by the side of man and on a level with him.</p> - -<p>Let her laugh at all the utopian follies elaborated -concerning her nature, her functions determined for -eternity, and remember that she is not what nature, but -what subjection, prejudice, ignorance has made her; let -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_247"> 247</a></span> -her escape from all her chains, and no longer permit -herself to be intimidated and debased.</p> - -<p>Thus, gentlemen, all my ideas on the nature and -functions of woman may be summed up in these few -propositions:</p> - -<p>I believe, because a physiological deduction authorizes -me to do so, that general humanity common to both -sexes is stamped by sexuality.</p> - -<p>In <i>fact</i>, I know not, and you know no better than I, -what are the true characteristics arising from the distinction -of the sexes, and I believe that they can be revealed -only by liberty in equality, parity of instruction -and of education.</p> - -<p>In social practice, functions should belong to those -who can perform them: woman therefore should perform -those functions for which she shows herself qualified, -and society should become so organized that this may -be possible.</p> - -<p>What are these functions relative to her degree of -present development? I will tell you directly.</p> - -<div class="section"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_248"> 248</a></span></p> -<p class="titre">LOVE; ITS FUNCTION IN HUMANITY.<br /> -<span class="medium">I.</span></p> -</div> - -<p>You tell the child that lies, "it is wrong to deceive; -you would not wish others to deceive you."</p> - -<p>You tell the child that pilfers, "it is wrong to steal; -you would not wish others to steal from you."</p> - -<p>You tell the child that takes advantage of his strength -and knowledge to torment his younger companion; "you -would not wish others to do these things to you; -you are wicked and cowardly."</p> - -<p>These are good lessons. Why then, when the child -has become a young man, do you say: <i>Young men must -sow their wild oats</i>?</p> - -<p><i>To sow their wild oats</i> is to deceive young girls, to -destroy their future, to practice adultery, to keep mistresses, -to visit brothels.</p> - -<p>Yet mothers, women thus consent to the profanation -of their sex!</p> - -<p>Those who forbade their child to steal a toy, permit -him to steal the honor and repose of human beings!</p> - -<p>Those who shamed their son for falsehood, permit -him to deceive poor young girls!</p> - -<p>Those who made it a crime in their son to oppress -those weaker than themselves, permit him to be oppressive -and perfidious toward women!</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_249"> 249</a></span> -Then they complain later that their sons treat them -ill; that they dishonor and ruin themselves;</p> - -<p>That they desire the death of their parents, in order -to enrich the usurers from whom they have borrowed -money to maintain their mistresses in luxury.</p> - -<p>They complain that they destroy their health, and -give their mothers puny grandchildren, for whose existence -they are in continual anxiety.</p> - -<p>Ah! ladies, you have only what you deserve; bear -the weight of a joint responsibility which you cannot -escape. You authorized your sons to sow their wild -oats; endure the consequences.</p> - -<p>But a mother cannot be the confident of her son, it -is said.</p> - -<p>Why not, madam, if you have brought him up in -such a way as to have no dishonorable confidence to -make to you.</p> - -<p>He would have none to make, if you had accustomed -him to conquer himself, to respect every woman as -though she were his mother, every young girl as though -she were his sister; to treat others as he would think it -right to be treated by them; if you had fully inculcated -on him that there is but one system of morality, -which both sexes are equally bound to obey; if -you had caused him to honor, love and practice labor; -if you had told him that we live to improve ourselves, -to practise justice and kindness, and to render back to -humanity what it does for us in protecting us, enlightening -us, rendering us moral, surrounding us with security -and comfort; that in fine our glory lies in subjecting -ourselves to the great law of Duty.</p> - -<p>If you had reared him in this manner, madam, on -surprising in your son the first signs of the ardent attraction -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_250"> 250</a></span> -that man feels toward the other sex, far from -abandoning the education of this instinct to the chances -of inexperience, you would do for it what you did for -the others; you would teach the young man to subject it -to a wise discipline.</p> - -<p>Instead of repeating the stupidly atrocious phrase; -<i>young men must sow their wild oats</i>, you would have -taken your son's hand affectionately in your own, and, -looking in his face, would have said: "My child, Nature -decrees that a woman should henceforth attract you -more strongly than I, and should maintain or destroy -what I have so laboriously built up: I do not murmur -at this; it must be so. But my affection and duty require -me to enlighten you in this grave juncture. Tell -me, if a young man, to satisfy the instinct which is now -awakening in you, should corrupt your sister, should -sacrifice her life, what would you think of him? what -would you do?"</p> - -<p>The young man, accustomed from childhood to practise -Justice, would not fail to reply: "I should think him -depraved and cowardly. Would he not be punished?"</p> - -<p>"No, my son, the seducer is not punished by the law."</p> - -<p>"Well! I would kill him, for my right of justice reverts -to me when the law makes no provision."</p> - -<p>"Right, my child. Then you will be neither depraved -nor cowardly with respect to any young girl; you will -not deserve the sentence which you have pronounced; -namely, death. You will respect all young girls and -women as you would wish your sister, your daughter to -be respected.</p> - -<p>"Another question: what would you think of a man -who should persuade me to betray your father; who -should rob him of my heart and cares; who should draw -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_251"> 251</a></span> -me aside from the grave duties of maternity? What -would you think of the man who should act thus with -respect to your own companion?"</p> - -<p>"I would judge him like the former and would treat -him no better."</p> - -<p>"Right again. Then you will respect all married -women as you would wish your mother and your wife -to be respected; and if you should meet any one towards -whom you should feel attracted, or who should be disloyal -enough to seek to attract you, you will shun her: -for flight is the sole remedy for passion.</p> - -<p>"A multitude of women, innocent at first, have been -turned aside from the right path by men who do not -think as you do. They now avenge themselves upon your -sex for the evil it has done them. They corrupt and -ruin men who, in their company, lose all sense of morality, -who learn to laugh at what you believe and venerate, -and undermine and destroy their health. Do you -feel the deplorable courage to expose yourself to such -risks?"</p> - -<p>The young man, practised from childhood to subject -his inclinations to reason and justice, would reply: "No, -mother, I will not do what I would not wish my companion -to do; I will neither degrade myself morally, -nor destroy my health, nor contribute my share towards -perpetuating a state of things which degrades the sex -to which belongs my mother, my sister, my wife and my -daughters, should I be so happy as to possess them.</p> - -<p>"I acknowledge frankly that I foresee a violent struggle -with myself, but, thanks to the moral training to -which you have accustomed me, thanks to the ideal of -destiny which you have given me, which I have accepted -in the plenitude of my reason, and which my duty -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_252"> 252</a></span> -marks out for me, I do not despair of subduing myself."—"This -victory will be less difficult to obtain, if you -employ yourself usefully and seriously; for you will -thus attract your vitality to the superior regions of the -brain. You will do wisely to add to this, much physical -exercise; to abstain from too substantial a diet, and -especially from stimulating drinks! you know the reaction -of the physical upon the moral system. Carefully -avoid licentious reading and improper conversation; give -a place in your mind to the virgin who will be united -to you; think and act as if in her presence; it will -guard you and keep you pure. This sweet ideal will -strengthen you against temptation, and contribute greatly -to render you insensible towards those women who -should have no place in your heart."</p> - -<p>"Love, my child, is a thing most serious in its results; -for the beings whom it unites become modified by each -other; it leaves its traces, however short may be its duration.</p> - -<p>"Its end is Marriage, one of the ends of which is the -continuity of the species. Now, you know the effects -of solidarity of blood; it is most important therefore -that you should choose for your companion a woman -whose character, morals and principles are in unison with -your own; not only for your happiness, but for the <i>organization</i> -of your children, the harmony of their nature -and conduct.</p> - -<p>"If passion does not leave you sufficiently free in your -judgment, come to me: I will see for you, and if I say: -my son, this woman will debase you, will cause you to -commit faults; be sure that your children will have -evil propensities; she is not adapted to rear them according -to your ideal, which she will never accept, because -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_253"> 253</a></span> -she is vain and selfish; if I tell you this, I know, -my son, that whatever may be your suffering, you will -renounce a woman whom you would cease to love after -a few months' union, and will prefer a transient sadness -to a life of unhappiness."</p> - -<p class="subh">II.</p> - -<p>The mother who has just shown her son why love -should be subjected to Reason and Justice, and has -pointed out to him what he should do to subdue its animal -phase, perceives also the awakening of this instinct -in her daughter. She wins her attention and gains her -confidence by revealing to her what is passing within her -heart, telling her that, at her age, she felt the same.</p> - -<p>"Hitherto," continues she, "you have been but a child; -your career as a woman is now commencing. You desire -the affection of a man, and your heart is moved at -the sweet thought of becoming a mother. Do not -blush, my daughter; it is lawful, on condition that your -desires are made subject to Reason and the law of Duty.</p> - -<p>"Many snares will be spread before your steps; for -men of all ages address to a young girl innumerable -flattering speeches, and surround her with homage -which renders her vain and coquettish if she has the -weakness to suffer herself to be intoxicated thereby. -Persuade yourself fully that all this adoration is not addressed -to you individually, but to your youth, to the -brightness of your eyes, to the freshness of your complexion, -and that, were you far better than you are and -far superior in intellect, these men would be ceremoniously -and frigidly polite, were you thirty years older. -This thought present in your mind will make you smile -at their frivolous and common-place jargon, and will -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_254"> 254</a></span> -preserve you from many weaknesses, such as rivalry of -dress, petty jealousies, and the ridiculous blunder of -playing the young girl at fifty.</p> - -<p>"As you can espouse but one man, it is sufficient to -be loved by one in the manner that you wish. A woman -who comports herself voluntarily so as to captivate -the hearts of many men, and leaves each to believe -that she prefers him above all, is an unworthy coquette, -who sins against Justice and Kindness: against Justice, -inasmuch as she demands a sentiment for which she can -make no return; as she acts towards others as she -would think it unjust that others should act towards her; -against Kindness, inasmuch as she risks causing suffering -to sincere hearts and sacrificing their repose to a -pleasurable impulse of vanity: such a woman, my -child, is contemptible; she is a dangerous enemy of her -sex; first, because she gives a bad opinion of it; next, -because she is an enemy to the repose of other women; -I know that you are too ingenuous, too true and too -worthy to fear that you will fall into such errors.</p> - -<p>"You have acknowledged to me that your young imagination -had pictured to itself a man. Far from banishing -this ideal, let it be always present to your mind, -much less in its physical aspect than in that of intellect, -morality and industry. This image will do more to -keep you safe than all my counsels, than all the surveillance -that I might, but never would exercise over you, -because this would be unworthy of us both.</p> - -<p>"Do not forget however that an ideal is absolute; that -the reality is always defective; do not therefore seek in -the man to whom you shall give your heart, a realization -of the ideal, but the qualities and faculties which, -with your aid, will permit him to approximate to what -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_255"> 255</a></span> -you wish to see him. You yourself are the ideal of a -man, not such as you are, but such as he will aid you -to become.</p> - -<p>"I dwell upon this point, my daughter, because nothing -is more dangerous than to insist on finding the ideal -in the reality; this makes us over difficult and lacking -in indulgence; and, if we have a lively imagination and -little reason, renders us unhappy and involves us in innumerable -errors.</p> - -<p>You know and feel that the end of love is Marriage; -now one of your duties as lover and spouse is the improvement -of the one to whom you shall be united. -You will stand with him in two different relations! first -as his betrothed, afterwards as his wife. Your modifying -power will, in the first case, be exercised in a direct -proportion to his desire to please and to be worthy of -you; in the second, in proportion to his confidence, esteem -and affection for you. In the first case, he will <i>wish</i> -to modify himself; in the second, he will do so without -knowing it."</p> - -<p>"What, mother, will he not always love me the same?"</p> - -<p>"Love, my child, undergoes transformations which we -should expect and to which we should submit; in the -beginning it is a fever of the soul; but fever is a condition -which cannot last without destroying life. Your -husband, while loving you perhaps more deeply, will -love you less ardently than before Marriage. Your -love will become transformed, why shall not his be the -same?</p> - -<p>"You cannot imagine how much trouble results from -the ignorance of women on this point, and from the -vain pursuit of the ideal in love. Many women, believing -that their husband loves them no longer because -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_256"> 256</a></span> -he loves them in a different manner, become detached -from him, suffer, and betray their duties; others, dreaming -of perfection in the loved one, fancy that they have -found it, and becoming disabused after the fever has -past, quit him, accusing him of having deceived them; -they love others with the same illusion, followed by the -same disenchantment, until age creeps on without curing -them of the chimera. Lastly, there are others who, -comprehending only the first period of love, cease to -love the man who has passed beyond it, and pursue another -love which will bring them the same fever; these, -as you comprehend, have not the slightest idea of woman's -grave duties in Love.</p> - -<p>"What I have just said of women is equally true of -men. You will avoid these dangers, my daughter, you -who have been accustomed from childhood to submit to -reason; who know that all reality is imperfect, that -habit weakens sentiment, you will therefore take the -man who suits you, as he is, designing to improve him -and to render him happy, knowing in advance that his -love will change without becoming extinguished, if you -succeed in gaining his affection, confidence and esteem, -so that he will find in you good counsel, peace, assistance -and security. You are too pure, my daughter, to -foresee all the snares that will be spread for you. It -belongs to me therefore to arm your youthful prudence: -You will perhaps encounter men married or betrothed -who, according to the common expression, <i>will pay -court to you</i>, and will utter innumerable sophisms to -justify their conduct."</p> - -<p>"Their sophisms would fall to the ground before the -simple answer: Sir, as I should be driven to despair if -another woman should rob me of him whom I loved, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_257"> 257</a></span> -as I should despise and hate her, all your compliments -cannot persuade me that it is right for me to do what I -would not that others should do to me. If you return -to the subject, I shall inform the person interested.</p> - -<p>"Right, my child: but if a young man who was free -should speak of love, and urge you to write to him in -secret?"</p> - -<p>"Might he not have good reason for acting in this -manner?"