Socialism; Women -- Social and moral questions; Women and socialism
A small minority of the knights seem to have been enthusiastic over
feminine beauty, but their enthusiasm was by no means platonic but
pursued very material aims. Even that clown among the romantic
admirers “of lovely women,” Ulrick of Lichtenstein of ridiculous
memory, was a platonic lover only so long as he was compelled to
be. In the main, this romantic worship of woman was nothing but
deification of the mistress at the expense of the legitimate wife;
it was nothing but courtesanship, as it has existed in Greece at the
time of Pericles, transplanted into medieval Christianity. The mutual
seduction of wives was frequently practiced among the knights also,
as it is still practiced in certain circles of our bourgeoisie.
The open manifestation of sensuality, characteristic of that age,
constituted a frank recognition of the fact that the natural desires
implanted in every healthy, adult human being rightfully seek
satisfaction. In that respect it expressed a victory of healthy
nature over the ascetic teachings of Christianity. But on the other
hand it must again be emphasized, that this recognition came into
consideration for the one sex only, while the other sex was treated
on the assumption that it could not and dare not have the same
impulses. The slightest transgression by women of the moral laws
laid down for them by men, was punished with unmerciful severity.
Women, as a result of constant oppression and a singular education,
have become so accustomed to the conception of their rulers, that
they still consider this condition quite natural. Were there not
also millions of slaves who considered slavery a natural condition
and who would never have liberated themselves had not the liberators
sprung from the slave owning class? When Prussian peasants were to
be emancipated from serfdom, they petitioned the government not to
emancipate them, “for who should provide for them when they were aged
or ill?” And do we not meet with the same situation in the modern
labor movement? How many workingmen still permit their exploiters
to influence them and lead them at will!
The oppressed needs some one to animate and inspire him, because he
lacks the initiative for independence. It was thus in the present
day movement of the proletariat, and it is the same in the struggle
for the emancipation of women. Even the bourgeoisie, that enjoyed a
relatively more favorable position in its struggle for independence,
found its leaders and spokesmen among the nobility and clergy.
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