No thoughtful person can fail to appreciate the enormous influence which
women are constantly exercising for good and evil upon the destinies
of the world. The charms and graces of existence, whatever ennobles and
embellishes life, we owe mainly to them. They are the natural guardians
of morality, and from age to age the mothers of households have
preserved the sacred fire on the domestic hearth, whereat every virtue
is kindled. But they have also been the most formidable enemies of
progress. Their conservatism is usually of the most unreasoning kind,
and the tenacity with which they cling to favorite prejudices is
rarely overcome either by argument or appeal. They have been from
time immemorial the dupes, the tools, and the most effective allies of
priestcraft. Their hostility to the cause of Reform has been so fatal,
not only because of the direct influence of their actions, but because
of that subtle power which they exert so skilfully over the minds of
husbands, brothers and friends, by the arts of remonstrance, entreaty
and the contagion of their feeble alarms. The question whether their
hostility can be turned into friendship, is one of momentous importance
for the leaders of the Liberal movement to consider.
In the following we shall endeavor to make plain that the subordinate
position hitherto assigned to women, is the principal cause that has
impelled them to take sides against religious progress.
Among the primitive races woman was reduced to a condition of abject
slavery. Affection of the deeper kind was unknown. The wife was robbed
or purchased from her relations; was treated as a menial by her husband,
and often exposed to the most brutal abuse. As civilization advanced,
the marriage bond became more firm, and common interest in the offspring
of the union served to create common sympathies. Among the Greeks, the
ideal of domestic life was pure and elevated. The tales of Andromache,
Penelope and Alcestes illustrate the strength of conjugal fidelity and
the touching pathos of love that outlasts death. The Grecian home was
fenced about with scrupulous care and strictest privacy protected its
inmates from temptation. It was the duty of the wife to superintend
the internal economy of the household, to spin and weave, to direct the
slaves in their various occupations, to nurse them when sick, to
watch over the young children, and chiefly to insure the comfort and
satisfaction of her lord. His cares and ambitions indeed she hardly
shared. She never aspired to be his equal, and simple obedience to
his wishes was the supreme virtue impressed upon her by education, and
enforced by habit. Among the Romans, the character of the matron is
described in the most laudatory and reverential terms. Still the laws
of the Republic made woman practically the bondswoman of man. It is
well-known that our English word family is derived from the Latin
where it originally means the household of slaves. The matron too, was
counted, at least theoretically, among these slaves, and the right of
deciding her fate literally for life or death, belonged exclusively to
her husband. It is true in the cordial intimacy of the monogamic bond,
the austerity of usage, and the harshness of the laws are often tempered
by affection and mutual respect; yet we are aptly reminded by a modern
writer on this subject, that the law which remains a dead letter to
the refined and cultivated becomes the instrument of the most heartless
oppression in the hands of the vulgar and the passionate.
Among the Hebrews, a position of great dignity and consequence was
sometimes accorded to their women. The wives of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
played an important part in directing the affairs of the Patriarchal
households. A woman performed the functions of judge and leader of
armies, women sat upon the throne, prophetesses were consulted in grave
matters of the State and of religion; in the absence of sons, the
Mosaic law guarantees to daughters the right of succession to the family
estate. The later writings of the Jews are likewise replete with noble
sentiments touching the sanctity of the conjugal tie. Many of the
ordinances of the Talmud depend upon women for their execution, and this
circumstance alone must have contributed to raise them in the popular
estimation. In every marriage contract a certain sum was set apart for
the wife, in case of her husband's death or of divorce. Still the right
of dissolving the matrimonial connection belonged exclusively to the
husband, although under certain conditions he could be forced by the
court to issue the "writ of separation." However the wife might be
honored and loved, she was ever regarded as man's inferior.
The influence of Christianity upon the position of women, was twofold,
and in opposite directions. On the one hand women had been among
the first and most devoted followers of Jesus; women were largely
instrumental in effecting the conversion of the Roman Empire, and in the
list of martyrs, their names shine preeminent. On the other hand, the
church in the early centuries cast an unpardonable slur on the
marriage relation. We read of young maidens fleeing the society of dear
companions and friends, to escape the temptation of the affections, of
faithful wives, filled with inexpressible loathing at a connection which
they deemed contrary to the dictates of religion, and deserting husbands
and children. The desire of love was poisoned with a sense of guilt. The
celibacy of the clergy, finally enforced by Pope Hildebrand, gave rise
to the most shocking irregularities. All this tended to degrade the
female sex.
At the time of the crusades a partial revulsion of feeling took place.
The spirit of chivalry entered the church, the character of woman was
transfigured, and the worship of the Virgin Mary spread in consequence
throughout Europe. A change in the education of girls was one of the
results of the rise of Chivalry. Music and poetry became its chief
elements; women were fed on intellectual sweetmeats, but strong and
healthy nourishment was still denied them.
In all the different stages of progress which we have thus rapidly
scanned, the assumption of man's superiority to woman was held as an
incontestible article of belief, and even the chivalric ideal is only a
more amiable and disguised expression of the same view.
What effect the disabilities under which they labored must have had upon
the religious life of women will readily be perceived. There are two
attitudes of mind peculiarly favorable to orthodoxy; the one a tendency
to lean on authority, the other a disposition to give free sway to the
feelings without submitting them to the checks of reason. Now it is
plain that the condition of dependence to which society has condemned
woman is calculated to develop these very qualities to an abnormal
degree. From early childhood she receives commands and is taught to
distrust her own judgment. When she enters the bonds of matrimony she
becomes dependent on her husband for support, and in the vast majority
of cases, his riper judgment shames her inexperience. In all graver
matters she must perforce defer to his decision. Accustomed to rely on
authority, is it surprising that in matters of religion, where even
men confess their ignorance, she should rejoice in the authority of the
priest, whose directions relieve her of doubt and supply a ready channel
for her thoughts and acts. Again the feelings are her natural weapons,
shall she not trust them! The stability and security of society are the
conditions on which her dearest hopes depend for their realization. Can
she welcome the struggles of innovation. All her feelings cluster about
the religious traditions of the past; all a woman's heart pleads for
their maintenance.
Now to confine the feelings of woman within their proper bounds, it is
necessary to give wider scope, and a more generous cultivation to her
intellect; in brief to allow her the same freedom of development as is
universally accorded to man. Freedom makes strong, and the confidence of
others generates an independent and self-reliant spirit in ourselves. It
is indeed often urged that woman is by nature the inferior of man. But
the appeal to physiology seems to be at least premature; the relation of
the size of the brain to intellectual capacity being by no means clearly
determined; while the appeal to history is, if possible, even more
treacherous, because it cites the evils engendered by an ancient and
long continued system of oppression in favor of the system itself.
Counting all the disadvantages against which woman has been forced
to contend, and which have hampered her every effort to elevate her
condition, it is truly marvelous, not that she has done so little, but
that she has accomplished that which she has. Even in the difficult art
of government she has earned well merited distinction, and women are
named among the wisest and most beneficent rulers of ancient and modern
times.* What the possibilities of woman's nature may be, no one can
tell; least of all she herself. As it is she is credited with a superior
power of intuition, a readier insight into character, a more complete
mastery of details. What larger powers now latent a broader culture will
bring to light, remains for the future to show.
* J. S. Mill, The Subjection of Women, p. 100.
But we are told that the sphere of woman's work is in the home, and that
properly to perform her vocation there, she does not need the vigorous
training required for men. That woman's mission ought to be and happily
is in the majority of cases in the home, no one will gainsay. At the
same time, we should not close our eyes to patent facts, facts such as
these; that the number of women whose mission actually does not lie in
the home, is exceedingly great; that according to the last census of the
United States, for instance, the female population of the State of New
York, is fifty-six thousand in excess of the male; that well nigh two
millions of women in this country are engaged in working for their
livelihood. Is it not cruel mockery to say to these women that their
business is in the household? If the condition of things is such that
they must seek outside labor; if we permit them to toil by hundreds of
thousands in the fields and factories, on what plea of right or reason
can we deny them admission to the higher grades of service? Is it not
simple justice to admit them to all the professions, and to allow them
the same advantages in colleges and professional schools as are enjoyed
by men?
We need not fear that the privilege will be abused. If women undertake
to engage in pursuits for which they are physically or mentally unfit,
the effect of competition will quickly discourage them, and here as
elsewhere, only the fittest will survive.
But aside from those who are destined to remain single, and considering
the seven millions of women, or more, who will become wives and mothers
of families; is not the demand for higher education equally imperative
in their case? Young girls are but too often educated to be the
agreeable companions, rather than the partners of their future husbands.
They receive sufficient instruction to give them a general acquaintance
with the surface of things, but not sufficient to develop what ought to
be the chief end of every scheme of education--a permanent intellectual
interest in any one direction. Much time is wasted on minor
accomplishments. At an age when the young girl is still totally
immature, she is often withdrawn from the influence of her preceptors,
and hurried from dissipation to dissipation, to tread the round of
society's gayeties, and to inhale the poisonous atmosphere of flattery
and conventional falsehoods. She enters a new world. The contrast
between the restraints of school life, and her novel sense of
consequence intoxicates her; the desire for pleasure becomes a passion;
the books of useful information, that never possessed a real charm for
her, are cast aside, and the literature of the sentiments alone retains
its attractions during the remainder of life. It is not astonishing
that those whose minds are thus left barren, should employ their leisure
hours in frivolous or vicious occupations; that an exorbitant luxury,
the sign at all times, of deficient culture, should have infected the
community. It is not wonderful that when the trials of life approach,
these women grasp wildly at the nearest superstition, and prostrate
themselves before any idol of the vulgar, in their blind ignorance and
credulity.
I have said that higher education can alone make marriage what it ought
to be, for it is not fancy or the glow of passion that can bind the
hearts together in lasting wedlock. The marriage bond has deeper
meanings. Two souls are united, each to be all in all to each. Here
shall be the very consummation of love; love, that precious boon that
assuages every pang, and stills every grief, and triumphs over sickness,
sorrow, and the tomb. All nature's symbols fail to express its fulness;
it has the hope of the dawning day; it has the tender pathos of the
light of the moon; it has the melody of birds, the mystic stillness
of the forest, the infinity of the fathomless sea! Bounteous love,
how inexhaustible are its treasures! The fires of the passions kindle
affection, but cannot secure it. If there be only the stubble of desire
in the heart, that will quickly be consumed; if there be veins of true
gold there, that will be melted and refined. Years pass, youth fades,
the attendant train of the graces vanishes, loveliness falls like a
mask, but the union only becomes firmer and trustier, because it is a
union, not of the sentiments merely, but of the souls. The wife becomes
the true sharer of her husband's thoughts; mutual confidence reigns
between them; they grow by mutual furtherance; each sees in each the
mirror of his nobler self; they are the true complement one to the
other. Who does not know that such unions are rare! Common sympathies,
common duties do indeed create a tolerable understanding in most
households; but that is not wedlock that men and women should jog on
tolerably well together for the better part of a lifetime.
The modern mind is constantly broadening; new facts, new discoveries are
constantly coming to light, and loftier problems engage the attention
of thinkers. If woman would not be utterly left behind in the race, then
must she make an effort to acquire more solid knowledge, and educational
reform is the first step in the cause of woman's emancipation. The
electoral franchise, and whatever other measures may be included in
the popular phrase of "Woman's rights" should be reserved for future
discussion. If practicable at all, they are assuredly for the present of
secondary importance.
Permit me to close by briefly formulating a few points that seem to me
to deserve special consideration in this connection.
Woman, like man, should comprehend the age in which she lives and the
great questions by which it is agitated. To this end a knowledge of
history, and chiefly the history of her own nation, is requisite. She
should learn to understand the principles of the language she speaks,
and the literature in which it is preserved, not from dry text-books,
but from the living works of the authors themselves. She should be able
to pass an intelligent judgment upon the political issues of the day,
that take up so large a share of men's conversation, and to this end
the rudiments of political science might profitably be taught her.
She should possess sufficient familiarity with the natural sciences to
comprehend at least the main results of scientific investigations, and
a training of this kind would have the further advantage of accustoming
her mind to the methods of accurate thinking. She should gain some
knowledge of the human body and of the laws upon which its health
depends. Is it not strange that this important branch of knowledge is
so generally neglected in the training of those who are to be mothers of
the future generation? How often would proper attention to a few simple
rules of hygiene prevent sickness; how often would more efficient
nursing avert death, where it is now freely allowed to enter. Then too
the outlines of pedagogy should be included in a course of advanced
instruction for women. Mothers are the educators of the children, but
the educators themselves require to be educated.
If the intellect of girls were braced and stimulated in this manner,
they would exhibit greater self-possession and self-reliance in their
later lives; they would be less apt to be deluded by false appeals to
the feelings: "the woman's view" would be no longer proverbial for the
weaker view; the whole of society would feel the beneficent change, and
the problem which we set out to discuss in the beginning would in due
time solve itself.
We do not for a moment apprehend that the increased cultivation of
the intellect would entail any loss of sweetness or of those gracious
qualities that make the charm of womanhood. Wherever such a result has
been apparently observed, it is safe to ascribe it to other causes.
Truth and beauty are far too closely akin in their inmost nature to
exclude each other. Nor do we fear that the intensity of moral feeling,
for which women are distinguished, would suffer under the restraining
influence of reason's guidance. The moral feelings would indeed be
purified, elevated and directed to their proper objects by the judicious
use of reason; they would not therefore be enfeebled. In the past,
the conservatism of women has been a mighty obstacle in the path
of progress. It is but just to add that at the dawn of every great
religious movement which promised the moral advancement of the race,
gifted women, rising above the weakness of their sisters, have been
among the earliest to welcome the new hope for humanity; have been among
the most ardent, the most self-sacrificing of its disciples. The Liberal
movement of our day also is essentially a movement for larger morality,
and more and more as this feature will be clearly developed, may it hope
to gain the sympathies of brave and good women to its side. In their
support it will behold at once the criterion of its worthiness, and the
surest pledge of its ultimate triumph.