science' is now recognised by one or two of our newer universities as a regular subject, but it is still an excrescence, an alternative, to be adopted for commercial reasons, rather than an essential feature in feminine education. Everywhere, in the United States as in England, the pioneers of female education seem to have aimed at approximating as closely as possible to male ideals, and this is the more to be regretted, says Prof. Barnes, since some women's colleges in America had unique opportunities for setting up their own standard. The result in the United States, where co-education and the swamping of the teaching profession by women have made feminine influence paramount in the educational world, is not, so far, a stringing-up of the female to the male pitch, but a tendency to bring all education, and even journalism and literature, to a feminine level. 'Feminisation means emphasis on languages, literature, and history, as opposed to mathematics, chemistry and civics'; a concentration on the practical and material as compared with the theoretic and speculative, Moreover, the egoistic, personal, and emotional note in journalism and fiction, though not to be attributed solely to woman's influence, certainly owes a great deal to it. Finally Prof. Barnes declares, 'Our present elementary schools, and still more our high-schools, lead girls neither to intelligent work nor to intelligent living as women.' This indictment must be read in the light of the fact that Prof. Barnes is an avowed feminist, in favour of woman suffrage and the 'equality of the sexes.' Obviously he ought to be on the side of Herbert Spencer, who held 'the minds of women to be unlike [those of men] both quantitatively and qualitatively. I believe' (he said) 'the difference to result from a physiological necessity, and that no amount of culture can obliterate it.' The American writer, however, adopts only the first half of the hypothesis. Having demonstrated the persistent nature of feminine characteristics, and shown that so far from being masculinised by education, education is feminised by them, he is still prepared to allow that the difference in male and female mentality 'might have been produced by environment and ideals, and may hence give way to education.' Without attempting to dogmatise on the vexed question of sex, it may be stated that both maleness and femaleness are inherited by each individual, the dominance of the one over the other determining the sex. Masculine qualities are not uncommon in women, nor feminine ones in men, but on what biological grounds is it assumed that the best type of female must approximate most closely to the male? And why should it be taken for granted that the world has no use for the characteristically feminine mentality? It is not a question of inferiority and superiority, but of difference in kind and function. There is no more startling evidence that modern women have got out of touch with reality than the low opinion some of them profess to entertain of their own natural functions, qualities, and place in society. The writer has heard a very clever and thoughtful woman regret that, although she had found great happiness in marriage and maternity, her engagement had cut short a promising academic career which might have opened out to original work. After all,' she said, 'anyone can have children!' At a famous high-school, some years ago, the news of the early marriage of a favourite old pupil was met with the comment, What a waste!' To Rosa Mayreder maternity is merely woman's handicap in the march of progress. Curiously enough, the subtlety of the feminine mind is able to find something meritorious in the performance of these lowly duties, so that she who submits to them is sometimes considered to be heroically sacrificing her higher possibilities on the altar of the family. We shall see presently to what conclusion this habit of mind leads in the studies of an advanced feminist. The prominence and admiration gained in public spheres nowadays by the child-free woman have created a spurious standard; and many women who would otherwise have been contented with their natural functions are utterly demoralised by the glare and glitter of the careers of their free and independent' sisters. Three factors keep the truth from coming out. First, the novelty of these careers has still glamour enough to blind those who follow them; secondly, they are too proud to confess, if they feel the emptiness of life; and thirdly, if Miss Cicely Hamilton is to be believed, we are really witnessing the development of a neuter sex, to which these women may belong. The efficiency' of such women is the subject of panegyrics by their own sex. In any case, the average house-keeping, motherly type of woman is now inclined to under-value her own work and sphere, and to believe that her brilliant unmarried or childless sister, who writes or speaks or does political, professional, or social work, is more useful, is having a fuller life,' than the mere wife and mother. It is a question of values. Feminists, as Ellen Key points out, are not essentially concerned to prove that women can do, or should do, the same work as men, but it is certainly along these lines that the modern feminist movement has developed. Meanwhile, the main effect of modern education on women has been to complicate instead of to solve the economic question. The problem, 'What shall we do with our girls?' is keener now than ever; and, although conscientious parents strive, with many sacrifices, to make their daughters efficient economic units, as an alternative to matrimony, it cannot be said that their efforts are very successful. A vast range of occupations unknown to our grandmothers has opened out to the modern girl, but the fact remains that a school and college education, which has cost hundreds of pounds, may leave her with a lower market value than the uneducated' woman who can cook or do housework. Consequently the economic gain of a self-supporting daughter or sister is more than balanced by the increased expense of education and housekeeping; and this last factor is a deterrent to matrimony, thus throwing an increasing number of women into the labour market, and thereby completing a vicious circle in the economic evolution of women." Moreover, the spurious standard of which mention has been made compels in young women a superstitious reverence for booklearning and its academic reward. Those who can write letters after their names are inordinately puffed up by the privilege, although it is shared with thousands of obscure male persons. Very frequently they are unfitted by this distinction, both in their own opinion and that of their friends, for the humble career of wife and mother. The teaching profession naturally attracts a great pro * Statistics do not show an increase in industrially employed women, relatively to the increase of population, but few people can doubt that the middle-class woman is being forced more and more by economic pressure to become a wage-earner. portion of those who are exceptionally gifted in passing examinations; and they sacrifice youth and health in order to obtain the necessary qualifications. Education is essentially, to them, a means to a. definite end, which undoubtedly accounts for much that is peculiar to the women's side of our college life. But when the strain is over, and the coveted prize of a post as teacher is won, is it worth the price paid? A life full of minor irritations to all but the born teacher, restricted within narrow limits and often monotonous, with very few plums and a scale of remuneration leaving little margin for the pleasures of life-such is the vista opened out to all save a favoured few who adopt teaching as a profession. It is not wonderful if discontent is rife among middle-class women when such conditions prevail. Unhappily it is to this class, on whom changing social conditions have laid such a heavy burden, that the young girls of to-day look for guidance and for their philosophy of life. There are many sane, healthy, and splendid women among them, but the conditions of life do not make for either breadth of view or depth of understanding among the majority; and it is to be regretted that the influence of mothers has been so largely superseded nowadays by that of the female celibate pedagogue. The question of the mutual influence of modern education and the feminist movement is too wide to be fully discussed here, nor is there any intention, on the part of the writer, to condemn wholesale either the present system or the women it has produced. No one wishes to stereoSocial changes require What is striking type any kind of man or woman. adaptation on the part of both sexes. to an observer is the reflection that, while men seem to be fitting in fairly comfortably to the conditions of modern life, seeking and finding careers overseas when no opening presents itself at home, growing steadier and more sober to meet the demands of a democratic society, women, on the contrary, are growing to be more and more at issue with their environment. The adaptability of the college-bred man in the colonies is a good illustration. He has been brought up as softly as his sister, yet whereas he can cheerfully start life again at the bottom of the social ladder by cleaning pigsties or ploughing fields, she can seldom face either the physical strain or the mental isolation involved by pioneer life. If these difficulties had not been faced by the women of an earlier generation, our empire would have been considerably smaller. Whatever boons higher education has brought to women, it does not seem to give them that elasticity of mind and body and that deftness of hand which make the truly adaptable person. Nor, if feminist writers are to be believed, has it brought them happiness. The despised Victorian woman, if one's recollections of her as an old lady are to be trusted, found a spiritual satisfaction in life which many of her grand-daughters seem to miss. There is no need to elaborate the subject of the present discontent of women. The suffrage agitation is its keenest witness. If we listen to the arguments of suffragists, it is obvious that their emotion is altogether out of proportion to the grievances they advance. They fasten, it is true, upon the most terrible features of woman's life -the White Slave or the sweated worker; but it is frequently obvious that they know nothing of either, and that they have no clear idea of the remedies they would themselves apply to these evils. A passion of pity for their sex surges through them, for they choose to regard both classes of women as victims to man's cruelty. But beyond this vicarious suffering they have a difficulty in explaining exactly what is wrong with them, and yet their faces are witnesses to mental distress of no slight order. The banner of revolt against man has enlisted many women who have never received anything but kindness and consideration, and attracts to-day many young girls who know nothing of social evils or sweated workers. 'Why,' asks Dr Tayler, when the young girl's mind opens out to the womanly, does a feeling of discontent with womanliness and its opportunities tend to arise?'* Such surface manifestations as the franchise agitation, the demand for increased occupational facilities, for a wider domestic horizon or for entire freedom from domestic duties-all these are only superficial expressions of something deeper. Olive Schreiner speaks of... dis-co-ordination, struggle and consequent suffering which undoubtedly do exist when we regard the world of sexual * J. L. Tayler, 'Nature of Woman.' |