Mary
Wollstonecraft
from
A VINDICATION OF THE RIGHTS OF WOMAN (1792)
INTRODUCTION.
After considering the historic page, and viewing the living world with
anxious solicitude, the most melancholy emotions of sorrowful indignation have
depressed my spirits, and I have sighed when obliged to confess, that either
nature has made a great difference between man and man, or that the
civilization, which has hitherto taken place in the world, has been very
partial. I have turned over various books written on the subject of education,
and patiently observed the conduct of parents and the management of schools;
but what has been the result? a profound conviction, that the neglected
education of my fellow creatures is the grand source of the misery I deplore;
and that women in particular, are rendered weak and wretched by a variety of
concurring causes, originating from one hasty conclusion. The conduct and
manners of women, in fact, evidently prove, that their minds are not in a
healthy state; for, like the flowers that are planted in too rich a soil,
strength and usefulness are sacrificed to beauty; and the flaunting leaves,
after having pleased a fastidious eye, fade, disregarded on the stalk, long
before the season when they ought to have arrived at maturity. One cause of this
barren blooming I attribute to a false system of education, gathered from the
books written on this subject by men, who, considering females rather as women
than human creatures, have been more anxious to make them alluring mistresses
than rational wives; and the understanding of the sex has been so bubbled by
this specious homage, that the civilized women of the present century, with a
few exceptions, are only anxious to inspire love, when they ought to cherish a
nobler ambition, and by their abilities and virtues exact respect.
In a treatise, therefore, on female rights and manners, the works
which have been particularly written for their improvement must not be
overlooked; especially when it is asserted, in direct terms, that the minds of
women are enfeebled by false refinement; that the books of instruction, written
by men of genius, have had the same tendency as more frivolous productions; and
that, in the true style of Mahometanism, they are only considered as females,
and not as a part of the human species, when improvable reason is allowed to be
the dignified distinction, which raises men above the brute creation, and puts
a natural sceptre in a feeble hand.
Yet, because I am a woman, I would not lead my readers to suppose,
that I mean violently to agitate the contested question respecting the equality
and inferiority of the sex; but as the subject lies in my way, and I cannot
pass it over without subjecting the main tendency of my reasoning to
misconstruction, I shall stop a moment to deliver, in a few words, my opinion.
In the government of the physical world, it is observable that the female, in
general, is inferior to the male. The male pursues, the female yields—this is
the law of nature; and it does not appear to be suspended or abrogated in favour
of woman. This physical superiority cannot be denied—and it is a noble
prerogative! But not content with this natural pre-eminence, men endeavour to
sink us still lower, merely to render us alluring objects for a moment; and
women, intoxicated by the adoration which men, under the influence of their
senses, pay them, do not seek to obtain a durable interest in their hearts, or
to become the friends of the fellow creatures who find amusement in their
society.
I am aware of an obvious inference: from every quarter have I heard
exclamations against masculine women; but where are they to be found? If, by
this appellation, men mean to inveigh against their ardour in hunting,
shooting, and gaming, I shall most cordially join in the cry; but if it be,
against the imitation of manly virtues, or, more properly speaking, the
attainment of those talents and virtues, the exercise of which ennobles the
human character, and which raise females in the scale of animal being, when
they are comprehensively termed mankind—all those who view them with a
philosophical eye must, I should think, wish with me, that they may every day
grow more and more masculine.
This discussion naturally divides the subject. I shall first consider
women in the grand light of human creatures, who, in common with men, are
placed on this earth to unfold their faculties; and afterwards I shall more
particularly point out their peculiar designation.
I wish also to steer clear of an error, which many respectable writers
have fallen into; for the instruction which has hitherto been addressed to
women, has rather been applicable to LADIES, if the little indirect advice,
that is scattered through Sandford and Merton, be excepted; but, addressing my
sex in a firmer tone, I pay particular attention to those in the middle class,
because they appear to be in the most natural state. Perhaps the seeds of false
refinement, immorality, and vanity have ever been shed by the great. Weak,
artificial beings raised above the common wants and affections of their race, in
a premature unnatural manner, undermine the very foundation of virtue, and
spread corruption through the whole mass of society! As a class of mankind they
have the strongest claim to pity! the education of the rich tends to render
them vain and helpless, and the unfolding mind is not strengthened by the
practice of those duties which dignify the human character. They only live to
amuse themselves, and by the same law which in nature invariably produces
certain effects, they soon only afford barren amusement.
But as I purpose taking a separate view of the different ranks of
society, and of the moral character of women, in each, this hint is, for the
present, sufficient; and I have only alluded to the subject, because it appears
to me to be the very essence of an introduction to give a cursory account of
the contents of the work it introduces.
My own sex, I hope, will excuse me, if I treat them like rational
creatures, instead of flattering their FASCINATING graces, and viewing them as
if they were in a state of perpetual childhood, unable to stand alone. I
earnestly wish to point out in what true dignity and human happiness consists—I
wish to persuade women to endeavour to acquire strength, both of mind and body,
and to convince them, that the soft phrases, susceptibility of heart, delicacy
of sentiment, and refinement of taste, are almost synonymous with epithets of
weakness, and that those beings who are only the objects of pity and that kind
of love, which has been termed its sister, will soon become objects of
contempt.
Dismissing then those pretty feminine phrases, which the men
condescendingly use to soften our slavish dependence, and despising that weak
elegancy of mind, exquisite sensibility, and sweet docility of manners,
supposed to be the sexual characteristics of the weaker vessel, I wish to show
that elegance is inferior to virtue, that the first object of laudable ambition
is to obtain a character as a human being, regardless of the distinction of
sex; and that secondary views should be brought to this simple touchstone.
This is a rough sketch of my plan; and should I express my conviction
with the energetic emotions that I feel whenever I think of the subject, the
dictates of experience and reflection will be felt by some of my readers.
