The Relations of the Sexes (Duffey)/Chapter 3

THE study of the social institutions of all countries of the world, and their effect upon the development of the characters of men and women, would prove interesting and profitable to both the social and the political economist.

In the earliest ages, while the human race was in its infancy, and when, according to Homer, "They had neither assemblies for consultation, nor Themistes, but every one exercised jurisdiction over his wives and children, and they paid no regard to one another: "when was realized in all literalness Carlyle's declaration that "the ultimate question between two human beings is, 'can I kill thee, or canst thou kill me?'" when laws there were none, and society there was less than none:—in those days, when the time of man was taken up in providing the means of subsistence, and in defending himself and family from aggressive neighbors, and perhaps in making raids upon neighbors weaker than himself, wo​man naturally fell into a subordinate position. She could not fight. The giving birth to and rearing of children prevented her taking any active part in the search for food; therefore, she of necessity remained quietly in the rude shelter which represented the primitive home, performed the menial offices, obeyed her husband, and was protected by him from all but himself, as a return for her industry and submission. Being physically weaker than man, the only alternative presented to woman was either to submit herself to one tyrant who would protect her, and perhaps give her a small measure of affection; or become the victim of many tyrants, who should know neither love nor mercy.

In those days there was probably no thought of intellectual excellence in either man or woman. Man was at best but a splendid "savage with the character of childhood, and the passions and strength of a man," as Sir John Lubbock has said; and whoever most excelled in these passions, and by his strength and prowess succeeded best in obtaining the means of gratifying them, was the most splendid savage of them all, and the one most to be admired and envied. It was the age in which might made right, and the weaker naturally submitted to and looked up to the stronger.

It is not singular, in this state of things, that woman should sink to a very inferior place. The traits for which she is most remarkable and most valued to-day, were totally undeveloped and undreamed of then. Morality was ​a name and an idea unknown; goodness and excellence of any sort, save a pure physical kind, were unappreciated; and all the finer qualities of the heart were uncomprehended. Woman had not strength, and virtue and chastity were only prized in her as they made her more the exclusive property of a single man. Women had to be protected like children; so they naturally ranked with children. They were good for nothing but to bear children, and to act as servants to their lords and masters; and they were thus considered, and despised accordingly. Yes, they were good for one thing besides; to gratify the lusts of men. They were exceedingly good for this: so exceedingly good that they were set down in the savage mind as having been created principally for this purpose. He who could obtain most women for his personal use was happiest and greatest, according to their way of reckoning happiness and grandeur.

It was not the age when wealth was measured by dollars and cents, or by any other standard of currency. In those times, riches consisted in the abundance of those things which should serve to supply physical needs, and gratify the senses. A man was accounted rich according to the number of his flocks and his herds, his wives and his children; and their owner would as soon have thought of consulting the wishes and feelings of the two former in anything that concerned his pleasure, as he would those of the two latter. There is one exception to this statement. A man's sons were regarded as in ​some sort his representatives, and successors; and, as such, received a certain consideration.

Self was in those times the pivot on which the world moved. If any one is skeptical as to the truth of this picture which I have drawn, let him recall the most ignorant and degraded man of whom he has any knowledge, and learn his opinion and treatment of women; then let him remember that all men were, in the early ages of the world, like this man, though more ignorant even; for there were no enlightment and intelligence anywhere, tending in any manner to modify their ideas. I think all scientists, whether evolutionists or anti-evolutionists, will justify me in making this statement. As we descend in the scale of intelligence and knowledge, even among the men of modern days, we almost invariably find that the estimation in which women are held, is lower and lower, until the most ignorant man holds his wife but little, if any, above his beast of burden. Tennyson has expressed this idea in Locksley Hall:

Then we must remember the lowest standard of to-day is more or less affected and modified by the higher standards with which it is brought into contact and comparison and is consequently higher than the highest of those times.

Fortunately for them, women were equally ignorant ​with men, and passively accepted the state of things by which they were so degraded, as the right and proper one. Otherwise, who can estimate the misery which the world would then have contained! Any cry in those times for more "rights" by a class who were not admitted to have any rights at all, would probably have been promptly punished with death. Such women would have been considered as traitors to their race, in desiring to overturn long settled and time-sanctioned institutions.

This state of affairs once fully established, it was very difficult to change it. Indeed, it could only be modified by slow degrees, as time developed the natures of both men and women. This primitive idea of women we find holding its own for whole ages after the creation of man. In those countries which have not reached a high state of civilization, it is still retained, to a greater or less degree. China has a history extending back farther, perhaps, than that of any other nation. Mayhew, in his excellent work, "London labor and the London poor," gives the following account of the position of women in that country: "As in all Asiatic, indeed in all barbarous countries, women in China are counted inferior to men. The high example of Confucius taught the people—though their own character inclined them before—that the female sex was created for the convenience of the male. The great philosopher spoke of women and slaves as belonging to the same class, and complained that they were equally ​difficult to govern. 'That ten daughters are not equal in value to one son' is a proverb which strongly expresses the Chinese sentiment upon this point, and the whole of their manner is pervaded by the same spirit. Feminine virtue, indeed, is severely guarded by the law, but not for its own sake. The well-being of the state, and the interests of the male sex, are sought to be protected by the rigorous enactments on the subjects of chastity."

Polygamy is a recognized institution in China, though the first wife always holds a position superior to the others. The first must be chosen from a family equal in rank with that of the husband; the second may be inferior. The inferior wives are usually purchased. They are virtually the servants of the chief wife, and are not permitted to eat in her presence. Their sons receive half as much patrimony as the sons of the mistress of the household. The offenses against them are less harshly, and offenses by them more rigorously chastised. Unfaithfulness to the marriage vow is recognized as a sin only on the part of the wife. A man may kill his wife for adultery, but a man does not himself commit adultery except with a married woman.

Women are held in such light esteem among the Chinese, that the murder of female babes is more common among then than it ever was in India. It is pursued systematically in many provinces. The birth of a female child is regarded as a calamity. One of the national proverbs says that "to a female infant a common tile may ​be given, as a toy, while to a male a gem should be presented." It is stated that in some provinces one-half the female infants born into the world are destroyed, so that the population shows a vast preponderance of the male sex.

In Japan we find a somewhat better state of affairs. A man can have but one wife, though he is permitted to take as many concubines as he chooses. Nevertheless, this single advance in the position of wives has done much for the Japanese women. They are more intelligent and chaste than those women who are held in less esteem. Men pay them a polite respect, which must have its foundation in general regard. Can we not trace the desire which Japan has shown as a nation to become acquainted with and adopt western civilization, as the direct result of the elevation of that sex, which has such a powerful influence in moulding the characters of the men who rule the nation?

India has a civilization dating far back in the past. Both under the Buddhist and Brahminical religions there is a state of things similar to that found in China. Women in India are not secluded by either law or custom, though the higher castes believe it more compatible with their dignity that their women should remain strict homekeepers, and avoid unnecessary acquaintance with strangers. Though women are recognized in their religion, and their theology contains vast numbers of female deities, women are held in exceedingly low esteem. It is a mis​fortune and a disgrace to give birth to a female child. It has, therefore, been customary in certain sections of the country, to destroy a large proportion of the female children as soon as born.

A writer says: "The state of women among the Hindoos is not elevated, and as long as their ancient teachers are revered, such must be the case. The female sex is held absolutely dependent on the male, and, as among the Chinese, the father before marriage, the husband afterwards, and the son in widowhood, are the natural protectors assigned by the sacred law. Nothing is to be done by a woman by her purely independent will. She must reverence her lord, and approach him with humble respect. She is bound to him while he desires it, whatever his conduct may be; and, if she rebel, is to be chastised with a rope or cane, on the back part of her person, and not on a noble part by any means." Though contempt for women is inculcated, and they are degraded in many ways, being debarred from the advantages of education, forbidden to eat with their husbands, and not allowed to mingle in society, yet they are held in much esteem by the men, who often become kind and indulgent husbands. As we find frequently to be the case, even among nations which claim a superiority in point of civilization, the people prove better than their laws.

