You ask _what impels the bravest, the most distinguished among us to an assault on paternal and marital supremacy_. You do not comprehend the movement, or you would have said _masculine supremacy_. In my turn, I ask you: What would have impelled Proudhon, a Roman slave, to play the part of Spartacus? What would have impelled Proudhon, a feudal serf, to organize a Jacquerie? What would have impelled Proudhon, a black slave, to become a Toussaint L'Ouverture? What would have impelled Proudhon, a Russian serf, to take the character of Poutgachef? What would have impelled Proudhon, a citizen of '89, to overthrow the privileges of the nobility and the clergy? What would impel Proudhon ... but I will not touch on reality. What would Proudhon have replied to all the holders of _prerogatives_ and _supremacy_, who would not have failed on their part to have put to him the naïve question: "Ah! what does this vile slave, this unworthy serf, this audacious and stupid citizen want of us, then? _To which of our faculties, our virtues, our prerogatives does he aspire? Is this the cry of his outraged nature, or an aberration of his understanding?_" The answer that Proudhon would make, is that which will be made to him by all women who have attained majority. There is in the brain of woman, say you, an organ which the masculine mind alone is capable of setting in motion. Render the service then to science of pointing it out and demonstrating its manner of working. As to the other organ of which you speak, it is its inertia, doubtless, that has caused it to be defined by some, _parvum animal furibondum, octo ligamentis alligatum_. Before choosing anatomical and physiological facts as proofs of your assertions, consult some learned physician; such is the counsel given you, not only by my _obstetrical, but also by my medical sagacity_. You offer to acquaint me with your _direct_ and _positive_ observations. What, Sir! has it been possible for you in a few weeks to delve into the depths of the healthy and the diseased organization! to go through the whole labyrinth of functions implicated in the questions. It is more than miraculous; despite my good will, I cannot believe it, unless you prove that you are a _prophet_ in communication with some deity. Shall I tell you what I really think? It is that you have studied these matters neither _directly_ nor _indirectly_, and that it belongs to me to tell you _that you do not understand woman; that you do not know the first word of the question_. Your five or six _purely_ moral and intellectual autopsies prove only one thing; namely, your inexperience in physiology. You have naïvely mistaken the scalpel of your imagination for that of science.