Animated by this important object, I shall disdain to cull my phrases or polish
my style—I aim at being useful, and sincerity will render me unaffected; for
wishing rather to persuade by the force of my arguments, than dazzle by the
elegance of my language, I shall not waste my time in rounding periods, nor in
fabricating the turgid bombast of artificial feelings, which, coming from the
head, never reach the heart. I shall be employed about things, not words! and,
anxious to render my sex more respectable members of society, I shall try to
avoid that flowery diction which has slided from essays into novels, and from
novels into familiar letters and conversation.
These pretty nothings, these caricatures of the real beauty of
sensibility, dropping glibly from the tongue, vitiate the taste, and create a
kind of sickly delicacy that turns away from simple unadorned truth; and a
deluge of false sentiments and over-stretched feelings, stifling the natural
emotions of the heart, render the domestic pleasures insipid, that ought to
sweeten the exercise of those severe duties, which educate a rational and
immortal being for a nobler field of action.
The education of women has, of late, been more attended to than
formerly; yet they are still reckoned a frivolous sex, and ridiculed or pitied
by the writers who endeavour by satire or instruction to improve them. It is
acknowledged that they spend many of the first years of their lives in
acquiring a smattering of accomplishments: meanwhile, strength of body and mind
are sacrificed to libertine notions of beauty, to the desire of establishing
themselves, the only way women can rise in the world—by marriage. And this
desire making mere animals of them, when they marry, they act as such children
may be expected to act: they dress; they paint, and nickname God's creatures.
Surely these weak beings are only fit for the seraglio! Can they govern a
family, or take care of the poor babes whom they bring into the world?
If then it can be fairly deduced from the present conduct of the sex,
from the prevalent fondness for pleasure, which takes place of ambition and
those nobler passions that open and enlarge the soul; that the instruction
which women have received has only tended, with the constitution of civil
society, to render them insignificant objects of desire; mere propagators of
fools! if it can be proved, that in aiming to accomplish them, without
cultivating their understandings, they are taken out of their sphere of duties,
and made ridiculous and useless when the short lived bloom of beauty is over*,
I presume that RATIONAL men will excuse me for endeavouring to persuade them to
become more masculine and respectable.
(*Footnote. A lively writer, I cannot recollect his name, asks what
business women turned of forty have to do in the world.)
Indeed the word masculine is only a bugbear: there is little reason to
fear that women will acquire too much courage or fortitude; for their apparent
inferiority with respect to bodily strength, must render them, in some degree,
dependent on men in the various relations of life; but why should it be
increased by prejudices that give a sex to virtue, and confound simple truths
with sensual reveries?
Women are, in fact, so much degraded by mistaken notions of female
excellence, that I do not mean to add a paradox when I assert, that this
artificial weakness produces a propensity to tyrannize, and gives birth to
cunning, the natural opponent of strength, which leads them to play off those
contemptible infantile airs that undermine esteem even whilst they excite
desire. Do not foster these prejudices, and they will naturally fall into their
subordinate, yet respectable station in life.
It seems scarcely necessary to say, that I now speak of the sex in
general. Many individuals have more sense than their male relatives; and, as
nothing preponderates where there is a constant struggle for an equilibrium,
without it has naturally more gravity, some women govern their husbands without
degrading themselves, because intellect will always govern.
(…)
CHAPTER 2.
THE PREVAILING OPINION OF A SEXUAL CHARACTER DISCUSSED.
To account for,
and excuse the tyranny of man, many ingenious arguments have been brought
forward to prove, that the two sexes, in the acquirement of virtue, ought to
aim at attaining a very different character: or, to speak explicitly, women are
not allowed to have sufficient strength of mind to acquire what really deserves
the name of virtue. Yet it should seem, allowing them to have souls, that there
is but one way appointed by providence to lead MANKIND to either virtue or
happiness.
If then women
are not a swarm of ephemeron triflers, why should they be kept in ignorance
under the specious name of innocence? Men complain, and with reason, of the
follies and caprices of our sex, when they do not keenly satirize our
headstrong passions and groveling vices. Behold, I should answer, the natural
effect of ignorance! The mind will ever be unstable that has only prejudices to
rest on, and the current will run with destructive fury when there are no
barriers to break its force. Women are told from their infancy, and taught by
the example of their mothers, that a little knowledge of human weakness, justly
termed cunning, softness of temper, OUTWARD obedience, and a scrupulous
attention to a puerile kind of propriety, will obtain for them the protection
of man; and should they be beautiful, every thing else is needless, for at
least twenty years of their lives.
Thus Milton
describes our first frail mother; though when he tells us that women are formed
for softness and sweet attractive grace, I cannot comprehend his meaning,
unless, in the true Mahometan strain, he meant to deprive us of souls, and
insinuate that we were beings only designed by sweet attractive grace, and
docile blind obedience, to gratify the senses of man when he can no longer soar
on the wing of contemplation.
How grossly do
they insult us, who thus advise us only to render ourselves gentle, domestic
brutes! For instance, the winning softness, so warmly, and frequently
recommended, that governs by obeying. What childish expressions, and how
insignificant is the being—can it be an immortal one? who will condescend to
govern by such sinister methods! "Certainly," says Lord Bacon,
"man is of kin to the beasts by his body: and if he be not of kin to God
by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature!" Men, indeed, appear to
me to act in a very unphilosophical manner, when they try to secure the good
conduct of women by attempting to keep them always in a state of childhood.
Rousseau was more consistent when he wished to stop the progress of reason in
both sexes; for if men eat of the tree of knowledge, women will come in for a
taste: but, from the imperfect cultivation which their understandings now
receive, they only attain a knowledge of evil.
Children, I
grant, should be innocent; but when the epithet is applied to men, or women, it
is but a civil term for weakness. For if it be allowed that women were destined
by Providence to acquire human virtues, and by the exercise of their
understandings, that stability of character which is the firmest ground to rest
our future hopes upon, they must be permitted to turn to the fountain of light,
and not forced to shape their course by the twinkling of a mere satellite.