</p> - -<p>"None, my child. You must know that men are exceedingly -corrupt; that many among them eschew marriage, -flit from one woman to another, take advantage -of our credulity, and make use of the most impassioned -language to lead us in the way of shame and perdition. -Now, my child, know besides that we bear the weight of -men's faults as well as of our own; the verbal and -written promises of a man bind him to nothing. If, -suffering yourself to be led astray, you should become -a mother, the child would remain your charge; and -you could no longer hope for marriage; I say nothing -of our grief and shame, nor of the terrible risks to -which you would expose your brother, who might perish -in punishing the vile seducer whom the law does -not touch. If a man seeks you therefore unknown to -us, be sure that it is because his intentions are evil; that -he considers you as a toy which he purposes to break when -it ceases to amuse him. Now, my daughter, you know -that woman is created to be the worthy companion of -man; that she is not born to be sacrificed to him as an -object of pleasure. Instead therefore of suffering yourself -to be seduced, profit by the influence over men -which is given you by your beauty and grace, to recall -them to their duties: in this manner, you may be the -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_258"> 258</a></span> -means of saving many women; you will give a favorable -opinion of your sex, and will prepare a good example -for your daughter by setting one to your companions, -many of whom will follow it in order to share in the -esteem that will surround you; always remember that -our acts not only injure ourselves, but we have a joint -responsibility with others, and consequently no one can -be lost or saved alone.</p> - -<p>"One word more, my child. In your uncertainties, do -not hesitate to confide your troubles to me; do not say, -My mother is too reasonable to understand me in this. -Was it not by becoming a child again in order to comprehend -you, that I fulfilled my sacred task of instructor? -be persuaded that it will not be more difficult for -me to become a young girl again in order to comprehend, -while remaining a tender and experienced mother -to advise you.</p> - -<p>"You are free: I am not your censor, but your elder -sister, who loves you with devotion and desires your -happiness before all things. As a recompense for my -love and my long-continued cares, I only ask to be your -best friend; that is, the one in whose presence you will -think and speak aloud. Is this asking too much of you, -who are my joy and crown."</p> - -<p>This is the way, ladies, in which the woman who has -attained majority, strives to educate the world in Love.</p> - -<p class="subh">III.</p> - -<p>The young girl and young man enter into society. -The prudent mother knows that it is gently insinuated -to her son that she is a <i>prude</i>, a <i>dotard</i> who knows nothing -of the passions; who does not suspect that <i>everything -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_259"> 259</a></span> -in nature is good</i>, and should be respected; and -who has read the history of our species to so little purpose -that she has not perceived that humanity has love -in all forms: the <i>polygamic</i> and <i>polyandric</i>, and even -... the <i>ambiguous</i>.</p> - -<p>She knows also, that he is told that the satisfaction of -the animal instinct is necessary to the <i>health</i> of man, -and that brothels are places of public utility.</p> - -<p>She knows, lastly, that young and giddy girls, with -lax principles, make dangerous confidences to her -daughter.</p> - -<p>It is time, in opposition to these lax doctrines and -pernicious examples, to give to her children the philosophy -of Love. According to her method, she suffers is -to elucidate itself.</p> - -<p>My son, says she, what is the end of the attraction of -mineral molecules towards each other?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> The <i>production</i> of a body having a determined -form.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> What is the end of the attraction of the -plant for heat, light, air, the elements which it absorbs?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> The <i>production</i> of its own body, the development -of its organs, and of its properties, its preservation.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> And do you know, my daughter, what is -the end of the attraction of the pistil and stamens of the -flower.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">D</span><span class="smallc">AUGHTER.</span> The <i>production</i> of a being resembling -its parents.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> Why do we as well as the animals experience -an inclination or attraction for certain kinds of -food?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> It is evidently in order to incite to action the -organs which procure to the organism the elements -adapted to <i>produce</i> blood.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_260"> 260</a></span> -<span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> Why do both sexes of the same species experience -an attraction towards each other?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">D</span><span class="smallc">AUGHTER.</span> For the <i>production</i> of young to perpetuate -the species.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> Why do the females, and often males -among animals experience an inclination or attraction -to take care of the young?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">D</span><span class="smallc">AUGHTER.</span> In order to preserve them and to educate -them as far as is in their power, that they may be -able to provide for themselves.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> Are you quite sure, my children, that the -end of these attractions is not the attraction itself, the -procurement of a pleasure?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> The pleasure seems to me only the means of -impelling the being to fulfill a necessary or useful function. -Thus the end of our scientific, artistic and industrial -inclinations or attractions is not the pleasure which -we take in their satisfaction, but the <i>production</i> of -science, art and industry.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">D</span><span class="smallc">AUGHTER.</span> That is, the increase and progress of our -intellect through the knowledge of the laws of Nature, -in order to modify this nature with a view to our wants -and pleasures.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> To what inclination or attraction is Society -due?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> To our attraction for our fellow beings.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">D</span><span class="smallc">AUGHTER.</span> This attraction is the father of Justice -and of Goodness: it <i>produces</i> them.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> Will you generalize the character of this -inclination or attraction in accordance with what we -have just said?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> The end of all attraction or inclination is the -<i>production</i>, <i>progress</i> and <i>preservation</i> of beings.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_261"> 261</a></span> -<span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> Are all instincts good which are merely inclinations -or attractions?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> For animals, which are subject to fatality, they -are; because they tend directly to their end, without -ever appearing to deviate from it. In our species, they -are good in principle, if we regard their end; but they -may become evil through the deviation to which our -liberty subjects them.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> By what token can we know that our instinct -has a right tendency?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">D</span><span class="smallc">AUGHTER.</span> By comparing its use with its end; by assuring -ourselves that this use is not prejudicial to the -practice of justice, that it does not detract from the -right of any of our faculties; that is, that it disturbs -neither our individual harmony nor that of others; for -it is on these conditions alone that it can coöperate in -the realization of the social ideal.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> Very well. Now apply this general doctrine -to human love, my children.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">S</span><span class="smallc">ON.</span> Since love is one of the forms of attraction, -and since the general end of attraction is the production, -progress and preservation of beings and species, it -is evident that human love should possess these characteristics. -Its principal function appears to me to be the -reproduction of the species.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">D</span><span class="smallc">AUGHTER.</span> It seems to me, brother, that this is not -enough; since true husbands and wives do not cease to -love each other after this end has been fulfilled, and -since persons may love without having children.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">M</span><span class="smallc">OTHER.</span> You are right, my daughter; our faculties -being more numerous and more fully developed than -those of the animals, our love cannot be incomplete -like theirs; it cannot be of the same nature in our progressive -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_262"> 262</a></span> -species as in those species fatal and unprogressive -of themselves. In us, each faculty, properly -employed, aids in the improvement of all the rest, -wrongly employed, it interrupts our harmony and -lowers us; it is the same with our love. Or rather this -passion is the one that most of all causes us to grow or -to decline.</p> - -<p>You know, my children, that humanity advances only -by forming itself an ideal and endeavoring to realize it. -Every passion has its ideal, which is modified by that -of the whole. In the beginning, man, in the animal -state, made the end of love the pleasure resulting from -the satisfaction of a wholly physical want: he cared -nothing for the most evident aim—progeny. A little -later, man less gross, loved woman for her beauty and -fruitfulness; this was the patriarchal age of love. Later -still, the Northern races wrought a change in this instinct; -love became decomposed, as it were; the lover -possessed the love of the soul; the woman was loved -not only for her beauty, but as the inspirer of lofty -deeds; the husband was the possessor of the body alone -and the children were the fruit of marriage; this was -the chivalrous age of love. Since pacific labor has been -organized and has gained a place in public opinion, love -has entered a new phase; many among the moderns -consider it as the initiative of labor. Some regard the -attraction of pleasure as playing the chief part in industrial -production, and leave full liberty to the attraction, -however inconsistent it may be; others preserve the -couple, and transform woman into the moving power -of action; the love that she inspires excites the efforts -of the worker.</p> - -<p>The progress hitherto made by humanity is therefore -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_263"> 263</a></span> -that love has now for its end the perpetuation of -the species, the modification of man by woman, and the -production of labor.</p> - -<p>In a higher ideal of Justice, the sexes being equal in -rights, love will have a higher end; the spouses will -unite on account of conformity of principles, union of -hearts, wedding of intellects, common labor: love will -join them to double their strength, to modify them by -each other, from the friction of their hearts will be -struck out sentiments which neither would have had -alone; from the union of their intellects will be born -thoughts which neither would have had alone; from the -aid that they will lend each other in their common labor -will proceed works that neither would have accomplished -alone, as from the union of their whole being, -will be born new generations more perfect than the preceding -because they will be the product of the greatest -possible harmony. It will be only when woman shall -take her lawful place that humanity will see love in all -its splendor, and that this passion, subversive to-day in -inequality and incoherence, will become what it should -be; one of the great instruments of Progress.</p> - -<p>We, my children, who are too rational to mistake the -means by which Nature impels us to accomplish her -designs for the designs themselves, will take care not to -fancy that the end of love is pleasure; on the other -hand, we have too much respect for equality to imagine -that it is for the benefit of one sex alone. We will remain -faithful to the ideal of our lofty destinies, in defining -love as the reciprocal attraction of man and woman -with the end of perpetuating the species, of improving -the partners mutually with respect to intellect -and feeling, and of advancing science, art and industry -by the labor of the pair.</p> - -<p class="subh"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_264"> 264</a></span> -IV.</p> - -<p>Sophists have told you, my son, that all our inclinations -are in Nature; that they are good and should be -respected.</p> - -<p>You asked them doubtless whether the inclinations to -theft, to assassination, to violation, to anthropophagy, -which are in Nature, are good, and why, instead of respecting -them, society punishes their manifestation.</p> - -<p>You demonstrated to them, I hope, that there is nothing -commendable in the exaggeration or the perversion -of instincts.</p> - -<p>You demonstrated to them, I hope, that Nature is -brutal fatality against which we are bound to struggle -both within and without ourselves; that our Justice -and virtue are composed only of conquests made over it -in us, as all that constitutes our physical well-being is -only the result of conquests made over it outside of us.</p> - -<p>These sophists have told you that love comes and -goes without our knowing how or wherefore; and that -we can no more command it to spring up than to endure.</p> - -<p>This is true, my son, of the brutal desires of the -flesh, which is the passion of animals alone, and is -extinguished by possession.</p> - -<p>This is also true of that complex passion which has -its seat in the imagination and the senses, and ends with -the illusion that is always of short duration.</p> - -<p>But it is not true of genuine love; this sees both the -faults and the virtues of the loved one; but softens the -first and exalts the last, and hopes by degrees to put an -end to that which wounds it.</p> - -<p>This sentiment which takes possession of the heart, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_265"> 265</a></span> -is patient; it bears lest it become effaced, it surrounds -itself with precautions in order to remain constant; if -it becomes extinct, it is not unconsciously: for we suffer -cruel tortures before resolving to cease to love.</p> - -<p>You have been told that love is irrepressible; are we -then beings of fatality? This sophism renders man -cowardly and depraves him; for what is the use of -struggling against what we know to be unconquerable, -and why not sacrifice to it the best of our tendencies? -Examine the conduct of the partisans of such a doctrine.</p> - -<p>The human ideal requires that they shall not do to -others what they would not think it just that others -should do to them; yet they seduce maidens, make -them mothers, and abandon them without caring about -the children born of these unions; without caring -whether the young mother commits suicide, dies of -grief, or becomes depraved; without caring whether -the parents go down to the grave.</p> - -<p>Like deadly reptiles, they glide to the domestic fireside -of others, rob their friend of the affection of his -wife, and force him to labor for the children of adultery.</p> - -<p>The woman who believes in irrepressible love breaks -her pledges to her husband; lives a life of deceit; -brings trouble and sorrow into the houses of other women, -whose lives are blighted by her.</p> - -<p>It is in this way that those who practice this sophistry -fulfil their duty to be just, not to afflict their fellows, -to labor for the happiness and improvement of those -about them, to preserve the weak from oppression and -wrong. To this pretended irrepressibility of love, they -sacrifice Justice, goodness, the happiness, repose and -honor of others; lead them into the path of dissipation; -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_266"> 266</a></span> -bring dissolution into the family and society; -in a word, offer up as a sacrifice to animal instinct, -moral sense and reason.</p> - -<p>You have also been told that every species of love is -found in Nature; the polyamic and polygandric, as -well as that of the constant pair.</p> - -<p>Yes, my child, every species of love is found in Nature, -as is every species of vice and every species of -virtue. But you know that it is not enough that a thing -exists within us to prove it to be good; it must be in -conformity with the ideal of our destiny, with our harmony: -it is wrong in the opposite case.</p> - -<p>Love, such as we have defined it, needs duration and -equality; duration, because we do not become modified -in a few months; because we do not accomplish great -works in a few months; because we do not rear children -in a few months; duration is so truly an aspiration of -love, that it imagines that eternity will hardly suffice -for it. It must have equality; division is hateful to it; -it will therefore have a unit for a unit, both male and -female. Now polygamy and polyandria are the negation -of equality, of dignity in love.</p> - -<p>Let us consider the effects of these two deviations of -instinct.</p> - -<p>Oriental polygamy renders human beings profoundly -unequal, transforms women into cattle, mutilates thousands -of men to guard the harems, depraves the possessor -of women by despotism and cruelty, concentrates all -his vitality upon a single instinct at the expense of intellect, -reason and activity; whence it follows that he -is lost to science, art, industry, society according to -right: that he submits without repugnance to despotism, -and passively extends his neck to the halter. There, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_267"> 267</a></span> -no influence is wielded by woman, who is subjected to -designed enervation, who is depraved in as hideous a -manner as the eunuch, her keeper. Thus, inequality in -love and in right, abandonment of art, science and industry, -intellectual and physical enervation, debasement -of the moral sense—such are vices inherent to the polygamy -of the East. You see that this is far from the -ideal of our destinies.