XX

My intention in writing this book has not been to inveigh against the

institution of marriage, the life companionship of man and woman; all

that I have inveighed against has been the largely compulsory character

of that institution—as far as one-half of humanity is concerned—the

sweated trade element in it, and the glorification of certain qualities

and certain episodes and experiences of life at the expense of all the

others. I believe—because I have seen it in the working—that the

companionship in marriage of self-respecting man and self-respecting

woman is a very perfect thing; but I also believe that, under present

conditions, it is not easy for self-respecting woman to find a mate

with whom she can live on the terms demanded by her self-respect.

Hence a distinct tendency on her part to avoid marriage. Those women

who look at the matter in this light are those who, while not denying

that matrimony may be an excellent thing in itself, realize that there

are some excellent things which may be bought too dear. That is the

position of a good many of us in these latter days. If we are more or

less politely incredulous when we are informed that we are leading an

unnatural existence, it is not because we have no passions, but because

life to us means a great deal more than one of its possible episodes.

If we decline to listen with becoming reverence to disquisitions on the

broadening effect of motherhood upon our lives, the deep and miraculous

understanding that it brings into our hearts, it is not because we

are contemptuous of maternity, but because we have met so many silly

persons who brought babies into the world and remained just as silly

as they were before. We are quite aware, too, that it is, for the most

part, women of our own unmated class, and, likely enough, of our own

way of thinking, who spend their days in teaching bungling mothers how

to rear the children who would otherwise only come into the world in

order to afford employment to the undertaker by going out of it. (A

considerable proportion of the infant population of this country would

be in a parlous state if the “superfluous women” thereof were suddenly

caught up into the air and dumped _en bloc_ in the Sahara.)

And in this connection I feel it necessary to state that I have

hitherto sought in vain in real life for that familiar figure in

fiction—the unmarried woman whose withered existence is passed in

ceaseless and embittered craving for the possession of a child of

her own. The sufferings of this unfortunate creature, as depicted

by masculine writers, have several times brought me to the verge of

tears; it is difficult to believe that they are entirely the result of

vivid masculine imagination; but honesty compels me to admit that I

have never discovered their counterpart in life, in spite of the fact

that my way has led me amongst spinsters of all ages. Young unmarried

women have told me frankly that they would like to bear a child; a

very few elderly unmarried women have told me that they would have

preferred to marry; and quite a number of married women have told me

that they should have done better for themselves by remaining single.

I have known wives who desired maternity as anxiously as others

desired to avoid it; but the spinster whose days are passed in gloomy

contemplation of her lack of olive-branches I have not yet met. I

started by believing in her, just as I started by believing that the

world held nothing for me but marriage and reproduction of my kind.

Later on I discovered that there were more things in heaven and earth

than marriage and reproduction of my kind, and I have no reason to

suppose that I am the only woman who has made that discovery.

The women I have known who lamented their single state as a real evil

have been actuated in their dislike of it by mixed motives. A desire to

bear children has, perhaps, been one; but it has always been interwoven

with the desire to improve their position socially or commercially, and

the corresponding fear of failure or poverty implied by spinsterhood.

So far as my experience goes, the only women who fret passionately at

the lack of children of their own are married women whose husbands are

desirous of children.

I should be the last to deny that many unmarried women have the sense

of maternity strongly developed; but the sense of maternity, as I see

it, is not completely dependent on the accidents of marriage and

child-birth. As I have already said, I believe it is not the physical

side of maternity—the side which appeals so strongly to men—which

appeals most strongly to women; and from the other, and, to me,

infinitely more beautiful side, no unmarried woman is necessarily

debarred. The spinster who devotes herself to permanent lamentation

over her lack of descendants must (if she exists) be a person who has

never risen above the male conception of motherhood as a physical and

instinctive process. Some of the best mothers I have met have never

borne a child; but one does not imagine that it will be counted to them

for unrighteousness that the children who rise up and call them blessed

are not their own. Nor is it childhood alone which enkindles the sense

of maternity in women; the truest mother I know is one who enwraps with

her love a “child” who came into the world before she was thought of.

After all, there is a kinship that is not that of the flesh, and

some of us are very little the children of our parents. The people

who have framed and influenced the conditions under which we live,

whose thoughts have moulded our lives, have also had a share in

our making. It is possible that descendants of Homer walk the earth

to-day—very worthy persons whose existence is of no particular moment

to any but themselves. Shakespeare was married I know, and I believe

he was the father of a family; but of how many that family consisted,

what were their names and what became of them all, I have never even

troubled to inquire. Did Goethe leave descendants, or did he not? I

frankly confess that I don’t know, simply because I have never had

the slightest curiosity on the subject. But Faust has been part of my

life. It matters very little to the world at large what became of the

children whom Jean Jacques Rousseau handed over to the tender mercies

of a foundling hospital; but there are very few people alive to-day to

whom it does not matter that the current of the world’s striving was

turned into a new channel by the spiritual sons of Rousseau—the men

who made the French Revolution. Reproduction is not everything; the

men and women who have striven to shorten the hours of child-labour

have often been possessed of a keener sense of responsibility and

tenderness, a keener sense of fatherhood and motherhood, than the

parents whose children they sought to protect. If I were one of those

who have so striven, I should consider that the help I had given to the

world was no less worthy of honour and commendation than that of the

paterfamilias who marches a family of fourteen to church on Sundays.

If humanity had only been created in order to reproduce its kind, we

might still be dodging cave-bears in the intervals of grubbing up roots

with our nails. It is not only the children who matter: there is the

world into which they are born. Every human being who influences for

the better, however slightly, the conditions under which he lives is

doing something for those who come after; and thus, it seems to me,

that those women who are proving by their lives that marriage is not

a necessity for them, that maternity is not a necessity for them,

are preparing a heritage of fuller humanity for the daughters of

others—who will be daughters of their own in the spirit, if not in

the flesh. The home of the future will be more of an abiding-place and

less of a prison because they have made it obvious that, so far as many

women are concerned, the home can be done without; and if the marriage

of the future is what it ought to be—a voluntary contract on both

sides—it will be because they have proved the right of every woman to

refuse it if she will, by demonstrating that there are other means of

earning a livelihood than bearing children and keeping house. It is

the woman without a husband to support her, the woman who has no home

but such as she makes for herself by her own efforts, who is forcing a

reluctant masculine generation to realize that she is something more

than the breeding factor of the race. By her very existence she is

altering the male conception of her sex.

According to latter-day notions, to speak in praise of celibacy in

man or in woman is tantamount to committing the crime of high treason

against the race. Other centuries—some of them with social systems

quite as scientific as our own—have not been of that way of thinking;

and one is half inclined to suspect that the modern dislike of the

celibate has its root in the natural annoyance of an over-sexed and

mentally lax generation at receiving ocular demonstration of the fact

that the animal passions can be kept under control. It saves such

a lot of trouble to assume at once that they cannot be kept under

control; so, in place of the priest, we have the medicine man, whose

business it is to make pathological excuses for original sin. Myself

I have a good deal of respect for the celibate; not because he has no

children, but because he is capable of self-control—which is a thing

respectable in itself.

At the same time, I do not advocate celibacy except for persons whom it

suits; but I do not see why persons whom it does suit should be ashamed

of acknowledging the fact. I am inclined to think that they are more

numerous than is commonly supposed, and I will admit frankly that I am

exceedingly glad that it seems, in these latter days, to suit so many

women. I am glad, not because the single life appears to me essentially

better than the married, but because I believe that the conditions of

marriage, as they affect women, can only be improved by the women who

do without marriage—and do without it gladly. Other generations have

realized that particular duties could best be performed by persons

without engrossing domestic interests; and I believe that the wives

and mothers of this generation require the aid of women unhampered by

such interests—women who will eventually raise the value of the wife

and mother in the eyes of the husband and father by making it clear

to him that she did not enter the married state solely because there

was nothing else for her to do, and that his child was not born simply

because its mother had no other way of earning a living. There are

women married every day, there are children born every day, for no

better reasons than these.

Marriage as a Trade · 第 29 / 31 题