our androcentric culture-第4章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


O　the　little；　little；　female；　female　monad！〃


This　ultra　littleness　and　ultra　femaleness　has　been　demanded　and
produced　by　our　Androcentric　Culture。

Following　this；　and　part　of　it；　comes　the　effect　on　motherhood。　　This
function　was　the　original　and　legitimate　base　of　family　life；　and　its
ample　sustaining　power　throughout　the　long　early　period　of　〃the
mother…right；〃　or　as　we　call　it；　the　matriarchate；　the　father　being　her
assistant　in　the　great　work。　　The　patriarchate；　with　its　proprietary
family；　changed　this　altogether；　the　woman；　as　the　property　of　the　man
was　considered　first　and　foremost　as　a　means　of　pleasure　to　him；　and
while　she　was　still　valued　as　a　mother；　it　was　in　a　tributary　capacity。　
Her　children　were　now　his；　his　property；　as　she　was；　the　whole　enginery
of　the　family　was　turned　from　its　true　use　to　this　new　one；　hitherto
unknown；　the　service　of　the　adult　male。

To　this　day　we　are　living　under　the　influence　of　the　proprietary　family。
　The　duty　of　the　wife　is　held　to　involve　man…service　as　well　as
child…service；　and　indeed　far　more；　as　the　duty　of　the　wife　to　the
husband　quite　transcends　the　duty　of　the　mother　to　the　child。

See　for　instance　the　English　wife　staying　with　her　husband　in　India　and
sending　the　children　home　to　be　brought　up；　because　India　is　bad　for
children。　　See　our　common　law　that　the　man　decides　the　place　of
residence；　if　the　wife　refuses　to　go　with　him　to　howsoever　unfit　a　place
for　her　and　for　the　little　ones；　such　refusal　on　her　part　constitutes
〃desertion〃　and　is　ground　for　divorce。

See　again　the　idea　that　the　wife　must　remain　with　the　husband　though　a
drunkard；　or　diseased；　regardless　of　the　sin　against　the　child　involved
in　such　a　relation。　　Public　feeling　on　these　matters　is　indeed　changing；
but　as　a　whole　the　ideals　of　the　man…made　family　still　obtain。

The　effect　of　this　on　the　woman　has　been　inevitably　to　weaken　and
overshadow　her　sense　of　the　real　purpose　of　the　family；　of　the
relentless　responsibilities　of　her　duty　as　a　mother。　　She　is　first
taught　duty　to　her　parents；　with　heavy　religious　sanction；　and　then　duty
to　her　husband；　similarly　buttressed；　but　her　duty　to　her　children　has
been　left　to　instinct。　　She　is　not　taught　in　girlhood　as　to　her
preeminent　power　and　duty　as　a　mother；　her　young　ideals　are　all　of
devotion　to　the　lover　and　husband：　with　only　the　vaguest　sense　of
results。

The　young　girl　is　reared　in　what　we　call　〃innocence；〃　poetically
described　as　〃bloom；〃　and　this　condition　is　held　one　of　her　chief
〃charms。〃　　The　requisite　is　wholly　androcentric。　　This　〃innocence〃　does
not　enable　her　to　choose　a　husband　wisely；　she　does　not　even　know　the
dangers　that　possibly　confront　her。　　We　vaguely　imagine　that　her　father
or　brother；　who　do　know；　will　protect　her。　　Unfortunately　the　father　and
brother；　under　our　current　〃double　standard〃　of　morality　do　not　judge
the　applicants　as　she　would　if　she　knew　the　nature　of　their　offenses。

Furthermore；　if　her　heart　is　set　on　one　of　them；　no　amount　of　general
advice　and　opposition　serves　to　prevent　her　marrying　him。　　〃I　love　him！〃
she　says；　sublimely。　　〃I　do　not　care　what　he　has　done。　　I　will　forgive
him。　　I　will　save　him！〃

This　state　of　mind　serves　to　forward　the　interests　of　the　lover；　but　is
of　no　advantage　to　the　children。　　We　have　magnified　the　duties　of　the
wife；　and　minified　the　duties　of　the　mother；　and　this　is　inevitable　in　a
family　relation　every　law　and　custom　of　which　is　arranged　from　the
masculine　viewpoint。

From　this　same　viewpoint；　equally　essential　to　the　proprietary　family；
comes　the　requirement　that　the　woman　shall　serve　the　man。　　Her　service
is　not　that　of　the　associate　and　equal；　as　when　she　joins　him　in　his
business。　　It　is　not　that　of　a　beneficial　combination；　as　when　she
practices　another　business　and　they　share　the　profits；　it　is　not　even
that　of　the　specialist；　as　the　service　of　a　tailor　or　barber；　it　is
personal　servicethe　work　of　a　servant。

In　large　generalization；　the　women　of　the　world　cook　and　wash；　sweep　and
dust；　sew　and　mend；　for　the　men。

We　are　so　accustomed　to　this　relation；　have　held　it　for　so　long　to　be
the　〃natural〃　relation；　that　it　is　difficult　indeed　to　show　that　it　is
distinctly　unnatural　and　injurious。　　The　father　expects　to　be　served　by
the　daughter；　a　service　quite　different　from　what　he　expects　of　the　son。
　This　shows　at　once　that　such　service　is　no　integral　part　of　motherhood；
or　even　of　marriage；　but　is　supposed　to　be　the　proper　industrial
position　of　women；　as　such。

Why　is　this　so？　　Why；　on　the　face　of　it；　given　a　daughter　and　a　son；
should　a　form　of　service　be　expected　of　the　one；　which　would　be
considered　ignominious　by　the　other？

The　underlying　reason　is　this。　　Industry；　at　its　base；　is　a　feminine
function。　　The　surplus　energy　of　the　mother　does　not　manifest　itself　in
noise；　or　combat；　or　display；　but　in　productive　industry。　　Because　of
her　mother…power　she　became　the　first　inventor　and　laborer；　being　in
truth　the　mother　of　all　industry　as　well　as　all　people。

Man's　entrance　upon　industry　is　late　and　reluctant；　as　will　be　shown
later　in　treating　his　effect　on　economics。　　In　this　field　of　family
life；　his　effect　was　as　follows：

Establishing　the　proprietary　family　at　an　age　when　the　industry　was
primitive　and　domestic；　and　thereafter　confining　the　woman　solely　to　the
domestic　area；　he　thereby　confined　her　to　primitive　industry。　　The
domestic　industries；　in　the　hands　of　women；　constitute　a　survival　of　our
remotest　past。　　Such　work　was　〃woman's　work〃　as　was　all　the　work　then
known；　such　work　is　still　considered　woman's　work　because　they　have　been
prevented　from　doing　any　other。

The　term　〃domestic　industry〃　does　not　define　a　certain　kind　of　labor；
but　a　certain　grade　of　labor。　　Architecture　was　a　domestic　industry
oncewhen　every　savage　mother　set　up　her　own　tepee。　　To　be　confined　to
domestic　industry　is　no　proper　distinction　of　womanhood；　it　is　an
historic　distinction；　an　economic　distinction；　it　sets　a　date　and　limit
to　woman's　industrial　progress。

In　this　respect　the　man…made　family　has　resulted　in　arresting　the
development　of　half　the　field。　　We　have　a　world　wherein　men；
industrially；　live　in　the　twentieth　century；　and　women；　industrially；
live　in　the　firstand　back　of　it。

To　the　same　source　we　trace　the　social　and　educational　limitations　set
about　women。　　The　dominant　male；　holding　his　women　as　property；　and
fiercely　jealous　of　them；　considering　them　always　as　_his；_　not
belonging　to　themselves；　their　children；　or　the　world；　has　hedged　them
in　with　restrictions　of　a　thousand　sorts；　physical；　as　in　the　crippled
Chinese　lady　or　the　imprisoned　odalisque；　moral；　as　in　the　oppressive
doctrines　of　submission　taught　by　all　our　androcentric　religions；
mental；　as　in　the　enforced　ignorance　from　which　women　are　now　so　swiftly
emerging。

This　abnormal　restriction　of　women　has　necessarily　injured　motherhood。　
The　man；　free；　growing　in　the　world's　growth；　has　mounted　with　the
centuries；　filling　an　ever　wider　range　of　world　activities。　　The　woman；
bound；　has　not　so　grown；　and　the　child　is　born　to　a　progressive
fatherhood　and　a　stationary　motherhood。　　Thus　the　man…made　family　reacts
unfavorably　upon　the　child。　　We　rob　our　children　of　half　their　social
heredity　by　keeping　the　mother　in　an　inferior　position；　however
legalized；　hallowed；　or　ossified　by　time；　the　position　of　a　domestic
servant　is　inferior。

It　is　for　this　reason　that　child　culture　is　at　so　low　a　level；　and　for
the　most　part　utterly　unknown。　　Today；　when　the　forces　of　education　are
steadily　working　nearer　to　the　cradle；　a　new　sense　is　wakening　of　the
importance　of　the　period　of　infancy；　and　its　wiser　treatment；　yet　those
who　know　of　such　a　movement　are　few；　and　of　them　some　are　content　to
earn　easy　praiseand　payby　belittling　right　progress　to　gratify　the
prejudices　of　the　ignorant。

The　whole　position　is　simple　and　clear；　and　easily　traceable　to　its
root。　　Given　a　proprietary　family；　where　the　man　holds　the　woman
primarily　for　his　satisfaction　and　servicethen　necessarily　he　shuts
her　up　and　keeps　her　for　these　purposes。　　Being　so　kept；　she　cannot
develop　humanly；　as　he　has；　through　social　conta