</p> - -<p>In our West, polygamy <i>de facto</i> produces the cattle -of the brothel, legions of courtesans who ruin families. -As many of these women are diseased, they infect those -who associate with them with fearful maladies which -undermine their constitutions, and thus pave the way -for puny offspring, consequently, for weak minds and -feeble intellects. I appeal for proof to the conscription; -never were so many exemptions seen as now on account -of under size, although the standard has been lowered, -never were so many exemptions seen as now for constitutional -imperfections and acquired disease.</p> - -<p>To vitiate the generation in its germ is not the only -crime of our polygamy; it enervates those who practice -it, for nothing leads to excess, consequently to enervation, -so much as the change of relations. On the -other hand, our polygamists become transformed into -machines of sensation; then intellect grows weak; they -become stupid and selfish. Look at the pitiable young -men of the present time, emaciated by their vices and -by those of their sires; scoffers, faithless, jesting at the -most sacred things, despising, not only the corrupt women, -their worthy companions, but also the whole sex -to which their mothers belong; look at them; so gross -as to sicken the observer, nothing longer commands -their respect; they thrust aside gray haired women -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_268"> 268</a></span> -from the sidewalk into the gutter; they are impertinent -to old men; they put young girls to the blush with their -cynical speeches; polygamy has rendered them ignoble, -and has destroyed our native urbanity as well as all -dignity.</p> - -<p>They will tell you that women are but little better -than they. But this result becomes inevitable in a -country in which women are not kept in seclusion. -Polyandria becomes the necessary companion of polygamy; -for since men consider themselves at liberty to -have more than one woman, why should women consider -themselves forbidden to have more than one man?</p> - -<p>Finally, my son, the results of irrepressible love, -Polygamy and Polyandria in our Western country are:</p> - -<p>The seduction and corruption of women;</p> - -<p>Adultery, debasement of character; the moral and -intellectual enfeebling of both sexes;</p> - -<p>The enervation and degeneracy of the race;</p> - -<p>Falsehood, deceit, cruelty, injustice of every kind, -the use of woman by man for her beauty, that of man -by woman for his money or position;</p> - -<p>The dissolution and ruin of the family;</p> - -<p>Several thousand illegitimate children annually, without -counting abortions;</p> - -<p>Such is the value of these theories put in practice.</p> - -<p>Is this in conformity with our ideal of human love? -Is it in conformity with our ideal of human destiny, -which requires that we shall progress and cause others -to progress in good; that we shall practice Justice and -Goodness?</p> - -<p>A word more, and we have done.</p> - -<p>When Rome had ceased to believe in chastity, in the -sacredness of oaths; when she wallowed in polygamic -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_269"> 269</a></span> -and polyandric customs; when she took pleasure for -her end, tyranny appeared. Nothing was more natural: -man binds captive those only who have first suffered -themselves to be bound under the yoke of bestial instinct: -he who knows how to govern himself does not -yield obedience to man; he bows only before the law -when it is the expression of Reason.</p> - -<p>Remember, my son, that we are powerful only -through chastity; only thus can we produce great -works in science, art and industry; only thus can we -practice Justice, be worthy of liberty. Outside of chastity, -there is nothing but degradation, injustice, impotence, -slavery; and every nation that forsakes it falls -from the arms of despotism into the grave.</p> - -<p>Do not suffer yourself therefore to be moved by modern -sophisms, have always before your thoughts your -obligations as a moral and a free being, your duties as a -member of humanity; subject all that is within you to -Reason, to Justice, to the sentiment of your dignity, and -live like a man, not like a brute.</p> - -<div class="section"> -<p class="subh"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_270"> 270</a></span> -MARRIAGE, A DIALOGUE.<br /> -<span class="medium">I</span></p> -</div> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> We are about to speak of Marriage from -the stand point of the modern ideal—how do you define -it?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Love, sanctioned by Society.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Do you consider Marriage as indissoluble?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Before the law, I do not; but at the moment -of their union, the spouses should have full confidence -that the bond will never be dissolved.</p> - -<p>I believe that Marriage becomes indissoluble by the -will alone of the spouses; that it can be so only in this -manner.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> What part do you assign to Society in Marriage?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> You shall fix it yourself after recalling our -principles.</p> - -<p>If man and woman are free beings at any period -of their life, they cannot <i>legally and validly</i> lose their -liberty.</p> - -<p>If man and woman are beings socially equal in any -of their relations, the one cannot <i>legally, validly</i> be -subordinated to the other.</p> - -<p>If the continual end of the human being is to become -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_271"> 271</a></span> -perfected through liberty, and to seek happiness, no law -can legitimately, <i>validly</i> turn him aside from its pursuit.</p> - -<p>If the end of society should be to render individuals -<i>equal</i> it cannot, under penalty of forfeiting its mission, -constitute inequality of persons and of rights.</p> - -<p>If Society cannot without iniquity enter the domain -of individual liberty, it cannot <i>lawfully, validly</i> prescribe -duties that pertain only to the jurisdiction of the -conscience, and annul moral liberty.</p> - -<p>Now draw your conclusions.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> From these principles, it follows that man -and woman should remain free and equal in Marriage; -that Society has no right to intervene in their association -except to render them equal; that it has no right -to prescribe to them duties which proceed only from -love, nor consequently to punish their violation, that it -cannot in principle grant or refuse divorce, because it -belongs to the husband and wife alone to know whether -it is useful for their happiness and progress to be separated -from each other.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Your conclusions are right, but if Society -has no right over the body or the soul of the husband -and wife in their capacity of spouses, if it cannot without -abuse of power interfere in any of their intimate -relations, it is its right and duty to intervene in Marriage -as regards interests and children.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> In fact, in the union of the sexes, there is -not merely an association of two free and equal persons, -but also a partnership of capital and labor; then, -from the marriage, children are born for whose education, -occupation and subsistence it is necessary to provide.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Now, the general protection of material -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_272"> 272</a></span> -interests and of the rising generation devolves of right -upon Society. In the sight of the law, the husband -and wife ought to be regarded only as partners, engaging -to employ a certain share of capital, together with -their labor, for a definite purpose. Society takes note -only of a contract of interests, the execution of which -it guarantees like that of any other contract, and the -breach of which it makes public, should it take place by -the wish of the parties interested. On the other hand, -the education of the rising generation is a question of -life and death to Society. The children being free with -respect to development, and liable to be useful or injurious -to their fellow citizens according to the training -which they have received, society has a right to watch -over them, to secure their material support, their moral -future, to fix the age of marriage, to entrust the children -to the more deserving parent in case of separation, -and if both are unworthy, to take them away entirely.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Do you not go a little too far; on the one -hand, do not children belong to their parents, on the -other, may not Society err with respect to the choice of -the principles to be instilled in them?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Children do not belong to their parents because -they are not <span class="smallc">THINGS</span>: to those who obstinately -persist in believing them <i>property</i>, we say that Society -has the right of dispossession for the public good. Then -the social right over children is limited so far as principles -are concerned to those of morality. Society has -no right over religious beliefs which belong to the domain -of spiritual jurisdiction. The power that should -take away children from their parents because they -were not of a certain religious faith would be guilty of -despotism, and would merit universal execration. If -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_273"> 273</a></span> -you say that Society has no right to impose a dogma -upon children, you speak truly; but I cannot conceive -how you can entertain the thought of forbidding it the -right to teach them, even against the will of their parents, -enlightening science, purifying morality. Is it not -the duty of society to secure the progress of its members, -and can any one have a right to keep a human being -in ignorance and evil?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> You are right, and I condemn myself. Let -us return to Marriage. I see with pleasure that you -differ in opinion from a number of modern innovators -who deny the lawfulness of social interference in the -union of the sexes.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> If the union were without protection, who -would suffer by it? Not men, but rather women and -children.</p> - -<p>No one can compel a man to live with a woman -whom he has ceased to love; but he must be constrained -to fulfill his duties with respect to the children born of -this union, and to keep his business engagements: in -wronging his companion and escaping from the burdens -of paternity, he takes advantage of his liberty to the -detriment of others: Society has a right to prevent -this.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> So you do not grant to Society the right of -binding souls or bodies; but that of guaranteeing the -contract of Marriage, and the obligations of the spouses -towards their future children; of forcing them, in case -of separation, to fulfill this last obligation?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Yes; thus in case of the rupture of the -marriage tie, society has only to state publicly the responsibilities -of the spouses, the number of children, and -the name of the parent on whom their guardianship devolves, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_274"> 274</a></span> -either by mutual consent or by social authority. -And in confining itself to this part, Society would do -more to prevent the separation of married couples than -by all that it has hitherto foolishly invented for the purpose. -The parties would be free to marry again; but -what woman would be willing to unite herself to a man -who was burdened with several children, or who had -treated his first companion unkindly? What man would -consent to wed a woman in the same position?</p> - -<p>Do you not think that the difficulty that would be experienced -in contracting a new marriage would be a -curb on the inconstancy and bad conduct that lead to a -rupture?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> I believe indeed that marriage, as you understand -it, would have more chances of duration than -ours: first, because it is our nature to cling most closely -to that which we may lose. I have often asked myself -why many men remain faithful to their mistresses and -treat them kindly, while they are disrespectful and unfaithful -to their wives; I have asked myself also why -many couples who had long lived happily together -when voluntarily united, were unhappy and often driven -to a legal separation when they had finally married; -and the only reason that I have been able to find is that -we set the most value on that which we know may -escape us. Man has more respect for a woman who -is not his legal property, his inferior, than for her who -is thus transformed by the law. Notwithstanding, it -must be acknowledged that your ideas appear eccentric.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Yet they are nothing more than an application -of our laws; indeed, do they not decree that -covenants can have <i>things</i> only, not <i>persons</i> for their object. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_275"> 275</a></span> -That Society <i>does not recognize vows</i>, and that -proceedings cannot be instituted against their violation?</p> - -<p>Now the existing law of marriage <i>alienates</i> one of -the partners in favor of the other; the wife <i>belongs</i> to -the husband; she is in his <i>power</i>. What is such a contract, -if not the violation of the principle which affirms -that no covenant can be made involving persons? can it -be more lawful to alienate one's person by a contract -of slavery?</p> - -<p>Some say that we are at liberty to dispose of our freedom -as we choose, even though it be to renounce it. -Indeed, we may do this, as we may commit suicide, but -to make use of our liberty to renounce it or to commit -suicide is much less to use aright than to violate the -laws of moral or physical nature; these are acts of insanity -which we should pity, but which we are not at -liberty to erect into a law.</p> - -<p>Why does Society refuse to recognize vows and to -punish their violation, if not because it admits that it is -forbidden to penetrate into the jurisdiction of the conscience? -if not because it does not admit that an individual -may alienate his moral and intellectual being any -more than his body, and devote himself to immobility -when it is his duty, on the contrary, to go forward?</p> - -<p>I ask then if this same Society is not inconsistent in -exacting perpetual vows from the husband and wife, in -exacting from the wife a vow of obedience, a tacit vow -to deliver up her person to the desires of the husband?</p> - -<p>Is not the moral liberty of the spouses as worthy of -respect as that of nuns, priests and monks?</p> - -<p>Have married persons more right in Nature and Reason, -to alienate their moral and intellectual being, their -liberty and their person than the celibates of the Church?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_276"> 276</a></span> -Another inconsistency of the law is that it declares -Marriage an association; the contract of Marriage is -therefore a contract of partnership. Now I ask whether, -in a single contract of this kind, it is enjoined by law on -one of the partners to <i>obey</i>, to be subjected to a <i>perpetual -minority</i>, to be <i>absorbed</i>?</p> - -<p>I doubt not that the law would declare such a contract -between independent partners void; why then -does it legalize such a monstrosity in the partnership of -husband and wife? It is a relic of barbarism, as you -will see if you reflect on it.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> I hope that, through reason and necessity, -the law will be reformed sooner or later: but a reformation -which will not take place is that of the forms -of religious marriage, which prescribe to the spouses the -same oaths as the code, and like it, subject the wife to -the husband.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Well, what matters it to us, since, thanks -to liberty, the religious marriage is merely a benediction -with which we can dispense. Those who have a -disposition to go to the Church, the Temple, or the -Synagogue should have full liberty to receive the blessing -of their respective priests! this does not concern Society. -What we need is that, if afterward their vows -should not seem to them binding, social authority should -not make them obligatory; they have a right to be -absurd, but society has no right to impose absurdity on -them. Its duty is, on the contrary, to enlighten them, -and to render them free.</p> - -<p class="subh">II.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Those who subordinate woman in marriage -rest on the assertion that unity of direction, consequently -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_277"> 277</a></span> -a ruling power, is needed in the family; now, -your theory evidently destroys this ruling power.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> What is the ruling power? Practically, -it is manifested through the function of government. -Formerly, it was based upon two principles, now recognized -as radically false: <i>Divine right</i> and <i>inequality</i>. -It was the <i>right</i> of those who exercised it to call themselves -kings, autocrats, priests, men; it was the <i>duty</i> -therefore of the people, the church, woman to obey the -elect of God, their superiors by the grace of right delegated -from on high.</p> - -<p>But in modern opinion, the ruling power is nothing -more than a function delegated by the parties interested -in order to execute their will.</p> - -<p>It is not our business to inquire here whether this -modern interpretation has become incarnated in facts; -whether the old principle is not still struggling with the -new; whether the holders of political and familial authority -are not still making insane pretensions to divine -right; we have only to show what the notion of the -ruling power has become in the present state of thought -and feeling.</p> - -<p>What will be the ruling power in marriage, in accordance -with modern opinion, if not the delegation by -one spouse to the other of the management of business -and of the family—a delegation of function; no longer -a right?