MAINLY FOR WOMEN

Greymouth Evening Star, 29 March 1930, Page 3

MAINLY FOR WOMEN

ITEMS OF INTEREST

(Notes by

Marjorie)

WOMEN IN INDUSTRY. marriage NO SECURITY. NEW YORK, February 19. That marriage has brought no economic security for women and that chivalry is an “age-worn myth” are among the opinions expressed in a bulletin issued at Washington by the United States Women’s Bureau. The bulletin, entitled “What the Wage-earning Woman Contributes to Family Support,” sees a great difference from conditions prevailing a generation or so ago. Nowadays, it says, a large proportion of families living ’in cities depends largely on the earnings of women, and in many homes the entire income is earned by wife or daughters. The author, Miss Agnes L. Peterson, assistant-director of the bureau, calls attention to “the. great personal sacrifice demanded of women in order that they may make, a contribution to the support of their families. The double standard in wages and the absence of chivalry have resulted in the unscrupulous exploitation of the. potential motherhood of the land.” “Sons do not assume equal responsibility with daughters toward the parental home,” says Miss Peterson. “It may be considered common knowledge that sons do not forgo marraige and careers to anything like the extent to which daughters remain at home because of the needs of parents or younger sisters and brothers. In a study of more than 17,000 married women, one in every five is earning for a family with no help from male relatives, says the report, which cites another investigation of 30,000 families, in which 27 per cent, of the workers said there were no men wageearners in their families. Married women now form such a large- factor in industry that in 10 recent cases studied by the Women’s Bureau single women formed less than 50 per cent, of the wage-earning group. In three other cases the unmarried element fell to less than 36 per cent.

VALUE OF A WIFE. DIVORCE SUIT DAMAGES. LONDON, February 13. Damages totalling £2700 were awarded to the husbands in three divorce cases heard this week. In one case a Church of England minister was granted a decree nisi against his wife, and the jury awarded him £2OO damages against the co-respondent. The suit was not defended. Mr Justice Hill said he always found very great difficulty in assessing in pounds, shillings and pence the loss of a wife to a man. He did not know why a man should want to turn into cash his wife’s dishonour. He did not know how really it could be done, and he was very thankful when the task was taken from him.

“Fortunately,” said His Honor to the jury, “in the great mass of cases that come before our courts here, petitioners do not ask for damages. I find it very difficult to understand how a clergyman, whose case might have gone through quietly as an undefended case, should want to bring it into Court and have it tried before a jury, but you must give him what the law says he is entitled to. “It has been said that the corespondent came into some property, but a man’s means are really irrelevant, as the injury which a husband suffers is the same whether it was inflicted by a rich man or a poor man. You are not to award damages by way of punishment, but only to assess the value of the loss of a wife’s society. The law allows an injured husband to recover something in respect of his injured feelings, and I suppose you must take it into account however strange you might think it. that any man should want to have his injured feelings in respect of the loss of a wife turned into money.” The “Daily Telegraph” says it considers it probable that in no long time the claim for damages in divorce will become for practical purposes obsolete. Already in the great majority of cases no claim is made; whether it is considered ignominious oi’ whether or not the plaintiff feels that in the conditions of modern marriage no injury could be proved. But whether this is evidence of a loftier ideal of marriage is not clear. The “Daily Chronicle,” however, has a different opinion. “A wife’s behaviour,” says this journal, “may inflict on a husband much damage besides the loss of a mate; it may interfere with his profession, blast his career, occasion heavy losses of money. Whore the co-respondent, who brought it all ab.out, is a, rich man, is it unreasonable that he should be forced to pay money against these money losses?”

SNOBS AMONG GIRLS. Class distinction and snobbishness among village girls tended to increase the shortage of domestic servants, said a speaker at the annual conference of the Berkshire Federation of Women’s Institutes at Reading. Remarking upon the decreasing number of girls entering domestic service, she said factory, shop and office girls looked down on servants. “Take social clubs as an example,” she said. “The superintendent usually greets an office or shop girl with ‘Good evening, Miss Jones,’ but when a servant entered it is ‘Hullo, Mary, so glad the missus let iyou out to-night.” MYSTERY OF DRESS PRICES. Most women of maturer years can remember how surprised they were when short dresses became- fashionable and the prices of frocks and costumes did not correspondingly decline. They were gravely told the reason for this was that the material played a small part in the total cost of a dress, and there was just as much labour to be paid for in making a short frock. This being so, it is rather a shock to discover how longer, skirts have put up the prices of dresses at once. Many of the new picture frocks are made of brocades costing 25/- to 30/- a yard to the trade and between seven and bight yards are required. The woman who used to pay 10 guineas for an evening dress is now asked at least 15 guineas for a dress of the same standard.

“BEAUTY” CULTS. EXAMPLES FROM MANY LANDS. Fashions in the deformation and decoration of the body are illustrated by a collection on view at tire Wellcome Historical Medical Museum, writes a special representative of the “Morning Post,” London. Primitive people have, it appears, more excuse for their vagaries than exist for the “golden-lily” feet of Chinese women. Beauty is not their only object in deformation. In illness bushmen are prepared to sacrifice one finger to their gods to secure their recovery. It is better, they think, to Jive on, though maimed or halt, than to pass whole into the shadow-land beyond. Moro obvious utility leads the Chinook Indians to flatten their children’s heads by the application of boards and pads. By this means their capacity for carrying burdens is enormously increased. Neither their, intellect nor their courage seems to be affected, and in some tribes the individuals who have had the misfortune to remain normal are ignominously sold as slaves. Equally practical is the hobbling of Nigerian women by wide-flanged anklets. These are commonly given as a wedding present by the father-in-law, partly as an ornament and partly to prevent his new relation from running away. Magic as well as beauty is generally the reason for tattooing and painting. The design on the wrist of a Kayan of Borneo prevents the escape of his soul when he is ill. The women believe that their designs will serve as torches to guide them on their journey to the next world.

Girls of one tribe are tattooed by degrees all over the body. They believe that if a woman is completely tattooed before'death she will be allowed by the gods to gather the pearls that cover the bed of the mythical river, Telang Julan. If she is partly tattooed she can at least stand on the bank and watch her more fortunate sisters. But if she has no tattoo modesty will compel her to hide in solitary degradation. Both tattooing and painting are often the subject of elaborate ceremonies.

More drastic is the practice of enlarging the lips and ears by the insertion of gradually increasing wooden ornaments. A successful ear operation results in a loop so large that it can be lifted over the victim’s head and worn as a human necklace. Ferocity rather than beauty is the aim of the Borneo nose ornament. But in this, as in all forms of primitive mutilation, magic plays an important part. A fierce appearance is the outward sign of unholy courage to secure which the hunter will gladly pay the price of a trivial, though painful,

HOUSE FACING TWO SQUARES. BATHROOM TO EACH BEDROOM. Mrs Gordon Leith, a well-known London Society woman, who gave a house-warming party recently, has an immense new house on the north side of the Park. It faces on to two squares, the front on to Hyde Park Square, and the back on to Gloucester Square, such is the length of the house, with three big drawing rooms on the first floor, painted Italian blue. Practically each bedroom on the guest floor, which is reached by a lift fitted with flaps to carry breakfast trays, has its own' bathroom. That of the chatelaine is biscuit and green to match her enormous bedroom, half of which becomes a sitting room with sofas and chair. Mr Leith’s rooms reverse the colour scheme and are green and biscuit. A large oval table was made in Florence for the dining room in gilded wood and marbled composition, with chairs to match. From Florence, too, came the Italian gates that make an original front door.