It is a fact,’ sez he,
‘The surest plan to make a Man
Is, Think him so, J. B.,
Ez much ez you or me!’”
J. R. Lowell.
It is often said that the women’s movement is chaotic1, that no one knows whither the modern woman is going, nor even whither she wants to go; woman is, in fact, adrift, having lost her helm (or perhaps only the helmsman), and is going, full steam, all round the compass.
It is very much easier to make such assertions, at least they sound less preposterous2, if one keeps to the rhetorical singular and begs the whole question at issue by assuming that women are one in need, capacity and character, and that this eternal feminine has been once for all dissected3, understood and catalogued, and that all variations are merely caprice. But let us drop the singular and we shall see that although women want as many different things as there are different women, there are two things which the women in the movement consciously[15] desire and strive for beyond all others, and these are knowledge and scope. The women’s movement is one to open the doors of the world to women: that they may know the nature of their own bodies (to every mother her workshop), and the bodies of men, their mates, not according to the teaching of the schools and churches, but in the light of modern science; that they may have in their ranks women who know the condition of law and medicine and affairs; that the mind and character of women shall be enabled to play upon these matters with knowledge, and shall present to the world the complementary view to that given by the mind and character of men.
In so far as the deepest needs of men and women are one, men suffer as well as women from the ignorance or degradation5 of women; a stream cannot rise higher than its source, and men are the sons of women. In so far as the bodies and minds, the lives and experiences of men and women differ, in so far do both men and women suffer, if the specifically feminine character is unillumined by science, the specifically feminine activity hampered6 and checked by external law or economic necessity.
In this striving for knowledge and scope the women are in sympathy with the spirit of the time. Scientific men have abandoned the invention of worlds and have betaken themselves to the study of the world presented to them, in most matters except those in which sex plays a part. Here there are still some who talk about “Ideal Woman,” or[16] “Normal Woman,” of being unsexed by knowledge and liberty, as if by nature women were unwomanly, and nothing but the stern restraints of darkness and bondage7 could keep them natural. In asking that these restraints should be removed, women are demanding the only conditions under which any really scientific generalisations can be made about woman’s sphere and woman’s nature.
As lately as the middle of the nineteenth century, Mrs. Norton wrote:—
“He has made me dream that it was meant for a higher and stronger purpose, that gift which came not from man but from God! It was meant to enable me to rouse the hearts of others, to examine into all the gross injustice8 of these laws, to ask the nation of gallant9 gentlemen whose countrywoman I am, for once to hear a woman’s pleading on the subject. Not because I deserve more at their hands than other women. Well I know, on the contrary, how many hundreds, infinitely10 better than I,—more pious11, more patient, and less rash under injury,—have watered their bread with tears! My plea to attention is, that in pleading for myself I am able to plead for all these others. Not that my sufferings or my deserts are greater than theirs, but that I combine, with the fact of having suffered wrong, the power to comment on and explain the cause of that wrong, which few women are able to do.”
Mrs. Norton knew what was the state of the law, having suffered cruelly from it, and there was, in her day, very little chance of any women knowing the law, except through just such personal bitter[17] suffering. Few women, as she truly said, could combine this knowledge with the powers of exposition, agitation12 and eloquence13 which so distinguished14 her. This is less true now than it was then. Progressive women are determined15 that it shall cease to be true altogether. They are increasingly devoting themselves to studying the complex social system into which they are born and are themselves introducing new lives; they are supplementing the intuitions of motherhood with the reasonings of science; they are finding in the knowledge of racial poisons justification16 for what has hitherto been simple racial instinct. The defilement17 or the abuse of marriage by men, which has hitherto been regarded as venial18, because the wife and child were property, acquire quite a different colour when women as well as men know the effects upon the race. It is possible to tell devoted19 ignorant wives that it is their part to endure all and never to refuse. Medical men have kept silence, priests have preached and lawyers have advised submission20, and ignorant mothers have handed on these precepts21 to their daughters. “La femme est née pour souffrir,” says one mother of daughters; and the more woman suffers, the more truly womanly she is. “Entbehren sollst du,” quotes the anti-suffragist,—to women only,—and sacrifice, qua sacrifice, has been made the woman’s idol22. But when she gets to know that the sacrifice is depriving her of motherhood or poisoning the children to come, how then? Will she be so much in love with sacrifice? Can anyone[18] believe that a woman will retain the old attitude towards marriage after she has learnt the causes of many of the congenital diseases of children, or of what are ironically termed “diseases of women”? Whatever the view of enlightened women will be (and I decline altogether to prophesy), of one thing we may be quite certain, their view will be prodigiously23 changed by the light.
