Feminism; Women; Women -- Social and moral questions; Women -- Social conditions
Whereupon another seeming paradox confronts us. Namely, that the sons of
those earlier women, in whom masculine inherences were permitted to
remain dormant, were notably more virile of body and mind than are the
sons of latter-day emancipated mothers who have sedulously cultivated
and have fully exercised their male proclivities.
And now upsprings a further momentous consideration: Is this cause and
effect? Were the sons of women in whom the potential male had remained
abeyant, more virile of body and brain than are the sons of women who
have cultivated masculine characteristics, solely and absolutely because
the mothers in the latter case had misappropriated to their own uses
powers that belonged by right of heredity to sons? While those other
mothers, by retaining such in latency, preserved them as a rich
inheritance for male heirs. Is it similar, indeed, to the cases of a
mother who realises and expends for her own purposes her sons' financial
patrimony, and of a mother who, expending the interest alone thereof,
retains the capital intact; and is enabled thus to pass it on as
heritage? Is the power held latent in one generation the potential of
the generation following?
It may be asked: Why should woman forgo possession and exercise of
faculties available to her, in order to transmit these to sons? One
might answer as in respect of that other patrimony. If it be true that
she holds these powers in trust merely, they are not hers to spend. To
expend them is to despoil her sons; to make paupers and bankrupts of
them, humanly speaking. Further, since daughters inherit from the
father, the male entail woman forbears to realise and to exploit for her
own uses returns to her sex in the person of her grand-daughter--by
paternal inheritance. For the able father is the parent of the able
daughter.
Thus Nature works with the eternal justice of eternal reciprocity
between the sexes; making them all the while more complexly diverse, but
nevertheless more closely interdependent. So that one sex can neither
progress nor can it regress by itself; but draws the other onward with
it, or drags it back. Thus, the bread of human heritage consigned to the
stream of posterity by one sex, for equipment and furtherance of the
other, returns to the hand of the sex that consigned it.
If this be so--and I hope to prove it so--the woman who develops the
potential male in her defrauds of its lawful racial and personal entail
not only the opposite sex, in the person of her son, but she defrauds of
its dower her own sex too, in the person of her grand-daughter.
Of the interesting and important biological processes underlying the
mystery of the Dual-Sex constitution and its manifold phenomena, I am
about to present a wholly new and--I venture to believe--a wholly true
and convincing elucidation.
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