Sexism; Women -- Social and moral questions; Women -- Social conditions
There already appears in the world, indeed, a class of women, who,
while still not genuinely averse to marriage, are yet free from any
theory that it is necessary, or even invariably desirable. Among these
women are a good many somewhat vociferous propagandists, almost male in
their violent earnestness; they range from the man-eating suffragettes
to such preachers of free motherhood as Ellen Key and such professional
shockers of the bourgeoisie as the American prophetess of
birth-control, Margaret Sanger. But among them are many more who wake
the world with no such noisy eloquence, but content themselves with
carrying out their ideas in a quiet and respectable manner. The number
of such women is much larger than is generally imagined, and that
number tends to increase steadily. They are women who, with their
economic independence assured, either by inheritance or by their own
efforts, chiefly in the arts and professions, do exactly as they
please, and make no pother about it. Naturally enough, their
superiority to convention and the common frenzy makes them extremely
attractive to the better sort of men, and so it is not uncommon for one
of them to find herself voluntarily sought in marriage, without any
preliminary scheming by herself—surely an experience that very few
ordinary women ever enjoy, save perhaps in dreams or delirium.
The old order changeth and giveth place to the new. Among the women’s
clubs and in the women’s colleges, I have no doubt, there is still much
debate of the old and silly question: Are platonic relations possible
between the sexes? In other words, is friendship possible without sex?
Many a woman of the new order dismisses the problem with another
question: Why without sex? With the decay of the ancient concept of
women as property there must come inevitably a reconsideration of the
whole sex question, and out of that reconsideration there must come a
revision of the mediaeval penalties which now punish the slightest
frivolity in the female. The notion that honour in women is exclusively
a physical matter, that a single aberrance may convert a woman of the
highest merits into a woman of none at all, that the sole valuable
thing a woman can bring to marriage is virginity—this notion is so
preposterous that no intelligent person, male or female, actually
cherishes it. It survives as one of the hollow conventions of
Christianity; nay, of the levantine barbarism that preceded
Christianity. As women throw off the other conventions which now bind
them they will throw off this one, too, and so their virtue, grounded
upon fastidiousness and self-respect instead of upon mere fear and
conformity, will become afar more laudable thing than it ever can be
under the present system. And for its absence, if they see fit to
dispose of it, they will no more apologize than a man apologizes today.
43. The Lady of Joy
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