Milton, I grant, was of a very different opinion; for he only bends to the
indefeasible right of beauty, though it would be difficult to render two
passages, which I now mean to contrast, consistent: but into similar
inconsistencies are great men often led by their senses:—
"To whom
thus Eve with perfect beauty adorned:
My author and disposer, what thou bidst
Unargued I obey; so God ordains;
God is thy law, thou mine; to know no more
Is woman's happiest knowledge and her praise."
These are
exactly the arguments that I have used to children; but I have added,
"Your reason is now gaining strength, and, till it arrives at some degree
of maturity, you must look up to me for advice: then you ought to THINK, and
only rely on God."
Yet, in the
following lines, Milton seems to coincide with me, when he makes Adam thus
expostulate with his Maker:—
"Hast thou
not made me here thy substitute,
And these inferior far beneath me set?
Among unequals what society
Can sort, what harmony or delight?
Which must be mutual, in proportion due
Given and received; but in disparity
The one intense, the other still remiss
Cannot well suit with either, but soon prove
Tedious alike: of fellowship I speak
Such as I seek fit to participate
All rational delight."
In treating,
therefore, of the manners of women, let us, disregarding sensual arguments,
trace what we should endeavour to make them in order to co-operate, if the
expression be not too bold, with the Supreme Being.
By individual
education, I mean—for the sense of the word is not precisely defined—such an
attention to a child as will slowly sharpen the senses, form the temper,
regulate the passions, as they begin to ferment, and set the understanding to
work before the body arrives at maturity; so that the man may only have to
proceed, not to begin, the important task of learning to think and reason.
To prevent any
misconstruction, I must add, that I do not believe that a private education can
work the wonders which some sanguine writers have attributed to it. Men and
women must be educated, in a great degree, by the opinions and manners of the
society they live in. In every age there has been a stream of popular opinion
that has carried all before it, and given a family character, as it were, to
the century. It may then fairly be inferred, that, till society be differently
constituted, much cannot be expected from education. It is, however, sufficient
for my present purpose to assert, that, whatever effect circumstances have on
the abilities, every being may become virtuous by the exercise of its own
reason; for if but one being was created with vicious inclinations—that is,
positively bad— what can save us from atheism? or if we worship a God, is not
that God a devil?
Consequently,
the most perfect education, in my opinion, is such an exercise of the
understanding as is best calculated to strengthen the body and form the heart;
or, in other words, to enable the individual to attain such habits of virtue as
will render it independent. In fact, it is a farce to call any being virtuous
whose virtues do not result from the exercise of its own reason. This was
Rousseau's opinion respecting men: I extend it to women, and confidently assert
that they have been drawn out of their sphere by false refinement, and not by
an endeavour to acquire masculine qualities. Still the regal homage which they
receive is so intoxicating, that, till the manners of the times are changed,
and formed on more reasonable principles, it may be impossible to convince them
that the illegitimate power, which they obtain by degrading themselves, is a
curse, and that they must return to nature and equality, if they wish to secure
the placid satisfaction that unsophisticated affections impart. But for this
epoch we must wait—wait, perhaps, till kings and nobles, enlightened by reason,
and, preferring the real dignity of man to childish state, throw off their
gaudy hereditary trappings; and if then women do not resign the arbitrary power
of beauty, they will prove that they have LESS mind than man. I may be accused
of arrogance; still I must declare, what I firmly believe, that all the writers
who have written on the subject of female education and manners, from Rousseau
to Dr. Gregory, have contributed to render women more artificial, weaker
characters, than they would otherwise have been; and, consequently, more useless
members of society. I might have expressed this conviction in a lower key; but
I am afraid it would have been the whine of affectation, and not the faithful
expression of my feelings, of the clear result, which experience and reflection
have led me to draw. When I come to that division of the subject, I shall
advert to the passages that I more particularly disapprove of, in the works of
the authors I have just alluded to; but it is first necessary to observe, that
my objection extends to the whole purport of those books, which tend, in my
opinion, to degrade one half of the human species, and render women pleasing at
the expense of every solid virtue.
Though to
reason on Rousseau's ground, if man did attain a degree of perfection of mind
when his body arrived at maturity, it might be proper in order to make a man
and his wife ONE, that she should rely entirely on his understanding; and the
graceful ivy, clasping the oak that supported it, would form a whole in which
strength and beauty would be equally conspicuous. But, alas! husbands, as well
as their helpmates, are often only overgrown children; nay, thanks to early
debauchery, scarcely men in their outward form, and if the blind lead the
blind, one need not come from heaven to tell us the consequence.
Many are the
causes that, in the present corrupt state of society, contribute to enslave
women by cramping their understandings and sharpening their senses. One,
perhaps, that silently does more mischief than all the rest, is their disregard
of order.
To do every
thing in an orderly manner, is a most important precept, which women, who,
generally speaking, receive only a disorderly kind of education, seldom attend
to with that degree of exactness that men, who from their infancy are broken
into method, observe. This negligent kind of guesswork, for what other epithet
can be used to point out the random exertions of a sort of instinctive common
sense, never brought to the test of reason? prevents their generalizing matters
of fact, so they do to-day, what they did yesterday, merely because they did it
yesterday.
This contempt
of the understanding in early life has more baneful consequences than is
commonly supposed; for the little knowledge which women of strong minds attain,
is, from various circumstances, of a more desultory kind than the knowledge of
men, and it is acquired more by sheer observations on real life, than from
comparing what has been individually observed with the results of experience
generalized by speculation. Led by their dependent situation and domestic
employments more into society, what they learn is rather by snatches; and as
learning is with them, in general, only a secondary thing, they do not pursue
any one branch with that persevering ardour necessary to give vigour to the
faculties, and clearness to the judgment. In the present state of society, a
little learning is required to support the character of a gentleman; and boys
are obliged to submit to a few years of discipline. But in the education of
women the cultivation of the understanding is always subordinate to the
acquirement of some corporeal accomplishment; even while enervated by
confinement and false notions of modesty, the body is prevented from attaining
that grace and beauty which relaxed half-formed limbs never exhibit. Besides,
in youth their faculties are not brought forward by emulation; and having no
serious scientific study, if they have natural sagacity it is turned too soon
on life and manners. They dwell on effects, and modifications, without tracing
them back to causes; and complicated rules to adjust behaviour are a weak
substitute for simple principles.
