,,the   ,,subjection   ,,of   ,,women   
,,by   ,,john ,,stuart ,,mill           
,,london   ,,longmans1 ,,green1         
,,reader1 ,,and ,,dyer   #ahfi          
,,london3   ,,savill1 ,,edwards ,,and   
,,co41 ,,printers1 ,,chandos ,,street1  
,,covent ,,garden4     ,,chapter ,i4    
,the object of this ,essay is to explain
 as clearly as ,i am able1 the grounds  
of an opinion which ,i have held from   
the very earliest period when ,i had    
formed any opinions at all on social or 
political matters1 and which1 instead of
 being weakened or modified1 has been   
constantly growing stronger by the      
progress of reflection and the          
experience of life3 ,that the principle 
which regulates the existing social     
relations between the two sexes--the    
legal subordination of one sex to the   
other--is wrong in itself1 and now one  
of the chief hindrances to human        
improvement2 and that it ought to be    
replaced by a principle of perfect      
equality1 admitting no power or         

privilege on the one side1 nor          
disability on the other4  ,the very     
words necessary to express the task ,i  
have undertaken1 show how arduous it is4
 ,but it would be a mistake to suppose  
that the difficulty of the case must lie
 in the insufficiency or obscurity of   
the grounds of reason on which my       
conviction rests4 ,the difficulty is    
that which exists in all cases in which 
there is a mass of feeling to be        
contended against4 ,so long as an       
opinion is strongly rooted in the       
feelings1 it gains rather than loses in 
stability by having a preponderating    
weight of argument against it4 ,for if  
it were accepted as a result of         
argument1 the refutation of the argument
 might shake the solidity of the        
conviction2 but when it rests solely on 
feeling1 the worse it fares in          
argumentative contest1 the more         
persuaded its adherents are that their  
feeling must have some deeper ground1   
which the arguments do not reach2 and   

while the feeling remains1 it is always 
throwing up fresh intrenchments of      
argument to repair any breach made in   
the old4 ,and there are so many causes  
tending to make the feelings connected  
with this subject the most intense and  
most deeply-rooted of all those which   
gather round and protect old            
institutions and customs1 that we need  
not wonder to find them as yet less     
undermined and loosened than any of the 
rest by the progress of the great modern
 spiritual and social transition2 nor   
suppose that the barbarisms to which men
 cling longest must be less barbarisms  
than those which they earlier shake off4
  ,in every respect the burthen is hard 
on those who attack an almost universal 
opinion4 ,they must be very fortunate as
 well as unusually capable if they      
obtain a hearing at all4 ,they have more
 difficulty in obtaining a trial1 than  
any other litigants have in getting a   
verdict4 ,if they do extort a hearing1  
they are subjected to a set of logical  

requirements totally different from     
those exacted from other people4 ,in all
 other cases1 the burthen of proof is   
supposed to lie with the affirmative4   
,if a person is charged with a murder1  
it rests with those who accuse him to   
give proof of his guilt1 not with       
himself to prove his innocence4 ,if     
there is a difference of opinion about  
the reality of any alleged historical   
event1 in which the feelings of men in  
general are not much interested1 as the 
,siege of ,troy for example1 those who  
maintain that the event took place are  
expected to produce their proofs1 before
 those who take the other side can be   
required to say anything2 and at no time
 are these required to do more than show
 that the evidence produced by the      
others is of no value4 ,again1 in       
practical matters1 the burthen of proof 
is supposed to be with those who are    
against liberty2 who contend for any    
restriction or prohibition2 either any  
limitation of the general freedom of    

human action1 or any disqualification or
 disparity of privilege affecting one   
person or kind of persons1 as compared  
with others4 ,the a priori presumption  
is in favour of freedom and             
impartiality4 ,it is held that there    
should be no restraint not required by  
the general good1 and that the law      
should be no respecter of persons1 but  
should treat all alike1 save where      
dissimilarity of treatment is required  
by positive reasons1 either of justice  
or of policy4 ,but of none of these     
rules of evidence will the benefit be   
allowed to those who maintain the       
opinion ,i profess4 ,it is useless for  
me to say that those who maintain the   
doctrine that men have a right to       
command and women are under an          
obligation to obey1 or that men are fit 
for government and women unfit1 are on  
the affirmative side of the question1   
and that they are bound to show positive
 evidence for the assertions1 or submit 
to their rejection4 ,it is equally      

unavailing for me to say that those who 
deny to women any freedom or privilege  
rightly allowed to men1 having the      
double presumption against them that    
they are opposing freedom and           
recommending partiality1 must be held to
 the strictest proof of their case1 and 
unless their success be such as to      
exclude all doubt1 the judgment ought to
 go against them4 ,these would be       
thought good pleas in any common case2  
but they will not be thought so in this 
instance4 ,before ,i could hope to make 
any impression1 ,i should be expected   
not only to answer all that has ever    
been said by those who take the other   
side of the question1 but to imagine all
 that could be said by them--to find    
them in reasons1 as well as answer all  
,i find3 and besides refuting all       
arguments for the affirmative1 ,i shall 
be called upon for invincible positive  
arguments to prove a negative4 ,and even
 if ,i could do all this1 and leave the 
opposite party with a host of unanswered

 arguments against them1 and not a      
single unrefuted one on their side1 ,i  
should be thought to have done little2  
for a cause supported on the one hand by
 universal usage1 and on the other by so
 great a preponderance of popular       
sentiment1 is supposed to have a        
presumption in its favour1 superior to  
any conviction which an appeal to reason
 has power to produce in any intellects 
but those of a high class4  ,i do not   
mention these difficulties to complain  
of them2 first1 because it would be     
useless2 they are inseparable from      
having to contend through people's      
understandings against the hostility of 
their feelings and practical tendencies3
 and truly the understandings of the    
majority of mankind would need to be    
much better cultivated than has ever yet
 been the case1 before they can be asked
 to place such reliance in their own    
power of estimating arguments1 as to    
give up practical principles in which   
they have been born and bred and which  

are the basis of much of the existing   
order of the world1 at the first        
argumentative attack which they are not 
capable of logically resisting4 ,i do   
not therefore quarrel with them for     
having too little faith in argument1 but
 for having too much faith in custom and
 the general feeling4 ,it is one of the 
characteristic prejudices of the        
reaction of the nineteenth century      
against the eighteenth1 to accord to the
 unreasoning elements in human nature   
the infallibility which the eighteenth  
century is supposed to have ascribed to 
the reasoning elements4 ,for the        
apotheosis of ,reason we have           
substituted that of ,instinct2 and we   
call everything instinct which we find  
in ourselves and for which we cannot    
trace any rational foundation4 ,this    
idolatry1 infinitely more degrading than
 the other1 and the most pernicious of  
the false worships of the present day1  
of all of which it is now the main      
support1 will probably hold its ground  

until it gives way before a sound       
psychology1 laying bare the real root of
 much that is bowed down to as the      
intention of ,nature and the ordinance  
of ,god4 ,as regards the present        
question1 ,i am willing to accept the   
unfavourable conditions which the       
prejudice assigns to me4 ,i consent that
 established custom1 and the general    
feeling1 should be deemed conclusive    
against me1 unless that custom and      
feeling from age to age can be shown to 
have owed their existence to other      
causes than their soundness1 and to have
 derived their power from the worse     
rather than the better parts of human   
nature4 ,i am willing that judgment     
should go against me1 unless ,i can show
 that my judge has been tampered with4  
,the concession is not so great as it   
might appear2 for to prove this1 is by  
far the easiest portion of my task4     
,the generality of a practice is in some
 cases a strong presumption that it is1 
or at all events once was1 conducive to 

laudable ends4 ,this is the case1 when  
the practice was first adopted1 or      
afterwards kept up1 as a means to such  
ends1 and was grounded on experience of 
the mode in which they could be most    
effectually attained4 ,if the authority 
of men over women1 when first           
established1 had been the result of a   
conscientious comparison between        
different modes of constituting the     
government of society2 if1 after trying 
various other modes of social           
organization--the government of women   
over men1 equality between the two1 and 
such mixed and divided modes of         
government as might be invented--it had 
been decided1 on the testimony of       
experience1 that the mode in which women
 are wholly under the rule of men1      
having no share at all in public        
concerns1 and each in private being     
under the legal obligation of obedience 
to the man with whom she has associated 
her destiny1 was the arrangement most   
conducive to the happiness and well     

being of both2 its general adoption     
might then be fairly thought to be some 
evidence that1 at the time when it was  
adopted1 if was the best3 though even   
then the considerations which           
recommended it may1 like so many other  
primeval social facts of the greatest   
importance1 have subsequently1 in the   
course of ages1 ceased to exist4 ,but   
the state of the case is in every       
respect the reverse of this4 ,in the    
first place1 the opinion in favour of   
the present system1 which entirely      
subordinates the weaker sex to the      
stronger1 rests upon theory only2 for   
there never has been trial made of any  
other3 so that experience1 in the sense 
in which it is vulgarly opposed to      
theory1 cannot be pretended to have     
pronounced any verdict4 ,and in the     
second place1 the adoption of this      
system of inequality never was the      
result of deliberation1 or forethought1 
or any social ideas1 or any notion      
whatever of what conduced to the benefit

 of humanity or the good order of       
society4 ,it arose simply from the fact 
that from the very earliest twilight of 
human society1 every woman 7owing to the
 value attached to her by men1 combined 
with her inferiority in muscular        
strength7 was found in a state of       
bondage to some man4 ,laws and systems  
of polity always begin by recognising   
the relations they find already existing
 between individuals4 ,they convert what
 was a mere physical fact into a legal  
right1 give it the sanction of society1 
and principally aim at the substitution 
of public and organized means of        
asserting and protecting these rights1  
instead of the irregular and lawless    
conflict of physical strength4 ,those   
who had already been compelled to       
obedience became in this manner legally 
bound to it4 ,slavery1 from being a mere
 affair of force between the master and 
the slave1 became regularized and a     
matter of compact among the masters1    
who1 binding themselves to one another  

for common protection1 guaranteed by    
their collective strength the private   
possessions of each1 including his      
slaves4 ,in early times1 the great      
majority of the male sex were slaves1 as
 well as the whole of the female4 ,and  
many ages elapsed1 some of them ages of 
high cultivation1 before any thinker was
 bold enough to question the            
rightfulness1 and the absolute social   
necessity1 either of the one slavery or 
of the other4 ,by degrees such thinkers 
did arise3 and 7the general progress of 
society assisting7 the slavery of the   
male sex has1 in all the countries of   
,christian ,europe at least 7though1 in 
one of them1 only within the last few   
years7 been at length abolished1 and    
that of the female sex has been         
gradually changed into a milder form of 
dependence4 ,but this dependence1 as it 
exists at present1 is not an original   
institution1 taking a fresh start from  
considerations of justice and social    
expediency--it is the primitive state of

 slavery lasting on1 through successive 
mitigations and modifications occasioned
 by the same causes which have softened 
the general manners1 and brought all    
human relations more under the control  
of justice and the influence of         
humanity4 ,it has not lost the taint of 
its brutal origin4 ,no presumption in   
its favour1 therefore1 can be drawn from
 the fact of its existence4 ,the only   
such presumption which it could be      
supposed to have1 must be grounded on   
its having lasted till now1 when so many
 other things which came down from the  
same odious source have been done away  
with4 ,and this1 indeed1 is what makes  
it strange to ordinary ears1 to hear it 
asserted that the inequality of rights  
between men and women has no other      
source than the law of the strongest4   
,that this statement should have the    
effect of a paradox1 is in some respects
 creditable to the progress of          
civilization1 and the improvement of the
 moral sentiments of mankind4 ,we now   

live--that is to say1 one or two of the 
most advanced nations of the world now  
live--in a state in which the law of the
 strongest seems to be entirely         
abandoned as the regulating principle of
 the world's affairs3 nobody professes  
it1 and1 as regards most of the         
relations between human beings1 nobody  
is permitted to practise it4 ,when any  
one succeeds in doing so1 it is under   
cover of some pretext which gives him   
the semblance of having some general    
social interest on his side4 ,this being
 the ostensible state of things1 people 
flatter themselves that the rule of mere
 force is ended2 that the law of the    
strongest cannot be the reason of       
existence of anything which has remained
 in full operation down to the present  
time4 ,however any of our present       
institutions may have begun1 it can     
only1 they think1 have been preserved to
 this period of advanced civilization by
 a well-grounded feeling of its         
adaptation to human nature1 and         

conduciveness to the general good4 ,they
 do not understand the great vitality   
and durability of institutions which    
place right on the side of might2 how   
intensely they are clung to2 how the    
good as well as the bad propensities and
 sentiments of those who have power in  
their hands1 become identified with     
retaining it2 how slowly these bad      
institutions give way1 one at a time1   
the weakest first1 beginning with those 
which are least interwoven with the     
daily habits of life2 and how very      
rarely those who have obtained legal    
power because they first had physical1  
have ever lost their hold of it until   
the physical power had passed over to   
the other side4 ,such shifting of the   
physical force not having taken place in
 the case of women2 this fact1 combined 
with all the peculiar and characteristic
 features of the particular case1 made  
it certain from the first that this     
branch of the system of right founded on
 might1 though softened in its most     

atrocious features at an earlier period 
than several of the others1 would be the
 very last to disappear4 ,it was        
inevitable that this one case of a      
social relation grounded on force1 would
 survive through generations of         
institutions grounded on equal justice1 
an almost solitary exception to the     
general character of their laws and     
customs2 but which1 so long as it does  
not proclaim its own origin1 and as     
discussion has not brought out its true 
character1 is not felt to jar with      
modern civilization1 any more than      
domestic slavery among the ,greeks      
jarred with their notion of themselves  
as a free people4  ,the truth is1 that  
people of the present and the last two  
or three generations have lost all      
practical sense of the primitive        
condition of humanity2 and only the few 
who have studied history accurately1 or 
have much frequented the parts of the   
world occupied by the living            
representatives of ages long past1 are  

able to form any mental picture of what 
society then was4 ,people are not aware 
how entirely1 in former ages1 the law of
 superior strength was the rule of life2
 how publicly and openly it was avowed1 
,i do not say cynically or              
shamelessly--for these words imply a    
feeling that there was something in it  
to be ashamed of1 and no such notion    
could find a place in the faculties of  
any person in those ages1 except a      
philosopher or a saint4 ,history gives a
 cruel experience of human nature1 in   
shewing how exactly the regard due to   
the life1 possessions1 and entire       
earthly happiness of any class of       
persons1 was measured by what they had  
the power of enforcing2 how all who made
 any resistance to authorities that had 
arms in their hands1 however dreadful   
might be the provocation1 had not only  
the law of force but all other laws1 and
 all the notions of social obligation   
against them2 and in the eyes of those  
whom they resisted1 were not only guilty

 of crime1 but of the worst of all      
crimes1 deserving the most cruel        
chastisement which human beings could   
inflict4 ,the first small vestige of a  
feeling of obligation in a superior to  
acknowledge any right in inferiors1     
began when he had been induced1 for     
convenience1 to make some promise to    
them4 ,though these promises1 even when 
sanctioned by the most solemn oaths1    
were for many ages revoked or violated  
on the most trifling provocation or     
temptation1 it is probable that this1   
except by persons of still worse than   
the average morality1 was seldom done   
without some twinges of conscience4 ,the
 ancient republics1 being mostly        
grounded from the first upon some kind  
of mutual compact1 or at any rate formed
 by an union of persons not very unequal
 in strength1 afforded1 in consequence1 
the first instance of a portion of human
 relations fenced round1 and placed     
under the dominion of another law than  
that of force4 ,and though the original 

law of force remained in full operation 
between them and their slaves1 and also 
7except so far as limited by express    
compact7 between a commonwealth and its 
subjects1 or other independent          
commonwealths2 the banishment of that   
primitive law even from so narrow a     
field1 commenced the regeneration of    
human nature1 by giving birth to        
sentiments of which experience soon     
demonstrated the immense value even for 
material interests1 and which           
thenceforward only required to be       
enlarged1 not created4 ,though slaves   
were no part of the commonwealth1 it was
 in the free states that slaves were    
first felt to have rights as human      
beings4 ,the ,stoics were1 ,i believe1  
the first 7except so far as the ,jewish 
law constitutes an exception7 who taught
 as a part of morality that men were    
bound by moral obligations to their     
slaves4 ,no one1 after ,christianity    
became ascendant1 could ever again have 
been a stranger to this belief1 in      

theory2 nor1 after the rise of the      
,catholic ,church1 was it ever without  
persons to stand up for it4 ,yet to     
enforce it was the most arduous task    
which ,christianity ever had to perform4
 ,for more than a thousand years the    
,church kept up the contest1 with hardly
 any perceptible success4 ,it was not   
for want of power over men's minds4 ,its
 power was prodigious4 ,it could make   
kings and nobles resign their most      
valued possessions to enrich the        
,church4 ,it could make thousands1 in   
the prime of life and the height of     
worldly advantages1 shut themselves up  
in convents to work out their salvation 
by poverty1 fasting1 and prayer4 ,it    
could send hundreds of thousands across 
land and sea1 ,europe and ,asia1 to give
 their lives for the deliverance of the 
,holy ,sepulchre4 ,it could make kings  
relinquish wives who were the object of 
their passionate attachment1 because the
 ,church declared that they were within 
the seventh 7by our calculation the     

fourteenth7 degree of relationship4 ,all
 this it did2 but it could not make men 
fight less with one another1 nor        
tyrannize less cruelly over the serfs1  
and when they were able1 over burgesses4
 ,it could not make them renounce either
 of the applications of force2 force    
militant1 or force triumphant4 ,this    
they could never be induced to do until 
they were themselves in their turn      
compelled by superior force4 ,only by   
the growing power of kings was an end   
put to fighting except between kings1 or
 competitors for kingship2 only by the  
growth of a wealthy and warlike         
bourgeoisie in the fortified towns1 and 
of a plebeian infantry which proved more
 powerful in the field than the         
undisciplined chivalry1 was the insolent
 tyranny of the nobles over the         
bourgeoisie and peasantry brought within
 some bounds4 ,it was persisted in not  
only until1 but long after1 the         
oppressed had obtained a power enabling 
them often to take conspicuous          

vengeance2 and on the ,continent much of
 it continued to the time of the ,french
 ,revolution1 though in ,england the    
earlier and better organization of the  
democratic classes put an end to it     
sooner1 by establishing equal laws and  
free national institutions4  ,if people 
are mostly so little aware how          
completely1 during the greater part of  
the duration of our species1 the law of 
force was the avowed rule of general    
conduct1 any other being only a special 
and exceptional consequence of peculiar 
ties--and from how very recent a date it
 is that the affairs of society in      
general have been even pretended to be  
regulated according to any moral law2 as
 little do people remember or consider1 
how institutions and customs which never
 had any ground but the law of force1   
last on into ages and states of general 
opinion which never would have permitted
 their first establishment4 ,less than  
forty years ago1 ,englishmen might still
 by law hold human beings in bondage as 

saleable property3 within the present   
century they might kidnap them and carry
 them off1 and work them literally to   
death4 ,this absolutely extreme case of 
the law of force1 condemned by those who
 can tolerate almost every other form of
 arbitrary power1 and which1 of all     
others1 presents features the most      
revolting to the feelings of all who    
look at it from an impartial position1  
was the law of civilized and ,christian 
,england within the memory of persons   
now living3 and in one half of          
,anglo-,saxon ,america three or four    
years ago1 not only did slavery exist1  
but the slave trade1 and the breeding of
 slaves expressly for it1 was a general 
practice between slave states4 ,yet not 
only was there a greater strength of    
sentiment against it1 but1 in ,england  
at least1 a less amount either of       
feeling or of interest in favour of it1 
than of any other of the customary      
abuses of force3 for its motive was the 
love of gain1 unmixed and undisguised2  

and those who profited by it were a very
 small numerical fraction of the        
country1 while the natural feeling of   
all who were not personally interested  
in it1 was unmitigated abhorrence4 ,so  
extreme an instance makes it almost     
superfluous to refer to any other3 but  
consider the long duration of absolute  
monarchy4 ,in ,england at present it is 
the almost universal conviction that    
military despotism is a case of the law 
of force1 having no other origin or     
justification4 ,yet in all the great    
nations of ,europe except ,england it   
either still exists1 or has only just   
ceased to exist1 and has even now a     
strong party favourable to it in all    
ranks of the people1 especially among   
persons of station and consequence4     
,such is the power of an established    
system1 even when far from universal2   
when not only in almost every period of 
history there have been great and       
well-known examples of the contrary     
system1 but these have almost invariably

 been afforded by the most illustrious  
and most prosperous communities4 ,in    
this case1 too1 the possessor of the    
undue power1 the person directly        
interested in it1 is only one person1   
while those who are subject to it and   
suffer from it are literally all the    
rest4 ,the yoke is naturally and        
necessarily humiliating to all persons1 
except the one who is on the throne1    
together with1 at most1 the one who     
expects to succeed to it4 ,how different
 are these cases from that of the power 
of men over women6 ,i am not now        
prejudging the question of its          
justifiableness4 ,i am showing how      
vastly more permanent it could not but  
be1 even if not justifiable1 than these 
other dominations which have            
nevertheless lasted down to our own     
time4 ,whatever gratification of pride  
there is in the possession of power1 and
 whatever personal interest in its      
exercise1 is in this case not confined  
to a limited class1 but common to the   

whole male sex4 ,instead of being1 to   
most of its supporters1 a thing         
desirable chiefly in the abstract1 or1  
like the political ends usually         
contended for by factious1 of little    
private importance to any but the       
leaders2 it comes home to the person and
 hearth of every male head of a family1 
and of every one who looks forward to   
being so4 ,the clodhopper exercises1 or 
is to exercise1 his share of the power  
equally with the highest nobleman4 ,and 
the case is that in which the desire of 
power is the strongest3 for every one   
who desires power1 desires it most over 
those who are nearest to him1 with whom 
his life is passed1 with whom he has    
most concerns in common1 and in whom any
 independence of his authority is       
oftenest likely to interfere with his   
individual preferences4 ,if1 in the     
other cases specified1 powers manifestly
 grounded only on force1 and having so  
much less to support them1 are so slowly
 and with so much difficulty got rid of1

 much more must it be so with this1 even
 if it rests on no better foundation    
than those4 ,we must consider1 too1 that
 the possessors of the power have       
facilities in this case1 greater than in
 any other1 to prevent any uprising     
against it4 ,every one of the subjects  
lives under the very eye1 and almost1 it
 may be said1 in the hands1 of one of   
the masters--in closer intimacy with him
 than with any of her fellow-subjects2  
with no means of combining against him1 
no power of even locally over-mastering 
him1 and1 on the other hand1 with the   
strongest motives for seeking his favour
 and avoiding to give him offence4 ,in  
struggles for political emancipation1   
everybody knows how often its champions 
are bought off by bribes1 or daunted by 
terrors4 ,in the case of women1 each    
individual of the subject-class is in a 
chronic state of bribery and            
intimidation combined4 ,in setting up   
the standard of resistance1 a large     
number of the leaders1 and still more of

 the followers1 must make an almost     
complete sacrifice of the pleasures or  
the alleviations of their own individual
 lot4 ,if ever any system of privilege  
and enforced subjection had its yoke    
tightly riveted on the necks of those   
who are kept down by it1 this has4 ,i   
have not yet shown that it is a wrong   
system3 but every one who is capable of 
thinking on the subject must see that   
even if it is1 it was certain to outlast
 all other forms of unjust authority4   
,and when some of the grossest of the   
other forms still exist in many         
civilized countries1 and have only      
recently been got rid of in others1 it  
would be strange if that which is so    
much the deepest-rooted had yet been    
perceptibly shaken anywhere4 ,there is  
more reason to wonder that the protests 
and testimonies against it should have  
been so numerous and so weighty as they 
are4  ,some will object1 that a         
comparison cannot fairly be made between
 the government of the male sex and the 

forms of unjust power which ,i have     
adduced in illustration of it1 since    
these are arbitrary1 and the effect of  
mere usurpation1 while it on the        
contrary is natural4 ,but was there ever
 any domination which did not appear    
natural to those who possessed it8      
,there was a time when the division of  
mankind into two classes1 a small one of
 masters and a numerous one of slaves1  
appeared1 even to the most cultivated   
minds1 to be a natural1 and the only    
natural1 condition of the human race4   
,no less an intellect1 and one which    
contributed no less to the progress of  
human thought1 than ,aristotle1 held    
this opinion without doubt or misgiving2
 and rested it on the same premises on  
which the same assertion in regard to   
the dominion of men over women is       
usually based1 namely that there are    
different natures among mankind1 free   
natures1 and slave natures2 that the    
,greeks were of a free nature1 the      
barbarian races of ,thracians and       

