1.—“... _woman shall her own redemption gain_.”
In the greatest depth of their meaning remain true the words of Olive
Schreiner: “He who stands by the side of woman cannot help her; she must
help herself.”
_Id._... “Nothing is clearer than that woman must lead her own
revolution; not alone because it is hers, and that no other being can
therefore have her interest in its achievement, but because it is for a
life whose highest needs and rights—those to be redressed in its
success—lie above the level of man’s experiences or comprehension. Only
woman is sufficient to state woman’s claims and vindicate them.”—Eliza
W. Farnham (“Woman,” Vol. I., p. 308).
(See also Notes to XLVI. 7 and LVIII. 1.)
2.—“_Instructed by the sting of bootless pain_.”
“Toutes les fonctions du corps humain, sauf l’enfantement, sont autant
de plaisirs. Dès que la douleur surgit, la nature est violée. La douleur
est d’origine humaine. Un corps malade ou a violé les lois de la nature,
ou bien souffre de la violation de la loi d’un de ses semblables. La
douleur par elle-même est donc le meilleur diagnostic pour le
médecin.... Entre la loi de la nature et la violation de cette loi, il
n’y a que désordres, douleurs et ruines.... La maladie ne vient pas de
la nature, elle n’y est même pas. Elle n’est que la violation d’une des
lois de la nature. Dès qu’une de ces lois est violée, la douleur arrive
et vous dit qu’une loi vient d’être enfreinte. S’il est temps encore, le
mal peut être amoindri, expulsé, chassé.... La maladie n’est donc que le
résultat de la violation d’une loi naturelle.... La science et la
mécanique du corps humain, c’est l’art de vivre d’après les lois de la
nature, c’est la certitude que pas un médecin ne possède contre la
violation d’une de ces lois un remède autre que d’y rentrer le plus tôt
possible.... Chaque fois que l’homme s’efforcera de suivre la loi de la
nature, il chassera devant soi une centaine de maladies.”—Dr. Alexandre
Weill (“Lois et Mystères de l’Amour,” pp. 41, 91, 24, 85, 83).
3, 4.—“_With Nature ever helpful to retrieve
The injury we heedlessly achieve._”
“Thus, if we could, by preaching our pet ideal, or in any other way
induce one generation of women to turn to a new pursuit, we should have
accomplished a step towards bending all future womanhood in the same
direction.”—Frances Power Cobbe (Essay: “The Final Cause of Woman”).
See also Note XXIII., 4.
6.—“_Already guerdon rich in hope is shown_.”
“He (Mr. Frederic Harrison) says—‘All women, with few exceptions, are
subject to functional interruption absolutely incompatible with the
highest forms of continuous pressure.’ This assertion I venture most
emphatically to deny. The actual period of child-birth apart, the
ordinarily healthy woman is as fit for work every day of her life as the
ordinarily healthy man. Fresh air, exercise, suitable clothing and
nourishing food, added to the habitual temperance of women in eating and
drinking, have brought about a marvellously good result in improving
their average health.”—Mrs. Fawcett (_Fortnightly Review_, Nov. 1891).
(See also Note LX., 8.)
8.—“_The sage physician, she_ ...”
Not only “sage” physician, but “brave” physician; for brave indeed has
been the part she has had to bear against male professional prejudice
and jealousy, opposition from masculine vested interests, virulent abuse
and even personal violence. So recently as 1888, Dr. Sophia Jex-Blake
has to report concerning the medical education of women, that:—
“The first difficulty lies in some remaining jealousy and ill-will
towards medical women on the part of a section (constantly
diminishing, as I believe) of the medical profession itself. Some
twenty years ago the professional prejudice was so deep and so widely
spread that it constituted a very formidable obstacle, but it has been
steadily melting away before the logic of facts; and now is, with a
few exceptions, rarely to be found among the leaders of the
profession, nor indeed among the great majority of the rank and file,
as far as can be judged by the personal experience of medical women
themselves. Unfortunately, it seems strongest just where it has least
justification, viz., among the practitioners who devote themselves
chiefly to midwifery, and to the special diseases of women. The
Obstetrical Society is, so far as I know, still of the same mind as
when, in 1874, they excluded Dr. Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, a
distinguished M.D. of Paris, from their membership; and the Soho
Square Hospital for Women has never revoked its curt refusal to allow
me to enter its doors, when, in 1878, I proposed to take advantage of
the invitation issued in its report to all practitioners who were
specially interested in the cases for which the hospital is reserved.