</p> - -<p>And if man and woman are socially equal in principle, -if the aptitudes, upon which all functions are based, -are not dependent on sex, by what right does society interfere -to give the authority either to the husband or -the wife?</p> - -<p>If there is need of a ruling power in the household, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_278"> 278</a></span> -are not the parties themselves best capable of bestowing -it on the one who can best and most usefully exercise -it?</p> - -<p>But among partners, is there really room for a ruling -power? No, there is room only for division of labor, -mutual understanding with respect to common interests. -To consult each other, to come to an agreement, to divide -the tasks, to remain master each of his own department; -this is what the spouses should do, and what -they do in general.</p> - -<p>The law has so little part in our customs that to-day -things happen in this wise: many rich women translate -two articles of the Code as follows; <i>the husband shall -obey his wife, and shall follow her wherever she sees -fit to dwell or sojourn</i>. And the husbands obey, because -it would not do to offend a wife with a large dowry; -because it would make a scandal to thwart their -wife; because they need her, being unable, without dishonoring -themselves, to keep a mistress.</p> - -<p>Husbands in the great centres of population escape -obedience through love outside of marriage; they lay -no restrictions on their part; Madame is free.</p> - -<p>Among the working classes of the citizens and the -people, it is practically admitted that neither shall command, -and that the husband shall do nothing without -consulting his wife and obtaining her consent.</p> - -<p>In all classes, if any husband is simple enough to -take his pretended right in earnest, he is cited as a bad -man, an intolerable despot whom his wife may hate and -deceive with a safe conscience; and it is a curious fact -that the greater part of the legal separations are for no -other cause at the bottom than the exercise of the -rights and prerogatives conceded to the husbands by -law.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_279"> 279</a></span> -I ask you now, what is the use of maintaining against -reason and custom, an authority which does not exist, -or which is transferred to the spouse condemned to subjection.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> On this point, I am wholly of your opinion; -not a single woman of modern times takes the rights -of her husband in earnest. But your theory not only -attacks his authority; it also wages war against the indissolubility -of marriage, which it is affirmed, is necessary -to the dignity of this tie; to the happiness and future -of the children, to the morality of the family.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> I claim, on the contrary, that my theory -secures, as far as is humanly possible, the perpetuity -and purity of marriage. At present, when the knot is -tied, the spouses, no longer fearing to lose each other, -find in the absence of this fear the germ of a mutual -coolness; they may quarrel, be discourteous or unfaithful -to each other; there will be scandal, a legal separation -perhaps, but they are riveted together; they can -never become strangers. Contrast with this picture a -household in which the bond is dissoluble; all is -changed; the despotic or brutal husband represses his -evil propensities, because he knows that his companion, -whom after all he loves, would quit him and transfer to -another the attentions she lavishes on him; and that no -honest woman would be willing to take her place.</p> - -<p>The husband disposed to be unfaithful would continue -in the path of duty, because his abandonment and -offences would alienate his wife, blast his reputation, -and prevent him from forming an honorable alliance.</p> - -<p>The worn out profligate would no longer espouse the -dowry of a young girl, because he would know that, -promptly disenchanted, the young wife, instead of having -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_280"> 280</a></span> -recourse to adultery, would break the ill assorted -union.</p> - -<p>The woman who should take advantage of her -dowry, of the necessity of her husband to remain faithful, -to tyrannise over him, would fear a divorce which -would throw the blame on her and condemn her to a -life of solitude.</p> - -<p>A shrewish wife would no longer dare to inflict suffering -on her husband, or a coquette to deceive or torment -him; who would marry them after a separation?</p> - -<p>Do you not see that free marriages are happier and -more lasting than any others?</p> - -<p>Have you not yourself admitted that to separate the -parties in these unions, it often suffices to join them legally?</p> - -<p>I know myself of a voluntary union that was very -happy during <i>twenty-two</i> years, and was dissolved by -separation at the end of three years of legal marriage; -I have known of many others of a shorter duration -which legality contributed to dissolve instead of rendering -eternal.</p> - -<p>You would hardly believe how many married couples -reformed in their treatment of each other in 1848, when -they feared that the law of divorce might be accepted. -If the simple expedient of divorce has power to produce -good results, what may not be expected from a rational -law.</p> - -<p>We need only to reflect in order to comprehend that -voluntary dissolubility, without social intervention, -would render unions better assorted, for it would be for -one's interest, for his own reputation, to enter into -them only with the moral conviction of being able to -preserve them; then only would no excuse be found for -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_281"> 281</a></span> -infidelity; loyalty would make part of the relations of the -spouses. The law of perpetuity has perverted everything, -corrupted everything; on the side of the woman, -it favors, yes, necessitates stratagem; on the side of the -man, it favors brutality and despotism; it provokes on -both sides adultery, poisoning and assassination; and -leads to those separations which are daily increasing in -number, and which, by giving the lie to the indissolubility -of marriage, place the partners in a painful and -perilous situation, and bring in their train a host of -irregularities.</p> - -<p>In fact, if the spouses are separated while young, -concubinage is their refuge. The man in this false position -finds many to excuse him; but the woman is -forced to conceal herself, to tremble at the thought of a -pregnancy and to make it disappear. Legal separation -leads the spouses not only to concubinage, to mutual -hatred, but causes the birth of thousands of children -whose future is compromised, destroyed by the fact of -their illegitimacy. Let the spouses be free in accordance -with their right, and all will fall into its proper -order, for all will be done openly and truly.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> But the future of the children?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> The morality of the children is better insured -under the system of liberty than under that of -indissolubility, for they will not be witnesses for years of -the bitter contention and licentiousness which now render -them deceitful and vicious, and inspire them with -contempt or hatred for one of the authors of their being, -sometimes of both, when they do not take them -for models; if life in common becomes impossible to the -parents, which will be more rare under the law of liberty, -the children will not be subjected to the power of -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_282"> 282</a></span> -those who violate the law of received morality; they -may see these parents contract a new alliance <i>as now</i>, -but this alliance will be honored by all.</p> - -<p>From these unions children may be born <i>as now</i>, but -these children, instead of being cast into the hospital, -will share with the first the affection and inheritance -of their father or mother. The so-styled legitimate -children will lose in fortune, it is true; but they will -gain in good examples; many children who are now in -the category of the illegitimate will be ranked among the -former, and will be no longer condemned by desertion -to die young, or else to grovel in ignorance, vice and -misery; to see their brow branded with the fault of their -parents as of their own by a host of imbeciles and men -without heart, who have no other guarantee for what -they call their legitimacy than the presumption accorded -them by the law.</p> - -<p class="subh">III.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> It will be long yet, perhaps, before collective -Reason comprehends liberty in the union of the -sexes as you do, and men will ascribe to themselves the -right not only of binding the interests, but the souls -and bodies of the spouses.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> As far as we can foresee, Society must -necessarily? pass through two stages to realize our opinion; -it must first grant divorce <i>for a declared cause</i>; -later it will grant divorce decreed in private on the petition -of one or both of the spouses. We will not take -up this last form of the rupture of the conjugal tie, but -that which is nearest us—divorce for a declared cause.</p> - -<p>What are the reasons which you would consider valid -for a petition for divorce?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_283"> 283</a></span> -<span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> First, those which now give rise to separation -from bed and board: adultery of the wife, cruelty, -grave abuses, condemnation of one of the spouses to -punishment affecting the liberty or person, the fraudulent -management of the property by the husband; next, infidelity -of the husband, qualified adultery, incompatibility -of temper, notable vices, such as drunkenness, -gaming, etc.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Very well; these causes suffice.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> During the proceedings for divorce, the -wife should be as free as the husband. The child that -should be born to her after more than ten months' separation -should be reputed natural, even though the divorce -had not been pronounced; and should bear her name and -inherit from her like one of her legitimate children.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Who should take custody of the children -and the property during the proceedings?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> The court should decide who should have -the care of the children, in accordance with the causes -for the petition for divorce and the testimony of the -parents, friends and neighbors.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> But if the spouses ask to be divorced only -on account of incompatibility of temper, and are both -honorable?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> They should be requested to agree mutually -either to share the children, or to entrust them to one -of the two, or to give the younger children to the mother, -leaving the sons over fifteen to the father. The court, -besides, should appoint from the family of the mother, -a guardian to watch over the conduct of the father towards -the children left in his care; and from the family -of the father, a similar guardian to the mother and the -children remaining with her. This guardianship, which -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_284"> 284</a></span> -should be strictly moral, should continue till the children -had attained majority.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> And in case the parents should be alike unworthy?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> In such a case, which would seldom happen, -the judge, in behalf of society, should deprive them of -the custody of the children, and entrust it to a member -of the family of one of the parents, appointing a guardian -to watch over his conduct and protect the interests -of his ward from the family of the other.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Very well; I see with pleasure that you -are cured of the erroneous belief that the children <i>belong</i> -to the parents, and that you comprehend the high function -of society as the protector of minors.</p> - -<p>During the suit for divorce, who shall have the control -of the property?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> If the contract has been made under the -system of separation of property, and for paraphernalia, -there is no need of putting the question; each one will -manage his own.</p> - -<p>But I am somewhat puzzled how to answer you in -case of communion of goods, or in case the capital is -embarked in a common business, carried on solely by -one of the parties. The present law does not seem to -me sufficiently to protect the interests of the wife in case -of separation.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Without entangling ourselves in a host of -individual cases which modify or contradict each other, -let us provide that in case of communion of goods, the -administration of the property shall be taken from the -spouse holding it if the petition for divorce be based on -his bad management, his dissipated habits, or his condemnation -to a penalty affecting his liberty or person; -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_285"> 285</a></span> -that in all other cases, he shall make an inventory of -the property and the condition of the business; and a -person shall be appointed from the family of the spouse -excluded from the management to watch over the conduct -of the spouse to whom it is entrusted, who shall be -bound to pay alimony to the other until the divorce -shall be decreed.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> And if there is no fortune?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Until the spouses become strangers, they -owe assistance to each other: the court should therefore -require the spouse that earns the more to aid the -other.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> How long a time should elapse between the -admission of the petition and the judgment of divorce?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A year, in order that the parties may have -time for reflection.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> The divorce being granted, and the ex-partners -restored to liberty, would you permit them to -marry others?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Most assuredly; else what signifies our -arguments against separation?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> What! the adulterous and brutal spouse, -he who has inflicted suffering on his partner, who has -been wholly in the wrong, should enjoy like the other -the privilege of marrying again? I confess that this -shocks me.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Because you are not sufficiently imbued -with the doctrines of liberty and the sentiment of right. -Marriage is the natural right of every adult; society -has no right therefore to prohibit it or to make it a privilege; -on the other hand, in every divorce, there is -wrong or the lack of something on either side with respect -to the other; the man or woman who commits -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_286"> 286</a></span> -adultery may be a model of fidelity to a partner better -suited to his or her temperament and disposition; he -who has been brutal and violent may be wholly different -with a wife possessing a different character; in -short, we repeat, to prohibit marriage is to permit libertinism, -and it is not the interest of society to pervert -itself. Both partners therefore should have a right to -marry, but the law should take care that all should be -informed of the burdens resting upon them by reason -of their first marriage, and know that they are divorced. -Consequently, society has a right to publish the bill of -divorce, and to require that the parties divorced should -provide for the necessities of their minor children, and -that the bill of divorce, joined to the one setting forth -this obligation, should accompany the publication of the -bans of a new marriage; in this, there is neither injustice -nor abuse of power; for each one will submit -to the consequence of what he has done in perfect freedom.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> And would you not fix the number of times -that a divorced person might re-marry?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why fix it? do you fix the number of -times that a widow or widower may marry again?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> But a libertine, a bad man might marry -ten times, and thus render ten women unhappy.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> What are you talking of! do you seriously -believe that there would be a woman insane enough to -marry a man <i>nine times</i> divorced, a man obliged to accompany -the publication of his bans with nine bills of -divorce, with nine judgements compelling him to pay -so much yearly for the support of seven, eight or nine -children. Do you seriously believe that a woman -would consent to become the companion of such a man! -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_287"> 287</a></span> -This man might indeed marry twice—but three times! -do you think that it would be possible?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> You are right, and on reflection, the measures -which you advocate appear perhaps severe.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> I know it; but our aim is not to favor divorces -nor subsequent unions; but, on the contrary, to -prevent the former as far as possible by the difficulties -of forming the latter. Now for this it is not necessary -to restrict the liberty of the individual, but to render -him responsible for his acts, and to rivet the chain that -he has forged for himself in such a manner that he can -neither cast it aside nor lay the burden of it on others -unless they are duly warned of it and consent thereto.</p> - -<p class="subh">IV.