sexual generation—base of ancient cosmogonies—propagation non-sexual in simpler forms—am?ba and cells—germs and buds—anemones—worms—spores—origin of sex—ovary and male organ—hermaphrodites—parthenogenesis—bees and insects—man and woman—characters of each sex—woman’s position—improved by civilisation—christianity the feminine pole—monogamy the law of nature—tone respecting women test of character—women in literature—in society—attraction and repulsion of sexes—like attracts unlike—ideal marriage—woman’s rights and modern legislation.
‘male and female created he them.’ at first sight this distinction of sex appears as fundamental as that of plant and animal. mankind, and all the higher forms of life with which mankind has relations, can only propagate their species in one way: by the co-operation of two individuals of the species, who are essentially like and yet unlike, possessing attributes which are complementary of one another, and whose union is requisite to originate a new living unit—in other words, by sexual propagation. so certain does this appear that all ancient religions and philosophies begin by assuming a male and female principle for their gods, or first guesses at the unknown first causes of the phenomena of nature. thus ouranos and gaia, heaven and earth; ph?bus and artemis, the sun and moon: are all figured by the primitive imagination as male and female; and the spirit of god brooding over chaos and producing the[103] world, is only a later edition, revised according to monotheistic ideas, of the far older chaldean legend which describes the creation of cosmos out of chaos by the co-operation of great gods, male and female. even in later and more advanced religions, traces of this ineradicable tendency to assume difference of sex as the indispensable condition of the creation of new existence are found to linger and crop up in cases where they are altogether inapplicable. thus, in the orthodox christian creed we are taught to repeat ‘begotten, not made,’ a phrase which is absolute nonsense, or non-sense—that is, an instance of using words like counterfeit notes, which have no solid value of an idea behind them. for ‘begotten’ is a very definite term, which implies the conjunction of two opposite sexes to produce a new individual. unless two deities are assumed of different sexes the statement has no possible meaning. it is a curious instance of atavism, or the way in which the qualities and ideas of remote ancestors sometimes crop up in their posterity.
science, however, makes sad havoc with this impression of sexual generation being the original and only mode of reproduction, and the microscope and dissecting knife of the naturalist introduce us to new and altogether unsuspected worlds of life. by far the larger proportion of living forms, in number at any rate, if not in size, have come into existence without the aid of sexual propagation. when we begin at the beginning, or with those monera which are simple specks of homogeneous protoplasm, we find them multiplying by self-division. am?ba a, when it outgrows its natural size, contracts in the middle and splits into two am?b?, b and c, which are exactly like one another and like[104] the original a. in fact b contains one half of its parent a, and c the other half. they each grow to the size of the original a, and then repeat the process of splitting and duplicating themselves.
the next earliest stage in the evolution of living matter, the nucleated cell, does exactly the same thing. the nucleus splits into two, each of which becomes a new nucleus for the protoplasmic matter of the original cell, and either multiply within it, or burst the old cell-wall and become two new cells resembling the first.
the next stage in advance is that of propagation by germs or buds, in which the organism does not divide into two equal parts, but a small portion of it swells out at its surface, and finally parts company and starts on a separate existence which grows to the size of the parent by its inherent faculty of manufacturing fresh protoplasm from surrounding inorganic materials. this process may be witnessed any day in an aquarium containing specimens of the sea-anemone, where the minute new anemones may be seen in every form, both before and after they have parted from the parent body. it remains one of the principal modes of propagation of the vegetable world, where plants are multiplied from buds even after they have developed the higher mode of sexual propagation by seeds. in some of the lowest animals, such as worms, the buds are reduced to a small aggregation of cells, which form themselves into distinct individuals inside the body of the parent, and separate from it when they have attained a certain stage of development.
advancing still further on the road towards sexual reproduction, we find these germ-buds reduced to spores, or single cells, which are emitted from the parent, and[105] afterwards multiply by division until they form a many-celled organism, which has the hereditary qualities of the original one. this is the general form of propagation of the lower plants, such as alg?, mosses, and ferns, and also of a number of the lower forms of animal-like microscopic organisms, such as bacteria, whose spores, floating in the air in enormous quantities, and multiplying when they find a fit soil with astonishing rapidity, in a few days devastate the potato crop of a whole district or bring about an epidemic of scarlet-fever or cholera. they have their use however in creation, and their action is beneficent as well as the reverse, for they are the principal cause of putrefaction, the process by which the dead organic matter, which, if not removed, would choke up the world, is resolved into the inorganic elements from which it sprang, and rendered available for fresh combinations.
