The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-10-31


less directly. Then, the brides, having
nothing else in which to interest them
Selves took up society for its own sake,
and it is very American to want to get
to the top in everything. Really, we
have pitied the poor little brides who
have struggled with inefficient help Civ
ing elaborate dinners to stupid and unin-
teresting men who happen to be In po-
sitions to help boost their husbands bust
ness prospects. Their teas and receptions
were equally distressing, for they had to
use all sorts Of tricks and articles Ito
make these appear grand enough to i'm
press the people of whom they wished to
make social leaders. -
'Now, that sort OF thing is of no use
to us, and that Is one thing women who
work have to be thankful for Pull Is
Of little value to em.~except In political
positions, so, when they have done their
work WELL, other efforts count for SO
little that they are not worth consider
ing. AS entertaining and our social
position do not affect our business stand
ing, we feel perfectly free to do as Httle
or as much as we please. We do things
when we feel like it and have what we
enjoy, not what some one else thinks in
the thing We don't invite people we
don't care for. as 1t would be quite as
much of a bore to accept their return
hospitalities as to entertain them our
selves. If we plan spread or theater
party or anything and some one vital to
our enjoyment drops out, we promptly
postpone the whole thing. Our usual ef-s
forts are always conditioned on getting
the right crowd"
We all knew something must have
stirred up usually placid Rebecca to
this vigorous harangue, and our questions
soon brought it out. 1.-THE reluctance OF
our friends to call our nest q home In
was reused to the connbative stage by
hearing paper read the other day by a
clever woman In st. Paul, whom I know.
on The Decrease In Domesticity, and
she assumed, just as the people who
neither write nor think papers, that do
mesticity is based absolutely on marriage.
She proved that fewer women marry, ergo
domesticity is decreasing. Now ] object
to the deduction. She. denies fatty that
the independence Of women has resulted
in the extinction in the hearts OF women
Of a desire for home life, and, Of course,
T agree with her on that, but I go farther.
+ think there is likely to be reaction by
which the inroads Of industrial indepen-
dence OF women on natrimony may be
checked somewhat, but the single woman
has become permanent class, whether It
be relatively larger or smaller than at the
present time. When that has come to
be regarded as more natural and set.
tied fact, women will adapt themselves to
it better and more easily.
ITO my mind that means that the work.
ing woman Of the future is not to be
homeless, forlorn, leftover creature, with
no outlet for her domestic instincts, or
genius If you please, but that she will
be a homemaker and that her home will
be a model one, for she will have an ap-
probation OF it lacking among women
to whom It has been cage, even tho
gilded one. Feeling keenly the need of
haven Of refuge, place Of comfort and
quiet, she will shape it to its ends to the
full extent Of her ability. Already there
are dozens of groups Of Minneapolis work.
ing women who have just such homes.
and believe they are the forerunners
Of a general movement among independ-
ent women to be honenakers, even tho
the delightful and important factor Of
husband is lacking. I don't believe either
that such home comforts or even luxuries
will make the possible husband the less
appreciated, but they will soften the as
perities OF a workaday Mfe and of the
consciousness of the incompleteness of
single life. Without question the best
basis for home is the mutual love Of
man and woman, as my friend, the
paper writer, said, but I would not have
that regarded as the only possible basis.
Nevertheless, I also agree with her that
even the most independent women joy-
fully exchange a business career for the
delights OF home life with the right
man. s5s5si