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Ought society to permit unions disproportioned -in age? Is it not to expose a woman to adultery, -to marry her at seventeen or eighteen to a man of -thirty, forty or even fifty years of age? What harmony -of sentiments and views can exist at that time between -the spouses? The wife sees in her husband a -sort of father, whom notwithstanding she can neither -love nor respect like a father, and she remains a minor -all her life.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> These unions are very prejudicial to woman -and the race, and they would be for the most part -averted, if the law should fix the marriageable age at -twenty-four or twenty-five for both sexes. At seventeen, -we marry to be called Madame, and to wear a bridal -dress and a wreath of orange flowers; we certainly -should not do this at twenty-five.</p> - -<p>If the flower is not called on to form its fruit until -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_288"> 288</a></span> -it is fully matured, neither should man and woman: -now, in our climate the organization of neither is complete -until twenty-four or twenty-five.</p> - -<p>Woman gives more to the great work of reproduction -and wears out faster in it; to render her liable to -become a mother prematurely is therefore to expose her -to greater sufferings.</p> - -<p>In the first place, she is forced to share between herself -and her offspring the elements necessary to her own -nutrition, which weakens both her and the child.</p> - -<p>Her development is checked, her constitution is -changed, she becomes predisposed to uterine affections, -and runs the risk of becoming an invalid at the age -when she ought to enjoy robust health.</p> - -<p>The enervation of the body brings with it that of -the mind: the woman becomes nervous, irritable, and -often capricious; she cannot nurse her children; she -will not be capable of rearing them properly, she will -make dolls of them, and will favor the development of -faults which afterwards becoming vices, will afflict the -family and society.</p> - -<p>This woman, a mother before her time, not only will -never become the thoughtful companion and counsellor -of her husband who, being much older than she, will -amuse himself with her as with a child, but will be his -ward for her whole life, and will have recourse to artifice -to have her own way. Thus to weaken woman in -every respect, to shorten her life, to put her under guardianship, -to prepare the way for puny and badly reared -offspring,—such are the most obvious results of her -precocious marriage.</p> - -<p>To hold women in voluntary subjection and to organize -the harem among us, we need only take advantage -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_289"> 289</a></span> -of the permission of the law authorising their marriage -at the age of fifteen.</p> - -<p>That woman may not be in subjection; that she may -be able to become a mother without detriment to her -health and under circumstances favorable to the good -organization of her children; that she may be a worthy -and earnest wife, prepared to fulfill all her duties, she -must not be married, I repeat, before twenty-four or -twenty-five; and she must not marry a man older than -herself.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> But it is claimed that the husband ought to -be ten years older than the wife, because the latter -grows old faster, and because it is necessary that the -husband should have had experience in life in order to -appreciate his wife and to render her happy.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Errors and prejudices all. Woman grows -old sooner than man only through premature marriage -and maternity; a well preserved man and woman are -alike old at the same age. But the woman consents to -grow old while the man is much less willing to do so, since -he does not blush when gray haired, to marry a young -girl, and to set up the ridiculous pretention of being -loved by her for love. Men must be broken of the -habit of believing themselves perpetually at the age -of pleasing; of imagining that they are quite as agreeable -to our eyes when they are old and ugly as if they -were Adonises. They must be told unceasingly that -what is unbecoming in us is equally so in them; and -that an old woman would be no more ridiculous in -seeking the love of a young man, than an old man in -pretending to that of a young girl.</p> - -<p>The husband and wife should be nearly of the same -age; first, to treat each other more easily as equals; -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_290"> 290</a></span> -next, because there will be more harmony in their feelings -and views, as well as in their temperaments, all -things very necessary to the organization of children.</p> - -<p>It is necessary besides, in order that the woman may -not be tempted to infidelity; you know how many troubles -arise from unions disproportioned in age.</p> - -<p>The husband must have <i>seen life</i>, it is said; this is -the opinion of those who permit their sons to <i>sow their -wild oats</i>; who believe that man is at liberty to wallow -in the mire of dens of infamy, and that there are two -kinds of morality. We do not belong to this class. -You would not give your daughter to a man who had -<i>seen life</i>, because he would be <i>blasé</i>, because he would -pervert her or expose her, through the disenchantment -that would follow, to seek in another what she did not -find in her husband.</p> - -<p>What we have said as regards your daughter applies -also to your son; he must not marry a woman younger -than himself; for you would no more desire a disadvantageous -position for your daughter-in-law than for your -daughter; both are dear to you and worthy of respect -before the solidarity of sex.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> I shall educate my son to comprehend that -the form of marriage prescribed by the Code is merely -a relic of barbarism, that his wife owes obedience only -to Duty, that she is a free being and his equal; and -that he has no rights over her person but those which -she herself accords to him. I shall tell him that love is -a tender plant which must be tended carefully to keep it -alive; that it is blighted by unceremoniousness and -slovenliness; that he should therefore be as careful of -his personal appearance after marriage as he was to be -pleasing to the eyes of his betrothed. I shall say to -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_291"> 291</a></span> -him: ask nothing except from the love of your wife; -remember that more than one husband has excited repulsion -by the brutality of the wedding night. Marriage, -my son, is a grave and holy thing; purity is its -choicest jewel; know that many men have owed the -adultery of their wife to the deplorable pains that they -have taken to deprave her imagination. Far from -using your influence over her who will be the half of -yourself in order to render her docile to your wishes, -and to make her your echo, develop reason and character -in her; in elevating her, you will become better, -and will prepare for yourself a counsel and stay. I -have married you under the system of separation of -goods in order that your wife may be protected against -you, should you depart from your principles; and should -you ever grieve me by straying from them, your wife -will became doubly my daughter. I shall be her companion -and consoler, and shall close my arms and my -doors on you.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Right, and you will do well to add: interest -your wife in your occupation; take care that she is -always busy, for labor is the preserver of chastity.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> To my daughter I will say: the social order -in which we live requires, my child, that you shall -superintend your house; the state of Society is still far -distant in which our sex will be relieved from this function. -Do not forget that the prosperity of the family -depends on the spirit of order and economy of the wife. -What your fortune or special business exempts you -from executing, superintend and direct. Extravagance -of dress and furniture now surpasses all bounds. Luxury -is not wrong in itself, but in the existing state of -things, it is a great relative evil, for we have not yet resolved -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_292"> 292</a></span> -the problem of increasing and varying products -without at the same time increasing the wretchedness -and debasement of their producers. Be simple therefore: -this does not exclude elegance, but only those -piles of silks and laces which trail in the dust of the -streets, those diamonds and precious stones which make -the fortune of the few at the expense of the morality of -the many, and which are only dead capital, the liberation -of which would be productive of great good. Do -not suffer yourself to be ensnared by the sophism that -honest women must adorn themselves to hinder men -from passing their time with courtesans. Would you -not be ashamed to compete in dress with women whom -you do not esteem, and would the man who could be -retained by such means be worth the trouble?</p> - -<p>I have instructed you in your legal position as wife, -mother and property holder; I marry you under the -system of separation of goods in order to spare your -husband the temptation of regarding himself as your -master; in order that he may be obliged to take your -advice and to look upon you as his partner. Despite -these precautions, you will be a minor, since the law -thus decrees. But our law is not Reason: never forget -that you are a human being; that is, a being endowed -like your husband with intellect, sentiments, free -will, and inclination; that you owe submission only to -Reason and your conscience; that if it is your duty to -make sacrifices to the peace in little things, and to tolerate -the faults of your husband as he should tolerate -yours, it is none the less your duty resolutely to resist a -brutal—<i>I will have it so</i>.</p> - -<p>You will be a mother, I hope; nurse your children -yourself, rear them in the principles of Right and Duty -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_293"> 293</a></span> -which I have instilled into your intellect and heart, in -order to make of them, not only just, good, chaste men -and women, but laborers in the great work of Progress.</p> - -<p>You understand the great destiny of our species; you -understand your rights and duties; I need not therefore -repeat to you that woman is no more made for man -than man for woman; that consequently woman cannot, -without failing in her duty, become lost and absorbed in -man; for with him, she should love her children, her -country, humanity; she owes more to her children than -she does to him; and if forced to choose between family -interests and generous sentiments of a higher order -woman should no more hesitate than should man to -sacrifice the former to justice.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> It will be said that you instruct your -daughter in a very manly way.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Since in our days men play the mandolin, -is it not necessary that women should speak seriously? -Since men, in the name of their naïve selfishness, claim -the right to confiscate woman to their use, to extol to -her the charms of the gyneceum, to suppress her rights, -and to preach to her the sweets of absorption, must not -women re-act against these soporific doctrines, and recall -their daughters to the sentiment of dignity and individuality.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> I endorse you with all my heart!</p> - -<p>Now that we are nearly agreed on all points, we -have only to sum up what we have said, and to give an -outline of the principal reforms necessary to be wrought -in order that woman my be placed in a position more in -conformity with Right and Justice.</p> - -<div class="section"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_294"> 294</a></span></p> -<p class="titre">SUMMARY OF PROPOSED REFORMS.<br /> -I.</p> -</div> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Identity of right being based on identity -of species, and woman being of the same species as -man, what ought she to be before civil dignity, in the -employment of her activity and in marriage?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> The equal of man.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> How will she become the equal of man in -civil dignity?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> When she shall hold a place on the jury -and by the side of all civil functionaries; shall be a -member of boards of trade and mercantile associations; -and shall be a witness in all cases in which the testimony -of man is required.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why ought the testimony of woman to be -admitted in all cases in which that of man is required?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Because woman is as credible as man; because -she is, like him, a civil personage.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why ought woman to have a place on the -jury?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Because the Code declaring her the equal -of man as regards culpability, misdemeanor, crime and -punishment, she is thus declared capable like him of -comprehending wrong in others;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_295"> 295</a></span> -Because the jury being a guarantee for the male culprit, -the female culprit should have a similar guarantee;</p> - -<p>Because if the <i>male</i> criminal is better comprehended -by men, the <i>female</i> criminal will be better comprehended -by women;</p> - -<p>Because society in its aggregate being offended by the -crime, it is necessary that this society, composed of two -sexes, should be represented by both to judge and to -condemn it. Because, lastly, where the moral sense is -concerned, the feminine element is the more necessary inasmuch -as men claim that our sex is in general more -moral and more merciful than their own.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why ought woman to hold a place among -civil functionaries?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Because society, represented by these functionaries, -is composed of two sexes;</p> - -<p>Because even now in a number of public functions, -there is a department more especially belonging to woman;</p> - -<p>Because, in the ceremony of the marriage celebration -for instance, if woman does not appear as magistrate, -not only is society insufficiently represented, but the -wife may regard herself as delivered up to the power of -a man by all the men of the country.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why ought woman to have her place in -boards of trade and mercantile associations?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Because she shares equally in industrial -production;</p> - -<p>Because she shares equally in commerce;</p> - -<p>Because she understands business transactions and -contracts as well if not better than man;</p> - -<p>Because, in all questions of interests, she should be -her own representative.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_296"> 296</a></span> -<span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> When will woman become the equal of -man in the employment of her activity and of her -other faculties?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> When she shall have colleges, academies -and schools for special instruction, and when all vocations -shall be accessible to her.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why ought women to receive the same national -education as men?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Because they exercise a vast influence over -the ideas, sentiments and conduct of men, and because -it is for the interest of society that this influence should -be salutary;</p> - -<p>Because it is for the interest of all to enlarge the views -and elevate the sentiments of women, in order that they -may use their natural ascendency for the advancement -of progress, of truth, of good, of moral beauty;</p> - -<p>Because woman has a right, like man, to cultivate -her intellect, and to acquire the knowledge bestowed by -the state;</p> - -<p>Because, lastly, as she pays her part of the expenses -of national education, it is robbery to prohibit her from -participating in it.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why ought woman to be admitted to academies -and professional schools?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Because Society, not having a right to deny -the existence of any aptitude among its members, has -consequently no right to prevent those who claim to -possess them from cultivating them, nor to lock up from -them the treasures of science and practice which are at -its disposal.</p> - -<p>Because there are women who are born chemists, -physicians, mathematicians, etc., and because these women -have a right to find in social institutions the same -resources as man for the cultivation of their aptitudes;</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_297"> 297</a></span> -Because there are professions practised by women -who need the instruction that is interdicted them.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Why ought every field of occupation to be -accessible to woman?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Because woman is a free being, whose vocation -no one has a right to contest or to restrict;</p> - -<p>Because she, no more than man, will enter vocations -forbidden her by temperament, lack of aptitude or -want of time; and it is therefore quite as unnecessary -to interdict them to her as to those men who are unfit -to enter them.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Do you not even interdict to her those vocations -in which strength is needed, or which are attended -with danger?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Women are not forbidden to be carpenters or -tilers, yet they do not become such, because their nature -opposes it; it is precisely because nature does oppose it, -that I think society unreasonable in meddling with the -nature. There is no need to prohibit what is impossible; -and if what has been declared impossible is done, -it is because it is possible: now society has no right to -prohibit what is possible to any of its members; this -appears even absurd where vocation is in question.