Nevertheless, a woman's reputation for voluntary chastity is held lightly. "A woman is chaste when there is neither place, time, nor person, to afford her opportunity ​to be immoral," says the Hetopadera. In Ceylon there is a poem, proverbial among the people, which reads as follows:

The point of the first line of this poem is that the Adumbra tree never blossoms. In view of this asserted tendency to immorality and untruthfulness on the part of the female, the girl is married as soon as she reaches puberty, which in this climate is at an exceedingly early age. It is reckoned disgraceful for a woman to remain unmarried three years after the age of puberty. In widdowhood she is not permitted to marry a second time; and, as it was held impossible that the sex should remain chaste, and true to the memory of their husbands, the institution of suttee was established, and wives were encouraged to immolate themselves on their dead husband's funeral pyres, as the best and safest course to preserve them from lives of infamy.

In a country so large as India, divided into so many forms of religion, it is impossible to give more than a general account of the institution of marriage. Polygamy is allowed, though many husbands have but one wife. We find the system of polyandry, in a certain northern province of India, and in Kandy, a province of Ceylon. A woman usually marries a whole family of brothers. The offspring of these compound unions call all the brothers ​alike fathers, and the family property is divided equally between them. These unions are represented as harmonious, and are regarded as an excellent custom by those who indulge in them, as they avoid the expense of numerous families, and save property from minute subdivision.

The position of woman in India—her early marriage, ignorance, and general degradation—results in trouble of all kinds. Naturally, from the many children which are born, there is an excess of population, which there is a constant attempt to check by abortion and infanticide. Human life is held in slight esteem, profligacy is very common with both sexes, and ignorance is universal. No wonder, with such a people, India fell an easy prey to England.

The Mohammedan religion has incorporated the primitive ideas concerning woman so fully into itself, that not only does it hold her in light esteem on earth, but it gives her no place in heaven. It gives no recognition whatever to genuine womanly traits: its only acknowledged human need of woman is a sensual one. That need, which inheres in man's nature, and is to be carried beyond the grave, is to be supplied in paradise by houris, lovely beyond description.

I do not know how true it may be of men, but I feel certain that it is true of women, that they, as a mass, never rise above that character and condition which is ascribed to them. Their elevation is always accomplished by means of a few individuals who rise above the rest ​and, by their personal teachings and accomplishments, lift up public opinion to their standard; and then the mass rise to it. We have seen this thing over and over again in our own day and in our own country. The wo. men of the East are waiting, supinely and thoughtlessly, yet nevertheless waiting, for their individual saviours to arise among themselves, and first teach men what women are and can be, and then show their ignorant sisters how they can reach the same standard. Meantime they are content to take themselves at the valuation of their husbands and lords. In oriental countries, and among Mohammedans particularly, women are recognized as having been created but for one purpose—to gratify sensual passion; and as presenting but one predominant attribute: that of sensuality. They are forced to that life, and moulded to to that idea, until, as a class, it is undoubtedly true of them.

Men may have ambitions and desires; they may take part in government, in trade, and in commerce; they may come and go when and where they choose. Their passions are unchecked, and are in all cases honorable and commendable, except when they happen to infringe on other men's rights. Nevertheless, there seems to be a certain shame about the matter, and this shame extends not only to the passion and its gratification, but to the object which excites and gratifies it. Thus, women are included in this shame. It is immodest for them to show their faces, and criminal for them to indulge in the most ​harmless social intercourse with men other than their husbands and near relatives. Their very existence is held to be a sort of disgrace to humanity, and only excusable on the ground of the imperative sensual needs of men. They are secluded and hidden, and the harem is not so much sacred, as forbidden and shameful ground, any reference to which by another is resented as an insult by a man of honor. We, with our Western civilization, would sooner think of admitting strangers into the most private chambers of our dwellings, than the Mohammedan husband would think of allowing a friend to intrude into the apartments occupied by the women of his household. He only enters them himself for relaxation and amusement. His real life is outside of them, in a world which does not recognize their inmates as having any part or parcel in it. When he makes his appearance the dirty, unattractive women, who have spent their time in idleness and wrangling, put on as if by magic their most gorgeous apparel, and seek by every means to ravish his senses. He is waited on by servile wives, who do all they can to show their desire to please and prove attractive to their lord. He does not look for the higher womanly atattributes, consequently he is not disappointed when he does not find them; for women thus educated do not possess them.

The harem is the very paradise of the sensualist But what of the men and women who are born in it, and come to maturity within its influence? First of all, in the se​ries of causes which go to make these people what they are, is the fact that the women have no recognized occupation. They may have more or less of the household labors to perform, though these are generally entrusted to servants. Their only duty is to make themselves attractive to the other sex. This they must do by handsome dress and personal adornments. If we may believe the statements of those who have drawn aside the curtain of obscurity which hides these sacred places, and given us glimpses of oriental interiors, their life is one of idleness and aimlessness. The only art in which they excel, or strive to excel, is that of bouquet-making, and in that they produce most marvellous results, proving that they have artistic faculties which, if properly applied, might accomplish more important purposes. They are undisciplined, dirty, and disregardful of the requirements of hygiene. Their sole legitimate amusement is found in visiting at one another's houses, and indulging in gossip. "Satan finds some mischief still for idle hands to do," is true in the case of these women. There is in most women's natures, quite as much as, if not more than, in man's, an amount of energy which, if checked and repressed when it would seek proper channels of expenditure, is sure to break out in the guise of frivolity or sin. The "girl of the period," if she were to devote as much energy, study and persistence, to some useful occupation, as she gives to the details of her dress, or the capture of a beau, could not fail of achieving success in that occu​pation. I am of opinion that she only absorbs herself thus in trivial matters, because in most cases she is dis couraged, if not absolutely prohibited, from turning her attention to any thing higher. We find a parallel in the case of oriental women. They are uneducated. Society, as we recognize it, has no calls upon them. The church awards them but an inferior place in this world, and perhaps none at all in the next. They are never allowed to dream of art or literature. But they must do something. Thus, as they have been taught that they are creatures of sense alone, until they fully believe it, they give their attention to sensual matters, and so become the very voluptuaries they are accused of being. Though they are closely watched, and though infidelity to a husband is so severely punishable, intriguing, we are told, is their chiefest delight, and there is no such thing as true womanly virtue—the virtue which practices chastity for chastity's sake—among them. We are told "the veils which were invented to preserve their virtue, favor their intrigues to dispose of it. The most watchful husband may pass his wife in the street without knowing her. Thus they live in perpetual masquerade. The places of assignation are usually at Jews' shops, where they meet their paramours. though very seldom letting them know who they are." The Mohammedan husband believes the utmost watch fulness over his wives necessary to preserve his own honor intact. The women themselves consider it their due, and feel that their husband is culpably neglectful of and ​wanting in proper affection to them, if he shows any inclination to relax that watchfulness, while to evade it becomes the excitement and delight of their lives.

Mohammedan women are not without their ambitions. Though forbidden to take part in politics, and discouraged from any intellectual development, their power and influence is very sensibly felt in the government. Being the sons of such mothers, born and educated amid such home influences, it is not strange that, sensual and undisciplined and often ignorant as they are, the rulers are greatly swayed by the women with whom they consort. Thus it cannot be denied that oriental women hold a power behind the throne far greater than would at first appear: a power exercised, as irresponsible power always is, for personal and petty ends, which are subversive to the true spirit of government. And this is, no doubt, one of the prime reasons which has kept the East so far behind the West in civilization. The men can never be better than the women, as the stream cannot rise higher than its source. As the women are, so will the whole nation be.

Before pausing in our investigations into the condition of women in the east, it would be unfair not to give at least a passing notice of the wandering tribes of Cential, Western and Northern Asia. Most of these regard a wife in the light of a purchase, which makes her the property of her husband. She is the domestic drudge and slave, to whom tasks and abuse are plenty, and kind words few. Polygamy is more or less common. In the ​marriage ceremonies of many of these peoples there is included some symbol of submission to the husband on the part of the wife. Thus, one tribe requires the first act of the newly-married bride to be that of pulling off her husband's boots, as a sign of servitude. In another tribe the girl's father presents the husband with a whip, which he is directed to use freely. In another nation the bride is brought to the prospective husband with the words: "Here wolf, take thy lamb,"—significant words of the kind and extent of power which the husband holds over his wife. We are told of the women of certain tribes of the Bedouins, that "modesty with them is regarded as the finest grace of the sex. It is genuine and unassailable. The bride even is sometimes so coy that her husband is obliged to tie her up and whip her before she will yield to him!"

Among the Arabs, we find the most pleasing picture of domestic life. The female sex is with them held in high estimation, and treated with many marks of regard. Though wives are taught to pay great deference to their husbands, the claims of mothers upon their sons are held to be sacred. Nevertheless, we cannot consider these tribes as presenting an exception to the general condition of women throughout the East.

It seems unnecessary to my purpose to refer to the marriage laws of any more Eastern countries. There is the same principle apparent in all, namely: the absolute supremacy of the husband, and the toleration of the ​wife only as a servant, an object for sensual gratification, and a child-bearer. Whether polygamy or monogamy prevails, whether the wife is given away, bought or stolen, in all cases the woman is not considered. She is not supposed to have any right to her own person, any ownership in her children, or any voice in anything that concerns herself. The whole ordering of society is from a masculine basis, and for the convenience and pleasure of men alone. This is the distinctively oriental characteristic. To the eastern mind, the world is composed wholly of men, and women were only created as an afterthought, that they might, especially, perpetuate the race of men, and incidentally minister to the pleasure of their owners, add to their honor, and make life less toilsome. Self is the pivot of oriental civilization—a one-sided, masculine self.

I have not touched upon the Ancient Greek marriage laws and customs, because, after all, they would be but a repetition of those of other nations. And Rome belongs to the Western World. Neither do I propose here to recapitulate the Jewish laws, though I find it necessary, for the further and fuller exemplification of my views in the matter, to make one or two extracts from the Bible, showing how the primitive ideas concerning women remained in full force under the Jewish dispensation.

When Absalom was at war with his father David for supremacy in the kingdom, we are told, Samuel II, Chapter XVI, verses 21 and 22:

​"And Ahithophel said unto Absalom, go in unto thy father's concubines, which he hath left to keep the house; and all Israel shall hear that thou art abhorred of thy father: then shall the hands of all that are with thee be strong.

"So they spread Absalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Absalom went in unto his father's concubines in the sight of all Israel."

Again, Samuel II, Chapter XX, Verse 3:

"And David came to his house at Jerusalem; and the King took the ten women, his concubines, whom he had left to keep the house, and put them in ward, and fed them, but went not in unto them. So they were shut up unto the day of their death, living in widowhood."

Did any one ever dwell upon the real pathos there is hidden in this story? The historian has not considered it necessary to mention whether these ten women were willing agents in the dishonor of their lord. Whether they went willingly to the abominable act, or whether they shrunk in all the depths of their womanly natures, both from the act and its publicity, was not of the least moment to those who took active part in the measures. One man was to be extolled, and another man dishonored, and these women were the tools without volition in the matter.

When David returned, and his honor was to be vindicated, one would naturally suppose, looking from a nineteenth century point of view, that, in justice, those who ​had conceived and carried out the atrocious purpose, would be the ones upon whom the wrath of David would especially fall, while the helpless tools who had been forced to act by the superior will of another would be forgiven, and a meed of mercy accorded them. But a one-sided humanity confronts us. A man had been dishonored through these women, and only through them could his honor be vindicated. As their assent or dissent did not for one moment occupy the mind of Absalom, neither did it that of David. These women, his property, had been defiled, and only their perpetual banishment and imprisonment could restore brilliancy to his tarnished honor. "So they were shut up unto the day of their death." Ten helpless women were condemned to wear their lives away in the dreary monotony of a "house of ward," or prison, and denied domestic and social ties, until their lives were wasted, their energies worn out, and death came to set them free. And all for no other crime than that of being born women, and consequently under the dominion of the stronger sex. The story is a sad one, but there are plenty more like it in the Bible, showing how closely the Hebrew nation held to the traditions descended from earliest times.

A civilization based upon this idea of the sexes is one-sided, and can have no real elements of progress in it. I think the careful student might find ample proof that the dead level of Eastern civilization, its weakness, its effeminacy, its opposition to the spirit of progress, ​and its backwardness generally, are owing to the servile position which it accords women. Humanity was made dual in its character, and for it to hope to advance while one-half is kept stationary, is like trying to drag a cart with one wheel hopelessly blocked; or like a man trying to walk with one foot tied down to the ground, or heavily clogged.