The Harmful Effects of Unnatural Social Distinctions

From the respect paid to property flow, as from a poisoned fountain, most of the evils and vices which render this world such a dreary scene to the contemplative mind. For it is in the most polished society that noisome reptiles and venomous serpents lurk under the rank herbage; and there is voluptuousness pampered by the still sultry air, which relaxes every good disposition before it ripens into virtue.

Most of the evils and vices that make the world so bleak to a thoughtful mind flow from respect for property. They flow from it as if from a poisoned fountain. For even in the most refined society, foul reptiles and venomous snakes lurk beneath the overgrown grass. There, sensual pleasure is indulged in the still, sultry air. That air weakens every good impulse before it can develop into virtue.

One class presses on another; for all are aiming to procure respect on account of their property: and property, once gained, will procure the respect due only to talents and virtue. Men neglect the duties incumbent on man, yet are treated like demi-gods; religion is also separated from morality by a ceremonial veil, yet men wonder that the world is almost, literally speaking, a den of sharpers or oppressors.

One class oppresses another because all seek respect for their property. Once gained, property earns them the respect due only to talent and virtue. Men neglect their duties as human beings, yet they are treated like demigods. Religion, too, is separated from morality by a veil of ceremony. Yet men wonder why the world is almost literally a den of swindlers and oppressors.

There is a homely proverb, which speaks a shrewd truth, that whoever the devil finds idle he will employ. And what but habitual idleness can hereditary wealth and titles produce? For man is so constituted that he can only attain a proper use of his faculties by exercising them, and will not exercise them unless necessity, of some kind, first set the wheels in motion. Virtue likewise can only be acquired by the discharge of relative duties; but the importance of these sacred duties will scarcely be felt by the being who is cajoled out of his humanity by the flattery of sycophants. There must be more equality established in society, or morality will never gain ground, and this virtuous equality will not rest firmly even when founded on a rock, if one half of mankind are chained to its bottom by fate, for they will be continually undermining it through ignorance or pride. It is vain to expect virtue from women till they are, in some degree, independent of men; nay, it is vain to expect that strength of natural affection, which would make them good wives and good mothers. Whilst they are absolutely dependent on their husbands, they will be cunning, mean, and selfish, and the men who can be gratified by the fawning fondness, of spaniel-like affection, have not much delicacy, for love is not to be bought, in any sense of the word, its silken wings are instantly shrivelled up when any thing beside a return in kind is sought. Yet whilst wealth enervates men; and women live, as it were, by their personal charms, how, can we expect them to discharge those ennobling duties which equally require exertion and self-denial. Hereditary property sophisticates the mind, and the unfortunate victims to it, if I may so express myself, swathed from their birth, seldom exert the locomotive faculty of body or mind; and, thus viewing every thing through one medium, and that a false one, they are unable to discern in what true merit and happiness consist. False, indeed, must be the light when the drapery of situation hides the man, and makes him stalk in masquerade, dragging from one scene of dissipation to another the nerveless limbs that hang with stupid listlessness, and rolling round the vacant eye which plainly tells us that there is no mind at home.

There is a familiar proverb that tells a shrewd truth: the devil finds work for idle hands. And what can inherited wealth and titles produce but habitual idleness? People are made so that they can learn to use their abilities properly only by exercising them. Yet they will not exercise them unless some kind of necessity first sets the wheels in motion. Virtue, too, can be acquired only by carrying out our duties to others. But someone flattered out of his humanity by sycophants will scarcely feel the importance of these sacred duties. There must be greater equality in society, or morality will never advance. Even if this virtuous equality were founded on a rock, it would not stand firm while half of humanity remains chained to its base by fate. Through ignorance or pride, they would constantly undermine it. It is useless to expect virtue from women until they are, to some degree, independent of men. Indeed, it is useless to expect them to have the strength of natural affection that would make them good wives and mothers. As long as women are completely dependent on their husbands, they will be cunning, petty, and selfish. And men who can be pleased by fawning, doglike affection have little delicacy. Love cannot be bought in any sense of the word. Its silken wings shrivel instantly when anything other than love in return is sought. Yet wealth weakens men, while women live, so to speak, by their personal charms. How, then, can we expect men and women to carry out those ennobling duties that require both effort and self-denial? Inherited property corrupts the mind. Its unfortunate victims, if I may call them that, are wrapped up from birth. They seldom exercise their power to move either body or mind. So they see everything through one lens, and a false one at that. They cannot see what true merit and happiness consist in. The light must indeed be false when the trappings of rank hide the man and make him strut about in disguise. He drags his limp limbs from one scene of indulgence to another. They hang in dull listlessness, and he rolls his vacant eyes, plainly telling us that there is no mind at home.

