“They that have power to hurt, and will do none,
That do not do the thing they most do show,
Who, moving others, are themselves as stone,
Unmovèd, cold, and to temptation slow,—
They rightly do inherit Heaven’s graces,
And husband nature’s riches from expense;
They are the lords and owners of their faces,
Others, but stewards2 of their excellence3.”
William Shakespeare.
If men have made the mistake of attempting to repress women, we must admit that women have taken their share of the sex war in attempting to get the better of men. Men have insisted that women shall live by their sex alone, and women have used their sex in every conceivable way to accomplish their ends. Men have drawn4 ring-fences round women and then twitted them with their narrowness. Men have had to bow to the necessity of women bearing and rearing children, but whereas this is a work requiring the broadest culture and the widest sympathies, men have for[174] ages restricted women’s culture and cramped5 women’s sympathies. Full of vitality6 and personality, women have felt the heavy hand of brute7 force upon them, and like all live persons, they have either fretted8 and rebelled (which, when it is done by a woman, is called nagging), or they have circumvented9 the oppressor by wiles10 and lies. True, women have impotently raged against men, and, true, it is a pity. If you are weak and ignorant, your rage will, half the time, be not only impotent, but directed against the wrong things and the wrong persons. True, women have lied to men and cheated them, and some of these women have been the most successful in twisting men round their little fingers, while the incurably11 honest women have looked on in disgust and despair. But no one can say that women have abused men more than men have abused women—all literature and history proves the reverse. No one can say that women have lied to men more than men have lied to women; the deserted12 girl-mothers are the witnesses.
All these mistakes are due to selfishness, and this is a human, not a sex characteristic. It is always a difficult matter for each individual person to determine when self-expression and self-development merge13 into selfishness, and there is no short way and no simple rule by which it can be determined14. One must allow that men have greater natural temptations to be selfish, owing to physical differences between them and women, and the[175] education of boys, instead of, as now, enhancing the force of these temptations, should be directed to counteracting15 them. The physical circumstances of motherhood, for instance, do not allow a woman to escape the consequences of the sexual act as a man can. It requires more imagination for a man to realise the cruelty of deserting a baby than it does for a woman to realise it. The baby reminds her. So we find that women less often desert their babies than men do. A healthy public opinion would stimulate18 the man’s imagination in this direction. Again, man’s greater physical strength makes it more easy for him to bully19 a woman than for her to bully him. When, by chance, a woman is physically20 stronger than a man, she does not always refrain from using her force unchivalrously. If it be true that a man has stronger appetites than a woman, this again increases his temptations; but one must, if one allows this circumstance, also allow that it may give the woman an advantage, and so tempt1 her to bully the man in her way, and there is no doubt some women yield to this temptation. I sometimes see, in the very cruelty of men to women, a hidden agony of fear lest, ultimately, women should need men less than men need women. If this be true on the purely21 animal plane, nothing could be further from the truth, if we take the whole human creature into account, and men who, by brutality22 (the result of fear and the cause of fear, too), kill the higher attractions of which they are capable,[176] are making a tremendous miscalculation; for they might attain24 by the one what they altogether miss by the other; and this is going in the future to be more so, not less. The women of the future will have men on terms, or go without, and the terms must be the only honourable25 terms, of love and liberty and mutual26 service. A man will find he has no need to preach wifely submission27 to the woman whose love he has won, and he will find that he does not want it either.
Alarmists declare that the women’s movement has caused sex-antagonism28. The preceding chapter has, I think, disposed of such an absurd contention29, and most thoughtful persons do not defend a statement so easily refuted by literature and history. Others, with more evidence, maintain that sex-antagonism was there, a kind of sleeping dog, which the women’s movement has now aroused to vicious attack. It is contended that the progressive women have stirred up normal women to rebellion, which they never would, of themselves, have contemplated30; that the progressives are mischief31-makers, who have put dangerous ideas into the heads of people quite unable to carry them out, and the only result will be unrest, disputes, discomfort32 for men, misery33 for women, and a final vindication34 of the supreme35 authority of man. The progressives will probably suffer severe castigation36, but the normal women will be kissed and forgiven, for, after all, they are only women and not quite accountable for their[177] actions; and, besides, men are really rather fond of the silly things. This is the style of the commoner leader-writer in the anti-suffrage37 newspapers.
We may grant at once that the women’s movement would not be where it is but for its leaders. This is no less true of the women’s than of all other movements. A movement does not really get going until leaders have arisen from the ranks; the absurd mistake is to suppose that a movement can be kept going for any prolonged time by the leaders only, without support from the ranks. For many years, the women found it exceedingly difficult to raise up leaders from their own ranks, and a very considerable lead was, as a matter of fact, given by men. But until women had arisen who could carry on the leadership, progress was slow, partial and almost entirely38 academic. If John Stuart Mill’s searching analysis of women’s position had not made women think for themselves; if his disgust and shame had raised no answering disgust and shame in women, they would have proved themselves fit for the position they were in, and would never have begun to stir out of it. And about that time there were other men too, ready to help, William Lloyd Garrison39 and Walt Whitman and Mazzini and Stansfeld and Henry Sidgwick, and all the other people who did the pioneer work of helping40 the women to get education and training, and of opening up careers to them. Then, although the active reformers among[178] men have been comparatively recent, there have been great artists, from the earliest times, who have held the mirror up to man and shown him his deeds towards woman. No feminist41 tract23 can compare for propaganda purposes with The Trojan Women, or Medea. Tell a woman she has no concern with the great imperial matters of peace and war, and then give her the first to read! She will have a whole armoury of answers. Or try to crush a woman who has read the second with reproaches concerning the treachery and falseness of womankind! If the sex-war is as old as history, there have been—and herein lies our chief hope—men in all times who have read its causes. If it were not so, we might despair of the true causes ever appearing to all.
If sex-war has existed because the majority of men were tempted42 by their superior physical force to enslave women, and because the majority of women have retaliated43 by using the only power available to them, the power of sex, to get some of their own back, it is clear that much of the war on the women’s side was not overt44. It is impossible, however, to believe that the women who have lied to men, and deceived them, and who have played upon their sex, have not in their hearts felt considerable contempt for the men they were entrapping45 through their grosser nature. It is a sorry picture that is presented to us, of the “womanly” woman cajoling and bamboozling46 a man into complaisance47, and that state of things cannot[179] be described as peace, while the present state of friction48 is called war. There are elements of warfare49 in both, but the first was underhand and corrupting50, while the foolish elements of the present condition are patent and, as I believe, temporary. I believe this because I feel pretty sure that there is enough fairness in the mass of men for them not permanently51 to resist what is just in the women’s claim, once the women make it plain; and secondly52, because what has been foolish or wrong in the women’s movement is the result of the old folly53 and wrong which the movement as a whole is directed against: the folly of trying to make legislative54 action precede education, and the wrong of fighting evil with evil, the age-long error of retaliation56.
One must grant that one hears a great deal more of sex-antagonism now than one did even ten years ago; certainly much more than one did a quarter of a century ago. But if anyone will take the trouble to compare the debates in the House of Commons twenty-five years ago with the debates now, and note the difference of tone when women are mentioned, he cannot avoid being struck by the fact that the thing is getting more talked about now, just because it is going. The old contempt for women has largely gone, and has been replaced by a most serious, if considerably57 bewildered effort to understand what the women would be at. It does not lie in the mouths of men who built or maintained in the House the monkey cage, which[180] goes by the euphemistic name of the Ladies’ Gallery, to assert that there was no antagonism; those men both feared and despised women. The cage will go when Englishmen realise (it takes them some time) how ridiculous they appear to all the world by exhibiting themselves as in terror of their own women.
In many other ways women feel the antagonism less, and one improvement of the utmost importance to them is the enormous increase in their liberty of going about without molestation58 from men. When I was a girl, it was considered rather a bold thing for a lady to walk unescorted within the precincts of the City of London, and there were very few restaurants where she would have been safe from rudeness. Consider who offered this rudeness: men. And why? because, though the woman was doing an absolutely harmless thing, she was singular, and it was assumed that she did it from an improper59 motive60 and was therefore fair game; or still more simply, because the cruel lust61 of tormenting62 a helpless creature was irresistible63. What woman who has moved an inch out of shelter, but has encountered this?
Still, the antagonism is much less than it was. How is it that we hear more of it? The chief reason is a very simple one: women’s griefs have become reasoned and articulate. Whereas women were fighting man by wiles and arts, they are now appealing to his reason and finding words for their appeal, while a few, exasperated64, are hitting out[181] rather wildly with man’s own weapons. In order to appeal to men’s reason, women have had to find words for their grievances65 and their differences, and to give words to a thing always makes it ten times as important as it was. The unreasonable67 man points to the inarticulate women and invites you to note how satisfied they are; he then points to the articulate ones and cries shame on them for fomenting68 sex-war. To the unreasonable man, it is impossible ever to demonstrate women’s grievances, for to do so is at once to be reproached with being “anti-man”; yet surely even he might admit that to err55 is human. If he had a little of the gift of humour, he might profitably consider the eighteenth-century treatment of women, and ask himself if it is really not rather funny that he should be so hurt when women at last find tongue to say what they think of the rare old sport of woman-baiting. When the admirable Sir Charles Grandison ejaculates, “Were it not, my dear ladies, for male protectors, to what insults, to what outrages70, would not your sex be subject?” he was not overstating the case against the men of that day. It was not against the other forces of nature, against hunger or cold, or wild beasts that women most needed protection; it was against insult and outrage69 from man. Man was, by far, woman’s most formidable enemy and most terrible danger. Women are frequently invited to bewail the death of chivalry71. What chivalry meant, in these days, was the protection by individual men of their own[182] women against the depredations72 of other men. If a woman had no “protector” of her own, or if he chanced to be a tyrant73, she remained unprotected by the State. The growth of a healthier opinion among men has now greatly reduced the number of men who desire to “outrage and insult” women, and has greatly increased the State protection of women. There will perhaps always be some few men of primeval instincts, or what is worse, of primeval instincts corrupted74 by modernity; but it is for civilised men to reduce them as far as they can, to control those that cannot be civilised, and surely not to become their apologists.
The development in England that is known as militancy75 is, so far, peculiar76 to England, and is the result of the political situation and of the temperament77 and character of two women, Mrs. Pankhurst and her daughter Christabel, acting16 upon it. The fiery78 and self-willed nature of Mrs. Pankhurst made her a person to whom half-measures and compromises have always been repugnant. Her deep and passionate79 sex-pride gave her an eloquence80 and an attractive force which drew thousands of women to her. She voiced in a language new to the timid and the ladylike, all the revolt that was gnawing81 at the hearts of women. To many women it must have seemed that their deepest unuttered thoughts and the unuttered thoughts of generations of women had found expression, and anyone who has had this experience, knows what intense devotion is[183] felt towards the person who has the courage and the genius to utter the words. If Mrs. Pankhurst alone had inspired the militant82 movement, it would have been at once a nobler and a more terrible thing than it has proved. The machine, that wonderful engine of advertisement and ingenuity83, was the work of other minds. Doubtless it was the machine which served to make the lightning progress of the militant movement in its first years; it has been the machine, however, which has largely been responsible for the disasters of recent times. What was great and noble has become inextricably entangled84 with what the public has come to regard as a gigantic fake, and consequently the attitude of the public is either one of amusement, to see what fresh trick ingenuity will invent, what fresh show will be presented to the gaping85 crowd, or of exasperation86 at what seems to them like pointless mischief. The clever exploiting of the psychology87 of mobs did not go deep enough, and was, in truth, far too cynical88. There is an appalling89 amount of mob spirit (not by any means confined to the common people, but to be seen even in the House of Commons), and many of the militant devices have successfully appealed to this; but no reform worth having was ever won from the mob, and it is the tragic91 truth that much of the deeper meaning of the most selfless and devoted92 sacrifice on the part of individual women has been hidden by the very advertisement which it has received.