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Let each one follow his private occupation -at his own risk and peril, then; but are there not certain -public functions which are not suitable for women?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> No one knows this, since they are not open -for her admission; and, were it so, the prohibition -would be useless: competition would show the falsity -of ill-founded pretentions.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> When will woman become the equal of -man in marriage?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> When the person of the wife is not pledged -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_298"> 298</a></span> -in marriage; when the engagements are reciprocal, and -when the wife is not treated as a minor and absorbed in -the husband. And this should be so:</p> - -<p>Because it is not allowable to alienate one's personality, -such an alienation, being <i>immoral</i> and <i>void</i> of itself;</p> - -<p>Because the wife being a distinct individual, cannot -be actually absorbed by the husband, and a law is absurd -when it rests on a fiction and supposes an impossibility;</p> - -<p>Because, in fine, woman, being the equal of man before -Society, cannot, under any pretext, lose this equality -by reason of a closer association with him.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> There are two questions in marriage, aside -from that of the person—property and children. Do -you not think that the married woman ought, like the -unmarried woman who has attained majority, to be mistress -of her property, to be free to exercise any profession -that suits her, and to be at liberty to sell, to buy, -to give, to receive, and to institute suits at law?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> The married man having all these rights, -it is evident that the married woman ought to have -them under the law of equality. Are you not of the -same opinion?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> In all partnerships, we pledge a portion of -our liberty on certain points agreed upon. Now the -husband and wife are partners; they cannot therefore -be as perfectly free with respect to each other as though -they were strangers; but it is necessary, we repeat, -that their position should be the same and their pledges -mutual. If the wife can neither sell, nor alienate, nor -give, nor receive, nor appear in court without the consent -of the husband, it is not allowable for the husband -to do these things without the consent of the wife; if -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_299"> 299</a></span> -the wife is not permitted to practise a profession without -the consent of the husband, the husband is not at liberty -to do so without the consent of the wife; if the wife cannot -pledge the common property without authority from -the husband, the husband cannot pledge it without the -consent of the wife. I go further; I would not willingly -permit the wife, before the age of twenty-five, to give -her husband authority to alienate anything belonging to -one of the two; the husband has too much influence -over her for her to be really free before this age.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> But what if one of the parties through caprice -or evil motives is unwilling that the other should -do something that is proper and advantageous?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Arbiters are frequently chosen in the differences -that arise between partners in business; society, -represented by the judicial power, is the general arbiter -between the husband and wife; still we think that -it would be well to establish between them a perpetual -arbiter, holding the first degree of jurisdiction: this -might be the family council, organized differently from -the present. Before this confidential tribunal, better -fitted than any other to understand the case, the husband -and wife should carry, not only the differences -arising between them concerning questions of interests, -but those relating to the education, profession and marriage -of the children. This tribunal should give the -first judgment, and much scandal would be avoided by -its decisions, from which besides one could always appeal -to the social court.</p> - -<p>I need not add that the right of the father and the -mother over the children is absolutely equal, and that, if -the right of either could be contested, it would not be -that of the mother, who alone can say, I <i>know</i>, I am -<i>certain</i> that these children are mine.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_300"> 300</a></span> -<span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> In fact, it is odious that the plenitude of -right should be found on the side of the mere legal -presumption, the act of faith, uncertainty.</p> - -<p>Regarding marriage as a partnership of equals, do -you not think that it would be well to mark this equality -and the distinction of personalities in the name borne -by the spouses and their children?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Certainly, on the day of marriage each of -the spouses should join his partner's name to his own; -this is done already in certain cantons of Switzerland, -and even in France, among a few individuals.</p> - -<p>The children should bear the double name of their -parents until marriage, when the daughters should -keep the mother's name, and the sons the father's; or -else, if we wish to bring into the question the system -of liberty, it might be decreed that, on attaining majority, -the child himself should choose which of the two -names he would bear and transmit.</p> - -<p class="subh">II.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Now, let us take up the political right.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> A nation is an association of free and equal -individuals, co-operating, by their labor and contributions, -to the maintenance of the common work; they have -an incontestible right to do whatever is necessary to protect -their persons, their rights and their property from -injury. Man has political rights because he is free and -the equal of his co-partners; according to others, because -he is a producer and a tax-payer; now, woman -being, through identity of species, free and the equal of -man; being in point of fact, a producer and a tax-payer; -and having the same general instincts as man, -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_301"> 301</a></span> -it is evident that she has the same political rights as he. -Such are the principles, let us proceed to the application.</p> - -<p>We have said elsewhere, that it is not enough that a -thing should be true in an absolute sense; it is necessary -under penalty of transforming good into evil, to take -into account the surroundings into which we seek to introduce -it; this men too often forget, the <i>practical</i> truth -in our question is that it is profitable to recognize political -rights <i>only to the extent to which it is demanded</i>, because -those who do not demand it are intellectually incapable -of making use of it, and because if they should -exercise it, in a majority of cases, it would be against -their own interests; Prudence exacts that we should -be sure that the possessor of a right is really emancipated, -and that he will not be the blind tool of a man or -a party.</p> - -<p>Now, in the existing state of affairs, women not only -do not demand their political rights, but laugh at those -who address them on the subject; they pride themselves -on being thought unfit for that which regards -general interests; they recognize themselves therefore -as incapable.</p> - -<p>On the other hand, they are minors civilly, slaves of -prejudice, deprived of general education, submissive for -the most part to the influence of their husbands, lovers -or confessors, clinging as a majority to the ways of the -past. If therefore they should enter without preparation -into political life, they would either duplicate -men or cause humanity to retrograde.</p> - -<p>You comprehend now why many women who are -more capable than an infinite number of men of coöperating -in great political acts, choose rather to renounce -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_302"> 302</a></span> -them than to compromise the cause of progress by the -extension of political right to all women.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Personally, I am of your opinion; but it is -necessary to foresee and to refute the objections that -may be made to you by very intelligent women; these -women will say, Reflect, the negation of right is iniquitous, -for it is the negation of equality and of human -nature. It is as false as dangerous to lay down the -principle of the recognition of right only to the extent -in which it is claimed; for it is notorious that slaves are -not the ones in general to demand their own rights; -your affirmation therefore condemns the emancipation -of slaves and serfs, and universal suffrage.</p> - -<p>The objection that you raise against the right on account -of the incapacity of women and the low use -which they would make of it, might apply quite as well -to men who are scarcely more fully emancipated than -they; who are often the duplicate of their wife or confessor, -or who have no other opinion than that of their -electoral committee.</p> - -<p>In right, as in everything else, an apprenticeship is -necessary: woman will make use of it at first badly, -then better, then well; for we learn to play on an instrument -much more quickly by using it than by learning -its theory.</p> - -<p>The exercise of right gives elevation and dignity, -elevates the individual in his own esteem, and causes -him to study questions which he would have neglected -had he not been obliged to examine them in order to -concur in and resolve them. Do you wish women to -take to heart matters of general interest? Then give -them political right.</p> - -<p>These objections, may be raised against you.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_303"> 303</a></span> -<span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> They were raised against me in 1848 by a -number of eminent women, and by many men devoted -to the triumph of the new principles.</p> - -<p>I answered them then and I answer them again to-day: -We should speedily agree, if our modern society -were not the scene of conflict between two diametrically -opposite principles.</p> - -<p>The question is not to decide whether political right -belongs to woman, whether she would develop it, enlarge -it, etc., but rather whether she would use it to ensure -the triumph of the principle that says to humanity, -Advance! or of that which gives as the word of command, -Retreat!</p> - -<p>What is the end of political right? Evidently, to -accomplish a great duty in the direction of progress. -Well, is it not dangerous to accord it to those who would -employ it against this end?</p> - -<p>What! you struggle for right, in order to obtain the -triumph of a holy cause, yet feel no hesitation in according -it to those who would certainly make use of -right to kill right!</p> - -<p>You reproach me for acting like the Jesuits, who -value justice much less than expediency. Well, gentlemen, -if you had had half their ability, you would have -been successful long ago. Like true savages, you -would think yourselves dishonored by possessing prudence -and practical sense, by offering yourselves to battle -otherwise than with naked bodies; this may be very -fine, very courageous—but as to being sensible, that is -another thing.</p> - -<p>I am not guilty of the crime of denying right, since -I do not deny it; I only desire that it shall not be demanded -since this would be suicidal, I do not lay down -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_304"> 304</a></span> -the principle that <i>every kind</i> of right should be recognized -only to the extent in which it is claimed, since I -speak to you of political rights alone; there are rights -which make their own demand, such as those of living, -of development, of enjoyment, of the fruit of one's labor, -and it is shameful for society not to recognize them -to their full extent. But we awaken later to the sentiment -of civil right, and still later to that of political -right; take the logical advance of humanity into account -therefore and do not remain in the absolute.</p> - -<p>I know that my objection on the score of the incapacity -of women is quite as applicable to that of men; -but is it a reason, because you have admitted the right -of the ignorant masses of men who had not demanded -it, to show yourselves equally unwise with respect to -women who are in the same position? I will correct -myself, gentlemen, of what you term my <i>aristocratic</i> -spirit, when I see your political freedmen comprehending -the tendencies of civilization, and making use of -their right to drive the abettors of the past to despair -by promoting the triumph of liberty and equality. Until -then, permit me to keep my opinion.</p> - -<p>And I have kept my opinion, which is this: the exercise -of political right is a means of reform and progress, -only if those who enjoy it believe in progress and are -anxious for reforms: in the opposite case, the popular -vote can be nothing but the expression of prejudices, -errors and passions—instead of learning to exercise it -through the use of it, as it is urged, they employ it -simply to cut their own fingers.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> May it not be objected that, in accordance -with your theory of right, all being equal, no one can -arrogate to himself the function of distributing rights?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_305"> 305</a></span> -<span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Theory is the ideal towards which practice -should tend; if we had not this ideal, we could not -know by what principle to guide ourselves; but in -social <i>reality</i>, there are individuals who have attained -majority, and others who, being minors, are destined to -attain it.</p> - -<p>If I should assert that those who have attained majority -can rightfully accord or refuse right to the minors, -I should depart essentially from my principles; it -is by the <i>law</i>, which is the expression of the conscience -of those most advanced, while waiting till it shall be the -conscience of all, that political majority is decreed and -that its conditions are established. The right is virtual -in each of us; no one therefore has the right to give it, -to take it away, or to contest it; it is recognized when -we are in a condition to exercise and to demand it; -and we prove that we are in a condition to exercise it -when we satisfy the conditions fixed by the law.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> What should be these conditions for the -enjoyment of political right, in your opinion?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Twenty-five years of age; and a certificate -attesting that the individual knows how to read, write -and reckon, that he possesses an elementary knowledge -of the history and geography of his country; together -with a correct theory with respect to Right and Duty, -and the destiny of humanity upon earth. The knowledge -of a small volume would be sufficient, as you see, -to enable every man and woman, twenty-five years of -age and healthy in mind, to enjoy political rights, after -having been subjected to an initiation by the enjoyment -of civil rights. But, I ask you, what could those -do with political right who confound liberty with license, -who scarcely know the meaning of the words -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_306"> 306</a></span> -Right and Duty, and who are even incapable of writing -their own vote! Men have their rights, let them -keep them! a right once admitted cannot be taken -away: let them render themselves fit to exercise them. -As to women, let them first emancipate themselves civilly -and become educated: their turn will come.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> It is very important that men should comprehend -that you do not deny, but merely postpone the -political rights of our sex.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Be easy; they will comprehend it rightly; -they will not mistake counsel dictated by prudence for -an acknowledgement of inferiority and a resignation of -functions.</p> - -<p class="subh">III.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Will you now state the legal reforms which -we should demand successively.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> So far as civil life is concerned, we should -ask:</p> - -<p>That a woman who is a foreigner may be able to become -naturalized in a country otherwise than by marriage.</p> - -<p>That woman shall not lose her nationality by the -same sacrament.</p> - -<p>That woman be admitted to sign, as a witness, all certificates -of social condition, with all others that have -been hitherto interdicted to her.</p> - -<p>You know that already, in derogation of the law, -midwives sign certificates of birth of unacknowledged -natural children, and that, in certain notarial documents, -drawn up by justices of the peace, to attest to a fact in -the absence of written evidence, the testimony of women -is admitted.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_307"> 307</a></span> -We demand that tradeswomen and merchant women -shall form a part of the boards of trade; that in every -criminal trial, women shall be placed on the jury: that -to women shall be entrusted the management and superintendence -of hospitals, prisons for women, and charitable -associations.</p> - -<p>That in every district, a woman shall be appointed to -superintend girls' schools, infant asylums, and nurses.</p> - -<p>You know that women are already filling public -employments in derogation of the law, since the teaching -and inspection of girls' schools, and other asylums, -are entrusted to them, and since women keep post-offices, -stamp offices, etc.