Women will not only obscurely feel, they will know; when they know, there is no power on earth that can prevent them from acting24. The only question is whether they shall act freely, or whether their informed energy shall be thwarted25, diverted and suppressed to the point of explosiveness and to the embitterment26 of their lives and characters. In Great Britain, at the present time, this question is acute; but it is being put all the world over, and different nations are answering it in different ways, and finding it amazingly difficult to learn from each other’s experience. Do we not even find English people prophesying27 direst results if the causes for divorce are made equal as between men and women, and these people are left open-mouthed when informed that in the northern portion of Great Britain they are so? While others declare that the mere4 notion of a woman being a Member of Parliament, of a jury, or of the police force, must be the cause of inextinguishable laughter, thereby28 convicting themselves of bad manners towards two European nations and the United States of America.
The wisest among those who educate the young[19] are disbelieving in the doctrine29 of original sin; they no longer regard education as violently forcing a child into moulds; they believe that in giving scope for natural energy the teacher is doing almost all that a teacher can profitably do; they think that as the human race has evolved into two sexes which are indispensable to one another, the better they understand one another the closer will be their sympathy and co-operation with each other, and that, therefore, the segregation30 of the sexes is bad. The subjection of one sex to the other is also bad, since the slave-owner never can really know the slave, while the knowledge the slave has of her owner is bitter fruit. In the art of medicine, doctors are more and more setting themselves to remove obstructions31 to health. Even the penal32 codes of the world are slowly becoming less and less retributive. Women, therefore, are in the direct line of progressive thought when they demand that their vital force shall not be circumscribed33 and shackled34, but that men shall give them the same scope as they claim for themselves. And progressive women declare that liberty will tend to assuage35 the war of the sexes, which is as old as the domination of man.
点击收听单词发音
1 chaotic | |
adj.混沌的,一片混乱的,一团糟的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 preposterous | |
adj.荒谬的,可笑的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 dissected | |
adj.切开的,分割的,(叶子)多裂的v.解剖(动物等)( dissect的过去式和过去分词 );仔细分析或研究 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 mere | |
adj.纯粹的;仅仅,只不过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 degradation | |
n.降级;低落;退化;陵削;降解;衰变 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 hampered | |
妨碍,束缚,限制( hamper的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 bondage | |
n.奴役,束缚 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 injustice | |
n.非正义,不公正,不公平,侵犯(别人的)权利 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 gallant | |
adj.英勇的,豪侠的;(向女人)献殷勤的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 infinitely | |
adv.无限地,无穷地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 pious | |
adj.虔诚的;道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 agitation | |
n.搅动;搅拌;鼓动,煽动 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 eloquence | |
n.雄辩;口才,修辞 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 distinguished | |
adj.卓越的,杰出的,著名的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 determined | |
adj.坚定的;有决心的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 justification | |
n.正当的理由;辩解的理由 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 defilement | |
n.弄脏,污辱,污秽 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 venial | |
adj.可宽恕的;轻微的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 devoted | |
adj.忠诚的,忠实的,热心的,献身于...的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 submission | |
n.服从,投降;温顺,谦虚;提出 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 precepts | |
n.规诫,戒律,箴言( precept的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 idol | |
n.偶像,红人,宠儿 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 prodigiously | |
adv.异常地,惊人地,巨大地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 acting | |
n.演戏,行为,假装;adj.代理的,临时的,演出用的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 thwarted | |
阻挠( thwart的过去式和过去分词 ); 使受挫折; 挫败; 横过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26 embitterment | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27 prophesying | |
v.预告,预言( prophesy的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28 thereby | |
adv.因此,从而 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29 doctrine | |
n.教义;主义;学说 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30 segregation | |
n.隔离,种族隔离 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31 obstructions | |
n.障碍物( obstruction的名词复数 );阻碍物;阻碍;阻挠 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
32 penal | |
adj.刑罚的;刑法上的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
33 circumscribed | |
adj.[医]局限的:受限制或限于有限空间的v.在…周围划线( circumscribe的过去式和过去分词 );划定…范围;限制;限定 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
34 shackled | |
给(某人)带上手铐或脚镣( shackle的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
35 assuage | |
v.缓和,减轻,镇定 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |