A Woman's Philosophy of Woman; or, Woman affranchised.: An answer to Michelet, Proudhon, Girardin, Legouvé, Comte, and other modern innovatorsHéricourt, Madame d'
Philosophy
A Woman's Philosophy of Woman; or, Woman affranchised.: An answer to Michelet, Proudhon, Girardin, Legouvé, Comte, and other modern innovators
Héricourt, Madame d'
Women's rights -- France
"In the second place, with regard to you, Madam, who, in
interrogating me do not leave me in ignorance of your sentiments,
I will tell you with all the frankness which your letter exacts,
and which you expect from a compatriot, that I do not regard the
question of marriage, of woman, and of the family in the same
light as yourself, or any of the innovating authors whose ideas
have come to my knowledge; that I do not admit, for instance,
that woman has the right at the present time to separate her
cause from that of man, and to demand for herself special
legislation, as though her chief tyrant and enemy were man; that
further, I do not admit that, whatever reparation may be due to
woman, of joint thirds with her husband (or father) and her
children, the most rigorous justice can ever make her the EQUAL
of man; that neither do I admit that this inferiority of the
female sex constitutes for it either servitude, or humiliation,
or a diminution of dignity, liberty, or happiness. I maintain
that the contrary is true.
"I consider, therefore, the sort of crusade that is being carried
on at this time by a few estimable ladies in both hemispheres in
behalf of the prerogatives of their sex, as a symptom of the
general renovation that is being wrought; but nevertheless, as
an exaggerated symptom, _an infatuation that proceeds precisely
from the infirmity of the sex and its incapacity to understand
and to govern itself_.
"I have read, Madam, a few of your articles. I find that your
wit, capacity and knowledge place you certainly above an infinity
of males who have nothing of their sex but the proletary faculty.
In this respect, were it necessary to decide on your thesis by
comparisons of this kind, you would doubtless gain the cause.
"But you have too much good sense not to comprehend that the
question here is by no means to compare individual with
individual, but the whole feminine sex in its aggregate with the
whole masculine sex, in order to know whether these two halves,
the complements of each other, are or are not equals in the human
androgynus.
"In accordance with this principle, I do not believe that your
system, which is, I think, that of equality or equivalence, can
be sustained, and I regard it as a weakness of our epoch.
"You have interrogated me, Madam, with Franche-Comtois
abruptness. I wish you to take my words in good part, and, since
I doubtless do not agree at all with you, not to see in me an
enemy of woman, a detractor of your sex, worthy of the
animadversions of maidens, wives and mothers. The rules of fair
discussion oblige you to admit at least that you may be deceived,
that I may be right, that in such case it is I who am truly the
defender and friend of woman; I ask nothing more.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account