As a proof that
education gives this appearance of weakness to females, we may instance the
example of military men, who are, like them, sent into the world before their
minds have been stored with knowledge or fortified by principles. The
consequences are similar; soldiers acquire a little superficial knowledge,
snatched from the muddy current of conversation, and, from continually mixing
with society, they gain, what is termed a knowledge of the world; and this
acquaintance with manners and customs has frequently been confounded with a
knowledge of the human heart. But can the crude fruit of casual observation,
never brought to the test of judgment, formed by comparing speculation and
experience, deserve such a distinction? Soldiers, as well as women, practice
the minor virtues with punctilious politeness. Where is then the sexual
difference, when the education has been the same; all the difference that I can
discern, arises from the superior advantage of liberty which enables the former
to see more of life.
It is wandering
from my present subject, perhaps, to make a political remark; but as it was
produced naturally by the train of my reflections, I shall not pass it silently
over.
Standing armies
can never consist of resolute, robust men; they may be well disciplined
machines, but they will seldom contain men under the influence of strong
passions or with very vigorous faculties. And as for any depth of understanding,
I will venture to affirm, that it is as rarely to be found in the army as
amongst women; and the cause, I maintain, is the same. It may be further
observed, that officers are also particularly attentive to their persons, fond
of dancing, crowded rooms, adventures, and ridicule. Like the FAIR sex, the
business of their lives is gallantry. They were taught to please, and they only
live to please. Yet they do not lose their rank in the distinction of sexes,
for they are still reckoned superior to women, though in what their superiority
consists, beyond what I have just mentioned, it is difficult to discover.
The great
misfortune is this, that they both acquire manners before morals, and a
knowledge of life before they have from reflection, any acquaintance with the
grand ideal outline of human nature. The consequence is natural; satisfied with
common nature, they become a prey to prejudices, and taking all their opinions
on credit, they blindly submit to authority. So that if they have any sense, it
is a kind of instinctive glance, that catches proportions, and decides with
respect to manners; but fails when arguments are to be pursued below the
surface, or opinions analyzed.
May not the
same remark be applied to women? Nay, the argument may be carried still further,
for they are both thrown out of a useful station by the unnatural distinctions
established in civilized life. Riches and hereditary honours have made cyphers
of women to give consequence to the numerical figure; and idleness has produced
a mixture of gallantry and despotism in society, which leads the very men who
are the slaves of their mistresses, to tyrannize over their sisters, wives, and
daughters. This is only keeping them in rank and file, it is true. Strengthen
the female mind by enlarging it, and there will be an end to blind obedience;
but, as blind obedience is ever sought for by power, tyrants and sensualists
are in the right when they endeavour to keep women in the dark, because the
former only want slaves, and the latter a play-thing. The sensualist, indeed,
has been the most dangerous of tyrants, and women have been duped by their
lovers, as princes by their ministers, whilst dreaming that they reigned over
them.
I now
principally allude to Rousseau, for his character of Sophia is, undoubtedly, a
captivating one, though it appears to me grossly unnatural; however, it is not
the superstructure, but the foundation of her character, the principles on
which her education was built, that I mean to attack; nay, warmly as I admire
the genius of that able writer, whose opinions I shall often have occasion to
cite, indignation always takes place of admiration, and the rigid frown of
insulted virtue effaces the smile of complacency, which his eloquent periods
are wont to raise, when I read his voluptuous reveries. Is this the man, who,
in his ardour for virtue, would banish all the soft arts of peace, and almost
carry us back to Spartan discipline? Is this the man who delights to paint the
useful struggles of passion, the triumphs of good dispositions, and the heroic
flights which carry the glowing soul out of itself? How are these mighty
sentiments lowered when he describes the prettyfoot and enticing airs of his
little favourite! But, for the present, I waive the subject, and, instead of
severely reprehending the transient effusions of overweening sensibility, I
shall only observe, that whoever has cast a benevolent eye on society, must
often have been gratified by the sight of humble mutual love, not dignified by
sentiment, nor strengthened by a union in intellectual pursuits. The domestic
trifles of the day have afforded matter for cheerful converse, and innocent
caresses have softened toils which did not require great exercise of mind, or
stretch of thought: yet, has not the sight of this moderate felicity excited
more tenderness than respect? An emotion similar to what we feel when children
are playing, or animals sporting, whilst the contemplation of the noble
struggles of suffering merit has raised admiration, and carried our thoughts to
that world where sensation will give place to reason.
Women are,
therefore, to be considered either as moral beings, or so weak that they must
be entirely subjected to the superior faculties of men.
Let us examine
this question. Rousseau declares, that a woman should never, for a moment feel
herself independent, that she should be governed by fear to exercise her
NATURAL cunning, and made a coquetish slave in order to render her a more
alluring object of desire, a SWEETER companion to man, whenever he chooses to relax
himself. He carries the arguments, which he pretends to draw from the
indications of nature, still further, and insinuates that truth and fortitude
the corner stones of all human virtue, shall be cultivated with certain
restrictions, because with respect to the female character, obedience is the
grand lesson which ought to be impressed with unrelenting rigour.
What nonsense!
When will a great man arise with sufficient strength of mind to puff away the
fumes which pride and sensuality have thus spread over the subject! If women
are by nature inferior to men, their virtues must be the same in quality, if
not in degree, or virtue is a relative idea; consequently, their conduct should
be founded on the same principles, and have the same aim.
Connected with man
as daughters, wives, and mothers, their moral character may be estimated by
their manner of fulfilling those simple duties; but the end, the grand end of
their exertions should be to unfold their own faculties, and acquire the
dignity of conscious virtue. They may try to render their road pleasant; but
ought never to forget, in common with man, that life yields not the felicity
which can satisfy an immortal soul. I do not mean to insinuate, that either sex
should be so lost, in abstract reflections or distant views, as to forget the
affections and duties that lie before them, and are, in truth, the means
appointed to produce the fruit of life; on the contrary, I would warmly
recommend them, even while I assert, that they afford most satisfaction when they
are considered in their true subordinate light.
Probably the
prevailing opinion, that woman was created for man, may have taken its rise
from Moses's poetical story; yet, as very few it is presumed, who have bestowed
any serious thought on the subject, ever supposed that Eve was, literally
speaking, one of Adam's ribs, the deduction must be allowed to fall to the
ground; or, only be so far admitted as it proves that man, from the remotest
antiquity, found it convenient to exert his strength to subjugate his
companion, and his invention to show that she ought to have her neck bent under
the yoke; because she as well as the brute creation, was created to do his
pleasure.
Let it not be
concluded, that I wish to invert the order of things; I have already granted,
that, from the constitution of their bodies, men seem to be designed by
Providence to attain a greater degree of virtue. I speak collectively of the
whole sex; but I see not the shadow of a reason to conclude that their virtues
should differ in respect to their nature. In fact, how can they, if virtue has
only one eternal standard? I must, therefore, if I reason consequentially, as
strenuously maintain, that they have the same simple direction, as that there
is a God.
It follows
then, that cunning should not be opposed to wisdom, little cares to great
exertions, nor insipid softness, varnished over with the name of gentleness, to
that fortitude which grand views alone can inspire.
I shall be
told, that woman would then lose many of her peculiar graces, and the opinion
of a well known poet might be quoted to refute my unqualified assertions. For
Pope has said, in the name of the whole male sex,
"Yet ne'er
so sure our passions to create,
As when she touch'd the brink of all we hate."
In what light
this sally places men and women, I shall leave to the judicious to determine;
meanwhile I shall content myself with observing, that I cannot discover why,
unless they are mortal, females should always be degraded by being made
subservient to love or lust.
To speak disrespectfully
of love is, I know, high treason against sentiment and fine feelings; but I
wish to speak the simple language of truth, and rather to address the head than
the heart. To endeavour to reason love out of the world, would be to out
Quixote Cervantes, and equally offend against common sense; but an endeavour to
restrain this tumultuous passion, and to prove that it should not be allowed to
dethrone superior powers, or to usurp the sceptre which the understanding
should ever coolly wield, appears less wild.
Youth is the
season for love in both sexes; but in those days of thoughtless enjoyment,
provision should be made for the more important years of life, when reflection
takes place of sensation. But Rousseau, and most of the male writers who have
followed his steps, have warmly inculcated that the whole tendency of female
education ought to be directed to one point to render them pleasing.
Let me reason
with the supporters of this opinion, who have any knowledge of human nature, do
they imagine that marriage can eradicate the habitude of life? The woman who
has only been taught to please, will soon find that her charms are oblique
sun-beams, and that they cannot have much effect on her husband's heart when
they are seen every day, when the summer is past and gone. Will she then have
sufficient native energy to look into herself for comfort, and cultivate her
dormant faculties? or, is it not more rational to expect, that she will try to
please other men; and, in the emotions raised by the expectation of new
conquests, endeavour to forget the mortification her love or pride has
received? When the husband ceases to be a lover—and the time will inevitably
come, her desire of pleasing will then grow languid, or become a spring of
bitterness; and love, perhaps, the most evanescent of all passions, gives place
to jealousy or vanity.
I now speak of
women who are restrained by principle or prejudice; such women though they
would shrink from an intrigue with real abhorrence, yet, nevertheless, wish to
be convinced by the homage of gallantry, that they are cruelly neglected by
their husbands; or, days and weeks are spent in dreaming of the happiness
enjoyed by congenial souls, till the health is undermined and the spirits
broken by discontent. How then can the great art of pleasing be such a
necessary study? it is only useful to a mistress; the chaste wife, and serious
mother, should only consider her power to please as the polish of her virtues,
and the affection of her husband as one of the comforts that render her task
less difficult, and her life happier. But, whether she be loved or neglected,
her first wish should be to make herself respectable, and not rely for all her
happiness on a being subject to like infirmities with herself.
The amiable Dr.
Gregory fell into a similar error. I respect his heart; but entirely disapprove
of his celebrated Legacy to his Daughters.
He advises them
to cultivate a fondness for dress, because a fondness for dress, he asserts, is
natural to them. I am unable to comprehend what either he or Rousseau mean,
when they frequently use this indefinite term. If they told us, that in a
pre-existent state the soul was fond of dress, and brought this inclination
with it into a new body, I should listen to them with a half smile, as I often
do when I hear a rant about innate elegance. But if he only meant to say that
the exercise of the faculties will produce this fondness, I deny it. It is not
natural; but arises, like false ambition in men, from a love of power.
Dr. Gregory
goes much further; he actually recommends dissimulation, and advises an
innocent girl to give the lie to her feelings, and not dance with spirit, when
gaiety of heart would make her feet eloquent, without making her gestures
immodest. In the name of truth and common sense, why should not one woman
acknowledge that she can take more exercise than another? or, in other words,
that she has a sound constitution; and why to damp innocent vivacity, is she
darkly to be told, that men will draw conclusions which she little thinks of?
Let the libertine draw what inference he pleases; but, I hope, that no sensible
mother will restrain the natural frankness of youth, by instilling such
indecent cautions. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh; and a
wiser than Solomon hath said, that the heart should be made clean, and not
trivial ceremonies observed, which it is not very difficult to fulfill with
scrupulous exactness when vice reigns in the heart.
Women ought to
endeavour to purify their hearts; but can they do so when their uncultivated
understandings make them entirely dependent on their senses for employment and
amusement, when no noble pursuit sets them above the little vanities of the
day, or enables them to curb the wild emotions that agitate a reed over which
every passing breeze has power? To gain the affections of a virtuous man, is
affectation necessary?