,asiatics of a slave nature4 ,but why   
need ,i go back to ,aristotle8 ,did not 
the slaveowners of the ,southern ,united
 ,states maintain the same doctrine1    
with all the fanaticism with which men  
cling to the theories that justify their
 passions and legitimate their personal 
interests8 ,did they not call heaven and
 earth to witness that the dominion of  
the white man over the black is natural1
 that the black race is by nature       
incapable of freedom1 and marked out for
 slavery8 some even going so far as to  
say that the freedom of manual labourers
 is an unnatural order of things        
anywhere4 ,again1 the theorists of      
absolute monarchy have always affirmed  
it to be the only natural form of       
government2 issuing from the            
patriarchal1 which was the primitive and
 spontaneous form of society1 framed on 
the model of the paternal1 which is     
anterior to society itself1 and1 as they
 contend1 the most natural authority of 
all4 ,nay1 for that matter1 the law of  

force itself1 to those who could not    
plead any other1 has always seemed the  
most natural of all grounds for the     
exercise of authority4 ,conquering races
 hold it to be ,nature's own dictate    
that the conquered should obey the      
conquerors1 or1 as they euphoniously    
paraphrase it1 that the feebler and more
 unwarlike races should submit to the   
braver and manlier4 ,the smallest       
acquaintance with human life in the     
middle ages1 shows how supremely natural
 the dominion of the feudal nobility    
over men of low condition appeared to   
the nobility themselves1 and how        
unnatural the conception seemed1 of a   
person of the inferior class claiming   
equality with them1 or exercising       
authority over them4 ,it hardly seemed  
less so to the class held in subjection4
 ,the emancipated serfs and burgesses1  
even in their most vigorous struggles1  
never made any pretension to a share of 
authority2 they only demanded more or   
less of limitation to the power of      

tyrannizing over them4 ,so true is it   
that unnatural generally means only     
uncustomary1 and that everything which  
is usual appears natural4 ,the          
subjection of women to men being a      
universal custom1 any departure from it 
quite naturally appears unnatural4 ,but 
how entirely1 even in this case1 the    
feeling is dependent on custom1 appears 
by ample experience4 ,nothing so much   
astonishes the people of distant parts  
of the world1 when they first learn     
anything about ,england1 as to be told  
that it is under a queen3 the thing     
seems to them so unnatural as to be     
almost incredible4 ,to ,englishmen this 
does not seem in the least degree       
unnatural1 because they are used to it2 
but they do feel it unnatural that women
 should be soldiers or members of       
parliament4 ,in the feudal ages1 on the 
contrary1 war and politics were not     
thought unnatural to women1 because not 
unusual2 it seemed natural that women of
 the privileged classes should be of    

manly character1 inferior in nothing but
 bodily strength to their husbands and  
fathers4 ,the independence of women     
seemed rather less unnatural to the     
,greeks than to other ancients1 on      
account of the fabulous ,amazons 7whom  
they believed to be historical71 and the
 partial example afforded by the        
,spartan women2 who1 though no less     
subordinate by law than in other ,greek 
states1 were more free in fact1 and     
being trained to bodily exercises in the
 same manner with men1 gave ample proof 
that they were not naturally            
disqualified for them4 ,there can be    
little doubt that ,spartan experience   
suggested to ,plato1 among many other of
 his doctrines1 that of the social and  
political equality of the two sexes4    
,but1 it will be said1 the rule of men  
over women differs from all these others
 in not being a rule of force3 it is    
accepted voluntarily2 women make no     
complaint1 and are consenting parties to
 it4 ,in the first place1 a great number

 of women do not accept it4 ,ever since 
there have been women able to make their
 sentiments known by their writings 7the
 only mode of publicity which society   
permits to them71 an increasing number  
of them have recorded protests against  
their present social condition3 and     
recently many thousands of them1 headed 
by the most eminent women known to the  
public1 have petitioned ,parliament for 
their admission to the ,parliamentary   
,suffrage4 ,the claim of women to be    
educated as solidly1 and in the same    
branches of knowledge1 as men1 is urged 
with growing intensity1 and with a great
 prospect of success2 while the demand  
for their admission into professions and
 occupations hitherto closed against    
them1 becomes every year more urgent4   
,though there are not in this country1  
as there are in the ,united ,states1    
periodical ,conventions and an organized
 party to agitate for the ,rights of    
,women1 there is a numerous and active  
,society organized and managed by women1

 for the more limited object of         
obtaining the political franchise4 ,nor 
is it only in our own country and in    
,america that women are beginning to    
protest1 more or less collectively1     
against the disabilities under which    
they labour4 ,france1 and ,italy1 and   
,switzerland1 and ,russia now afford    
examples of the same thing4 ,how many   
more women there are who silently       
cherish similar aspirations1 no one can 
possibly know2 but there are abundant   
tokens how many would cherish them1 were
 they not so strenuously taught to      
repress them as contrary to the         
proprieties of their sex4 ,it must be   
remembered1 also1 that no enslaved class
 ever asked for complete liberty at     
once4 ,when ,simon de ,montfort called  
the deputies of the commons to sit for  
the first time in ,parliament1 did any  
of them dream of demanding that an      
assembly1 elected by their constituents1
 should make and destroy ministries1 and
 dictate to the king in affairs of      

state8 ,no such thought entered into the
 imagination of the most ambitious of   
them4 ,the nobility had already these   
pretensions2 the commons pretended to   
nothing but to be exempt from arbitrary 
taxation1 and from the gross individual 
oppression of the king's officers4 ,it  
is a political law of nature that those 
who are under any power of ancient      
origin1 never begin by complaining of   
the power itself1 but only of its       
oppressive exercise4 ,there is never any
 want of women who complain of ill usage
 by their husbands4 ,there would be     
infinitely more1 if complaint were not  
the greatest of all provocatives to a   
repetition and increase of the ill      
usage4 ,it is this which frustrates all 
attempts to maintain the power but      
protect the woman against its abuses4   
,in no other case 7except that of a     
child7 is the person who has been proved
 judicially to have suffered an injury1 
replaced under the physical power of the
 culprit who inflicted it4 ,accordingly 

wives1 even in the most extreme and     
protracted cases of bodily ill usage1   
hardly ever dare avail themselves of the
 laws made for their protection3 and if1
 in a moment of irrepressible           
indignation1 or by the interference of  
neighbours1 they are induced to do so1  
their whole effort afterwards is to     
disclose as little as they can1 and to  
beg off their tyrant from his merited   
chastisement4  ,all causes1 social and  
natural1 combine to make it unlikely    
that women should be collectively       
rebellious to the power of men4 ,they   
are so far in a position different from 
all other subject classes1 that their   
masters require something more from them
 than actual service4 ,men do not want  
solely the obedience of women1 they want
 their sentiments4 ,all men1 except the 
most brutish1 desire to have1 in the    
woman most nearly connected with them1  
not a forced slave but a willing one1   
not a slave merely1 but a favourite4    
,they have therefore put everything in  

practice to enslave their minds4 ,the   
masters of all other slaves rely1 for   
maintaining obedience1 on fear2 either  
fear of themselves1 or religious fears4 
,the masters of women wanted more than  
simple obedience1 and they turned the   
whole force of education to effect their
 purpose4 ,all women are brought up from
 the very earliest years in the belief  
that their ideal of character is the    
very opposite to that of men2 not       
self-will1 and government by            
self-control1 but submission1 and       
yielding to the control of others4 ,all 
the moralities tell them that it is the 
duty of women1 and all the current      
sentimentalities that it is their       
nature1 to live for others2 to make     
complete abnegation of themselves1 and  
to have no life but in their affections4
 ,and by their affections are meant the 
only ones they are allowed to           
have--those to the men with whom they   
are connected1 or to the children who   
constitute an additional and            

indefeasible tie between them and a man4
 ,when we put together three            
things--first1 the natural attraction   
between opposite sexes2 secondly1 the   
wife's entire dependence on the husband1
 every privilege or pleasure she has    
being either his gift1 or depending     
entirely on his will2 and lastly1 that  
the principal object of human pursuit1  
consideration1 and all objects of social
 ambition1 can in general be sought or  
obtained by her only through him1 it    
would be a miracle if the object of     
being attractive to men had not become  
the polar star of feminine education and
 formation of character4 ,and1 this     
great means of influence over the minds 
of women having been acquired1 an       
instinct of selfishness made men avail  
themselves of it to the utmost as a     
means of holding women in subjection1 by
 representing to them meekness1         
submissiveness1 and resignation of all  
individual will into the hands of a man1
 as an essential part of sexual         

attractiveness4 ,can it be doubted that 
any of the other yokes which mankind    
have succeeded in breaking1 would have  
subsisted till now if the same means had
 existed1 and had been as sedulously    
used1 to bow down their minds to it8 ,if
 it had been made the object of the life
 of every young plebeian to find        
personal favour in the eyes of some     
patrician1 of every young serf with some
 seigneur2 if domestication with him1   
and a share of his personal affections1 
had been held out as the prize which    
they all should look out for1 the most  
gifted and aspiring being able to reckon
 on the most desirable prizes2 and if1  
when this prize had been obtained1 they 
had been shut out by a wall of brass    
from all interests not centering in him1
 all feelings and desires but those     
which he shared or inculcated2 would not
 serfs and seigneurs1 plebeians and     
patricians1 have been as broadly        
distinguished at this day as men and    
women are8 and would not all but a      

thinker here and there1 have believed   
the distinction to be a fundamental and 
unalterable fact in human nature8  ,the 
preceding considerations are amply      
sufficient to show that custom1 however 
universal it may be1 affords in this    
case no presumption1 and ought not to   
create any prejudice1 in favour of the  
arrangements which place women in social
 and political subjection to men4 ,but  
,i may go farther1 and maintain that the
 course of history1 and the tendencies  
of progressive human society1 afford not
 only no presumption in favour of this  
system of inequality of rights1 but a   
strong one against it2 and that1 so far 
as the whole course of human improvement
 up to this time1 the whole stream of   
modern tendencies1 warrants any         
inference on the subject1 it is1 that   
this relic of the past is discordant    
with the future1 and must necessarily   
disappear4  ,for1 what is the peculiar  
character of the modern world--the      
difference which chiefly distinguishes  

modern institutions1 modern social      
ideas1 modern life itself1 from those of
 times long past8 ,it is1 that human    
beings are no longer born to their place
 in life1 and chained down by an        
inexorable bond to the place they are   
born to1 but are free to employ their   
faculties1 and such favourable chances  
as offer1 to achieve the lot which may  
appear to them most desirable4 ,human   
society of old was constituted on a very
 different principle4 ,all were born to 
a fixed social position1 and were mostly
 kept in it by law1 or interdicted from 
any means by which they could emerge    
from it4 ,as some men are born white and
 others black1 so some were born slaves 
and others freemen and citizens2 some   
were born patricians1 others plebeians2 
some were born feudal nobles1 others    
commoners and roturiers4 ,a slave or    
serf could never make himself free1 nor1
 except by the will of his master1      
become so4 ,in most ,european countries 
it was not till towards the close of the

 middle ages1 and as a consequence of   
the growth of regal power1 that         
commoners could be ennobled4 ,even among
 nobles1 the eldest son was born the    
exclusive heir to the paternal          
possessions1 and a long time elapsed    
before it was fully established that the
 father could disinherit him4 ,among the
 industrious classes1 only those who    
were born members of a guild1 or were   
admitted into it by its members1 could  
lawfully practise their calling within  
its local limits2 and nobody could      
practise any calling deemed important1  
in any but the legal manner--by         
processes authoritatively prescribed4   
,manufacturers have stood in the pillory
 for presuming to carry on their        
business by new and improved methods4   
,in modern ,europe1 and most in those   
parts of it which have participated most
 largely in all other modern            
improvements1 diametrically opposite    
doctrines now prevail4 ,law and         
government do not undertake to prescribe

 by whom any social or industrial       
operation shall or shall not be         
conducted1 or what modes of conducting  
them shall be lawful4 ,these things are 
left to the unfettered choice of        
individuals4 ,even the laws which       
required that workmen should serve an   
apprenticeship1 have in this country    
been repealed3 there being ample        
assurance that in all cases in which an 
apprenticeship is necessary1 its        
necessity will suffice to enforce it4   
,the old theory was1 that the least     
possible should be left to the choice of
 the individual agent2 that all he had  
to do should1 as far as practicable1 be 
laid down for him by superior wisdom4   
,left to himself he was sure to go      
wrong4 ,the modern conviction1 the fruit
 of a thousand years of experience1 is1 
that things in which the individual is  
the person directly interested1 never go
 right but as they are left to his own  
discretion2 and that any regulation of  
them by authority1 except to protect the

 rights of others1 is sure to be        
mischievous4 ,this conclusion1 slowly   
arrived at1 and not adopted until almost
 every possible application of the      
contrary theory had been made with      
disastrous result1 now 7in the          
industrial department7 prevails         
universally in the most advanced        
countries1 almost universally in all    
that have pretensions to any sort of    
advancement4 ,it is not that all        
processes are supposed to be equally    
good1 or all persons to be equally      
qualified for everything2 but that      
freedom of individual choice is now     
known to be the only thing which        
procures the adoption of the best       
processes1 and throws each operation    
into the hands of those who are best    
qualified for it4 ,nobody thinks it     
necessary to make a law that only a     
strong-armed man shall be a blacksmith4 
,freedom and competition suffice to make
 blacksmiths strong-armed men1 because  
the weak-armed can earn more by engaging

 in occupations for which they are more 
fit4 ,in consonance with this doctrine1 
it is felt to be an overstepping of the 
proper bounds of authority to fix       
beforehand1 on some general presumption1
 that certain persons are not fit to do 
certain things4 ,it is now thoroughly   
known and admitted that if some such    
presumptions exist1 no such presumption 
is infallible4 ,even if it be well      
grounded in a majority of cases1 which  
it is very likely not to be1 there will 
be a minority of exceptional cases in   
which it does not hold3 and in those it 
is both an injustice to the individuals1
 and a detriment to society1 to place   
barriers in the way of their using their
 faculties for their own benefit and for
 that of others4 ,in the cases1 on the  
other hand1 in which the unfitness is   
real1 the ordinary motives of human     
conduct will on the whole suffice to    
prevent the incompetent person from     
making1 or from persisting in1 the      
attempt4  ,if this general principle of 

social and economical science is not    
true2 if individuals1 with such help as 
they can derive from the opinion of     
those who know them1 are not better     
judges than the law and the government1 
of their own capacities and vocation2   
the world cannot too soon abandon this  
principle1 and return to the old system 
of regulations and disabilities4 ,but if
 the principle is true1 we ought to act 
as if we believed it1 and not to ordain 
that to be born a girl instead of a boy1
 any more than to be born black instead 
of white1 or a commoner instead of a    
nobleman1 shall decide the person's     
position through all life--shall        
interdict people from all the more      
elevated social positions1 and from all1
 except a few1 respectable occupations4 
,even were we to admit the utmost that  
is ever pretended as to the superior    
fitness of men for all the functions now
 reserved to them1 the same argument    
applies which forbids a legal           
qualification for members of            

,parliament4 ,if only once in a dozen   
years the conditions of eligibility     
exclude a fit person1 there is a real   
loss1 while the exclusion of thousands  
of unfit persons is no gain2 for if the 
constitution of the electoral body      
disposes them to choose unfit persons1  
there are always plenty of such persons 
to choose from4 ,in all things of any   
difficulty and importance1 those who can
 do them well are fewer than the need1  
even with the most unrestricted latitude
 of choice3 and any limitation of the   
field of selection deprives society of  
some chances of being served by the     
competent1 without ever saving it from  
the incompetent4  ,at present1 in the   
more improved countries1 the            
disabilities of women are the only case1
 save one1 in which laws and            
institutions take persons at their      
birth1 and ordain that they shall never 
in all their lives be allowed to compete
 for certain things4 ,the one exception 
is that of royalty4 ,persons still are  

born to the throne2 no one1 not of the  
reigning family1 can ever occupy it1 and
 no one even of that family can1 by any 
means but the course of hereditary      
succession1 attain it4 ,all other       
dignities and social advantages are open
 to the whole male sex3 many indeed are 
only attainable by wealth1 but wealth   
may be striven for by any one1 and is   
actually obtained by many men of the    
very humblest origin4 ,the difficulties1
 to the majority1 are indeed insuperable
 without the aid of fortunate accidents2
 but no male human being is under any   
legal ban3 neither law nor opinion      
superadd artificial obstacles to the    
natural ones4 ,royalty1 as ,i have said1
 is excepted3 but in this case every one
 feels it to be an exception--an anomaly
 in the modern world1 in marked         
opposition to its customs and           
principles1 and to be justified only by 
extraordinary special expediencies1     
which1 though individuals and nations   
differ in estimating their weight1      

unquestionably do in fact exist4 ,but in
 this exceptional case1 in which a high 
social function is1 for important       
reasons1 bestowed on birth instead of   
being put up to competition1 all free   
nations contrive to adhere in substance 
to the principle from which they        
nominally derogate2 for they            
circumscribe this high function by      
conditions avowedly intended to prevent 
the person to whom it ostensibly belongs
 from really performing it2 while the   
person by whom it is performed1 the     
responsible minister1 does obtain the   
post by a competition from which no     
full-grown citizen of the male sex is   
legally excluded4 ,the disabilities1    
therefore1 to which women are subject   
from the mere fact of their birth1 are  
the solitary examples of the kind in    
modern legislation4 ,in no instance     
except this1 which comprehends half the 
human race1 are the higher social       
functions closed against any one by a   
fatality of birth which no exertions1   

and no change of circumstances1 can     
overcome2 for even religious            
disabilities 7besides that in ,england  
and in ,europe they have practically    
almost ceased to exist7 do not close any
 career to the disqualified person in   
case of conversion4  ,the social        
subordination of women thus stands out  
an isolated fact in modern social       
institutions2 a solitary breach of what 
has become their fundamental law2 a     
single relic of an old world of thought 
and practice exploded in everything     
else1 but retained in the one thing of  
most universal interest2 as if a        
gigantic dolmen1 or a vast temple of    
,jupiter ,olympius1 occupied the site of
 ,st4 ,paul's and received daily        
worship1 while the surrounding          
,christian churches were only resorted  
to on fasts and festivals4 ,this entire 
discrepancy between one social fact and 
all those which accompany it1 and the   
radical opposition between its nature   
and the progressive movement which is   

the boast of the modern world1 and which
 has successively swept away everything 
else of an analogous character1 surely  
affords1 to a conscientious observer of 
human tendencies1 serious matter for    
reflection4 ,it raises a prima facie    
presumption on the unfavourable side1   
far outweighing any which custom and    
usage could in such circumstances create
 on the favourable2 and should at least 
suffice to make this1 like the choice   
between republicanism and royalty1 a    
balanced question4  ,the least that can 
be demanded is1 that the question should
 not be considered as prejudged by      
existing fact and existing opinion1 but 
open to discussion on its merits1 as a  
question of justice and expediency3 the 
decision on this1 as on any of the other
 social arrangements of mankind1        
depending on what an enlightened        
estimate of tendencies and consequences 
may show to be most advantageous to     
humanity in general1 without distinction
 of sex4 ,and the discussion must be a  

real discussion1 descending to          
foundations1 and not resting satisfied  
with vague and general assertions4 ,it  
will not do1 for instance1 to assert in 
general terms1 that the experience of   
mankind has pronounced in favour of the 
existing system4 ,experience cannot     
possibly have decided between two       
courses1 so long as there has only been 
experience of one4 ,if it be said that  
the doctrine of the equality of the     
sexes rests only on theory1 it must be  
remembered that the contrary doctrine   
also has only theory to rest upon4 ,all 
that is proved in its favour by direct  
experience1 is that mankind have been   
able to exist under it1 and to attain   
the degree of improvement and prosperity
 which we now see2 but whether that     
prosperity has been attained sooner1 or 
is now greater1 than it would have been 
under the other system1 experience does 
not say4 ,on the other hand1 experience 
does say1 that every step in improvement
 has been so invariably accompanied by a

 step made in raising the social        
position of women1 that historians and  
philosophers have been led to adopt     
their elevation or debasement as on the 
whole the surest test and most correct  
measure of the civilization of a people 
or an age4 ,through all the progressive 
period of human history1 the condition  
of women has been approaching nearer to 
equality with men4 ,this does not of    
itself prove that the assimilation must 
go on to complete equality2 but it      
assuredly affords some presumption that 
such is the case4  ,neither does it     
avail anything to say that the nature of
 the two sexes adapts them to their     
present functions and position1 and     
renders these appropriate to them4      
,standing on the ground of common sense 
and the constitution of the human mind1 
,i deny that any one knows1 or can know1
 the nature of the two sexes1 as long as
 they have only been seen in their      
present relation to one another4 ,if men
 had ever been found in society without 

women1 or women without men1 or if there
 had been a society of men and women in 
which the women were not under the      
control of the men1 something might have
 been positively known about the mental 
and moral differences which may be      
inherent in the nature of each4 ,what is
 now called the nature of women is an   
eminently artificial thing--the result  
of forced repression in some directions1
 unnatural stimulation in others4 ,it   
may be asserted without scruple1 that no
 other class of dependents have had     
their character so entirely distorted   
from its natural proportions by their   
relation with their masters2 for1 if    
conquered and slave races have been1 in 
some respects1 more forcibly repressed1 
whatever in them has not been crushed   
down by an iron heel has generally been 
let alone1 and if left with any liberty 
of development1 it has developed itself 
according to its own laws2 but in the   
case of women1 a hot-house and stove    
cultivation has always been carried on  

of some of the capabilities of their    
nature1 for the benefit and pleasure of 
their masters4 ,then1 because certain   
products of the general vital force     
sprout luxuriantly and reach a great    
development in this heated atmosphere   
and under this active nurture and       
watering1 while other shoots from the   
same root1 which are left outside in the
 wintry air1 with ice purposely heaped  
all round them1 have a stunted growth1  
and some are burnt off with fire and    
disappear2 men1 with that inability to  
recognise their own work which          
distinguishes the unanalytic mind1      
indolently believe that the tree grows  
of itself in the way they have made it  
grow1 and that it would die if one half 
of it were not kept in a vapour bath and
 the other half in the snow4  ,of all   
difficulties which impede the progress  
of thought1 and the formation of        
well-grounded opinions on life and      
social arrangements1 the greatest is now
 the unspeakable ignorance and          

inattention of mankind in respect to the
 influences which form human character4 
,whatever any portion of the human      
species now are1 or seem to be1 such1 it
 is supposed1 they have a natural       
tendency to be3 even when the most      
elementary knowledge of the             
circumstances in which they have been   
placed1 clearly points out the causes   
that made them what they are4 ,because a
 cottier deeply in arrears to his       
landlord is not industrious1 there are  
people who think that the ,irish are    
naturally idle4 ,because constitutions  
can be overthrown when the authorities  
appointed to execute them turn their    
arms against them1 there are people who 
think the ,french incapable of free     
government4 ,because the ,greeks cheated
 the ,turks1 and the ,turks only        
plundered the ,greeks1 there are persons
 who think that the ,turks are naturally
 more sincere3 and because women1 as is 
often said1 care nothing about politics 
except their personalities1 it is       

supposed that the general good is       
naturally less interesting to women than
 to men4 ,history1 which is now so much 
better understood than formerly1 teaches
 another lesson3 if only by showing the 
extraordinary susceptibility of human   
nature to external influences1 and the  
extreme variableness of those of its    
manifestations which are supposed to be 
most universal and uniform4 ,but in     
history1 as in travelling1 men usually  
see only what they already had in their 
own minds2 and few learn much from      
history1 who do not bring much with them
 to its study4  ,hence1 in regard to    
that most difficult question1 what are  
the natural differences between the two 
sexes--a subject on which it is         
impossible in the present state of      
society to obtain complete and correct  
knowledge--while almost everybody       
dogmatizes upon it1 almost all neglect  
and make light of the only means by     
which any partial insight can be        
obtained into it4 ,this is1 an analytic 

study of the most important department  
of psychology1 the laws of the influence
 of circumstances on character4 ,for1   
however great and apparently            
ineradicable the moral and intellectual 
differences between men and women might 
be1 the evidence of their being natural 
differences could only be negative4     
,those only could be inferred to be     
natural which could not possibly be     
artificial--the residuum1 after         
deducting every characteristic of either
 sex which can admit of being explained 
from education or external              
circumstances4 ,the profoundest         
knowledge of the laws of the formation  
of character is indispensable to entitle
 any one to affirm even that there is   
any difference1 much more what the      
difference is1 between the two sexes    
considered as moral and rational beings2
 and since no one1 as yet1 has that     
knowledge1 7for there is hardly any     
subject which1 in proportion to its     
importance1 has been so little studied71

 no one is thus far entitled to any     
positive opinion on the subject4        
,conjectures are all that can at present
 be made2 conjectures more or less      
probable1 according as more or less     
authorized by such knowledge as we yet  
have of the laws of psychology1 as      
applied to the formation of character4  
,even the preliminary knowledge1 what   
the differences between the sexes now   
are1 apart from all question as to how  
they are made what they are1 is still in
 the crudest and most incomplete state4 
,medical practitioners and physiologists
 have ascertained1 to some extent1 the  
differences in bodily constitution2 and 
this is an important element to the     
psychologist3 but hardly any medical    
practitioner is a psychologist4         
,respecting the mental characteristics  
of women2 their observations are of no  
more worth than those of common men4 ,it
 is a subject on which nothing final can
 be known1 so long as those who alone   
can really know it1 women themselves1   

have given but little testimony1 and    
that little1 mostly suborned4 ,it is    
easy to know stupid women4 ,stupidity is
 much the same all the world over4 ,a   
stupid person's notions and feelings may
 confidently be inferred from those     
which prevail in the circle by which the
 person is surrounded4 ,not so with     
those whose opinions and feelings are an
 emanation from their own nature and    
faculties4 ,it is only a man here and   
there who has any tolerable knowledge of
 the character even of the women of his 
own family4 ,i do not mean1 of their    
capabilities2 these nobody knows1 not   
even themselves1 because most of them   
have never been called out4 ,i mean     
their actually existing thoughts and    
feelings4 ,many a man thinks he         
perfectly understands women1 because he 
has had amatory relations with several1 
perhaps with many of them4 ,if he is a  
good observer1 and his experience       
extends to quality as well as quantity1 
he may have learnt something of one     

narrow department of their nature--an   
important department1 no doubt4 ,but of 
all the rest of it1 few persons are     
generally more ignorant1 because there  
are few from whom it is so carefully    
hidden4 ,the most favourable case which 
a man can generally have for studying   
the character of a woman1 is that of his
 own wife3 for the opportunities are    
greater1 and the cases of complete      
sympathy not so unspeakably rare4 ,and  
in fact1 this is the source from which  
any knowledge worth having on the       
subject has1 ,i believe1 generally come4
 ,but most men have not had the         
opportunity of studying in this way more
 than a single case3 accordingly one    
can1 to an almost laughable degree1     
infer what a man's wife is like1 from   
his opinions about women in general4 ,to
 make even this one case yield any      
result1 the woman must be worth knowing1
 and the man not only a competent judge1
 but of a character so sympathetic in   
itself1 and so well adapted to hers1    

that he can either read her mind by     
sympathetic intuition1 or has nothing in
 himself which makes her shy of         
disclosing it4 ,hardly anything1 ,i     
believe1 can be more rare than this     
conjunction4 ,it often happens that     
there is the most complete unity of     
feeling and community of interests as to
 all external things1 yet the one has as
 little admission into the internal life
 of the other as if they were common    
acquaintance4 ,even with true affection1
 authority on the one side and          
subordination on the other prevent      
perfect confidence4 ,though nothing may 
be intentionally withheld1 much is not  
shown4 ,in the analogous relation of    
parent and child1 the corresponding     
phenomenon must have been in the        
observation of every one4 ,as between   
father and son1 how many are the cases  
in which the father1 in spite of real   
affection on both sides1 obviously to   
all the world does not know1 nor        
suspect1 parts of the son's character   

familiar to his companions and equals4  
,the truth is1 that the position of     
looking up to another is extremely      
unpropitious to complete sincerity and  
openness with him4 ,the fear of losing  
ground in his opinion or in his feelings
 is so strong1 that even in an upright  
character1 there is an unconscious      
tendency to show only the best side1 or 
the side which1 though not the best1 is 
that which he most likes to see3 and it 
may be confidently said that thorough   
knowledge of one another hardly ever    
exists1 but between persons who1 besides
 being intimates1 are equals4 ,how much 
more true1 then1 must all this be1 when 
the one is not only under the authority 
of the other1 but has it inculcated on  
her as a duty to reckon everything else 
subordinate to his comfort and pleasure1
 and to let him neither see nor feel    
anything coming from her1 except what is
 agreeable to him4 ,all these           
difficulties stand in the way of a man's
 obtaining any thorough knowledge even  

of the one woman whom alone1 in general1
 he has sufficient opportunity of       
studying4 ,when we further consider that
 to understand one woman is not         
necessarily to understand any other     
woman2 that even if he could study many 
women of one rank1 or of one country1 he
 would not thereby understand women of  
other ranks or countries2 and even if he
 did1 they are still only the women of a
 single period of history2 we may safely
 assert that the knowledge which men can
 acquire of women1 even as they have    
been and are1 without reference to what 
they might be1 is wretchedly imperfect  
and superficial1 and always will be so1 
until women themselves have told all    
that they have to tell4  ,and this time 
has not come2 nor will it come otherwise
 than gradually4 ,it is but of yesterday
 that women have either been qualified  
by literary accomplishments1 or         
permitted by society1 to tell anything  
to the general public4 ,as yet very few 
of them dare tell anything1 which men1  

on whom their literary success depends1 
are unwilling to hear4 ,let us remember 
in what manner1 up to a very recent     
time1 the expression1 even by a male    
author1 of uncustomary opinions1 or what
 are deemed eccentric feelings1 usually 
was1 and in some degree still is1       
received2 and we may form some faint    
conception under what impediments a     
woman1 who is brought up to think custom
 and opinion her sovereign rule1        
attempts to express in books anything   
drawn from the depths of her own nature4
 ,the greatest woman who has left       
writings behind her sufficient to give  
her an eminent rank in the literature of
 her country1 thought it necessary to   
prefix as a motto to her boldest work1  
,un homme peut braver l'opinion2 une    
femme doit s'y soumettre4#a ,the greater
 part of what women write about women is
 mere sycophancy to men4 ,in the case of
 unmarried women1 much of it seems only 
intended to increase their chance of a  
husband4 ,many1 both married and        

unmarried1 overstep the mark1 and       
inculcate a servility beyond what is    
desired or relished by any man1 except  
the very vulgarest4 ,but this is not so 
often the case as1 even at a quite late 
period1 it still was4 ,literary women   
are becoming more freespoken1 and more  
willing to express their real           
sentiments4 ,unfortunately1 in this     
country especially1 they are themselves 
such artificial products1 that their    
sentiments are compounded of a small    
element of individual observation and   
consciousness1 and a very large one of  
acquired associations4 ,this will be    
less and less the case1 but it will     
remain true to a great extent1 as long  
as social institutions do not admit the 
same free development of originality in 
women which is possible to men4 ,when   
that time comes1 and not before1 we     
shall see1 and not merely hear1 as much 
as it is necessary to know of the nature
 of women1 and the adaptation of other  
things to it4  ,i have dwelt so much on 

the difficulties which at present       
obstruct any real knowledge by men of   
the true nature of women1 because in    
this as in so many other things opinio  
copiae inter maximas causas inopiae est2
 and there is little chance of          
reasonable thinking on the matter1 while
 people flatter themselves that they    
perfectly understand a subject of which 
most men know absolutely nothing1 and of
 which it is at present impossible that 
any man1 or all men taken together1     
should have knowledge which can qualify 
them to lay down the law to women as to 
what is1 or is not1 their vocation4     
,happily1 no such knowledge is necessary
 for any practical purpose connected    
with the position of women in relation  
to society and life4 ,for1 according to 
all the principles involved in modern   
society1 the question rests with women  
themselves--to be decided by their own  
experience1 and by the use of their own 
faculties4 ,there are no means of       
finding what either one person or many  

can do1 but by trying--and no means by  
which any one else can discover for them
 what it is for their happiness to do or
 leave undone4  ,one thing we may be    
certain of--that what is contrary to    
women's nature to do1 they never will be
 made to do by simply giving their      
nature free play4 ,the anxiety of       
mankind to interfere in behalf of       
nature1 for fear lest nature should not 
succeed in effecting its purpose1 is an 
altogether unnecessary solicitude4 ,what
 women by nature cannot do1 it is quite 
superfluous to forbid them from doing4  
,what they can do1 but not so well as   
the men who are their competitors1      
competition suffices to exclude them    
from2 since nobody asks for protective  
duties and bounties in favour of women2 
it is only asked that the present       
bounties and protective duties in favour
 of men should be recalled4 ,if women   
have a greater natural inclination for  
some things than for others1 there is no
 need of laws or social inculcation to  

make the majority of them do the former 
in preference to the latter4 ,whatever  
women's services are most wanted for1   
the free play of competition will hold  
out the strongest inducements to them to
 undertake4 ,and1 as the words imply1   
they are most wanted for the things for 
which they are most fit2 by the         
apportionment of which to them1 the     
collective faculties of the two sexes   
can be applied on the whole with the    
greatest sum of valuable result4  ,the  
general opinion of men is supposed to   
be1 that the natural vocation of a woman
 is that of a wife and mother4 ,i say1  
is supposed to be1 because1 judging from
 acts--from the whole of the present    
constitution of society--one might infer
 that their opinion was the direct      
contrary4 ,they might be supposed to    
think that the alleged natural vocation 
of women was of all things the most     
repugnant to their nature2 insomuch that
 if they are free to do anything        
else--if any other means of living1 or  

occupation of their time and faculties1 
is open1 which has any chance of        
appearing desirable to them--there will 
not be enough of them who will be       
willing to accept the condition said to 
be natural to them4 ,if this is the real
 opinion of men in general1 it would be 
well that it should be spoken out4 ,i   
should like to hear somebody openly     
enunciating the doctrine 7it is already 
implied in much that is written on the  
subject7--,it is necessary to society   
that women should marry and produce     
children4 ,they will not do so unless   
they are compelled4 ,therefore it is    
necessary to compel them4 ,the merits of
 the case would then be clearly defined4
 ,it would be exactly that of the       
slaveholders of ,south ,carolina and    
,louisiana4 ,it is necessary that cotton
 and sugar should be grown4 ,white men  
cannot produce them4 ,negroes will not1 
for any wages which we choose to give4  
,ergo they must be compelled4 ,an       
illustration still closer to the point  

is that of impressment4 ,sailors must   
absolutely be had to defend the country4
 ,it often happens that they will not   
voluntarily enlist4 ,therefore there    
must be the power of forcing them4 ,how 
often has this logic been used6 and1 but
 for one flaw in it1 without doubt it   
would have been successful up to this   
day4 ,but it is open to the             
retort--,first pay the sailors the      
honest value of their labour4 ,when you 
have made it as well worth their while  
to serve you1 as to work for other      
employers1 you will have no more        
difficulty than others have in obtaining
 their services4 ,to this there is no   
logical answer except ,i will not3 and  
as people are now not only ashamed1 but 
are not desirous1 to rob the labourer of
 his hire1 impressment is no longer     
advocated4 ,those who attempt to force  
women into marriage by closing all other
 doors against them1 lay themselves open
 to a similar retort4 ,if they mean what
 they say1 their opinion must evidently 

be1 that men do not render the married  
condition so desirable to women1 as to  
induce them to accept it for its own    
recommendations4 ,it is not a sign of   
one's thinking the boon one offers very 
attractive1 when one allows only        
,hobson's choice1 that or none4 ,and    
here1 ,i believe1 is the clue to the    
feelings of those men1 who have a real  
antipathy to the equal freedom of women4
 ,i believe they are afraid1 not lest   
women should be unwilling to marry1 for 
,i do not think that any one in reality 
has that apprehension2 but lest they    
should insist that marriage should be on
 equal conditions2 lest all women of    
spirit and capacity should prefer doing 
almost anything else1 not in their own  
eyes degrading1 rather than marry1 when 
marrying is giving themselves a master1 
and a master too of all their earthly   
possessions4 ,and truly1 if this        
consequence were necessarily incident to
 marriage1 ,i think that the            
apprehension would be very well founded4

 ,i agree in thinking it probable that  
few women1 capable of anything else1    
would1 unless under an irresistible     
entrainement1 rendering them for the    
time insensible to anything but itself1 
choose such a lot1 when any other means 
were open to them of filling a          
conventionally honourable place in life3
 and if men are determined that the law 
of marriage shall be a law of despotism1
 they are quite right1 in point of mere 
policy1 in leaving to women only        
,hobson's choice4 ,but1 in that case1   
all that has been done in the modern    
world to relax the chain on the minds of
 women1 has been a mistake4 ,they never 
should have been allowed to receive a   
literary education4 ,women who read1    
much more women who write1 are1 in the  
existing constitution of things1 a      
contradiction and a disturbing element3 
and it was wrong to bring women up with 
any acquirements but those of an        
odalisque1 or of a domestic servant4    
,footnote #a3 ,title-page of ,mme4 de   

,stael's ,delphine4     ,,chapter ,,ii4 
,it will be well to commence the        
detailed discussion of the subject by   
the particular branch of it to which the
 course of our observations has led us3 
the conditions which the laws of this   
and all other countries annex to the    
marriage contract4 ,marriage being the  
destination appointed by society for    
women1 the prospect they are brought up 
to1 and the object which it is intended 
should be sought by all of them1 except 
those who are too little attractive to  
be chosen by any man as his companion2  
one might have supposed that everything 
would have been done to make this       
condition as eligible to them as        
possible1 that they might have no cause 
to regret being denied the option of any
 other4 ,society1 however1 both in this1
 and1 at first1 in all other cases1 has 
preferred to attain its object by foul  
rather than fair means3 but this is the 
only case in which it has substantially 
persisted in them even to the present   

day4 ,originally women were taken by    
force1 or regularly sold by their father
 to the husband4 ,until a late period in
 ,european history1 the father had the  
power to dispose of his daughter in     
marriage at his own will and pleasure1  
without any regard to hers4 ,the        
,church1 indeed1 was so far faithful to 
a better morality as to require a formal
 yes from the woman at the marriage     
ceremony2 but there was nothing to shew 
that the consent was other than         
compulsory2 and it was practically      
impossible for the girl to refuse       
compliance if the father persevered1    
except perhaps when she might obtain the
 protection of religion by a determined 
resolution to take monastic vows4 ,after
 marriage1 the man had anciently 7but   
this was anterior to ,christianity7 the 
power of life and death over his wife4  
,she could invoke no law against him2 he
 was her sole tribunal and law4 ,for a  
long time he could repudiate her1 but   
she had no corresponding power in regard

 to him4 ,by the old laws of ,england1  
the husband was called the lord of the  
wife2 he was literally regarded as her  
sovereign1 inasmuch that the murder of a
 man by his wife was called treason     
7petty as distinguished from high       
treason71 and was more cruelly avenged  
than was usually the case with high     
treason1 for the penalty was burning to 
death4 ,because these various enormities
 have fallen into disuse 7for most of   
them were never formally abolished1 or  
not until they had long ceased to be    
practised7 men suppose that all is now  
as it should be in regard to the        
marriage contract2 and we are           
continually told that civilization and  
,christianity have restored to the woman
 her just rights4 ,meanwhile the wife is
 the actual bond-servant of her husband3
 no less so1 as far as legal obligation 
goes1 than slaves commonly so called4   
,she vows a lifelong obedience to him at
 the altar1 and is held to it all       
through her life by law4 ,casuists may  

say that the obligation of obedience    
stops short of participation in crime1  
but it certainly extends to everything  
else4 ,she can do no act whatever but by
 his permission1 at least tacit4 ,she   
can acquire no property but for him2 the
 instant it becomes hers1 even if by    
inheritance1 it becomes ipso facto his4 
,in this respect the wife's position    
under the common law of ,england is     
worse than that of slaves in the laws of
 many countries3 by the ,roman law1 for 
example1 a slave might have his         
peculium1 which to a certain extent the 
law guaranteed to him for his exclusive 
use4 ,the higher classes in this country
 have given an analogous advantage to   
their women1 through special contracts  
setting aside the law1 by conditions of 
pin-money1 c43 since parental feeling   
being stronger with fathers than the    
class feeling of their own sex1 a father
 generally prefers his own daughter to a
 son-in-law who is a stranger to him4   
,by means of settlements1 the rich      

usually contrive to withdraw the whole  
or part of the inherited property of the
 wife from the absolute control of the  
husband3 but they do not succeed in     
keeping it under her own control2 the   
utmost they can do only prevents the    
husband from squandering it1 at the same
 time debarring the rightful owner from 
its use4 ,the property itself is out of 
the reach of both2 and as to the income 
derived from it1 the form of settlement 
most favourable to the wife 7that called
 to her separate use7 only precludes the
 husband from receiving it instead of   
her3 it must pass through her hands1 but
 if he takes it from her by personal    
violence as soon as she receives it1 he 
can neither be punished1 nor compelled  
to restitution4 ,this is the amount of  
the protection which1 under the laws of 
this country1 the most powerful nobleman
 can give to his own daughter as        
respects her husband4 ,in the immense   
majority of cases there is no           
settlement3 and the absorption of all   

rights1 all property1 as well as all    
freedom of action1 is complete4 ,the two
 are called one person in law1 for the  
purpose of inferring that whatever is   
hers is his1 but the parallel inference 
is never drawn that whatever is his is  
hers2 the maxim is not applied against  
the man1 except to make him responsible 
to third parties for her acts1 as a     
master is for the acts of his slaves or 
of his cattle4 ,i am far from pretending
 that wives are in general no better    
treated than slaves2 but no slave is a  
slave to the same lengths1 and in so    
full a sense of the word1 as a wife is4 
,hardly any slave1 except one           
immediately attached to the master's    
person1 is a slave at all hours and all 
minutes2 in general he has1 like a      
soldier1 his fixed task1 and when it is 
done1 or when he is off duty1 he        
disposes1 within certain limits1 of his 
own time1 and has a family life into    
which the master rarely intrudes4 ,uncle
 ,tom under his first master had his own

 life in his cabin1 almost as much as   
any man whose work takes him away from  
home1 is able to have in his own family4
 ,but it cannot be so with the wife4    
,above all1 a female slave has 7in      
,christian countries7 an admitted right1
 and is considered under a moral        
obligation1 to refuse to her master the 
last familiarity4 ,not so the wife3     
however brutal a tyrant she may         
unfortunately be chained to--though she 
may know that he hates her1 though it   
may be his daily pleasure to torture    
her1 and though she may feel it         
impossible not to loathe him--he can    
claim from her and enforce the lowest   
degradation of a human being1 that of   
being made the instrument of an animal  
function contrary to her inclinations4  
,while she is held in this worst        
description of slavery as to her own    
person1 what is her position in regard  
to the children in whom she and her     
master have a joint interest8 ,they are 
by law his children4 ,he alone has any  

legal rights over them4 ,not one act can
 she do towards or in relation to them1 
except by delegation from him4 ,even    
after he is dead she is not their legal 
guardian1 unless he by will has made her
 so4 ,he could even send them away from 
her1 and deprive her of the means of    
seeing or corresponding with them1 until
 this power was in some degree          
restricted by ,serjeant ,talfourd's     
,act4 ,this is her legal state4 ,and    
from this state she has no means of     
withdrawing herself4 ,if she leaves her 
husband1 she can take nothing with her1 
neither her children nor anything which 
is rightfully her own4 ,if he chooses1  
he can compel her to return1 by law1 or 
by physical force2 or he may content    
himself with seizing for his own use    
anything which she may earn1 or which   
may be given to her by her relations4   
,it is only legal separation by a decree
 of a court of justice1 which entitles  
her to live apart1 without being forced 
back into the custody of an exasperated 

jailer--or which empowers her to apply  
any earnings to her own use1 without    
fear that a man whom perhaps she has not
 seen for twenty years will pounce upon 
her some day and carry all off4 ,this   
legal separation1 until lately1 the     
courts of justice would only give at an 
expense which made it inaccessible to   
any one out of the higher ranks4 ,even  
now it is only given in cases of        
desertion1 or of the extreme of cruelty2
 and yet complaints are made every day  
that it is granted too easily4 ,surely1 
if a woman is denied any lot in life but
 that of being the personal body-servant
 of a despot1 and is dependent for      
everything upon the chance of finding   
one who may be disposed to make a       
favourite of her instead of merely a    
drudge1 it is a very cruel aggravation  
of her fate that she should be allowed  
to try this chance only once4 ,the      
natural sequel and corollary from this  
state of things would be1 that since her
 all in life depends upon obtaining a   

good master1 she should be allowed to   
change again and again until she finds  
one4 ,i am not saying that she ought to 
be allowed this privilege4 ,that is a   
totally different consideration4 ,the   
question of divorce1 in the sense       
involving liberty of remarriage1 is one 
into which it is foreign to my purpose  
to enter4 ,all ,i now say is1 that to   
those to whom nothing but servitude is  
allowed1 the free choice of servitude is
 the only1 though a most insufficient1  
alleviation4 ,its refusal completes the 
assimilation of the wife to the         
slave--and the slave under not the      
mildest form of slavery3 for in some    
slave codes the slave could1 under      
certain circumstances of ill usage1     
legally compel the master to sell him4  
,but no amount of ill usage1 without    
adultery superadded1 will in ,england   
free a wife from her tormentor4  ,i have
 no desire to exaggerate1 nor does the  
case stand in any need of exaggeration4 
,i have described the wife's legal      

position1 not her actual treatment4 ,the
 laws of most countries are far worse   
than the people who execute them1 and   
many of them are only able to remain    
laws by being seldom or never carried   
into effect4 ,if married life were all  
that it might be expected to be1 looking
 to the laws alone1 society would be a  
hell upon earth4 ,happily there are both
 feelings and interests which in many   
men exclude1 and in most1 greatly       
temper1 the impulses and propensities   
which lead to tyranny3 and of those     
feelings1 the tie which connects a man  
with his wife affords1 in a normal state
 of things1 incomparably the strongest  
example4 ,the only tie which at all     
approaches to it1 that between him and  
his children1 tends1 in all save        
exceptional cases1 to strengthen1       
instead of conflicting with1 the first4 
,because this is true2 because men in   
general do not inflict1 nor women       
suffer1 all the misery which could be   
inflicted and suffered if the full power

 of tyranny with which the man is       
legally invested were acted on2 the     
defenders of the existing form of the   
institution think that all its iniquity 
is justified1 and that any complaint is 
merely quarrelling with the evil which  
is the price paid for every great good4 
,but the mitigations in practice1 which 
are compatible with maintaining in full 
legal force this or any other kind of   
tyranny1 instead of being any apology   
for despotism1 only serve to prove what 
power human nature possesses of reacting
 against the vilest institutions1 and   
with what vitality the seeds of good as 
well as those of evil in human character
 diffuse and propagate themselves4 ,not 
a word can be said for despotism in the 
family which cannot be said for         
political despotism4 ,every absolute    
king does not sit at his window to enjoy
 the groans of his tortured subjects1   
nor strips them of their last rag and   
turns them out to shiver in the road4   
,the despotism of ,louis ,,xvi4 was not 

the despotism of ,philippe le ,bel1 or  
of ,nadir ,shah1 or of ,caligula2 but it
 was bad enough to justify the ,french  
,revolution1 and to palliate even its   
horrors4 ,if an appeal be made to the   
intense attachments which exist between 
wives and their husbands1 exactly as    
much may be said of domestic slavery4   
,it was quite an ordinary fact in       
,greece and ,rome for slaves to submit  
to death by torture rather than betray  
their masters4 ,in the proscriptions of 
the ,roman civil wars it was remarked   
that wives and slaves were heroically   
faithful1 sons very commonly            
treacherous4 ,yet we know how cruelly   
many ,romans treated their slaves4 ,but 
in truth these intense individual       
feelings nowhere rise to such a         
luxuriant height as under the most      
atrocious institutions4 ,it is part of  
the irony of life1 that the strongest   
feelings of devoted gratitude of which  
human nature seems to be susceptible1   
are called forth in human beings towards

 those who1 having the power entirely to
 crush their earthly existence1         
voluntarily refrain from using that     
power4 ,how great a place in most men   
this sentiment fills1 even in religious 
devotion1 it would be cruel to inquire4 
,we daily see how much their gratitude  
to ,heaven appears to be stimulated by  
the contemplation of fellow-creatures to
 whom ,god has not been so merciful as  
he has to themselves4  ,whether the     
institution to be defended is slavery1  
political absolutism1 or the absolutism 
of the head of a family1 we are always  
expected to judge of it from its best   
instances2 and we are presented with    
pictures of loving exercise of authority
 on one side1 loving submission to it on
 the other--superior wisdom ordering all
 things for the greatest good of the    
dependents1 and surrounded by their     
smiles and benedictions4 ,all this would
 be very much to the purpose if any one 
pretended that there are no such things 
as good men4 ,who doubts that there may 

be great goodness1 and great happiness1 
and great affection1 under the absolute 
government of a good man8 ,meanwhile1   
laws and institutions require to be     
adapted1 not to good men1 but to bad4   
,marriage is not an institution designed
 for a select few4 ,men are not         
required1 as a preliminary to the       
marriage ceremony1 to prove by          
testimonials that they are fit to be    
trusted with the exercise of absolute   
power4 ,the tie of affection and        
obligation to a wife and children is    
very strong with those whose general    
social feelings are strong1 and with    
many who are little sensible to any     
other social ties2 but there are all    
degrees of sensibility and insensibility
 to it1 as there are all grades of      
goodness and wickedness in men1 down to 
those whom no ties will bind1 and on    
whom society has no action but through  
its ultima ratio1 the penalties of the  
law4 ,in every grade of this descending 
scale are men to whom are committed all 

the legal powers of a husband4 ,the     
vilest malefactor has some wretched     
woman tied to him1 against whom he can  
commit any atrocity except killing her1 
and1 if tolerably cautious1 can do that 
without much danger of the legal        
penalty4 ,and how many thousands are    
there among the lowest classes in every 
country1 who1 without being in a legal  
sense malefactors in any other respect1 
because in every other quarter their    
aggressions meet with resistance1       
indulge the utmost habitual excesses of 
bodily violence towards the unhappy     
wife1 who alone1 at least of grown      
persons1 can neither repel nor escape   
from their brutality2 and towards whom  
the excess of dependence inspires their 
mean and savage natures1 not with a     
generous forbearance1 and a point of    
honour to behave well to one whose lot  
in life is trusted entirely to their    
kindness1 but on the contrary with a    
notion that the law has delivered her to
 them as their thing1 to be used at     

their pleasure1 and that they are not   
expected to practise the consideration  
towards her which is required from them 
towards everybody else4 ,the law1 which 
till lately left even these atrocious   
extremes of domestic oppression         
practically unpunished1 has within these
 few years made some feeble attempts to 
repress them4 ,but its attempts have    
done little1 and cannot be expected to  
do much1 because it is contrary to      
reason and experience to suppose that   
there can be any real check to          
brutality1 consistent with leaving the  
victim still in the power of the        
executioner4 ,until a conviction for    
personal violence1 or at all events a   
repetition of it after a first          
conviction1 entitles the woman ipso     
facto to a divorce1 or at least to a    
judicial separation1 the attempt to     
repress these aggravated assaults by    
legal penalties will break down for want
 of a prosecutor1 or for want of a      
witness4  ,when we consider how vast is 

the number of men1 in any great country1
 who are little higher than brutes1 and 
that this never prevents them from being
 able1 through the law of marriage1 to  
obtain a victim1 the breadth and depth  
of human misery caused in this shape    
alone by the abuse of the institution   
swells to something appalling4 ,yet     
these are only the extreme cases4 ,they 
are the lowest abysses1 but there is a  
sad succession of depth after depth     
before reaching them4 ,in domestic as in
 political tyranny1 the case of absolute
 monsters chiefly illustrates the       
institution by showing that there is    
scarcely any horror which may not occur 
under it if the despot pleases1 and thus
 setting in a strong light what must be 
the terrible frequency of things only a 
little less atrocious4 ,absolute fiends 
are as rare as angels1 perhaps rarer3   
ferocious savages1 with occasional      
touches of humanity1 are however very   
frequent3 and in the wide interval which
 separates these from any worthy        

representatives of the human species1   
how many are the forms and gradations of
 animalism and selfishness1 often under 
an outward varnish of civilization and  
even cultivation1 living at peace with  
the law1 maintaining a creditable       
appearance to all who are not under     
their power1 yet sufficient often to    
make the lives of all who are so1 a     
torment and a burthen to them6 ,it would
 be tiresome to repeat the commonplaces 
about the unfitness of men in general   
for power1 which1 after the political   
discussions of centuries1 every one     
knows by heart1 were it not that hardly 
any one thinks of applying these maxims 
to the case in which above all others   
they are applicable1 that of power1 not 
placed in the hands of a man here and   
there1 but offered to every adult male1 
down to the basest and most ferocious4  
,it is not because a man is not known to
 have broken any of the ,ten            
,commandments1 or because he maintains a
 respectable character in his dealings  

with those whom he cannot compel to have
 intercourse with him1 or because he    
does not fly out into violent bursts of 
ill-temper against those who are not    
obliged to bear with him1 that it is    
possible to surmise of what sort his    
conduct will be in the unrestraint of   
home4 ,even the commonest men reserve   
the violent1 the sulky1 the             
undisguisedly selfish side of their     
character for those who have no power to
 withstand it4 ,the relation of         
superiors to dependents is the nursery  
of these vices of character1 which1     
wherever else they exist1 are an        
overflowing from that source4 ,a man who
 is morose or violent to his equals1 is 
sure to be one who has lived among      
inferiors1 whom he could frighten or    
worry into submission4 ,if the family in
 its best forms is1 as it is often said 
to be1 a school of sympathy1 tenderness1
 and loving forgetfulness of self1 it is
 still oftener1 as respects its chief1 a
 school of wilfulness1 overbearingness1 

unbounded self-indulgence1 and a        
double-dyed and idealized selfishness1  
of which sacrifice itself is only a     
particular form3 the care for the wife  
and children being only care for them as
 parts of the man's own interests and   
belongings1 and their individual        
happiness being immolated in every shape
 to his smallest preferences4 ,what     
better is to be looked for under the    
existing form of the institution8 ,we   
know that the bad propensities of human 
nature are only kept within bounds when 
they are allowed no scope for their     
indulgence4 ,we know that from impulse  
and habit1 when not from deliberate     
purpose1 almost every one to whom others
 yield1 goes on encroaching upon them1  
until a point is reached at which they  
are compelled to resist4 ,such being the
 common tendency of human nature2 the   
almost unlimited power which present    
social institutions give to the man over
 at least one human being--the one with 
whom he resides1 and whom he has always 

present--this power seeks out and evokes
 the latent germs of selfishness in the 
remotest corners of his nature--fans its
 faintest sparks and smouldering        
embers--offers to him a license for the 
indulgence of those points of his       
original character which in all other   
relations he would have found it        
necessary to repress and conceal1 and   
the repression of which would in time   
have become a second nature4 ,i know    
that there is another side to the       
question4 ,i grant that the wife1 if she
 cannot effectually resist1 can at least
 retaliate2 she1 too1 can make the man's
 life extremely uncomfortable1 and by   
that power is able to carry many points 
which she ought1 and many which she     
ought not1 to prevail in4 ,but this     
instrument of self-protection--which may
 be called the power of the scold1 or   
the shrewish sanction--has the fatal    
defect1 that it avails most against the 
least tyrannical superiors1 and in      
favour of the least deserving           

dependents4 ,it is the weapon of        
irritable and self-willed women2 of     
those who would make the worst use of   
power if they themselves had it1 and who
 generally turn this power to a bad use4
 ,the amiable cannot use such an        
instrument1 the highminded disdain it4  
,and on the other hand1 the husbands    
against whom it is used most effectively
 are the gentler and more inoffensive2  
those who cannot be induced1 even by    
provocation1 to resort to any very harsh
 exercise of authority4 ,the wife's     
power of being disagreeable generally   
only establishes a counter-tyranny1 and 
makes victims in their turn chiefly of  
those husbands who are least inclined to
 be tyrants4  ,what is it1 then1 which  
really tempers the corrupting effects of
 the power1 and makes it compatible with
 such amount of good as we actually see8
 ,mere feminine blandishments1 though of
 great effect in individual instances1  
have very little effect in modifying the
 general tendencies of the situation2   

for their power only lasts while the    
woman is young and attractive1 often    
only while her charm is new1 and not    
dimmed by familiarity2 and on many men  
they have not much influence at any     
time4 ,the real mitigating causes are1  
the personal affection which is the     
growth of time1 in so far as the man's  
nature is susceptible of it1 and the    
woman's character sufficiently congenial
 with his to excite it2 their common    
interests as regards the children1 and  
their general community of interest as  
concerns third persons 7to which however
 there are very great limitations72 the 
real importance of the wife to his daily
 comforts and enjoyments1 and the value 
he consequently attaches to her on his  
personal account1 which1 in a man       
capable of feeling for others1 lays the 
foundation of caring for her on her own2
 and lastly1 the influence naturally    
acquired over almost all human beings by
 those near to their persons 7if not    
actually disagreeable to them73 who1    

both by their direct entreaties1 and by 
the insensible contagion of their       
feelings and dispositions1 are often    
able1 unless counteracted by some       
equally strong personal influence1 to   
obtain a degree of command over the     
conduct of the superior1 altogether     
excessive and unreasonable4 ,through    
these various means1 the wife frequently
 exercises even too much power over the 
man2 she is able to affect his conduct  
in things in which she may not be       
qualified to influence it for good--in  
which her influence may be not only     
unenlightened1 but employed on the      
morally wrong side2 and in which he     
would act better if left to his own     
prompting4 ,but neither in the affairs  
of families nor in those of states is   
power a compensation for the loss of    
freedom4 ,her power often gives her what
 she has no right to1 but does not      
enable her to assert her own rights4 ,a 
,sultan's favourite slave has slaves    
under her1 over whom she tyrannizes2 but

 the desirable thing would be that she  
should neither have slaves nor be a     
slave4 ,by entirely sinking her own     
existence in her husband2 by having no  
will 7or persuading him that she has no 
will7 but his1 in anything which regards
 their joint relation1 and by making it 
the business of her life to work upon   
his sentiments1 a wife may gratify      
herself by influencing1 and very        
probably perverting1 his conduct1 in    
those of his external relations which   
she has never qualified herself to judge
 of1 or in which she is herself wholly  
influenced by some personal or other    
partiality or prejudice4 ,accordingly1  
as things now are1 those who act most   
kindly to their wives1 are quite as     
often made worse1 as better1 by the     
wife's influence1 in respect to all     
interests extending beyond the family4  
,she is taught that she has no business 
with things out of that sphere2 and     
accordingly she seldom has any honest   
and conscientious opinion on them2 and  

therefore hardly ever meddles with them 
for any legitimate purpose1 but         
generally for an interested one4 ,she   
neither knows nor cares which is the    
right side in politics1 but she knows   
what will bring in money or invitations1
 give her husband a title1 her son a    
place1 or her daughter a good marriage4 
,but how1 it will be asked1 can any     
society exist without government8 ,in a 
family1 as in a state1 some one person  
must be the ultimate ruler4 ,who shall  
decide when married people differ in    
opinion8 ,both cannot have their way1   
yet a decision one way or the other must
 be come to4  ,it is not true that in   
all voluntary association between two   
people1 one of them must be absolute    
master3 still less that the law must    
determine which of them it shall be4    
,the most frequent case of voluntary    
association1 next to marriage1 is       
partnership in business3 and it is not  
found or thought necessary to enact that
 in every partnership1 one partner shall

 have entire control over the concern1  
and the others shall be bound to obey   
his orders4 ,no one would enter into    
partnership on terms which would subject
 him to the responsibilities of a       
principal1 with only the powers and     
privileges of a clerk or agent4 ,if the 
law dealt with other contracts as it    
does with marriage1 it would ordain that
 one partner should administer the      
common business as if it was his private
 concern2 that the others should have   
only delegated powers2 and that this one
 should be designated by some general   
presumption of law1 for example as being
 the eldest4 ,the law never does this3  
nor does experience show it to be       
necessary that any theoretical          
inequality of power should exist between
 the partners1 or that the partnership  
should have any other conditions than   
what they may themselves appoint by     
their articles of agreement4 ,yet it    
might seem that the exclusive power     
might be conceded with less danger to   

the rights and interests of the         
inferior1 in the case of partnership    
than in that of marriage1 since he is   
free to cancel the power by withdrawing 
from the connexion4 ,the wife has no    
such power1 and even if she had1 it is  
almost always desirable that she should 
try all measures before resorting to it4
  ,it is quite true that things which   
have to be decided every day1 and cannot
 adjust themselves gradually1 or wait   
for a compromise1 ought to depend on one
 will3 one person must have their sole  
control4 ,but it does not follow that   
this should always be the same person4  
,the natural arrangement is a division  
of powers between the two2 each being   
absolute in the executive branch of     
their own department1 and any change of 
system and principle requiring the      
consent of both4 ,the division neither  
can nor should be pre-established by the
 law1 since it must depend on individual
 capacities and suitabilities4 ,if the  
two persons chose1 they might           

pre-appoint it by the marriage contract1
 as pecuniary arrangements are now often
 pre-appointed4 ,there would seldom be  
any difficulty in deciding such things  
by mutual consent1 unless the marriage  
was one of those unhappy ones in which  
all other things1 as well as this1      
become subjects of bickering and        
dispute4 ,the division of rights would  
naturally follow the division of duties 
and functions2 and that is already made 
by consent1 or at all events not by law1
 but by general custom1 modified and    
modifiable at the pleasure of the       
persons concerned4  ,the real practical 
decision of affairs1 to whichever may be
 given the legal authority1 will greatly
 depend1 as it even now does1 upon      
comparative qualifications4 ,the mere   
fact that he is usually the eldest1 will
 in most cases give the preponderance to
 the man2 at least until they both      
attain a time of life at which the      
difference in their years is of no      
importance4 ,there will naturally also  

be a more potential voice on the side1  
whichever it is1 that brings the means  
of support4 ,inequality from this source
 does not depend on the law of marriage1
 but on the general conditions of human 
society1 as now constituted4 ,the       
influence of mental superiority1 either 
general or special1 and of superior     
decision of character1 will necessarily 
tell for much4 ,it always does so at    
present4 ,and this fact shows how little
 foundation there is for the            
apprehension that the powers and        
responsibilities of partners in life 7as
 of partners in business71 cannot be    
satisfactorily apportioned by agreement 
between themselves4 ,they always are so 
apportioned1 except in cases in which   
the marriage institution is a failure4  
,things never come to an issue of       
downright power on one side1 and        
obedience on the other1 except where the
 connexion altogether has been a        
mistake1 and it would be a blessing to  
both parties to be relieved from it4    

,some may say that the very thing by    
which an amicable settlement of         
differences becomes possible1 is the    
power of legal compulsion known to be in
 reserve2 as people submit to an        
arbitration because there is a court of 
law in the background1 which they know  
that they can be forced to obey4 ,but to
 make the cases parallel1 we must       
suppose that the rule of the court of   
law was1 not to try the cause1 but to   
give judgment always for the same side1 
suppose the defendant4 ,if so1 the      
amenability to it would be a motive with
 the plaintiff to agree to almost any   
arbitration1 but it would be just the   
reverse with the defendant4 ,the        
despotic power which the law gives to   
the husband may be a reason to make the 
wife assent to any compromise by which  
power is practically shared between the 
two1 but it cannot be the reason why the
 husband does4 ,that there is always    
among decently conducted people a       
practical compromise1 though one of them

 at least is under no physical or moral 
necessity of making it1 shows that the  
natural motives which lead to a         
voluntary adjustment of the united life 
of two persons in a manner acceptable to
 both1 do on the whole1 except in       
unfavourable cases1 prevail4 ,the matter
 is certainly not improved by laying    
down as an ordinance of law1 that the   
superstructure of free government shall 
be raised upon a legal basis of         
despotism on one side and subjection on 
the other1 and that every concession    
which the despot makes may1 at his mere 
pleasure1 and without any warning1 be   
recalled4 ,besides that no freedom is   
worth much when held on so precarious a 
tenure1 its conditions are not likely to
 be the most equitable when the law     
throws so prodigious a weight into one  
scale2 when the adjustment rests between
 two persons one of whom is declared to 
be entitled to everything1 the other not
 only entitled to nothing except during 
the good pleasure of the first1 but     

under the strongest moral and religious 
obligation not to rebel under any excess
 of oppression4  ,a pertinacious        
adversary1 pushed to extremities1 may   
say1 that husbands indeed are willing to
 be reasonable1 and to make fair        
concessions to their partners without   
being compelled to it1 but that wives   
are not3 that if allowed any rights of  
their own1 they will acknowledge no     
rights at all in any one else1 and never
 will yield in anything1 unless they can
 be compelled1 by the man's mere        
authority1 to yield in everything4 ,this
 would have been said by many persons   
some generations ago1 when satires on   
women were in vogue1 and men thought it 
a clever thing to insult women for being
 what men made them4 ,but it will be    
said by no one now who is worth replying
 to4 ,it is not the doctrine of the     
present day that women are less         
susceptible of good feeling1 and        
consideration for those with whom they  
are united by the strongest ties1 than  

men are4 ,on the contrary1 we are       
perpetually told that women are better  
than men1 by those who are totally      
opposed to treating them as if they were
 as good2 so that the saying has passed 
into a piece of tiresome cant1 intended 
to put a complimentary face upon an     
injury1 and resembling those            
celebrations of royal clemency which1   
according to ,gulliver1 the king of     
,lilliput always prefixed to his most   
sanguinary decrees4 ,if women are better
 than men in anything1 it surely is in  
individual self-sacrifice for those of  
their own family4 ,but ,i lay little    
stress on this1 so long as they are     
universally taught that they are born   
and created for self-sacrifice4 ,i      
believe that equality of rights would   
abate the exaggerated self-abnegation   
which is the present artificial ideal of
 feminine character1 and that a good    
woman would not be more self-sacrificing
 than the best man3 but on the other    
hand1 men would be much more unselfish  

and self-sacrificing than at present1   
because they would no longer be taught  
to worship their own will as such a     
grand thing that it is actually the law 
for another rational being4 ,there is   
nothing which men so easily learn as    
this self-worship3 all privileged       
persons1 and all privileged classes1    
have had it4 ,the more we descend in the
 scale of humanity1 the intenser it is2 
and most of all in those who are not1   
and can never expect to be1 raised above
 any one except an unfortunate wife and 
children4 ,the honourable exceptions are
 proportionally fewer than in the case  
of almost any other human infirmity4    
,philosophy and religion1 instead of    
keeping it in check1 are generally      
suborned to defend it2 and nothing      
controls it but that practical feeling  
of the equality of human beings1 which  
is the theory of ,christianity1 but     
which ,christianity will never          
practically teach1 while it sanctions   
institutions grounded on an arbitrary   

preference of one human being over      
another4  ,there are1 no doubt1 women1  
as there are men1 whom equality of      
consideration will not satisfy2 with    
whom there is no peace while any will or
 wish is regarded but their own4 ,such  
persons are a proper subject for the law
 of divorce4 ,they are only fit to live 
alone1 and no human beings ought to be  
compelled to associate their lives with 
them4 ,but the legal subordination tends
 to make such characters among women    
more1 rather than less1 frequent4 ,if   
the man exerts his whole power1 the     
woman is of course crushed3 but if she  
is treated with indulgence1 and         
permitted to assume power1 there is no  
rule to set limits to her encroachments4
 ,the law1 not determining her rights1  
but theoretically allowing her none at  
all1 practically declares that the      
measure of what she has a right to1 is  
what she can contrive to get4  ,the     
equality of married persons before the  
law1 is not only the sole mode in which 

that particular relation can be made    
consistent with justice to both sides1  
and conducive to the happiness of both1 
but it is the only means of rendering   
the daily life of mankind1 in any high  
sense1 a school of moral cultivation4   
,though the truth may not be felt or    
generally acknowledged for generations  
to come1 the only school of genuine     
moral sentiment is society between      
equals4 ,the moral education of mankind 
has hitherto emanated chiefly from the  
law of force1 and is adapted almost     
solely to the relations which force     
creates4 ,in the less advanced states of
 society1 people hardly recognise any   
relation with their equals4 ,to be an   
equal is to be an enemy4 ,society1 from 
its highest place to its lowest1 is one 
long chain1 or rather ladder1 where     
every individual is either above or     
below his nearest neighbour1 and        
wherever he does not command he must    
obey4 ,existing moralities1 accordingly1
 are mainly fitted to a relation of     

command and obedience4 ,yet command and 
obedience are but unfortunate           
necessities of human life3 society in   
equality is its normal state4 ,already  
in modern life1 and more and more as it 
progressively improves1 command and     
obedience become exceptional facts in   
life1 equal association its general     
rule4 ,the morality of the first ages   
rested on the obligation to submit to   
power2 that of the ages next following1 
on the right of the weak to the         
forbearance and protection of the       
strong4 ,how much longer is one form of 
society and life to content itself with 
the morality made for another8 ,we have 
had the morality of submission1 and the 
morality of chivalry and generosity2 the
 time is now come for the morality of   
justice4 ,whenever1 in former ages1 any 
approach has been made to society in    
equality1 ,justice has asserted its     
claims as the foundation of virtue4 ,it 
was thus in the free republics of       
antiquity4 ,but even in the best of     

these1 the equals were limited to the   
free male citizens2 slaves1 women1 and  
the unenfranchised residents were under 
the law of force4 ,the joint influence  
of ,roman civilization and of           
,christianity obliterated these         
distinctions1 and in theory 7if only    
partially in practice7 declared the     
claims of the human being1 as such1 to  
be paramount to those of sex1 class1 or 
social position4 ,the barriers which had
 begun to be levelled were raised again 
by the northern conquests2 and the whole
 of modern history consists of the slow 
process by which they have since been   
wearing away4 ,we are entering into an  
order of things in which justice will   
again be the primary virtue2 grounded as
 before on equal1 but now also on       
sympathetic association2 having its root
 no longer in the instinct of equals for
 self-protection1 but in a cultivated   
sympathy between them2 and no one being 
now left out1 but an equal measure being
 extended to all4 ,it is no novelty that

 mankind do not distinctly foresee their
 own changes1 and that their sentiments 
are adapted to past1 not to coming ages4
 ,to see the futurity of the species has
 always been the privilege of the       
intellectual elite1 or of those who have
 learnt from them2 to have the feelings 
of that futurity has been the           
distinction1 and usually the martyrdom1 
of a still rarer elite4 ,institutions1  
books1 education1 society1 all go on    
training human beings for the old1 long 
after the new has come2 much more when  
it is only coming4 ,but the true virtue 
of human beings is fitness to live      
together as equals2 claiming nothing for
 themselves but what they as freely     
concede to every one else2 regarding    
command of any kind as an exceptional   
necessity1 and in all cases a temporary 
one2 and preferring1 whenever possible1 
the society of those with whom leading  
and following can be alternate and      
reciprocal4 ,to these virtues1 nothing  
in life as at present constituted gives 

cultivation by exercise4 ,the family is 
a school of despotism1 in which the     
virtues of despotism1 but also its      
vices1 are largely nourished4           
,citizenship1 in free countries1 is     
partly a school of society in equality2 
but citizenship fills only a small place
 in modern life1 and does not come near 
the daily habits or inmost sentiments4  
,the family1 justly constituted1 would  
be the real school of the virtues of    
freedom4 ,it is sure to be a sufficient 
one of everything else4 ,it will always 
be a school of obedience for the        
children1 of command for the parents4   
,what is needed is1 that it should be a 
school of sympathy in equality1 of      
living together in love1 without power  
on one side or obedience on the other4  
,this it ought to be between the        
parents4 ,it would then be an exercise  
of those virtues which each requires to 
fit them for all other association1 and 
a model to the children of the feelings 
and conduct which their temporary       

training by means of obedience is       
designed to render habitual1 and        
therefore natural1 to them4 ,the moral  
training of mankind will never be       
adapted to the conditions of the life   
for which all other human progress is a 
preparation1 until they practise in the 
family the same moral rule which is     
adapted to the normal constitution of   
human society4 ,any sentiment of freedom
 which can exist in a man whose nearest 
and dearest intimacies are with those of
 whom he is absolute master1 is not the 
genuine or ,christian love of freedom1  
but1 what the love of freedom generally 
was in the ancients and in the middle   
ages--an intense feeling of the dignity 
and importance of his own personality2  
making him disdain a yoke for himself1  
of which he has no abhorrence whatever  
in the abstract1 but which he is        
abundantly ready to impose on others for
 his own interest or glorification4  ,i 
readily admit 7and it is the very       
foundation of my hopes7 that numbers of 

married people even under the present   
law1 7in the higher classes of ,england 
probably a great majority17 live in the 
spirit of a just law of equality4 ,laws 
never would be improved1 if there were  
not numerous persons whose moral        
sentiments are better than the existing 
laws4 ,such persons ought to support the
 principles here advocated2 of which the
 only object is to make all other       
married couples similar to what these   
are now4 ,but persons even of           
considerable moral worth1 unless they   
are also thinkers1 are very ready to    
believe that laws or practices1 the     
evils of which they have not personally 
experienced1 do not produce any evils1  
but 7if seeming to be generally approved
 of7 probably do good1 and that it is   
wrong to object to them4 ,it would1     
however1 be a great mistake in such     
married people to suppose1 because the  
legal conditions of the tie which unites
 them do not occur to their thoughts    
once in a twelvemonth1 and because they 

live and feel in all respects as if they
 were legally equals1 that the same is  
the case with all other married couples1
 wherever the husband is not a notorious
 ruffian4 ,to suppose this1 would be to 
show equal ignorance of human nature and
 of fact4 ,the less fit a man is for the
 possession of power--the less likely to
 be allowed to exercise it over any     
person with that person's voluntary     
consent--the more does he hug himself in
 the consciousness of the power the law 
gives him1 exact its legal rights to the
 utmost point which custom 7the custom  
of men like himself7 will tolerate1 and 
take pleasure in using the power1 merely
 to enliven the agreeable sense of      
possessing it4 ,what is more2 in the    
most naturally brutal and morally       
uneducated part of the lower classes1   
the legal slavery of the woman1 and     
something in the merely physical        
subjection to their will as an          
instrument1 causes them to feel a sort  
of disrespect and contempt towards their

 own wife which they do not feel towards
 any other woman1 or any other human    
being1 with whom they come in contact2  
and which makes her seem to them an     
appropriate subject for any kind of     
indignity4 ,let an acute observer of the
 signs of feeling1 who has the requisite
 opportunities1 judge for himself       
whether this is not the case3 and if he 
finds that it is1 let him not wonder at 
any amount of disgust and indignation   
that can be felt against institutions   
which lead naturally to this depraved   
state of the human mind4  ,we shall be  
told1 perhaps1 that religion imposes the
 duty of obedience2 as every established
 fact which is too bad to admit of any  
other defence1 is always presented to us
 as an injunction of religion4 ,the     
,church1 it is very true1 enjoins it in 
her formularies1 but it would be        
difficult to derive any such injunction 
from ,christianity4 ,we are told that   
,st4 ,paul said1 ,wives1 obey your      
husbands3 but he also said1 ,slaves1    

obey your masters4 ,it was not ,st4     
,paul's business1 nor was it consistent 
with his object1 the propagation of     
,christianity1 to incite any one to     
rebellion against existing laws4 ,the   
apostle's acceptance of all social      
institutions as he found them1 is no    
more to be construed as a disapproval of
 attempts to improve them at the proper 
time1 than his declaration1 ,the powers 
that be are ordained of ,god1 gives his 
sanction to military despotism1 and to  
that alone1 as the ,christian form of   
political government1 or commands       
passive obedience to it4 ,to pretend    
that ,christianity was intended to      
stereotype existing forms of government 
and society1 and protect them against   
change1 is to reduce it to the level of 
,islamism or of ,brahminism4 ,it is     
precisely because ,christianity has not 
done this1 that it has been the religion
 of the progressive portion of mankind1 
and ,islamism1 ,brahminism1 c41 have    
been those of the stationary portions2  

or rather 7for there is no such thing as
 a really stationary society7 of the    
declining portions4 ,there have been    
abundance of people1 in all ages of     
,christianity1 who tried to make it     
something of the same kind2 to convert  
us into a sort of ,christian            
,mussulmans1 with the ,bible for a      
,koran1 prohibiting all improvement3 and
 great has been their power1 and many   
have had to sacrifice their lives in    
resisting them4 ,but they have been     
resisted1 and the resistance has made us
 what we are1 and will yet make us what 
we are to be4  ,after what has been said
 respecting the obligation of obedience1
 it is almost superfluous to say        
anything concerning the more special    
point included in the general one--a    
woman's right to her own property2 for  
,i need not hope that this treatise can 
make any impression upon those who need 
anything to convince them that a woman's
 inheritance or gains ought to be as    
much her own after marriage as before4  

,the rule is simple3 whatever would be  
the husband's or wife's if they were not
 married1 should be under their         
exclusive control during marriage2 which
 need not interfere with the power to   
tie up property by settlement1 in order 
to preserve it for children4 ,some      
people are sentimentally shocked at the 
idea of a separate interest in money    
matters1 as inconsistent with the ideal 
fusion of two lives into one4 ,for my   
own part1 ,i am one of the strongest    
supporters of community of goods1 when  
resulting from an entire unity of       
feeling in the owners1 which makes all  
things common between them4 ,but ,i have
 no relish for a community of goods     
resting on the doctrine1 that what is   
mine is yours but what is yours is not  
mine2 and ,i should prefer to decline   
entering into such a compact with any   
one1 though ,i were myself the person to
 profit by it4  ,this particular        
injustice and oppression to women1 which
 is1 to common apprehensions1 more      

obvious than all the rest1 admits of    
remedy without interfering with any     
other mischiefs3 and there can be little
 doubt that it will be one of the       
earliest remedied4 ,already1 in many of 
the new and several of the old ,states  
of the ,american ,confederation1        
provisions have been inserted even in   
the written ,constitutions1 securing to 
women equality of rights in this        
respect3 and thereby improving          
materially the position1 in the marriage
 relation1 of those women at least who  
have property1 by leaving them one      
instrument of power which they have not 
signed away2 and preventing also the    
scandalous abuse of the marriage        
institution1 which is perpetrated when a
 man entraps a girl into marrying him   
without a settlement1 for the sole      
purpose of getting possession of her    
money4 ,when the support of the family  
depends1 not on property1 but on        
earnings1 the common arrangement1 by    
which the man earns the income and the  

wife superintends the domestic          
expenditure1 seems to me in general the 
most suitable division of labour between
 the two persons4 ,if1 in addition to   
the physical suffering of bearing       
children1 and the whole responsibility  
of their care and education in early    
years1 the wife undertakes the careful  
and economical application of the       
husband's earnings to the general       
comfort of the family2 she takes not    
only her fair share1 but usually the    
larger share1 of the bodily and mental  
exertion required by their joint        
existence4 ,if she undertakes any       
additional portion1 it seldom relieves  
her from this1 but only prevents her    
from performing it properly4 ,the care  
which she is herself disabled from      
taking of the children and the          
household1 nobody else takes2 those of  
the children who do not die1 grow up as 
they best can1 and the management of the
 household is likely to be so bad1 as   
even in point of economy to be a great  

drawback from the value of the wife's   
earnings4 ,in an otherwise just state of
 things1 it is not1 therefore1 ,i think1
 a desirable custom1 that the wife      
should contribute by her labour to the  
income of the family4 ,in an unjust     
state of things1 her doing so may be    
useful to her1 by making her of more    
value in the eyes of the man who is     
legally her master2 but1 on the other   
hand1 it enables him still farther to   
abuse his power1 by forcing her to work1
 and leaving the support of the family  
to her exertions1 while he spends most  
of his time in drinking and idleness4   
,the power of earning is essential to   
the dignity of a woman1 if she has not  
independent property4 ,but if marriage  
were an equal contract1 not implying the
 obligation of obedience2 if the        
connexion were no longer enforced to the
 oppression of those to whom it is      
purely a mischief1 but a separation1 on 
just terms 7,i do not now speak of a    
divorce71 could be obtained by any woman

 who was morally entitled to it2 and if 
she would then find all honourable      
employments as freely open to her as to 
men2 it would not be necessary for her  
protection1 that during marriage she    
should make this particular use of her  
faculties4 ,like a man when he chooses a
 profession1 so1 when a woman marries1  
it may in general be understood that she
 makes choice of the management of a    
household1 and the bringing up of a     
family1 as the first call upon her      
exertions1 during as many years of her  
life as may be required for the purpose2
 and that she renounces1 not all other  
objects and occupations1 but all which  
are not consistent with the requirements
 of this4 ,the actual exercise1 in a    
habitual or systematic manner1 of       
outdoor occupations1 or such as cannot  
be carried on at home1 would by this    
principle be practically interdicted to 
the greater number of married women4    
,but the utmost latitude ought to exist 
for the adaptation of general rules to  

individual suitabilities2 and there     
ought to be nothing to prevent faculties
 exceptionally adapted to any other     
pursuit1 from obeying their vocation    
notwithstanding marriage3 due provision 
being made for supplying otherwise any  
falling-short which might become        
inevitable1 in her full performance of  
the ordinary functions of mistress of a 
family4 ,these things1 if once opinion  
were rightly directed on the subject1   
might with perfect safety be left to be 
regulated by opinion1 without any       
interference of law4     ,,chapter      
,,iii4   ,on the other point which is   
involved in the just equality of women1 
their admissibility to all the functions
 and occupations hitherto retained as   
the monopoly of the stronger sex1 ,i    
should anticipate no difficulty in      
convincing any one who has gone with me 
on the subject of the equality of women 
in the family4 ,i believe that their    
disabilities elsewhere are only clung to
 in order to maintain their             

subordination in domestic life2 because 
the generality of the male sex cannot   
yet tolerate the idea of living with an 
equal4 ,were it not for that1 ,i think  
that almost every one1 in the existing  
state of opinion in politics and        
political economy1 would admit the      
injustice of excluding half the human   
race from the greater number of         
lucrative occupations1 and from almost  
all high social functions2 ordaining    
from their birth either that they are   
not1 and cannot by any possibility      
become1 fit for employments which are   
legally open to the stupidest and basest
 of the other sex1 or else that however 
fit they may be1 those employments shall
 be interdicted to them1 in order to be 
preserved for the exclusive benefit of  
males4 ,in the last two centuries1 when 
7which was seldom the case7 any reason  
beyond the mere existence of the fact   
was thought to be required to justify   
the disabilities of women1 people seldom
 assigned as a reason their inferior    

mental capacity2 which1 in times when   
there was a real trial of personal      
faculties 7from which all women were not
 excluded7 in the struggles of public   
life1 no one really believed in4 ,the   
reason given in those days was not      
women's unfitness1 but the interest of  
society1 by which was meant the interest
 of men3 just as the raison d'etat1     
meaning the convenience of the          
government1 and the support of existing 
authority1 was deemed a sufficient      
explanation and excuse for the most     
flagitious crimes4 ,in the present day1 
power holds a smoother language1 and    
whomsoever it oppresses1 always pretends
 to do so for their own good3           
accordingly1 when anything is forbidden 
to women1 it is thought necessary to    
say1 and desirable to believe1 that they
 are incapable of doing it1 and that    
they depart from their real path of     
success and happiness when they aspire  
to it4 ,but to make this reason         
plausible 7,i do not say valid71 those  

by whom it is urged must be prepared to 
carry it to a much greater length than  
any one ventures to do in the face of   
present experience4 ,it is not          
sufficient to maintain that women on the
 average are less gifted than men on the
 average1 with certain of the higher    
mental faculties1 or that a smaller     
number of women than of men are fit for 
occupations and functions of the highest
 intellectual character4 ,it is         
necessary to maintain that no women at  
all are fit for them1 and that the most 
eminent women are inferior in mental    
faculties to the most mediocre of the   
men on whom those functions at present  
devolve4 ,for if the performance of the 
function is decided either by           
competition1 or by any mode of choice   
which secures regard to the public      
interest1 there needs be no apprehension
 that any important employments will    
fall into the hands of women inferior to
 average men1 or to the average of their
 male competitors4 ,the only result     

would be that there would be fewer women
 than men in such employments2 a result 
certain to happen in any ease1 if only  
from the preference always likely to be 
felt by the majority of women for the   
one vocation in which there is nobody to
 compete with them4 ,now1 the most      
determined depreciator of women will not
 venture to deny1 that when we add the  
experience of recent times to that of   
ages past1 women1 and not a few merely1 
but many women1 have proved themselves  
capable of everything1 perhaps without a
 single exception1 which is done by men1
 and of doing it successfully and       
creditably4 ,the utmost that can be said
 is1 that there are many things which   
none of them have succeeded in doing as 
well as they have been done by some     
men--many in which they have not reached
 the very highest rank4 ,but there are  
extremely few1 dependent only on mental 
faculties1 in which they have not       
attained the rank next to the highest4  
,is not this enough1 and much more than 

enough1 to make it a tyranny to them1   
and a detriment to society1 that they   
should not be allowed to compete with   
men for the exercise of these functions8
 ,is it not a mere truism to say1 that  
such functions are often filled by men  
far less fit for them than numbers of   
women1 and who would be beaten by women 
in any fair field of competition8 ,what 
difference does it make that there may  
be men somewhere1 fully employed about  
other things1 who may be still better   
qualified for the things in question    
than these women8 ,does not this take   
place in all competitions8 ,is there so 
great a superfluity of men fit for high 
duties1 that society can afford to      
reject the service of any competent     
person8 ,are we so certain of always    
finding a man made to our hands for any 
duty or function of social importance   
which falls vacant1 that we lose nothing
 by putting a ban upon one-half of      
mankind1 and refusing beforehand to make
 their faculties available1 however     

distinguished they may be8 ,and even if 
we could do without them1 would it be   
consistent with justice to refuse to    
them their fair share of honour and     
distinction1 or to deny to them the     
equal moral right of all human beings to
 choose their occupation 7short of      
injury to others7 according to their own
 preferences1 at their own risk8 ,nor is
 the injustice confined to them3 it is  
shared by those who are in a position to
 benefit by their services4 ,to ordain  
that any kind of persons shall not be   
physicians1 or shall not be advocates1  
or shall not be members of parliament1  
is to injure not them only1 but all who 
employ physicians or advocates1 or elect
 members of parliament1 and who are     
deprived of the stimulating effect of   
greater competition on the exertions of 
the competitors1 as well as restricted  
to a narrower range of individual       
choice4  ,it will perhaps be sufficient 
if ,i confine myself1 in the details of 
my argument1 to functions of a public   