I mean, therefore, to infer, that the society is not properly organized which does not compel men and women to discharge their respective duties, by making it the only way to acquire that countenance from their fellow creatures, which every human being wishes some way to attain. The respect, consequently, which is paid to wealth and mere personal charms, is a true north-east blast, that blights the tender blossoms of affection and virtue. Nature has wisely attached affections to duties, to sweeten toil, and to give that vigour to the exertions of reason which only the heart can give. But, the affection which is put on merely because it is the appropriated insignia of a certain character, when its duties are not fulfilled is one of the empty compliments which vice and folly are obliged to pay to virtue and the real nature of things.

I therefore conclude that society is not properly organized unless it compels men and women to fulfill their respective duties. It should do so by making duty the only way to gain the approval of others, which every human being seeks in some way. The respect given to wealth and mere personal beauty is therefore like a harsh northeast wind, blighting the tender blossoms of affection and virtue. Nature has wisely linked affection to duty, to sweeten hard work and give reason’s efforts the strength only the heart can provide. But sometimes people display affection merely because it is expected of someone in their role, even though they do not fulfill that role’s duties. Such affection is one of the empty tributes that vice and folly are forced to pay to virtue and the true nature of things.

To illustrate my opinion, I need only observe, that when a woman is admired for her beauty, and suffers herself to be so far intoxicated by the admiration she receives, as to neglect to discharge the indispensable duty of a mother, she sins against herself by neglecting to cultivate an affection that would equally tend to make her useful and happy. True happiness, I mean all the contentment, and virtuous satisfaction that can be snatched in this imperfect state, must arise from well regulated affections; and an affection includes a duty. Men are not aware of the misery they cause, and the vicious weakness they cherish, by only inciting women to render themselves pleasing; they do not consider, that they thus make natural and artificial duties clash, by sacrificing the comfort and respectability of a woman's life to voluptuous notions of beauty, when in nature they all harmonize.

To illustrate my point, I need only consider a woman who is admired for her beauty. If she becomes so carried away by that admiration that she neglects her essential duty as a mother, she wrongs herself. She fails to cultivate a love that would make her both useful and happy. True happiness must arise from well governed affections. By true happiness, I mean all the contentment and virtuous satisfaction we can find in this imperfect state. And every affection carries a duty. Men do not realize the misery they cause or the harmful weakness they encourage by urging women only to make themselves attractive. They do not consider how this sets natural and artificial duties against each other. They sacrifice the comfort and respectability of a woman's life to sensual notions of beauty, though in nature all these duties are in harmony.

Cold would be the heart of a husband, were he not rendered unnatural by early debauchery, who did not feel more delight at seeing his child suckled by its mother, than the most artful wanton tricks could ever raise; yet this natural way of cementing the matrimonial tie, and twisting esteem with fonder recollections, wealth leads women to spurn. To preserve their beauty, and wear the flowery crown of the day, that gives them a kind of right to reign for a short time over the sex, they neglect to stamp impressions on their husbands' hearts, that would be remembered with more tenderness when the snow on the head began to chill the bosom, than even their virgin charms. The maternal solicitude of a reasonable affectionate woman is very interesting, and the chastened dignity with which a mother returns the caresses that she and her child receive from a father who has been fulfilling the serious duties of his station, is not only a respectable, but a beautiful sight. So singular, indeed, are my feelings, and I have endeavoured not to catch factitious ones, that after having been fatigued with the sight of insipid grandeur and the slavish ceremonies that with cumberous pomp supplied the place of domestic affections, I have turned to some other scene to relieve my eye, by resting it on the refreshing green every where scattered by nature. I have then viewed with pleasure a woman nursing her children, and discharging the duties of her station with, perhaps, merely a servant made to take off her hands the servile part of the household business. I have seen her prepare herself and children, with only the luxury of cleanliness, to receive her husband, who returning weary home in the evening, found smiling babes and a clean hearth. My heart has loitered in the midst of the group, and has even throbbed with sympathetic emotion, when the scraping of the well known foot has raised a pleasing tumult.

A husband would have a cold heart, unless early debauchery had made him unnatural, if he did not feel greater delight watching his wife nurse their child than the most skillful, seductive tricks could ever give him. Yet wealth leads women to reject this natural way of strengthening marriage and weaving tender memories together with respect. To preserve their beauty and wear the flower crown of the day, which gives them a kind of right to reign briefly over men, they neglect to leave lasting impressions on their husbands’ hearts. Those impressions would be remembered more tenderly than even their youthful charms when gray hair began to chill their husbands’ hearts. The maternal care of a sensible, affectionate woman is deeply engaging. A mother returns the caresses she and her child receive from a father who has been fulfilling the serious duties of his position. Her restrained dignity as she does so is not only respectable but beautiful to see. My feelings are indeed so unusual, and I have tried not to adopt artificial ones, that I have sought another scene after growing weary of empty grandeur and servile ceremonies. Their cumbersome pomp had taken the place of family affection. I turned away to rest my eyes on the refreshing green that nature scatters everywhere. I have then watched with pleasure a woman nursing her children and fulfilling the duties of her position. Perhaps she had only one servant to take the menial household work off her hands. I have seen her make herself and her children ready to receive her husband, with cleanliness as their only luxury. Returning home tired in the evening, he found smiling children and a clean hearth. My heart lingered among them and even throbbed with shared emotion when the familiar sound of his foot scraping at the door stirred a happy commotion.

Whilst my benevolence has been gratified by contemplating this artless picture, I have thought that a couple of this description, equally necessary and independent of each other, because each fulfilled the respective duties of their station, possessed all that life could give. Raised sufficiently above abject poverty not to be obliged to weigh the consequence of every farthing they spend, and having sufficient to prevent their attending to a frigid system of economy which narrows both heart and mind. I declare, so vulgar are my conceptions, that I know not what is wanted to render this the happiest as well as the most respectable situation in the world, but a taste for literature, to throw a little variety and interest into social converse, and some superfluous money to give to the needy, and to buy books. For it is not pleasant when the heart is opened by compassion, and the head active in arranging plans of usefulness, to have a prim urchin continually twitching back the elbow to prevent the hand from drawing out an almost empty purse, whispering at the same time some prudential maxim about the priority of justice.

My goodwill has been gratified by considering this simple, natural picture. I have thought that a couple like this had all that life could give. Each was equally necessary to the other and independent, because each fulfilled the duties of their own position. They were sufficiently above extreme poverty not to have to consider the consequences of every penny they spent. They had enough to avoid a cold, strict economy that narrows both heart and mind. I declare that my ideas are so ordinary that I know of only two things needed to make theirs the happiest and most respectable situation in the world. One is a taste for literature, to bring some variety and interest to their conversations. The other is some spare money to give to people in need and to buy books. For it is not pleasant to feel compassion and be busy planning ways to help others, only to have a prim little child continually tug your elbow back. The child stops you from reaching into an almost empty purse, while whispering some cautious saying about how justice must come first.

Destructive, however, as riches and inherited honours are to the human character, women are more debased and cramped, if possible by them, than men, because men may still, in some degree, unfold their faculties by becoming soldiers and statesmen.

Wealth and inherited titles are destructive to human character. Yet, if possible, they degrade and restrict women even more than men. This is because men can still develop their abilities to some degree by becoming soldiers and statesmen.

As soldiers, I grant, they can now only gather, for the most part, vainglorious laurels, whilst they adjust to a hair the European balance, taking especial care that no bleak northern nook or sound incline the beam. But the days of true heroism are over, when a citizen fought for his country like a Fabricius or a Washington, and then returned to his farm to let his virtuous fervour run in a more placid, but not a less salutary stream. No, our British heroes are oftener sent from the gaming table than from the plough; and their passions have been rather inflamed by hanging with dumb suspense on the turn of a die, than sublimated by panting after the adventurous march of virtue in the historic page.

I grant that, as soldiers, they can now mostly win only hollow glory. They maintain the European balance of power with meticulous precision, taking special care that no bleak northern corner or strait tips the scales. But the days of true heroism are over. A citizen once fought for his country like a Fabricius or a Washington. Then he returned to his farm, where his virtuous zeal flowed more peacefully, but no less beneficially. No, our British heroes are sent to war more often from the gambling table than from the plough. Their passions have been inflamed by silent suspense over a roll of the dice. They have not been elevated by eager longing to follow the adventurous course of virtue in the pages of history.

The statesman, it is true, might with more propriety quit the Faro Bank, or card-table, to guide the helm, for he has still but to shuffle and trick. The whole system of British politics, if system it may courteously be called, consisting in multiplying dependents and contriving taxes which grind the poor to pamper the rich; thus a war, or any wild goose chace is, as the vulgar use the phrase, a lucky turn-up of patronage for the minister, whose chief merit is the art of keeping himself in place.

It is true that a statesman might more appropriately leave the Faro Bank or card table to take the helm. After all, he still has only to shuffle and cheat. The whole system of British politics, if it can politely be called a system, consists of multiplying dependents and devising taxes. These taxes grind down the poor to pamper the rich. So a war or any wild goose chase is, as ordinary people say, a lucky chance for the minister to hand out favors. His chief talent is keeping himself in office.

It is not necessary then that he should have bowels for the poor, so he can secure for his family the odd trick. Or should some show of respect, for what is termed with ignorant ostentation an Englishman's birth-right, be expedient to bubble the gruff mastiff that he has to lead by the nose, he can make an empty show, very safely, by giving his single voice, and suffering his light squadron to file off to the other side. And when a question of humanity is agitated, he may dip a sop in the milk of human kindness, to silence Cerberus, and talk of the interest which his heart takes in an attempt to make the earth no longer cry for vengeance as it sucks in its children's blood, though his cold hand may at the very moment rivet their chains, by sanctioning the abominable traffick. A minister is no longer a minister than while he can carry a point, which he is determined to carry. Yet it is not necessary that a minister should feel like a man, when a bold push might shake his seat.

He need not feel compassion for the poor, then, as long as he can secure the extra advantage for his family. He may also find it useful to show some respect for what people ignorantly and ostentatiously call an Englishman's birthright. This may help him fool the gruff mastiff he must lead by the nose. He can safely put on an empty show by casting his own vote while letting his small squad of followers vote the other way. And when a question of humanity is debated, he may offer a token of human kindness to silence Cerberus. He may speak of his heartfelt interest in an effort to stop the earth from crying out for vengeance as it drinks its children's blood. Yet at that very moment, his cold hand may be fastening their chains by approving the abominable trade. A minister remains a minister only as long as he can get his way on a point he is determined to carry. Yet he need not feel like a human being when a bold move might cost him his position.

But, to have done with these episodical observations, let me return to the more specious slavery which chains the very soul of woman, keeping her for ever under the bondage of ignorance.

But enough of these side observations. Let me return to the more deceptive slavery that chains women’s very souls, keeping them forever in the bondage of ignorance.

The preposterous distinctions of rank, which render civilization a curse, by dividing the world between voluptuous tyrants, and cunning envious dependents, corrupt, almost equally, every class of people, because respectability is not attached to the discharge of the relative duties of life, but to the station, and when the duties are not fulfilled, the affections cannot gain sufficient strength to fortify the virtue of which they are the natural reward. Still there are some loop-holes out of which a man may creep, and dare to think and act for himself; but for a woman it is an herculean task, because she has difficulties peculiar to her sex to overcome, which require almost super-human powers.

The absurd distinctions of rank make civilization a curse by dividing the world between pleasure-loving tyrants and cunning, envious dependents. These distinctions corrupt almost every class of people equally. That is because respectability depends on a person's position, not on how well they fulfill their duties to others. When people do not fulfill those duties, their affections cannot grow strong enough to strengthen their virtue, although such affections are virtue's natural reward. Still, a man has some ways to escape and dare to think and act for himself. But for a woman, this is a herculean task. She must overcome difficulties peculiar to her sex, which require almost superhuman powers.

A truly benevolent legislator always endeavours to make it the interest of each individual to be virtuous; and thus private virtue becoming the cement of public happiness, an orderly whole is consolidated by the tendency of all the parts towards a common centre. But, the private or public virtue of women is very problematical; for Rousseau, and a numerous list of male writers, insist that she should all her life, be subjected to a severe restraint, that of propriety. Why subject her to propriety—blind propriety, if she be capable of acting from a nobler spring, if she be an heir of immortality? Is sugar always to be produced by vital blood? Is one half of the human species, like the poor African slaves, to be subject to prejudices that brutalize them, when principles would be a surer guard only to sweeten the cup of man? Is not this indirectly to deny women reason? for a gift is a mockery, if it be unfit for use.

A truly benevolent lawmaker always tries to make it in each person’s interest to be virtuous. In this way, private virtue holds public happiness together. All parts tend toward a common center, forming an orderly whole. But whether women have private or public virtue is very doubtful. Rousseau and many other male writers insist that a woman should be strictly restrained by propriety all her life. Why subject her to blind propriety if she is capable of acting from a nobler motive, if she is an heir to immortality? Must sugar always be produced at the cost of lifeblood? Must one half of the human species, like the poor African slaves, be subject to prejudices that brutalize them, just to sweeten man’s cup, when principles would be a surer safeguard? Is this not an indirect denial that women have reason? A gift is a mockery if it cannot be used.

Women are in common with men, rendered weak and luxurious by the relaxing pleasures which wealth procures; but added to this, they are made slaves to their persons, and must render them alluring, that man may lend them his reason to guide their tottering steps aright. Or should they be ambitious, they must govern their tyrants by sinister tricks, for without rights there cannot be any incumbent duties. The laws respecting woman, which I mean to discuss in a future part, make an absurd unit of a man and his wife; and then, by the easy transition of only considering him as responsible, she is reduced to a mere cypher.

Like men, women are made weak and self-indulgent by the comfortable pleasures that wealth provides. But women are also made slaves to their appearance. They must make themselves attractive so that men will lend them their reason to guide their unsteady steps. Or, if women are ambitious, they must control their tyrants through underhanded tricks. For without rights, there can be no duties. The laws concerning women make a man and his wife into one absurd legal unit. I intend to discuss these laws later. The laws then easily reduce the wife to a mere nothing by treating only the husband as responsible.

The being who discharges the duties of its station, is independent; and, speaking of women at large, their first duty is to themselves as rational creatures, and the next, in point of importance, as citizens, is that, which includes so many, of a mother. The rank in life which dispenses with their fulfilling this duty, necessarily degrades them by making them mere dolls. Or, should they turn to something more important than merely fitting drapery upon a smooth block, their minds are only occupied by some soft platonic attachment; or, the actual management of an intrigue may keep their thoughts in motion; for when they neglect domestic duties, they have it not in their power to take the field and march and counter-march like soldiers, or wrangle in the senate to keep their faculties from rusting.

A person who fulfills the duties of their station is independent. Generally speaking, women’s first duty is to themselves as rational beings. Their next most important duty as citizens is motherhood, which includes so many duties. A social rank that excuses women from motherhood necessarily degrades them by making them mere dolls. Or, if they turn to something more important than simply arranging clothes on a smooth block, their minds are occupied only by some tender platonic attachment. Or managing an actual affair may keep their thoughts active. For when women neglect their domestic duties, they cannot take the field and march back and forth like soldiers. Nor can they argue in the senate to keep their minds from rusting.

I know, that as a proof of the inferiority of the sex, Rousseau has exultingly exclaimed, How can they leave the nursery for the camp! And the camp has by some moralists been termed the school of the most heroic virtues; though, I think, it would puzzle a keen casuist to prove the reasonableness of the greater number of wars, that have dubbed heroes. I do not mean to consider this question critically; because, having frequently viewed these freaks of ambition as the first natural mode of civilization, when the ground must be torn up, and the woods cleared by fire and sword, I do not choose to call them pests; but surely the present system of war, has little connection with virtue of any denomination, being rather the school of FINESSE and effeminacy, than of fortitude.

I know that Rousseau has triumphantly asked, as proof of women’s inferiority, How can they leave the nursery for the battlefield! Some moralists have called the battlefield a school of the most heroic virtues. Yet I think even a skilled moral reasoner would struggle to justify most of the wars that have made men heroes. I do not mean to examine this question closely. I have often seen these acts of ambition as the first, natural stage of civilization, when the ground must be torn up and the forests cleared by fire and sword. For that reason, I do not choose to call wars scourges. But surely the present system of war has little connection with virtue of any kind. It is a school of cunning and effeminacy rather than courage.

Yet, if defensive war, the only justifiable war, in the present advanced state of society, where virtue can show its face and ripen amidst the rigours which purify the air on the mountain's top, were alone to be adopted as just and glorious, the true heroism of antiquity might again animate female bosoms. But fair and softly, gentle reader, male or female, do not alarm thyself, for though I have contrasted the character of a modern soldier with that of a civilized woman, I am not going to advise them to turn their distaff into a musket, though I sincerely wish to see the bayonet converted into a pruning hook. I only recreated an imagination, fatigued by contemplating the vices and follies which all proceed from a feculent stream of wealth that has muddied the pure rills of natural affection, by supposing that society will some time or other be so constituted, that man must necessarily fulfil the duties of a citizen, or be despised, and that while he was employed in any of the departments of civil life, his wife, also an active citizen, should be equally intent to manage her family, educate her children, and assist her neighbours.

Yet, if defensive war alone were considered just and glorious, the true heroism of ancient times might again inspire women. In our advanced society, defensive war is the only justifiable kind. In such a war, virtue can appear and grow strong amid hardships, just as harsh conditions purify the air on a mountaintop. But gently, dear reader, whether man or woman, do not be alarmed. Though I have contrasted a modern soldier’s character with a civilized woman’s, I do not advise women to exchange their distaffs for muskets. Still, I sincerely wish to see the bayonet turned into a pruning hook. I was only giving my imagination some relief. It had grown tired from contemplating the vices and follies that all flow from the filthy stream of wealth, which has muddied the clear streams of natural affection. I imagined that society might someday be so organized that a man must do his duty as a citizen or be despised. While he worked in any branch of civil life, his wife would also be an active citizen. She would be equally committed to managing her family, educating her children, and helping her neighbors.

But, to render her really virtuous and useful, she must not, if she discharge her civil duties, want, individually, the protection of civil laws; she must not be dependent on her husband's bounty for her subsistence during his life, or support after his death—for how can a being be generous who has nothing of its own? or, virtuous, who is not free? The wife, in the present state of things, who is faithful to her husband, and neither suckles nor educates her children, scarcely deserves the name of a wife, and has no right to that of a citizen. But take away natural rights, and there is of course an end of duties.

But to make a woman truly virtuous and useful, she must have individual protection under civil laws if she is to perform her civic duties. She must not depend on her husband's generosity for her living during his life or for support after his death. For how can a person be generous without anything of her own? Or virtuous without freedom? As things stand, a wife who is faithful to her husband but neither nurses nor educates her children hardly deserves to be called a wife. She has no right to be called a citizen. But take away natural rights, and duties of course come to an end.

Women thus infallibly become only the wanton solace of men, when they are so weak in mind and body, that they cannot exert themselves, unless to pursue some frothy pleasure, or to invent some frivolous fashion. What can be a more melancholy sight to a thinking mind, than to look into the numerous carriages that drive helter-skelter about this metropolis in a morning, full of pale-faced creatures who are flying from themselves. I have often wished, with Dr. Johnson, to place some of them in a little shop, with half a dozen children looking up to their languid countenances for support. I am much mistaken, if some latent vigour would not soon give health and spirit to their eyes, and some lines drawn by the exercise of reason on the blank cheeks, which before were only undulated by dimples, might restore lost dignity to the character, or rather enable it to attain the true dignity of its nature. Virtue is not to be acquired even by speculation, much less by the negative supineness that wealth naturally generates.

Women inevitably become mere objects of men’s sexual pleasure when they are so weak in mind and body. They cannot exert themselves except to pursue some trivial pleasure or invent some frivolous fashion. What could be more depressing to a thinking person than the sight of the many carriages racing about this city in the morning? They are full of pale creatures fleeing from themselves. Like Dr. Johnson, I have often wished to put some of these women in a small shop, with half a dozen children looking to their listless faces for support. I am much mistaken if some hidden strength would not soon bring health and spirit to their eyes. And the lines that reasoning might draw on their blank cheeks, previously marked only by dimples, might restore their lost dignity. Or rather, these lines might help their character attain the true dignity of its nature. Virtue cannot be acquired even through contemplation, much less through the passive idleness that wealth naturally produces.

Besides, when poverty is more disgraceful than even vice, is not morality cut to the quick? Still to avoid misconstruction, though I consider that women in the common walks of life are called to fulfil the duties of wives and mothers, by religion and reason, I cannot help lamenting that women of a superiour cast have not a road open by which they can pursue more extensive plans of usefulness and independence. I may excite laughter, by dropping an hint, which I mean to pursue, some future time, for I really think that women ought to have representatives, instead of being arbitrarily governed without having any direct share allowed them in the deliberations of government.

Besides, when poverty is considered more shameful than even vice, is not morality deeply wounded? Still, I want to avoid being misunderstood. I believe that religion and reason call women in ordinary life to fulfill their duties as wives and mothers. Yet I cannot help regretting that women of greater ability have no path open to them. They should be able to pursue broader plans for usefulness and independence. I may provoke laughter by suggesting an idea I intend to pursue at some future time. I truly believe women ought to have representatives. Instead, they are governed arbitrarily, without any direct share in the deliberations of government.

But, as the whole system of representation is now, in this country, only a convenient handle for despotism, they need not complain, for they are as well represented as a numerous class of hard working mechanics, who pay for the support of royality when they can scarcely stop their children's mouths with bread. How are they represented, whose very sweat supports the splendid stud of an heir apparent, or varnishes the chariot of some female favourite who looks down on shame? Taxes on the very necessaries of life, enable an endless tribe of idle princes and princesses to pass with stupid pomp before a gaping crowd, who almost worship the very parade which costs them so dear. This is mere gothic grandeur, something like the barbarous, useless parade of having sentinels on horseback at Whitehall, which I could never view without a mixture of contempt and indignation.

But the whole system of representation in this country is now merely a convenient tool of despotism. So they need not complain. They are as well represented as a large class of hardworking laborers. These laborers pay to support royalty when they can scarcely feed their children bread. How are they represented, when their very sweat supports the magnificent horses of an heir to the throne? Or pays to polish the carriage of some female favorite who looks down on shame? Taxes on the very necessities of life allow an endless tribe of idle princes and princesses to parade in mindless splendor. They pass before a crowd that stares and almost worships the very spectacle that costs them so much. This is mere Gothic grandeur. It is like the barbaric, useless display of mounted sentries at Whitehall. I could never look at that display without a mixture of contempt and indignation.

How strangely must the mind be sophisticated when this sort of state impresses it! But till these monuments of folly are levelled by virtue, similar follies will leaven the whole mass. For the same character, in some degree, will prevail in the aggregate of society: and the refinements of luxury, or the vicious repinings of envious poverty, will equally banish virtue from society, considered as the characteristic of that society, or only allow it to appear as one of the stripes of the harlequin coat, worn by the civilized man.

How strangely distorted a mind must be to be impressed by this kind of grandeur! But until virtue brings down these monuments to folly, similar follies will spread through the whole of society. For society as a whole will share, to some degree, the same character. The refinements of luxury and the bitter complaints of the envious poor will equally banish virtue as a defining feature of society. At best, virtue will appear as just one stripe on the harlequin coat worn by civilized man.

In the superiour ranks of life, every duty is done by deputies, as if duties could ever be waved, and the vain pleasures which consequent idleness forces the rich to pursue, appear so enticing to the next rank, that the numerous scramblers for wealth sacrifice every thing to tread on their heels. The most sacred trusts are then considered as sinecures, because they were procured by interest, and only sought to enable a man to keep GOOD COMPANY. Women, in particular, all want to be ladies. Which is simply to have nothing to do, but listlessly to go they scarcely care where, for they cannot tell what.