Nature has
given woman a weaker frame than man; but, to ensure her husband's affections,
must a wife, who, by the exercise of her mind and body, whilst she was discharging
the duties of a daughter, wife, and mother, has allowed her constitution to
retain its natural strength, and her nerves a healthy tone, is she, I say, to
condescend, to use art, and feign a sickly delicacy, in order to secure her
husband's affection? Weakness may excite tenderness, and gratify the arrogant
pride of man; but the lordly caresses of a protector will not gratify a noble
mind that pants for and deserves to be respected. Fondness is a poor substitute
for friendship!
In a seraglio,
I grant, that all these arts are necessary; the epicure must have his palate
tickled, or he will sink into apathy; but have women so little ambition as to
be satisfied with such a condition? Can they supinely dream life away in the
lap of pleasure, or in the languor of weariness, rather than assert their claim
to pursue reasonable pleasures, and render themselves conspicuous, by
practising the virtues which dignify mankind? Surely she has not an immortal
soul who can loiter life away, merely employed to adorn her person, that she
may amuse the languid hours, and soften the cares of a fellow-creature who is
willing to be enlivened by her smiles and tricks, when the serious business of
life is over.
Besides, the
woman who strengthens her body and exercises her mind will, by managing her
family and practising various virtues, become the friend, and not the humble
dependent of her husband; and if she deserves his regard by possessing such
substantial qualities, she will not find it necessary to conceal her affection,
nor to pretend to an unnatural coldness of constitution to excite her husband's
passions. In fact, if we revert to history, we shall find that the women who
have distinguished themselves have neither been the most beautiful nor the most
gentle of their sex.
Nature, or to
speak with strict propriety God, has made all things right; but man has sought
him out many inventions to mar the work. I now allude to that part of Dr.
Gregory's treatise, where he advises a wife never to let her husband know the
extent of her sensibility or affection. Voluptuous precaution; and as
ineffectual as absurd. Love, from its very nature, must be transitory. To seek
for a secret that would render it constant, would be as wild a search as for
the philosopher's stone, or the grand panacea; and the discovery would be
equally useless, or rather pernicious to mankind. The most holy band of society
is friendship. It has been well said, by a shrewd satirist, "that rare as
true love is, true friendship is still rarer."
This is an
obvious truth, and the cause not lying deep, will not elude a slight glance of
inquiry.
Love, the
common passion, in which chance and sensation take place of choice and reason,
is in some degree, felt by the mass of mankind; for it is not necessary to
speak, at present, of the emotions that rise above or sink below love. This
passion, naturally increased by suspense and difficulties, draws the mind out
of its accustomed state, and exalts the affections; but the security of
marriage, allowing the fever of love to subside, a healthy temperature is
thought insipid, only by those who have not sufficient intellect to substitute
the calm tenderness of friendship, the confidence of respect, instead of blind
admiration, and the sensual emotions of fondness.
This is, must be,
the course of nature—friendship or indifference inevitably succeeds love. And
this constitution seems perfectly to harmonize with the system of government
which prevails in the moral world. Passions are spurs to action, and open the
mind; but they sink into mere appetites, become a personal momentary
gratification, when the object is gained, and the satisfied mind rests in
enjoyment. The man who had some virtue whilst he was struggling for a crown,
often becomes a voluptuous tyrant when it graces his brow; and, when the lover
is not lost in the husband, the dotard a prey to childish caprices, and fond
jealousies, neglects the serious duties of life, and the caresses which should
excite confidence in his children are lavished on the overgrown child, his wife.
In order to
fulfil the duties of life, and to be able to pursue with vigour the various
employments which form the moral character, a master and mistress of a family
ought not to continue to love each other with passion. I mean to say, that they
ought not to indulge those emotions which disturb the order of society, and
engross the thoughts that should be otherwise employed. The mind that has never
been engrossed by one object wants vigour—if it can long be so, it is weak.
A mistaken
education, a narrow, uncultivated mind, and many sexual prejudices, tend to
make women more constant than men; but, for the present, I shall not touch on
this branch of the subject. I will go still further, and advance, without
dreaming of a paradox, that an unhappy marriage is often very advantageous to a
family, and that the neglected wife is, in general, the best mother. And this
would almost always be the consequence, if the female mind was more enlarged;
for, it seems to be the common dispensation of Providence, that what we gain in
present enjoyment should be deducted from the treasure of life, experience; and
that when we are gathering the flowers of the day and revelling in pleasure,
the solid fruit of toil and wisdom should not be caught at the same time. The
way lies before us, we must turn to the right or left; and he who will pass
life away in bounding from one pleasure to another, must not complain if he
neither acquires wisdom nor respectability of character.
Supposing for a
moment, that the soul is not immortal, and that man was only created for the
present scene; I think we should have reason to complain that love, infantine
fondness, ever grew insipid and palled upon the sense. Let us eat, drink, and
love, for to-morrow we die, would be in fact the language of reason, the
morality of life; and who but a fool would part with a reality for a fleeting
shadow? But, if awed by observing the improvable powers of the mind, we disdain
to confine our wishes or thoughts to such a comparatively mean field of action;
that only appears grand and important as it is connected with a boundless
prospect and sublime hopes; what necessity is there for falsehood in conduct,
and why must the sacred majesty of truth be violated to detain a deceitful good
that saps the very foundation of virtue? Why must the female mind be tainted by
coquetish arts to gratify the sensualist, and prevent love from subsiding into
friendship or compassionate tenderness, when there are not qualities on which
friendship can be built? Let the honest heart show itself, and REASON teach
passion to submit to necessity; or, let the dignified pursuit of virtue and
knowledge raise the mind above those emotions which rather imbitter than
sweeten the cup of life, when they are not restrained within due bounds.
I do not mean
to allude to the romantic passion, which is the concomitant of genius. Who can
clip its wings? But that grand passion not proportioned to the puny enjoyments
of life, is only true to the sentiment, and feeds on itself. The passions which
have been celebrated for their durability have always been unfortunate. They
have acquired strength by absence and constitutional melancholy. The fancy has
hovered round a form of beauty dimly seen—but familiarity might have turned
admiration into disgust; or, at least, into indifference, and allowed the
imagination leisure to start fresh game. With perfect propriety, according to
this view of things, does Rousseau make the mistress of his soul, Eloisa, love
St. Preux, when life was fading before her; but this is no proof of the
immortality of the passion.