we are now at the threshold of that system of sexual propagation which has become the rule in all the higher families of animals and in many plants. it may be conceived as originating in the amalgamation of some germ-cell or spore with the original cell which was about to develop into a germ-bud within the body of some individual, and by the union of the two producing a new and more vigorous originating cell which modified the course of development of the germ-bud and of its resulting organism. this organism, having advantages in the struggle for life, established itself permanently with ever new developments in the same direction, which would be fixed and extended in its descendants by heredity, and special organs developed to meet the altered conditions. thus at length the distinction would be firmly established of a female organ or ovary containing[106] the egg or primitive cell from which the new being was to be developed, and a male organ supplying the fertilising spore or cell, which was necessary to start the egg in the evolutionary process by which it developed into the germ of an offspring combining qualities of the two parents. this is confirmed by a study of embryology, which shows that in the human and higher animal species the distinction of sex is not developed until a considerable progress has been made in the growth of the embryo. it is only however in the higher and more specialised families that we find this mode of propagation by two distinct individuals of different sexes firmly established. in the great majority of plants, and in some of the lower families of animals—for instance, snails and earth-worms—the male and female organs are developed within the same being, and they are what is called hermaphrodites. thus, in most of the flowering plants the same blossom contains both the stamens and anther, which are the male organ, and the style and germ, which are the female.
another transition form is parthenogenesis, or virginal reproduction, in which germ-cells, apparently similar in all respects to egg-cells, develop themselves into new individuals without any fructifying element. this is found to be the case with many species of insects, and with this curious result, that those same germ-cells are often capable of being fructified, and in that case produce very different individuals. thus, among the common bees, male bees or drones arise from the non-fructified eggs of the queen bee, while females are produced if the egg has been fructified.
in the higher families however of animal life the distinction of sex in different individuals has become[107] the universal rule, and it produces a polarity or contrast which becomes ever more conspicuous as we rise in the scale of creation, until it attains its highest development in the highest stage hitherto reached, that of civilised man and woman. both physical and mental characteristics depend mainly on the fact that the ovary or egg-producing organ is developed in the female, and thus the whole work of reproduction is thrown on her. to perform this a large portion of the vital energy is required, which in the male is available for larger and more prolonged growth of organs, such as the brain, stature, and limbs, by which a more powerful grasp is attained of the outward environment. in other words, the female comes sooner to maturity and is weaker than the male. she is also animated by a much stronger love for the offspring, which is part of her own body, during the period of infancy; and thus, in addition to the physical attributes, such as lacteal glands and larger breasts, she inherits qualities of softness, amiability, and devotion, which fit her for the office of nurse. her physical weakness, again, has made her, for untold ages, and even now in all the less advanced communities, and too often even in the most advanced, the slave of the stronger male. she has thus inherited many of the mental qualities which are essential to such a state: the desire to propitiate by pleasing and making herself attractive; the gentleness and submissiveness which shrink from a contest of brute force in which she is sure to be defeated; the clinging to a stronger nature for support, which in extreme cases leads to blind admiration of power and the spaniel-like attachment to a master whether deserving of it or not. as civilisation however advances, and as intellectual and moral[108] qualities gain ascendency over brute strength and animal instincts, the condition of woman improves, and it comes more and more to be recognised that she is not made to be man’s slave or plaything, but has her own personality and character, which, if in some respects inferior, are in others better than those of the male half of creation. tennyson, the great poet of modern thought, who sums up so many of the ideas and tendencies of the age in concise and vigorous verse, writes:—
for woman is not undeveloped man,
nor yet man’s opposite.
not opposite, yet different, so that the one supplements what is wanting to the other, and the harmonious union of the two makes ideal perfection. it is the glory of european civilisation to have done so much to develop this idea of the equality of the sexes, and to have gone so far towards emancipating the weaker half of the human species from the tyranny of the stronger half.
it would be unfair to omit mention of the great part which christianity has had in this good work; not only by direct precept and recognition of religious equality, but even more by the embodiment, as its ideal, of the feminine virtues of gentleness, humility, resignation, self-devotion, and charity. ideal christianity is, in fact, what may be called the feminine pole of conduct and morality, as opposed to the masculine one of courage, hardihood, energy, and self-reliance. many of the precepts of christianity are unworkable, and have to be silently dropped in practice. it would not answer either for individuals or nations ‘when smitten on one cheek to turn the other.’ when an appeal is made to fact to decide whether it is a right[109] rule to live as the sparrows do, taking no thought for the morrow, the verdict of fact is in favour of foresight and frugality. herbert spencer has stated this polarity very strongly as that of the religion of amity and the religion of enmity; but i think he states the case too adversely for the latter, for the qualities which make men and nations good fighters and victorious in the struggle for existence, are in their way just as essential as the gentler virtues, and both alike become defects when pushed to the ‘falsehood of extremes.’ christianity, therefore, whatever may become of its dogmas, ought always to be regarded with affection and respect for the humanising effect it has produced, especially in improving the condition of the female half of creation.