In the upper ranks of society, people have others perform every duty for them, as if duties could simply be set aside. The resulting idleness forces the rich to pursue empty pleasures. These pleasures seem so enticing to the rank below that the many people scrambling for wealth sacrifice everything to follow close behind. Even the most sacred responsibilities are treated as paid positions requiring no work. They were obtained through connections and sought only so that a man could keep GOOD COMPANY. Women, in particular, all want to be ladies. Being a lady simply means having nothing to do but drift aimlessly from place to place, scarcely caring where or knowing why.

But what have women to do in society? I may be asked, but to loiter with easy grace; surely you would not condemn them all to suckle fools, and chronicle small beer! No. Women might certainly study the art of healing, and be physicians as well as nurses. And midwifery, decency seems to allot to them, though I am afraid the word midwife, in our dictionaries, will soon give place to accoucheur, and one proof of the former delicacy of the sex be effaced from the language.

But what are women to do in society, I may be asked, besides idle about with effortless grace? Surely you would not condemn them all to nurse fools and keep track of trivial household matters! No. Women could certainly study medicine and become doctors as well as nurses. And modesty seems to make midwifery a fitting profession for women. Yet I fear that the word midwife will soon give way to accoucheur in our dictionaries. One sign of women's former delicacy will then be erased from the language.

They might, also study politics, and settle their benevolence on the broadest basis; for the reading of history will scarcely be more useful than the perusal of romances, if read as mere biography; if the character of the times, the political improvements, arts, etc. be not observed. In short, if it be not considered as the history of man; and not of particular men, who filled a niche in the temple of fame, and dropped into the black rolling stream of time, that silently sweeps all before it, into the shapeless void called eternity. For shape can it be called, "that shape hath none?"

They might also study politics and give their concern for others the broadest possible foundation. For reading history will hardly be more useful than reading romances if it is treated as mere biography. Readers must also observe the character of the times, political improvements, the arts, and so on. In short, they must regard history as the story of humanity, not of individual men. Those men occupied a niche in the temple of fame, then dropped into the dark, rolling stream of time. That stream silently sweeps all before it into the shapeless void called eternity. For can that be called a shape "that shape hath none?"

Business of various kinds, they might likewise pursue, if they were educated in a more orderly manner, which might save many from common and legal prostitution. Women would not then marry for a support, as men accept of places under government, and neglect the implied duties; nor would an attempt to earn their own subsistence, a most laudable one! sink them almost to the level of those poor abandoned creatures who live by prostitution. For are not milliners and mantuamakers reckoned the next class? The few employments open to women, so far from being liberal, are menial; and when a superior education enables them to take charge of the education of children as governesses, they are not treated like the tutors of sons, though even clerical tutors are not always treated in a manner calculated to render them respectable in the eyes of their pupils, to say nothing of the private comfort of the individual. But as women educated like gentlewomen, are never designed for the humiliating situation which necessity sometimes forces them to fill; these situations are considered in the light of a degradation; and they know little of the human heart, who need to be told, that nothing so painfully sharpens the sensibility as such a fall in life.

If women were educated more systematically, they could also pursue various kinds of business. This might save many from both ordinary and legal prostitution. Women would then not marry for financial support, as men accept government positions and neglect the duties that come with them. Nor would an attempt to earn their own living, a most praiseworthy effort, reduce women almost to the level of those poor, abandoned creatures who live by prostitution. After all, are not hatmakers and dressmakers considered the next class above them? The few jobs open to women are far from respectable professions. They are menial work. Even when a better education qualifies women to teach children as governesses, they are not treated like tutors of sons. Yet even tutors who are clergymen are not always treated in a way that makes their pupils respect them, let alone ensures their personal comfort. But women educated as gentlewomen are never intended for the humiliating positions that necessity sometimes forces them to accept. So these positions are seen as a fall in status. Anyone who needs to be told how painfully such a fall sharpens a person’s feelings knows little of the human heart.

Some of these women might be restrained from marrying by a proper spirit or delicacy, and others may not have had it in their power to escape in this pitiful way from servitude; is not that government then very defective, and very unmindful of the happiness of one half of its members, that does not provide for honest, independent women, by encouraging them to fill respectable stations? But in order to render their private virtue a public benefit, they must have a civil existence in the state, married or single; else we shall continually see some worthy woman, whose sensibility has been rendered painfully acute by undeserved contempt, droop like "the lily broken down by a plough share."

Some of these women might be held back from marrying by a proper sense of dignity or delicacy. Others may not have had the opportunity to escape servitude in this pitiful way. Is a government not deeply flawed and neglectful of the happiness of half its members if it fails to provide for honest, independent women by encouraging them to take respectable positions? But for their private virtue to benefit the public, these women must have legal standing in the state, whether married or single. Otherwise, we shall continually see worthy women whose feelings have been made painfully sensitive by undeserved contempt. They will droop like "the lily broken down by a plough share."