nature3 since1 if ,i am successful as to
 those1 it probably will be readily     
granted that women should be admissible 
to all other occupations to which it is 
at all material whether they are        
admitted or not4 ,and here let me begin 
by marking out one function1 broadly    
distinguished from all others1 their    
right to which is entirely independent  
of any question which can be raised     
concerning their faculties4 ,i mean the 
suffrage1 both parliamentary and        
municipal4 ,the right to share in the   
choice of those who are to exercise a   
public trust1 is altogether a distinct  
thing from that of competing for the    
trust itself4 ,if no one could vote for 
a member of parliament who was not fit  
to be a candidate1 the government would 
be a narrow oligarchy indeed4 ,to have a
 voice in choosing those by whom one is 
to be governed1 is a means of           
self-protection due to every one1 though
 he were to remain for ever excluded    
from the function of governing3 and that

 women are considered fit to have such a
 choice1 may be presumed from the fact1 
that the law already gives it to women  
in the most important of all cases to   
themselves3 for the choice of the man   
who is to govern a woman to the end of  
life1 is always supposed to be          
voluntarily made by herself4 ,in the    
case of election to public trusts1 it is
 the business of constitutional law to  
surround the right of suffrage with all 
needful securities and limitations2 but 
whatever securities are sufficient in   
the case of the male sex1 no others need
 be required in the case of women4      
,under whatever conditions1 and within  
whatever limits1 men are admitted to the
 suffrage1 there is not a shadow of     
justification for not admitting women   
under the same4 ,the majority of the    
women of any class are not likely to    
differ in political opinion from the    
majority of the men of the same class1  
unless the question be one in which the 
interests of women1 as such1 are in some

 way involved2 and if they are so1 women
 require the suffrage1 as their         
guarantee of just and equal             
consideration4 ,this ought to be obvious
 even to those who coincide in no other 
of the doctrines for which ,i contend4  
,even if every woman were a wife1 and if
 every wife ought to be a slave1 all the
 more would these slaves stand in need  
of legal protection3 and we know what   
legal protection the slaves have1 where 
the laws are made by their masters4     
,with regard to the fitness of women1   
not only to participate in elections1   
but themselves to hold offices or       
practise professions involving important
 public responsibilities2 ,i have       
already observed that this consideration
 is not essential to the practical      
question in dispute3 since any woman1   
who succeeds in an open profession1     
proves by that very fact that she is    
qualified for it4 ,and in the case of   
public offices1 if the political system 
of the country is such as to exclude    

unfit men1 it will equally exclude unfit
 women3 while if it is not1 there is no 
additional evil in the fact that the    
unfit persons whom it admits may be     
either women or men4 ,as long therefore 
as it is acknowledged that even a few   
women may be fit for these duties1 the  
laws which shut the door on those       
exceptions cannot be justified by any   
opinion which can be held respecting the
 capacities of women in general4 ,but1  
though this last consideration is not   
essential1 it is far from being         
irrelevant4 ,an unprejudiced view of it 
gives additional strength to the        
arguments against the disabilities of   
women1 and reinforces them by high      
considerations of practical utility4    
,let us at first make entire abstraction
 of all psychological considerations    
tending to show1 that any of the mental 
differences supposed to exist between   
women and men are but the natural effect
 of the differences in their education  
and circumstances1 and indicate no      

radical difference1 far less radical    
inferiority1 of nature4 ,let us consider
 women only as they already are1 or as  
they are known to have been2 and the    
capacities which they have already      
practically shown4 ,what they have done1
 that at least1 if nothing else1 it is  
proved that they can do4 ,when we       
consider how sedulously they are all    
trained away from1 instead of being     
trained towards1 any of the occupations 
or objects reserved for men1 it is      
evident that ,i am taking a very humble 
ground for them1 when ,i rest their case
 on what they have actually achieved4   
,for1 in this case1 negative evidence is
 worth little1 while any positive       
evidence is conclusive4 ,it cannot be   
inferred to be impossible that a woman  
should be a ,homer1 or an ,aristotle1 or
 a ,michael ,angelo1 or a ,beethoven1   
because no woman has yet actually       
produced works comparable to theirs in  
any of those lines of excellence4 ,this 
negative fact at most leaves the        

question uncertain1 and open to         
psychological discussion4 ,but it is    
quite certain that a woman can be a     
,queen ,elizabeth1 or a ,deborah1 or a  
,joan of ,arc1 since this is not        
inference1 but fact4 ,now it is a       
curious consideration1 that the only    
things which the existing law excludes  
women from doing1 are the things which  
they have proved that they are able to  
do4 ,there is no law to prevent a woman 
from having written all the plays of    
,shakspeare1 or composed all the operas 
of ,mozart4 ,but ,queen ,elizabeth or   
,queen ,victoria1 had they not inherited
 the throne1 could not have been        
intrusted with the smallest of the      
political duties1 of which the former   
showed herself equal to the greatest4   
,if anything conclusive could be        
inferred from experience1 without       
psychological analysis1 it would be that
 the things which women are not allowed 
to do are the very ones for which they  
are peculiarly qualified2 since their   

vocation for government has made its    
way1 and become conspicuous1 through the
 very few opportunities which have been 
given2 while in the lines of distinction
 which apparently were freely open to   
them1 they have by no means so eminently
 distinguished themselves4 ,we know how 
small a number of reigning queens       
history presents1 in comparison with    
that of kings4 ,of this smaller number a
 far larger proportion have shown       
talents for rule2 though many of them   
have occupied the throne in difficult   
periods4 ,it is remarkable1 too1 that   
they have1 in a great number of         
instances1 been distinguished by merits 
the most opposite to the imaginary and  
conventional character of women3 they   
have been as much remarked for the      
firmness and vigour of their rule1 as   
for its intelligence4 ,when1 to queens  
and empresses1 we add regents1 and      
viceroys of provinces1 the list of women
 who have been eminent rulers of mankind
 swells to a great length4#a ,this fact 

is so undeniable1 that some one1 long   
ago1 tried to retort the argument1 and  
turned the admitted truth into an       
additional insult1 by saying that queens
 are better than kings1 because under   
kings women govern1 but under queens1   
men4  ,it may seem a waste of reasoning 
to argue against a bad joke2 but such   
things do affect people's minds2 and ,i 
have heard men quote this saying1 with  
an air as if they thought that there was
 something in it4 ,at any rate1 it will 
serve as well as anything else for a    
starting point in discussion4 ,i say1   
then1 that it is not true that under    
kings1 women govern4 ,such cases are    
entirely exceptional3 and weak kings    
have quite as often governed ill through
 the influence of male favourites1 as of
 female4 ,when a king is governed by a  
woman merely through his amatory        
propensities1 good government is not    
probable1 though even then there are    
exceptions4 ,but ,french history counts 
two kings who have voluntarily given the

 direction of affairs during many years1
 the one to his mother1 the other to his
 sister3 one of them1 ,charles ,,viii41 
was a mere boy1 but in doing so he      
followed the intentions of his father   
,louis ,,xi41 the ablest monarch of his 
age4 ,the other1 ,saint ,louis1 was the 
best1 and one of the most vigorous      
rulers1 since the time of ,charlemagne4 
,both these princesses ruled in a manner
 hardly equalled by any prince among    
their contemporaries4 ,the emperor      
,charles the ,fifth1 the most politic   
prince of his time1 who had as great a  
number of able men in his service as a  
ruler ever had1 and was one of the least
 likely of all sovereigns to sacrifice  
his interest to personal feelings1 made 
two princesses of his family            
successively ,governors of the          
,netherlands1 and kept one or other of  
them in that post during his whole life1
 7they were afterwards succeeded by a   
third74 ,both ruled very successfully1  
and one of them1 ,margaret of ,austria1 

was one of the ablest politicians of the
 age4 ,so much for one side of the      
question4 ,now as to the other4 ,when it
 is said that under queens men govern1  
is the same meaning to be understood as 
when kings are said to be governed by   
women8 ,is it meant that queens choose  
as their instruments of government1 the 
associates of their personal pleasures8 
,the case is rare even with those who   
are as unscrupulous on the latter point 
as ,catherine ,,ii43 and it is not in   
these cases that the good government1   
alleged to arise from male influence1 is
 to be found4 ,if it be true1 then1 that
 the administration is in the hands of  
better men under a queen than under an  
average king1 it must be that queens    
have a superior capacity for choosing   
them2 and women must be better qualified
 than men both for the position of      
sovereign1 and for that of chief        
minister2 for the principal business of 
a prime minister is not to govern in    
person1 but to find the fittest persons 

to conduct every department of public   
affairs4 ,the more rapid insight into   
character1 which is one of the admitted 
points of superiority in women over men1
 must certainly make them1 with anything
 like parity of qualifications in other 
respects1 more apt than men in that     
choice of instruments1 which is nearly  
the most important business of every one
 who has to do with governing mankind4  
,even the unprincipled ,catherine de'   
,medici could feel the value of a       
,chancellor de l',hopital4 ,but it is   
also true that most great queens have   
been great by their own talents for     
government1 and have been well served   
precisely for that reason4 ,they        
retained the supreme direction of       
affairs in their own hands3 and if they 
listened to good advisers1 they gave by 
that fact the strongest proof that their
 judgment fitted them for dealing with  
the great questions of government4  ,is 
it reasonable to think that those who   
are fit for the greater functions of    

politics1 are incapable of qualifying   
themselves for the less8 ,is there any  
reason in the nature of things1 that the
 wives and sisters of princes should1   
whenever called on1 be found as         
competent as the princes themselves to  
their business1 but that the wives and  
sisters of statesmen1 and               
administrators1 and directors of        
companies1 and managers of public       
institutions1 should be unable to do    
what is done by their brothers and      
husbands8 ,the real reason is plain     
enough2 it is that princesses1 being    
more raised above the generality of men 
by their rank than placed below them by 
their sex1 have never been taught that  
it was improper for them to concern     
themselves with politics2 but have been 
allowed to feel the liberal interest    
natural to any cultivated human being1  
in the great transactions which took    
place around them1 and in which they    
might be called on to take a part4 ,the 
ladies of reigning families are the only

 women who are allowed the same range of
 interests and freedom of development as
 men2 and it is precisely in their case 
that there is not found to be any       
inferiority4 ,exactly where and in      
proportion as women's capacities for    
government have been tried1 in that     
proportion have they been found         
adequate4  ,this fact is in accordance  
with the best general conclusions which 
the world's imperfect experience seems  
as yet to suggest1 concerning the       
peculiar tendencies and aptitudes       
characteristic of women1 as women have  
hitherto been4 ,i do not say1 as they   
will continue to be2 for1 as ,i have    
already said more than once1 ,i consider
 it presumption in any one to pretend to
 decide what women are or are not1 can  
or cannot be1 by natural constitution4  
,they have always hitherto been kept1 as
 far as regards spontaneous development1
 in so unnatural a state1 that their    
nature cannot but have been greatly     
distorted and disguised2 and no one can 

safely pronounce that if women's nature 
were left to choose its direction as    
freely as men's1 and if no artificial   
bent were attempted to be given to it   
except that required by the conditions  
of human society1 and given to both     
sexes alike1 there would be any material
 difference1 or perhaps any difference  
at all1 in the character and capacities 
which would unfold themselves4 ,i shall 
presently show1 that even the least     
contestable of the differences which now
 exist1 are such as may very well have  
been produced merely by circumstances1  
without any difference of natural       
capacity4 ,but1 looking at women as they
 are known in experience1 it may be said
 of them1 with more truth than belongs  
to most other generalizations on the    
subject1 that the general bent of their 
talents is towards the practical4 ,this 
statement is conformable to all the     
public history of women1 in the present 
and the past4 ,it is no less borne out  
by common and daily experience4 ,let us 

consider the special nature of the      
mental capacities most characteristic of
 a woman of talent4 ,they are all of a  
kind which fits them for practice1 and  
makes them tend towards it4 ,what is    
meant by a woman's capacity of intuitive
 perception8 ,it means1 a rapid and     
correct insight into present fact4 ,it  
has nothing to do with general          
principles4 ,nobody ever perceived a    
scientific law of nature by intuition1  
nor arrived at a general rule of duty or
 prudence by it4 ,these are results of  
slow and careful collection and         
comparison of experience2 and neither   
the men nor the women of intuition      
usually shine in this department1       
unless1 indeed1 the experience necessary
 is such as they can acquire by         
themselves4 ,for what is called their   
intuitive sagacity makes them peculiarly
 apt in gathering such general truths as
 can be collected from their individual 
means of observation4 ,when1            
consequently1 they chance to be as well 

provided as men are with the results of 
other people's experience1 by reading   
and education1 7,i use the word chance  
advisedly1 for1 in respect to the       
knowledge that tends to fit them for the
 greater concerns of life1 the only     
educated women are the self-educated7   
they are better furnished than men in   
general with the essential requisites of
 skilful and successful practice4 ,men  
who have been much taught1 are apt to be
 deficient in the sense of present fact2
 they do not see1 in the facts which    
they are called upon to deal with1 what 
is really there1 but what they have been
 taught to expect4 ,this is seldom the  
case with women of any ability4 ,their  
capacity of intuition preserves them    
from it4 ,with equality of experience   
and of general faculties1 a woman       
usually sees much more than a man of    
what is immediately before her4 ,now    
this sensibility to the present1 is the 
main quality on which the capacity for  
practice1 as distinguished from theory1 

depends4 ,to discover general           
principles1 belongs to the speculative  
faculty3 to discern and discriminate the
 particular cases in which they are and 
are not applicable1 constitutes         
practical talent3 and for this1 women as
 they now are have a peculiar aptitude4 
,i admit that there can be no good      
practice without principles1 and that   
the predominant place which quickness of
 observation holds among a woman's      
faculties1 makes her particularly apt to
 build over-hasty generalizations upon  
her own observation2 though at the same 
time no less ready in rectifying those  
generalizations1 as her observation     
takes a wider range4 ,but the corrective
 to this defect1 is access to the       
experience of the human race2 general   
knowledge--exactly the thing which      
education can best supply4 ,a woman's   
mistakes are specifically those of a    
clever self-educated man1 who often sees
 what men trained in routine do not see1
 but falls into errors for want of      

knowing things which have long been     
known4 ,of course he has acquired much  
of the pre-existing knowledge1 or he    
could not have got on at all2 but what  
he knows of it he has picked up in      
fragments and at random1 as women do4   
,but this gravitation of women's minds  
to the present1 to the real1 to actual  
fact1 while in its exclusiveness it is a
 source of errors1 is also a most useful
 counteractive of the contrary error4   
,the principal and most characteristic  
aberration of speculative minds as such1
 consists precisely in the deficiency of
 this lively perception and ever-present
 sense of objective fact4 ,for want of  
this1 they often not only overlook the  
contradiction which outward facts oppose
 to their theories1 but lose sight of   
the legitimate purpose of speculation   
altogether1 and let their speculative   
faculties go astray into regions not    
peopled with real beings1 animate or    
inanimate1 even idealized1 but with     
personified shadows created by the      

illusions of metaphysics or by the mere 
entanglement of words1 and think these  
shadows the proper objects of the       
highest1 the most transcendant1         
philosophy4 ,hardly anything can be of  
greater value to a man of theory and    
speculation who employs himself not in  
collecting materials of knowledge by    
observation1 but in working them up by  
processes of thought into comprehensive 
truths of science and laws of conduct1  
than to carry on his speculations in the
 companionship1 and under the criticism1
 of a really superior woman4 ,there is  
nothing comparable to it for keeping his
 thoughts within the limits of real     
things1 and the actual facts of nature4 
,a woman seldom runs wild after an      
abstraction4 ,the habitual direction of 
her mind to dealing with things as      
individuals rather than in groups1 and  
7what is closely connected with it7 her 
more lively interest in the present     
feelings of persons1 which makes her    
consider first of all1 in anything which

 claims to be applied to practice1 in   
what manner persons will be affected by 
it--these two things make her extremely 
unlikely to put faith in any speculation
 which loses sight of individuals1 and  
deals with things as if they existed for
 the benefit of some imaginary entity1  
some mere creation of the mind1 not     
resolvable into the feelings of living  
beings4 ,women's thoughts are thus as   
useful in giving reality to those of    
thinking men1 as men's thoughts in      
giving width and largeness to those of  
women4 ,in depth1 as distinguished from 
breadth1 ,i greatly doubt if even now1  
women1 compared with men1 are at any    
disadvantage4  ,if the existing mental  
characteristics of women are thus       
valuable even in aid of speculation1    
they are still more important1 when     
speculation has done its work1 for      
carrying out the results of speculation 
into practice4 ,for the reasons already 
given1 women are comparatively unlikely 
to fall into the common error of men1   

that of sticking to their rules in a    
case whose specialities either take it  
out of the class to which the rules are 
applicable1 or require a special        
adaptation of them4 ,let us now consider
 another of the admitted superiorities  
of clever women1 greater quickness of   
apprehension4 ,is not this pre-eminently
 a quality which fits a person for      
practice8 ,in action1 everything        
continually depends upon deciding       
promptly4 ,in speculation1 nothing does4
 ,a mere thinker can wait1 can take time
 to consider1 can collect additional    
evidence2 he is not obliged to complete 
his philosophy at once1 lest the        
opportunity should go by4 ,the power of 
drawing the best conclusion possible    
from insufficient data is not indeed    
useless in philosophy2 the construction 
of a provisional hypothesis consistent  
with all known facts is often the       
needful basis for further inquiry4 ,but 
this faculty is rather serviceable in   
philosophy1 than the main qualification 

for it3 and1 for the auxiliary as well  
as for the main operation1 the          
philosopher can allow himself any time  
he pleases4 ,he is in no need of the    
capacity of doing rapidly what he does2 
what he rather needs is patience1 to    
work on slowly until imperfect lights   
have become perfect1 and a conjecture   
has ripened into a theorem4 ,for those1 
on the contrary1 whose business is with 
the fugitive and perishable--with       
individual facts1 not kinds of          
facts--rapidity of thought is a         
qualification next only in importance to
 the power of thought itself4 ,he who   
has not his faculties under immediate   
command1 in the contingencies of action1
 might as well not have them at all4 ,he
 may be fit to criticize1 but he is not 
fit to act4 ,now it is in this that     
women1 and the men who are most like    
women1 confessedly excel4 ,the other    
sort of man1 however pre-eminent may be 
his faculties1 arrives slowly at        
complete command of them3 rapidity of   

judgment and promptitude of judicious   
action1 even in the things he knows     
best1 are the gradual and late result of
 strenuous effort grown into habit4  ,it
 will be said1 perhaps1 that the greater
 nervous susceptibility of women is a   
disqualification for practice1 in       
anything but domestic life1 by rendering
 them mobile1 changeable1 too vehemently
 under the influence of the moment1     
incapable of dogged perseverance1       
unequal and uncertain in the power of   
using their faculties4 ,i think that    
these phrases sum up the greater part of
 the objections commonly made to the    
fitness of women for the higher class of
 serious business4 ,much of all this is 
the mere overflow of nervous energy run 
to waste1 and would cease when the      
energy was directed to a definite end4  
,much is also the result of conscious or
 unconscious cultivation2 as we see by  
the almost total disappearance of       
hysterics and fainting fits1 since they 
have gone out of fashion4 ,moreover1    

when people are brought up1 like many   
women of the higher classes 7though less
 so in our own country than in any      
other7 a kind of hot-house plants1      
shielded from the wholesome vicissitudes
 of air and temperature1 and untrained  
in any of the occupations and exercises 
which give stimulus and development to  
the circulatory and muscular system1    
while their nervous system1 especially  
in its emotional department1 is kept in 
unnaturally active play2 it is no wonder
 if those of them who do not die of     
consumption1 grow up with constitutions 
liable to derangement from slight       
causes1 both internal and external1 and 
without stamina to support any task1    
physical or mental1 requiring continuity
 of effort4 ,but women brought up to    
work for their livelihood show none of  
these morbid characteristics1 unless    
indeed they are chained to an excess of 
sedentary work in confined and unhealthy
 rooms4 ,women who in their early years 
have shared in the healthful physical   

education and bodily freedom of their   
brothers1 and who obtain a sufficiency  
of pure air and exercise in after-life1 
very rarely have any excessive          
susceptibility of nerves which can      
disqualify them for active pursuits4    
,there is indeed a certain proportion of
 persons1 in both sexes1 in whom an     
unusual degree of nervous sensibility is
 constitutional1 and of so marked a     
character as to be the feature of their 
organization which exercises the        
greatest influence over the whole       
character of the vital phenomena4 ,this 
constitution1 like other physical       
conformations1 is hereditary1 and is    
transmitted to sons as well as          
daughters2 but it is possible1 and      
probable1 that the nervous temperament  
7as it is called7 is inherited by a     
greater number of women than of men4 ,we
 will assume this as a fact3 and let me 
then ask1 are men of nervous temperament
 found to be unfit for the duties and   
pursuits usually followed by men8 ,if   

not1 why should women of the same       
temperament be unfit for them8 ,the     
peculiarities of the temperament are1 no
 doubt1 within certain limits1 an       
obstacle to success in some employments1
 though an aid to it in others4 ,but    
when the occupation is suitable to the  
temperament1 and sometimes even when it 
is unsuitable1 the most brilliant       
examples of success are continually     
given by the men of high nervous        
sensibility4 ,they are distinguished in 
their practical manifestations chiefly  
by this1 that being susceptible of a    
higher degree of excitement than those  
of another physical constitution1 their 
powers when excited differ more than in 
the case of other people1 from those    
shown in their ordinary state3 they are 
raised1 as it were1 above themselves1   
and do things with ease which they are  
wholly incapable of at other times4 ,but
 this lofty excitement is not1 except in
 weak bodily constitutions1 a mere      
flash1 which passes away immediately1   

leaving no permanent traces1 and        
incompatible with persistent and steady 
pursuit of an object4 ,it is the        
character of the nervous temperament to 
be capable of sustained excitement1     
holding out through long continued      
efforts4 ,it is what is meant by spirit4
 ,it is what makes the high-bred        
racehorse run without slackening speed  
till he drops down dead4 ,it is what has
 enabled so many delicate women to      
maintain the most sublime constancy not 
only at the stake1 but through a long   
preliminary succession of mental and    
bodily tortures4 ,it is evident that    
people of this temperament are          
particularly apt for what may be called 
the executive department of the         
leadership of mankind4 ,they are the    
material of great orators1 great        
preachers1 impressive diffusers of moral
 influences4 ,their constitution might  
be deemed less favourable to the        
qualities required from a statesman in  
the cabinet1 or from a judge4 ,it would 

be so1 if the consequence necessarily   
followed that because people are        
excitable they must always be in a state
 of excitement4 ,but this is wholly a   
question of training4 ,strong feeling is
 the instrument and element of strong   
self-control3 but it requires to be     
cultivated in that direction4 ,when it  
is1 it forms not the heroes of impulse  
only1 but those also of self-conquest4  
,history and experience prove that the  
most passionate characters are the most 
fanatically rigid in their feelings of  
duty1 when their passion has been       
trained to act in that direction4 ,the  
judge who gives a just decision in a    
case where his feelings are intensely   
interested on the other side1 derives   
from that same strength of feeling the  
determined sense of the obligation of   
justice1 which enables him to achieve   
this victory over himself4 ,the         
capability of that lofty enthusiasm     
which takes the human being out of his  
every-day character1 reacts upon the    

daily character itself4 ,his aspirations
 and powers when he is in this          
exceptional state1 become the type with 
which he compares1 and by which he      
estimates1 his sentiments and           
proceedings at other times3 and his     
habitual purposes assume a character    
moulded by and assimilated to the       
moments of lofty excitement1 although   
those1 from the physical nature of a    
human being1 can only be transient4     
,experience of races1 as well as of     
individuals1 does not show those of     
excitable temperament to be less fit1 on
 the average1 either for speculation or 
practice1 than the more unexcitable4    
,the ,french1 and the ,italians1 are    
undoubtedly by nature more nervously    
excitable than the ,teutonic races1 and1
 compared at least with the ,english1   
they have a much greater habitual and   
daily emotional life3 but have they been
 less great in science1 in public       
business1 in legal and judicial         
eminence1 or in war8 ,there is abundant 

evidence that the ,greeks were of old1  
as their descendants and successors     
still are1 one of the most excitable of 
the races of mankind4 ,it is superfluous
 to ask1 what among the achievements of 
men they did not excel in4 ,the ,romans1
 probably1 as an equally southern       
people1 had the same original           
temperament3 but the stern character of 
their national discipline1 like that of 
the ,spartans1 made them an example of  
the opposite type of national character2
 the greater strength of their natural  
feelings being chiefly apparent in the  
intensity which the same original       
temperament made it possible to give to 
the artificial4 ,if these cases         
exemplify what a naturally excitable    
people may be made1 the ,irish ,celts   
afford one of the aptest examples of    
what they are when left to themselves2  
7if those can be said to be left to     
themselves who have been for centuries  
under the indirect influence of bad     
government1 and the direct training of a

 ,catholic hierarchy and of a sincere   
belief in the ,catholic religion47 ,the 
,irish character must be considered1    
therefore1 as an unfavourable case3 yet1
 whenever the circumstances of the      
individual have been at all favourable1 
what people have shown greater capacity 
for the most varied and multifarious    
individual eminence8 ,like the ,french  
compared with the ,english1 the ,irish  
with the ,swiss1 the ,greeks or         
,italians compared with the ,german     
races1 so women compared with men may be
 found1 on the average1 to do the same  
things with some variety in the         
particular kind of excellence4 ,but1    
that they would do them fully as well on
 the whole1 if their education and      
cultivation were adapted to correcting  
instead of aggravating the infirmities  
incident to their temperament1 ,i see   
not the smallest reason to doubt4       
,supposing it1 however1 to be true that 
women's minds are by nature more mobile 
than those of men1 less capable of      

persisting long in the same continuous  
effort1 more fitted for dividing their  
faculties among many things than for    
travelling in any one path to the       
highest point which can be reached by   
it3 this may be true of women as they   
now are 7though not without great and   
numerous exceptions71 and may account   
for their having remained behind the    
highest order of men in precisely the   
things in which this absorption of the  
whole mind in one set of ideas and      
occupations may seem to be most         
requisite4 ,still1 this difference is   
one which can only affect the kind of   
excellence1 not the excellence itself1  
or its practical worth3 and it remains  
to be shown whether this exclusive      
working of a part of the mind1 this     
absorption of the whole thinking faculty
 in a single subject1 and concentration 
of it on a single work1 is the normal   
and healthful condition of the human    
faculties1 even for speculative uses4 ,i
 believe that what is gained in special 

development by this concentration1 is   
lost in the capacity of the mind for the
 other purposes of life2 and even in    
abstract thought1 it is my decided      
opinion that the mind does more by      
frequently returning to a difficult     
problem1 than by sticking to it without 
interruption4 ,for the purposes1 at all 
events1 of practice1 from its highest to
 its humblest departments1 the capacity 
of passing promptly from one subject of 
consideration to another1 without       
letting the active spring of the        
intellect run down between the two1 is a
 power far more valuable2 and this power
 women pre-eminently possess1 by virtue 
of the very mobility of which they are  
accused4 ,they perhaps have it from     
nature1 but they certainly have it by   
training and education2 for nearly the  
whole of the occupations of women       
consist in the management of small but  
multitudinous details1 on each of which 
the mind cannot dwell even for a minute1
 but must pass on to other things1 and  

if anything requires longer thought1    
must steal time at odd moments for      
thinking of it4 ,the capacity indeed    
which women show for doing their        
thinking in circumstances and at times  
which almost any man would make an      
excuse to himself for not attempting it1
 has often been noticed3 and a woman's  
mind1 though it may be occupied only    
with small things1 can hardly ever      
permit itself to be vacant1 as a man's  
so often is when not engaged in what he 
chooses to consider the business of his 
life4 ,the business of a woman's        
ordinary life is things in general1 and 
can as little cease to go on as the     
world to go round4  ,but 7it is said7   
there is anatomical evidence of the     
superior mental capacity of men compared
 with women3 they have a larger brain4  
,i reply1 that in the first place the   
fact itself is doubtful4 ,it is by no   
means established that the brain of a   
woman is smaller than that of a man4 ,if
 it is inferred merely because a woman's

 bodily frame generally is of less      
dimensions than a man's1 this criterion 
would lead to strange consequences4 ,a  
tall and large-boned man must on this   
showing be wonderfully superior in      
intelligence to a small man1 and an     
elephant or a whale must prodigiously   
excel mankind4 ,the size of the brain in
 human beings1 anatomists say1 varies   
much less than the size of the body1 or 
even of the head1 and the one cannot be 
at all inferred from the other4 ,it is  
certain that some women have as large a 
brain as any man4 ,it is within my      
knowledge that a man who had weighed    
many human brains1 said that the        
heaviest he knew of1 heavier even than  
,cuvier's 7the heaviest previously      
recorded17 was that of a woman4 ,next1  
,i must observe that the precise        
relation which exists between the brain 
and the intellectual powers is not yet  
well understood1 but is a subject of    
great dispute4 ,that there is a very    
close relation we cannot doubt4 ,the    

brain is certainly the material organ of
 thought and feeling3 and 7making       
abstraction of the great unsettled      
controversy respecting the appropriation
 of different parts of the brain to     
different mental faculties7 ,i admit    
that it would be an anomaly1 and an     
exception to all we know of the general 
laws of life and organization1 if the   
size of the organ were wholly           
indifferent to the function2 if no      
accession of power were derived from the
 greater magnitude of the instrument4   
,but the exception and the anomaly would
 be fully as great if the organ         
exercised influence by its magnitude    
only4 ,in all the more delicate         
operations of nature--of which those of 
the animated creation are the most      
delicate1 and those of the nervous      
system by far the most delicate of      
these--differences in the effect depend 
as much on differences of quality in the
 physical agents1 as on their quantity3 
and if the quality of an instrument is  

to be tested by the nicety and delicacy 
of the work it can do1 the indications  
point to a greater average fineness of  
quality in the brain and nervous system 
of women than of men4 ,dismissing       
abstract difference of quality1 a thing 
difficult to verify1 the efficiency of  
an organ is known to depend not solely  
on its size but on its activity3 and of 
this we have an approximate measure in  
the energy with which the blood         
circulates through it1 both the stimulus
 and the reparative force being mainly  
dependent on the circulation4 ,it would 
not be surprising--it is indeed an      
hypothesis which accords well with the  
differences actually observed between   
the mental operations of the two        
sexes--if men on the average should have
 the advantage in the size of the brain1
 and women in activity of cerebral      
circulation4 ,the results which         
conjecture1 founded on analogy1 would   
lead us to expect from this difference  
of organization1 would correspond to    

some of those which we most commonly    
see4 ,in the first place1 the mental    
operations of men might be expected to  
be slower4 ,they would neither be so    
prompt as women in thinking1 nor so     
quick to feel4 ,large bodies take more  
time to get into full action4 ,on the   
other hand1 when once got thoroughly    
into play1 men's brain would bear more  
work4 ,it would be more persistent in   
the line first taken2 it would have more
 difficulty in changing from one mode of
 action to another1 but1 in the one     
thing it was doing1 it could go on      
longer without loss of power or sense of
 fatigue4 ,and do we not find that the  
things in which men most excel women are
 those which require most plodding and  
long hammering at a single thought1     
while women do best what must be done   
rapidly8 ,a woman's brain is sooner     
fatigued1 sooner exhausted2 but given   
the degree of exhaustion1 we should     
expect to find that it would recover    
itself sooner4 ,i repeat that this      

speculation is entirely hypothetical2 it
 pretends to no more than to suggest a  
line of enquiry4 ,i have before         
repudiated the notion of its being yet  
certainly known that there is any       
natural difference at all in the average
 strength or direction of the mental    
capacities of the two sexes1 much less  
what that difference is4 ,nor is it     
possible that this should be known1 so  
long as the psychological laws of the   
formation of character have been so     
little studied1 even in a general way1  
and in the particular case never        
scientifically applied at all2 so long  
as the most obvious external causes of  
difference of character are habitually  
disregarded--left unnoticed by the      
observer1 and looked down upon with a   
kind of supercilious contempt by the    
prevalent schools both of natural       
history and of mental philosophy3 who1  
whether they look for the source of what
 mainly distinguishes human beings from 
one another1 in the world of matter or  

in that of spirit1 agree in running down
 those who prefer to explain these      
differences by the different relations  
of human beings to society and life4    
,to so ridiculous an extent are the     
notions formed of the nature of women1  
mere empirical generalizations1 framed1 
without philosophy or analysis1 upon the
 first instances which present          
themselves1 that the popular idea of it 
is different in different countries1    
according as the opinions and social    
circumstances of the country have given 
to the women living in it any speciality
 of development or non-development4 ,an 
,oriental thinks that women are by      
nature peculiarly voluptuous2 see the   
violent abuse of them on this ground in 
,hindoo writings4 ,an ,englishman       
usually thinks that they are by nature  
cold4 ,the sayings about women's        
fickleness are mostly of ,french origin2
 from the famous distich of ,francis the
 ,first1 upward and downward4 ,in       
,england it is a common remark1 how much

 more constant women are than men4      
,inconstancy has been longer reckoned   
discreditable to a woman1 in ,england   
than in ,france2 and ,englishwomen are  
besides1 in their inmost nature1 much   
more subdued to opinion4 ,it may be     
remarked by the way1 that ,englishmen   
are in peculiarly unfavourable          
circumstances for attempting to judge   
what is or is not natural1 not merely to
 women1 but to men1 or to human beings  
altogether1 at least if they have only  
,english experience to go upon3 because 
there is no place where human nature    
shows so little of its original         
lineaments4 ,both in a good and a bad   
sense1 the ,english are farther from a  
state of nature than any other modern   
people4 ,they are1 more than any other  
people1 a product of civilization and   
discipline4 ,england is the country in  
which social discipline has most        
succeeded1 not so much in conquering1 as
 in suppressing1 whatever is liable to  
conflict with it4 ,the ,english1 more   

than any other people1 not only act but 
feel according to rule4 ,in other       
countries1 the taught opinion1 or the   
requirement of society1 may be the      
stronger power1 but the promptings of   
the individual nature are always visible
 under it1 and often resisting it3 rule 
may be stronger than nature1 but nature 
is still there4 ,in ,england1 rule has  
to a great degree substituted itself for
 nature4 ,the greater part of life is   
carried on1 not by following inclination
 under the control of rule1 but by      
having no inclination but that of       
following a rule4 ,now this has its good
 side doubtless1 though it has also a   
wretchedly bad one2 but it must render  
an ,englishman peculiarly ill-qualified 
to pass a judgment on the original      
tendencies of human nature from his own 
experience4 ,the errors to which        
observers elsewhere are liable on the   
subject1 are of a different character4  
,an ,englishman is ignorant respecting  
human nature1 a ,frenchman is           

prejudiced4 ,an ,englishman's errors are
 negative1 a ,frenchman's positive4 ,an 
,englishman fancies that things do not  
exist1 because he never sees them2 a    
,frenchman thinks they must always and  
necessarily exist1 because he does see  
them4 ,an ,englishman does not know     
nature1 because he has had no           
opportunity of observing it2 a          
,frenchman generally knows a great deal 
of it1 but often mistakes it1 because he
 has only seen it sophisticated and     
distorted4 ,for the artificial state    
superinduced by society disguises the   
natural tendencies of the thing which is
 the subject of observation1 in two     
different ways3 by extinguishing the    
nature1 or by transforming it4 ,in the  
one case there is but a starved residuum
 of nature remaining to be studied2 in  
the other case there is much1 but it may
 have expanded in any direction rather  
than that in which it would             
spontaneously grow4  ,i have said that  
it cannot now be known how much of the  

existing mental differences between men 
and women is natural1 and how much      
artificial2 whether there are any       
natural differences at all2 or1         
supposing all artificial causes of      
difference to be withdrawn1 what natural
 character would be revealed4 ,i am not 
about to attempt what ,i have pronounced
 impossible3 but doubt does not forbid  
conjecture1 and where certainty is      
unattainable1 there may yet be the means
 of arriving at some degree of          
probability4 ,the first point1 the      
origin of the differences actually      
observed1 is the one most accessible to 
speculation2 and ,i shall attempt to    
approach it1 by the only path by which  
it can be reached2 by tracing the mental
 consequences of external influences4   
,we cannot isolate a human being from   
the circumstances of his condition1 so  
as to ascertain experimentally what he  
would have been by nature2 but we can   
consider what he is1 and what his       
circumstances have been1 and whether the

 one would have been capable of         
producing the other4  ,let us take1     
then1 the only marked case which        
observation affords1 of apparent        
inferiority of women to men1 if we      
except the merely physical one of bodily
 strength4 ,no production in philosophy1
 science1 or art1 entitled to the first 
rank1 has been the work of a woman4 ,is 
there any mode of accounting for this1  
without supposing that women are        
naturally incapable of producing them8  
,in the first place1 we may fairly      
question whether experience has afforded
 sufficient grounds for an induction4   
,it is scarcely three generations since 
women1 saving very rare exceptions1 have
 begun to try their capacity in         
philosophy1 science1 or art4 ,it is only
 in the present generation that their   
attempts have been at all numerous2 and 
they are even now extremely few1        
everywhere but in ,england and ,france4 
,it is a relevant question1 whether a   
mind possessing the requisites of       

first-rate eminence in speculation or   
creative art could have been expected1  
on the mere calculation of chances1 to  
turn up during that lapse of time1 among
 the women whose tastes and personal    
position admitted of their devoting     
themselves to these pursuits4 ,in all   
things which there has yet been time    
for--in all but the very highest grades 
in the scale of excellence1 especially  
in the department in which they have    
been longest engaged1 literature 7both  
prose and poetry7--women have done quite
 as much1 have obtained fully as high   
prizes and as many of them1 as could be 
expected from the length of time and the
 number of competitors4 ,if we go back  
to the earlier period when very few     
women made the attempt1 yet some of     
those few made it with distinguished    
success4 ,the ,greeks always accounted  
,sappho among their great poets2 and we 
may well suppose that ,myrtis1 said to  
have been the teacher of ,pindar1 and   
,corinna1 who five times bore away from 

him the prize of poetry1 must at least  
have had sufficient merit to admit of   
being compared with that great name4    
,aspasia did not leave any philosophical
 writings2 but it is an admitted fact   
that ,socrates resorted to her for      
instruction1 and avowed himself to have 
obtained it4  ,if we consider the works 
of women in modern times1 and contrast  
them with those of men1 either in the   
literary or the artistic department1    
such inferiority as may be observed     
resolves itself essentially into one    
thing3 but that is a most material one2 
deficiency of originality4 ,not total   
deficiency2 for every production of mind
 which is of any substantive value1 has 
an originality of its own--is a         
conception of the mind itself1 not a    
copy of something else4 ,thoughts       
original1 in the sense of being         
unborrowed--of being derived from the   
thinker's own observations or           
intellectual processes--are abundant in 
the writings of women4 ,but they have   

not yet produced any of those great and 
luminous new ideas which form an era in 
thought1 nor those fundamentally new    
conceptions in art1 which open a vista  
of possible effects not before thought  
of1 and found a new school4 ,their      
compositions are mostly grounded on the 
existing fund of thought1 and their     
creations do not deviate widely from    
existing types4 ,this is the sort of    
inferiority which their works manifest3 
for in point of execution1 in the       
detailed application of thought1 and the
 perfection of style1 there is no       
inferiority4 ,our best novelists in     
point of composition1 and of the        
management of detail1 have mostly been  
women2 and there is not in all modern   
literature a more eloquent vehicle of   
thought than the style of ,madame de    
,stael1 nor1 as a specimen of purely    
artistic excellence1 anything superior  
to the prose of ,madame ,sand1 whose    
style acts upon the nervous system like 
a symphony of ,haydn or ,mozart4 ,high  

originality of conception is1 as ,i have
 said1 what is chiefly wanting4 ,and now
 to examine if there is any manner in   
which this deficiency can be accounted  
for4  ,let us remember1 then1 so far as 
regards mere thought1 that during all   
that period in the world's existence1   
and in the progress of cultivation1 in  
which great and fruitful new truths     
could be arrived at by mere force of    
genius1 with little previous study and  
accumulation of knowledge--during all   
that time women did not concern         
themselves with speculation at all4     
,from the days of ,hypatia to those of  
the ,reformation1 the illustrious       
,heloisa is almost the only woman to    
whom any such achievement might have    
been possible2 and we know not how great
 a capacity of speculation in her may   
have been lost to mankind by the        
misfortunes of her life4 ,never since   
any considerable number of women have   
begun to cultivate serious thought1 has 
originality been possible on easy terms4

 ,nearly all the thoughts which can be  
reached by mere strength of original    
faculties1 have long since been arrived 
at2 and originality1 in any high sense  
of the word1 is now scarcely ever       
attained but by minds which have        
undergone elaborate discipline1 and are 
deeply versed in the results of previous
 thinking4 ,it is ,mr4 ,maurice1 ,i     
think1 who has remarked on the present  
age1 that its most original thinkers are
 those who have known most thoroughly   
what had been thought by their          
predecessors3 and this will always      
henceforth be the case4 ,every fresh    
stone in the edifice has now to be      
placed on the top of so many others1    
that a long process of climbing1 and of 
carrying up materials1 has to be gone   
through by whoever aspires to take a    
share in the present stage of the work4 
,how many women are there who have gone 
through any such process8 ,mrs4         
,somerville1 alone perhaps of women1    
knows as much of mathematics as is now  

needful for making any considerable     
mathematical discovery3 is it any proof 
of inferiority in women1 that she has   
not happened to be one of the two or    
three persons who in her lifetime have  
associated their names with some        
striking advancement of the science8    
,two women1 since political economy has 
been made a science1 have known enough  
of it to write usefully on the subject3 
of how many of the innumerable men who  
have written on it during the same time1
 is it possible with truth to say more8 
,if no woman has hitherto been a great  
historian1 what woman has had the       
necessary erudition8 ,if no woman is a  
great philologist1 what woman has       
studied ,sanscrit and ,slavonic1 the    
,gothic of ,ulphila and the ,persic of  
the ,zendavesta8 ,even in practical     
matters we all know what is the value of
 the originality of untaught geniuses4  
,it means1 inventing over again in its  
rudimentary form something already      
invented and improved upon by many      

successive inventors4 ,when women have  
had the preparation which all men now   
require to be eminently original1 it    
will be time enough to begin judging by 
experience of their capacity for        
originality4  ,it no doubt often happens
 that a person1 who has not widely and  
accurately studied the thoughts of      
others on a subject1 has by natural     
sagacity a happy intuition1 which he can
 suggest1 but cannot prove1 which yet   
when matured may be an important        
addition to knowledge3 but even then1 no
 justice can be done to it until some   
other person1 who does possess the      
previous acquirements1 takes it in hand1
 tests it1 gives it a scientific or     
practical form1 and fits it into its    
place among the existing truths of      
philosophy or science4 ,is it supposed  
that such felicitous thoughts do not    
occur to women8 ,they occur by hundreds 
to every woman of intellect4 ,but they  
are mostly lost1 for want of a husband  
or friend who has the other knowledge   

which can enable him to estimate them   
properly and bring them before the      
world3 and even when they are brought   
before it1 they generally appear as his 
ideas1 not their real author's4 ,who can
 tell how many of the most original     
thoughts put forth by male writers1     
belong to a woman by suggestion1 to     
themselves only by verifying and working
 out8 ,if ,i may judge by my own case1 a
 very large proportion indeed4  ,if we  
turn from pure speculation to literature
 in the narrow sense of the term1 and   
the fine arts1 there is a very obvious  
reason why women's literature is1 in its
 general conception and in its main     
features1 an imitation of men's4 ,why is
 the ,roman literature1 as critics      
proclaim to satiety1 not original1 but  
an imitation of the ,greek8 ,simply     
because the ,greeks came first4 ,if     
women lived in a different country from 
men1 and had never read any of their    
writings1 they would have had a         
literature of their own4 ,as it is1 they

 have not created one1 because they     
found a highly advanced literature      
already created4 ,if there had been no  
suspension of the knowledge of          
antiquity1 or if the ,renaissance had   
occurred before the ,gothic cathedrals  
were built1 they never would have been  
built4 ,we see that1 in ,france and     
,italy1 imitation of the ancient        
literature stopped the original         
development even after it had commenced4
 ,all women who write are pupils of the 
great male writers4 ,a painter's early  
pictures1 even if he be a ,raffaelle1   
are undistinguishable in style from     
those of his master4 ,even a ,mozart    
does not display his powerful           
originality in his earliest pieces4     
,what years are to a gifted individual1 
generations are to a mass4 ,if women's  
literature is destined to have a        
different collective character from that
 of men1 depending on any difference of 
natural tendencies1 much longer time is 
necessary than has yet elapsed1 before  

it can emancipate itself from the       
influence of accepted models1 and guide 
itself by its own impulses4 ,but if1 as 
,i believe1 there will not prove to be  
any natural tendencies common to women1 
and distinguishing their genius from    
that of men1 yet every individual writer
 among them has her individual          
tendencies1 which at present are still  
subdued by the influence of precedent   
and example3 and it will require        
generations more1 before their          
individuality is sufficiently developed 
to make head against that influence4    
,it is in the fine arts1 properly so    
called1 that the prima facie evidence of
 inferior original powers in women at   
first sight appears the strongest3 since
 opinion 7it may be said7 does not      
exclude them from these1 but rather     
encourages them1 and their education1   
instead of passing over this department1
 is in the affluent classes mainly      
composed of it4 ,yet in this line of    
exertion they have fallen still more    

short than in many others1 of the       
highest eminence attained by men4 ,this 
shortcoming1 however1 needs no other    
explanation than the familiar fact1 more
 universally true in the fine arts than 
in anything else2 the vast superiority  
of professional persons over amateurs4  
,women in the educated classes are      
almost universally taught more or less  
of some branch or other of the fine     
arts1 but not that they may gain their  
living or their social consequence by   
it4 ,women artists are all amateurs4    
,the exceptions are only of the kind    
which confirm the general truth4 ,women 
are taught music1 but not for the       
purpose of composing1 only of executing 
it3 and accordingly it is only as       
composers1 that men1 in music1 are      
superior to women4 ,the only one of the 
fine arts which women do follow1 to any 
extent1 as a profession1 and an         
occupation for life1 is the histrionic2 
and in that they are confessedly equal1 
if not superior1 to men4 ,to make the   

comparison fair1 it should be made      
between the productions of women in any 
branch of art1 and those of men not     
following it as a profession4 ,in       
musical composition1 for example1 women 
surely have produced fully as good      
things as have ever been produced by    
male amateurs4 ,there are now a few     
women1 a very few1 who practise painting
 as a profession1 and these are already 
beginning to show quite as much talent  
as could be expected4 ,even male        
painters 7pace ,mr4 ,ruskin7 have not   
made any very remarkable figure these   
last centuries1 and it will be long     
before they do so4 ,the reason why the  
old painters were so greatly superior to
 the modern1 is that a greatly superior 
class of men applied themselves to the  
art4 ,in the fourteenth and fifteenth   
centuries the ,italian painters were the
 most accomplished men of their age4    
,the greatest of them were men of       
encyclopaedical acquirements and powers1
 like the great men of ,greece4 ,but in 

their times fine art was1 to men's      
feelings and conceptions1 among the     
grandest things in which a human being  
could excel2 and by it men were made1   
what only political or military         
distinction now makes them1 the         
companions of sovereigns1 and the equals
 of the highest nobility4 ,in the       
present age1 men of anything like       
similar calibre find something more     
important to do1 for their own fame and 
the uses of the modern world1 than      
painting3 and it is only now and then   
that a ,reynolds or a ,turner 7of whose 
relative rank among eminent men ,i do   
not pretend to an opinion7 applies      
himself to that art4 ,music belongs to a
 different order of things2 it does not 
require the same general powers of mind1
 but seems more dependant on a natural  
gift3 and it may be thought surprising  
that no one of the great musical        
composers has been a woman4 ,but even   
this natural gift1 to be made available 
for great creations1 requires study1 and

 professional devotion to the pursuit4  
,the only countries which have produced 
first-rate composers1 even of the male  
sex1 are ,germany and ,italy--countries 
in which1 both in point of special and  
of general cultivation1 women have      
remained far behind ,france and         
,england1 being generally 7it may be    
said without exaggeration7 very little  
educated1 and having scarcely cultivated
 at all any of the higher faculties of  
mind4 ,and in those countries the men   
who are acquainted with the principles  
of musical composition must be counted  
by hundreds1 or more probably by        
thousands1 the women barely by scores3  
so that here again1 on the doctrine of  
averages1 we cannot reasonably expect to
 see more than one eminent woman to     
fifty eminent men2 and the last three   
centuries have not produced fifty       
eminent male composers either in        
,germany or in ,italy4  ,there are other
 reasons1 besides those which we have   
now given1 that help to explain why     

women remain behind men1 even in the    
pursuits which are open to both4 ,for   
one thing1 very few women have time for 
them4 ,this may seem a paradox2 it is an
 undoubted social fact4 ,the time and   
thoughts of every woman have to satisfy 
great previous demands on them for      
things practical4 ,there is1 first1 the 
superintendence of the family and the   
domestic expenditure1 which occupies at 
least one woman in every family1        
generally the one of mature years and   
acquired experience2 unless the family  
is so rich as to admit of delegating    
that task to hired agency1 and          
submitting to all the waste and         
malversation inseparable from that mode 
of conducting it4 ,the superintendence  
of a household1 even when not in other  
respects laborious1 is extremely onerous
 to the thoughts2 it requires incessant 
vigilance1 an eye which no detail       
escapes1 and presents questions for     
consideration and solution1 foreseen and
 unforeseen1 at every hour of the day1  

from which the person responsible for   
them can hardly ever shake herself free4
 ,if a woman is of a rank and           
circumstances which relieve her in a    
measure from these cares1 she has still 
devolving on her the management for the 
whole family of its intercourse with    
others--of what is called society1 and  
the less the call made on her by the    
former duty1 the greater is always the  
development of the latter3 the dinner   
parties1 concerts1 evening parties1     
morning visits1 letter writing1 and all 
that goes with them4 ,all this is over  
and above the engrossing duty which     
society imposes exclusively on women1 of
 making themselves charming4 ,a clever  
woman of the higher ranks finds nearly a
 sufficient employment of her talents in
 cultivating the graces of manner and   
the arts of conversation4 ,to look only 
at the outward side of the subject3 the 
great and continual exercise of thought 
which all women who attach any value to 
dressing well 7,i do not mean           

expensively1 but with taste1 and        
perception of natural and of artificial 
convenance7 must bestow upon their own  
dress1 perhaps also upon that of their  
daughters1 would alone go a great way   
towards achieving respectable results in
 art1 or science1 or literature1 and    
does actually exhaust much of the time  
and mental power they might have to     
spare for either4#b ,if it were possible
 that all this number of little         
practical interests 7which are made     
great to them7 should leave them either 
much leisure1 or much energy and freedom
 of mind1 to be devoted to art or       
speculation1 they must have a much      
greater original supply of active       
faculty than the vast majority of men4  
,but this is not all4 ,independently of 
the regular offices of life which       
devolve upon a woman1 she is expected to
 have her time and faculties always at  
the disposal of everybody4 ,if a man has
 not a profession to exempt him from    
such demands1 still1 if he has a        

pursuit1 he offends nobody by devoting  
his time to it2 occupation is received  
as a valid excuse for his not answering 
to every casual demand which may be made
 on him4 ,are a woman's occupations1    
especially her chosen and voluntary     
ones1 ever regarded as excusing her from
 any of what are termed the calls of    
society8 ,scarcely are her most         
necessary and recognised duties allowed 
as an exemption4 ,it requires an illness
 in the family1 or something else out of
 the common way1 to entitle her to give 
her own business the precedence over    
other people's amusement4 ,she must     
always be at the beck and call of       
somebody1 generally of everybody4 ,if   
she has a study or a pursuit1 she must  
snatch any short interval which         
accidentally occurs to be employed in   
it4 ,a celebrated woman1 in a work which
 ,i hope will some day be published1    
remarks truly that everything a woman   
does is done at odd times4 ,is it       
wonderful1 then1 if she does not attain 

the highest eminence in things which    
require consecutive attention1 and the  
concentration on them of the chief      
interest of life8 ,such is philosophy1  
and such1 above all1 is art1 in which1  
besides the devotion of the thoughts and
 feelings1 the hand also must be kept in
 constant exercise to attain high skill4
  ,there is another consideration to be 
added to all these4 ,in the various arts
 and intellectual occupations1 there is 
a degree of proficiency sufficient for  
living by it1 and there is a higher     
degree on which depend the great        
productions which immortalize a name4   
,to the attainment of the former1 there 
are adequate motives in the case of all 
who follow the pursuit professionally3  
the other is hardly ever attained where 
there is not1 or where there has not    
been at some period of life1 an ardent  
desire of celebrity4 ,nothing less is   
commonly a sufficient stimulus to       
undergo the long and patient drudgery1  
which1 in the case even of the greatest 

natural gifts1 is absolutely required   
for great eminence in pursuits in which 
we already possess so many splendid     
memorials of the highest genius4 ,now1  
whether the cause be natural or         
artificial1 women seldom have this      
eagerness for fame4 ,their ambition is  
generally confined within narrower      
bounds4 ,the influence they seek is over
 those who immediately surround them4   
,their desire is to be liked1 loved1 or 
admired1 by those whom they see with    
their eyes3 and the proficiency in      
knowledge1 arts1 and accomplishments1   
which is sufficient for that1 almost    
always contents them4 ,this is a trait  
of character which cannot be left out of
 the account in judging of women as they
 are4 ,i do not at all believe that it  
is inherent in women4 ,it is only the   
natural result of their circumstances4  
,the love of fame in men is encouraged  
by education and opinion3 to scorn      
delights and live laborious days for its
 sake1 is accounted the part of noble   

minds1 even if spoken of as their last  
infirmity1 and is stimulated by the     
access which fame gives to all objects  
of ambition1 including even the favour  
of women2 while to women themselves all 
these objects are closed1 and the desire
 of fame itself considered daring and   
unfeminine4 ,besides1 how could it be   
that a woman's interests should not be  
all concentrated upon the impressions   
made on those who come into her daily   
life1 when society has ordained that all
 her duties should be to them1 and has  
contrived that all her comforts should  
depend on them8 ,the natural desire of  
consideration from our fellow creatures 
is as strong in a woman as in a man2 but
 society has so ordered things that     
public consideration is1 in all ordinary
 cases1 only attainable by her through  
the consideration of her husband or of  
her male relations1 while her private   
consideration is forfeited by making    
herself individually prominent1 or      
appearing in any other character than   

that of an appendage to men4 ,whoever is
 in the least capable of estimating the 
influence on the mind of the entire     
domestic and social position and the    
whole habit of a life1 must easily      
recognise in that influence a complete  
explanation of nearly all the apparent  
differences between women and men1      
including the whole of those which imply
 any inferiority4  ,as for moral        
differences1 considered as distinguished
 from intellectual1 the distinction     
commonly drawn is to the advantage of   
women4 ,they are declared to be better  
than men2 an empty compliment1 which    
must provoke a bitter smile from every  
woman of spirit1 since there is no other
 situation in life in which it is the   
established order1 and considered quite 
natural and suitable1 that the better   
should obey the worse4 ,if this piece of
 idle talk is good for anything1 it is  
only as an admission by men1 of the     
corrupting influence of power2 for that 
is certainly the only truth which the   

fact1 if it be a fact1 either proves or 
illustrates4 ,and it is true that       
servitude1 except when it actually      
brutalizes1 though corrupting to both1  
is less so to the slaves than to the    
slave-masters4 ,it is wholesomer for the
 moral nature to be restrained1 even by 
arbitrary power1 than to be allowed to  
exercise arbitrary power without        
restraint4 ,women1 it is said1 seldomer 
fall under the penal law--contribute a  
much smaller number of offenders to the 
criminal calendar1 than men4 ,i doubt   
not that the same thing may be said1    
with the same truth1 of negro slaves4   
,those who are under the control of     
others cannot often commit crimes1      
unless at the command and for the       
purposes of their masters4 ,i do not    
know a more signal instance of the      
blindness with which the world1         
including the herd of studious men1     
ignore and pass over all the influences 
of social circumstances1 than their     
silly depreciation of the intellectual1 

and silly panegyrics on the moral1      
nature of women4  ,the complimentary    
dictum about women's superior moral     
goodness may be allowed to pair off with
 the disparaging one respecting their   
greater liability to moral bias4 ,women1
 we are told1 are not capable of        
resisting their personal partialities3  
their judgment in grave affairs is      
warped by their sympathies and          
antipathies4 ,assuming it to be so1 it  
is still to be proved that women are    
oftener misled by their personal        
feelings than men by their personal     
interests4 ,the chief difference would  
seem in that case to be1 that men are   
led from the course of duty and the     
public interest by their regard for     
themselves1 women 7not being allowed to 
have private interests of their own7 by 
their regard for somebody else4 ,it is  
also to be considered1 that all the     
education which women receive from      
society inculcates on them the feeling  
that the individuals connected with them

 are the only ones to whom they owe any 
duty--the only ones whose interest they 
are called upon to care for2 while1 as  
far as education is concerned1 they are 
left strangers even to the elementary   
ideas which are presupposed in any      
intelligent regard for larger interests 
or higher moral objects4 ,the complaint 
against them resolves itself merely into
 this1 that they fulfil only too        
faithfully the sole duty which they are 
taught1 and almost the only one which   
they are permitted to practise4  ,the   
concessions of the privileged to the    
unprivileged are so seldom brought about
 by any better motive than the power of 
the unprivileged to extort them1 that   
any arguments against the prerogative of
 sex are likely to be little attended to
 by the generality1 as long as they are 
able to say to themselves that women do 
not complain of it4 ,that fact certainly
 enables men to retain the unjust       
privilege some time longer2 but does not
 render it less unjust4 ,exactly the    

same thing may be said of the women in  
the harem of an ,oriental3 they do not  
complain of not being allowed the       
freedom of ,european women4 ,they think 
our women insufferably bold and         
unfeminine4 ,how rarely it is that even 
men complain of the general order of    
society2 and how much rarer still would 
such complaint be1 if they did not know 
of any different order existing anywhere
 else4 ,women do not complain of the    
general lot of women2 or rather they do1
 for plaintive elegies on it are very   
common in the writings of women1 and    
were still more so as long as the       
lamentations could not be suspected of  
having any practical object4 ,their     
complaints are like the complaints which
 men make of the general                
unsatisfactoriness of human life2 they  
are not meant to imply blame1 or to     
plead for any change4 ,but though women 
do not complain of the power of         
husbands1 each complains of her own     
husband1 or of the husbands of her      

friends4 ,it is the same in all other   
cases of servitude1 at least in the     
commencement of the emancipatory        
movement4 ,the serfs did not at first   
complain of the power of their lords1   
but only of their tyranny4 ,the ,commons
 began by claiming a few municipal      
privileges2 they next asked an exemption
 for themselves from being taxed without
 their own consent2 but they would at   
that time have thought it a great       
presumption to claim any share in the   
king's sovereign authority4 ,the case of
 women is now the only case in which to 
rebel against established rules is still
 looked upon with the same eyes as was  
formerly a subject's claim to the right 
of rebelling against his king4 ,a woman 
who joins in any movement which her     
husband disapproves1 makes herself a    
martyr1 without even being able to be an
 apostle1 for the husband can legally   
put a stop to her apostleship4 ,women   
cannot be expected to devote themselves 
to the emancipation of women1 until men 

in considerable number are prepared to  
join with them in the undertaking4      
,footnote #a3 ,especially is this true  
if we take into consideration ,asia as  
well as ,europe4 ,if a ,hindoo          
principality is strongly1 vigilantly1   
and economically governed2 if order is  
preserved without oppression2 if        
cultivation is extending1 and the people
 prosperous1 in three cases out of four 
that principality is under a woman's    
rule4 ,this fact1 to me an entirely     
unexpected one1 ,i have collected from a
 long official knowledge of ,hindoo     
governments4 ,there are many such       
instances3 for though1 by ,hindoo       
institutions1 a woman cannot reign1 she 
is the legal regent of a kingdom during 
the minority of the heir2 and minorities
 are frequent1 the lives of the male    
rulers being so often prematurely       
terminated through the effect of        
inactivity and sensual excesses4 ,when  
we consider that these princesses have  
never been seen in public1 have never   

conversed with any man not of their own 
family except from behind a curtain1    
that they do not read1 and if they did1 
there is no book in their languages     
which can give them the smallest        
instruction on political affairs2 the   
example they afford of the natural      
capacity of women for government is very
 striking4  ,footnote #b3 ,it appears to
 be the same right turn of mind which   
enables a man to acquire the truth1 or  
the just idea of what is right1 in the  
ornaments1 as in the more stable        
principles of art4 ,it has still the    
same centre of perfection1 though it is 
the centre of a smaller circle4--,to    
illustrate this by the fashion of dress1
 in which there is allowed to be a good 
or bad taste4 ,the component parts of   
dress are continually changing from     
great to little1 from short to long2 but
 the general form still remains3 it is  
still the same general dress which is   
comparatively fixed1 though on a very   
slender foundation2 but it is on this   

which fashion must rest4 ,he who invents
 with the most success1 or dresses in   
the best taste1 would probably1 from the
 same sagacity employed to greater      
purposes1 have discovered equal skill1  
or have formed the same correct taste1  
in the highest labours of art4--,sir    
,joshua ,reynolds' ,discourses1 ,disc4  
vii4     ,,chapter ,,iv4   ,there       
remains a question1 not of less         
importance than those already discussed1
 and which will be asked the most       
importunately by those opponents whose  
conviction is somewhat shaken on the    
main point4 ,what good are we to expect 
from the changes proposed in our customs
 and institutions8 ,would mankind be at 
all better off if women were free8 ,if  
not1 why disturb their minds1 and       
attempt to make a social revolution in  
the name of an abstract right8  ,it is  
hardly to be expected that this question
 will be asked in respect to the change 
proposed in the condition of women in   
marriage4 ,the sufferings1 immoralities1

 evils of all sorts1 produced in        
innumerable cases by the subjection of  
individual women to individual men1 are 
far too terrible to be overlooked4      
,unthinking or uncandid persons1        
counting those cases alone which are    
extreme1 or which attain publicity1 may 
say that the evils are exceptional2 but 
no one can be blind to their existence1 
nor1 in many cases1 to their intensity4 
,and it is perfectly obvious that the   
abuse of the power cannot be very much  
checked while the power remains4 ,it is 
a power given1 or offered1 not to good  
men1 or to decently respectable men1 but
 to all men2 the most brutal1 and the   
most criminal4 ,there is no check but   
that of opinion1 and such men are in    
general within the reach of no opinion  
but that of men like themselves4 ,if    
such men did not brutally tyrannize over
 the one human being whom the law       
compels to bear everything from them1   
society must already have reached a     
paradisiacal state4 ,there could be no  

need any longer of laws to curb men's   
vicious propensities4 ,astraea must not 
only have returned to earth1 but the    
heart of the worst man must have become 
her temple4 ,the law of servitude in    
marriage is a monstrous contradiction to
 all the principles of the modern world1
 and to all the experience through which
 those principles have been slowly and  
painfully worked out4 ,it is the sole   
case1 now that negro slavery has been   
abolished1 in which a human being in the
 plenitude of every faculty is delivered
 up to the tender mercies of another    
human being1 in the hope forsooth that  
this other will use the power solely for
 the good of the person subjected to it4
 ,marriage is the only actual bondage   
known to our law4 ,there remain no legal
 slaves1 except the mistress of every   
house4  ,it is not1 therefore1 on this  
part of the subject1 that the question  
is likely to be asked1 ,cui bono8 ,we   
may be told that the evil would outweigh
 the good1 but the reality of the good  

admits of no dispute4 ,in regard1       
however1 to the larger question1 the    
removal of women's disabilities--their  
recognition as the equals of men in all 
that belongs to citizenship--the opening
 to them of all honourable employments1 
and of the training and education which 
qualifies for those employments--there  
are many persons for whom it is not     
enough that the inequality has no just  
or legitimate defence2 they require to  
be told what express advantage would be 
obtained by abolishing it4  ,to which   
let me first answer1 the advantage of   
having the most universal and pervading 
of all human relations regulated by     
justice instead of injustice4 ,the vast 
amount of this gain to human nature1 it 
is hardly possible1 by any explanation  
or illustration1 to place in a stronger 
light than it is placed by the bare     
statement1 to any one who attaches a    
moral meaning to words4 ,all the selfish
 propensities1 the self-worship1 the    
unjust self-preference1 which exist     

among mankind1 have their source and    
root in1 and derive their principal     
nourishment from1 the present           
constitution of the relation between men
 and women4 ,think what it is to a boy1 
to grow up to manhood in the belief that
 without any merit or any exertion of   
his own1 though he may be the most      
frivolous and empty or the most ignorant
 and stolid of mankind1 by the mere fact
 of being born a male he is by right the
 superior of all and every one of an    
entire half of the human race3 including
 probably some whose real superiority to
 himself he has daily or hourly occasion
 to feel2 but even if in his whole      
conduct he habitually follows a woman's 
guidance1 still1 if he is a fool1 she   
thinks that of course she is not1 and   
cannot be1 equal in ability and judgment
 to himself2 and if he is not a fool1 he
 does worse--he sees that she is        
superior to him1 and believes that1     
notwithstanding her superiority1 he is  
entitled to command and she is bound to 

obey4 ,what must be the effect on his   
character1 of this lesson8 ,and men of  
the cultivated classes are often not    
aware how deeply it sinks into the      
immense majority of male minds4 ,for1   
among right-feeling and well-bred       
people1 the inequality is kept as much  
as possible out of sight2 above all1 out
 of sight of the children4 ,as much     
obedience is required from boys to their
 mother as to their father3 they are not
 permitted to domineer over their       
sisters1 nor are they accustomed to see 
these postponed to them1 but the        
contrary2 the compensations of the      
chivalrous feeling being made prominent1
 while the servitude which requires them
 is kept in the background4 ,well       
brought-up youths in the higher classes 
thus often escape the bad influences of 
the situation in their early years1 and 
only experience them when1 arrived at   
manhood1 they fall under the dominion of
 facts as they really exist4 ,such      
people are little aware1 when a boy is  

differently brought up1 how early the   
notion of his inherent superiority to a 
girl arises in his mind2 how it grows   
with his growth and strengthens with his
 strength2 how it is inoculated by one  
schoolboy upon another2 how early the   
youth thinks himself superior to his    
mother1 owing her perhaps forbearance1  
but no real respect2 and how sublime and
 sultan-like a sense of superiority he  
feels1 above all1 over the woman whom he
 honours by admitting her to a          
partnership of his life4 ,is it imagined
 that all this does not pervert the     
whole manner of existence of the man1   
both as an individual and as a social   
being8 ,it is an exact parallel to the  
feeling of a hereditary king that he is 
excellent above others by being born a  
king1 or a noble by being born a noble4 
,the relation between husband and wife  
is very like that between lord and      
vassal1 except that the wife is held to 
more unlimited obedience than the vassal
 was4 ,however the vassal's character   

may have been affected1 for better and  
for worse1 by his subordination1 who can
 help seeing that the lord's was        
affected greatly for the worse8 whether 
he was led to believe that his vassals  
were really superior to himself1 or to  
feel that he was placed in command over 
people as good as himself1 for no merits
 or labours of his own1 but merely for  
having1 as ,figaro says1 taken the      
trouble to be born4 ,the self-worship of
 the monarch1 or of the feudal superior1
 is matched by the self-worship of the  
male4 ,human beings do not grow up from 
childhood in the possession of unearned 
distinctions1 without pluming themselves
 upon them4 ,those whom privileges not  
acquired by their merit1 and which they 
feel to be disproportioned to it1       
inspire with additional humility1 are   
always the few1 and the best few4 ,the  
rest are only inspired with pride1 and  
the worst sort of pride1 that which     
values itself upon accidental           
advantages1 not of its own achieving4   

,above all1 when the feeling of being   
raised above the whole of the other sex 
is combined with personal authority over
 one individual among them2 the         
situation1 if a school of conscientious 
and affectionate forbearance to those   
whose strongest points of character are 
conscience and affection1 is to men of  
another quality a regularly constituted 
,academy or ,gymnasium for training them
 in arrogance and overbearingness2 which
 vices1 if curbed by the certainty of   
resistance in their intercourse with    
other men1 their equals1 break out      
towards all who are in a position to be 
obliged to tolerate them1 and often     
revenge themselves upon the unfortunate 
wife for the involuntary restraint which
 they are obliged to submit to          
elsewhere4  ,the example afforded1 and  
the education given to the sentiments1  
by laying the foundation of domestic    
existence upon a relation contradictory 
to the first principles of social       
justice1 must1 from the very nature of  

man1 have a perverting influence of such
 magnitude1 that it is hardly possible  
with our present experience to raise our
 imaginations to the conception of so   
great a change for the better as would  
be made by its removal4 ,all that       
education and civilization are doing to 
efface the influences on character of   
the law of force1 and replace them by   
those of justice1 remains merely on the 
surface1 as long as the citadel of the  
enemy is not attacked4 ,the principle of
 the modern movement in morals and      
politics1 is that conduct1 and conduct  
alone1 entitles to respect3 that not    
what men are1 but what they do1         
constitutes their claim to deference2   
that1 above all1 merit1 and not birth1  
is the only rightful claim to power and 
authority4 ,if no authority1 not in its 
nature temporary1 were allowed to one   
human being over another1 society would 
not be employed in building up          
propensities with one hand which it has 
to curb with the other4 ,the child would

 really1 for the first time in man's    
existence on earth1 be trained in the   
way he should go1 and when he was old   
there would be a chance that he would   
not depart from it4 ,but so long as the 
right of the strong to power over the   
weak rules in the very heart of society1
 the attempt to make the equal right of 
the weak the principle of its outward   
actions will always be an uphill        
struggle2 for the law of justice1 which 
is also that of ,christianity1 will     
never get possession of men's inmost    
sentiments2 they will be working against
 it1 even when bending to it4  ,the     
second benefit to be expected from      
giving to women the free use of their   
faculties1 by leaving them the free     
choice of their employments1 and opening
 to them the same field of occupation   
and the same prizes and encouragements  
as to other human beings1 would be that 
of doubling the mass of mental faculties
 available for the higher service of    
humanity4 ,where there is now one person

 qualified to benefit mankind and       
promote the general improvement1 as a   
public teacher1 or an administrator of  
some branch of public or social affairs1
 there would then be a chance of two4   
,mental superiority of any kind is at   
present everywhere so much below the    
demand2 there is such a deficiency of   
persons competent to do excellently     
anything which it requires any          
considerable amount of ability to do2   
that the loss to the world1 by refusing 
to make use of one-half of the whole    
quantity of talent it possesses1 is     
extremely serious4 ,it is true that this
 amount of mental power is not totally  
lost4 ,much of it is employed1 and would
 in any case be employed1 in domestic   
management1 and in the few other        
occupations open to women2 and from the 
remainder indirect benefit is in many   
individual cases obtained1 through the  
personal influence of individual women  
over individual men4 ,but these benefits
 are partial2 their range is extremely  

circumscribed2 and if they must be      
admitted1 on the one hand1 as a         
deduction from the amount of fresh      
social power that would be acquired by  
giving freedom to one-half of the whole 
sum of human intellect1 there must be   
added1 on the other1 the benefit of the 
stimulus that would be given to the     
intellect of men by the competition2 or 
7to use a more true expression7 by the  
necessity that would be imposed on them 
of deserving precedency before they     
could expect to obtain it4  ,this great 
accession to the intellectual power of  
the species1 and to the amount of       
intellect available for the good        
management of its affairs1 would be     
obtained1 partly1 through the better and
 more complete intellectual education of
 women1 which would then improve pari   
passu with that of men4 ,women in       
general would be brought up equally     
capable of understanding business1      
public affairs1 and the higher matters  
of speculation1 with men in the same    

class of society2 and the select few of 
the one as well as of the other sex1 who
 were qualified not only to comprehend  
what is done or thought by others1 but  
to think or do something considerable   
themselves1 would meet with the same    
facilities for improving and training   
their capacities in the one sex as in   
the other4 ,in this way1 the widening of
 the sphere of action for women would   
operate for good1 by raising their      
education to the level of that of men1  
and making the one participate in all   
improvements made in the other4 ,but    
independently of this1 the mere breaking
 down of the barrier would of itself    
have an educational virtue of the       
highest worth4 ,the mere getting rid of 
the idea that all the wider subjects of 
thought and action1 all the things which
 are of general and not solely of       
private interest1 are men's business1   
from which women are to be warned       
off--positively interdicted from most of
 it1 coldly tolerated in the little     

which is allowed them--the mere         
consciousness a woman would then have of
 being a human being like any other1    
entitled to choose her pursuits1 urged  
or invited by the same inducements as   
any one else to interest herself in     
whatever is interesting to human beings1
 entitled to exert the share of         
influence on all human concerns which   
belongs to an individual opinion1       
whether she attempted actual            
participation in them or not--this alone
 would effect an immense expansion of   
the faculties of women1 as well as      
enlargement of the range of their moral 
sentiments4  ,besides the addition to   
the amount of individual talent         
available for the conduct of human      
affairs1 which certainly are not at     
present so abundantly provided in that  
respect that they can afford to dispense
 with one-half of what nature proffers2 
the opinion of women would then possess 
a more beneficial1 rather than a        
greater1 influence upon the general mass

 of human belief and sentiment4 ,i say a
 more beneficial1 rather than a greater 
influence2 for the influence of women   
over the general tone of opinion has    
always1 or at least from the earliest   
known period1 been very considerable4   
,the influence of mothers on the early  
character of their sons1 and the desire 
of young men to recommend themselves to 
young women1 have in all recorded times 
been important agencies in the formation
 of character1 and have determined some 
of the chief steps in the progress of   
civilization4 ,even in the ,homeric age1
 ,greek3 aidos towards the ,greek3      
,troadas ,greek3 helkesipeplous is an   
acknowledged and powerful motive of     
action in the great ,hector4 ,the moral 
influence of women has had two modes of 
operation4 ,first1 it has been a        
softening influence4 ,those who were    
most liable to be the victims of        
violence1 have naturally tended as much 
as they could towards limiting its      
sphere and mitigating its excesses4     

,those who were not taught to fight1    
have naturally inclined in favour of any
 other mode of settling differences     
rather than that of fighting4 ,in       
general1 those who have been the        
greatest sufferers by the indulgence of 
selfish passion1 have been the most     
earnest supporters of any moral law     
which offered a means of bridling       
passion4 ,women were powerfully         
instrumental in inducing the northern   
conquerors to adopt the creed of        
,christianity1 a creed so much more     
favourable to women than any that       
preceded it4 ,the conversion of the     
,anglo-,saxons and of the ,franks may be
 said to have been begun by the wives of
 ,ethelbert and ,clovis4 ,the other mode
 in which the effect of women's opinion 
has been conspicuous1 is by giving a    
powerful stimulus to those qualities in 
men1 which1 not being themselves trained
 in1 it was necessary for them that they
 should find in their protectors4       
,courage1 and the military virtues      

generally1 have at all times been       
greatly indebted to the desire which men
 felt of being admired by women3 and the
 stimulus reaches far beyond this one   
class of eminent qualities1 since1 by a 
very natural effect of their position1  
the best passport to the admiration and 
favour of women has always been to be   
thought highly of by men4 ,from the     
combination of the two kinds of moral   
influence thus exercised by women1 arose
 the spirit of chivalry3 the peculiarity
 of which is1 to aim at combining the   
highest standard of the warlike         
qualities with the cultivation of a     
totally different class of              
virtues--those of gentleness1           
generosity1 and self-abnegation1 towards
 the non-military and defenceless       
classes generally1 and a special        
submission and worship directed towards 
women2 who were distinguished from the  
other defenceless classes by the high   
rewards which they had it in their power
 voluntarily to bestow on those who     

endeavoured to earn their favour1       
instead of extorting their subjection4  
,though the practice of chivalry fell   
even more sadly short of its theoretic  
standard than practice generally falls  
below theory1 it remains one of the most
 precious monuments of the moral history
 of our race2 as a remarkable instance  
of a concerted and organized attempt by 
a most disorganized and distracted      
society1 to raise up and carry into     
practice a moral ideal greatly in       
advance of its social condition and     
institutions2 so much so as to have been
 completely frustrated in the main      
object1 yet never entirely              
inefficacious1 and which has left a most
 sensible1 and for the most part a      
highly valuable impress on the ideas and
 feelings of all subsequent times4  ,the
 chivalrous ideal is the acme of the    
influence of women's sentiments on the  
moral cultivation of mankind3 and if    
women are to remain in their subordinate
 situation1 it were greatly to be       

lamented that the chivalrous standard   
should have passed away1 for it is the  
only one at all capable of mitigating   
the demoralizing influences of that     
position4 ,but the changes in the       
general state of the species rendered   
inevitable the substitution of a totally
 different ideal of morality for the    
chivalrous one4 ,chivalry was the       
attempt to infuse moral elements into a 
state of society in which everything    
depended for good or evil on individual 
prowess1 under the softening influences 
of individual delicacy and generosity4  
,in modern societies1 all things1 even  
in the military department of affairs1  
are decided1 not by individual effort1  
but by the combined operations of       
numbers2 while the main occupation of   
society has changed from fighting to    
business1 from military to industrial   
life4 ,the exigencies of the new life   
are no more exclusive of the virtues of 
generosity than those of the old1 but it
 no longer entirely depends on them4    

,the main foundations of the moral life 
of modern times must be justice and     
prudence2 the respect of each for the   
rights of every other1 and the ability  
of each to take care of himself4        
,chivalry left without legal check all  
forms of wrong which reigned unpunished 
throughout society2 it only encouraged a
 few to do right in preference to wrong1
 by the direction it gave to the        
instruments of praise and admiration4   
,but the real dependence of morality    
must always be upon its penal           
sanctions--its power to deter from evil4
 ,the security of society cannot rest on
 merely rendering honour to right1 a    
motive so comparatively weak in all but 
a few1 and which on very many does not  
operate at all4 ,modern society is able 
to repress wrong through all departments
 of life1 by a fit exertion of the      
superior strength which civilization has
 given it1 and thus to render the       
existence of the weaker members of      
society 7no longer defenceless but      

protected by law7 tolerable to them1    
without reliance on the chivalrous      
feelings of those who are in a position 
to tyrannize4 ,the beauties and graces  
of the chivalrous character are still   
what they were1 but the rights of the   
weak1 and the general comfort of human  
life1 now rest on a far surer and       
steadier support2 or rather1 they do so 
in every relation of life except the    
conjugal4  ,at present the moral        
influence of women is no less real1 but 
it is no longer of so marked and        
definite a character3 it has more nearly
 merged in the general influence of     
public opinion4 ,both through the       
contagion of sympathy1 and through the  
desire of men to shine in the eyes of   
women1 their feelings have great effect 
in keeping alive what remains of the    
chivalrous ideal--in fostering the      
sentiments and continuing the traditions
 of spirit and generosity4 ,in these    
points of character1 their standard is  
higher than that of men2 in the quality 

of justice1 somewhat lower4 ,as regards 
the relations of private life it may be 
said generally1 that their influence is1
 on the whole1 encouraging to the softer
 virtues1 discouraging to the sterner3  
though the statement must be taken with 
all the modifications dependent on      
individual character4 ,in the chief of  
the greater trials to which virtue is   
subject in the concerns of life--the    
conflict between interest and           
principle--the tendency of women's      
influence is of a very mixed character4 
,when the principle involved happens to 
be one of the very few which the course 
of their religious or moral education   
has strongly impressed upon themselves1 
they are potent auxiliaries to virtue3  
and their husbands and sons are often   
prompted by them to acts of abnegation  
which they never would have been capable
 of without that stimulus4 ,but1 with   
the present education and position of   
women1 the moral principles which have  
been impressed on them cover but a      

comparatively small part of the field of
 virtue1 and are1 moreover1 principally 
negative2 forbidding particular acts1   
but having little to do with the general
 direction of the thoughts and purposes4
 ,i am afraid it must be said1 that     
disinterestedness in the general conduct
 of life--the devotion of the energies  
to purposes which hold out no promise of
 private advantages to the family--is   
very seldom encouraged or supported by  
women's influence4 ,it is small blame to
 them that they discourage objects of   
which they have not learnt to see the   
advantage1 and which withdraw their men 
from them1 and from the interests of the
 family4 ,but the consequence is that   
women's influence is often anything but 
favourable to public virtue4  ,women    
have1 however1 some share of influence  
in giving the tone to public moralities 
since their sphere of action has been a 
little widened1 and since a considerable
 number of them have occupied themselves
 practically in the promotion of objects

 reaching beyond their own family and   
household4 ,the influence of women      
counts for a great deal in two of the   
most marked features of modern ,european
 life--its aversion to war1 and its     
addiction to philanthropy4 ,excellent   
characteristics both2 but unhappily1 if 
the influence of women is valuable in   
the encouragement it gives to these     
feelings in general1 in the particular  
applications the direction it gives to  
them is at least as often mischievous as
 useful4 ,in the philanthropic          
department more particularly1 the two   
provinces chiefly cultivated by women   
are religious proselytism and charity4  
,religious proselytism at home1 is but  
another word for embittering of         
religious animosities3 abroad1 it is    
usually a blind running at an object1   
without either knowing or heeding the   
fatal mischiefs--fatal to the religious 
object itself as well as to all other   
desirable objects--which may be produced
 by the means employed4 ,as for charity1

 it is a matter in which the immediate  
effect on the persons directly          
concerned1 and the ultimate consequence 
to the general good1 are apt to be at   
complete war with one another3 while the
 education given to women--an education 
of the sentiments rather than of the    
understanding--and the habit inculcated 
by their whole life1 of looking to      
immediate effects on persons1 and not to
 remote effects on classes of           
persons--make them both unable to see1  
and unwilling to admit1 the ultimate    
evil tendency of any form of charity or 
philanthropy which commends itself to   
their sympathetic feelings4 ,the great  
and continually increasing mass of      
unenlightened and shortsighted          
benevolence1 which1 taking the care of  
people's lives out of their own hands1  
and relieving them from the disagreeable
 consequences of their own acts1 saps   
the very foundations of the             
self-respect1 self-help1 and            
self-control which are the essential    

conditions both of individual prosperity
 and of social virtue--this waste of    
resources and of benevolent feelings in 
doing harm instead of good1 is immensely
 swelled by women's contributions1 and  
stimulated by their influence4 ,not that
 this is a mistake likely to be made by 
women1 where they have actually the     
practical management of schemes of      
beneficence4 ,it sometimes happens that 
women who administer public             
charities--with that insight into       
present fact1 and especially into the   
minds and feelings of those with whom   
they are in immediate contact1 in which 
women generally excel men--recognise in 
the clearest manner the demoralizing    
influence of the alms given or the help 
afforded1 and could give lessons on the 
subject to many a male political        
economist4 ,but women who only give     
their money1 and are not brought face to
 face with the effects it produces1 how 
can they be expected to foresee them8 ,a
 woman born to the present lot of women1

 and content with it1 how should she    
appreciate the value of self-dependence8
 ,she is not self-dependent2 she is not 
taught self-dependence2 her destiny is  
to receive everything from others1 and  
why should what is good enough for her  
be bad for the poor8 ,her familiar      
notions of good are of blessings        
descending from a superior4 ,she forgets
 that she is not free1 and that the poor
 are2 that if what they need is given to
 them unearned1 they cannot be compelled
 to earn it3 that everybody cannot be   
taken care of by everybody1 but there   
must be some motive to induce people to 
take care of themselves2 and that to be 
helped to help themselves1 if they are  
physically capable of it1 is the only   
charity which proves to be charity in   
the end4  ,these considerations show how
 usefully the part which women take in  
the formation of general opinion1 would 
be modified for the better by that more 
enlarged instruction1 and practical     
conversancy with the things which their 

opinions influence1 that would          
necessarily arise from their social and 
political emancipation4 ,but the        
improvement it would work through the   
influence they exercise1 each in her own
 family1 would be still more remarkable4
  ,it is often said that in the classes 
most exposed to temptation1 a man's wife
 and children tend to keep him honest   
and respectable1 both by the wife's     
direct influence1 and by the concern he 
feels for their future welfare4 ,this   
may be so1 and no doubt often is so1    
with those who are more weak than       
wicked2 and this beneficial influence   
would be preserved and strengthened     
under equal laws2 it does not depend on 
the woman's servitude1 but is1 on the   
contrary1 diminished by the disrespect  
which the inferior class of men always  
at heart feel towards those who are     
subject to their power4 ,but when we    
ascend higher in the scale1 we come     
among a totally different set of moving 
forces4 ,the wife's influence tends1 as 

far as it goes1 to prevent the husband  
from falling below the common standard  
of approbation of the country4 ,it tends
 quite as strongly to hinder him from   
rising above it4 ,the wife is the       
auxiliary of the common public opinion4 
,a man who is married to a woman his    
inferior in intelligence1 finds her a   
perpetual dead weight1 or1 worse than a 
dead weight1 a drag1 upon every         
aspiration of his to be better than     
public opinion requires him to be4 ,it  
is hardly possible for one who is in    
these bonds1 to attain exalted virtue4  
,if he differs in his opinion from the  
mass--if he sees truths which have not  
yet dawned upon them1 or if1 feeling in 
his heart truths which they nominally   
recognise1 he would like to act up to   
those truths more conscientiously than  
the generality of mankind--to all such  
thoughts and desires1 marriage is the   
heaviest of drawbacks1 unless he be so  
fortunate as to have a wife as much     
above the common level as he himself is4

  ,for1 in the first place1 there is    
always some sacrifice of personal       
interest required2 either of social     
consequence1 or of pecuniary means2     
perhaps the risk of even the means of   
subsistence4 ,these sacrifices and risks
 he may be willing to encounter for     
himself2 but he will pause before he    
imposes them on his family4 ,and his    
family in this case means his wife and  
daughters2 for he always hopes that his 
sons will feel as he feels himself1 and 
that what he can do without1 they will  
do without1 willingly1 in the same      
cause4 ,but his daughters--their        
marriage may depend upon it3 and his    
wife1 who is unable to enter into or    
understand the objects for which these  
sacrifices are made--who1 if she thought
 them worth any sacrifice1 would think  
so on trust1 and solely for his         
sake--who can participate in none of the
 enthusiasm or the self-approbation he  
himself may feel1 while the things which
 he is disposed to sacrifice are all in 

all to her2 will not the best and most  
unselfish man hesitate the longest      
before bringing on her this consequence8
 ,if it be not the comforts of life1 but
 only social consideration1 that is at  
stake1 the burthen upon his conscience  
and feelings is still very severe4      
,whoever has a wife and children has    
given hostages to ,mrs4 ,grundy4 ,the   
approbation of that potentate may be a  
matter of indifference to him1 but it is
 of great importance to his wife4 ,the  
man himself may be above opinion1 or may
 find sufficient compensation in the    
opinion of those of his own way of      
thinking4 ,but to the women connected   
with him1 he can offer no compensation4 
,the almost invariable tendency of the  
wife to place her influence in the same 
scale with social consideration1 is     
sometimes made a reproach to women1 and 
represented as a peculiar trait of      
feebleness and childishness of character
 in them3 surely with great injustice4  
,society makes the whole life of a      

woman1 in the easy classes1 a continued 
self-sacrifice2 it exacts from her an   
unremitting restraint of the whole of   
her natural inclinations1 and the sole  
return it makes to her for what often   
deserves the name of a martyrdom1 is    
consideration4 ,her consideration is    
inseparably connected with that of her  
husband1 and after paying the full price
 for it1 she finds that she is to lose  
it1 for no reason of which she can feel 
the cogency4 ,she has sacrificed her    
whole life to it1 and her husband will  
not sacrifice to it a whim1 a freak1 an 
eccentricity2 something not recognised  
or allowed for by the world1 and which  
the world will agree with her in        
thinking a folly1 if it thinks no worse6
 ,the dilemma is hardest upon that very 
meritorious class of men1 who1 without  
possessing talents which qualify them to
 make a figure among those with whom    
they agree in opinion1 hold their       
opinion from conviction1 and feel bound 
in honour and conscience to serve it1 by

 making profession of their belief1 and 
giving their time1 labour1 and means1 to
 anything undertaken in its behalf4 ,the
 worst case of all is when such men     
happen to be of a rank and position     
which of itself neither gives them1 nor 
excludes them from1 what is considered  
the best society2 when their admission  
to it depends mainly on what is thought 
of them personally--and however         
unexceptionable their breeding and      
habits1 their being identified with     
opinions and public conduct unacceptable
 to those who give the tone to society  
would operate as an effectual exclusion4
 ,many a woman flatters herself 7nine   
times out of ten quite erroneously7 that
 nothing prevents her and her husband   
from moving in the highest society of   
her neighbourhood--society in which     
others well known to her1 and in the    
same class of life1 mix freely--except  
that her husband is unfortunately a     
,dissenter1 or has the reputation of    
mingling in low radical politics4 ,that 

it is1 she thinks1 which hinders ,george
 from getting a commission or a place1  
,caroline from making an advantageous   
match1 and prevents her and her husband 
from obtaining invitations1 perhaps     
honours1 which1 for aught she sees1 they
 are as well entitled to as some folks4 
,with such an influence in every house1 
either exerted actively1 or operating   
all the more powerfully for not being   
asserted1 is it any wonder that people  
in general are kept down in that        
mediocrity of respectability which is   
becoming a marked characteristic of     
modern times8  ,there is another very   
injurious aspect in which the effect1   
not of women's disabilities directly1   
but of the broad line of difference     
which those disabilities create between 
the education and character of a woman  
and that of a man1 requires to be       
considered4 ,nothing can be more        
unfavourable to that union of thoughts  
and inclinations which is the ideal of  
married life4 ,intimate society between 

people radically dissimilar to one      
another1 is an idle dream4 ,unlikeness  
may attract1 but it is likeness which   
retains2 and in proportion to the       
likeness is the suitability of the      
individuals to give each other a happy  
life4 ,while women are so unlike men1 it
 is not wonderful that selfish men      
should feel the need of arbitrary power 
in their own hands1 to arrest in limine 
the life-long conflict of inclinations1 
by deciding every question on the side  
of their own preference4 ,when people   
are extremely unlike1 there can be no   
real identity of interest4 ,very often  
there is conscientious difference of    
opinion between married people1 on the  
highest points of duty4 ,is there any   
reality in the marriage union where this
 takes place8 ,yet it is not uncommon   
anywhere1 when the woman has any        
earnestness of character2 and it is a   
very general case indeed in ,catholic   
countries1 when she is supported in her 
dissent by the only other authority to  

which she is taught to bow1 the priest4 
,with the usual barefacedness of power  
not accustomed to find itself disputed1 
the influence of priests over women is  
attacked by ,protestant and ,liberal    
writers1 less for being bad in itself1  
than because it is a rival authority to 
the husband1 and raises up a revolt     
against his infallibility4 ,in ,england1
 similar differences occasionally exist 
when an ,evangelical wife has allied    
herself with a husband of a different   
quality2 but in general this source at  
least of dissension is got rid of1 by   
reducing the minds of women to such a   
nullity1 that they have no opinions but 
those of ,mrs4 ,grundy1 or those which  
the husband tells them to have4 ,when   
there is no difference of opinion1      
differences merely of taste may be      
sufficient to detract greatly from the  
happiness of married life4 ,and though  
it may stimulate the amatory            
propensities of men1 it does not conduce
 to married happiness1 to exaggerate by 

differences of education whatever may be
 the native differences of the sexes4   
,if the married pair are well-bred and  
well-behaved people1 they tolerate each 
other's tastes2 but is mutual toleration
 what people look forward to1 when they 
enter into marriage8 ,these differences 
of inclination will naturally make their
 wishes different1 if not restrained by 
affection or duty1 as to almost all     
domestic questions which arise4 ,what a 
difference there must be in the society 
which the two persons will wish to      
frequent1 or be frequented by6 ,each    
will desire associates who share their  
own tastes3 the persons agreeable to    
one1 will be indifferent or positively  
disagreeable to the other2 yet there can
 be none who are not common to both1 for
 married people do not now live in      
different parts of the house and have   
totally different visiting lists1 as in 
the reign of ,louis ,,xv4 ,they cannot  
help having different wishes as to the  
bringing up of the children3 each will  

wish to see reproduced in them their own
 tastes and sentiments3 and there is    
either a compromise1 and only a         
half-satisfaction to either1 or the wife
 has to yield--often with bitter        
suffering2 and1 with or without         
intention1 her occult influence         
continues to counterwork the husband's  
purposes4  ,it would of course be       
extreme folly to suppose that these     
differences of feeling and inclination  
only exist because women are brought up 
differently from men1 and that there    
would not be differences of taste under 
any imaginable circumstances4 ,but there
 is nothing beyond the mark in saying   
that the distinction in bringing-up     
immensely aggravates those differences1 
and renders them wholly inevitable4     
,while women are brought up as they are1
 a man and a woman will but rarely find 
in one another real agreement of tastes 
and wishes as to daily life4 ,they will 
generally have to give it up as         
hopeless1 and renounce the attempt to   

have1 in the intimate associate of their
 daily life1 that idem velle1 idem      
nolle1 which is the recognised bond of  
any society that is really such3 or if  
the man succeeds in obtaining it1 he    
does so by choosing a woman who is so   
complete a nullity that she has no velle
 or nolle at all1 and is as ready to    
comply with one thing as another if     
anybody tells her to do so4 ,even this  
calculation is apt to fail2 dulness and 
want of spirit are not always a         
guarantee of the submission which is so 
confidently expected from them4 ,but if 
they were1 is this the ideal of         
marriage8 ,what1 in this case1 does the 
man obtain by it1 except an upper       
servant1 a nurse1 or a mistress8 ,on the
 contrary1 when each of two persons1    
instead of being a nothing1 is a        
something2 when they are attached to one
 another1 and are not too much unlike to
 begin with2 the constant partaking in  
the same things1 assisted by their      
sympathy1 draws out the latent          

capacities of each for being interested 
in the things which were at first       
interesting only to the other2 and works
 a gradual assimilation of the tastes   
and characters to one another1 partly by
 the insensible modification of each1   
but more by a real enriching of the two 
natures1 each acquiring the tastes and  
capacities of the other in addition to  
its own4 ,this often happens between two
 friends of the same sex1 who are much  
associated in their daily life3 and it  
would be a common1 if not the commonest1
 case in marriage1 did not the totally  
different bringing-up of the two sexes  
make it next to an impossibility to form
 a really well-assorted union4 ,were    
this remedied1 whatever differences     
there might still be in individual      
tastes1 there would at least be1 as a   
general rule1 complete unity and        
unanimity as to the great objects of    
life4 ,when the two persons both care   
for great objects1 and are a help and   
encouragement to each other in whatever 

regards these1 the minor matters on     
which their tastes may differ are not   
all-important to them2 and there is a   
foundation for solid friendship1 of an  
enduring character1 more likely than    
anything else to make it1 through the   
whole of life1 a greater pleasure to    
each to give pleasure to the other1 than
 to receive it4  ,i have considered1    
thus far1 the effects on the pleasures  
and benefits of the marriage union which
 depend on the mere unlikeness between  
the wife and the husband3 but the evil  
tendency is prodigiously aggravated when
 the unlikeness is inferiority4 ,mere   
unlikeness1 when it only means          
difference of good qualities1 may be    
more a benefit in the way of mutual     
improvement1 than a drawback from       
comfort4 ,when each emulates1 and       
desires and endeavours to acquire1 the  
other's peculiar qualities1 the         
difference does not produce diversity of
 interest1 but increased identity of it1
 and makes each still more valuable to  

the other4 ,but when one is much the    
inferior of the two in mental ability   
and cultivation1 and is not actively    
attempting by the other's aid to rise to
 the other's level1 the whole influence 
of the connexion upon the development of
 the superior of the two is             
deteriorating3 and still more so in a   
tolerably happy marriage than in an     
unhappy one4 ,it is not with impunity   
that the superior in intellect shuts    
himself up with an inferior1 and elects 
that inferior for his chosen1 and sole  
completely intimate1 associate4 ,any    
society which is not improving1 is      
deteriorating3 and the more so1 the     
closer and more familiar it is4 ,even a 
really superior man almost always begins
 to deteriorate when he is habitually   
7as the phrase is7 king of his company3 
and in his most habitual company the    
husband who has a wife inferior to him  
is always so4 ,while his                
self-satisfaction is incessantly        
ministered to on the one hand1 on the   

other he insensibly imbibes the modes of
 feeling1 and of looking at things1     
which belong to a more vulgar or a more 
limited mind than his own4 ,this evil   
differs from many of those which have   
hitherto been dwelt on1 by being an     
increasing one4 ,the association of men 
with women in daily life is much closer 
and more complete than it ever was      
before4 ,men's life is more domestic4   
,formerly1 their pleasures and chosen   
occupations were among men1 and in men's
 company3 their wives had but a fragment
 of their lives4 ,at the present time1  
the progress of civilization1 and the   
turn of opinion against the rough       
amusements and convivial excesses which 
formerly occupied most men in their     
hours of relaxation--together with 7it  
must be said7 the improved tone of      
modern feeling as to the reciprocity of 
duty which binds the husband towards the
 wife--have thrown the man very much    
more upon home and its inmates1 for his 
personal and social pleasures3 while the

 kind and degree of improvement which   
has been made in women's education1 has 
made them in some degree capable of     
being his companions in ideas and mental
 tastes1 while leaving them1 in most    
cases1 still hopelessly inferior to him4
 ,his desire of mental communion is thus
 in general satisfied by a communion    
from which he learns nothing4 ,an       
unimproving and unstimulating           
companionship is substituted for 7what  
he might otherwise have been obliged to 
seek7 the society of his equals in      
powers and his fellows in the higher    
pursuits4 ,we see1 accordingly1 that    
young men of the greatest promise       
generally cease to improve as soon as   
they marry1 and1 not improving1         
inevitably degenerate4 ,if the wife does
 not push the husband forward1 she      
always holds him back4 ,he ceases to    
care for what she does not care for2 he 
no longer desires1 and ends by disliking
 and shunning1 society congenial to his 
former aspirations1 and which would now 

shame his falling-off from them2 his    
higher faculties both of mind and heart 
cease to be called into activity4 ,and  
this change coinciding with the new and 
selfish interests which are created by  
the family1 after a few years he differs
 in no material respect from those who  
have never had wishes for anything but  
the common vanities and the common      
pecuniary objects4  ,what marriage may  
be in the case of two persons of        
cultivated faculties1 identical in      
opinions and purposes1 between whom     
there exists that best kind of equality1
 similarity of powers and capacities    
with reciprocal superiority in them--so 
that each can enjoy the luxury of       
looking up to the other1 and can have   
alternately the pleasure of leading and 
of being led in the path of             
development--,i will not attempt to     
describe4 ,to those who can conceive it1
 there is no need2 to those who cannot1 
it would appear the dream of an         
enthusiast4 ,but ,i maintain1 with the  

profoundest conviction1 that this1 and  
this only1 is the ideal of marriage2 and
 that all opinions1 customs1 and        
institutions which favour any other     
notion of it1 or turn the conceptions   
and aspirations connected with it into  
any other direction1 by whatever        
pretences they may be coloured1 are     
relics of primitive barbarism4 ,the     
moral regeneration of mankind will only 
really commence1 when the most          
fundamental of the social relations is  
placed under the rule of equal justice1 
and when human beings learn to cultivate
 their strongest sympathy with an equal 
in rights and in cultivation4  ,thus    
far1 the benefits which it has appeared 
that the world would gain by ceasing to 
make sex a disqualification for         
privileges and a badge of subjection1   
are social rather than individual2      
consisting in an increase of the general
 fund of thinking and acting power1 and 
an improvement in the general conditions
 of the association of men with women4  

,but it would be a grievous             
understatement of the case to omit the  
most direct benefit of all1 the         
unspeakable gain in private happiness to
 the liberated half of the species2 the 
difference to them between a life of    
subjection to the will of others1 and a 
life of rational freedom4 ,after the    
primary necessities of food and raiment1
 freedom is the first and strongest want
 of human nature4 ,while mankind are    
lawless1 their desire is for lawless    
freedom4 ,when they have learnt to      
understand the meaning of duty and the  
value of reason1 they incline more and  
more to be guided and restrained by     
these in the exercise of their freedom2 
but they do not therefore desire freedom
 less2 they do not become disposed to   
accept the will of other people as the  
representative and interpreter of those 
guiding principles4 ,on the contrary1   
the communities in which the reason has 
been most cultivated1 and in which the  
idea of social duty has been most       

powerful1 are those which have most     
strongly asserted the freedom of action 
of the individual--the liberty of each  
to govern his conduct by his own        
feelings of duty1 and by such laws and  
social restraints as his own conscience 
can subscribe to4  ,he who would rightly
 appreciate the worth of personal       
independence as an element of happiness1
 should consider the value he himself   
puts upon it as an ingredient of his    
own4 ,there is no subject on which there
 is a greater habitual difference of    
judgment between a man judging for      
himself1 and the same man judging for   
other people4 ,when he hears others     
complaining that they are not allowed   
freedom of action--that their own will  
has not sufficient influence in the     
regulation of their affairs--his        
inclination is1 to ask1 what are their  
grievances8 what positive damage they   
sustain8 and in what respect they       
consider their affairs to be mismanaged8
 and if they fail to make out1 in answer

 to these questions1 what appears to him
 a sufficient case1 he turns a deaf ear1
 and regards their complaint as the     
fanciful querulousness of people whom   
nothing reasonable will satisfy4 ,but he
 has a quite different standard of      
judgment when he is deciding for        
himself4 ,then1 the most unexceptionable
 administration of his interests by a   
tutor set over him1 does not satisfy his
 feelings3 his personal exclusion from  
the deciding authority appears itself   
the greatest grievance of all1 rendering
 it superfluous even to enter into the  
question of mismanagement4 ,it is the   
same with nations4 ,what citizen of a   
free country would listen to any offers 
of good and skilful administration1 in  
return for the abdication of freedom8   
,even if he could believe that good and 
skilful administration can exist among a
 people ruled by a will not their own1  
would not the consciousness of working  
out their own destiny under their own   
moral responsibility be a compensation  

to his feelings for great rudeness and  
imperfection in the details of public   
affairs8 ,let him rest assured that     
whatever he feels on this point1 women  
feel in a fully equal degree4 ,whatever 
has been said or written1 from the time 
of ,herodotus to the present1 of the    
ennobling influence of free             
government--the nerve and spring which  
it gives to all the faculties1 the      
larger and higher objects which it      
presents to the intellect and feelings1 
the more unselfish public spirit1 and   
calmer and broader views of duty1 that  
it engenders1 and the generally loftier 
platform on which it elevates the       
individual as a moral1 spiritual1 and   
social being--is every particle as true 
of women as of men4 ,are these things no
 important part of individual happiness8
 ,let any man call to mind what he      
himself felt on emerging from           
boyhood--from the tutelage and control  
of even loved and affectionate          
elders--and entering upon the           

responsibilities of manhood4 ,was it not
 like the physical effect of taking off 
a heavy weight1 or releasing him from   
obstructive1 even if not otherwise      
painful1 bonds8 ,did he not feel twice  
as much alive1 twice as much a human    
being1 as before8 ,and does he imagine  
that women have none of these feelings8 
,but it is a striking fact1 that the    
satisfactions and mortifications of     
personal pride1 though all in all to    
most men when the case is their own1    
have less allowance made for them in the
 case of other people1 and are less     
listened to as a ground or a            
justification of conduct1 than any other
 natural human feelings2 perhaps because
 men compliment them in their own case  
with the names of so many other         
qualities1 that they are seldom         
conscious how mighty an influence these 
feelings exercise in their own lives4   
,no less large and powerful is their    
part1 we may assure ourselves1 in the   
lives and feelings of women4 ,women are 

schooled into suppressing them in their 
most natural and most healthy direction1
 but the internal principle remains1 in 
a different outward form4 ,an active and
 energetic mind1 if denied liberty1 will
 seek for power3 refused the command of 
itself1 it will assert its personality  
by attempting to control others4 ,to    
allow to any human beings no existence  
of their own but what depends on others1
 is giving far too high a premium on    
bending others to their purposes4 ,where
 liberty cannot be hoped for1 and power 
can1 power becomes the grand object of  
human desire2 those to whom others will 
not leave the undisturbed management of 
their own affairs1 will compensate      
themselves1 if they can1 by meddling for
 their own purposes with the affairs of 
others4 ,hence also women's passion for 
personal beauty1 and dress and display2 
and all the evils that flow from it1 in 
the way of mischievous luxury and social
 immorality4 ,the love of power and the 
love of liberty are in eternal          

antagonism4 ,where there is least       
liberty1 the passion for power is the   
most ardent and unscrupulous4 ,the      
desire of power over others can only    
cease to be a depraving agency among    
mankind1 when each of them individually 
is able to do without it3 which can only
 be where respect for liberty in the    
personal concerns of each is an         
established principle4  ,but it is not  
only through the sentiment of personal  
dignity1 that the free direction and    
disposal of their own faculties is a    
source of individual happiness1 and to  
be fettered and restricted in it1 a     
source of unhappiness1 to human beings1 
and not least to women4 ,there is       
nothing1 after disease1 indigence1 and  
guilt1 so fatal to the pleasurable      
enjoyment of life as the want of a      
worthy outlet for the active faculties4 
,women who have the cares of a family1  
and while they have the cares of a      
family1 have this outlet1 and it        
generally suffices for them3 but what of

 the greatly increasing number of women1
 who have had no opportunity of         
exercising the vocation which they are  
mocked by telling them is their proper  
one8 ,what of the women whose children  
have been lost to them by death or      
distance1 or have grown up1 married1 and
 formed homes of their own8 ,there are  
abundant examples of men who1 after a   
life engrossed by business1 retire with 
a competency to the enjoyment1 as they  
hope1 of rest1 but to whom1 as they are 
unable to acquire new interests and     
excitements that can replace the old1   
the change to a life of inactivity      
brings ennui1 melancholy1 and premature 
death4 ,yet no one thinks of the        
parallel case of so many worthy and     
devoted women1 who1 having paid what    
they are told is their debt to          
society--having brought up a family     
blamelessly to manhood and              
womanhood--having kept a house as long  
as they had a house needing to be       
kept--are deserted by the sole          

occupation for which they have fitted   
themselves2 and remain with undiminished
 activity but with no employment for it1
 unless perhaps a daughter or           
daughter-in-law is willing to abdicate  
in their favour the discharge of the    
same functions in her younger household4
 ,surely a hard lot for the old age of  
those who have worthily discharged1 as  
long as it was given to them to         
discharge1 what the world accounts their
 only social duty4 ,of such women1 and  
of those others to whom this duty has   
not been committed at all--many of whom 
pine through life with the consciousness
 of thwarted vocations1 and activities  
which are not suffered to expand--the   
only resources1 speaking generally1 are 
religion and charity4 ,but their        
religion1 though it may be one of       
feeling1 and of ceremonial observance1  
cannot be a religion of action1 unless  
in the form of charity4 ,for charity    
many of them are by nature admirably    
fitted2 but to practise it usefully1 or 

even without doing mischief1 requires   
the education1 the manifold preparation1
 the knowledge and the thinking powers1 
of a skilful administrator4 ,there are  
few of the administrative functions of  
government for which a person would not 
be fit1 who is fit to bestow charity    
usefully4 ,in this as in other cases    
7pre-eminently in that of the education 
of children71 the duties permitted to   
women cannot be performed properly1     
without their being trained for duties  
which1 to the great loss of society1 are
 not permitted to them4 ,and here let me
 notice the singular way in which the   
question of women's disabilities is     
frequently presented to view1 by those  
who find it easier to draw a ludicrous  
picture of what they do not like1 than  
to answer the arguments for it4 ,when it
 is suggested that women's executive    
capacities and prudent counsels might   
sometimes be found valuable in affairs  
of state1 these lovers of fun hold up to
 the ridicule of the world1 as sitting  

in parliament or in the cabinet1 girls  
in their teens1 or young wives of two or
 three and twenty1 transported bodily1  
exactly as they are1 from the           
drawing-room to the ,house of ,commons4 
,they forget that males are not usually 
selected at this early age for a seat in
 ,parliament1 or for responsible        
political functions4 ,common sense would
 tell them that if such trusts were     
confided to women1 it would be to such  
as having no special vocation for       
married life1 or preferring another     
employment of their faculties 7as many  
women even now prefer to marriage some  
of the few honourable occupations within
 their reach71 have spent the best years
 of their youth in attempting to qualify
 themselves for the pursuits in which   
they desire to engage2 or still more    
frequently perhaps1 widows or wives of  
forty or fifty1 by whom the knowledge of
 life and faculty of government which   
they have acquired in their families1   
could by the aid of appropriate studies 

be made available on a less contracted  
scale4 ,there is no country of ,europe  
in which the ablest men have not        
frequently experienced1 and keenly      
appreciated1 the value of the advice and
 help of clever and experienced women of
 the world1 in the attainment both of   
private and of public objects2 and there
 are important matters of public        
administration to which few men are     
equally competent with such women2 among
 others1 the detailed control of        
expenditure4 ,but what we are now       
discussing is not the need which society
 has of the services of women in public 
business1 but the dull and hopeless life
 to which it so often condemns them1 by 
forbidding them to exercise the         
practical abilities which many of them  
are conscious of1 in any wider field    
than one which to some of them never    
was1 and to others is no longer1 open4  
,if there is anything vitally important 
to the happiness of human beings1 it is 
that they should relish their habitual  

pursuit4 ,this requisite of an enjoyable
 life is very imperfectly granted1 or   
altogether denied1 to a large part of   
mankind2 and by its absence many a life 
is a failure1 which is provided1 in     
appearance1 with every requisite of     
success4 ,but if circumstances which    
society is not yet skilful enough to    
overcome1 render such failures often for
 the present inevitable1 society need   
not itself inflict them4 ,the           
injudiciousness of parents1 a youth's   
own inexperience1 or the absence of     
external opportunities for the congenial
 vocation1 and their presence for an    
uncongenial1 condemn numbers of men to  
pass their lives in doing one thing     
reluctantly and ill1 when there are     
other things which they could have done 
well and happily4 ,but on women this    
sentence is imposed by actual law1 and  
by customs equivalent to law4 ,what1 in 
unenlightened societies1 colour1 race1  
religion1 or in the case of a conquered 
country1 nationality1 are to some men1  

sex is to all women2 a peremptory       
exclusion from almost all honourable    
occupations1 but either such as cannot  
be fulfilled by others1 or such as those
 others do not think worthy of their    
acceptance4 ,sufferings arising from    
causes of this nature usually meet with 
so little sympathy1 that few persons are
 aware of the great amount of           
unhappiness even now produced by the    
feeling of a wasted life4 ,the case will
 be even more frequent1 as increased    
cultivation creates a greater and       
greater disproportion between the ideas 
and faculties of women1 and the scope   
which society allows to their activity4 
,when we consider the positive evil     
caused to the disqualified half of the  
human race by their                     
disqualification--first in the loss of  
the most inspiriting and elevating kind 
of personal enjoyment1 and next in the  
weariness1 disappointment1 and profound 
dissatisfaction with life1 which are so 
often the substitute for it2 one feels  

that among all the lessons which men    
require for carrying on the struggle    
against the inevitable imperfections of 
their lot on earth1 there is no lesson  
which they more need1 than not to add to
 the evils which nature inflicts1 by    
their jealous and prejudiced            
restrictions on one another4 ,their vain
 fears only substitute other and worse  
evils for those which they are idly     
apprehensive of3 while every restraint  
on the freedom of conduct of any of     
their human fellow creatures1 7otherwise
 than by making them responsible for any
 evil actually caused by it71 dries up  
pro tanto the principal fountain of     
human happiness1 and leaves the species 
less rich1 to an inappreciable degree1  
in all that makes life valuable to the  
individual human being4    ,,the ,,end4