[50] Dawson, _Germany and the Germans_, Vol. I, p. 96.
[51] _United States Census Report_, 1900, p. CCXXIII.
[52] Lynch, _French Life in Town and Country_, p. 188.
[53] Patten, _New Basis of Civilization_, p. 193.
[54] William Hard; Rheta Childe Dorr, _The Woman’s Invasion_,
Everybody’s Magazine, Nov., 1908.
[55] Patten, _New Basis of Civilization_, pp. 193-4.
CHAPTER V
WOMEN OF LEISURE
Many laboring women are benefited by the transition of work from the
home to the factory, or the introduction of new industries which were
never allied to the home but represent an entirely new venture into
the business world. But distinct from these, there is a class of women
who reap the benefits of present industrial conditions in a greater or
less degree by virtue of their parasitic relations to some man. These
are the women “to whom leisure has come unsought, a free gift of the
new industrial order.... Never before in the history of civilization
have women enjoyed leisure comparable to that which falls to the lot of
those in comfortable circumstances in America.”[56]
The new era of industrialism has brought into prominence a large class
of successful or partially successful business men whose financial
remuneration is sufficient to allow their homes to be adapted to all
the industrial changes which lighten household tasks. The husband’s
economic importance is often marked, and there is no necessity for the
wife to add to the income of the family. She profits by the development
of new industries in the business world which supersede those carried
on in the home and her demand for the output of the new industry is
no small item in determining its success. She is not deterred from
trying the new because of the financial outlay it involves. She
welcomes the era of canned meats and vegetables; the new uses of gas
and electricity, and the application of compressed air for cleaning
purposes. She is the household innovator in a conservative society.
She knows that whatever advantage her husband wins in the industrial
field, increases the possibility of her leisure rather than his own.
For whatever time the business man may gain for himself, it is most
often utilized to increase the volume of his business. By virtue of
his success his wife can afford to take advantage of home industry
performed by people outside her home. The results are evident. It is no
longer necessary to hire a large number of servants in the household
to carry on the productive industries. The word _servant_ is rapidly
becoming synonymous with menial, for personal services, as household
tasks, are being divorced from production.
The compensation for the absence of the servants in the home is the
ability to purchase the finished article outside the home.
In the earlier stages of production, few women were idle, for if
they themselves were not actually engaged in production within the
home, they were called upon to supervise the tasks performed by their
underlings. But modern industry has not only freed many women from
productive work within the home, but released others from the necessity
of managing large households. Responsibility has been shifted from
the home to the business world. This shifting of responsibility so
apparent in production can be also perceived in those activities which
are closely allied to consumption. The business world is no respecter
of tradition. Wherever financial opportunity presents itself, business
takes hold.
We are accustomed to close our eyes and not admit the possibility of
change until it is upon us. Our immediate past presents to us the
pleasing spectacle of a domestic wife, her head encircled with a halo.
More often this vision is that of _mother_, the memory of whom is
associated with some form of domestic activity. But time makes changes
and now the successful business man is expected to shield his wife
from all irksome employments; and no matter how much he or his wife
cherishes the occupations of the last generation, tradition does not
prevent the courting of comfort and leisure when possible. Hence all
employments dealing with consumption are willingly transferred to the
business world, and the lady of the house becomes indeed a lady of
leisure.
Of course there are exceptions. There are families of wealth that
persist in clinging to occupations closely allied to the home in the
immediate past. The preservation and preparation of foods, the making
of all articles of clothing, including hosiery, are still the work of
a few households, and it is clung to with an affection and a loyalty
indicating the close mental association of these occupations with the
idea of home.
Nevertheless, time continues to bring about an adjustment of family
life to economic life. The better-to-do classes tend to flock to family
hotels and apartment houses and the new generation laughs at the fears
and prophecies of the old. The possibility of a higher plane of comfort
at less cost is too much for even the conservative man. He cherishes
his ideal of family life, and would gladly enforce it upon society in
general, but often he thinks circumstances justify the discrepancy
between this theory and his practice. He frequently gives up his
separate dwelling, and takes advantage of modern business methods
of extensive co-operation. Thus specialization and co-operation are
freeing many women from household responsibilities and are bringing
about for some the possibility of idleness.
The theory that women have suffered and are still suffering from the
tyranny of men does not seem sound when one considers that the women
of the well-to-do classes are always the first to benefit by a surplus
of leisure. Many men work eight or more hours a day while their wives
are not obliged to perform any kind of work. The women’s time is
their own and their husbands resent neither their leisure nor their
idleness. This indifference on the part of men to the complete economic
dependence of women has its basis in sex, out of which arose a feeling
of responsibility for the protection of the family, at first from
enemies and later from economic cares.
The employments of the women of the leisure class are tersely stated
by Veblen when he says of the well-to-do household: “Under a mandatory
code of decency, the time and effort of the members of such a household
are required to be ostensibly all spent in a performance of conspicuous
leisure, in the way of calls, drives, clubs, sewing-circles, sports,
charity organizations, and other like social functions. Those persons
whose time and energy are employed in these matters privately avow that
all these observances, as well as the incidental attention to dress
and other conspicuous consumption, are very irksome but altogether
unavoidable. Under the requirement of conspicuous consumption of
goods, the apparatus of living has grown so elaborate and cumbrous,
in the way of dwellings, furniture, bric-a-brac, wardrobe, and meals,
that the consumers of these things cannot make way with them in the
required manner without help. Personal contact with the hired persons
whose aid is called in to fulfill the routine of decencies is commonly
distasteful to the occupants of the house, but their presence is
endured and paid for, in order to delegate to them a share in this
generous consumption of household goods. The presence of domestic
servants, and of the special class of body servants in an eminent
degree, is a concession of physical comfort to the moral need of
pecuniary decency.”[57]
The status of the women of leisure is social rather than economic. It
has its basis in the economic strength of the husband but the social
status of the wife is far superior to that of the man of the family.
Although men depend upon their economic strength to give them a social
status, they depend upon their wives to maintain it, and willingly
surrender to them the reins of authority. Authority in the home among
the higher social classes in the more democratic countries rests in
the hands of women rather than in the hands of men. This is one of the
results of a divorce of the economic life from family life, and the
substitution of a social unit for an economic one. The change in itself
need not be condemned if the new social unit promotes a higher ethical
development of its members than is possible under the old economic
regime. But in the leisure class the family as a social unit rarely has
as its goal the ethical advancement of its members. Its desire is for
prestige in a circle conspicuous for display of material wealth.
Social prestige is closely connected with economic prosperity and only
in so far as the social goal has attained an importance greater than
the economic, is the authority of women conspicuous. The economic idea
is fundamental until a degree of security is attained eliminating the
possibility of want. This changed relation so apparent in the United
States causes no little amusement to the foreigners who have not yet
accepted feminine rule.
Although the leisure-class women are not conspicuous in demanding
political equality, it is no new phenomenon to see them play a
significant part in the political affairs of the day. Their influence
and support has been sought and is still sought by political aspirants.
But upon the whole their ambitions are purely social. They do not
challenge the admiration of the saner element of the population but
they represent an extreme social type just as many of their fortunes
represent an abnormal and unhealthy financial condition. Their
principal function is that of conspicuous consumption and dissipation.
With no serious purpose in life degeneracy is bound to be the ultimate
result. If it were not for the dormant abilities and capacities for
good which exist among the women of the leisure class, and which
generate in high society an undercurrent toward better things, their
self elimination would be only a question of time. Patten says: “At
the present time, excessive consumption of wealth, dissipation, and
the vices are destroying successive aristocracies by self-induced
exhaustion, and the suicidal group quickly disappears without
establishing a line of descent. They continually reform on the old
basis and bequeath to society, not sons, but a body of traditions. The
present leisure class of America, for instance, is governed by concepts
handed down by the continental nobility of an era that recognized no
industrial or business man’s ideas.”[58]
Earnest social workers are making a strong effort to utilize this
excessive leisure on the part of women, and are attempting to direct
it to channels useful to the city, the commonwealth, and society in
general.
Any one who has associated intimately with women whose entire time is
their own to employ as they see fit, or with women who have a few hours
of leisure daily and who represent a large proportion of our prosperous
middle class, must be impressed with the fact that there is a great
waste of talent, ability, and culture.