When the Women’s Social and Political union[184] sprang into public view some eight years ago, the time was certainly ripe for a revival93. Some people still think that the union has done nothing but harm. This has always seemed to me an unreasonable opinion. Undoubtedly94 they made other work extraordinarily95 difficult in some ways, and for a time. They captured the press, but, since they did not win the approval of the press for their object, but only secured notices by their sensationalism, it was, for some years, actually more difficult for other workers to get any publicity96 at all for their views or their work. The report of a street row always gets precedence of the report of a peaceful meeting, and the result of this was that, for some years, the newspapers were filled with reports of militancy, while their columns showed nothing of the great and steady growth of the non-militant movement, nor did they even do justice to the educational side of the militants97’ work. This condition of things was in itself intensely provocative98, and nothing is a more striking example of women’s level-headedness and far-sightedness than the fact that the enormous mass of suffragists refused to be provoked to any unconsidered act of retaliation. Some of them had the political sense to note that the newspapers which gave most prominence99 to militancy were those most hostile to women’s suffrage.
It would take very much more space than I have, thoroughly100 to argue the pros101 and cons17 of militancy, to distinguish its different forms, and to disentangle its motives102. Like all great movements, this one[185] contains people who have joined it for very different motives, and some of the arguments by which it has been defended are mutually destructive. Its greatest achievement in my opinion is that it woke people up and opened their purses, in a way totally unprecedented103. It made those who had never cared realise that some women cared intensely, and made them ask why. It made those who had been working for long years realise that there were many yet untried methods, and that some of them were good. Above all, it made many women feel that, if they desired the enfranchisement104 of women, and if they did not like the methods of the W.S.P.U., the only respectable thing to do was to work as hard, and give as much for what they thought right, as these other women did. To the constitutional suffragists, it is a matter of complete indifference105 who gets the credit, when the vote is won; but it is a matter of the utmost import to them, not only that the vote should be won, but that both women and men should be prepared to make the best use of so great a reform.
Something can, of course, be done by telling people they are ready. This is what the early militants did. There was no real opposition106 in the country; there was a very large favourable107 majority in the House, and there had been a majority since 1886. One can quite conceive a revival which would in a few years have carried mere108 inertia109. What happened was that the W.S.P.U. inflamed110 a party against the movement, and this party was the[186] one which by its first principles was actually pledged to support the movement. Temper, party advantage, personal loyalties111 were all aroused; but, instead of being aroused for the suffrage movement, they were inflamed against it. It was to be war. All possible peaceful methods had, we were told, been tried and had failed. (This was, of course, the great and fundamental untruth. The work up to that time had not had anything like the popular appeal of recent years.) At first, by skilful112 advertisement, it almost seemed as if elections might be lost and won by these means, and some alarm was felt in party circles; but it did not take long to show that there were very few men who were going to vote against their party at the command of the militant suffragists, and the cry of “Keep the Liberal out!” became ineffective. It caused the maximum of irritation113 and the minimum of effect.
The militant campaign would have succeeded if the majority of women, even perhaps if the majority of suffragists, had backed it. I am not afraid of making this concession114, holding, as I do, that the enormous majority of women kept out of the militant movement from ethical115 considerations. It is not easy to bring the ethical case against the militants, because they themselves waver incessantly116 between two positions. Sometimes they are soldiers, fighting a battle, inflicting117 damage, having a “siege of Whitehall” (to quote from one of their posters), “proving that women can fight.” Sometimes they are martyrs119, who do injury to no one but[187] themselves; who merely refuse to be governed without their consent; who have adopted the Oriental device of dying on their enemy’s doorstep. Now this second policy is the very reverse of the first, and the only thing that can be said against it is, that it is an extreme measure which should on no account be undertaken, until ordinary methods of education and organisation120 have been fully90 tried. To become a martyr118 as soon as you can’t get your own way, is a form of spiritual bullying121 that is extraordinarily exasperating122.
But the first policy cuts away the whole ground upon which the women’s demand is based; upon this ground not only would men infallibly beat women, but the great mass of women, as well as men, would feel that the militant women had invited defeat. When Mrs. Leigh adjures123 her women hearers to use their nails upon the eyes of men who attempt to arrest them, does she not know that this could only succeed for as long as the men disbelieved the women’s intentions? As soon as the men apprehended124 real danger, they could effectively dispose of the women. Even if it were not wrong, it would be futile125 in the extreme. But it is wrong, inexcusably wrong, on the part of women, whose experience of life ought to have proved to them that for women to invite physical force against themselves is to provoke all the forces of reaction against which their movement is, in reality, directed. Long years ago, men threw stones and filth126 at women who asked for enfranchisement.[188] Gradually public opinion killed out this hooliganism. Then came the militants, and, by smashing windows and arson127 and general terrorism, revived the ape in men, so that, for some years past, all women are once more in danger of violence from men. It is degrading to both men and women, and the only merit that I can see in the process is, that men who have so loved to exercise all the virtues128 vicariously in their women, are being a little shocked to see how ugly violence can be, and, from seeing it ugly in a woman may, by and by, turn to see it ugly in themselves.
It is hypocrisy129, of course, for men to say that they refuse women’s claims because some women have been violent, firstly, because they refused them just the same, before women became violent; secondly, because only a few women have been violent; thirdly, because the vote was not given to men as a reward for their abstinence from violence. In fact, the brutalities of anti-suffragists might make the more sensitive Antis cease, for very shame, to reproach the other side with violence, their own side having been guilty of personal assaults of the most disgusting nature.
Men have not yet given women the vote, partly because they are very slow to move and indifferent about women’s questions; partly because they are still somewhat fearful of what women may do; but chiefly because no political party has yet seen a clear party gain to be made by it. This last, which has been the greatest obstacle to the accomplishment[189] of this reform, will be its great safeguard once it has been won. The women’s vote would be on a precarious130 tenure131 if it were won by one party in the teeth of the bitter opposition of the whole of the other party. The peaceful and fruitful use of the vote depends upon a general conversion132 of the country to the principles involved. Representative institutions can only work well by common consent and goodwill133.
Militants sometimes defend their violence by saying how trivial, after all, it has been. This, of course, is true. But what a strange argument to use in defence of war! “See how little damage our guns do!” And although I am convinced that they refrain from more serious crime, because their consciences revolt from it, they lay themselves open to the unthinking retort that they only do not do more because they can’t; a retort not only untrue, but provocative, to people sufficiently134 childish to be “dared” into action. What women have to do is to make their demand a formidable demand, and they cannot do this by adopting methods which the enormous mass of women will never whole-heartedly apply. By continued education, by well-considered and thoroughly prepared political action, by constant readiness for negotiation135, by taking men always on their best side, and by making the help of women worth having, suffragists will enlist136 an ever-growing mass of women to hard work and sacrifice, and, what is more, they will convince men of the constructive[190] ability of women, and of the possibility of men and women working together in the future.
In the course of the militant movement, one has seen a vast amount of femininity using the old weapons, which one hopes will be gradually laid aside. Defiance137 alternating with injured innocence138. The smashing of a window by a woman, who cries, when a man apprehends139 her, “You mustn’t touch me! I’m a woman!” The frequent inexcusable untruth that “women are being imprisoned140 for daring to ask for the vote,” and that the Home Secretary is starving women in prison. It would have been too wonderful if women, in their fight for liberty, had proved themselves perfect. We have not. We have shown human foibles, like men, partisanship141 and violence, like men, and we have shown some faults which, though not specifically feminine, are the faults natural to subjected persons.
When all is said about the mistakes and faults and follies142 of suffragists, those of the Government have been far greater. They belittled143 the women’s movement, and treated it with the sort of sneering144 contempt which is more provocative than anything in the world. They magnified the first importunities into crimes. The early militants were treated with monstrous145 and disproportionate severity, and this contributed largely to their early popularity. They were treated like the worst criminals, for mere impropriety, or for the technical offence of obstruction146. They were subjected to the most[191] abominable147 brutalities when they asked questions at meetings. (It was a most unhappy thought which struck them, when they found out how easy men’s nerves and men’s passions make it for a woman to break up a meeting.) Two Acts of Parliament and innumerable special orders have been devised to deal with them, and have failed. Everybody with the slightest political insight knows that the reform must come. When Mr. Asquith (House of Commons, 6th May 1913) attempted to define what he meant by a demand for the vote, he said—
“I mean a demand which proceeds from a real, deep-seated, and widely diffused148 sense of grievance66 and discontent. I do not think that my honourable Friends will dispute that that is a fair statement of the case. Of course, I do not deny for one moment—who could?—that there are women, and many women in this country, including some of the most gifted, most accomplished149, most high-minded of their sex, who do feel in that way. It would be absurd and ridiculous to disguise the facts of the case. So, again, and this is a very serious consideration, it is clear from the phenomena150 of what is called militancy, to which I am not going to make any further reference, that there are women whose temperaments151 are such that this same sense of wrong, twisted, perverted152, inflamed, as I think in their case it is, the same sense of wrong leads to anti-social courses which men and even women find it difficult to conceive.”
This was, in fact, a complete abandonment of the anti-suffrage position, and a recognition that the[192] reform must come, and come soon. If many of the best women feel a real and deep sense of grievance, and if other women are being “twisted, perverted, and inflamed” by this sense of wrong, it is quite plain that it is not statesmanship, still less is it Liberal statesmanship, by delay and coercion153 to make the sense of grievance more deeply seated and more widely diffused. It is not even humane154. For who feels the grievance? Women. And against whom must they feel it? Men. Does any man in his senses wish that the grievance shall be so deeply inbitten that it will take generations to heal? I believe not. I believe too that every bit of work that is done to get the vote ought to be done in such a way as to make the use of the vote run smoothly155, when at last it is attained156. Militant methods, whether of martyrdom or war, are useless for that.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
tempt
|
|
| vt.引诱，勾引，吸引，引起…的兴趣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
stewards
|
|
| （轮船、飞机等的）乘务员( steward的名词复数 )； （俱乐部、旅馆、工会等的）管理员； （大型活动的）组织者； （私人家中的）管家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
excellence
|
|
| n.优秀，杰出，(pl.)优点，美德 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
cramped
|
|
| a.狭窄的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
vitality
|
|
| n.活力，生命力，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
brute
|
|
| n.野兽，兽性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
fretted
|
|
| 焦躁的，附有弦马的，腐蚀的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
circumvented
|
|
| v.设法克服或避免（某事物），回避( circumvent的过去式和过去分词 )；绕过，绕行，绕道旅行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
wiles
|
|
| n.（旨在欺骗或吸引人的）诡计，花招；欺骗，欺诈( wile的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
incurably
|
|
| ad.治不好地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
deserted
|
|
| adj.荒芜的，荒废的，无人的，被遗弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
merge
|
|
| v.(使)结合，(使)合并，(使)合为一体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
counteracting
|
|
| 对抗，抵消( counteract的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
acting
|
|
| n.演戏，行为，假装；adj.代理的，临时的，演出用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
cons
|
|
| n.欺骗，骗局( con的名词复数 )v.诈骗，哄骗( con的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
stimulate
|
|
| vt.刺激，使兴奋；激励，使…振奋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
bully
|
|
| n.恃强欺弱者，小流氓；vt.威胁，欺侮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
physically
|
|
| adj.物质上，体格上，身体上，按自然规律 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
brutality
|
|
| n.野蛮的行为，残忍，野蛮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
tract
|
|
| n.传单，小册子，大片(土地或森林) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
attain
|
|
| vt.达到，获得，完成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
honourable
|
|
| adj.可敬的；荣誉的，光荣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
submission
|
|
| n.服从，投降；温顺，谦虚；提出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
antagonism
|
|
| n.对抗，敌对，对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
contention
|
|
| n.争论，争辩，论战；论点，主张 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
contemplated
|
|
| adj. 预期的 动词contemplate的过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
mischief
|
|
| n.损害，伤害，危害；恶作剧，捣蛋，胡闹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
discomfort
|
|
| n.不舒服，不安，难过，困难，不方便 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
vindication
|
|
| n.洗冤，证实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
castigation
|
|
| n.申斥，强烈反对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
suffrage
|
|
| n.投票，选举权，参政权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
garrison
|
|
| n.卫戍部队；驻地，卫戍区；vt.派(兵)驻防 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
helping
|
|
| n.食物的一份&adj.帮助人的，辅助的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
feminist
|
|
| adj.主张男女平等的，女权主义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
retaliated
|
|
| v.报复，反击( retaliate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
overt
|
|
| adj.公开的，明显的，公然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
entrapping
|
|
| v.使陷入圈套，使入陷阱( entrap的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
bamboozling
|
|
| v.欺骗，使迷惑( bamboozle的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
47
complaisance
|
|