Sometimes this jealousy takes a sufficiently comic form. For instance,
I received for two successive years a lithographed circular inviting
me by name to send to the _Lancet_ the reports of interesting cases
that might occur in my dispensary practice, but when I wrote in
response to this supposed offer of professional fellowship, I received
by next post a hurried assurance from the editor that it was all a
mistake, and that, in fact, the _Lancet_ could not stoop to record
medical experiences, however interesting, if they occurred in the
practice of the inferior sex! Probably it will not require many more
years to make this sort of thing ridiculous, even in the eyes of those
who are now capable of such puerilities.
“The second obstacle lies in the continued exclusion of women from the
majority of our Universities, and from the English Colleges of
Physicians and Surgeons. Here also the matter may be left to the
growth of public opinion as regards those existing bodies which do not
depend upon the public purse; but it is time that Parliament should
refuse supplies to those bodies whose sense of justice cannot be
otherwise awakened, and it is certainly the duty of Government to see
that no new charter is granted without absolute security for equal
justice to students of both sexes.”—Sophia Jex-Blake, M.D.
(_Nineteenth Century_, Nov., 1887).
See also Note LVII., 1, and LVIII, 1.
_Id._... Progress is indeed being made, surely, yet slowly, for Mrs.
Fawcett has still necessity to reiterate, four years afterwards:—
“Make her a doctor, put her through the mental discipline and the
physical toil of the profession; charge her, as doctors are so often
charged, with the health of mind and body of scores of patients, she
remains womanly to her finger tips, and a good doctor in proportion as
the truly womanly qualities in her are strongly developed. Poor women
are very quick to find this out as patients. Not only from the immediate
neighbourhood of the New Hospital for Women, where all the staff are
women doctors, but also from the far East of London do they come,
because ‘the ladies,’ as they call them, are ladies, and show their poor
patients womanly sympathy, gentleness, and patience, womanly insight and
thoughtfulness in little things, and consideration for their home
troubles and necessities. It is not too much to say that a woman can
never hope to be a good doctor unless she is truly and really a womanly
woman. And much the same thing may be said with regard to fields of
activity not yet open to women.”—Mrs. Fawcett (_Fortnightly Review_,
Nov., 1891).
_Id._—“... _saviour of her sex_.”
Bebel says:—“Women doctors would be the greatest blessing to their own
sex. The fact that women must place themselves in the hands of men in
cases of illness or of the physical disturbances connected with their
sexual functions frequently prevents their seeking medical help in time.
This gives rise to numerous evils, not only for women, but also for men.
Every doctor complains of this reserve on the part of women, which
sometimes becomes almost criminal, and of their dislike to speak freely
of their ailments, even after they have made up their minds to consult a
doctor. This is perfectly natural, the only irrational thing about it is
the refusal of men, and especially of doctors, to recognise how
legitimate the study of medicine is for women.” (“Woman,” Walther’s
translation, p. 131.)
_Id._... “As I am alluding to my own experience in this matter, I may
perhaps be allowed to say how often in the same place I have been struck
with the _contingent_ advantages attendant on the medical care by women
of women; how often I have seen cases connected with stories of shame or
sorrow to which a woman’s hand could far more fittingly minister, and
where sisterly help and counsel could give far more appropriate succour
than could be expected from the average young medical man, however good
his intentions. Perhaps we shall find the solution of some of our
saddest social problems, when educated and pure-minded women are brought
more constantly in contact with their sinning and suffering sisters, in
other relations as well as those of missionary effort.”—Dr. Sophia
Jex-Blake (Essay: “Medicine as a Profession for Women”).