It is a melancholy truth; yet such is the blessed effects of civilization! the most respectable women are the most oppressed; and, unless they have understandings far superiour to the common run of understandings, taking in both sexes, they must, from being treated like contemptible beings, become contemptible. How many women thus waste life away, the prey of discontent, who might have practised as physicians, regulated a farm, managed a shop, and stood erect, supported by their own industry, instead of hanging their heads surcharged with the dew of sensibility, that consumes the beauty to which it at first gave lustre; nay, I doubt whether pity and love are so near a-kin as poets feign, for I have seldom seen much compassion excited by the helplessness of females, unless they were fair; then, perhaps, pity was the soft handmaid of love, or the harbinger of lust.

It is a sad truth, yet such are the blessed effects of civilization! The most respectable women are the most oppressed. Unless their understanding is far superior to that of most people of either sex, they must become contemptible from being treated as contemptible. How many women waste their lives this way, prey to discontent? They might have practiced as physicians, run a farm, or managed a shop. They might have stood tall, supported by their own work. Instead, they hang their heads, weighed down by the dew of sensibility. That dew consumes the beauty it first made radiant. Indeed, I doubt that pity and love are as closely related as poets claim. I have seldom seen the helplessness of women inspire much compassion unless they were beautiful. Then, perhaps, pity was the gentle servant of love, or the forerunner of lust.

How much more respectable is the woman who earns her own bread by fulfilling any duty, than the most accomplished beauty! beauty did I say? so sensible am I of the beauty of moral loveliness, or the harmonious propriety that attunes the passions of a well-regulated mind, that I blush at making the comparison; yet I sigh to think how few women aim at attaining this respectability, by withdrawing from the giddy whirl of pleasure, or the indolent calm that stupifies the good sort of women it sucks in.

How much more respectable is a woman who earns her own living by doing any kind of work than the most accomplished beauty! Did I say beauty? I am so aware of the beauty of moral goodness, and of the harmony that brings the passions of a well-ordered mind into balance, that I blush to make the comparison. Yet I sigh to think how few women seek this respectability by leaving behind the dizzy whirl of pleasure or the lazy calm that dulls the minds of the good women it draws in.

Proud of their weakness, however, they must always be protected, guarded from care, and all the rough toils that dignify the mind. If this be the fiat of fate, if they will make themselves insignificant and contemptible, sweetly to waste "life away," let them not expect to be valued when their beauty fades, for it is the fate of the fairest flowers to be admired and pulled to pieces by the careless hand that plucked them. In how many ways do I wish, from the purest benevolence, to impress this truth on my sex; yet I fear that they will not listen to a truth, that dear-bought experience has brought home to many an agitated bosom, nor willingly resign the privileges of rank and sex for the privileges of humanity, to which those have no claim who do not discharge its duties.

Proud of their weakness, however, they must always be protected from worry and all the hard work that gives the mind dignity. If fate has decreed this, if they choose to make themselves insignificant and contemptible, sweetly wasting "life away," let them not expect to be valued when their beauty fades. Even the fairest flowers are destined to be admired and then torn apart by the careless hand that picked them. In how many ways I wish, out of the purest kindness, to impress this truth on women. Yet I fear they will not listen to it, though painful experience has brought it home to many a troubled heart. Nor will they willingly give up the privileges of rank and sex for the privileges of humanity. Yet those who do not fulfill the duties of humanity have no claim to its privileges.

Those writers are particularly useful, in my opinion, who make man feel for man, independent of the station he fills, or the drapery of factitious sentiments. I then would fain convince reasonable men of the importance of some of my remarks and prevail on them to weigh dispassionately the whole tenor of my observations. I appeal to their understandings; and, as a fellow-creature claim, in the name of my sex, some interest in their hearts. I entreat them to assist to emancipate their companion to make her a help meet for them!

In my opinion, writers are especially useful when they inspire people to feel for one another. They do so regardless of a person's social position or the trappings of artificial sentiment. I would therefore like to convince reasonable men that some of my remarks are important. I hope to persuade them to consider all my observations impartially. I appeal to their reason. And, as a fellow human being, I ask them to show some sympathy for my sex. I urge them to help free their companion, so that she can be a suitable partner for them!

Would men but generously snap our chains, and be content with rational fellowship, instead of slavish obedience, they would find us more observant daughters, more affectionate sisters, more faithful wives, more reasonable mothers—in a word, better citizens. We should then love them with true affection, because we should learn to respect ourselves; and the peace of mind of a worthy man would not be interrupted by the idle vanity of his wife, nor his babes sent to nestle in a strange bosom, having never found a home in their mother's.

If men would generously break our chains and accept rational companionship instead of slavish obedience, they would find us more attentive daughters, more affectionate sisters, more faithful wives, and more reasonable mothers. In short, we would be better citizens. We would then love men with true affection because we would learn to respect ourselves. A worthy man's peace of mind would not be disturbed by his wife's idle vanity. Nor would his babies be sent to nestle in a stranger's arms, having never found a home in their mother's arms.