| n.彬彬有礼，殷勤，柔顺 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
friction
|
|
| n.摩擦，摩擦力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
warfare
|
|
| n.战争(状态)；斗争；冲突 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
corrupting
|
|
| （使）败坏( corrupt的现在分词 )； （使）腐化； 引起（计算机文件等的）错误； 破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
permanently
|
|
| adv.永恒地，永久地，固定不变地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
secondly
|
|
| adv.第二，其次 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
legislative
|
|
| n.立法机构，立法权；adj.立法的，有立法权的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
err
|
|
| vi.犯错误，出差错 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
retaliation
|
|
| n.报复，反击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
considerably
|
|
| adv.极大地；相当大地；在很大程度上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
molestation
|
|
| n.骚扰，干扰，调戏；折磨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
improper
|
|
| adj.不适当的，不合适的，不正确的，不合礼仪的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
motive
|
|
| n.动机，目的；adv.发动的，运动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
lust
|
|
| n.性(淫)欲；渴(欲)望；vi.对…有强烈的欲望 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
tormenting
|
|
| 使痛苦的，使苦恼的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
irresistible
|
|
| adj.非常诱人的，无法拒绝的，无法抗拒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
exasperated
|
|
| adj.恼怒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
grievances
|
|
| n.委屈( grievance的名词复数 )；苦衷；不满；牢骚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
grievance
|
|
| n.怨愤，气恼，委屈 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
unreasonable
|
|
| adj.不讲道理的，不合情理的，过度的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
fomenting
|
|
| v.激起，煽动（麻烦等）( foment的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
outrage
|
|
| n.暴行，侮辱，愤怒；vt.凌辱，激怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
outrages
|
|
| 引起…的义愤，激怒( outrage的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
chivalry
|
|
| n.骑士气概，侠义；（男人）对女人彬彬有礼，献殷勤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
depredations
|
|
| n.劫掠，毁坏( depredation的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
tyrant
|
|
| n.暴君，专制的君主，残暴的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
corrupted
|
|
| （使）败坏( corrupt的过去式和过去分词 )； （使）腐化； 引起（计算机文件等的）错误； 破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
militancy
|
|
| n.warlike behavior or tendency | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
temperament
|
|
| n.气质，性格，性情 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
fiery
|
|
| adj.燃烧着的，火红的；暴躁的；激烈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
passionate
|
|
| adj.热情的，热烈的，激昂的，易动情的，易怒的，性情暴躁的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
eloquence
|
|
| n.雄辩；口才，修辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
gnawing
|
|
| a.痛苦的，折磨人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
militant
|
|
| adj.激进的，好斗的；n.激进分子，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
ingenuity
|
|
| n.别出心裁；善于发明创造 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
entangled
|
|
| adj.卷入的；陷入的；被缠住的；缠在一起的v.使某人（某物/自己）缠绕，纠缠于（某物中），使某人（自己）陷入（困难或复杂的环境中）( entangle的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
gaping
|
|
| adj.口的；张口的；敞口的；多洞穴的v.目瞪口呆地凝视( gape的现在分词 )；张开，张大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
exasperation
|
|
| n.愤慨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
psychology
|
|
| n.心理，心理学，心理状态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
cynical
|
|
| adj.(对人性或动机)怀疑的，不信世道向善的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
appalling
|
|
| adj.骇人听闻的，令人震惊的，可怕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
tragic
|
|
| adj.悲剧的，悲剧性的，悲惨的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
revival
|
|
| n.复兴，复苏，（精力、活力等的）重振 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
extraordinarily
|
|
| adv.格外地；极端地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
publicity
|
|
| n.众所周知，闻名；宣传，广告 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
militants
|
|
| 激进分子，好斗分子( militant的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
provocative
|
|
| adj.挑衅的，煽动的，刺激的，挑逗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
prominence
|
|
| n.突出；显著；杰出；重要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
pros
|
|
| abbr.prosecuting 起诉；prosecutor 起诉人；professionals 自由职业者；proscenium （舞台）前部n.赞成的意见( pro的名词复数 )；赞成的理由；抵偿物；交换物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
unprecedented
|
|
| adj.无前例的，新奇的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
enfranchisement
|
|
| 选举权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
indifference
|
|
| n.不感兴趣，不关心，冷淡，不在乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
favourable
|
|
| adj.赞成的，称赞的，有利的，良好的，顺利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
inertia
|
|
| adj.惰性，惯性，懒惰，迟钝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
inflamed
|
|
| adj.发炎的，红肿的v.（使）变红，发怒，过热( inflame的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
loyalties
|
|
| n.忠诚( loyalty的名词复数 )；忠心；忠于…感情；要忠于…的强烈感情 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
skilful
|
|
| (=skillful)adj.灵巧的，熟练的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
irritation
|
|
| n.激怒，恼怒，生气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
concession
|
|
| n.让步，妥协；特许(权) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
ethical
|
|
| adj.伦理的，道德的，合乎道德的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
incessantly
|
|
| ad.不停地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
inflicting
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
martyr
|
|
| n.烈士，殉难者；vt.杀害，折磨，牺牲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
martyrs
|
|
| n.martyr的复数形式；烈士( martyr的名词复数 )；殉道者；殉教者；乞怜者（向人诉苦以博取同情） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
organisation
|
|
| n.组织，安排，团体，有机休 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
bullying
|
|
| v.恐吓，威逼( bully的现在分词 )；豪；跋扈 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
exasperating
|
|
| adj. 激怒的 动词exasperate的现在分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
adjures
|
|
| vt.（以起誓或诅咒等形式）命令要求（adjure的第三人称单数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
124
apprehended
|
|
| 逮捕，拘押( apprehend的过去式和过去分词 )； 理解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
futile
|
|
| adj.无效的，无用的，无希望的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
filth
|
|
| n.肮脏，污物，污秽；淫猥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
arson
|
|
| n.纵火，放火 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
hypocrisy
|
|
| n.伪善，虚伪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
precarious
|
|
| adj.不安定的，靠不住的；根据不足的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
tenure
|
|
| n.终身职位；任期；(土地)保有权，保有期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
conversion
|
|
| n.转化，转换，转变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
goodwill
|
|
| n.善意，亲善，信誉，声誉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
sufficiently
|
|
| adv.足够地，充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
negotiation
|
|
| n.谈判，协商 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
enlist
|
|
| vt.谋取(支持等)，赢得；征募；vi.入伍 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
defiance
|
|
| n.挑战，挑衅，蔑视，违抗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
innocence
|
|
| n.无罪；天真；无害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
apprehends
|
|
| 逮捕，拘押( apprehend的第三人称单数 )； 理解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
imprisoned
|
|
| 下狱，监禁( imprison的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
Partisanship
|
|
| n. 党派性, 党派偏见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
follies
|
|
| 罪恶，时事讽刺剧； 愚蠢，蠢笨，愚蠢的行为、思想或做法( folly的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
belittled
|
|
| 使显得微小，轻视，贬低( belittle的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
sneering
|
|
| 嘲笑的，轻蔑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
monstrous
|
|
| adj.巨大的；恐怖的；可耻的，丢脸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
obstruction
|
|
| n.阻塞，堵塞；障碍物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
abominable
|
|
| adj.可厌的，令人憎恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
diffused
|
|
| 散布的，普及的，扩散的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
accomplished
|
|
| adj.有才艺的；有造诣的；达到了的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
phenomena
|
|
| n.现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
temperaments
|
|
| 性格( temperament的名词复数 )； （人或动物的）气质； 易冲动； （性情）暴躁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
perverted
|
|
| adj.不正当的v.滥用( pervert的过去式和过去分词 )；腐蚀；败坏；使堕落 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
coercion
|
|
| n.强制，高压统治 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
humane
|
|
| adj.人道的，富有同情心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
smoothly
|
|
| adv.平滑地，顺利地，流利地，流畅地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |