Guest Author

THE ABSURD TIMES

The following article is written by a one-time editor of the Absurd Times. He manages to illustrate the previous article, much much more vividly:

ON WOMEN.

These few words of Jouy, _Sans les femmes le commencement de notre vie

seroit privé de secours, le milieu de plaisirs et la fin de

consolation_, more exactly express, in my opinion, the true praise of

woman than Schiller's poem, _Würde der Frauen_, which is the fruit of

much careful thought and impressive because of its antithesis and use of

contrast. The same thing is more pathetically expressed by Byron in

_Sardanapalus_, Act i, Sc. 2:--

"The very first

Of human life must spring from woman's breast,

Your first small words are taught you from her lips,

Your first tears quench'd by her, and your last sighs

Too often breathed out in a woman's hearing,

When men have shrunk from the ignoble care

Of watching the last hour of him who led them."

Both passages show the right point of view for the appreciation of

women.

One need only look at a woman's shape to discover that she is not

intended for either too much mental or too much physical work. She pays

the debt of life not by what she does but by what she suffers--by the

pains of child-bearing, care for the child, and by subjection to man, to

whom she should be a patient and cheerful companion. The greatest

sorrows and joys or great exhibition of strength are not assigned to

her; her life should flow more quietly, more gently, and less

obtrusively than man's, without her being essentially happier or

unhappier.

* * * * *

Women are directly adapted to act as the nurses and educators of our

early childhood, for the simple reason that they themselves are

childish, foolish, and short-sighted--in a word, are big children all

their lives, something intermediate between the child and the man, who

is a man in the strict sense of the word. Consider how a young girl will

toy day after day with a child, dance with it and sing to it; and then

consider what a man, with the very best intentions in the world, could

do in her place.

* * * * *

With girls, Nature has had in view what is called in a dramatic sense a

"striking effect," for she endows them for a few years with a richness

of beauty and a, fulness of charm at the expense of the rest of their

lives; so that they may during these years ensnare the fantasy of a man

to such a degree as to make him rush into taking the honourable care of

them, in some kind of form, for a lifetime--a step which would not

seem sufficiently justified if he only considered the matter.

Accordingly, Nature has furnished woman, as she has the rest of her

creatures, with the weapons and implements necessary for the protection

of her existence and for just the length of time that they will be of

service to her; so that Nature has proceeded here with her usual

economy. Just as the female ant after coition loses her wings, which

then become superfluous, nay, dangerous for breeding purposes, so for

the most part does a woman lose her beauty after giving birth to one or

two children; and probably for the same reasons.

Then again we find that young girls in their hearts regard their

domestic or other affairs as secondary things, if not as a mere jest.

Love, conquests, and all that these include, such as dressing, dancing,

and so on, they give their serious attention.

* * * * *

The nobler and more perfect a thing is, the later and slower is it in

reaching maturity. Man reaches the maturity of his reasoning and mental

faculties scarcely before he is eight-and-twenty; woman when she is

eighteen; but hers is reason of very narrow limitations. This is why

women remain children all their lives, for they always see only what is

near at hand, cling to the present, take the appearance of a thing for

reality, and prefer trifling matters to the most important. It is by

virtue of man's reasoning powers that he does not live in the present

only, like the brute, but observes and ponders over the past and future;

and from this spring discretion, care, and that anxiety which we so

frequently notice in people. The advantages, as well as the

disadvantages, that this entails, make woman, in consequence of her

weaker reasoning powers, less of a partaker in them. Moreover, she is

intellectually short-sighted, for although her intuitive understanding

quickly perceives what is near to her, on the other hand her circle of

vision is limited and does not embrace anything that is remote; hence

everything that is absent or past, or in the future, affects women in a

less degree than men. This is why they have greater inclination for

extravagance, which sometimes borders on madness. Women in their hearts

think that men are intended to earn money so that they may spend it, if

possible during their husband's lifetime, but at any rate after his

death.

As soon as he has given them his earnings on which to keep house they

are strengthened in this belief. Although all this entails many

disadvantages, yet it has this advantage--that a woman lives more in the

present than a man, and that she enjoys it more keenly if it is at all

bearable. This is the origin of that cheerfulness which is peculiar to

woman and makes her fit to divert man, and in case of need, to console

him when he is weighed down by cares. To consult women in matters of

difficulty, as the Germans used to do in old times, is by no means a

matter to be overlooked; for their way of grasping a thing is quite

different from ours, chiefly because they like the shortest way to the

point, and usually keep their attention fixed upon what lies nearest;

while we, as a rule, see beyond it, for the simple reason that it lies

under our nose; it then becomes necessary for us to be brought back to

the thing in order to obtain a near and simple view. This is why women

are more sober in their judgment than we, and why they see nothing more

in things than is really there; while we, if our passions are roused,

slightly exaggerate or add to our imagination.

It is because women's reasoning powers are weaker that they show more

sympathy for the unfortunate than men, and consequently take a kindlier

interest in them. On the other hand, women are inferior to men in

matters of justice, honesty, and conscientiousness. Again, because their

reasoning faculty is weak, things clearly visible and real, and

belonging to the present, exercise a power over them which is rarely

counteracted by abstract thoughts, fixed maxims, or firm resolutions, in

general, by regard for the past and future or by consideration for what

is absent and remote. Accordingly they have the first and principal

qualities of virtue, but they lack the secondary qualities which are

often a necessary instrument in developing it. Women may be compared in

this respect to an organism that has a liver but no gall-bladder.[9] So

that it will be found that the fundamental fault in the character of

women is that they have no "_sense of justice_." This arises from their

deficiency in the power of reasoning already referred to, and

reflection, but is also partly due to the fact that Nature has not

destined them, as the weaker sex, to be dependent on strength but on

cunning; this is why they are instinctively crafty, and have an

ineradicable tendency to lie. For as lions are furnished with claws and

teeth, elephants with tusks, boars with fangs, bulls with horns, and the

cuttlefish with its dark, inky fluid, so Nature has provided woman for

her protection and defence with the faculty of dissimulation, and all

the power which Nature has given to man in the form of bodily strength

and reason has been conferred on woman in this form. Hence,

dissimulation is innate in woman and almost as characteristic of the

very stupid as of the clever. Accordingly, it is as natural for women to

dissemble at every opportunity as it is for those animals to turn to

their weapons when they are attacked; and they feel in doing so that in

a certain measure they are only making use of their rights. Therefore a

woman who is perfectly truthful and does not dissemble is perhaps an

impossibility. This is why they see through dissimulation in others so

easily; therefore it is not advisable to attempt it with them. From the

fundamental defect that has been stated, and all that it involves,

spring falseness, faithlessness, treachery, ungratefulness, and so on.

In a court of justice women are more often found guilty of perjury than

men. It is indeed to be generally questioned whether they should be

allowed to take an oath at all. From time to time there are repeated

cases everywhere of ladies, who want for nothing, secretly pocketing and

taking away things from shop counters.

* * * * *

Nature has made it the calling of the young, strong, and handsome men to

look after the propagation of the human race; so that the species may

not degenerate. This is the firm will of Nature, and it finds its

expression in the passions of women. This law surpasses all others in

both age and power. Woe then to the man who sets up rights and interests

in such a way as to make them stand in the way of it; for whatever he

may do or say, they will, at the first significant onset, be

unmercifully annihilated. For the secret, unformulated, nay, unconscious

but innate moral of woman is: _We are justified in deceiving those who,

because they care a little for us_,--_that is to say for the

individual_,--_imagine they have obtained rights over the species. The

constitution, and consequently the welfare of the species, have been put

into our hands and entrusted to our care through the medium of the next

generation which proceeds from us; let us fulfil our duties

conscientiously_.

But women are by no means conscious of this leading principle _in

abstracto_, they are only conscious of it _in concreto_, and have no

other way of expressing it than in the manner in which they act when the

opportunity arrives. So that their conscience does not trouble them so

much as we imagine, for in the darkest depths of their hearts they are

conscious that in violating their duty towards the individual they have

all the better fulfilled it towards the species, whose claim upon them

is infinitely greater. (A fuller explanation of this matter may be found

in vol. ii., ch. 44, in my chief work, _Die Welt als Wille und

Vorstellung_.)

Because women in truth exist entirely for the propagation of the race,

and their destiny ends here, they live more for the species than for the

individual, and in their hearts take the affairs of the species more

seriously than those of the individual. This gives to their whole being

and character a certain frivolousness, and altogether a certain tendency

which is fundamentally different from that of man; and this it is which

develops that discord in married life which is so prevalent and almost

the normal state.

It is natural for a feeling of mere indifference to exist between men,

but between women it is actual enmity. This is due perhaps to the fact

that _odium figulinum_ in the case of men, is limited to their everyday

affairs, but with women embraces the whole sex; since they have only one

kind of business. Even when they meet in the street, they look at each

other like Guelphs and Ghibellines. And it is quite evident when two

women first make each other's acquaintance that they exhibit more

constraint and dissimulation than two men placed in similar

circumstances. This is why an exchange of compliments between two women

is much more ridiculous than between two men. Further, while a man will,

as a rule, address others, even those inferior to himself, with a

certain feeling of consideration and humanity, it is unbearable to see

how proudly and disdainfully a lady of rank will, for the most part,

behave towards one who is in a lower rank (not employed in her service)

when she speaks to her. This may be because differences of rank are much

more precarious with women than with us, and consequently more quickly

change their line of conduct and elevate them, or because while a

hundred things must be weighed in our case, there is only one to be

weighed in theirs, namely, with which man they have found favour; and

again, because of the one-sided nature of their vocation they stand in

closer relationship to each other than men do; and so it is they try to

render prominent the differences of rank.

* * * * *

It is only the man whose intellect is clouded by his sexual instinct

that could give that stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped, and

short-legged race the name of _the fair sex_; for the entire beauty of

the sex is based on this instinct. One would be more justified in

calling them the _unaesthetic sex_ than the beautiful. Neither for

music, nor for poetry, nor for fine art have they any real or true sense

and susceptibility, and it is mere mockery on their part, in their

desire to please, if they affect any such thing.

This makes them incapable of taking a purely objective interest in

anything, and the reason for it is, I fancy, as follows. A man strives

to get _direct_ mastery over things either by understanding them or by

compulsion. But a woman is always and everywhere driven to _indirect_

mastery, namely through a man; all her _direct_ mastery being limited to

him alone. Therefore it lies in woman's nature to look upon everything

only as a means for winning man, and her interest in anything else is

always a simulated one, a mere roundabout way to gain her ends,

consisting of coquetry and pretence. Hence Rousseau said, _Les femmes,

en général, n'aiment aucun art, ne se connoissent à aucun et n'ont aucun

génie_ (Lettre à d'Alembert, note xx.). Every one who can see through a

sham must have found this to be the case. One need only watch the way

they behave at a concert, the opera, or the play; the childish

simplicity, for instance, with which they keep on chattering during the

finest passages in the greatest masterpieces. If it is true that the

Greeks forbade women to go to the play, they acted in a right way; for

they would at any rate be able to hear something. In our day it would be

more appropriate to substitute _taceat mulier in theatro_ for _taceat

mulier in ecclesia_; and this might perhaps be put up in big letters on

the curtain.

Nothing different can be expected of women if it is borne in mind that

the most eminent of the whole sex have never accomplished anything in

the fine arts that is really great, genuine, and original, or given to

the world any kind of work of permanent value. This is most striking in

regard to painting, the technique of which is as much within their reach

as within ours; this is why they pursue it so industriously. Still, they

have not a single great painting to show, for the simple reason that

they lack that objectivity of mind which is precisely what is so

directly necessary in painting. They always stick to what is subjective.

For this reason, ordinary women have no susceptibility for painting at

all: for _natura non facet saltum_. And Huarte, in his book which has

been famous for three hundred years, _Examen de ingenios para las

scienzias_, contends that women do not possess the higher capacities.

Individual and partial exceptions do not alter the matter; women are and

remain, taken altogether, the most thorough and incurable philistines;

and because of the extremely absurd arrangement which allows them to

share the position and title of their husbands they are a constant

stimulus to his _ignoble_ ambitions. And further, it is because they are

philistines that modern society, to which they give the tone and where

they have sway, has become corrupted. As regards their position, one

should be guided by Napoleon's maxim, _Les femmes n'ont pas de rang_;

and regarding them in other things, Chamfort says very truly: _Elles

sont faites pour commercer avec nos faiblesses avec notre folie, mais

non avec notre raison. Il existe entre elles et les hommes des

sympathies d'épiderme et très-peu de sympathies d'esprit d'âme et de

caractère_. They are the _sexus sequior_, the second sex in every

respect, therefore their weaknesses should be spared, but to treat women

with extreme reverence is ridiculous, and lowers us in their own eyes.

When nature divided the human race into two parts, she did not cut it

exactly through the middle! The difference between the positive and

negative poles, according to polarity, is not merely qualitative but

also quantitative. And it was in this light that the ancients and people

of the East regarded woman; they recognised her true position better

than we, with our old French ideas of gallantry and absurd veneration,

that highest product of Christian-Teutonic stupidity. These ideas have

only served to make them arrogant and imperious, to such an extent as to

remind one at times of the holy apes in Benares, who, in the

consciousness of their holiness and inviolability, think they can do

anything and everything they please.

In the West, the woman, that is to say the "lady," finds herself in a

_fausse position_; for woman, rightly named by the ancients _sexus

sequior_, is by no means fit to be the object of our honour and

veneration, or to hold her head higher than man and to have the same

rights as he. The consequences of this _fausse position_ are

sufficiently clear. Accordingly, it would be a very desirable thing if

this Number Two of the human race in Europe were assigned her natural

position, and the lady-grievance got rid of, which is not only ridiculed

by the whole of Asia, but would have been equally ridiculed by Greece

and Rome. The result of this would be that the condition of our social,

civil, and political affairs would be incalculably improved. The Salic

law would be unnecessary; it would be a superfluous truism. The European

lady, strictly speaking, is a creature who should not exist at all; but

there ought to be housekeepers, and young girls who hope to become such;

and they should be brought up not to be arrogant, but to be domesticated

and submissive. It is exactly because there are _ladies_ in Europe that

women of a lower standing, that is to say, the greater majority of the

sex, are much more unhappy than they are in the East. Even Lord Byron

says (_Letters and Papers_, by Thomas Moore, vol. ii. p. 399), _Thought

of the state of women under the ancient Greeks--convenient enough.

Present state, a remnant of the barbarism of the chivalric and feudal

ages--artificial and unnatural. They ought to mind home--and be well fed

and clothed--but not mixed in society. Well educated, too, in

religion--but to read neither poetry nor politics--nothing but books of

piety and cookery. Music--drawing--dancing--also a little gardening and

ploughing now and then. I have seen them mending the roads in Epirus

with good success. Why not, as well as hay-making and milking_?

* * * * *

In our part of the world, where monogamy is in force, to marry means to

halve one's rights and to double one's duties. When the laws granted

woman the same rights as man, they should also have given her a

masculine power of reason. On the contrary, just as the privileges and

honours which the laws decree to women surpass what Nature has meted out

to them, so is there a proportional decrease in the number of women who

really share these privileges; therefore the remainder are deprived of

their natural rights in so far as the others have been given more than

Nature accords.

For the unnatural position of privilege which the institution of

monogamy, and the laws of marriage which accompany it, assign to the

woman, whereby she is regarded throughout as a full equivalent of the

man, which she is not by any means, cause intelligent and prudent men to

reflect a great deal before they make so great a sacrifice and consent

to so unfair an arrangement. Therefore, whilst among polygamous nations

every woman finds maintenance, where monogamy exists the number of

married women is limited, and a countless number of women who are

without support remain over; those in the upper classes vegetate as

useless old maids, those in the lower are reduced to very hard work of a

distasteful nature, or become prostitutes, and lead a life which is as

joyless as it is void of honour. But under such circumstances they

become a necessity to the masculine sex; so that their position is

openly recognised as a special means for protecting from seduction those

other women favoured by fate either to have found husbands, or who hope

to find them. In London alone there are 80,000 prostitutes. Then what

are these women who have come too quickly to this most terrible end but

human sacrifices on the altar of monogamy? The women here referred to

and who are placed in this wretched position are the inevitable

counterbalance to the European lady, with her pretensions and arrogance.