“The wives of tens of thousands of business men and well-paid
employees enjoy unquestioningly, and as a matter of course, a degree of
leisure such as formed the exclusive privilege of a small aristocracy
in earlier centuries. The beneficent social and philanthropic
activities of public spirited women and the baneful epidemic of
gambling at cards which has run riot for several years and shows no
tendency to diminish, are twin offspring of this unearned leisure.”[59]
Although less practical than men because of the almost complete divorce
of their mental activities from the duties of life, these women often
represent a plane of culture superior to that of the men of their
class, and possible only when advantage can be taken of intellectual
opportunists, associated with leisure. The women are the ones who are
able to attend public lectures and places of amusement during the
day; and often they alone have sufficient energy to profit by the
intellectual benefits which are offered for the public’s enlightenment.
In every college community where free lecture courses are given for the
benefit of the public, the audience is characteristically feminine.
A safe measure of the increase of leisure of women of all ages and of
the more prosperous classes is our institutions of higher learning.
The proportion of young women graduating from the high schools in the
United States is greater than that of young men; and if this tendency
continues the same will eventually apply to our institutions of higher
learning. This has been anticipated by a few of the universities
limiting the number of girls who might attend. What might seem to
be sex prejudice may be in reality a resistance to an effeminacy,
arising out of leisure class standards, which is fondly designated as
_culture_, in contrast to the practical application of knowledge.
The general tendency of young women to seek education for self
improvement rather than for practical usefulness indicates that they
benefit by the financial surplus of the family. On the other hand,
their brothers are expected to prepare themselves at an early age for
the industrial field or the world of business. This is giving to the
women of the family greater cultural opportunities than to the men.
This is most evident where girls consider their brother’s associates
their inferiors in the point of social prestige.
The women whose husbands are successfully employed in the business
world have a large range of social influence, and are so well
established in their pecuniary standing that they have no fear of
losing caste. By virtue of this pecuniary standing they are allowed a
greater degree of freedom than the women of the professional classes.
They can afford to make their own barriers and to some extent can, with
impunity, break down those imposed upon them by tradition. They can
afford to be, and often are cosmopolitan in their habits of life. This
is in a measure due to the constant shifting of the business interests
of the men of the family, and the often close relation of these
interests to all classes of society. While the women may be exclusive
from inclination, they cannot help but be affected by the democracy of
the business world to which their husbands belong.
Hence, society should appreciate the importance of utilizing the
leisure of the business man’s wife for the benefit of the community.
Her social consciousness has been awakened and she is ready, nay,
anxious to give her services. She knows idleness is not conducive to
happiness, and purely social pleasures are fast palling upon her. She
is a product of a society of business prosperity, highly trained and
stimulated by many social forces to a desire for a life of usefulness.
She does not want to work for wages--she is not yet willing to violate
her leisure-class ideals which forbid her to work for financial
remuneration--but she does want to exercise her trained faculties.
It is well to talk about the sacredness of the home, but there can be
little sacredness where there is so much idleness and discontent. When
women have been deprived of all useful occupations in the home it is
necessary for the welfare of the community that they find occupation
outside the home. Work is necessary to any normal person if degeneracy
is to be avoided. “A life of ease means lack of stimuli, and hence the
full development of but few powers. Power and efficiency come only
through vigorous exercise, and strength through struggle.”[60]
The women working in our large factories present grave problems but
society is alive to them, and there is some hope of their ultimate
solution; but the degenerating influence of excessive leisure has not
yet aroused the social conscience.
Nearly every effort to utilize this leisure has come from within the
class itself and takes the form of organized effort supported by
women’s clubs. This movement, comparatively new, often meets with the
restrictions of a conservative society, which thus makes it doubly hard
to attain the degree of efficiency needed for the performance of useful
services to the community.
Women of leisure are influenced by archaic aristocratic ideals which
before the era of industrialism were held by only a small number. With
the great increase of wealth and new methods of production the number
of women who assume a more or less parasitic relation to society grows
with alarming rapidity. The question now is, what is to be done with
this increasing number of idlers freed from economic responsibilities
formerly imposed by the home? Can they as social factors be neglected
without becoming a menace? Can society afford to support an
ever-increasing number of women in idleness and allow them to propagate
their leisure-class standard of consumption?
FOOTNOTES:
[56] Kelly, _Some Ethical Gains through Legislation_, p. 112.
[57] Veblen, _The Theory of the Leisure Class_, pp. 65-6.
[58] Patten, _New Basis of Civilization_, p. 62.
[59] Kelly, _Some Ethical Gains through Legislation_, pp. 112-3.
[60] Tyler, _Man in the Light of Evolution_, p. 109.
CHAPTER VI
STATUS OF WOMEN AND HOME INDUSTRY AMONG PROFESSIONAL CLASSES
The effect of industrial changes upon the status of women is most
marked in two conspicuous social classes--the class primarily engaged
in the task of procuring a bare subsistence where the lack of leisure
and insufficient economic returns allows little play for other than
the economic forces,--and the class which by virtue of new industrial
methods is the recipient of a constantly increasing degree of leisure.
Between these two extremes we find the professional classes the prey of
a conflict between the newer ideals of democracy and the leisure class
ideals wrought out before the era of modern industrialism.
No other class shows so marked a conflict between the older
conservatism and the innovations brought about by modern industrial
conditions, as the professional classes. The radical tendencies
appear in those professions most dependent upon and closely allied
to industrial life, and the conservative tendencies claim as their
stronghold those fields of activity closely allied to wealth and
leisure.
The spirit of innovation is one of the results of an adaptation to
changing industrial conditions; and this adaptation is always necessary
when a class depends directly for its remuneration upon the individuals
for whom the services were rendered. On the other hand, conservatism
had its basis in customs arising out of the institutions of the past;
can flourish only in a class independent of the general public for its
maintenance.
Before the spread of democratic ideals, the field of higher learning
was monopolized by the leisure class. Therefore, a high standard of
living characterized it, and was essential in maintaining the status of
its representatives.
Before the development of industry, the leisure class was synonymous
with the nobility or the priesthood. To belong to the nobility it
was necessary to possess the predatory instinct to a marked degree,
in order to gain material advantage, especially in an age when wealth
was more limited than at present and carried with it almost unlimited
power. Sometimes when an individual accumulated much material wealth he
was admitted into the noble class, and often into the priesthood.
Although the priesthood loaned its power to the nobility to fortify
its temporal authority, it taught equality in the spiritual realm.
The greater ease with which the priesthood could be entered opened a
larger field for the ambitious youth whose mind craved stimulation.
His economic condition had to be such as to free him from the
responsibility of providing for others, as well as sufficient to afford
him an education. When he had once attained his goal, and belonged to
the priestly class, he reached a status in life exclusive by virtue of
its prestige, and in no wise divorced from material wealth.
Learning in the past depended upon the individual’s ability to live
without productive employment, and a willingness to devote himself
to the learned arts which had no economic significance. Here we find
a combination of democratic and aristocratic ideals. When marked
intellectual ability was manifest, it was not uncommon for one of
humble origin to attain a position of distinction in the church. Once
in the church he belonged to an exclusive class surrounding itself with
rituals and ceremonials.
The nobility of the land received a rude shock from the development
of industry, but the church always allied itself to those who were
most able to give, and did not hesitate to sacrifice the temporal
aristocracy in order to maintain the spiritual one. Although learning
“set out with being in some sense a by-product of the priestly
vicarious class” it has had to submit to democratic influences which
grew out of industrial changes. These influences are most significant
in the spread of the rudiments of learning among the common people,
and the greater the opportunities for a common school education, the
greater the possibility for the individual to enter the field of higher
learning when the opportunity presents itself. But to enter this field
is to depart from the practical affairs of life and to devote oneself,
if breadwinning were essential, to imparting this knowledge to others.
This applies to the practice of acquiring knowledge for the sake of
learning and not for its practical application, as for instance in
medicine.
No matter how few the impediments placed in the way of the ambitious
youth entering the field of higher learning, the lack of economic
resources naturally deterred all but the most determined from the
undertaking. Hence we find the field of higher learning, which is
purely cultural, becoming the privilege of the leisure class, free
from economic pressure, and able to maintain the ritual and ceremonial
observances. “The universities of Paris and Oxford and Cambridge were
founded to educate the lord and the priest. And to these schools and
their successors, as time went on, fell the duty of training the
gentlemen and the clergy.”[61]
The early universities of Germany showed the same spirit. They “did
not grow up gradually, like the earlier ones in France and Italy, but
were established after a scheme already extant and in operation. The
spiritual and temporal power contributed to their foundation. The Pope,
by a bull, founded the institution as a teaching establishment, and
endowed it with the privilege of bestowing degrees, whereby it became
a _studium generale_ or _privilegiatum_, for according to mediaeval
conceptions teaching had its proper source and origin in the church
alone.”[62]
While it is extremely difficult to change fossilized habits of thought,
newer civilizations send forth fresh shoots adapted to new conditions.
Thanks to the development of industry demanding trained minds of a
useful bent, we find the newer institutions of learning becoming more
practical, and developing the useful arts and sciences.
“Through the movement toward the democracy of studies and constructive
individualism, a new ideal is being reached in American universities,
that of personal effectiveness. The ideal in England has always been
that of personal culture: that of France, the achieving, through
competitive examinations, of ready made careers, the satisfaction of
what Villari calls ‘Impiegomania,’ the craze for an appointment; that
of Germany, thoroughness of knowledge; that of America, the power to
deal with men and conditions.”[63]
The new types of schools, characteristically American, have influenced
the older type, until we see on all sides a struggle between the
leisure class ideals and the practical ideals of democracy; the outcome
of this struggle depending in each case upon the degree of control
exercised by the financial contributors--the leisure class or the
masses.
The degree of democracy in our higher institutions of learning
determines the degree of “ritualistic paraphernalia” in vogue. The use
of “ritualistic paraphernalia” is an example of the social ideals of
a naturally conservative class and is slow to respond to democratic
ideals brought about by industrial changes.
The spread of democracy has brought into our schools a new class of
savants. They possess all the qualifications of the older savants save
their financial independence. Their poverty is not a great calamity
to those who remain celibates, but to the head of a family it means a
struggle to maintain a standard of living too high for his income.
The home is the last to free itself from the influence of leisure class
ideals which permeate higher learning; and the struggle to reconcile
the newer ideals with the older ones is almost tragic. The heaviest
strain falls upon the wife who struggles to maintain her social status
upon which depends the status of the family. A display of clothes is
not as essential to the maintenance of this status as an appearance
of leisure, and the conveyance of the impression to the outsider that
a high standard of comfort and luxury is realized. That the comfort
actually exist is not necessary so long as the outsiders are deceived.
Often a great deal of ingenuity is displayed by the housewife in
conveying on a very moderate income the impression that the family is
living on a high plane. Economy is practiced “in the obscurer elements
of consumption that go to physical comfort and maintenance.”
This class of society illustrates most pathetically the ideals of
propriety of a non-industrial group. Its reluctance in giving up
its exclusiveness, and its persistence in clinging to leisure-class
standards is most apparent in the home. Here the life of the housewife
is often one of drudgery “especially where the competition for
reputability is close and strenuous.”
The duties of the wife of the college professor are manifold. The work
of ministering to the fundamental needs of the family is left to a
servant, or if it is impossible to keep hired help, it is done with as
much secrecy as possible, in order to avoid the stigma of commonness.
Where she assumes all the household tasks, the strain upon her is a
severe one. The mechanical conveniences are not applied to her work
with the same degree of speed with which newer patterns in rugs and
other furniture make their appearance in the household. The list of
articles essential to the maintenance of an appropriate standard of
living is a long one, and many of them have no other charm than the
expensiveness which proclaims pecuniary strength.
It must not be inferred that the position of the housewife is a
subordinate one. Her authority is paramount in the home which her
ingenuity has planned and so skillfully manipulates. Her social
prestige is as far above her financial means as the standard of living
she attempts to maintain is above her husband’s salary. This social
prestige rests upon a deference paid to the higher learning her
husband is accredited with by virtue of his position. Her intellectual
attainments may be very mediocre but that is a matter of indifference
as long as she possesses a knowledge of the arts of polite society.
Indeed, the superficial acquirements of a ladies’ seminary are of a
greater assistance to her in performing her social functions than a
mastery of the sciences.
The difficulty encountered in attempting to maintain the old
aristocratic ideals is having two effects: There is a greater tendency
for college men not to marry, or to marry late in life--after securing
an economic foothold; and secondly, to add to incomes by directing a
part of their energy along lines offering greater economic returns,
such as the writing of books to satisfy a popular demand not of a
purely scholastic nature, or of having interests belonging entirely to
the business world. Veblen says, “Those heads of institutions are best
accepted who combine the sacerdotal office with a degree of pecuniary
efficiency. There is a similar but less pronounced tendency to intrust
the work of instruction in the higher learning to men of some pecuniary
qualification.”[64]
The business ventures of college men afford a pecuniary return
compatible with scholastic scale of living. The increase of income
relieves wives of the strain which great economy necessarily involves,
and gives them a greater amount of leisure to perform their social
duties, and to render the little personal services so essential to the
comfort of their families.
In no other class do we see a greater divergence between the rating
of the women and that of the men. On the one hand, we see the men
graded by a standard of an intellectual nature; on the other hand
their womenfolk are rated according to a standard purely social and
pecuniary, with no regard to utility. Both are conservative and tend to
be archaic depending in a large measure upon the institution where the
teaching is done.
The conservatism shown in clinging to ancient ideals of womanhood
is illustrated by the attitude of these learned men toward the
admission of women into their ranks on an equality with themselves.
“There has prevailed a strong sense that the admission of women to
the privileges of the higher learning (as the Eleusinian mysteries)
would be derogatory to the dignity of the learned craft. It is,
therefore, only recently, and almost solely in the industrially most
advanced communities, that the higher grades of schools have been
freely opened to women. And even under the urgent circumstances
prevailing in the modern industrial communities, the highest and
most reputable universities show an extreme reluctance to making the
move. The sense of class worthiness, that is to say of status, of an
honorific differentiation of the sexes according to a distinction
between superior and inferior intellectual dignity, survives in a
vigorous form in these corporations of the aristocracy of learning.
It is felt that women should, in all propriety, acquire only such
knowledge as may be classed under one or the other of two heads: (1)
such knowledge as conduces immediately to a better performance of
domestic service--the domestic sphere; (2) such accomplishments and
dexterity, quasi-scholarly and quasi-artistic, as plainly come in
under the head of the performance of vicarious leisure. Knowledge is
felt to be unfeminine if it is knowledge which expresses the unfolding
of the learner’s own life, the acquisition of which proceeds on the
learner’s own cognitive interest, without prompting from the canons of
propriety.”[65]
Where women enter the higher fields of learning, they show a
tendency--although not so marked as in the past--to select those lines
of work and thought which have no practical bearing on every day
life. In other words, they follow those lines of study which are most
similar to those pursued by the students of the Middle Ages who sought
knowledge without any thought of its utility. This tendency of women is
evident in co-educational institutions where their selection of studies
shows their object in the main to be the acquisition of knowledge of a
cultural rather than a practical nature. This choice is most suitable
to their object in life assuming that object to be matrimony. The other
activity followed mostly by college bred women--school teaching, makes
little demand outside of the lines of work pursued by most women.
Men long ago learned that there is a demand for highly trained minds
in fields other than that of teaching. They have adapted themselves to
this demand until we see men deserting studies of a purely cultural
value, and pursuing those more applicable to every day life. Women are
showing the same tendencies in communities where there is a demand for
their services in fields other than teaching, and where matrimony has
become more of an uncertainty and economic independence a fact.
When women pursue their college work with a definite practical purpose
in view, they too will desert those lines of work, largely, if not
wholly, valued for their culture side alone.
In the schools directly controlled by the people we find a greater
appreciation of democracy than in the colleges. The public has great
reverence for custom and tradition so long as these conservative
forces do not interfere too much with practical utility. This sense of
practical utility is closely allied to the commercial principle of
getting the best to be had for money laid out. This principle appeals
to all save when it is a violent contradiction to the accepted moral
code. The policy conferring the greatest benefit to the greatest
number at the least cost is adopted if it does not conflict with more
powerful interests. As a result of this policy women are admitted into
professional work, especially school teaching, because they will not
only work for less wages than will the men, but will do a better grade
of work for less money.
Superintendents and principals are agreed that for the same salary a
higher grade teacher can be procured among women than among men, and
hence, despite their conservatism and prejudice, they feel obliged to
follow the policy that best utilizes the means at hand. As a result
women have crowded men out of the common schools and have become so
well established in this field of work as to have gathered sufficient
strength to demand the same remuneration as men for the same kind of
work.[66]
Married women are still excluded from many of the common schools in
deference to the old idea that married women should remain in the home
and follow no remunerative occupation. Even if there existed no good
reason for debarring married women from the work of school teaching,
the conservatism of the community would deter those in authority from
overruling conventional ideas. Not until there is a dearth of teachers,
brought about by the extension of the fields of activity open to
educated women, will married women receive general recognition in the
profession on the same footing with the unmarried.
Although in academic work the instructor is supposed to maintain
as high a plane of living as a full professor--especially in the
smaller colleges where the faculty is able to maintain its class
exclusiveness--the poorly paid minister is not so conscious of the
discrepancy between his standard of living and his income. He has,
indeed, the same financial problem to face as the college instructor,
for he, too, is guided largely by the leisure class standards of the
past, but it is smaller and hence less tragic. He is not expected to
keep up the same plane of expenditure as the better paid ministers.
