New-York tribune., 1873-01-21
SEX IN WAGES,

We find the following In one of the news
papers. 1t might be called sophistry, but we
are not sure that it merits even that un-
desirable name:
Complaints often made that not paid as
much for their work are. The obvious;
men are more in demand they, OF course command
higher price. They wanted sailors. soldiers,
miners farmers, and mechanics and many other works,
requiring strength and endurance, that women do not
have Besides this they have 10 bear all the expense OF
the support OF their families. The prices as they now
stand are right and just"
To this we answer I. That men are in par
ticular demand as men, for what men alone
can do; g. In the question of fixing woman's
wages regard must be had only to what
women can do, and, therefore, the sallorlng,
and soldering, and mining, and farming must
be eliminated from the discussion 3. Women,
and not men, are in demand for certain
kinds of work, and would, therefore, but for
wrong ideas upon the subject, receive wages pro-
portionately as high for their peculiar work
as men receive for theirs; 4. What the work
is really worth has nothing whatever to do
with the way in which the person who fairly
earns the money means to spend 1t, so that
the argument that women do not have fami-
lies to support is ll-founded even if it were
based on fact, which it is not, since great
many women do have families to support,
without any assistance from husbands; 8.
The prices, as they now stand, are wrong and
unjust, Just so far as they are less for women
than for men, the service being altogether or
substantially the same. These are PROPOSE
tions which nobody in his senses can honestly
gainsay.
What, for the purposes Of the present dis
cusson, we claim is, that wages for the same
work, whether done by man or by woman,
shall be the same. All talk about the less
cost at which woman can live, as good rea-
son for defrauding her, is simply the cruelty
and the impudence of the stronger party. 1t
is true that the prices charged for wOmans
board are usually less than those charged for
the board of men, and it is equally true that
the comforts and accommodations are usually
in proportion to the price. Moreover, there is
no reason why women should be kept at the
starvation point no reason why they should
not have money to spend upon little luxuries
and upon indul9ences not absolutely neces-
sary no reason why they should not secure
certain degree of elegance as well as COM
fort and if they are of the weaker sex, then
there is all the more. reason for recognizing
their weakness by paying them some
thing more instead of something less.
The device of cutting down their wages
upon the plea that they can live at less cost
than men, was hit upon by those who
were willing to make money out of their help
lessness, and it has been made the excuse for
shameful swindling ever since. We have said
nothing of the fact that out of many employ
ments requiring neither strength" nor "en-
"durance" women have been crowded, by the
stout and sinewy and muscular creatures called
men. 1t is pretty poor business for Goliahs to
be measuring calico and selling thread by the
spool and needles by the paper. However, we
are getting away from the proposition with
which we started, which is: The same wages
for the same work, whether done by mascu-
line or by feminine hands.