THE OPPOSITION TO WOMAN'S RIGHTS.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXVII, Issue 4304, 31 May 1871, Page 3

THE OPPOSITION TO WOMAN'S RIGHTS.

My, dekr' lady f riends,' that opposition" is' much larger than it would be if you" > would alter your tactics 4 little, - ; When, a man, Mri J. Stuart Mill, is really the apoB$$ of the' movement in favour of women ;,,when mek secured to the ladies their' position on thej London School Board ; when . man taught and are teaching lady-doctors ; when men at the head of universities are opening the doors of those seats of learning to women; wh.ba men, editors of newspapers, ar«e, ready to open their columns fotf-jvyomen, to discuss their views and wishes ; when, men help female lecturers and doctors, eh, and parsons too, by their support and countenance — when men do for women all this,- what worse than folly it is to speak and writ© of them as if the very fact ot their being men was quite ground enough for hating them as natural enemies and opponents. Such a hypothesis is so absurd that Josh Billings has soine excuse for saying that " Woman's Eights are Men's Lefts," for certainly stich bitter writing savours strongly of disappointment and chagrin. Men fool disgusted at such illogical rubbish. They sa^y, " Well, if that is all the sense, discrimination, and knowledge, of the world that women possess, it ivill not be a safe experiment to put power into their hands." We shouldn't be very ready to let a lunatic out of the Asylum who vehemently declared that the" first use he would make of his freedom would be to cut our throats; and ''the monster man" has some reason to hesitate about removing the curb from a senseless lot of idiots who declaie that they would use their freedom to crush him. They could not do it, of course: no one feels in the least alarmed on that score except some dreadfully cowardly men; but they would be a great annoyance, causing 8ndless complications and disturbances. » 1 am quite sure the folly aud want of practical common sense in women themselves has much to do with the large number of the opposition; and there is no hope of women as a body becoming thoroughly enlightened and practical until woman is educated and treated as she should be, as a responsible accountable being, answerable as well to man as to God for tbe proper use of her abilities. iMen daily complain of the folly, frivolity, and uselessness of women, and there is a good deal of ground for the complaint : yet those who are loudest in finding fault are the slowest generally to perceive that law and custom are wholly to blame. They say, " Let woman rise out of her present state of weak dependence ; let her be stronger, firmer, nobler;" and yet they offer no incentive to make women desire to be better and more useful. They propose still to leave her in a state of absolute dependence on the masculine sex, which would be doubly galling iu rmny cases to women educated aoove the present standard. The mean, cruel beings who disgrace the name of manhood by declaring that it is God's will that so it should be — that the all- wise and goodFather, who is as much "Our Father " as man's, created us but to suffer — speak falsely. Those men who declare that the Bible condemns women to hopeless slavery and subordination, simply blaspheme against the God of love and mercy, the Prince of Peace. When Christ's disciples, " whilst He was yet with them, aud betore the Holy Ghost had come upon them," tried more than once to persuade Him to condemn women, they never ouce succeeded in making Him by one word sauction their strictures. If Christians be Christlike, how very different must be their rule of life from that of Mr. Stephens for instance. Christ was throughout His ministry the friend and defender of women, frequently enjoying their society ; and how He was Joved by them is shown by their devotion to the end. It was the women who surrounded His cross, and ran first to His sepulchre — women bound to Him by ties of the deepest gratitude as their never-failing Friend aud constant defender. In a dark and bigotted age, He stood forth as "woman's advocate," and knowing this encourages many a woman to persevere, in spite of the dark narrow dogmas of ignorance and prejudice — dogmas founded solely on the perversion of a few texts. It is quite labour iu vain to argue with some minds. The true and beautiful character of Mrs. Mill herself, the enlightened appreciation of her excellent husband, nay, the very lessons of Christ, w'hose life could not straighten the stunted aud crooked faculties of a mind warped and diseased by prejudices, unsoftened by universal love, and devoid of that beauty of meekness which is so prominent a grace in ( the really Christian character. But these men are exceptional, thank God. Those who calmly and deliberately declare that woman's highest lot is to be man's slave or pampered menial, and who would yet eduoate and train her so that she might have the power of feeling her degradation more keenly, are worse than the slave - holders of (South America, a great deal more cruel, and a great deal less wise, for the slaveholder could see that bondage would be intolerable to an enlightened mind, and that the educated slave would be sure to rebel at slavery. "But," say some, " what nonsense you are talking, Polly Plum ! You know quite well — no one knows better — that women are not really slaves, that nothing could 'be higher' than the position many wives hold. ' They are tho trusted stewards and confidants of their husbauds, their advisers, friends, and in all but law their equals." That is quite true, and all honour to many men that so it should be, but that is woman's position ' 'in fact, " not in law. Legally, or rather by a legal fiction, they have no existence. _ Now, I want to see the position of women in law what it is now in fact, in most cases. A few men, void of shame and decency, take the utmost advantage of the "rights" the law gives them, but they generally outrage public opinion, and are quite as little thought of by men as by women. I can say certainly that seven out of every ten men I talk to on the subject of ' ' Woman's Eights " are in favour of the movement. Some are a little held back by considerations of the effect on property j also as to how it will affect the Children if the parents are legally equal and responsible; and women are absurd if they rant and rave at them for being a little cautious. Men by long habit and business' education' are accustomed as a rule to weigh well the practical results of anything to which 1 they pledge themselves; but very few wbmen (unless those who have been forced out of <jhe domestic sphere and actively engaged in the business of life) understand anything of all these possible complications) !! They are impulsive and not practical, and* they no Sooner see an evil than they want to rush at Xnce to experimentalise a remedy; they snow so little of the business of .the. world that they can see no harm in tryingthesa experiments, which ' might possibly^ '' cause immense complications- and losses. 1 '"- Men more experienced} though perhaps' not 'really wiser or more intelligent, hesitated This raises the ire of some wordy but unpractical woman, and she writes a long ifrothy tirade about the "tyrant man;" and the poor y tyrant, "who was quite "on her side, yet, hesitating,, %ityt)k>. as to, what cou^d^e^dpne ' vith safety to social interest's, hesitates still more when he finds how little fit sonte women ire to be trusted to even thinfc wisely.'" >There we many men, and women' too,; in 'thia 1 class. They do not oppose the <-'■ tights ?' ihovement. They see plainly^.a^r.eYerybpdjy.^nust that sees at all, how fearfujly and. cruelly the Existing laws press on the. wives of 'drunkards, ijdisers, dissipated men, petty , tyrants, and sluggajda. • , Nm bj&^^ifcbfod^n %nore the f *ct of hqigjiiypjrable the lot of the •hoor wives of 8uch'menViiiiujsji;,be.;jf Ji», ( would be bad enough inany §ase| bftftjijiji hopelessly bad now when the pootpreatures tied to them, ire almost completely at the mercy of these lien. Why then' do, they hesSiteito^Snledy ft? As I haw^Mu^viheiy •jdfnraf, as io the risk of ;BooiaH&$ejej^$$t the payings of "ultra^V Mraod^stake them hesitate, stiU inoiXLppx^«i8 leatT vtfysm to s { side with the opp|)8itibn. 1^ThiB l 48^the^tMra»tr swt of i^^%m$W$&^*m\ ) linderedandihimpered, raformsof; all kinds,' ft is to jbe .depio^,r ; bokuriff i4;M> Muder a

much harm; buf^th© trup jttngdoni of Christ, hasiflouriahed steadily, though sometimes in ! partial darkness, and it will some day "cpyerthe earth." One of. Christ's, chief maxims was/ "Do unto others as ye would i they should do unto yon," and, read in. the light of Christ's example, that maxim will 'form the groundwork of "women's emancipation." I am sure the day is dawning. I meet constantly with men who are more advanced advocate's for " Women's Eights " than I am; some who, say that woman should, have (whether single or married) a, positive legal existence; share' man's rights and powers, privileges and prerogatives; tie in all things his undoubted equal. What think you of that, ladies ? Is it fair to call man a tyrant and aft enemy, just because some venomous prejudiced beings try to bounce women /in the paper, .when there,' are to be found in our midst men' who calmly and deliberately express their conviction that woman is, or ought to be, and would be if she were rightly educated, man's t perfect equal. The men who say this go further than I go, and surely ought to satisfy the most insatiable crave after "Women's Rights," and inakethe strong-minded aisterhood reconsider thererdict, "That man by nature of his manhood is woman's undoubted opposer and foe."' The statement is' utterly false, and I here raise my protest against the custom of considering all men, or even men generally, as members of the opposition. ! ' Polly Plum.