He tends to imitate the well-to-do among his parishioners, or the
intellectual _elite_ of the community rather than his professional
brethren.
The stronger the hold the minister has over his congregation the more
closely does his remuneration correspond to the standard of living he
is expected to maintain. It is true his services are often undervalued
when measured by money, and that he belongs to a profession that stands
in a measure for sacrifice, but his social prestige in itself makes
certain demands upon the congregation that cannot be overlooked. To
maintain this prestige by a high plane of living on a meagre salary
is one of the problems of the minister and his family. George Eliot
presents the difficulty in a small conservative community in the
following words: “Given a man with a wife and six children; let him be
obliged always to exhibit himself when outside his own door in a suit
of black broadcloth, such as will not undermine the foundations of the
establishment by a paltry plebeian glossiness or an unseemly whiteness
at the edges; in a snowy cravat, which is a serious investment of
labour in the hemming, starching, and ironing departments; and in
a hat which shows no symptom of taking in the hideous doctrine of
expediency, and shaping itself according to circumstances; let him have
a parish large enough to create an external necessity for abundant
beef and mutton as well as poor enough to require frequent priestly
consolation in the shape of shillings and six-pences; and, lastly, let
him be compelled, by his own pride and other peoples’, to dress his
wife and children with gentility from bonnet-strings. By what process
of division can the sum of eighty pounds per annum be made to yield a
quotient which will cover that man’s weekly expenses?”
The problem is still essentially the same in a poor parish, for the
minister must maintain a standard of consumption above the average of
the community.
The problem tends to assume a different aspect in an industrial
community where democratic ideas are as evident as financial
prosperity. The individual’s concern for his well-being in another
world gives way to his concern for the present. He insists upon
spiritual guidance, but also expects assistance in bringing about
better relations between himself and his fellow men. He often insists
upon his minister being a higher intellectual product than is demanded
by the more conservative communities. He regards him as a teacher
who ought to be versed in the affairs of every-day-life and not one
confining himself exclusively to the implications of a future state.
Like the school men, ministers are appreciating the necessity of a
greater and broader democracy within their class, but unlike the
former, their habits of life are more democratic than their teachings.
Those professions depending upon the direct patronage of the public
for support are nowadays distinguished by a tendency to depart from
the conservatism characteristic of them in their earlier stages. A
physician often completes a college course in science and letters
before receiving the three or four years training fitting him for his
life work. In mental training he rivals the best college professors and
yet his social status savors of the common people. He is inclined to be
democratic in his tastes, in his habits of life, and in the selection
of his companions. He is one of the people rather than of an exclusive
social class.
While officialism and ceremonial rituals characterized the medical
profession when its services were rendered almost exclusively to
the people of rank and distinction, or when it was closely allied
to priestly functions, the nature of the work now demands close
association with those upon whom the profession depends for financial
support. The necessity of associating with people of all ranks fosters
the spirit of democracy, and a common-sense philosophy of life.
The physician maintains a standard of living in harmony with the
ideals of the community of which he is a part, and in accordance with
his income. He cannot maintain a standard of living which erects a
social barrier between himself and his patients, either by its extreme
simplicity, or by its conspicuous waste.
The wife of the average physician enjoys a freedom from social
restraint not seen in many of the professional classes. Financially she
does not feel the necessity of entering into economic employments to
keep up her standard of living, for the income of the family, though
varying, tends to adjust itself to the demands her social position
calls for.
The practice of medicine requires not only considerable skill but
great mental concentration, keen judgment and intuition. For women to
gain admission into medical schools is to acquire the privilege of the
fullest mental development. The concession of this privilege is an
acknowledgment of the possession of an inherent ability essential to
successfully follow this line of work. When one considers that success
in medicine calls for special talent it is evident the number of women
seeking to follow this line of work will be small compared with the
number desiring to enter the academic field.
Although women make strenuous efforts to overcome all barriers raised
against their admission to the different fields of activity, they
cling with great tenacity to ancient sex privileges inconsistent with
a man’s conception of “solid comfort.” For instance, the objects of
medical associations are social as well as scientific. The scientific
program would undoubtedly meet with the approval of both sexes
in the profession but the social functions are a real stumbling
block,--the women leaning toward formalities and conventionalities,
and the men toward what is termed “a good social time.” This is in
itself sufficient to prompt most men to oppose admitting women into
intellectual and social clubs.
The industrial evolution plays a large part in shaping the institutions
of society. While economic relations may not be considered the most
essential in life, they determine in great measure, the nature of our
relations to social institutions themselves.
Where the economic influence is not direct we see preserved with the
least change the institutions of the past. What is true of institutions
is also true of the occupations of men. Their conservatism varies
in the degree to which they are affected by economic and industrial
conditions.
Those professions least dependent upon immediate industrial changes are
the most conservative in their work and ideas, and most closely reflect
the ideals of the past. On the other hand, those professions which
depend for their support upon the services rendered to the community
remunerated according to the recipients’ estimation of these services,
have discarded almost all the traditions of the past, although their
origin can be traced to the most conservative institutions of society.
The influence of industrial changes upon social institutions is
apparent in the home. Although the homes of the industrial classes must
adapt themselves to industrial changes even though these changes lower
the plane of family comfort, the professional classes enjoy a margin
above subsistence sufficient to enable them to combat changes with a
conservatism characteristic of all classes having a greater respect for
custom and leisure-class standards than for beneficial innovations.
Hence we find the homes reflecting ideals of the past which clash with
the democratic ideals of the present, and illustrate in their various
phases the struggle between the old and the new.
While the home makers of some of the professional classes are more
conservative than the men, this is not true of those women who are
actively engaged in professional work themselves. They are more
radical than men of the same class, and are leaders not only in
movements for bettering the condition of women, but in progressive
movements affecting society as a whole. As a rule they are a superior
intellectual type, and not representative of the average woman any more
than our intellectual _elite_ among the men represent the average man,
for the average person is characterized by adaptability rather than by
the spirit of innovations.
The professional classes here discussed are those which have developed
out of a class of savants who were originally and primarily engaged
with knowledge of an occult nature. It is true that out of these
classes engaged in the transmission of knowledge have developed a class
of scientists whose field of activity is industrial, the engineer
groups--and whose standard of living tends to correspond to the money
income of the family. It is often considerably larger than the income
of the professional man employed in college work. For that reason the
wife of the professional man is not confronted with the same problems
as the wife of the teacher.
The social status of the professional people whose activities are
confined to the industrial field is measured by their financial status.
This makes it unnecessary for them to maintain a plane of consumption
at variance with their income.
FOOTNOTES:
[61] Jordan, _The Voice of the Scholar_, pp. 173-4.
[62] Paulsen, _German Universities, Character and Historical
Development_, pp. 21-22.
[63] Jordan, _The Voice of the Scholar_, pp. 115-6.
[64] Veblen, _The Theory of the Leisure Class_, p. 375.
[65] Veblen, _The Theory of the Leisure Class_, pp. 375-6.
[66] _Outlook_, Vol. 88, pp. 481, 515.
CHAPTER VII
THE EFFECTS OF INDUSTRIAL CHANGES UPON MARRIAGE
The effect of industrial changes upon marriage among primitive peoples
has been discussed at some length by students of primitive conditions.
So closely do the industrial habits of mankind affect the social that
one is forced to concede an important place to the economic in the
evolution of the race. The preëminence of the struggle for subsistence
in the history of civilization shows how reckless it is to make
historical interpretations while neglecting the industrial side of
society.
The industrial habits of primitive peoples were intimately related to
the physical environment. There had to be game before man could live by
hunting; a body of water to fish in before there could be fishermen;
grass to feed the herds before herding could be the chief occupation of
a people; and tillable soil before there could arise an agricultural
stage in the history of the race. Favorable conditions had to exist
before men could establish even a temporary dwelling place, not to
mention a permanent one. Conditions determined the occupations of men,
and in turn these occupations made possible a type of social life
compatible with the environment. The social life was not a preconceived
scheme so much as a development spontaneously arising out of existing
conditions. The type of the family was no exception to this rule.
Herman Grosse has a unique place as an exponent of the theory that
economic occupations have always been the determining influence in
the establishment of the form of marriage and the status of women.
