In the foregoing chapters I have intimated that every phase of the
question of freedom for women is bound up with the larger question
of human freedom. If it is freedom that women want, they can not be
content to be legally equal with men; but having gained this equality
they must carry on their struggle against the oppressions which
privilege exercises upon humanity at large by virtue of an usurped
economic power. All human beings, presumably, would gain by freedom;
but women particularly stand to gain by it, for as I have shown, they
are victims of special prepossessions which mere legal equality with
men may hardly be expected to affect.
If, on the other hand, it is dominance that they desire, they might,
indeed, conceivably attain this without freedom; but one can not see
much encouragement for that wish in the present trend of affairs.
Before women could dominate, they would not only have to overcome
the prejudices, superstitions, and legal disabilities which have
contributed to their subjection; but they would also have to get the
upper hand of men economically. They would have to manœuvre themselves
into that advantage in opportunity which men at present enjoy. One
can hardly see how this could be brought about except by some kind of
_coup d’état_, for the tendency of modern legislation, as I have shown,
far from being calculated to enlarge the scope of women’s economic
activity, is likely rather to narrow it; nor is it entirely probable
that the establishment of mere legal equality would count for much in
the premises, for the courts may always decide that any legislation
designed for the Larger Good is valid even though it may clash with
the principle of equal rights.[30] Suppose, however, that the momentum
gathered by the woman’s movement should carry society through a period
of sex-equality and bring it out on the other side--the side of female
domination--then men and women would simply have exchanged places,
and the social evils which now afflict mankind would remain, _mutatis
mutandis_. Women would be more nearly free than men, as men are now
more nearly free than women; but no one would be really free, because
real freedom is not a matter of the shifting of advantage from one
sex to the other or from one class to another. Real freedom means the
disappearance of advantage, and primarily of economic advantage. It
can not be too often repeated that political and social freedom are
unattainable unless and until economic freedom has been attained--but
this is not a concern of either sex or class. In order to live, women,
like men, must eat; to eat, they, like men, must labour; to labour,
they, like men, must have opportunity. Control of men’s and women’s
economic opportunity, therefore, means control of their livelihood,
and control of men’s and women’s livelihood means control of men and
women. Real freedom, therefore, does not come in sight of either men
or women until this control is abated; that is to say, until (speaking
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account