Hence polygamy is a real benefit to the female sex, taking it _as a

whole_. And, on the other hand, there is no reason why a man whose wife

suffers from chronic illness, or remains barren, or has gradually become

too old for him, should not take a second. Many people become converts

to Mormonism for the precise reasons that they condemn the unnatural

institution of monogamy. The conferring of unnatural rights upon women

has imposed unnatural duties upon them, the violation of which, however,

makes them unhappy. For example, many a man thinks marriage unadvisable

as far as his social standing and monetary position are concerned,

unless he contracts a brilliant match. He will then wish to win a woman

of his own choice under different conditions, namely, under those which

will render safe her future and that of her children. Be the conditions

ever so just, reasonable, and adequate, and she consents by giving up

those undue privileges which marriage, as the basis of civil society,

alone can bestow, she must to a certain extent lose her honour and lead

a life of loneliness; since human nature makes us dependent on the

opinion of others in a way that is completely out of proportion to its

value. While, if the woman does not consent, she runs the risk of being

compelled to marry a man she dislikes, or of shrivelling up into an old

maid; for the time allotted to her to find a home is very short. In view

of this side of the institution of monogamy, Thomasius's profoundly

learned treatise, _de Concubinatu_, is well worth reading, for it shows

that, among all nations, and in all ages, down to the Lutheran

Reformation, concubinage was allowed, nay, that it was an institution,

in a certain measure even recognised by law and associated with no

dishonour. And it held this position until the Lutheran Reformation,

when it was recognised as another means for justifying the marriage of

the clergy; whereupon the Catholic party did not dare to remain

behindhand in the matter.

It is useless to argue about polygamy, it must be taken as a fact

existing everywhere, the _mere regulation_ of which is the problem to be

solved. Where are there, then, any real monogamists? We all live, at any

rate for a time, and the majority of us always, in polygamy.

Consequently, as each man needs many women, nothing is more just than to

let him, nay, make it incumbent upon him to provide for many women. By

this means woman will be brought back to her proper and natural place as

a subordinate being, and _the lady_, that monster of European

civilisation and Christian-Teutonic stupidity, with her ridiculous claim

to respect and veneration, will no longer exist; there will still be

_women_, but no _unhappy women_, of whom Europe is at present full. The

Mormons' standpoint is right.

* * * * *

In India no woman is ever independent, but each one stands under the

control of her father or her husband, or brother or son, in accordance

with the law of Manu.

It is certainly a revolting idea that widows should sacrifice themselves

on their husband's dead body; but it is also revolting that the money

which the husband has earned by working diligently for all his life, in

the hope that he was working for his children, should be wasted on her

paramours. _Medium tenuere beati_. The first love of a mother, as that

of animals and men, is purely _instinctive_, and consequently ceases

when the child is no longer physically helpless. After that, the first

love should be reinstated by a love based on habit and reason; but this

often does not appear, especially where the mother has not loved the

father. The love of a father for his children is of a different nature

and more sincere; it is founded on a recognition of his own inner self

in the child, and is therefore metaphysical in its origin.

In almost every nation, both of the new and old world, and even among

the Hottentots, property is inherited by the male descendants alone; it

is only in Europe that one has departed from this. That the property

which men have with difficulty acquired by long-continued struggling and

hard work should afterwards come into the hands of women, who, in their

want of reason, either squander it within a short time or otherwise

waste it, is an injustice as great as it is common, and it should be

prevented by limiting the right of women to inherit. It seems to me that

it would be a better arrangement if women, be they widows or daughters,

only inherited the money for life secured by mortgage, but not the

property itself or the capital, unless there lacked male descendants. It

is men who make the money, and not women; therefore women are neither

justified in having unconditional possession of it nor capable of

administrating it. Women should never have the free disposition of

wealth, strictly so-called, which they may inherit, such as capital,

houses, and estates. They need a guardian always; therefore they should

not have the guardianship of their children under any circumstances

whatever. The vanity of women, even if it should not be greater than

that of men, has this evil in it, that it is directed on material

things--that is to say, on their personal beauty and then on tinsel,

pomp, and show. This is why they are in their right element in society.

This it is which makes them inclined to be _extravagant_, especially

since they possess little reasoning power. Accordingly, an ancient

writer says, [Greek: Gunae to synolon esti dapanaeron physei].[10] Men's

vanity, on the other hand, is often directed on non-material advantages,

such as intellect, learning, courage, and the like. Aristotle explains

in the _Politics_[11] the great disadvantages which the Spartans brought

upon themselves by granting too much to their women, by allowing them

the right of inheritance and dowry, and a great amount of freedom; and

how this contributed greatly to the fall of Sparta. May it not be that

the influence of women in France, which has been increasing since Louis

XIII.'s time, was to blame for that gradual corruption of the court and

government which led to the first Revolution, of which all subsequent

disturbances have been the result? In any case, the false position of

the female sex, so conspicuously exposed by the existence of the "lady,"

is a fundamental defect in our social condition, and this defect,

proceeding from the very heart of it, must extend its harmful influence

in every direction. That woman is by nature intended to obey is shown by

the fact that every woman who is placed in the unnatural position of

absolute independence at once attaches herself to some kind of man, by

whom she is controlled and governed; this is because she requires a

master. If she, is young, the man is a lover; if she is old, a priest.