Of the same
complexion is Dr. Gregory's advice respecting delicacy of sentiment, which he
advises a woman not to acquire, if she has determined to marry. This
determination, however, perfectly consistent with his former advice, he calls
INDELICATE, and earnestly persuades his daughters to conceal it, though it may
govern their conduct: as if it were indelicate to have the common appetites of
human nature.
Noble morality!
and consistent with the cautious prudence of a little soul that cannot extend
its views beyond the present minute division of existence. If all the faculties
of woman's mind are only to be cultivated as they respect her dependence on
man; if, when she obtains a husband she has arrived at her goal, and meanly
proud, is satisfied with such a paltry crown, let her grovel contentedly,
scarcely raised by her employments above the animal kingdom; but, if she is
struggling for the prize of her high calling, let her cultivate her
understanding without stopping to consider what character the husband may have
whom she is destined to marry. Let her only determine, without being too
anxious about present happiness, to acquire the qualities that ennoble a
rational being, and a rough, inelegant husband may shock her taste without
destroying her peace of mind. She will not model her soul to suit the frailties
of her companion, but to bear with them: his character may be a trial, but not
an impediment to virtue.
If Dr. Gregory
confined his remark to romantic expectations of constant love and congenial
feelings, he should have recollected, that experience will banish what advice
can never make us cease to wish for, when the imagination is kept alive at the
expence of reason.
I own it
frequently happens, that women who have fostered a romantic unnatural delicacy
of feeling, waste their lives in IMAGINING how happy they should have been with
a husband who could love them with a fervid increasing affection every day, and
all day. But they might as well pine married as single, and would not be a jot
more unhappy with a bad husband than longing for a good one. That a proper
education; or, to speak with more precision, a well stored mind, would enable a
woman to support a single life with dignity, I grant; but that she should avoid
cultivating her taste, lest her husband should occasionally shock it, is
quitting a substance for a shadow. To say the truth, I do not know of what use
is an improved taste, if the individual be not rendered more independent of the
casualties of life; if new sources of enjoyment, only dependent on the solitary
operations of the mind, are not opened. People of taste, married or single,
without distinction, will ever be disgusted by various things that touch not
less observing minds. On this conclusion the argument must not be allowed to
hinge; but in the whole sum of enjoyment is taste to be denominated a blessing?
The question
is, whether it procures most pain or pleasure? The answer will decide the
propriety of Dr. Gregory's advice, and show how absurd and tyrannic it is thus
to lay down a system of slavery; or to attempt to educate moral beings by any
other rules than those deduced from pure reason, which apply to the whole
species.
Gentleness of
manners, forbearance, and long suffering, are such amiable godlike qualities,
that in sublime poetic strains the Deity has been invested with them; and,
perhaps, no representation of his goodness so strongly fastens on the human
affections as those that represent him abundant in mercy and willing to pardon.
Gentleness, considered in this point of view, bears on its front all the
characteristics of grandeur, combined with the winning graces of condescension;
but what a different aspect it assumes when it is the submissive demeanour of
dependence, the support of weakness that loves, because it wants protection;
and is forbearing, because it must silently endure injuries; smiling under the
lash at which it dare not snarl. Abject as this picture appears, it is the
portrait of an accomplished woman, according to the received opinion of female
excellence, separated by specious reasoners from human excellence. Or, they
(Vide Rousseau, and Swedenborg) kindly restore the rib, and make one moral
being of a man and woman; not forgetting to give her all the "submissive
charms."
How women are
to exist in that state where there is to be neither marrying nor giving in
marriage, we are not told. For though moralists have agreed, that the tenor of
life seems to prove that MAN is prepared by various circumstances for a future
state, they constantly concur in advising WOMAN only to provide for the
present. Gentleness, docility, and a spaniel-like affection are, on this
ground, consistently recommended as the cardinal virtues of the sex; and,
disregarding the arbitrary economy of nature, one writer has declared that it
is masculine for a woman to be melancholy. She was created to be the toy of
man, his rattle, and it must jingle in his ears, whenever, dismissing reason,
he chooses to be amused.
To recommend
gentleness, indeed, on a broad basis is strictly philosophical. A frail being
should labour to be gentle. But when forbearance confounds right and wrong, it
ceases to be a virtue; and, however convenient it may be found in a companion,
that companion will ever be considered as an inferior, and only inspire a vapid
tenderness, which easily degenerates into contempt. Still, if advice could
really make a being gentle, whose natural disposition admitted not of such a
fine polish, something toward the advancement of order would be attained; but
if, as might quickly be demonstrated, only affectation be produced by this
indiscriminate counsel, which throws a stumbling block in the way of gradual
improvement, and true melioration of temper, the sex is not much benefited by
sacrificing solid virtues to the attainment of superficial graces, though for a
few years they may procure the individual's regal sway.
As a
philosopher, I read with indignation the plausible epithets which men use to
soften their insults; and, as a moralist, I ask what is meant by such
heterogeneous associations, as fair defects, amiable weaknesses, etc.? If there
is but one criterion of morals, but one archetype for man, women appear to be
suspended by destiny, according to the vulgar tale of Mahomet's coffin; they
have neither the unerring instinct of brutes, nor are allowed to fix the eye of
reason on a perfect model. They were made to be loved, and must not aim at
respect, lest they should be hunted out of society as masculine.