this improvement in the condition of women has brought about a corresponding improvement in the male sex, for the polarity between the two has come to be the most intimate and far-reaching influence of modern life. take the literature of the novel and play, which aim at holding up the mirror to human nature and contemporary manners, and you will find that they nearly all turn upon love. the word ‘immorality’ has come to signify the one particular breach of the laws of morality which arises from the relations of the sexes.
in providing for the birth of nearly equal numbers of each sex, nature clearly establishes monogamy, or union of single pairs, as the condition of things most in accordance with natural laws. the family also, the first germ of civilisation, is impossible, or can only exist in a very imperfect and half-developed state, without this permanent union of a single husband and wife. violations of this law lead to such disastrous[110] consequences to individuals, and are so deteriorating to nations, that they are properly considered as the ‘immorality’ par excellence, and condemned by all right-minded opinion. and yet to observe this law is a constant lesson in self-control for a great part of the life: a lesson of the utmost value, for it is a virtue which is at the root of all other virtues. and it is formed and becomes habitual and easy by practice, for just as the muscles of the ballet-dancer’s leg or blacksmith’s arm acquire strength and elasticity by use, so do the finer fibres of the brain improve by exercise and become soft and flabby by disuse, so that effort in the former case is a pleasure and in the latter a pain. for this reason chaste nations are generally strong and conquering nations; dissolute imperial rome went down before the goths and germans, and polygamous turkey perishes of dry rot in the midst of the progress of the nineteenth century. indeed, there is no better test of the position which either an individual, a class, or a nation hold in the scale of civilisation, than the tone which prevails among the men with regard to women. wherever turkish ideas prevail, we may be sure that whatever may be the outward varnish of manner there is essential snobbishness.
up and down
along the scale of life, through all,
to him who wears the golden ball,
by birth a king, at heart a clown
on the other hand, wherever women are regarded with a chivalrous respect and reverence, the heart of a true gentleman beats, though it be under the rough exterior of one of bret harte’s cow-boys or californian miners.
[111]
nothing in fact gives one more hope in the progress of human society than to find that in the freest countries, and those farthest advanced towards modern ideas and democratic institutions, the tone with regard to women shows the greatest improvement. there is a regular crescendo scale of progress from turkey to america. i do not refer so much to the fact that in the newer colonies and countries women can travel unprotected without fear of insult or injury, as to the almost instinctive recognition of their equal rights as intelligent and moral beings who have a personality and character of their own, which places them on the same platform as men though on opposite sides of it.
to understand rightly the real spirit of an age or country, it is not enough to study dry statistics or history in the form of records of wars and political changes. we must study the works of the best poets, novelists, and dramatists, who seek to embody types and to hold up the mirror to contemporary ideas and manners. a careful perusal of such works as those of dickens, thackeray, trollope, and george eliot at home, and of bret harte, howells, james, and mrs. burnett in the united states, will give a truer insight into the inner life of the country and period than any number of blue-books or consular returns. they show what the writers of the greatest genius, that is, of the greatest insight, see as types of the actual ideas and characters surrounding them; and the fact of their works being popular shows that the types are recognised as true. now it is certain that the english literature of fiction and its latest development, that of the american novelists, show an ever-increasing recognition of the female individual as an equal unit with the male in the constitution[112] of modern society. those dear ‘school marms’ of bret harte’s and wendell holmes’, who career so joyously through mining camps, receiving courtesy and radiating civilising influences among the rough inhabitants; or touch the hearts and throw a mellow light over the autumn days of middle-aged professors and philosophers, are far removed from the slaves of prehistoric savages or the inmates of a turkish harem. so also in the more complex relations of a more crowded civilisation, in the circles of washington, new york, and boston, the ideal american woman is always depicted as bright, intelligent, and independent, with a character and personality of her own, and the suspicion never seems to enter the author’s head that she is in any respect inferior to the male characters with whom she is associated.
the same may be said to a great extent of english literature from the time of shakespeare downwards. no better portrait than portia was ever drawn of the
perfect woman, nobly planned
to soothe, to comfort, and command;
and yet a spirit still, and bright
with something of an angel light.
and in the long gallery of good and loveable women, from rosalind and imogene down to lucy roberts and laura pendennis, we have not one who is a mere non-entity or child of passionate impulse. nor is the recognition of woman’s equality less marked in the bad characters. lady macbeth is of a stronger nature than macbeth; becky sharp more clever and full of resources than the men with whom she plays like puppets; maggie tulliver, with all her wild struggles with herself and her surroundings, has far more in her than her[113] brother tom. compare these characters with those of the school of modern french novels, which turn mainly on adultery and seduction, committed for the most part not in any whirlwind of irresistible passion, but to gratify some passing caprice or vanity, and it is easy to see how wide is the gulf which separates the ideals and moral atmosphere of the two countries.
it is not therefore from any wish to indulge in what herbert spencer calls the ‘unpatriotic bias,’ and depreciate my own country, that i am disposed to think that the younger english-speaking communities are somewhat in advance of ourselves in this matter of the relations of the sexes, but simply because i think that the feeling is there more widespread and universal. we have in english society two strata in which women are still considered as inferior beings to men: a lower one, where better ideas have not yet permeated the dense mass of ignorance and brutality; and a higher one, where among a certain portion, let us hope a small one, of the gilded youth and upper ten, luxury and idleness have blunted the finer susceptibilities, and created what may be most aptly called a turkish tone about women. there are many of this class, and unfortunately often in high places, where their example does widespread mischief, whose ideal might be summed up in the words of the irish ballad:—
i am one of the ould sort of bradies,
my turn does not lie to hard work;
but i’m fond of my pipe and the ladies,
and i’d make a most illigant turk.
and most ‘illigant turks’ they make, though far worse than real turks who are born and brought up in the ideas and surroundings of a lower civilisation; while[114] the tone of our english turks is far more nauseous and disgusting, as denoting innate selfishness, sensuality, and vulgarity. of these two classes there seem to be fewer in the newer english communities; and if they exist, they are in such a small minority that they conceal their existence, and pay the homage of vice to virtue which is called hypocrisy.
to return, however, to the more scientific aspects of the question, the polarity of sex displays itself as conspicuously as that of the magnet in the fundamental law of repulsion of like for like, and attraction of like for unlike. in each case there must be an identity of essence developing itself in opposite directions. thus, atoms attract or repel atoms, but not molecules; for if they seem to do so, it is only in cases in which the molecule contains some atom whose atomicity or polar power has not been fully satisfied. so currents of air or water do not affect electric currents. but given the identity of substance, its differentiation takes place under an ever-increasing progression of polarity of affinities and repulsions.
a german naturalist, brahm, discussing the question why birds sing, says, ‘the male finds in the female those desirable and attractive qualities which are wanting in himself. he seeks the opposite to himself with the force of a chemical element.’ this is equally true of the male and female of the human species. a masculine woman and effeminate man are equally unattractive, and if the qualities are pushed to an extreme extent, the individuals become monstrosities, and, instead of attracting, excite vehement disgust and repulsion. this, which is true physically, is equally true of moral and intellectual characteristics. each seeks,[115] in the happy marriage or perfect ideal union, the qualities which are most deficient in themselves: the woman, strength, active courage, and the harder qualities; the man, gentleness, amiability, and the softer virtues. in each individual, as in each union of individuals, harmony and perfection depend on the due balance of the opposite qualities, and the ‘falsehood of extremes’ leads up to chaos and insanity. the man in whom strength and hardihood are not tempered by gentleness and affection becomes brutal and tyrannical; while the woman who has no strength of character becomes silly and frivolous. marriage, however, involves the highest ideal, for the well-assorted union of the two in one gives a more complete harmony and reconciliation of opposites than can be attained by the single individual, who must always remain more or less within the sphere of the polarity of his or her respective sex. but here also the same law of polarity operates, for as happy marriage affords the highest ideal, so do unhappy and ill-assorted unions involve the greatest misery and most complete shipwreck of life. especially to the woman, for the man has other pursuits and occupations, and can to a great extent withdraw himself from domestic troubles; while the woman has no defence against the coarseness, selfishness, and vulgarity of the partner to whom she is tied, and who may make her life a perpetual purgatory, and drag all her finer intellectual and moral nature down to a lower level. fortunately extreme cases are rare, and, though the ideal of a perfect union may seldom be attained to, the great majority of married couples manage to jog on together, and bring up families in comparative comfort and respectability. evidently, however, in many cases the weaker party[116] does not get fair play, and the laws which are the result of centuries of male legislation are often too oblivious of the maxim that what is ‘sauce for goose is sauce for gander.’ improvement, however, is coming from the growth of the more healthy public opinion which stigmatises any invasion of woman’s real rights, and any attempt on the part of her natural protector to bully and tyrannise, as utterly disgraceful; and the waves of this public opinion are slowly but surely sapping the cliffs of legal conservatism, and forcing the intrenchments of stolid injustice behind ermine robes, horsehair wigs, and obsolete acts of parliament.