“Restricting his examination to the conditions which lie within actual
historical or ‘ethnological experience’ he seeks to demonstrate that
the ‘various forms of the family correspond to the various forms of
economy (Wirthschaft)’; that ‘in its essential features the character
of each particular form of the family may be explained by the form of
economy in which it is rooted.’”[67]
Grosse’s point of view is recognized by many writers who have given
thought to the subject. Howard says, “It seems certain that the whole
truth regarding the problem of kinship, as well as regarding the rise
and sequence of the forms of the family, can be reached only through
historical investigation of the industrial habits of mankind.”[68]
Ward gives expression to the same idea when he says, “marriage is from
the beginning an association dictated by economic needs.”[69]
No evidence existed bearing out the theory of the early prevalence of
promiscuity in sexual relations other than a recognized looseness of
sexual relations outside the marriage bond; or a marriage of such short
duration as to warrant the appellation of temporary pairing. Where the
latter custom prevails, it is the outcome of certain social conditions
existing in a tribe, and not representative of a certain stage of
culture.
Even in our advanced western civilization there exist small communities
of peoples who stand for certain moral principles developed to such
extreme forms as to shock people generally. These principles often
have their basis in sexual relations and are conspicuous by virtue
of their contrast to general practices. They in nowise warrant the
importance given them, representing as they do a mental excrescence
and not a healthy social development. The same may apply equally to
primitive societies. Only where certain causes have repeatedly brought
about certain results are we justified in the conclusion that certain
practices were common in a stage of which we have no direct knowledge.
Speaking of promiscuity, Morgan thinks it “was limited to the period
when mankind were frugivorous and within their primitive habitat,
since its continuance would have been improbable after they had become
fishermen and commenced their spread over the earth in dependence
upon food artificially acquired. Consanguine groups would then form,
with intermarriage within the group as a necessity, resulting in the
formation of the consanguine family. At all events, the oldest form of
society which meets us in the past through deductions from systems of
consanguinity is this family. It would be in the nature of a compact
on the part of several males for the joint subsistence of the group,
and for the defence of their common wives against the violence of
society.”[70]
Hobhouse says, “Sheer promiscuity is probably to be regarded rather
as the extreme of looseness in the sexual relation than as a positive
institution supported by social sanction.”[71]
Grosse finds in the different stages of industrial occupations which he
designates as “lower” and “higher hunters” “pastoral peoples” “lower
and higher cultivators of the soil,” prevalent forms of marriage
corresponding to the occupations pursued by the men.
The Bushmen and the Esquimaux of the present time are the best
representatives of the lower hunters among whom monogamy is the form of
marriage. Whether the Bushmen or the Esquimaux represent a primitive
type of the culture arising out of a lower stage of culture, or a
degeneration from a higher type, the author does not know. But he tells
us hunger plays a large part in their lives; and the lack of foresight
or sense of accumulation accounts for the little advantage the few have
over the many.[72]
Hobhouse says, “the strict monogamy and well-united family life of
the Veddahs is partly explained by the fact that they live in great
measure in isolation. In the dry season they pass their time on their
hunting ground; in the wet season small groups of families will resort
to some hillock which is the center of two or three hunting grounds and
sometimes two or three families will reside together for a time in one
cave.”[73]
Among the higher hunters, according to Grosse, monogamy is the
prevalent form of marriage but polygamy is sanctioned, and practiced by
the wealthy.[74]
The conditions of the herders are better known than that of the
hunters. The individual family may rest upon monogamy or polygamy
depending upon the wealth of the nomad. In Central Asia the price of
the wife is often very high, and the father considers his daughters as
a means of increasing his wealth. The price a well-to-do Kalmuck asks
for his daughter is fifteen horses, fifteen cows, three camel, and
twenty sheep. He gives in return as a dowry, one camel, one horse, four
sewed garments, eight unmade garments, and tools depending upon his
wealth.[75]
The great family (sippe) whether on the father’s or mother’s side
developed a social organization having its basis in agriculture. Starke
says, “An agricultural community lays much more claim to the capacity
of each individual for labour than is the case with a community which
is wholly or chiefly occupied with the rearing of cattle. In the former
case the diminution of the number of the household is a loss which is
difficult to supply, and they are chiefly concerned in keeping up their
numbers, that is, in retaining their hold on the individual. But in a
cattle-breeding community men make it their first object to increase
the number of stock. In the former community the head of the family
opposes the departure of his daughter, and seeks to induce her wooer to
become one of the household; but in the latter he sells her early, and
for as high a price as possible.”[76]
While Grosse emphasizes the fact that the different forms of economy
influence the prevalent form of marriage, it is apparent that polygamy
exists in a marked degree where women are not valued for their
labor, and where there has developed a stage of economy admitting of
inequalities in wealth. It is when woman’s work has real economic
value that she obtains rights of her own. Agriculture as a means of
subsistence is pursued to a marked degree only where there is a measure
of security against enemies: where there is strength by virtue of
numbers. Under these circumstances warfare is not so common, and there
is a tendency for the numbers of the sexes to remain comparatively
equal.
“The circumstances attending marriage by service, especially when we
compare it with marriage by purchase or capture, have shown us how much
the relations of husband and wife are determined by what in the modern
world is called the economic factor. The savage woman’s price--if we
mean by price the difficulty of approaching her--may be high or low.
Where it is always possible to organize a raid and carry her off it is
decidedly low, and she becomes the captor’s property. When this is not
countenanced, it is possible to buy her from her guardian, and then
presumably her price like that of other things, is a matter of supply
and demand.”[77]
In all civilizations inequalities of wealth arise, and make possible
social privileges differing from the common practices of the general
population. Under such circumstances we always find social types at
variance with established conceptions of right, and human nature
showing itself in many cases unspeakably repulsive when free from any
economic restraint. This is perhaps, the effect of a freedom from
restraint which is made possible by great wealth. The only restraint
then is public opinion or religious precepts; the former is easily
swayed by the powerful and wealthy, and the latter often admits of a
tolerance not shown to the masses of the people.
In industrial communities where no great inequalities of wealth exist,
the marriage relation tends toward monogamy. Even where western
civilization has made little impression on social institutions,
great and conscious inequalities do not often exist between the
sexes, and woman’s position is not a degraded one. All the important
factors entering into economic life, tending to create serious
distinctions--social, political and industrial--between men and men,
between the rich and the poor, tend to differentiate status between men
and women. Women are most degraded in the marriage relations where they
are economically the weakest; where they personally control the least
wealth. The few who are more fortunately situated are not sufficiently
numerous to make any impressive protest even if they desired to do so.
In a society where the few dictate to the many because of their
financial strength, in a society marked by inequalities originating
in predatory exploitation, we find in a greater or less degree moral
discrepancies with the prevailing conception of right and wrong. Normal
industrial life tends to promote a normal moral life, and to develop
ideals most conducive to a steady progress.
When the family represented an exclusive economic unit with little
dependence upon the outside world, it was of economic importance to
both men and women to marry, and thus lay the foundation for household
prosperity. Wife and children were never a luxury to the poor man,
but of real economic value. This fact is apparent in new countries
where the form of industry must be necessarily domestic. Women have
been shipped in large numbers to new colonies to marry the settlers.
In practically all cases the women went voluntarily for they too
appreciated the importance of obtaining for themselves a place in homes
where so much of the social and economic life of the time centered.
These unions, primarily economic resulted often in family groups
containing much of the ideal.
In the early colonial days of America “every farmer and his sons raised
wool and flax; his wife and daughters spun them into thread and yarn,
knit these into stockings and mittens, or wove them into linen and
cloth, and then made them into clothing. Even in large cities nearly
all women spun yarn and thread, all could knit, and many had hand-looms
to weave cloth at home.... All persons who were not employed in other
ways, as single women, girls, and boys, were required to spin. Each
family must contain one spinner.... There were no drones in this hive.
Neither the wealth nor high station of parents excused children from
this work. Thus all were leveled to one kind of labor, and by this
leveling all were elevated to independence.”[78]
In all rural communities of modern Europe much of women’s work is of
considerable importance from an economic point of view, and there is
little incentive for a man to remain single from economic prudence.
Instead of an economic burden the wife is more often a helpmeet who
even offers her services for pay outside the home. She works in the
fields like a man and is an important factor when estimating the value
of labor on the farm.
Letourneau says, “At Paris, where the struggle for existence is
more severe, and where the care for money is more predominant, late
marriages abound, and it is only above the age of forty for men and
thirty-five for women that the marriage rate equals and even exceeds,
that of the whole of France.”[79]
The constant drifting of country population into large cities where
employment can be found is affecting markedly the life of the rural
community, and tending to postpone the formation of family ties until
an economic foothold is secured.[80]
There has been a slight diminution of the marriage rate since the
middle of the nineteenth century, but so many forces have come into
play that one is hardly justified in the conclusion that this decrease
is due entirely to economic causes.
_Number of Marriages Per 1000 Population._[81]
---------------+----------+----------+----------
| 1876-80. | 1881-85. | 1886-90.
---------------+----------+----------+----------
Hungary | 9.6 | 10.3 | 8.9
Prussia | 8.0 | 8.0 | 8.1
Germany | 7.8 | 7.7 | 7.9
Austria | 7.8 | 7.9 | 7.7
Italy | 7.5 | 8.0 | 7.8
France | 7.6 | 7.5 | 7.2
Belgium | 6.9 | 6.8 | 7.1
Great Britain | 7.1 | 7.1 | 6.9
Switzerland | 7.4 | 6.8 | 7.0
Denmark | 7.8 | 7.7 | 7.0
Norway | 7.2 | 6.6 | 6.3
Sweden | 6.6 | 6.5 | 6.1
---------------+----------+----------+----------
Some statisticians see co-relation between the price of food and the
marriage rate.[82]
Food, clothing, and shelter are the essential needs of man. When the
price of food, shelter, and clothing increases and wages remain the
same, the money income of the family is relatively less. If the price
of food remains the same and wages are lowered because of an oversupply
of labor to meet the demand, or for other causes, the effect is
practically the same. When marriage means an increase of the financial
burden, and foresight comes into play there will naturally follow a
postponement of marriage. Letourneau says, the “principal causes which
influence matrimony are the greater or less existence, and the extreme
importance attached to money. As a general rule, life and death tend to
balance each other, and the populations whose mortality is great have,
as compensation, a rich birth-rate. We invariably see the number of
marriages and births increasing after a series of prosperous years, and
_vice versa_. General causes have naturally a greater influence on the
population living from hand to mouth. The well-to-do classes escape
this, and we find that the chances of marriage for the rich increase
during years of high prices.”[83]
Economic conditions will not prevent people from marrying when it is
understood the wife will continue her work in the factory as is true in
many manufacturing towns, especially in Europe. Under such conditions
marriage does not signify an immediate increase of the financial burden
of the husband. In fact, if marriage meant that the entire burden of
support was to fall upon the man alone, it would be a serious matter
when under the existing conditions husband and wife together can
scarcely make a living.[84]
European countries are cited as admirable examples of advanced
legislation for the protection of the home. Farsightedness and a love
of domesticity are not so much responsible for the protection of women
in industry as the fact that they have become a well established factor
in industrial life, such as they have not yet reached in the United
States.
When legislation provides women with a longer noon hour than men,
it is an acknowledgment of the fact that many women, so many as
to make legislation in their behalf a crying need, are employed
outside of the home and at the same time carrying the burden of
maintaining a household after working hours. The extra half hour at
noon allowed married women is time in which to prepare the noonday
meal for the members of the family. Beneficent as legislation is in
behalf of married women looking toward the welfare of the race, it is
significant of the fact that women are being forced out of the home
into the industrial field and compelled to assume heavier burdens
than the men. To restrict fecundity under such circumstances, or to
refuse to be mothers at all, is hardly a reproach to the women who are
thus forced to toil, but rather a reproach to civilization imposing
home-making, motherhood, and breadwinning upon the supposed weaker sex.
In communities where women take their places with their husbands in the
factory or work-shop, industrial changes do not affect the marriage
rate. It is where women are not expected to contribute to the family
income, and where men’s wages are at first by no means adequate to meet
the expenses of a household, that the marriage rate is affected.
Nevertheless even under these circumstances, where there is no outlook
but one of poverty for the future, marriages are often formed.
The decrease of the marriage rate among people who live close to
the margin of subsistence is not as apparent as among people whose
income warrants a scale of living which gratifies the higher social
wants. What is often attributed to the selfishness of men is a growing
consciousness of the responsibility which marriage involves as well
as an increase in the responsibility itself. There is a greater need
of money outlay than ever before, and with the decreasing importance
of women’s labor in the home, the financial strain is so great as to
prompt men to postpone marriage until they are able to support a family
in comfort, comfort meaning not merely sufficient food and clothing for
physical well being but a scale of expenditure characteristic of one’s
class.
The increasing independence of women is an _effect_ of the postponement
of marriage on the part of men rather than a _cause_. When men no
longer assume family responsibilities as soon as they become voters, or
shortly thereafter, women are forced into avenues of employment for a
livelihood. The lengthening period which a man dedicates to preparing
himself for his life work makes it just that much more difficult for
the women of his class to marry early.
When once established in the industrial field and confirmed in certain
habits of life associated with a higher plane of consumption than they
can hope for in a home of their own, women are not so eager to give
up the luxuries and opportunities for personal expression which their
work may afford, for matrimony. This is especially true at an age when
marriage has lost much of the romance youth endows it with. When life
is comparatively easy, and the romantic period of youth is passed, the
economic factor assumes greater importance in matrimonial alliances.
To lower one’s economic and social status, even when prompted to do
so by high ideals and motives, receives little commendation from an
enlightened community and its “How could she?” savors more of contempt
than admiration.
Among the higher social classes--although the same tendency is showing
itself in all classes--there is a growing consciousness of the
individual’s importance as a social unit, rather than his importance
as a part of the family unit. His ties to society are growing at
the expense of family ties. This changed attitude does not arise
from selfishness for never in history have men shown greater ability
and willingness to sacrifice personal interests to the interests of
society. There is a rapidly growing sentiment on the part of each that
he is indeed his brother’s keeper, and he is responsible for evil
industrial and social conditions. The time favors, not the family as
opposed to the community, but the family as a part of the community.
Says Howard, “More threatening to the solidarity of the family is
believed to be the individualistic tendencies arising in existing urban
and economic life. With the rise of corporate and associated industry
comes a weakening of the intimacy of home ties. Through the division
of labor the ‘family hearth-stone’ is fast becoming a mere temporary
meeting-place of individual wage-earners.”[85]
Thus we are rapidly approaching the time when men can no longer
consider marriage an economy. A wife tends to become a luxury to the
average man in so far as she adds nothing to the income of the family
and increases its expenses.
It is true many married women among the professional classes work
outside the home, but the practice is not sufficiently widespread to
meet with the general approval of a conservative society. When this
practice becomes common, provided there is no corresponding decrease
in the salaries of men and the increase of the income of the family is
marked, marriage will become more attractive to men.
Women, too, consider the economic side of marriage. They are just as
unwilling to lower their plane of living as the men. To the average
woman to marry a poor man means drudgery, for although her economic
importance as a bread winner has decreased, her domestic duties have
not grown correspondingly less.
Women’s class status shifts more easily than that of men. With
the latter it is personal success while with the former it is the
matrimonial relation that determines one’s social sphere. For this
reason women consciously or unconsciously are guided in their choice
of a husband by economic considerations. With the decrease of their
productive capacity in the home there is a greater need on their part
to consider the pecuniary side.
The marriage-rate among the rich and the very poor is little affected
by economic changes. The one feels no need to curtail expenses to meet
the needs of a family; the other is so hopelessly poor, especially in
many of the European countries, so starved in mind and body as to be
irresponsive to any but the primary animal instincts. It is the large
middle classes that reflect social and economic changes and determine
the type of future social institutions.
FOOTNOTES:
[67] Howard, _A History of Matrimonial Institutions_, I, pp. 60-61.
[68] _Ibid_, I, p. 115.
[69] Ward, _Pure Sociology_, p. 358.
[70] Morgan, _Ancient Society_, p. 501.
[71] Hobhouse, _Morals in Evolution_, p. 140.
[72] Grosse, _Familie und Wirthschaft_, p.
[73] Hobhouse, _Morals in Evolution_, I, p. 43.
[74] Grosse, _Familie und Wirthschaft_, pp. 73-4.
[75] Grosse, _Ibid_, pp. 104-5.
[76] Starke, _The Primitive Family_, pp. 99, 100.
[77] Hobhouse, _Morals and Evolution_, I, p. 176.
[78] Earle, _Home Life in Colonial Days_, pp. 166-7.
[79] Letourneau, _The Evolution of Marriage_, p. 352.
[80] E. Vandervelde, _L’Exode Rural_.
[81] Bailey, _Modern Social Conditions_, p. 139.
[82] Mayo-Smith, _Statistics and Sociology_, p. 100.
[83] Letourneau, _The Evolution of Marriage_, pp. 351-2.
[84] See page 51.
[85] Howard, _A History of Matrimonial Institutions_, III, 227-8.
CHAPTER VIII
ECONOMIC FORCES AND THE BIRTH-RATE
In primitive times infanticide was often resorted to as a means of
freeing the tribe from the care and responsibility of unwelcome
children. McLennan says, “The moment infanticide was thought of as an
expedient for keeping down numbers, a step was taken, perhaps the most
important that was ever taken in the history of mankind.”[86]
Westermarck thinks McLennan places too much emphasis upon the extent
of the practice of infanticide. “A minute investigation of the
extent to which female infanticide is practiced has convinced me
that McLennan has much exaggerated the importance of the custom. It
certainly prevails in many parts of the world; and it is true that,
as a rule, female children are killed rather than male. But there is
nothing to indicate that infanticide has ever been so universal or had
anywhere been practiced, on so large a scale, as McLennan’s hypothesis
presupposes.”[87]
Among primitive peoples when starvation threatened a tribe, it is
reasonable to believe a sacrifice of life was considered necessary
to lessen immediate as well as prospective suffering and where the
new-born infants were the selected victims, the female children would
be sacrificed before the male. The services of women were of less
importance to a warring community than of men, and under ordinary
circumstances there would be a tendency for women to out number men
since they were not exposed to the risks and hardships warfare imposed
upon the men.
That infanticide was widely practiced where there was no danger
from starvation does not seem likely. The maternal instinct is very
pronounced among all animals, and the mother shows greater willingness
to sacrifice herself than her offspring. It must have been necessary to
overcome the mother feeling by force of reasoning, or by an exercise of
tyrannical authority to win her consent.
There existed many natural checks to the increase of population among
primitive peoples. Droughts and the ravages of diseases played no
small part in keeping down numbers. These same natural forces in
perhaps fewer forms are still effective in all countries of the world,
producing an infant mortality of an alarming proportion.
Unsanitary conditions, bad housing, impure milk and water, and the
heat of summer are among the checks to the more rapid increase of
population. Mr. Phelps says in his statistical study of infant
mortality, “In view of the many material changes in the living habits
and industrial conditions of the world’s population in the last
generation, the great advance in medical knowledge and the marked
decrease in the general death-rate, the practical uniformity of the
infantile death-rate the world around is simply astounding.”[88]
The problem of how to decrease infant mortality has received
considerable attention from municipal and philanthropic associations.
The results obtained are far from satisfactory, so great and far
reaching are its causes.
The fall of the birth-rate is generally attributed to psychological
rather than to physiological causes. Statistical reports do not show
the same decline in the birth-rate among the inhabitants of poor
districts of a city as among the well-to-do. A large number of the
unskilled workers are foreigners, or people ignorant in respect to
medical and physiological knowledge, and likewise unconscious of the
prevalence of the practice of the restriction of the birth-rate. But
the rapid diffusion of knowledge of all kinds in a democratic country
will soon change this state of affairs. Mrs. Commander’s study of the
birth-rate led her to believe that the birth-rate among immigrants who
come to the United States of America “falls decidedly below European
standards, and that the majority of immigrants when only a short time
in this country imbibe the idea of limiting family. The small family
appears to be an American ideal which immigrants accept as they do
other American ideals.”[89]
The investigation of the Fabian Society of London brought to light
the fact that “the decline in the birth-rate appears to be especially
marked in places inhabited by the servant keeping class. The birth-rate
of Bethnal Green--the district in London in which there are fewest
non-Londoners and in which fewest of the inhabitants keep domestic
servants fell off between 1881 and 1901 by twelve per cent and that of
Hampstead, where most domestic servants are kept, fell off by no less
than 36 per cent. The birth-rate for 1901 of five separate groups of
metropolitan boroughs arranged in grades of average poverty gave the
following interesting result. The small group of three ‘rich’ boroughs
have, for 100,000 population 2,004 legitimate births; the four groups
comprising 19 intermediate boroughs have almost identical legitimate
birth-rate between 2,362 to 2,490 for 100,000 whilst the poorest group
of 7 boroughs has a legitimate birth-rate of no less than 3,078, or 50
per cent more than that in the ‘rich’ quarters.”[90]
The pathological reason for the decline in the birth-rate is presented
by The National League for the Protection of the Family. “Since the
discovery of the germ of what was formerly considered the milder and
less harmful of the two chief sexual diseases, and more especially
since the numerous ramifications and effects of this milder form,
hitherto little suspected to exist, have been found and studied, there
has been a strong tendency towards agreement among medical authorities
that this disease is the real cause of a large part of the decline in
the birth-rate everywhere. While the difficulty of getting accurate
statistics on the subject is fully recognized by the authorities upon
it, they seem to agree that nearly or quite one-half of the cases of
sterility among the married are due to this milder of the two diseases,
and some would put it much higher. The more recent investigations also
go to show, so the medical authorities say, that a large number of what
they call ‘one-child marriages’ must be accounted for by the effects of
this milder of the two diseases.”[91]
Thorndyke suggests that the opinion that the decline in the birth-rate
is psychological rather than physiological may be “as wide of the
mark as the common belief that unwillingness is the main cause of the
failure of the women of the better classes to nurse their children”.
As a contradiction of natural selection, he says, “I may suggest that
the existence, amount and result of the elimination of types by their
failure to produce of their kind is after all a problem which only
statistical inquiries can settle and that if the doctrine is to be used
as an excuse for reading certain obvious facts in human history it is
perhaps time that it should be questioned.”[92]
Undoubtedly various causes are responsible for the decline in the
birth-rate, some of which have existed for ages. When the dominant
cause is psychological the remedy, if desirable, must be looked for
in the education of a community. Conditions must be brought about
making children desirable in the home, and a sufficient number of them
for the race to hold its own. But if the cause is beyond individual
selfishness--is other than psychological, and is a symptom of race
degeneracy in its reproductive capacities, it is as Thorndyke suggests
“time that it should be questioned.”
A statistical study of 524 families in the city of Chicago made in the
summer of 1909 suggests the possibilities of race degeneracy brought
about by economic causes. The mothers of these 524 families had been
married at least ten years and were born in foreign countries. The
nationalities represented were Italians, Germans, Irish, Bohemians,
Polish, Swedish and Norwegian, English and Scotch. They were people
who lived in the congested districts of the city and whose families
represented from one to thirteen children. 588 children died before
they reached the age of three years and 303 more were prematurely born
or died at birth, making the total loss under three years of age of 891.
Of the 588 deaths practically all would be attributed to social causes
such as unsanitary conditions existing in large cities or the ignorance
of mothers in the care and feeding of their children. Of the 303 babies
who died at birth or were prematurely born a large percentage would
be attributed to psychological causes resulting in foetiside. But
when one considers that only 20 per cent of the mothers embraced the
Protestant religion, a little less than 15 per cent were Jews and 65
per cent Catholics--the Catholic mother believes the unbaptized child
is destined to eternal punishment--the suspicion seems unwarranted.
It is true the above cases are all abnormal. They do not even represent
the average family of the congested parts of Chicago but rather the
most unfortunate of the unfortunate. They are the mothers who were sent
by the charity associations to the summer camps for a few weeks’ rest.
Nearly all were miserably poor, and had large families which in all
probability were important factors bringing about their poverty.
Undoubtedly the men of the families were the most inefficient workers
and the women possessed the least vitality when compared with the women
of the more fortunate classes. They might have been the least fit to
be parents, and their children--those who did survive the first three
years of life--help to swell the number of defective children in our
schools.
The fact, as Phelps notes, that so little difference exists in the
infant mortality-rate in the various countries of the world in spite of
increased medical knowledge may be indicative of a social evil common
to all countries, namely poverty.
The people who come from Europe and make up the tenement districts are
the poorest class at home, and many of them have never been properly
nourished. A United States Emigration report says, “The Poles are a
most prolific race, of strong and good physique, but rather anaemic in
appearance, owing to insufficient diet;” of the Bohemians, “the people
are industrious and economical. Their homes are primitive and barren
of everything except necessities.” One of the reasons the Italian
comes to this country is “the fact that the needs of the people have
outstripped the means of satisfying them.”[93]
It is most often real hunger that drives the emigrant to a new country
in the hopes of bettering his condition. And perhaps it is generations
of hunger, of malnutrition, on the part of the mother that is
responsible for the inability of the new-born child to resist infantile
diseases, or that prevents its natural birth. Thus the economic sins
of one generation are visited upon the next. There is indeed danger of
race degeneracy if the mothers and fathers of the future generations
are to be the underfed and the underpaid of the present time.
When necessity forced men to invade women’s field of work they did
not assume the heavier tasks because of their inconsistency with
motherhood, but because they were those tasks most in harmony with
their habits of life. Primitive women’s work was severe, but it was
work consistent with a stationary life which was desirable in the
bearing and rearing of children. Convenience helped to determine habits
of life and they in turn developed into customs. These customs were
responsible for many of the sex barriers, and class barriers of later
historical times.
The individual belonged to a class and his status was apparently fixed.
There was complete subordination within the class and competition
became class competition rather than individual competition. Thus
occupations were fixed and the plane of living showed little variation
from one generation to the other. There was no incentive to leave one’s
class, and little possibility of doing so. The individual’s future
was secure. At least it was not a game of chance, and children had an
equal chance at prosperity or starvation with their parents. The son
followed the occupation of his father which was in all probability the
occupation of his grandfather as well. The daughter was content with
the status of her mother, for she knew nothing different. She accepted
things as they were, just as her brother did, and whether her lot was
hard or comparatively easy, it was not for her to question it.
Wherever this social regime exists, the birth-rate is high. But
wherever class barriers are let down, and there is a possibility of the
individual shifting from one class to the other, competition between
individuals grows keen and individualization progresses by leaps. The
tyranny of custom and tradition ceases, and the lower classes can
with impunity imitate the higher classes. This creates an insatiable
desire for invidious distinction. The means to attain the desired end
are purely economic. The mother often engages in gainful occupations
to raise the plane of living and gain social prestige. An increasing
family becomes of vital concern to both parents because it would entail
a foregoing of luxuries which have to them become necessities.
This same overwhelming power of new wants is in a large measure
responsible for the increasing number of women in the professional
fields of work. To them it is an economic necessity. When measured
by the mental torture involved it is as essential to maintain the
standards of one’s class as bread is to the poor Russian peasant. A
girl will stand behind the counter from morning until night displaying
goods to exacting customers in order to maintain her standard of dress.
If she fails, she suffers probably as much as if her supply of food
were insufficient to satisfy her hunger.
The decrease of the birth-rate among the middle classes is thought to
be psychological. The Royal Commission on the decline of the birth-rate
in New South Wales after a careful investigation came to the conclusion
that the reasons for limiting the birth-rate “have one element in
common, namely selfishness.” Other investigators call this force
egoism, individualization, or the result of a struggle to maintain the
standard of life common to a class, all of which means an increased
consciousness of self. Ross says, “In the face of the hobby-riders I
maintain that the cause of the shrinkage in fecundity lies in the human
will as influenced by certain factors which have their roots deep in
the civilization of our times.”[94]
With the decrease of the importance of women’s work in the home, and
the increase of the necessity for them to enter the industrial field,
the birth-rate will continue to fall. Women’s invasion of the fields
of work outside the home will eventually result in a marked decline in
fecundity. So long as individual competition prevails in the business
world, the successful women will be those without the handicap of small
children. Mothers of small children cannot compete successfully in
the industrial world with the women who have no ties making demands
on their time or energy. Here lies the real danger arising out of the
necessity of women seeking employment outside the home. Under the
present industrial regime motherhood is not compatible with business
careers.
As long as the home was an industrial sphere and demanded the entire
time and energy of women there was little chance on their part for
individual development. But with the transition of work from the home
to the factory, women’s interests ceased to be necessarily centered
about the hearth, and many of them developed an individuality formerly
characteristic of men only. Freed from the cares of maternity women are
quite as radical as men. It is maternity that is largely responsible
for the conservatism of women and their indifference toward affairs
outside the home.
The high birth-rate of former times will not return nor is it
desirable, for the decreased death-rate among infants will tend to
maintain numbers. But while in the past children were accepted without
question, and parents never thought of the possibility of limiting
the size of their families, in the future the human will will play an
ever increasing part. Whether the guiding motive in restricting the
birth-rate will be a worthy one, or one to be deprecated will depend
upon those social institutions which are responsible for the production
of individuals’ ideals.
FOOTNOTES:
[86] McLennan, _Studies in Ancient History_, pp. 81-2, 2nd Series.
[87] Westermarck.
[88] Phelps, _A Statistical Study of Infant Mortality_, p. 268.
Quarterly Publication of The American Statistical Association.
[89] Commander, _The American Idea_, p. 18.
[90] Webb, _Physical Degeneracy or Race Suicide_. Popular Science
Monthly, Dec. 1906, pp. 515-6.
[91] _Annual Report for 1906_, p. 10. _American Journal of Sociology_,
March, 1909. Doctor Morrow says, “A large proportion of sterile
marriages, contrary to the popular view, is from incapacity and not of
choice.” p. 626.
[92] Thorndyke, _Decrease in the Size of American Families_. Popular
Science Monthly, May, 1903, p. 69.
[93] Department of Commerce and Labor, _Emigration to the U. S._ 1904,
pp. 105, 112.
[94] Ross, _Western Civilisation and the Birth-Rate_. Am. Jour. of Soc.
XII, 610, March 1907.
CHAPTER IX
ECONOMIC CHANGES AND THE DIVORCE-RATE
So long has society been accustomed to accepting as final the laws and
customs arising out of earlier social conditions, that changes brought
about by new conditions, and contrary to the accepted scheme of things
arouse a widespread concern. There is no better illustration of the
conflict between the new and the old than the present tendency to
divorce, and the steady pressure of our social institutions to combat
this tendency.
It did not take primitive man long to see that organization was
essential to preservation. Only the best organized tribes could survive
in a struggle; and the closer the organization, the greater the
advantage when contending with outside or hostile forces. The basis
of tribal organization was the family, and the tribes with the best
organized families in a growing society proved the most effective in
the tribal life.
When the family became a recognized unit of stability--either for
methods of warfare or economic reasons--forces arose tending to
establish sentiments opposed to divorce. It was of primary importance
that these sentiments should be accepted as a code of morality in a
loosely organized society. It is when the larger organization, such as
the state, is not strong enough to maintain its own stability, that
it is of the utmost importance that the units composing it should
be compact and self reliant. Only in a highly organized, socialized
society, can the family be viewed as a compact with the welfare of its
individual members as its sole motive for existence.
In primitive times the unity of the family was of the utmost importance
to the men of the tribe as well as to the women. The permanency of the
marriage relation was essential to the preservation of society, for the
state could not assume the function of protection in contradistinction
to the protection afforded by the male head of the family. It is only
in peaceable communities where the occupations of the people are
principally industrial that a social consciousness arises, making
possible a non-militant social compact looking toward the individual’s
welfare as part of the community welfare.
It was important, too, that the head of the family should assume the
responsibility of caring for the helpless. If this were not so, the
care of the offspring would be shifted from the family to the tribe or
state. Irrespective of the moral practices within the family, or the
form of marriage, it was essential to maintain the family unity for the
care and the protection of children.
On the other hand it was important for the women to be attached to some
household, and recognized as a permanent part of it. If not, in cases
where their rights were entirely overlooked, they would be forced to
return to the households of their fathers. Consciously or unconsciously
the members of the tribe appreciated the importance of creating moral
sentiments fostering family responsibilities on the part of the
individual.
Divorce in the past was essentially a masculine institution. The state
arose out of the desire to protect property rights of the individual.
Women did not possess property to any considerable extent and so were
denied the privileges arising therefrom. They were considered by both
father and husband as property and all property rights inhering in
them as in lands and cattle. That is, the status of women did not
necessarily make them property, but the property right possession
involved was responsible to a marked measure for their status.
In many primitive tribes women neither fought nor cared for the herds
and all their activities resolved themselves into personal services.
Hence, more than one wife was a luxury to a husband for she was a real
economic burden.
All laws governing property naturally applied to women and aimed
alone at protecting the rights of men. Transgression against these
matrimonial rights of a man was an offense against property and
punished accordingly. It was not an offense against the moral sense
of the community, or of the individual, for wife-loaning was looked
upon with favor by many while the usurpation of the same privilege was
punishable by death. It was a crime against property and not against
the woman in question.
Women were often treated with great brutality, but this abuse did not
follow necessarily because they were women--the male is naturally
more considerate at all times of the female than of his own kind--but
because they possessed no rights which were synonymous with economic
strength. Their relative economic value did not inhere in them
personally but in the economic strength of their fathers and husbands.
The rights of women increased with the increase of their economic
importance in the household. During the period of domestic industry,
divorce was almost unknown. When it was practiced, it was the exclusive
privilege of the leisure class, or of those whose financial well being
was secured.
It is true the church took a decided stand against divorce and did much
toward counteracting the supposed evil, but a far greater force was the
development of the medieval town with its domestic industries.
Agricultural occupations were also a strong unifying force in the
family relation. Where people are attached to the soil by virtue of
their occupations and property rights, the home is an economic unit
just as is true of the diminutive factory carried on within the family
group.