But to view the
subject in another point of view. Do passive indolent women make the best
wives? Confining our discussion to the present moment of existence, let us see
how such weak creatures perform their part? Do the women who, by the attainment
of a few superficial accomplishments, have strengthened the prevailing
prejudice, merely contribute to the happiness of their husbands? Do they
display their charms merely to amuse them? And have women, who have early
imbibed notions of passive obedience, sufficient character to manage a family
or educate children? So far from it, that, after surveying the history of
woman, I cannot help agreeing with the severest satirist, considering the sex
as the weakest as well as the most oppressed half of the species. What does
history disclose but marks of inferiority, and how few women have emancipated
themselves from the galling yoke of sovereign man? So few, that the exceptions
remind me of an ingenious conjecture respecting Newton: that he was probably a
being of a superior order, accidentally caged in a human body. In the same
style I have been led to imagine that the few extraordinary women who have
rushed in eccentrical directions out of the orbit prescribed to their sex, were
MALE spirits, confined by mistake in a female frame. But if it be not
philosophical to think of sex when the soul is mentioned, the inferiority must
depend on the organs; or the heavenly fire, which is to ferment the clay, is
not given in equal portions.
But avoiding,
as I have hitherto done, any direct comparison of the two sexes collectively, or
frankly acknowledging the inferiority of woman, according to the present
appearance of things, I shall only insist, that men have increased that
inferiority till women are almost sunk below the standard of rational
creatures. Let their faculties have room to unfold, and their virtues to gain
strength, and then determine where the whole sex must stand in the intellectual
scale. Yet, let it be remembered, that for a small number of distinguished
women I do not ask a place.
It is difficult
for us purblind mortals to say to what height human discoveries and
improvements may arrive, when the gloom of despotism subsides, which makes us
stumble at every step; but, when morality shall be settled on a more solid
basis, then, without being gifted with a prophetic spirit, I will venture to
predict, that woman will be either the friend or slave of man. We shall not, as
at present, doubt whether she is a moral agent, or the link which unites man
with brutes. But, should it then appear, that like the brutes they were principally
created for the use of man, he will let them patiently bite the bridle, and not
mock them with empty praise; or, should their rationality be proved, he will
not impede their improvement merely to gratify his sensual appetites. He will
not with all the graces of rhetoric, advise them to submit implicitly their
understandings to the guidance of man. He will not, when he treats of the
education of women, assert, that they ought never to have the free use of
reason, nor would he recommend cunning and dissimulation to beings who are
acquiring, in like manner as himself, the virtues of humanity.
Surely there
can be but one rule of right, if morality has an eternal foundation, and
whoever sacrifices virtue, strictly so called, to present convenience, or whose
DUTY it is to act in such a manner, lives only for the passing day, and cannot
be an accountable creature.
The poet then
should have dropped his sneer when he says,
"If weak
women go astray,
The stars are more in fault than they."
For that they
are bound by the adamantine chain of destiny is most certain, if it be proved
that they are never to exercise their own reason, never to be independent,
never to rise above opinion, or to feel the dignity of a rational will that
only bows to God, and often forgets that the universe contains any being but
itself, and the model of perfection to which its ardent gaze is turned, to
adore attributes that, softened into virtues, may be imitated in kind, though
the degree overwhelms the enraptured mind.
If, I say, for
I would not impress by declamation when reason offers her sober light, if they
are really capable of acting like rational creatures, let them not be treated
like slaves; or, like the brutes who are dependent on the reason of man, when
they associate with him; but cultivate their minds, give them the salutary,
sublime curb of principle, and let them attain conscious dignity by feeling
themselves only dependent on God. Teach them, in common with man, to submit to
necessity, instead of giving, to render them more pleasing, a sex to morals.
Further, should
experience prove that they cannot attain the same degree of strength of mind,
perseverance and fortitude, let their virtues be the same in kind, though they
may vainly struggle for the same degree; and the superiority of man will be
equally clear, if not clearer; and truth, as it is a simple principle, which
admits of no modification, would be common to both. Nay, the order of society,
as it is at present regulated, would not be inverted, for woman would then only
have the rank that reason assigned her, and arts could not be practised to
bring the balance even, much less to turn it.
These may be
termed Utopian dreams. Thanks to that Being who impressed them on my soul, and
gave me sufficient strength of mind to dare to exert my own reason, till
becoming dependent only on him for the support of my virtue, I view with
indignation, the mistaken notions that enslave my sex.
I love man as
my fellow; but his sceptre real or usurped, extends not to me, unless the
reason of an individual demands my homage; and even then the submission is to
reason, and not to man. In fact, the conduct of an accountable being must be
regulated by the operations of its own reason; or on what foundation rests the
throne of God?
It appears to me
necessary to dwell on these obvious truths, because females have been insulted,
as it were; and while they have been stripped of the virtues that should clothe
humanity, they have been decked with artificial graces, that enable them to
exercise a short lived tyranny. Love, in their bosoms, taking place of every
nobler passion, their sole ambition is to be fair, to raise emotion instead of
inspiring respect; and this ignoble desire, like the servility in absolute
monarchies, destroys all strength of character. Liberty is the mother of
virtue, and if women are, by their very constitution, slaves, and not allowed
to breathe the sharp invigorating air of freedom, they must ever languish like
exotics, and be reckoned beautiful flaws in nature; let it also be remembered,
that they are the only flaw.
As to the
argument respecting the subjection in which the sex has ever been held, it
retorts on man. The many have always been enthralled by the few; and, monsters
who have scarcely shown any discernment of human excellence, have tyrannized
over thousands of their fellow creatures. Why have men of superior endowments
submitted to such degradation? For, is it not universally acknowledged that
kings, viewed collectively, have ever been inferior, in abilities and virtue,
to the same number of men taken from the common mass of mankind—yet, have they
not, and are they not still treated with a degree of reverence, that is an
insult to reason? China is not the only country where a living man has been
made a God. MEN have submitted to superior strength, to enjoy with impunity the
pleasure of the moment—WOMEN have only done the same, and therefore till it is
proved that the courtier, who servilely resigns the birthright of a man, is not
a moral agent, it cannot be demonstrated that woman is essentially inferior to
man, because she has always been subjugated.
Brutal force
has hitherto governed the world, and that the science of politics is in its
infancy, is evident from philosophers scrupling to give the knowledge most
useful to man that determinate distinction.
I shall not
pursue this argument any further than to establish an obvious inference, that
as sound politics diffuse liberty, mankind, including woman, will become more
wise and virtuous.
(…)