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> This regards civil Right in general; what -reforms shall we demand concerning married women?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> That the conjugal abode shall be that -which is inhabited by the husband and wife <i>together</i>, -no longer by the man alone.</p> - -<p>That the articles shall be suppressed which command -the wife to obey her husband, and to follow him wherever -he sees fit to reside.</p> - -<p>That the prohibition to sell, mortgage, receive, give, -appear in law, etc., without the consent of the husband -or court, shall be extended to the husband as far as to -the wife.</p> - -<p>That marriage under the system of separation of -goods shall become the public law.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> What reforms do you demand with respect -to the family council and guardianship?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> We demand that the family council shall -be composed of twenty persons; ten men and ten women, -parents, relatives and friends, chosen by the -spouses.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_308"> 308</a></span> -That the powers of this council, presided over by the -justice of the peace, shall be so determined that it shall -give the first judgment in differences arising between -the spouses as to children, property, guardianship, etc.</p> - -<p>We demand that every woman may be qualified to -be appointed guardian or to watch over the conduct of -the guardian towards the ward.</p> - -<p>That the guardianship of the spouse interdicted shall -be always confessed by the family council.</p> - -<p>That the wife like the husband, may name a definitive -guardian and a council of guardianship for her surviving -spouse.</p> - -<p>That the spouses may name during their lifetime, the -father, a male inspecting guardian from his family, the -mother, a female inspecting guardian from hers, that in -case of pre-decease, the children may be always under -the influence of both sexes.</p> - -<p>That this superior guardianship, in the absence of any -expressed desire, belongs of right to a member of the -family of the defunct, who must be of the same sex.</p> - -<p>That in case of a second marriage, if the child is -maltreated or unhappy, the inspecting guardian, whether -male or female, can have it adjudged to him by the -family council, without excluding the appeal of the -guardian to the courts.</p> - -<p>That in case of the death of the father or mother, -the guardianship belongs of right to the nearest ancestor, -and the inspecting guardianship to the nearest ancestor -of the other line.</p> - -<p>If there be competition between the two lines, the -family councils shall choose the guardian from one family -and the inspecting guardian from the other, and of -opposite sex.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_309"> 309</a></span> -That the duties of guardianship and inspecting guardianship -shall comprehend, not only the material, but -also the moral and intellectual interests of the wards.</p> - -<p>That the father who is guardian, shall lose the right of -guardianship over the children if he re-marries without -first having had it continued to him by the family council.</p> - -<p>That lastly, the State shall so organize a board of -guardianship for abandoned children that the boys shall -be under the superintendence of the men and the girls -under that of the women; this board will form a great -family council.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> I like your system better than that of the -law, not only because woman is the equal of man therein, -but because wards will be better protected by it; I -have known men to cause their wives, over-excited by -their ill treatment, to be placed under interdict, in order -to remain masters of their property; on the other hand, -you know how many children are wronged or made unhappy -by the second marriage of their father. A step-mother -has full power to inflict suffering on the little -unfortunates.</p> - -<p>But you have said nothing of the authority of parents -over their children.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> The authority of the parents over the children -is the same; the expression, paternal authority, is -incomplete; the true phrase would be <i>parental</i> authority. -On this head, we demand that if there be dissension -between the father and mother with regard to the -children, the family council shall decide in the first instance.</p> - -<p>That neither the father nor the mother shall have -power to shut up the child unless <i>both are agreed</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_310"> 310</a></span> -That the father or the mother acting as guardian -shall not have power to have recourse to this measure -except with the concurrence of the inspecting guardian, -or, in case of difference, with the approbation of the -family council, always reserving the right of appeal to -the court.</p> - -<p>That the marriageable age shall be fixed at twenty-five -for both sexes.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Shall we demand the suppression of separation -from bed and board?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> No; but we must demand that <i>divorce -shall be established</i>.</p> - -<p>That divorce may be obtained for the adultery of one -of the parties, cruelty, grave abuses, condemnation to -punishment affecting the liberty or person, notorious -vices, incompatibility of temper, mutual consent.</p> - -<p>That, during the suit for separation or for divorce, -the guardianship of the children shall be given to the -most deserving parent; and that, if both are alike unworthy, -a guardian and inspecting guardian of different -sexes shall be appointed.</p> - -<p>That, if both are deserving, they shall settle it amicably -between themselves before the family council.</p> - -<p>That parties married under the dotal system or under -that of the separation of goods, shall have control of -their own property.</p> - -<p>That if the petition for divorce be on account of the -bad management of the common property, the administration -shall be taken away from the husband and entrusted -to the wife.</p> - -<p>That if the petition be on account of the condemnation -of one of the parties to punishment affecting the -liberty or person, the other shall remain administrator.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_311"> 311</a></span> -That, in all other cases, an inventory shall be made -and the spouse best fitted to the task be appointed -guardian under the surveillance of one or two members -of the family of the other spouse, with the obligation of -furnishing estovers to the other.</p> - -<p>That the decree granting the divorce or separation -shall bear the number, name and age of the children -born of the marriage, together with the annual sum -that each party is bound to furnish for their maintenance -and education.</p> - -<p>That this decree shall state to whose custody the children -are entrusted, whether by natural consent or by -familial or judicial authority.</p> - -<p>That it shall be placarded publicly in the courts, and -inserted in the leading journals of the vicinity.</p> - -<p>That this instrument shall accompany the publication -of the bans of a subsequent marriage, under pain of -heavy penalties.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> These measures are severe; if it would be -easy to become divorced, it would not be easy to marry -afterwards.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> I do not deny it; but it is better to prevent -divorce by the difficulty of marrying afterwards, than -by placing restrictions upon it; in the first case, the -difficulty comes from the fetters which the individual -has forged for himself; he makes his own destiny; in -the second, individual liberty is infringed upon by social -authority, which is an abuse of power.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Let us enter upon the legal reforms concerning -morals.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> We demand that every promise of marriage -which is not fulfilled shall be punished with a fine -and damages.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_312"> 312</a></span> -That every man whom an unmarried mother can -prove by witnesses or letters, to be the father of her -child, shall be subject to the burdens of paternity.</p> - -<p>That the investigation of paternity shall be authorized -like that of maternity.</p> - -<p>That the seduction of an unmarried woman under -twenty-five shall be severely punished.</p> - -<p>That no unmarried woman can be registered among -the public women before twenty-five years old, and that -she shall be put into the house of correction if she -abandons herself to prostitution before this age.</p> - -<p>That every abandoned woman who receives a man -under twenty-five years of age shall be punished with -fine and imprisonment, and that the penalty shall be -terrible if she is diseased.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> It will be said that paternity cannot be -proved.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> I do not deny that it may be possible that -the father attributed to the natural child will not be the -true one; but it will be necessary to establish by proofs -that he has rendered himself liable to be reputed such: -it is the probability of paternity in marriage extended -to paternity out of marriage. So much the worse for -men who suffer themselves to be caught! it is shameful -to attach impunity to the most disorderly and subversive -of selfish desires; women must no longer bear alone -the burden of natural children, and no longer be tempted -to abandon them.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> But what if it be proved that a married -man has rendered himself liable to become a father outside -his household.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> This should be first a case of divorce; -next, of punishment for him and his accomplice. As -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_313"> 313</a></span> -to the child, the man should bear the charge of it in -concert with the mother.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> These are indeed Draconian laws!</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Do you not see that corruption is shutting -us in, body and soul; and that if we do not create a vigorous -reaction against it by the severity of the laws, -the reform of education, and the awakening of the ideal, -our society will be, ere long, only an immense brothel?</p> - -<p><span class="cap">R</span><span class="smallc">EADER.</span> Alas! it is but too true.</p> - -<p><span class="cap">A</span><span class="smallc">UTHOR.</span> Let us demand then, not only a rational reform -of the national education, but also that the number -of lyceums shall be doubled for girls.</p> - -<p>That all the institutions of higher instruction dependent -on the state shall be open to them as to boys.</p> - -<p>That they shall be admitted to receive the same university -degrees, and the same diplomas of capacity as -men.</p> - -<p>That every field of occupation shall be opened to -them as to men;</p> - -<p>So that, elevated in public opinion by equality, their -activity shall no longer be nominally compensated; that -they may live by their labor, and that want, discouragement -and suicide may no longer terminate their life -when they do not make choice of the sad part of elements -of demoralization.</p> - -<div class="section"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_314"> 314</a></span></p> -<p class="titre">I.<br /> -<span class="medium">APPEAL TO WOMEN.</span></p> -</div> - -<p>Progressive women, to you, I address my last words, -Listen in the name of the general good, in the name of -your sons and your daughters.</p> - -<p>You say: the manners of our time are corrupt; the -laws concerning our sex need reform.</p> - -<p>It is true; but do you think that to verify the evil -suffices to cure it?</p> - -<p>You say: so long as woman shall be a minor in the -city, the state and marriage, she will be so in social labor; -she will be forced to be supported by man; that is -to debase him while humbling herself.</p> - -<p>It is true; but do you believe that to verify these -things suffices to remedy our abasement?</p> - -<p>You say: the education that both sexes receive is deplorable -in view of the destiny of humanity.</p> - -<p>It is true; but do you believe that to affirm this suffices -to improve, to transform the method of education?</p> - -<p>Will words, complaints and protestations have power -to change any of these things?</p> - -<p>It is not to lament over them that is needed; it is to -act.</p> - -<p>It is not merely to demand justice and reform that is -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_315"> 315</a></span> -needed; it is to labor ourselves for reform; it is to prove -<i>by our works</i> that we are worthy to obtain justice; it is -to take possession resolutely of the contested place; it -is, in a word, to have intellect, courage and activity.</p> - -<p>Upon whom then will you have a right to count, if -you abandon yourselves?</p> - -<p>Upon men? Your carelessness and silence have in -part discouraged those who maintained your right; it -is much if they defend you against those who, to oppress -you, call to their aid every species of ignorance, every -species of despotism, every selfish passion, all the paradoxes -which they despise when their own sex is in question.</p> - -<p>You are insulted, you are outraged, you are denied -or you are blamed in order that you may be reduced to -subjection, and it is much if your indignation is roused -thereby!</p> - -<p>When will you be ashamed of the part to which you -are condemned?</p> - -<p>When will you respond to the appeal that generous -and intelligent men have made to you?</p> - -<p>When will you cease to be masculine photographs, -and resolve to complete the revolution of humanity by -finally making the word of woman heard in Religion, -in Justice, in Politics and in Science?</p> - -<p>What are we to do, you say?</p> - -<p>What are you to do, ladies? Well! what is done by -women believing. Look at those who have given their -soul to a dogma; they form organizations, teach, write, -act on their surroundings and on the rising generation -in order to secure the triumph of the faith that has the -support of their conscience. Why do not you do as -much as they?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_316"> 316</a></span> -Your rivals write books stamped with supernaturalism -and individualistic morality, why do you not write -those that bear the stamp of rationalism, of solidary -morality and of a holy faith in Progress?</p> - -<p>Your rivals found educational institutions and train -up professors in order to gain over the new generation -to their dogmas and their practices, why do not you do -as much for the benefit of the new ideas?</p> - -<p>Your rivals organize industrial associations, why do -not you imitate them?</p> - -<p>Would not what is lawful to them be so to you.</p> - -<p>Could a government which professes to revive the -principles of '89, and which is the offspring of Revolutionary -right, entertain the thought of fettering the direct -heirs of the principles laid down by '89, while -leaving those free to act who are more or less their enemies? -Can any one of you admit such a possibility?</p> - -<p>What are we to do?</p> - -<p>You are to establish a journal to maintain your claims.</p> - -<p>You are to appoint an encyclopedic committee to -draw up a series of treatises on the principal branches of -human knowledge for the enlightenment of women and -the people.</p> - -<p>You are to found a Polytechnic Institute for women.</p> - -<p>You are to aid your sisters of the laboring classes to -organize themselves in trades associations on economical -principles more equitable than those of the present time.</p> - -<p>You are to facilitate the return to virtue of the lost -women who ask you for aid and counsel.</p> - -<p>You are to labor with all your might for the reform of -educational methods.</p> - -<p>Yet, in the face of a task so complicated, you ask: -what are we to do?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_317"> 317</a></span> -Ah, ye women who have attained majority, arise, if -ye have heart and courage!</p> - -<p>Arise, and let those among you who are the most intelligent, -the most instructed, and who have the most -time and liberty constitute an <i>Apostleship of women</i>.</p> - -<p>Around this Apostleship, let all the women of Progress -be ranged, that each one may serve the common -cause according to her means.</p> - -<p>And remember, remember above all things, that <i>Union -is strength</i>.</p> - - -<p class="end">THE END.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenumh"><a id="Page_318"> 318</a></span></p> - - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_319"> 319</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<img src="images/logo.jpg" width="60" height="44" alt="" /> -</div> - -<p class="ad"><span class="xlarge sper">NEW BOOKS</span><br /> -<span class="medium">And New Editions Recently Issued by</span><br /> -<span class="large">CARLETON, PUBLISHER,</span><br /> -<span class="medium">NEW YORK.</span><br /> -<span class="small"><i>418 BROADWAY, CORNER OF LISPENARD STREET.</i></span></p> - -<p>N.B.—<span class="cap">T</span><span class="smallc">HE</span> <span class="cap">P</span><span class="smallc">UBLISHER</span>, upon receipt of the price in advance, will send any -of the following Books, by mail, <span class="smallc">POSTAGE FREE</span>, to any part of the United States. -This convenient and very safe mode may be adopted when the neighboring Booksellers -are not supplied with the desired work. State name and address in full.</p> - -<table id="ad" summary="contents"> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Victor Hugo.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">LES MISERABLES.—The only unabridged English translation of -"the grandest and best Novel ever written." One large -octavo vol., paper covers, $1.00,or cloth</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">LES MISERABLES.