From an Easy ChairLankester, E. Ray (Edwin Ray), Sir
History
From an Easy Chair
Lankester, E. Ray (Edwin Ray), Sir
Natural history; Science
So there is nothing in the eternal fitness of things proclaiming the
male as the necessary superior of the female throughout Nature. The
fact is that the question of equality and of general superiority
and inferiority has no place in regard to male and female from a
naturalist’s point of view. It is true that women are so very much
less endowed with muscular strength than men that practically every
woman is inferior to every man in this respect. It is also true that
woman’s brain is smaller than man’s, and that apart from mere size,
the intellectual activity and capacity of women, by whatever test
you examine it, is less than that of man. When exceptional cases on
both sides are excluded, the definite intellectual inferiority of the
average woman, as compared with the average man, is established as a
fact. The observations of those concerned in the education of young
men and young women side by side confirm this, and it is further
demonstrated by a consideration of the intellectual performances of
average men and average women. That, at any rate, is my own experience
as a University teacher. But women, on the other hand, fill a place in
human life as mothers, and administrators of detail, and as companions,
in which man, by the nature of things, cannot compete with them at all.
At the house of the late Sir James Knowles, some twenty-five years ago,
when discussing the relative value of the physical and intellectual
capacities of the men as compared with the women of the English working
class, Mr. Gladstone (at that time the head of the Government) said to
me, “I am of opinion that the relative value of a man and a woman is
in all classes of society about the same as it was in my grandfather’s
time in Jamaica when they purchased slaves. They gave £120 for a man
and £80 for a woman, and that is a fair measure of their relative value
all the world over.” It is necessary to remember that Mr. Gladstone
was not estimating the ultimate value of woman in human life when he
said this. He would, I think, have considered, as I do, that it is
absurd to attempt to estimate that or to raise a discussion as to
general superiority and inferiority in reference to the male and the
female of the human species. They are creatures as necessary one as
the other, differing from one another profoundly and excelling one
another in diverse qualities and capacities. Without this complementary
division of fitness and quality our life would be a monotone robbed
of the infinite variety which characterises humanity. What Mr.
Gladstone estimated as being less by one-third in women than in men
is power--work-value--whether physical or intellectual. I think Mr.
Gladstone’s estimate must be admitted as true.
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