Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1886-1890, 1888-03-07
ALADY BELIEVER
Who is Neither a Grandmother or the
Other Fellow Talks Back.

Who is Neither q Grandmother or the
Other Fellow Talks Back.
To the Editor of the Eagle.
1t is unjust that the odiu1n of the dress
reform movement should rest on the
/ Suffragists. The fact is Jenness Miller
| has been society woman of Washing
ton city, and have never heard he1
name mentioned in connection with
suffrage work.
| She certainly believes that woman
has right to dress herself according tc
her own taste and inclination, yet
doubt her being Suffragist.
Your friends impression that coup
d'etat is contemplated by the women is
as false as it is absurd and ridiculous
As if the only thing necessary to redeem
and enfranchise the sex is to discard
skirts. If that was the only thing need
| full to overcome the obstinacy of anti
quated laws and the ignorance and preju-
dice that remains from past ages,
l think as desirable as it would be to
women as class, the skirts would be
discarded for at least one day in the
year, although the dress reform has nc
bearing whatever upon the suffrage
question. Miss Foster, who had adopted
that style Of dress. introduced it to the
ladies at the suffrage convention by
special request of Miss Miller, and the
results she claimed for it were con-
venience. comfort and health.
You say ''had it not been for politics
there would have been more of this
painting after pants" l deny that
suffrage women want to dress like men,
but seriously if they should put aside
the corset and tight waist and don the
Prince Albert coat and silk hat, would
they not look equally as well as the men
in black silk Mother Hubbards? How
about the supreme judges? And with
due respect to the clergy l might also
mention the Episcopal and some of the
Unitarian ministers and the priests
who all wear robes. Again I have read
that military men wear corsets to give
them a straight, fine figure, and the dude
not only wears corsets but wears bang
and powders his face, and as long as
the supreme judges get themselves up
like women l fail to see the justice Of
the ridicule.
The men may feel contempt for a
woman who should don any part of men S
clothing, but the women can equally
scorn man who covers up his male
attire with a robe or mother hubbard,
When the men stop aping the women it
is then time to burles1ue the women for
wanting more comfortable clothing
While / am not an advocate of the
dress reform. do believe it will be con-
ducive to comfort and health, and finally
if men and women should dress nearly
alike, there still would be the same
courtesy and Difference due to
each other between the sexes.
1t is not the clothing to which we bow
in adoration-it is to the individual-the
being who has brain and soul, and
we may ''trust to nature to take care of
her own distinctions" To use a homely
illustration, "there is no need of build
ing fences to keep the chickens out of the
water"
1t occurs to me that you take an I'M
fair means of keeping the women from
voting at the next election. Women as
a class are too timid to stand much ridi-
cule and you say mo woman without a
pair of these garments will demand her
rights, and no one Boosting pair dare
be denied the exalted privilege of taking
a hand in setting things up" That is
unkind as well as unjust.
The question of voting or not should
be matter of conscience and not one of
dress, and out of the 5000 women who
voted last year In Kansas,
there perhaps was not one
who had adopted the reform dress.
Yesterday woman said to me, "What
is the use for the women to work as long
as Mr.. Murdoch takes the position that
he does at present" And it does seem
discouraging at times, for your paper
has such a wide circulation and its infiu-
ence for good or evil cannot be easily
estimated, and while great deal may
be written in sport, to the majority Of
men and women every word is taken
seriously. And your articles are copied
again and again by all the editors in the
surrounding towns who haven't an
original thought of their own.
Your dear correspondent does not
seem to have been ''sticking to home
duties very closely while writing to you.
And if she wants to remain a fraction
instead of a unit, and merge what little
individuality she has into that of her
husband and not dare think for herself,
much less act according to her own con-
victions-that is her privilege-but why
should she try to prevent freedom for
others?
IT'S doubtful compliment to her
when you say you prefer heart to
brains," and this is the key note of so
much suffering in humanity, so much
sorrow, crime and murder. that women
had had too much heart and not enough
brains.
Go to any city, to the hospitals, to pri-
vate asylums and to the foundlings'
home and there listen to the tales of sor-
row and crime, and hear the poor girls
heart-breaking sobs as she leaves her
babe at the door, and the conclusion is
certain that women have loved and
trusted too much and thought too little.
Women should not be lacking in char
acter Or decision. The will power and
intellectual life must be developed. and
yet there is no doubt but that women
will in all ages to come love and respect
men who are worthy.
Yours, respectfully,
A BELIEVER IN JUSTICE FOR ALL,