—A superior edition of the same Novel, in five -octavo vols.—"Fantine," "Cosette," "Marius," "St. -Denis," and "Valjean." Cloth, each vol.,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">THE LIFE OF VICTOR HUGO.—(Understood to be an Autobiography.) -"As charming and interesting as a Novel." octavo, cloth</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">By the Author of "Rutledge."</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">RUTLEDGE. A deeply interesting novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE SUTHERLANDS.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">FRANK WARRINGTON.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LOUIE'S LAST TERM AT ST. MARY'S.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">A NEW NOVEL. <i>In press.</i></span></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Hand-Books of Good Society.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">THE HABITS OF GOOD SOCIETY; with Thoughts, Hints, and -Anecdotes, concerning nice points of taste, good manners, -and the art of making oneself agreeable. Reprinted from -the London Edition. The best and most entertaining work -of the kind ever published. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">THE ART OF CONVERSATION.—With directions for self-culture. -A sensible and instructive work, that ought to be in the -hands of every one who wishes to be either an agreeable -talker or listener. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_320"> 320</a></span> -Mrs. Mary J. Holmes' Works.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">DARKNESS AND DAYLIGHT.<i>Just published.</i>12mo. cl.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">'LENA RIVERS. A Novel.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TEMPEST AND SUNSHINE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">MARIAN GREY.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">MEADOW BROOK.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ENGLISH ORPHANS.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">DORA DEANE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">COUSIN MAUDE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">HOMESTEAD ON THE HILLSIDE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Artemus Ward.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">HIS BOOK. An irresistibly funny volume of writings by the -immortal American humorist and showman; with plenty -of comic illustrations. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Miss Muloch.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">JOHN HALIFAX, Gentleman. A novel. 12mo cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">A LIFE FOR A LIFE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Charlotte Bronte (Currer Bell).</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">JANE EYRE. A novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">SHIRLEY.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">VILLETTE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Edmund Kirke.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">AMONG THE PINES. A thrilling work. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">MY SOUTHERN FRIENDS.</span></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">DOWN IN TENNESSEE.<i>Just published.</i></span></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Cuthbert Bede.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">VERDANT GREEN. A rollicking, humorous novel of student -life in an English University; with more than 200 comic -illustrations. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Richard B. Kimball.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">WAS HE SUCCESSFUL? A novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">UNDERCURRENTS.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">SAINT LEGER.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ROMANCE OF STUDENT LIFE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">IN THE TROPICS. Edited by R. B. Kimball.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Epes Sargent.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">PECULIAR.— One of the most remarkable and successful novels -published in this country. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Miss Augusta J. Evans.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">BEULAH.—A novel of great power. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">A. S. Roe's Works. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_321"> 321</a></span></th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">A LONG LOOK AHEAD.—A novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TO LOVE AND TO BE LOVED.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TIME AND TIDE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">I'VE BEEN THINKING.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE STAR AND THE CLOUD.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TRUE TO THE LAST.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">HOW COULD HE HELP IT.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LIKE AND UNLIKE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">A NEW NOVEL.—<i>In Press.</i></span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Walter Barrett, Clerk.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">OLD MERCHANTS OF NEW YORK.—Being personal incidents, -interesting sketches, bits of biography, and gossipy events -in the life of nearly every leading merchant in New York -City. Two series. 12mo. cloth, each,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">T. S. Arthur's New Works.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LIGHT ON SHADOWED PATHS.—A novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">OUT IN THE WORLD.—<i>In press.</i></span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">NOTHING BUT GOLD.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">The Orpheus C. Kerr Papers.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">A COLLECTION of exquisitely satirical and humorous military -criticisms. Two series. 12mo. cloth, each,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">M. Michelet's Works.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LOVE (L'AMOUR).—From the French. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">WOMAN (LA FEMME).</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">WOMAN MADE FREE.—French of D'Hericourt,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Novels by Ruffini.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">DR. ANTONIO.—A love story of Italy. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LAVINIA; OR, THE ITALIAN ARTIST.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">VINCENZO; OR, SUNKEN ROCKS.—8vo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Rev. John Cumming, D.D., of London.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE GREAT TRIBULATION.—Two series. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE GREAT PREPARATION.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE GREAT CONSUMMATION.</span></td> -<td class="tdr"> $ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TEACH US TO PRAY.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Ernest Renan.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE LIFE OF JESUS.—Translated by C. E. Wilbour from the -celebrated French work. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">RELIGIOUS HISTORY AND CRITICISM.— 8vo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 2.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Charles Reads -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_322"> 322</a></span></th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">THE CLOISTER AND THE HEARTH.—A magnificent new novel, by -the author of "Hard Cash," etc. 8vo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">The Opera.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">TALES FROM THE OPERAS.—A collection of clever stories, based -upon the plots of all the famous operas. 12mo. cl.,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">J. C. Jeaffreson.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">A BOOK ABOUT DOCTORS.—An exceedingly humorous and entertaining -volume of sketches, stories, and facts, about -famous physicians and surgeons. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Fred. S. Cozzens.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">THE SPARROWGRASS PAPERS.—A capital humorous work, with -illustrations by Darley. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">F. D. Guerrazzi</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">BEATRICE CENCI.—A great historical novel. Translated from -the Italian; with a portrait of the Cenci, from Guido's -famous picture in Rome. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Private Miles O'Reilly.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">HIS BOOK.—Rich with his songs, services, and speeches, and -comically illustrated. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">The New York Central Park.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">A SUPERB GIFT BOOK.—The Central Park pleasantly described, -and magnificently embellished with more than 50 exquisite -photographs of the principal views and objects of interest. -A large quarto volume, sumptuously bound in Turkey -morocco,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$25.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Joseph Rodman Drake.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">THE CULPRIT FAY.—The most charming faery poem in the -English language. Beautifully printed. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.75</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Mother Goose for Grown Folks.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">HUMOROUS RHYMES for grown people; based upon the famous -"Mother Goose Melodies." 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Stephen Massett.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">DRIFTING ABOUT.—A comic illustrated book of the life and -travels of "Jeems Pipes." 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">A New Sporting Work.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><p class="hanging indent">THE GAME FISH OF THE NORTH.—One of the best books on fish -and fishing ever published. Entertaining as well as instructive, -and full of illustrations. 12mo. cloth,</p></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Balzac's Novels. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_323"> 323</a></span></th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">CESAR BIROTTEAU.—From the French. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE ALCHEMIST.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">EUGENIE GRANDET.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">PETTY ANNOYANCES OF MARRIED LIFE.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Thomas Bailey Aldrich.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">BABIE BELL, AND OTHER POEMS.—Blue and gold binding,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">OUT OF HIS HEAD.—A new romance. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Richard H. Stoddard.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE KING'S BELL.—A new poem. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.75</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE MORGESONS.—A novel. By Mrs. R. H. Stoddard.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Edmund C. Stedman.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ALICE OF MONMOUTH.—A new poem. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LYRICS AND IDYLS.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.75</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">M. T. Walworth.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LULU.—A new novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">HOTSPUR.—<i>in press</i>.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Author of "Olie."</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">NEPENTHE.—A new novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TOGETHER.—<i>in press</i>.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Quest.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">A NEW ROMANCE.—<i>In press.</i> 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Victoire.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">A NEW NOVEL.—<i>In Press.</i> 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Red-Tape.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">AND PIGEON-HOLE GENERALS, as seen by a citizen-soldier in the -Army of the Potomac. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Author "Green Mountain Boys."</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">CENTEOLA.—A new work, <i>in press</i>. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">C. French Richards.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">JOHN GUILDERSTRING'S SIN.—A novel. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">J. R. Beckwith.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE WINTHROPS.—A novel, <i>in press</i>. 12mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Jas. H. Hackett.</th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">NOTES AND COMMENTS ON SHAKSPEARE.—2mo. cloth,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<th colspan="2" class="tdc">Miscellaneous Works. -<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_324"> 324</a></span></th> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ALEXANDER VON HUMBOLDT.—Life and travels. 12mo. cl.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LIFE OF HUGH MILLER, the Geologist.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ADAM GUROWSKI.—Diary for 1863.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">DOESTICKS.—The Elephant Club, illustrated.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">HUSBAND AND WIFE, or human development.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ROCKFORD.—A novel by Mrs. L. D. Umsted.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE PRISONER OF STATE.—By D. A. Mahony.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE PARTISAN LEADER.—By Beverly Tucker.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">SPREES AND SPLASHES.—By Henry Morford.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">AROUND THE PYRAMIDS.—By Gen. Aaron Ward.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">CHINA AND THE CHINESE.—By W. L. G. Smith.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">WANDERINGS OF A BEAUTY.—Mrs. Edwin James.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE U. S. TAX LAW.—"Government Edition."</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.75</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TREATISE ON DEAFNESS.—By Dr. E. B. Lighthill.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LYRICS OF A DAY.—or newspaper poetry.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">GARRET VAN HORN.—A novel by J. S. Sauzade.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE NATIONAL SCHOOL FOR THE SOLDIER.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">FORT LAFAYETTE.—A novel by Benjamin Wood.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE YACHTMAN'S PRIMER.—By T. R. Warren.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">GEN. NATHANIEL LYON.—Life and Writings.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">PHILIP THAXTER.—A novel.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LITERARY ESSAYS.—By George Brimley.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">HAYING TIME TO HOPPING.—A novel.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">THE VAGABOND. Essays by Adam Badeau.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">EDGAR POE AND HIS CRITICS.—By Mrs. Whitman.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.75</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TACTICS or, Cupid in Shoulder-Straps.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">JOHN DOE AND RICHARD ROE.—A novel.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">LOLA MONTEZ.—Her life and lectures.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">DEBT AND GRACE.—By Rev. C. F. Hudson.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">HUSBAND <i>vs.</i> WIFE.—A comic -illustrated poem.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 0.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TRANSITION.—Edited by Rev. H. S. Carpenter.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.00</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ROUMANIA.—By Dr. Jas. O. Noyes, illustrated.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">VERNON GROVE.—A novel.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">ANSWER TO HUGH MILLER.—By T. A. Davies.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.25</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">COSMOGONY.—By Thomas A. Davies. 8vo. cl.,</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">NATIONAL HYMNS.—By Richard Grant White.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 1.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">TWENTY YEARS Around the World.—J. Guy Vassar.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 3.50</td> -</tr> -<tr> -<td class="tdl"><span class="hanging indent small">SPIRIT OF HEBREW POETRY.—By Isaac Taylor.</span></td> -<td class="tdr">$ 2.50</td> -</tr> -</table> - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Woman's Philosophy of Woman, by -Jenny P. d'Héricourt - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A WOMAN'S PHILOSOPHY OF WOMAN *** - -***** This file should be named 53937-h.htm or 53937-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/3/9/3/53937/ - -Produced by Clarity, Héléne de Mink; and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - - -</pre> - -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/53937-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/53937-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 1600b7f..0000000 --- a/old/53937-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53937-h/images/logo.jpg b/old/53937-h/images/logo.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 2a9db38..0000000 --- a/old/53937-h/images/logo.jpg +++ /dev/null |
